Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
11 RESPONSE TO DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BOWERY IN THE CITY OF SANTA
Agenda Item _ 1 1 Reviewed: eviewed: AGENDA REPORT City Manager (JA Finance Director N/A MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 4, 2020 TO: MATTHEW S. WEST, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: TUSTIN RESPONSE TO DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BOWERY MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE CITY OF SANTA ANA SUMMARY: Tustin City Council concurrence is requested for the City of Tustin's (the City) response to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for The Bowery Mixed Use Project in Santa Ana. The proposed project would redevelop a 14.58 -acre site at 2300 South Red Hill Avenue and provide 1,150 multiple -family residences in four (4) buildings of five (5) to six (6) stories, 80,000 square feet of retail and restaurant commercial space, and adjacent parking structures. The project would require a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council direct staff to forward the attached response letter to the City of Santa Ana. FISCAL IMPACT: Fiscal impacts associated with this action are unknown at this time. CORRELATION TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN: Staff's review of the DEIR for The Bowery Mixed Use Project falls under Goal D of the Strategic Plan pertaining to strong community and regional relationships. The City strives to work collaboratively with agencies both within and outside Tustin on issues of mutual interest and concern. BACKGROUND: The proposed project would redevelop a 14.58 -acre site at 2300 South Red Hill Avenue and provide 1,150 multiple -family residences in four (4) buildings of five (5) to six (6) stories, 80,000 square feet of retail and restaurant commercial space, and adjacent City Council Agenda Report Bowery Mixed Use Project Page 2 parking structures. Also proposed is approximately 174,555 square feet of open space within courtyards, common areas, roof decks, perimeter plazas, and other open space areas. Recreation amenities for residents would include four (4) pool and spa areas, fitness areas, and community rooms. The project requires a General Plan Amendment from Professional and Administrative Office to a mixed -used designation and a Zone Change from Light Industrial to Specific Development. City staff has reviewed the subject DEIR. Based on concerns related to traffic, cumulative impacts, and impacts to City parks, staff believes that it is in the City's interest to be on record regarding this matter and has prepared correspondence (Attachment A) expressing the City's concerns regarding the DEIR (hyperlink - Attachment B). Staff requests that the Tustin City Council review and consider these comments and, if acceptable, concur with their formal transmittal to the City of Santa Ana. Scott Reekstin Principal Planner Attachments: A. Draft Comment Response Letter B. DEIR hyperlink: The Bowery DEIR Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director February 5, 2020 Mr. Jerry C. Guevara Assistant Planner I City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency PO BOX 1988 (M-20) Santa Ana, CA 92702 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE BOWERY MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE CITY OF SANTA ANA Dear Mr, Guevara: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for The Bowery Mixed Use Project proposed at the southwesterly corner of Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue in the City of Santa Ana. According to the DEIR, the proposed project consists of the development of a 14.58 -acre site with 1,150 multiple family residences within five -story to six -story buildings, wrapped parking structures, and 80,000 square feet of retail and restaurant commercial space. Also proposed is approximately 174,555 square feet of open space within courtyards, common areas, roof decks, perimeter plazas, and other open space areas. Recreation amenities for residents would include four (4) pool and spa areas, fitness areas, and community rooms. The project includes a proposed General Plan Amendment from Professional and Administrative Office to a mixed-use designation and a Zone Change from Light Industrial to Specific Development. The City of Tustin offers the following comments at this time: 1. The City of Tustin is concerned with the significant changes in land uses (i.e., from commercial and industrial buildings to residential mixed use) along Red Hill Avenue, Warner Avenue, and Dyer Road in Santa Ana that are proposed by The Bowery project or have occurred recently with the approval and construction of The Heritage project at 2001 East Dyer Road. The City of Santa Ana has already demonstrated that these significant use intensifications will likely continue, as evidenced by proposed land use changes that are already being contemplated through the public outreach efforts for Santa Ana's next comprehensive General Plan Update. These land use changes could result in significant modifications to the anticipated traffic and park impacts and planned mitigations. While individually each project may cause relatively modest changes in traffic patterns or impacts to parks, the cumulative impacts are likely to be substantial. Therefore, there should be some overall projections of the anticipated changes in land uses, so the cumulative impacts related to traffic and parks and the associated mitigation can be documented. The proposed Santa Ana General Plan Update or a focused General Plan Amendment for the Red Hill Avenue corridor should be completed before the proposed project is considered so that cumulative impacts are properly analyzed and mitigated. 2. The City of Santa Ana Municipal Code will require the project to pay park acquisition and development fees or dedicate land for park and recreational purposes. According to the DEIR, approximately 174,555 square feet of open space is proposed. However, this area includes private open space and perimeter open space and is not equivalent to park land provided. In any event, the project should be required to provide land for park and Mr. Jerry Guevara The Bowery Project DEIR February 4, 2020 Page 2 recreational purposes to meet the City of Santa Ana's minimum standard of "two (2) acres of property devoted to parks and recreational purposes for each thousand (1,000) persons residing within the City of Santa Ana." If on-site parkland is not required for the proposed project, residents of the project may be unable to find adequate parks in Santa Ana and may negatively impact parks and overburden parkland facilities in adjacent jurisdictions, including Tustin. These impacts must be mitigated. An analysis of the proposed project's compliance with the City of Santa Ana's park standards should focus on the potential to physically deteriorate existing and future recreational facilities in the City of Tustin, as the nearest existing and planned large scale recreational facilities are located in the City of Tustin. 3. According to Table 5.13-1 on page 5.13-2 of the DEIR, with one exception, the nearest City of Santa Ana parks are approximately two (2) to three (3) miles from the project site. As a comparison, the DEIR should analyze the distances from other similar existing City of Santa Ana residential neighborhoods to their nearest community parks. In addition, Table 5.13-2 on pages 5.13-3 and 5.13-4 of the DEIR, which lists City of Tustin and City of Irvine parks within the vicinity of the project site, should be modified to also include Ron Foell (Greenwood) Park. It is stated on page 5.13-7 of the DEIR that based "on the existing amount of park and recreation facilities in the vicinity of the Project site, the recreation facilities that would be provided as part of the Project, and the number of residents at full capacity of the proposed Project, the Project is not anticipated to increase the use of existing parks and recreation facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated." However, this statement is not supported by any studies in the DEIR, which should analyze the actual anticipated usage of existing and proposed parks in the City of Tustin, especially those that will offer sports -oriented recreational facilities and playing fields that will not be provided as part of The Bowery Mixed Use Project. The proposed Veterans Sports Park at Tustin Legacy, for example, will be three times larger and about half the distance from the Project site than the closest park in Santa Ana and will offer new, state of art facilities that will be attractive to park users. The analysis in the DEIR should consider the quality, amenities, and attractiveness of nearby parks when estimating park usage. 5. The DEIR notes that any park fees collected for the Project would be expended for the acquisition, construction, and renovation of park and recreation facilities in Santa Ana. Therefore, it should also be noted in the DEIR that the collected park fees would not directly benefit any park facilities in Tustin. The statement in the DEIR that "by payment of the required park fees, the Project would provide funding to offset any increased usage at other park and recreation facilities within Santa Ana. Overall, the proposed Project would not result in substantial physical deterioration of park and recreation facilities, and impacts would be less than significant." is misleading because it only applies to parks in Santa Ana and should not be used to reach the conclusion regarding deterioration of parks in Tustin. 6. It is incorrectly stated on page 5.13-5 of the DEIR that 5,136.35 acres of parkland will be provided per Project resident at full occupancy. 7. Table 5.13-3 appears to be missing a column for average travel times between 13 and 20 minutes. Mr, Jerry Guevara The Bowery Project DEIR February 4, 2020 Page 3 8. The project consists of 1,150 multi -family units and 80,000 square feet (SF) of commercial uses broken down into 18,000 SF of retail and 62,000 SF of quality, casual sit-down, fast food with and without drive-through and coffee/donut shop types of restaurant uses. The project trip generation is 1,012 AM, 1,315 PM and 16,785 average daily trips (ADT). The use of discounts to reduce project trip generation, such as internal and pass -by trips, results in a projected reduction of project trips as great as 42% in the PM peak hour. The reduced project trip generation with these discounts is 691 AM, 762 PM and 12,872 ADT. The use of these trip discounts results in reduced anticipated off-site impacts. The City of Tustin recommends that the worst-case scenario be presented rather than the best -case scenario. It should be noted that the analysis for The Heritage Project at 2001 East Dyer Road did not factor in pass -by trips to discount project trips. 9. The Industrial Park trip generation for the existing land use is higher than the trip generation based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) industrial park classification (i.e,, per thousand square feet (TSF): .32 and .08 for AM in and out and PM in and out and 3.37 for ADT). The use of the higher trip generation for existing uses results in a reduced net trip generation change when compared to the proposed project, which would not be the worst-case scenario. Again, a worst-case scenario should be used when projecting trip generation for the proposed project. 10. A queuing analysis should be provided for the left -turn into Driveway 1 at Warner Avenue to determine if the forecasted 290 vehicles in the PM peak hour can be accommodated in the proposed left -turn pocket and not have a negative impact on through traffic. 11. Due to the high inbound southbound peak hour volume of 265 vehicles into Driveway 3 on Red Hill Avenue, the City of Tustin recommends a dedicated right -turn lane to separate the right -turns from through traffic in the #3 lane where speeds are 50 mph. The right -turn pocket length should be based on Synchro. 12. At Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, the northbound left -turn volume in the PM peak hour increases from 578 to 860 with the project. Please demonstrate that the left -turn pocket length for northbound Red Hill Avenue can accommodate the additional 282 vehicles. 13. 2040 PM Peak Hour Mitigation: A right -turn overlap implies that there is a right -turn lane. Will the project construct one and operate it with a right -turn overlap? To remain eligible and qualify for Measure M funding, the City of Tustin does not support the conversion of the #3 through lane into a right -turn lane which would result in a downgrade of Red Hill Avenue. Should an alternative mitigation be selected, the City of Tustin's preference would be the addition of a dedicated right -turn lane on eastbound Warner Avenue to serve the high right -turn volume in the AM Peak Hour (i.e., 346 vehicles). 14. Tustin Ranch Road and Warner Avenue North: For City of Tustin locations where the intersection capacity utilization (ICU) is greater than the acceptable level of service (i.e., LOS E or ICU is greater than .90), mitigation of the project contribution is required to bring the intersection back to no -project conditions or better if the project contribution is greater than .02 or greater at non -Congestion Management Program (CMP) locations. Therefore, this intersection is not considered adversely impacted by the proposed project. The DEIR indicates that the intersection is adversely impacted and should be revised. Mr. Jerry Guevara The Bowery Project DEIR February 4, 2020 Page 4 15. Project feature of a new signal at Driveway 1/Warner Avenue intersection: Due to its proximity to the Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue signalized intersection maintained by the City of Tustin, it is expected that the proposed new signal at Driveway 1/Warner Avenue be also maintained by the City of Tustin. The Project shall be required to collaborate with the City of Tustin in its design and construction. 16. Future Project of a Class II Bicycle Facility on Warner Avenue: The proposed project shall be required to collaborate on the proposed joint Santa Ana/Tustin project to add a Class II Bike Lane on Warner Avenue on the northern boundary of the Project, with the City of Santa Ana as the lead. 17. The through traffic volumes on Warner Avenue west of Red Hill Avenue decrease significantly to/from the Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue intersection, which may underestimate the project impact at the proposed signalized project driveway on Warner Avenue. Please provide an explanation of the decreased through traffic volumes. 18. In Tables 8 and 12, please correct the level of service (LOS) for Intersection 22 — Red Hill Avenue at Edinger Avenue to LOS D in the PM peak hour. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed project. The City of Tustin would appreciate receiving early responses to our comments as well as a copy of the Final EIR when it becomes available and all future public hearing notices with respect to this project. Please provide all future CEQA notices regarding this project to the undersigned pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.2. If you have any questions regarding the City's comments, please call Scott Reekstin, Principal Planner, at (714) 573-3016 or Krys Saldivar, Public Works Manager, at (714) 573-3172. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director cc: Minh Thai, Executive Director, Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency Matthew S. West, City Manager Nicole Bernard, Assistant City Manager David Kendig, City Attorney John Buchanan, Director of Economic Development and Finance Douglas S. Stack, Public Works Director Chad Clanton, Parks and Recreation Director Ken Nishikawa, Deputy Director of Public Works/Engineering Justina Willkom, Assistant Director— Planning Krys Saldivar, Public Works Manager Scott Reekstin, Principal Planner Ryan Swiontek, Senior Management Analyst S:\Cdd\SCOTT\Environmental etc\Santa Ana Bowery Project DEIR Letter.DOC THE BOWERY MIXED-USE PROJECT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT o4z 44w�, p CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA JANAURY 2020 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2019080011 This page intentionally left blank. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT THE BOWERY MIXED-USE PROJECT SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2019080011 PREPARED FOR: CITY OF SANTA ANA 20 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA, M-25 SANTA ANA, CA 92702 CONTACT: JERRY C. GUEVARA, ASSISTANT PLANNER I PREPARED BY: ENVIRONMENT I PLANNING I DEVELOPMENT SOLUTI❑NS, INC. EPD SOLUTIONS 2 PARK PLAZA, SUITE 1120 IRVINE, CA 92614 CONTACT: KONNIE DOBREVA, JD, PROJECT MANAGER JANUARY 2020 This page intentionally left blank. The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page LISTOF FIGURES.................................................................................................................................................... ii LISTOF TABLES..................................................................................................................................................... iii APPENDICES.......................................................................................................................................................... v ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................................................... vi 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................ 2-1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................................3-1 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING..........................................................................................................................4-1 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS.........................................................................................................5-1 SECTION5.1, AESTHETICS...............................................................................................................................................................5.1 -1 SECTION5.2, AIR QUALITY............................................................................................................................................................. 5.2-1 SECTION5.3, CULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................................................................. 5.3-1 SECTION5.4, ENERGY.....................................................................................................................................................................5.4-1 SECTION5.5, GEOLOGY AND SOILS.............................................................................................................................................. 5.5-1 SECTION5.6, GREENHOUSE GASES...............................................................................................................................................5.6-1 SECTION 5.7, HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS................................................................................................................... 5.7-1 SECTION 5.8, HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY......................................................................................................................... 5.8-1 SECTION 5.9, LAND USE AND PLANNING....................................................................................................................................... 5.9-1 SECTION5.10, NOISE...................................................................................................................................................................5.10-1 SECTION 5.1 1, POPULATION AND HOUSING...............................................................................................................................5.1 1 -1 SECTION5.1 2, PUBLIC SERVICES..................................................................................................................................................5.1 1 -1 SECTION 5.1 3, PARK AND RECREATION........................................................................................................................................5.1 2-1 SECTION5.14, TRANSPORTATION................................................................................................................................................5.1 3-1 SECTION 5.1 5, TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES..............................................................................................................................5.14-1 SECTION 5.1 6, UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS...........................................................................................................................5.1 5-1 SECTION 5.1 7, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE..........................................................................................................5.1 6-1 6.0 ALTERNATIVES.............................................................................................................................................6-1 7.0 EIR PREPARERS AND PERSONS CONTACTED...............................................................................................7-1 City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page FIGURE3-1 REGIONAL LOCATION.................................................................................................................................................3-3 FIGURE3-2 PROJECT LOCATION...................................................................................................................................................3-5 FIGURE3-3 PROJECT SITE AERIAL..................................................................................................................................................3-7 FIGURE3-4 PROPOSED SITE PLAN.............................................................................................................................................. 3-11 FIGURE 3-5 PROPOSED OPEN SPACE PLAN............................................................................................................................... 3-15 FIGURE 3-6 BUILDING ELEVATIONS............................................................................................................................................. 3-17 FIGURE 5.1 -1 EXISTING ONSITE BUILDINGS.................................................................................................................................. 5.1-5 FIGURE5.1 -2 VIEWPOINT LOCATIONS......................................................................................................................................... 5.1-7 FIGURE 5.1 -3 EXISTING SITE VIEWS FROM RED HILL AVENUE...................................................................................................... 5.1-9 FIGURE 5.1-4 VIEWS 3 AND 4: EXISTING VIEWS FROM THE RED HILL AND WARNER INTERSECTION.........................................5.1 -1 1 FIGURE 5.1 -5 VIEWS 5,6, AND 7: EXISTING VIEWS FROM WARNER AVENUE..........................................................................5.1 -1 3 FIGURE 5.1-6 EXISTING NORTHEAST VIEWS ACROSS RED HILL AVENUE....................................................................................5.1-15 FIGURE 5.1-7 EXISTING SOUTHEAST VIEWS ACROSS RED HILL AVENUE....................................................................................5.1-17 FIGURE 5.1 -8 EXISTING VIEWS ACROSS WARNER AVENUE.......................................................................................................5.1 -21 FIGURE 5.1 -9 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGS FROM RED HILL AVENUE............................................................................................5.1 -27 FIGURE 5.1 -10 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGS FROM THE RED HILL AVENUE AND WARNER AVENUE INTERSECTION ........................5.1 -29 FIGURE 5.1 -1 1 CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGS FROM WARNER AVENUE...........................................................................................5.1 -31 FIGURE 5.7-1 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE................................................................................................................5.7-1 1 FIGURE 5.7-2 JOHN WAYNE NOISE IMPACT ZONES.................................................................................................................5.7-1 3 FIGURE 5.7-3 2018 JOHN WAYNE NOISE CONTOURS............................................................................................................5.7-1 5 FIGURE 5.7-4 AELUP NOTIFICATION AREA FOR JWA..............................................................................................................5.7-1 7 FIGURE 5.7-5 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT PLANNING BOUNDARIES AND OBSTRUCTION IMAGINARY SURFACES ........................ ... 5.7-19 FIGURE 5.8-1 ORANGE COUNTY GROUNDWATER PROTECTION AREAS.....................................................................................5.8-7 FIGURE 5.9-1 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE....................................................................................................................................5.9-14 FIGURE 5.9-2 EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATIONS......................................................................................................................5.9-1 6 FIGURE 5.10-1 NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS......................................................................................................................5.1 0-7 FIGURE 5.10-2 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE LEVEL CONTOURS........................................................................................... 5.10-10 FIGURE 5.10-3 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND RECEIVER LOCATIONS...................................................................................... 5.10-15 FIGURE 5.14-1 STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS................................................................................................................................5.14-7 FIGURE 5.14-2 HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT AREA LOCATION..........................................................................................................5.1 4-25 City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES Table Page TABLE1 -1 PROJECT SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................................. 1-2 TABLE 1-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, AND LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................. 1-7 TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF NOP / INITIAL STUDY COMMENT LETTERS....................................................................................2-3 TABLE3-1 PROJECT SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................... 3-10 TABLE 3-2 OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION AMENITIES....................................................................................................... 3-13 TABLE 3-3 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE............................................................................................................................... 3-20 TABLE 4-1 CITIES AND COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES AND INCREASE, 2010-2019 .................................................. 4-13 TABLE 4-2 CITIES AND COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS, 2019-2040..................................................................... 4-13 TABLE 4-3 CITIES AND COUNTY HOUSING ESTIMATES BY TYPE IN 2019 .......................................................................... 4-14 TABLE 4-4 CITIES AND COUNTY HOUSING INCREASES, 2010-2019............................................................................... 4-14 TABLE 4-5 SANTA ANA, TUSTIN, AND IRVINE JOBS BY SECTOR, 2017............................................................................. 4-15 TABLE4-6 JOBS - HOUSING BALANCE..............................................................................................................................4-1 6 TABLE 4-7 SANTA ANA FIRE STATIONS NEAR THE PROJECT SITE........................................................................................ 4-17 TABLE 4-8 EXISTING SCHOOL CAPACITY OF SCHOOLS SERVING THE PROJECT SITE ......................................................... 4-18 TABLE 4-9 SANTA ANA PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES WITHIN MILES OF THE PROJECT SITE ...................................... 4-18 TABLE 4-10 TUSTIN AND IRVINE PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES WITHIN THREE MILES OF THE PROJECT SITE ............. 4-1 9 TABLE 4-1 1 CITY OF SANTA ANA ACTUAL WATER SUPPLY 2015 ...................................................................................... 4-22 TABLE 4-12 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROJECTED WATER DEMAND AND SUPPLY PROJECTIONS (ACRE-FEET) ......................... 4-22 TABLE 5.2-1 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CRITERIA POLLUTANTS...................................................................... 5.2-2 TABLE 5.2-2 AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY 201 6-2018...................................................................................5.2-1 0 TABLE 5.2-3 ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SCAB.......................................................................5.2-1 1 TABLE 5.2-4 EXISTING INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OPERATIONAL AIR QUALITY EMISSIONS..................................................... . 5.2-11 TABLE 5.2-5 SCAQMD REGIONAL AIR QUALITY THRESHOLDS.........................................................................................5.2-1 2 TABLE 5.2-6 SCAQMD LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE CONSTRUCTION THRESHOLDS.......................................................... . 5.2-13 TABLE 5.2-7 MAXIMUM PEAK CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS................................................................................................5.2-1 6 TABLE 5.2-8 SUMMARY OF OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS.......................................................................................................5.2-17 TABLE 5.2-9 SUMMARY OF LOCALIZED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS..................................................................................5.2-17 TABLE 5.2-10 OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES.......................................................................................5.2-1 8 TABLE 5.4-1 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION ELECTRICITY USAGE.............................................................................................. 5.4-6 TABLE 5.4-2 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION FUEL CONSUMPTION........................................................................................... 5.4-6 TABLE 5.4-3 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION WORKER FUEL CONSUMPTION........................................................................... 5.4-7 TABLE 5.4-4 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION VENDOR FUEL CONSUMPTION (MEDIUM HIGH DUTY TRUCKS) .......................... 5.4-7 TABLE 5.4-5 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION HAULING FUEL CONSUMPTION (HEAVY HIGH DUTY TRUCKS) ........................... 5.4-7 TABLE 5.4-6 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATIONAL AUTOMOBILE FUEL CONSUMPTION.......................................................... 5.4-8 TABLE 5.4-7 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATIONAL NATURAL GAS DEMAND.......................................................................... 5.4-8 TABLE 5.4-8 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATIONAL ELECTRICITY DEMAND............................................................................... 5.4-9 TABLE 5.6-1 EXISTING PROJECT SITE GENERATED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.............................................................. 5.6-8 TABLE 5.6-2 SUMMARY OF AMORTIZED CONSTRUCTION GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................ . 5.6-10 TABLE 5.6-3 SUMMARY OF TOTAL PROJECT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.....................................................................5.6-1 1 TABLE 5.6-4 PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH 2008 CARB SCOPING PLAN........................................................................5.6-14 TABLE 5.6-5 PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH 2017 CARB SCOPING PLAN........................................................................5.6-1 5 TABLE 5.6-6 PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH SANTA ANA CAP...........................................................................................5.6-1 9 TABLE 5.8-1 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY PROJECTIONS (ACRE-FEET) ............................................. . 5.8-11 TABLE 5.8-2 2 -YEAR, 24-HOUR STORM SUMMARY..........................................................................................................5.8-1 3 TABLE 5.9-1 CONSISTENCY WITH SCAG REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY ... 5.9-20 TABLE 5.9-2 CONSISTENCY WITH JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN POLICIES ..................................................... . 5.9-21 TABLE 5.9-3 CONSISTENCY WITH RELEVANT GENERAL PLAN GOALS, POLICIES, AND OBJECTIVES .................................. . 5.9-24 TABLE 5.10-1 VIBRATION SCREENING STANDARDS..............................................................................................................5.1 0-3 TABLE 5.10-2 CITY OF SANTA ANA NOISE ELEMENT STANDARDS........................................................................................5.1 0-5 TABLE 5.10-3 CITY OF SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE RESIDENTIAL NOISE STANDARDS.....................................................5.1 0-5 TABLE 5.10-4 SUMMARY OF 24-HOUR AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS.................................................................5.1 0-6 TABLE 5.10-5 CONSTRUCTION REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS...................................................................................................5.10-14 TABLE 5.10-6 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION NOISE..................................................................................................................5.10-17 TABLE 5.10-7 CONSTRUCTION NOISE RELATED AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL INCREASES (DBA LEG)..........................................5.10-17 City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect Table of Contents TABLE 5.10-8 TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS AT RESIDENTIAL EXTERIOR COMMON AREAS.............................................................5.10-18 TABLE 5.10-9 EXISTING WITH PROJECT OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE.......................................................................................5.10-19 TABLE 5.10-10 OPENING YEAR (2022) WITH PROJECT OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE..............................................................5.10-19 TABLE 5.1 0-1 1 YEAR 2040 WITH PROJECT OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS...................................................................5.1 0-20 TABLE 5.10-12 FIRST FLOOR RESIDENTIAL INTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (CNEL).........................................................................5.1 0-21 TABLE 5.10-13 SECOND FLOOR RESIDENTIAL INTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (CNEL)....................................................................5.1 0-21 TABLE 5.10-14 THIRD FLOOR RESIDENTIAL INTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (CNEL)........................................................................5.1 0-22 TABLE 5.10-15 FOURTH THROUGH SIXTH FLOORS RESIDENTIAL INTERIOR NOISE LEVELS (CNEL)........................................5.1 0-23 TABLE 5.10-16 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT VIBRATION LEVELS...........................................................................................5.1 0-24 TABLE 5.11 -1 CITIES AND COUNTY POPULATION ESTIMATES AND INCREASE, 2010 - 2019 .............................................5.1 1-4 TABLE 5.11-2 CITIES AND COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS, 2019 - 2040................................................................5.1 1-4 TABLE 5.11-3 CITIES AND COUNTY HOUSING ESTIMATES BY TYPE IN 2019 .......................................................................5.11-5 TABLE 5.11-4 CITIES AND COUNTY HOUSING INCREASE, 2010 - 2019...........................................................................5.1 1-6 TABLE 5.11-5 SANTA ANA, TUSTIN, AND IRVINE JOBS BY SECTOR, 2017..........................................................................5.1 1-6 TABLE5.11-6 JOBS - HOUSING BALANCE...........................................................................................................................5.11-8 TABLE 5.11-7 ANTICIPATED RESIDENTS AT FULL OCCUPANCY..............................................................................................5.11-9 TABLE 5.11-8 JOBS - HOUSING BALANCE WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT........................................................................5.11-10 TABLE 5.12-1 SANTA ANA FIRE STATIONS NEAR THE PROJECT SITE.....................................................................................5.1 2-3 TABLE 5.12-2 EXISTING SCHOOL CAPACITY OF SCHOOLS SERVING THE PROJECT SITE.....................................................5.12-10 TABLE 5.13-1 SANTA ANA PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES WITHIN THREE MILES OF THE PROJECT SITE........................5.1 3-2 TABLE 5.13-2 TUSTIN AND IRVINE PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES WITHIN THREE MILES OF THE PROJECT SITE..............5.1 3-3 TABLE 5.13-3 AVERAGE TRAVEL TIME IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TO OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS................................5.1 3-6 TABLE 5.14-1 EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE..................................................................................................5.1 4-4 TABLE 5.14-2 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ICU AND LOS.........................................................................................................5.14-9 TABLE 5.14-3 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONTROL DELAY AND LOS AT A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION..................................5.1 4-9 TABLE 5.14-4 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DELAY AND LOS AT A TWSC INTERSECTION........................................................5.14-10 TABLE 5.14-5 PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION........................................................................................................5.1 4-1 1 TABLE 5.14-6 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE......................................................5.14-13 TABLE 5.14-7 SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE PROJECT TRIPS..................................................................................................5.14-15 TABLE 5.14-8 OPENING YEAR 2022 PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE................................5.14-17 TABLE 5.14-9 MITIGATED OPENING YEAR 2022 PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICES ......... 5.14-1 9 TABLE 5.14-10 YEAR 2040 PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE.................................................5.1 4-20 TABLE 5.14-11 YEAR 2040 PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE WITH MITIGATION.................................................................5.1 4-22 TABLE 5.16-1 CITY OF SANTA ANA ACTUAL WATER SUPPLY 2015 ...................................................................................5.1 6-4 TABLE 5.16-2 CITY OF SANTA ANA PROJECTED WATER DEMAND AND SUPPLY PROJECTIONS (ACRE-FEET) ......................5.1 6-4 TABLE 5.16-3 EXISTING WATER DEMANDS ASSUMED IN CITY ENTITLEMENTS......................................................................5.1 6-7 TABLE 5.16-4 WATER DEMANDS FROM OPERATION OF THE PROJECT.................................................................................5.1 6-8 TABLE 5.16-5 2 -YEAR, 24-HOUR STORM SUMMARY.........................................................................................................5.16-13 TABLE 5.16-6 SOLID WASTE DEMAND FROM OPERATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT...................................................5.16-16 TABLE 6-1 EXISTING INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OPERATIONAL AIR QUALITY EMISSIONS.............................................................6-7 TABLE 6-2 TRIP COMPARISON REDUCED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE......................................................................................... 6-18 TABLE 6-3 COMPARISON OF REDUCED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE YEAR 2040 LOS AT PROJECT IMPACTED LOCATIONS...... 6-19 TABLE 6-4 TRIP GENERATION OF THE BUILD OUT OF THE EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING ALTERNATIVE ....................... 6-25 TABLE 6-5 TRIP COMPARISON OF THE PROJECT AND BUILD OUT OF THE EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING .................... 6-26 TABLE 6-6 COMPARISON OF THE PROJECT AND BUILD OUT OF THE EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING ALTERNATIVE YEAR 2040 LOS AT PROJECT IMPACTED LOCATIONS................................................................................................................................. 6-26 TABLE 6-7 IMPACT COMPARISON OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES........................................................... 6-29 TABLE 6-8 COMPARISON OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVES ABILITY TO MEET OBJECTIVES ......................... 6-30 City of Santa Ana iv Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect Table of Contents APPENDICES Appendix Title APPENDIX A....................................................................................................................................................... NOP AND NOP COMMENTS APPENDIX B...................................................................................................................................................AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX C............................................................................................................................................................. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT APPENDIX D.............................................................................................................................. PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT APPENDIX E..................................................................................................................................................... GREENHOUSE GAS ANALYSIS APPENDIX F.............................................................................................................................. PHASE 11 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT APPENDIX G................................................................................................................. PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDIX H..................................................................................................................................................... WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT APPENDIX I.............................................................................................................................................................. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX J..................................................................................................................................... PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD EVALUATION APPENDIX K...........................................................................................................................................................TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX L............................................................................................................................................................ SEWER IMPACT ANALYSIS City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect Table of Contents °C Pg/ms AB 52 ACM AF ALUC ALUCP amsl AQIA AQMP APN ATCM BAAQMD BACM BACT Basin BAU BFE bgs BMPs CAA CAAA CAAQS CalEEMod CALGreen CAP CARB CBC CCAA CDFW CC&Rs CEC CEQA CESA CGEU CGS CH4 CHAPIS CHRIS CNDDB CNEL CNPS CO CO2 CO2e CRHR CTP CUP dB ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS degrees celsius micrograms per cubic meter California Assembly Bill 52 asbestos -containing material acre-feet Airport Land Use Commission Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan above mean sea level Air Quality Impact Analyses Air Quality Management Plan Assessor's Parcel Number airborne toxic control measure Bay Area Air Quality Management District best available control measure best available control technology South Coast Air Quality Basin business as usual base flood elevation below ground surface Best Management Practices Clean Air Act of 1970 CAA Amendments of 1990 California Ambient Air Quality Standards California Emissions Estimator Model California Green Building Standards Code Climate Action Plan of 2013 California Air Resources Board California Building Code California Clean Air Act of 1988 California Department of Fish and Wildlife Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions California Energy Commission California Environmental Quality Act California Endangered Species Act California Gas and Electric Utilities 2016 California Gas Report California Geological Survey methane Community Health Air Pollution Information System (CARB) California Historical Resources Inventory System California Natural Diversity Database community noise equivalent level California Native Plant Society carbon monoxide carbon dioxide carbon dioxide equivalent California Register of Historical Resources Clean Truck Program Conditional Use Permit decibel City of Santa Ana vi Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use dBA A -weighted decibels DPM diesel particulate matter DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control EIR Environmental Impact Report EMS Emergency Medical Services ESA Environmental Site Assessment FAR floor area ratio Table of Contents FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FESA Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program gal/day gallons per day GHG greenhouse gas GWP global warming potential Handbook Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (CARB 2005) HAPS hazardous air pollutants HCM Highway Capacity Manual HCP Habitat Conservation Plan HDT Heavy Duty Trucks HFCs hydroflourocarbons Hot Spots Act Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 HP horsepower HPLV High Pressure Low Volume HVAC heating, ventilating, and air conditioning ICU intersection capacity utilization I Interstate 1-5 Santa Ana Freeway LBP lead-based paint LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LEV Low Emission Vehicle LID low impact development LOS level of service LSTs localized significance thresholds MACT maximum available control technology MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 MCC Material Culture Consulting mgd million gallons per day MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMT million metric tons MPO metropolitan planning organization MT metric tons MT CO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards N2O nitrous oxide NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NALs numeric action levels NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan NESHAP national emissions standards for HAPS NH3 ammonia NHPA National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 NHTSA National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration NMC New Model Colony City of Santa Ana vii Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect Table of Contents NOP Notice of Preparation NO2 nitrogen oxide NOX nitrogen oxide NOI Notice of Intent NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS U.A. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Os ozone ODC Ontario Development Code ONT Ontario International Airport PA Planning Area Pb lead PDF project design feature PFCs perflourocarbons PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter PM10 particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter ppb parts per billion PPP Plans, Programs, and Policies PRC Public Resources Code PRIMP Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Plan PWS public water supplier REC recognized environmental conditions ROG reactive organic gas RTP Regional Transportation Plan RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SB Senate Bill SB 18 California Senate Bill 18, Ch. 905 (2004) SC Standard Condition SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center SCE Southern California Edison Company SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy SF square feet SFe sulfur hexaflouride SIP state implementation plan SO2 sulfur dioxide SOs sulfur trioxide SO4 sulfates SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company SOX sulfur oxides SP Specific Plan SR State Route SR -60 Pomona Freeway SR -83 Euclid Avenue SRA Source Receptor Area SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan SWQMP Storm Water Quality Management Plan SWRCB Storm Water Resources Control Board TACs toxic air contaminants TIA Traffic Impact Analysis tpy tons per year TTCP traditional tribal cultural places City of Santa Ana viii Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect Table of Contents TUA traditional use area USDA United States Department of Agriculture USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service UTRs utility tractors UWMP Urban Water Management Plan VdB velocity levels expressed in decibel notation VMT vehicle miles travelled VOC volatile organic compounds WDR Waste Discharge Requirements WFA Water Facilities Authority Williamson Act California Land Conservation Act of 1965 WQC Water Quality Certification City of Santa Ana ix Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed-Use Protect Table of Contents This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 1. Executive Summary 1. Executive Summary This Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) evaluates the environmental effects that may result from the construction and operation of the proposed Bowery Mixed -Use Project (proposed Project). This EIR has been prepared in conformance with State and City of Ontario environmental policy guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The EIR is being circulated for review and comment by the public and other interested parties, agencies and organizations for 45 days in accordance with Section 15087 and Section 15105 of the CEQA Guidelines. During the 45 -day review period, the Draft EIR will be available for public review at the City's website:(https: //www.santa-ana.org /pb /planning -division major-planningprojects-and- documents/bowery-2300-south-red-hill-avenue) or physically at the following locations: City of Santa Ana, Planning Division Counter City of Santa Ana Public Library 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-20 26 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Written comments related to environmental issues in the Draft EIR should be addressed to: Jerry C Guevara, Assistant Planner I City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency PO BOX 1988 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Email: jguevara@santa-ana.org A Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR was published concurrently with distribution of this document. 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION The Project site is 14.58 acres and is located at 2300, 2310, and 2320 South Redhill Avenue in the City of Santa Ana. (For the purposes of this EIR, the site's addresses are identified by the City of Santa Ana name for the roadway, which is "South Redhill Avenue". In the rest of the EIR, the roadway is identified as "Red Hill Avenue," as it is named in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine.) The site is identified by APNs 430-222-01 and 430-222-16. The site is located at the southwest corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. Regional access to the Project site is generally provided via the Costa Mesa (SR -55) Freeway at the Dyer Road exit. Access to the Project site is provided by Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The Project site is located within the southeastern most portion of the City of Santa Ana. Areas across from Red Hill Avenue (to the east) are within the City of Tustin and are part of the former Tustin Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), now known as the Tustin Legacy. Areas across from Dyer Road (0.5 mile south of the site) are in the City of Irvine, within the Irvine Business Complex (IBC). 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY The Project would redevelop the Project site for new commercial and multi -family residential uses. The proposed Project would demolish the three existing buildings and remove all of the existing improvements, landscaping, and pavement. The Project would then construct a 4 -phase mixed-use development that would City of Santa Ana 1 -1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 1. Executive Summary include up to 1,150 multi -family residential units and up to 80,000 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant space. The proposed Project would develop 3 mixed use buildings that would be 6 -stories in height and one residential building that would be 5 -stories in height. Each building of these buildings would have an adjacent parking structure. Two parking structures would provide 7 -levels of above ground parking and two would provide 6 levels of above ground parking. In addition, the Project would develop two one-story retail/restaurant commercial buildings and a surface parking lot. The tallest point of the Project would be approximately 94 feet from the ground level, which would be at the top of the architectural trim of the 6 - story buildings. See Figure 3-4, Conceptual Site Plan. Parking spaces would be provided at a rate of approximately 1.7 spaces per residential unit and 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. In addition, the Project would include 94 Electrical Vehicle (EV) parking spaces. The proposed development within each phase is listed in Table 3-1. Table 1-1: Project Summary Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Total Residential Units: 295 Total Residential Units: 262 Total Residential Units: 335 Total Residential Units: 258 • Studios: 59 • Studios: 38 • Studios: 69 • Studios: 38 • 1 Bedrooms: 155 • 1 Bedrooms: 145 • 1 Bedrooms: 167 • 1 Bedrooms: 135 • 2 Bedrooms: 81 • 2 Bedrooms: 79 • 2 Bedrooms: 99 • 2 Bedrooms: 85 Residential Parking: 527 Residential Parking: 457 Residential Parking: 570 Residential Parking: 440 EV Spaces: 28 EV Spaces: 27 EV Spaces: 30 EV Spaces: 9 Commercial: 40,000 sf Commercial: 20,000 sf Commercial: 20,000 sf -- Commercial Parking: 200 Commercial Parking: 130 Commercial Parking: 100 The proposed multi -family residential units would be for rental purposes and would be developed at a density of up to 79 dwelling units per acre. The proposed unit mix consists of 204 studios (17.7 percent), 602 one -bedrooms (52.4 percent), and 344 two -bedrooms (29.9 percent) residential units and would range in size from approximately 635 square feet to over 1,120 square feet. Residential units would have between 50 square feet and 80 square feet of outdoor terrace area. Open Space, Recreation, and Amenities The Project would provide open space and recreation amenities for residents that would include: open space plazas, courtyards, roof decks, and interior amenities. The Project would provide a total of 174,555 square feet of exterior open space recreation area and approximately 8,008 square feet of interior amenities to total 183,363 square feet of recreational and open space onsite. Each of the four residential buildings would have a recreational open space area that would include a pool, spa/hot tub, outdoor kitchen, seating areas, fitness center, club room. Site Access Vehicular access to the Project site would be provided via a full -access driveway and a right-in/right-out driveway on Warner Avenue and a right-in/right-out driveway on Red Hill Avenue. The proposed full -access driveway on Warner Avenue would be slightly offset to the east from the adjacent driveway on the north side of Warner Avenue. This driveway would be signalized with split -phase operation in the northbound and southbound direction. The split phase operation is necessary to ensure safety of ingress and egress for the Project and for the driveway on the north side of Warner Avenue. City of Santa Ana 1-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 1. Executive Summary Onsite parking would be provided in 3 parking structures and one surface parking lot. The site design would also include pedestrian/bicycle paths to provide for non -vehicular onsite circulation and connection to existing sidewalks and bike lanes adjacent to the Project site. Wastewater Infrastructure Wastewater from the Project site currently discharges into an existing City -owned 8 -inch sewer line within Warner Avenue. The Project includes replacing approximately 367 feet of the existing 8 -inch City sewer line in Warner Avenue, between the Project site and the Orange County Sanitation sewer line in Red Hill Avenue, with a 10 -inch sewer. In addition, the Project would install a new onsite sewer system that would connect to off-site City of Santa Ana sewer facilities. Approximately half the Project site would discharge wastewater directly into a City -owned manhole located at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. The other half of the Project site would discharge wastewater into the improved 10 -inch sewer in Warner Avenue to the existing 42 -inch sewer in Red Hill Avenue. Drainage Infrastructure The existing topography of the Project site is relatively flat and the site is 75 percent impervious. As part of development of the Project a new onsite storm water drainage system would be installed that could convey runoff to four Modular Wetland System units for water quality treatment in the parking lot along Redhill Avenue, which have been sized to treat runoff from the Design Capture Storm (85th percentile, 24-hour) from the proposed Project. The Modular Wetland System units are devices that are manufactured to mimic natural systems such as bioretention areas by incorporating plants, soil, and microbes engineered to provide treatment at higher flow rates or volumes and with smaller footprints than their natural counterparts. Treated runoff from the Modular Wetland System units would slowly discharge into the existing 84 -inch storm drain in Red Hill Avenue. General Plan Land Use and Zoning The Project site has an existing General Plan land use designation of Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) and a zoning designation of Light Industrial (M-1). A General Plan Land Use Amendment and zone change are required to allow for the proposed mixed -uses. The Project is requesting to change the General Plan land use designation to District Center (DC) and a zone change to Specific Development (SD). The DC land use designation would allow residential uses up to a maximum of 90 dwelling units per acre; and the SD zoning designation would provide site-specific standards for the mixed-use Project. 1.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The following objectives have been identified in order to aid decision makers in their review of the proposed Project and its associated environmental impacts. • Develop a mixed-use Project that constructs new multi -family residential units, which would help meet the region's demand for housing. • Transform an underutilized site with an economically viable development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and Irvine Business Complex (IBC) and combines residential uses with community -serving retail near employment opportunities, freeway access, and transit. City of Santa Ana 1-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 1. Executive Summary • Redevelop existing land uses that would utilize existing infrastructure, including: water, sewer, arterial roadways, transit, and freeways; and provide non -vehicular (pedestrian and bicycle) circulation. • Develop a mix of housing to assist the City in meeting its jobs/housing balance. • Provide onsite uses that reduce vehicular miles traveled (VMT) by providing an internal pedestrian circulation system that links residential uses, recreation areas, and retail/commercial areas onsite. • Implement the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Land Use Policies related to population and housing by providing additional housing near employment centers. 1.4 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES Section 6.0, Alternatives, of this EIR analyzes a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed Project. The alternatives that are analyzed in detail in Section 6.0 are summarized below. Alternative 1: No Project/No Build Alternative. Under this alternative, the proposed Project would not be developed, and no development would occur. The existing three industrial buildings would remain. In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the No Project/No Build Alternative for a development project on an identifiable property consists of the circumstance under which the Project does not proceed. Section 15 1 26.6(e)(3)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines states that, "In certain instances, the no project alternative means `no build' wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained." Accordingly, Alternative 1: No Project/No Build provides a comparison between the environmental impacts of the proposed Project in contrast to the result from not approving, or denying, the proposed Project. Thus, this alternative is intended to meet the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 151 26.6(e) for evaluation of a no project alternative. Alternative 2: Reduced Project Alternative. Under this alternative, a reduction in the number of residential units and commercial square footage would be built, which would result in increased setbacks and reduced building heights. Pursuant to discussion with City planning staff, it was determined that a reasonable decrease in developed on the Project site is 30 percent of each unit type and a 30 percent reduction in commercial retail space. Thus, like the proposed Project 17 percent of the units would be studios, 52 percent would be one -bedroom units, and 29 percent would be 2 -bedroom units. This alternative would develop and operate 805 multi -family residential units and 56,000 square feet of retail and restaurant commercial uses. Reducing these units from the proposed Project would eliminate 100 units from the three proposed mixed use buildings and 45 units from the residential only building, which would reduce the height of the three 6 - story mixed use buildings by two stories and reduce the height of the one 5 -story building by one story. Thus, each of the mixed-use and residential buildings would be 4 -stories in height under the Reduced Project Alternative. To support the reduced project under this alternative parking spaces would be provided at the same rate as the proposed Project of 1.7 spaces per residential unit and 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space within a two 4 -level parking structures and two 5 -level parking structures, which would each be two levels lower than the proposed Project. The 24,000 square foot reduction in commercial space would occur from reducing the Phase 1 commercial square footage from 40,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet and from reducing the Phase 3 commercial square footage from 20,000 square feet to 16,000 square feet. City of Santa Ana 1-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 1. Executive Summary Under the Reduced Project Alternative, the recreation amenities would also be reduced by 30 percent; thus, approximately 122,189 square feet of exterior open space recreation area and approximately 5,606 square feet of indoor amenities would be provided by this alternative. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would require a General Plan Amendment from the existing land use designation of PAO (Professional and Administrative Office) to District Center (DC), and a Zone change from M-1 (Light Industrial) to a Specific Development (SD) designation. Alternative 3: Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative. The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) with a designated Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.5 and is zoned Light Industrial (M-1). Under this alternative, the Project site would be redeveloped for new light industrial uses as allowed by the existing General Plan Land Use designation and the City's Zoning Code Sections 41-472 through 41-483. The Project site has a zoning designation of Light Industrial (M-1), which permits uses such as: warehousing, distribution, manufacture, assembly, and storage. The M-1 zone allows buildings up to 3 -stories or 35 -feet in height. At the allowable 0.5 FAR, the 14.58 -acre site would provide for approximately 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space and building heights of up to 35 -feet. These buildings would require approximately 635 parking spaces (per Municipal Code Section 41 -1390 requirement of 2 spaces per 1,000 square feet). The industrial buildings would be surrounded by drought tolerant ornamental landscaping. Under this alternative, the existing onsite development would be demolished, removed, and replaced to provide new building structures that would be developed pursuant to current building requirements, such as energy efficient power systems, drought tolerant landscaping, storm water filtration, and other Low Impact Development (LID) requirements. 1.5 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS Table 1-2 summarizes the conclusions of the environmental analysis contained in this EIR. The level of significance of impacts after the proposed mitigation measures are applied are identified as significant and unavoidable, less than significant, and no impact. Relevant standard conditions of approval are identified, and mitigation measures are provided for all potentially significant impacts. City of Santa Ana 1-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 1. Executive Summary This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 1-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Table 1-2: Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Level of Significance Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation 5.1 Aesthetics Impact AE -1: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Impact AE -2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant damage scenic resources, including, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. Impact AE -3: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings (public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point); and would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Impact AE -4: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant 5.2 Air Quality Impact AQ -1: The Project would result Significant Emissions from operation of the Project would Significant and in a conflict with or obstruct exceed SCAQMD's threshold for VOCs that Unavoidable implementation of the applicable air would be derived from consumer products quality plan. and vehicular activity that neither the Project Applicant nor the City have the ability to reduce emissions of. There are no feasible Impact AQ -2: The Project would result - PPP AQ -1: Rule 403. The following g Significant Significant and in a cumulatively considerable net measures shall be incorporated into p mitigation measures to reduce VOC Unavoidable increase of a criteria pollutant for which emissions. the Project region is non -attainment City of Santa Ana 1-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation under an applicable federal or state construction plans and specifications ambient air quality standard. as implementation of Rule 403: o All clearing, grading, earth- Impact AQ -3: The Project would not Less than significant Less than significant result in exposure of sensitive receptors moving, or excavation activities to substantial pollutant concentrations. shall cease when winds exceed in mph per SCAQMD guidelines order to limit fugitive dust Impact AQ -4: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant result in emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a emissions. substantial number of people. o The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and Cumulative disturbed areas within the Project Significant There are no feasible mitigation measures Significant and are watered at least three (3) to reduce cumulative VOC emissions. Unavoidable times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in the mid- morning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day. o The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. PPP AQ -2: Rule 1113. The following measure shall be incorporated into construction plans and specifications as implementation of Rule 1113. The Project shall only use "Low -Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)" paints (no more than 50 gram/liter of VOC) consistent with SCAQMD Rule 1113. PPP AQ -3: Rule 445. The following measure shall be incorporated into construction plans and specifications City of Santa Ana 1-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation as implementation of Rule 445. Wood burning stoves and fireplaces shall not be included or used in the new development. 5.3 Cultural Resources Impact CUL -1: The Project would not No impact None required No impact cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Impact CUL -2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. Impact CUL -3: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant 5.4 Energy Impact E-1: The Project would not result Less than significant None required Less than significant in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation. Impact E-2: The Project would not No impact None required No impact conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant City of Santa Ana 1-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation 5.5 Geology and Soils Impact GEO-1 is The Project would not No impact None required No impact directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. Impact GEO-Iii: The Project would not PPP GEO-1: CBC Compliance. The Less than significant None required Less than significant directly or indirectly cause potential Project is required to comply with substantial adverse effects, including the California Building Standards the risk of loss, injury, or death involving Code (CBC) as included in the City's strong seismic ground shaking. Municipal Code as Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1, to preclude significant adverse effects associated with seismic and soils hazards. As part of CBC compliance, CBC related and geologist and/or civil engineer specifications for the proposed Project shall be incorporated into grading plans and building specifications as a condition of construction permit approval. Impact GEO-1 iii: The Project would not PPP GEO-1: CBC Compliance, Less than significant None required Less than significant directly or indirectly cause potential listed above substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction. Impact GEO-1 iv: The Project would not No impact None required No impact directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including City of Santa Ana 1-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides. Impact GEO-2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Impact GEO-3: The Project would not PPP GEO-1: CBC Compliance, Less than significant None required Less than significant be located on a geologic unit or soil that listed above is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. Impact GEO-4: The Project would not PPP GEO-1: CBC Compliance, Less than significant None required Less than significant be located on expansive soil, as listed above defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. Impact GEO-5: The Project would not No impact None required No impact 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. Impact GEO-6: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Cumulative PPP GEO-1: CBC Compliance Less than significant None required Less than significant 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact GHG-1: The Project would Significant Approximately 60 percent of the GHG Significant and generate GHG emissions, either directly emissions would be generated by vehicle Unavoidable or indirectly, that may have a significant trips. Neither the Project Applicant nor the impact on the environment. Lead Agency (City of Santa Ana) can substantively or materially reduce the Impact GHG-2: The Project would Significant vehicular -source GHG emissions. Significant and conflict with any applicable plan, policy Unavoidable City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Cumulative Significant Significant and Unavoidable 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact HAZ-1: The Project would not PPP HAZ-1: SCAQMD Rule 1403. Significant Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to issuance Less than significant create a significant hazard to the public Prior to issuance of demolition of a grading permit, a Soil Management or the environment through the routine permits, the Project applicant shall Plan (SMP) shall be prepared by a qualified transport, use or disposal of hazardous submit verification to the City hazardous materials consultant and shall materials. Building and Safety Division that an detail procedures and protocols for asbestos survey has been conducted excavation and disposal of onsite hazardous at all existing buildings located on materials, including: the Project site. If asbestos is found, • A certified hazardous waste hauler shall the Project applicant shall follow all remove all potentially hazardous soils. procedural requirements and Excavation of contaminated soils shall regulations of South Coast Air be removed. In addition, sampling of Quality Management District Rule soil shall be conducted during 1403. Rule 1403 regulations excavation to ensure that all require that the following actions be contaminated soils are removed, and taken: notification of SCAQMD prior that residential Environmental Screening to construction activity, asbestos Levels (ESLs) for residential uses are not removal in accordance with exceeded. Excavated materials shall prescribed procedures, placement be transported per California of collected asbestos in leak -tight Hazardous Waste Regulations to a containers or wrapping, and proper landfill permitted by the state to accept disposal. hazardous materials. • Any subsurface materials exposed PPP HAZ-2: Lead. Prior to issuance during construction activities that of demolition permits, the Project appear suspect of contamination, either applicant shall submit verification to from visual staining or suspect odors, the City Building and Safety Division shall require immediate cessation of that a lead-based paint survey has excavation activities. Soils suspected of been conducted at all existing contamination shall be tested for buildings located on the Project site. potential contamination. If If lead-based paint is found, the contamination is found to be present per Project applicant shall follow all the California Department of Toxic procedural requirements and Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional regulations for proper removal and City of Santa Ana 1-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions or Plan, Program, Policy Level of Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation disposal of the lead-based paint. Water Quality Control Board Cal -OSHA has established limits of (RWQCB) ESLs for residential uses, it exposure to lead contained in dusts shall be transported and disposed of and fumes. Specifically, CCR Title 8, per California Hazardous Waste Section 1532.1 provides for Regulations to an appropriately exposure limits, exposure permitted landfill. monitoring, and respiratory • A Health and Safety Plan (HSP) shall be protection, and mandates good prepared for each contractor that working practices by workers addresses potential safety and health exposed to lead. hazards and includes the requirements and procedures for employee protection. The HSP shall also outline proper soil handling procedures and health and safety requirements to minimize worker and public exposure to hazardous materials during construction. • All SMP measures shall be printed on the construction documents, contracts, and project plans prior to issuance of grading permits. Impact HAZ-2: The Project would not PPP HAZ-1: SCAQMD Rule 1403, Significant Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Soil Less than significant create a significant hazard to the public listed above. Management Plan, listed above or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving the release of PPP HAZ-2: Lead, listed above. hazardous materials into the environment. PPP WO -1: NPDES/SWPPP. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the applicant shall provide the City Building and Safety Division evidence of compliance with the NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) requirement to obtain a construction permit from the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB). The permit requirement applies to grading and City of Santa Ana 1-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation construction sites of one acre or larger. The Project applicant/proponent shall comply by submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI) and by developing and implementing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a monitoring program and reporting plan for the construction site. PPP WO -2: WQMP. Prior to the approval of the Grading Plan and issuance of Grading Permits a completed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be submitted to and approved by the City Building and Safety Division. The WQMP shall identify all Post - Construction, Site Design. Source Control, and Treatment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be incorporated into the development project in order to minimize the adverse effects on receiving waters. Impact HAZ-3: The Project would not PPP HAZ-1: SCAQMD Rule 1403, Less than significant None required Less than significant emit hazardous emissions or handle listed above hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed PPP HAZ-2: Lead, listed above school. Impact HAZ-4: The Project would not No impact None required No impact be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. City of Santa Ana 1-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation Impact HAZ-5: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area for a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such plan has not been adopted, be within 2 miles of a public airport use airport or public use airport. Impact HAZ-6: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Impact HAZ-7: The Project would not No impact None required No impact expose people or structures either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Cumulative PPP HAZ-1, PPP HAZ-2, PPP WQ- Less than significant None required Less than significant 1, PPP WQ-2. 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality Impact WO -1: The Project would not PPP WO -1: NPDES/SWPPP, listed Less than significant None required Less than significant violate any water quality standards or above waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. PPP WO -2: WQMP, listed above Impact WO -2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Impact WO -3: The Project would not PPP WO -1: NPDES/SWPPP, listed Less than significant None required Less than significant substantially alter the existing drainage above pattern of the site or area, including City of Santa Ana 1-15 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation through the alteration of the course of a PPP WO -2: WQMP, listed above stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Impact WO -4: The Project would not PPP WO -1: NPDES/SWPPP, listed Less than significant None required Less than significant substantially alter the existing drainage above pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition PPP WO -2: WQMP, listed above of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site. Impact WO -5: The Project would not PPP WO -1: NPDES/SWPPP, listed Less than significant None required Less than significant substantially alter the existing drainage above pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition PPP WO -2: WQMP, listed above of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Impact WO -6: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows. Impact WO -7: The Project would not risk No impact None required No impact release of pollutants due to Project inundation in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. City of Santa Ana 1-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation Impact WO -8: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Cumulative PPP WQ-1 and PPP WQ-2, listed Less than significant None required Less than significant a bove. 5.9 Land Use and Planning Impact LU -1: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant physically divide an established community. Impact LU -2: The Project would not Potentially significant Mitigation Measure LU -1: The Development Less than significant cause a significant environmental Agreement that is required for impact due to a conflict with any land implementation of the proposed Project shall use plan, policy, or regulation adopted include a clause requiring that all prospective for the purpose of avoiding or residents of the Project site shall be notified mitigating an environmental effect. of airport related noise. Notification shall be included in lease/rental agreements and shall state the following: "Notice of Airport in Vicinity. This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations related to noise. Individual sensitivities to noise annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property and determine whether they are acceptable to you. Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant City of Santa Ana 1-17 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation 5.10 Noise Impact NOI-1: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Impact NOI-2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Impact NOI-3: The Project would not Potentially significant Mitigation Measure LU -1: Airport, listed Less than significant expose people residing or working in above. the Project area to excessive noise levels. Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant 5.11 Population and Housing Impact POP -1: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant induce substantial unplanned 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). Impact POP -2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant 5.12 Public Services Impact PS -1: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of City of Santa Ana 1-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation new or physically altered fire facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services. Impact PS -2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police services. Impact PS -3: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered school facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant 5.13 Parks and Recreation Impact PR -1: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Impact PR -2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. City of Santa Ana 1-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation Impact PR -3: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant 5.14 Transportation Impact TR -1: The Project would conflict Significant Mitigation Measure TR -1: Grand Significant and with a program, plan, ordinance, or Avenue/Warner Avenue (#4) (Santa Ana): Unavoidable policy addressing the circulation system, The Development Agreement that is required including transit, roadway, bicycle, and for implementation of the proposed Project pedestrian facilities. shall include a clause requiring payment of a fair share contribution to the improvement to add an eastbound protected right -turn overlap phase and prohibit northbound U- turns at the intersection of Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue. Mitigation Measure TR -2: Red Hill Avenue/Barranca Parkway (#30) (Santa Ana/Tustin/Irvine): The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring payment of the full cost or implementation of an additional westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and to prohibit southbound U-turns. The installation of this improvement is subject to the approval of the Cities of Tustin and Irvine. Mitigation Measure TR -3: Red Hill Avenue/Alton Parkway (#32) (Santa Ana/Irvine): The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause City of Santa Ana 1-20 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation requiring payment of the full cost or implementation of a westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and to prohibit southbound U-turns. The installation of this improvement is subject to the approval of the City of Irvine. Mitigation Measure TR -4: Tustin Ranch Road/Warner Avenue North (#47) (Tustin): The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring payment of a fair share contribution to restripe the 3rd northbound through lane as a shared through -right lane and remove the northbound right turn overlap. The installation of this improvement is subject to the approval of the City of Tustin. Impact TR -2: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b). Impact TR -3: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Impact TR -4: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant result in inadequate emergency access. Cumulative Significant Mitigation Measures TR -1 through TR -4, Significant and listed above. Unavoidable 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources Impact TCR -1: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of City of Santa Ana 1-21 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions or Plan, Program, Policy Level of Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). Impact TCR -2: The Project would not Potentially significant Mitigation Measure TCR -1: Native Less than significant cause a substantial adverse change in American Monitoring. Prior to the issuance the significance of a resource of any permits for initial site clearing (such as determined by the lead agency, in its pavement removal, grubbing, tree removals) discretion and supported by substantial or issuance of permits allowing ground - evidence, to be significant pursuant to disturbing activities that cause excavation to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of depths greater than artificial fill (including Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, as boring, grading, excavation, drilling, that considers the significance of the potholing or auguring, and trenching), the resource to a California Native City of Santa Ana shall ensure that the American tribe. project applicant/developer retain qualified Native American Monitor(s). The monitor(s) shall be approved by the tribal representatives of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and be present on-site during initial site clearing and construction that involves ground disturbing activities that cause excavation to depths greater than artificial fill identified herein. The monitor shall conduct a Native American Indian Sensitivity Training for construction personnel. The training session includes a handout and focus on how to identify Native American resources encountered during earthmoving activities and the procedures followed if resources are discovered. The Native American monitor(s) shall complete monitoring logs on a daily basis, providing descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when grading and excavation activities of native soil (i.e., previously undisturbed) are completed, or when the tribal representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low City of Santa Ana 1-22 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation potential for tribal cultural resources, whichever occurs first. In the event that tribal cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during ground - disturbing activities, work must be halted within 50 feet of the find until it can also be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist in cooperation with a Native American monitor to determine if the potential resource meet the CEQA definition of historical (State CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(a)) and/or unique resource (Public Resources Code 21083.2(g)). Construction activities could continue in other areas. If the find is considered an "archeological resource" the archaeologist, in cooperation with a Native American monitor shall pursue either protection in place or recovery, salvage and treatment of the deposits. Recovery, salvage and treatment protocols shall be developed in accordance with applicable provisions of Public Resource Code Section 21083.2 and State CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 and 151 26.4. If unique a tribal cultural resource cannot be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state, recovery, salvage and treatment shall be required at the Project applicant's expense. All recovered and salvaged resources shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation in an established accredited professional repository. Cumulative Potentially significant Mitigation Measure TCR -1: Inadvertent Less than significant Discoveries., listed above. 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems Impact UT -1: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant require or result in the relocation or construction of new water facilities, the City of Santa Ana 1-23 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions Level of Significance Mitigation Measures Significance after or Plan, Program, Policy before Mitigation Mitigation construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Impact UT -2: The Project would have Less than significant None required Less than significant sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Impact UT -3: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant require or result in the construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Impact UT -4: The Project would result in Less than significant None required Less than significant 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. Impact UT -5: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant 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. Impact UT -6: The Project would not Less than significant None required Less than significant generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Impact UT -7: The Project would comply No impact None required No impact with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. City of Santa Ana 1-24 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive Impact Applicable Standard Conditions or Plan, Program, Policy Level of Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Cumulative Less than significant None required Less than significant City of Santa Ana 1-25 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 1. Executive This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 1-26 Draft EIR January 2020 2. Introduction This Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) evaluates the environmental effects that may result from the construction and operation of the proposed Project. This EIR has been prepared by the City of Santa Ana in its capacity as Lead Agency, as that term is defined in Section 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.) and in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.). This EIR has been prepared to identify, analyze, and mitigate the significant environmental effects of the proposed Project. CEQA requires each EIR to reflect the independent judgment of the Lead Agency, including but not limited to the thresholds of significance used to analyze Project impacts, analyses and conclusions regarding the level of significance of impacts both before and after mitigation, the identification and application of mitigation measures to avoid or reduce Project -related impacts, and the consideration of alternatives to the proposed Project. In preparing this EIR, the City of Santa Ana has employed CEQA and environmental technical specialists; however, the analyses and conclusions set forth in this EIR reflect the independent judgment of the City as Lead Agency. 2.1 PURPOSE OF AN EIR CEQA requires that all state and local governmental agencies consider the environmental consequences of projects over which they have discretionary authority prior to taking action on those projects. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15121 (a), this EIR is intended as an informational document to inform public agency decision makers and the general public of the significant environmental effects of the proposed Project, identify possible ways to avoid or minimize those significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to the Project that might avoid or lessen significant environmental effects. Thus, this EIR is intended to aid the review and decision-making process. The CEQA Guidelines provide the following information regarding the purpose of an EIR: • Project Information and Environmental Effects. An EIR is an informational document that will inform public agency decision -makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effect(s) of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to the project. The public agency shall consider the information in the EIR along with other information that may be presented to the agency (CEQA Guidelines Section 15121(a)). • Standards for Adequacy of an EIR. An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to enable decision makers to make an intelligent decision that takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed Project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure (CEQA Guidelines Section 15151). As a public disclosure document, the purpose of an EIR is not to recommend either approval or denial of a project, but to provide information regarding the physical environmental changes that would result from an action being considered by a public agency to aid in the agency's decision-making process. City of Santa Ana 2-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 2.2 EIR SCOPE AND CONTENT 2. Introduction Impacts Found to Be Potentially Significant. The City determined that an EIR should be prepared for the Red Hill and Warner Mixed -Use Project. As a result, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was prepared and circulated between July 26, 2019 (Modified on August 5, 2019) and August 29, 2019 for the required 30 - day review period. The purpose of the NOP was to solicit early comments from public agencies with expertise in subjects that are discussed in this Draft EIR. The NOP and written responses to the NOP are contained in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. The City of Santa Ana also held a scoping meeting for the Project to solicit oral and written comments from the public and public agencies. The public scoping meeting was held on August 15, 2019. Comments received at the meeting are contained in Appendix A of this EIR. Topics requiring a detailed level of analysis evaluated in this EIR have been identified based upon the responses to both the NOP and a review of the Project by the City of Santa Ana. The City determined through the initial review process that impacts related to the following topics are potentially significant and required a detailed level of analysis in this EIR: • Aesthetics • Air Quality • Cultural Resources • Energy • Geology and Soils • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use and Planning • Noise • Population and Housing • Public Services • Parks and Recreation • Transportation • Tribal Cultural Resources • Utilities and Service Systems Impacts Found Not to Be Significant. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(a) states that "[a]n EIR shall identify and focus on the significant effects on the environment". Topics that have been determined not to be significant and are therefore are not discussed in detail in the EIR were identified based upon the responses to the NOP and a review of the Project by the City of Santa Ana. The City determined through the initial review process that impacts related to the following topics are not potentially significant and are not required to be analyzed in this EIR: • Agriculture & Forest Resources • Biological Resources 2.3 EIR PROCESS Notice of Preparation/initial Study • Mineral Resources • Wildfire Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the City of Santa Ana, as Lead Agency, prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the proposed Project, which was distributed on July 26, 2019 (Modified on August 5, 2019) for a 30 -day public review and comment period that ended on August 29, 2019. The NOP requested members of the public and public agencies to provide input on the scope and content of environmental impacts that should be included in the EIR being prepared. Comments received on the NOP are included in Appendix A and summarized in Table 2-1, which also includes a reference to the EIR section(s) in which issues raised in the comment letters are addressed. City of Santa Ana 2-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Table 2-1: Summary of NOP/Initial Study Comment Letters Comment Letter and Comment Relevant EIR Section State Agencies State Clearinghouse, August 1, 2019 This letter provides a copy of the State Clearinghouse NOP form that was EIR Appendix A sent to responsible state agencies and states that responsible agencies must submit comments on the scope of the NOP within 30 days of receipt of the NOP from the lead agency. The letter also provides the State Clearinghouse number for the CEQA documents (2019080011). State Department of Transportation/Caltrans, August 23, 2019 This letter provides details regarding the mission of Caltrans and recommends that the EIR should address the following comments: 1 . The proposed Project is adjacent to the Tustin Legacy development, which is a 1,600 -acre development that can include 6,800 new residential units. The comment suggests that cumulative impacts from both developments will have a significant impact on the local transportation system and requests coordination with the City of Tustin to develop strategies to mitigate impacts on the local transportation system. 2. As stated in Caltrans' Toward an Active California, the State's Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, the agency's goal is to triple biking, double walking, and double transit trips by 2020. Caltrans has the following comments related to this goal: • The City of Santa Ana's Active Transportation Plan (2019) shows the following proposed bicycle facilities nearby: Class IV on Warner Avenue; Class II on Carnegie Avenue; and Class II on Pullman Street. Additionally, the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (2017) notes the following proposed bicycle facilities nearby: Class II on Red Hill Avenue; Class II on Warner Avenue; Class II on Victory Road; and Class II on Armstrong Avenue. There is also an existing Class II on Barranca Parkway. The comment suggests coordination with the City of Tustin to construct the planned bicycle facilities on Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. • The comment encourages the design of Complete Streets that include high-quality pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities; such as secure bicycle storage, high visibility crosswalks, wayfinding signage, transit shelters, and Class IV separated bikeways. • The comment encourages the use of transit and states that Orange County Transpiration Authority (OCTA) operates bus routes near the Project site that include: Route 472 that runs from the Tustin Metrolink Station to Irvine Business Complex; and Route 71 that runs from the City of Yorba Linda to the City of Newport Beach. The comment requests transit service not be disrupted during construction. • The comment states that the Tustin Metrolink Station is located three miles away from the Project site, and the OCTA Bus Route 472 provides a direct connection to Tustin Metrolink. The comment also states that bicycle facilities improve first -last -mile connections to the stations. The comment states that the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (2017) proposes a Class I trail through the Tustin Legacy Park that runs diagonally from Red Hill Avenue and Barranca Parkway to the Tustin Metrolink Station. 3. The comment recommends installing electric vehicle charging stations within the development, and to include vanpooling and carpooling parking spaces at convenient locations to promote these services and reduce the number of automobiles on the road. 2. Introduction Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, & Transportation City of Santa Ana 2-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Comment Letter and Comment I Relevant EIR Section 4. The comment recommends incorporating designated areas/parking for freight delivery and micro -transit pick-up and drop-off in the site plan design for the Project. 5. The comment requests the Traffic Impact Study for the project provide an analysis of State Route (SR) -55, including a queuing analysis at Dyer Road and Newport Avenue. b. The comment requests the Traffic Impact Study for the project provide an analysis of SR -261, including traffic circulation to Jamboree Road. 7. The comment requests inclusion of a Traffic Management Plan to avoid disrupting normal traffic conditions. 8. The comment states that work in the vicinity of the State Right -of -Way (ROW) would require an encroachment permit and all environmental concerns to be adequately addressed. If the environmental documentation for project does not meet Caltrans's requirements for work done within the ROW, additional documentation would be required before approval of the encroachment permit. The letter also requests that Caltrans continues to be informed of the Project and any future developments that could potentially impact State transportation facilities. State Native American Heritage Commission, August 9, 2019 This letter states that compliance with AB 52 applies to any project for which a notice of preparation, notice of negative declaration, or a mitigated negative declaration is filed on or after July 1, 2015. In addition, if the project involves the adoption of an amendment to a general plan or a specific plan, or the designation of proposed designation of open space, on or after March 1, 2015, it may also be subject to Senate Bill 18. The NAHC recommends consultation with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed Project as early as possible in order to avoid inadvertent discoveries of Native American human remains and best protect tribal cultural resources. A brief summary of portions of AB 52 and SB 18, as well as the NAHC's recommendations for conducting cultural resource assessments is provided. Examples of mitigation measures that, if feasible, would avoid or minimize significant adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources are also provided. Regional Agencies Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, August 29, 2019 This letter provides details regarding the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and its interest in the Project's environmental impacts. The letter identifies two of its pipelines adjacent to the site: • The East Orange County Feeder No. 2 pipeline with Service Connection SA -07, appurtenant manhole, air release and vacuum valve structure located along Red Hill Ave and, • Santa Ana Cross Feeder pipeline and Service Connection OC -58 located on Warner Ave. The Santa Ana Cross Feeder pipeline is no longer in service and is abandoned. The letter requests that MWD facilities be fully shown and identified on Project plans and that preliminary plan be submitted for MWD review. The letter also states that MWD supports using water efficient fixtures, drought - City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 2. Introduction Cultural Resources & Tribal Cultural Resources Hydrology & Water Quality, Utilities & Service Systems 2-4 The Bowery Mixed -Use Comment Letter and Comment Relevant EIR Section tolerant landscaping, and reclaimed water to offset any increase in water use associated with the proposed Project. South Coast Air Quality Management District, August 20, 2019 This letter references the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook and recommends using the methodologies of the Handbook to evaluate impacts of the Project, including use of the CalEEMod model, recommended regional significance thresholds, and localized significance thresholds (LSTs) or dispersion modeling. The letter recommends a mobile health risk assessment related to diesel particulate matter (DPM) from heavy-duty diesel -fueled vehicles. In addition, it recommends using the adopted Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning in 2005. Impacts associated with implementing mitigation measures and a meaningful discussion of alternatives is also recommended. The comment also states that the EIR should include the following information: • Disclosure on potential health impacts to prospective residents from living in proximity to industrial and warehouse uses, and the reduced effectiveness of air filtration system when windows are open and when residents are outdoor; • Identification of the responsible implementing and enforcement agency such as the Lead Agency for ensuring that enhanced filters are installed on-site at the proposed Project before a permit of occupancy is issued; • Identification of the responsible implementing and enforcement agency such as the Lead Agency's building and safety inspection unit to provide periodic, regular inspection on filters; • Provide information and guidance to the Project developer or proponent on the importance of filter installation and ongoing maintenance; • Provide information to residents about where the MERV filers can be purchased; • Disclosure on increased costs for purchasing enhanced filtration systems to prospective residents; • Disclosure on increased energy costs for running the HVAC system with MERV filters to prospective residents; • Disclosure on recommended schedules (e.g., once a year or every six months) for replacing the enhanced filtration units to prospective residents. Southern California Association of Governments, August 29, 2019 This letter states that Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the designated Regional Transportation Agency and the clearinghouse for regionally significant projects and reviews projects for consistency with local and regional plans. The letter provides a list of the 2016 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Goals and Strategies that may be applicable to the proposed Project. In addition, the letter provides the SCAG Regional Growth Forecast data for the SCAG region and the City of Santa Ana. The letter also recommends review of SCAG recommended mitigation measures from the 2016 RTP/SCS Final EIR. 2. Introduction Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Emissions Transportation, Population and Housing City of Santa Ana 2-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Comment Letter and Comment Relevant EIR Section County and City Agencies Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County, August 28, 2019 This letter provides details regarding the Project's location within the primary aircraft approach corridor to John Wayne Airport and its location within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 Notification Area for JWA. The letter details that any project within this notification area needs to be reviewed by FAA and is required to file FAA Form 7460-1. The letter states that the Draft EIR should address all FAR Part 77 imaginary surfaces given the close proximity of the proposed Project to John Wayne Airport (JWA). The letter also recommended that the Draft EIR discuss how all required coordination with FAA was or will be completed. It also states that because the Project site is located under the aircraft approach corridor and conical surface for JWA, the Draft EIR should discuss maximum building heights and existing ground elevation to address whether the proposed Project is below the imaginary surfaces for JWA. The comment also recommends that the Draft EIR address land use compatibility impacts, safety impacts, visual impacts and outdoor recreational area impacts given the Project's location within the JWA primary aircraft approach corridor. The comment states that the Draft EIR should discuss the noise related to aircraft overflight. The comment also requests that prospective residents be notified of the presence of aircraft overflight via an EIR mitigation measure. The letter also states that Draft EIR should identify if the Project will be impacted by helicopter overflight due to the proximity of helicopter arrival and departure operations at JWA and if the Project allows for heliports as defined in the Orange County Airport Environs Land Use Plans (AELUP) for Heliports. The comment also recommends that because the Project is within the JWA AELUP planning area and requires a General Plan Amendment, it be referred to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a Consistency determination with the AELUP for JWA. Orange County Public Works, August 29, 2019 The Orange County Public Works Department provides the following comments for consideration: 1. The comment states that the Draft EIR for the Project should clearly identify the possible impacts to Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) facilities, such as Barranca Storm Drain (Facility No. F09P15) that is in the vicinity of the Project and contains deficient segments that are not capable of conveying runoff from the 100 -year storm event. The comment states that appropriate measures should be provided to address impacts, and minimize increased runoff resulting from the Project. 2. The comment states that hydrologic and hydraulic analyses should be performed to evaluate and compare quantitatively the runoff volumes, peak flow rate increases, adequacy of existing drainage facilities to ensure existing conditions are not worsened in the post -project condition. The comment states that the analyses should be consistent with the Orange County Hydrology Manual (OCHM), Addendum No. 1 to the OCHM, the Orange County Flood Control Design Manual, the Orange County Local Drainage Manual, and other related design criteria. 3. The comment states that the City should ensure that the proposed development is adequately protected from flooding in a 100 -year storm event. 2. Introduction Hazards & Hazardous Materials, Land Use & Planning, Noise Hydrology & Water Quality, Utilities & Service Systems, Transportation City of Santa Ana 2-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 2. Introduction Comment Letter and Comment Relevant EIR Section 4. The comment states that the City should ensure that floodplains are properly identified and that structures are located outside the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) a 1 00 -year floodplain, or designed in conformance with local floodplain ordinances, and FEMA regulations. The letter requests that a copy of the Traffic Study be provided to the County's Traffic Engineering for review, when it becomes available. John Wayne Airport, August 28, 2019 This letter provides details regarding the Project's location under the primary Hazards & Hazardous Materials, aircraft approach corridor to JWA and that JWA is not supportive of the Land Use & Planning, proposed residential portion of the Project. The letter states that the City Noise should give consideration as to how noise complaints would be addressed should the project be approved. The letter requests that the Draft EIR address all impacts related to airport compatibility, including but not limited to noise, land use and safety. Additionally, the letter requests that the Draft EIR address the visual impacts of aircraft flying above the site and impacts to proposed outdoor recreational areas. The letter also requests that the City include a project alternative in the Draft EIR that does not include residential uses at the site. City of Irvine, August 28, 2019 The City of Irvine provides the following comments for consideration: 1 . The letter requests inclusion the following intersections in the study area as the Project is in the Irvine Business Complex (IBC) sphere of influence. • Red Hill Avenue from Warner Avenue to MacArthur Boulevard; • MacArthur Boulevard from Red Hill Avenue to Michelson Drive; and • Barranca Parkway/Dyer Road from SR -55 to Jamboree Road. 2. The letter requests that the City contact the Irvine traffic modeling analyst to verify the existing, interim, and buildout land use and network assumptions within the City of Irvine's study area. Additionally, the letter requests use of the latest version of the Irvine Transportation Analysis Model (ITAM) when forecasting future traffic for the interim year and buildout conditions. 3. The letter requests that the traffic study analyze the existing, interim, and buildout years with "no project" and "with project" scenarios. 4. The letter requests use of the City of Irvine's performance criteria to analyze impacts within Irvine. If any impacts are identified on any Irvine arterials or intersections, include mitigation measures in the EIR findings. 5. The letter requests that the traffic study, identify project contributions towards any planned roadway improvements including, the widening of Dyer Road between Red Hill Avenue and the SR -55 ramps from 6 to 8 lanes, and roadway improvements associated with the Alton/SR-55 Overcrossing Project. 6. The letter requests that the Project minimize operational deficiencies along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, and to apply the City of Irvine's Transportation Design Procedures (TDPs), dated February 2007, to full access driveways and/or limited access driveways along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue (i.e. signal warrants, distance between driveways and intersections, left -turn pocket storage lengths, and more). 7. The letter requests that the City be contacted for a list of pending projects to include in the traffic analysis, and that Irvine is concurrently processing development projects within the Irvine Business Complex (IBC). Transportation & Traffic City of Santa Ana 2-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Comment Letter and Comment Relevant EIR Section 8. The letter requests that truck routes that would be utilized during the construction phase of the Project be identified. City of Tustin, August 22, 2019 This letter states that the City of Tustin is concerned with the significant changes in land uses proposed by the Project, other recent projects, and the new land uses being contemplated by the Santa Ana General Plan Update that could result in significant traffic and park cumulative impacts. The comment suggests that the General Plan Update and the focused General Plan Amendment for the Red Hill Avenue corridor be completed before the proposed Project is considered. The letter states that the Santa Ana Municipal Code requires park acquisition and development fees or parkland dedication at a standard of 2 acres per 1,000 persons and if parkland is not provided onsite it could physically deteriorate the City of Tustin's existing and proposed park and recreational facilities. The comment states that these impacts should be evaluated and mitigated in the Draft EIR. The letter states that the EIR should include a study of how far residents would travel to a park and the location of existing and future parks. The letter states that the Traffic Impact Analysis for the Project include the following: Tustin arterial roadways between Barranca Parkway/Dyer Road and the 1-5 in between the SR -55 and Jamboree Road. The letter states that the greatest potential impacts are anticipated to occur along Red Hill Avenue, Warner Avenue, and Barranca Parkway. The intersection of Tustin Ranch Road/Barranca Parkway is especially sensitive to additional impacts, as it is already expected to operate at unacceptable levels. The Red Hill Avenue /1-5 Ramp intersections along with the adjacent intersections at Nisson Road and EI Camino Real should be included. The letter states that the City of Tustin is not supportive of an additional traffic signal to serve the proposed development on Red Hill Avenue, nor the installation of median breaks to provide turning movements across the median. The letter also states that a traffic signal would likely be required on Warner Avenue; that the analysis be conducted pursuant to the City of Tustin methodology; and that mitigation be included to reduce impacts. Lozeau Drury, LLP, August 22, 2019 This letter requests notice of any and all actions or hearings related to the Project, including the following: • Notice of any public hearing in connection with the Project as required by California Planning and Zoning Law pursuant to Government Code Section 65091. • Any and all notices prepared for the Project pursuant to the CEQA. • All actions and notices of any public hearings to be held, as well as a copy of all Planning Commission and City Council meetings and/or hearing agendas. 2. Introduction Land Use and Planning, Traffic, Parks and Recreation City of Santa Ana 2-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 2. Introduction Comment Letter and Comment Relevant EIR Section Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters, August 29, 2019 This letter provides details of the Southwest Carpenters Council and their interest in the Project's environmental impacts. The letter also requests that the Lead Agency provide notice for any and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under CEQA and states that the commenter reserves the right to supplement the letter at or prior to hearings or proceedings related to the Project. Orange County Sanitation District, October 7, 2019 This letter advises that the Sanitation District does not allow parking structure Utilities & Service Systems drains to be connected to the sewer. Public Scoping Meeting Pursuant to Section 15082(c)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Santa Ana hosted a public scoping meeting for members of the public and public agencies to provide input as to the scope and content of the environmental information and analysis to be included in the EIR for the proposed Project. The scoping meeting was held on August 15, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. at the Embassy Suites located at 1325 East Dyer Road in Santa Ana. A representative from the City of Tustin attended the meeting and raised concerns about the proposed General Plan Amendment while the City of Santa Ana is undergoing a comprehensive General Plan update, and if cumulative impacts would be adequately considered. Potential impacts related to the proposed General Plan Amendment are described in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, and cumulatively considerable impacts are evaluated throughout Chapter 5 of this Draft EIR. Public Review of the Draft EIR The City of Santa Ana filed a Notice of Completion with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, indicating that this EIR has been completed and is available for review. A Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR was published concurrently with distribution of this document. The Draft EIR is being circulated for review and comment by the public and other interested parties, agencies and organizations for 45 days in accordance with Section 15087 and Section 15105 of the CEQA Guidelines. During the 45 -day review period, the Draft EIR is available for public review digitally on the City's website:(https://www.santa-ana.org/pb/planning-division/major-planning-projects-and- clocuments/bowery- 23 00 -south -red -hil I -avenue) or physically at the following locations: City of Santa Ana, Planning Division Counter City of Santa Ana Public Library 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-20 26 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Written comments related to environmental issues in the Draft EIR should be addressed to: Jerry C Guevara, Assistant Planner I City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency PO BOX 1988 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Email: jguevara@santa-ana.org City of Santa Ana 2-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 2. Introduction Final EIR Upon completion of the 45 -day review period, written responses to all comments related to the environmental issues in the Draft EIR will be prepared and incorporated into a Final EIR. The written responses to comments will be made available at least 10 days prior to the public hearing at which the certification of the Final EIR will be considered. These comments, and their responses, will be included in the Final EIR for consideration by the City, as well as other responsible agencies per CEQA. The Final EIR may also contain corrections and additions to the Draft EIR, and other information relevant to the environmental issues associated with the Project. The Final EIR will be available for public review prior to its certification by the City. Notice of the availability of the Final EIR will be sent to all who commented on the Draft EIR. 2.3 ORGANIZATION OF THIS DRAFT EIR The Draft EIR is organized into the following Sections. To help the reader locate information of interest, a brief summary of the contents of each chapter of this Draft EIR is provided. • Section 1 Executive Summary: This section provides a brief summary of the Project area, the proposed Project, and alternatives. The section also provides a summary of environmental impacts and mitigation measures that lists each identified environmental impact, applicable Project design features, standard conditions, proposed mitigation measure(s) (if any), and the level of significance after implementation of the mitigation measure. The level of significance after implementation of the proposed mitigation measure(s) will be characterized as either less than significant or significant and unavoidable. • Section 2 Introduction: This section provides an overview of the purpose and use of the EIR, the scope of this EIR, a summary of the legal authority for the EIR, a summary of the environmental review process, and the general format of the document. • Section 3 Project Description: This section provides a detailed description of the proposed Project, its objectives, and a list of Project -related discretionary actions. • Section 4 Environmental Setting: This section provides a discussion of the existing conditions within the Project area. • Section 5 Environmental Impact Analysis: This section includes a summary of the existing statutes, ordinances and regulations that apply to the environmental impact area being discussed; the analysis of the Project's direct and indirect environmental impacts on the environment, including potential cumulative impacts that could result from the proposed Project; any applicable Project design features; standard conditions and plans, policies, and programs that could reduce potential impacts; and the feasible mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate the significant adverse impacts identified. Impacts that cannot be mitigated to less than significant are identified as significant and unavoidable. This section also summarizes the significant and unavoidable impacts that would occur from implementation of the proposed Project and provides a summary of the environmental effects of the implementation of the proposed Project that were found not to be significant. Additionally, this section provides a discussion of various CEQA-mandated considerations including growth -inducing impacts and the identification of significant irreversible changes that would occur from implementation of the proposed Project. City of Santa Ana 2-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 2. Introduction • Section 6 Alternatives: This section describes and analyzes a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project. The CEQA-mandated No Project Alternative is included along with alternatives that would reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed Project. As required by the CEQA Guidelines, the environmentally superior alternative is also identified. • Section 7 Report Preparation and Persons Contacted: This section lists authors of the Draft EIR and City staff that assisted with the preparation and review of this document. This section also lists other people that were contacted for information that is included in this EIR document. 2.4 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE In accordance with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines and to reduce the size of the report, the following documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this EIR and are available for public review at the City of Santa Ana, Planning Division, 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701. A brief summary of the scope and content of these documents is provided below. City of Santa Ana General Plan: The City of Santa Ana General Plan provides a general, comprehensive, and long-range guide for community decision-making. Each element of the General Plan addresses a certain aspect of the City's growth and development. The individual elements identify goals and policies for existing and future conditions within the City. The following elements comprise the City's General Plan: • Airport Environs (adopted February 11, 2009) • Circulation (adopted February 2, 1998) • Conservation (adopted September 20, 1982) • Economic Development (adopted July 6, 1998) • Education (adopted January 19, 1988) • Energy (adopted September 20, 1982) • Growth Management (adopted July 1, 1991) • Housing (revised January 27, 2014) • Land Use (adopted February 2, 1998) • Noise (adopted September 20, 1982) • Open Space, Parks and Recreation (adopted September 20, 1982) • Public Facilities (adopted September 20, 1982) • Public Safety (adopted September 20, 1982) • Seismic Safety (adopted September 20, 1982) • Scenic Corridors (adopted September 20, 1982) • Urban Design (adopted July 6, 1998) The General Plan is utilized throughout this document as a fundamental planning document governing development within the City. Background information and policy information from the General Plan is cited in various sections of this EIR. Santa Ana Municipal Code: The City of Santa Ana Municipal Code consists of regulatory, penal, and administrative ordinances of the City of Santa Ana. The Municipal Code guides the City's control of land uses, in concert with General Plan goals, objectives, and policies. The City's Zoning Code (Chapter 41 of the City of Santa Ana 2-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 2. Introduction Municipal Code) identifies land uses permitted and prohibited according to the zoning category of particular parcels. The Municipal Code and Zoning Code are utilized throughout this document as a regulatory document governing development and land use activities within the City. Regulatory information from the Municipal Code and Zoning Code is cited in various sections of this EIR. City of Santa Ana 2-12 Draft EIR January 2020 3. Project Description 3.1 PROJECT LOCATION The Project site is 14.58 acres and is located at 2300, 2310, and 2320 South Redhill Avenue in the City of Santa Ana. (For the purposes of this EIR, the site's addresses are identified by the City of Santa Ana name for the roadway, which is "South Redhill Avenue". In the rest of the EIR, the roadway is identified as "Red Hill Avenue," as it is named in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine.) The site is identified by APNs 430-222-01 and 430-222-16. The site is located at the southwest corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. Regional access to the Project site is generally provided via the Costa Mesa (SR -55) Freeway at the Dyer Road exit. The regional location of the Project site is shown in Figure 3-1. Access to the Project site is provided by Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The Project site is located within the southeastern most portion of the City of Santa Ana. Areas across from Red Hill Avenue (to the east) are within the City of Tustin and are part of the former Tustin Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), now known as the Tustin Legacy. Areas across from Dyer Road (0.5 mile south of the site) are in the City of Irvine, within the Irvine Business Complex (IBC). The local vicinity is shown is Figure 3-2. 3.2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS The Project site is relatively flat and approximately 60 feet above mean sea level (msl). The site is currently developed with three partially occupied industrial buildings, parking areas, and vehicle circulation drives. The site has little vegetation other than an approximately 2.5 -acre undeveloped grass area at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenues, some ornamental trees scattered throughout the site, and street trees along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The 3 existing buildings total 212,121 square feet and consist of the following structures: 2300 South Redhill Avenue: 30,129 square foot building with a 3,330 SF square foot mezzanine and 6 loading docks • 2310 South Redhill Avenue: 68,992 square foot building with a 9,992 square foot mezzanine office and 6 loading docks • 2320 South Redhill Avenue: 113,000 square foot building with a 43,000 square foot mezzanine office and 7 loading docks The buildings are currently utilized by various lessees, which include 119,121 square feet that is utilized by warehousing and distribution operations; 5,000 square feet that is utilized for research and development; and 30,000 square feet in the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building that is being utilized as a 200 -bed temporary homeless shelter by the City of Santa Ana. The remaining 53,000 square feet of building area is currently vacant. The Project site was formerly occupied by Ricoh Electronics, Inc., a manufacturer and distributor of thermal paper and toner from approximately 1985 through 2017. The existing buildings are three-story high concrete industrial buildings. Building exteriors are distinguished by detailing around the entrances that include steel framed or wood framed doorways, and various loading docks. Wire fencing currently surrounds the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building that is located on the northeastern portion of the Project site, and approximately 6 -foot high retaining wall is located on the western boundary of the Project site. Lighting is present in parking areas and on the exterior of the buildings, mainly focused on entrances and exits, as well as loading docks. An aerial photograph of the Project site is shown as Figure 3-3. City of Santa Ana 3-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) and is zoned Light Industrial (M-1). The original industrial manufacturing development and use of the Project site was consistent with the uses that were previously provided in the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station, across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site, within the City of Tustin, as described below. 3.3 DESCRIPTION OF ADJACENT AREAS The Project site is located within an urban area that is either fully developed or planned for urban development. Northwest and Southwest: The site is bounded to the northwest and southwest by existing business park and industrial warehouse buildings, associated parking lot areas, and a portion of an abandoned BNSF rail line spur. North: Warner Avenue (a 6 -lane arterial roadway) bounds the site to the north, followed by commercial office uses. Areas across Warner Avenue from the site are within the City of Tustin. East: Red Hill Avenue (a 6 -lane arterial roadway) is adjacent to the site on the east. Areas across Red Hill Avenue from the site are within the City of Tustin and Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area. Tustin Legacy Specific Plan The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area was formerly used as a U.S. Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) and is a large area that is under redevelopment and planned by the City of Tustin to become a new mixed-use urban center providing: single-family residential, multi -family residential, mixed-use, commercial retail, office, schools, parks, and other public facilities. The Tustin Legacy Land Use Plan consists of 13 Planning Areas and numerous sub -planning areas. Areas directly across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site are within Planning Area 9-12, which is also identified as Neighborhood E — Employment Center. The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan describes that the employment center is to provide a business park setting for a full range of professional offices, research & development, and commercial uses. Currently, this area has been approved for development of 870,000 square feet of modern creative office space and supporting retail that includes: a food hall, a conference center, and outdoor multi -use space. Of this, 470,000 square feet of office space, the food hall, and conference center has been developed and is operational. Additionally, areas across the street from the site, on the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, are within Planning Area 1, Education Village (within Neighborhood A), which is designated to provide a range of public -serving uses that include education, training, park and recreation, and specific social service functions. The Tustin Legacy Planning Areas further west, beyond Planning Areas 9-12 and 1, are identified for both single and multi -family residential uses. The Tustin Legacy is currently partially developed with these new planned uses, including residential units along Edinger Avenue, The District at Tustin Legacy commercial center at the northwest corner of Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway, and public facilities to the northwest of the Red Hill and Warner intersection (Orange County Sheriff Training Academy, Orange County Animal Shelter). Overall, the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan is a large planned development area that is across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site that is planned to include urban development of residential, mixed -uses, commercial, and office space. City of Santa Ana 3-2 Draft EIR January 2020 Regional Location rarra'b 4 ¢' Edison A Colima Rd Chino ry Whittier Hills �Fk J Merrill A sMari r i., ' Biqa F,actFZd 1b eo I a 7 ,-", r�6 �a c� Loe Aneeles \ c � puna v 0 cTel 61 ° z Br range 4��\ z oc a r \ I Norwalk— L Lir,-r, -r \ o I idra Blvd ye Fr /°• Yorba Linda 11% yo,h,Li�dag, \ I at Fullerton I' Wyk.,z,�d�o JAye \ 9 - ,Buena Park , �� y� 016, Y S deb- ,�� �K ur ch f29 \ Lincoln Ave W Lincoln Ave 4Qa. Anahel -- E Nor \\ m \ rnE Me sO \ Ba Rd 1'; Rall Ra E Ball Rd y C an i tri-:. =w e- _mom° \ KatellaAve y. > �` 0 \ m z 5 o �z a r- range E Chapmoc St �� s " So, Garden G, -Garden t'r ov—��� o' O oveFWy °. Westminster " t''I"' �' Santa Ana Ii - Bolsa Ave rn W tstSt 1� Tustin McFadden A o r -per- c Sa Edinger Aver t 3�6 h r. 1 0 a PROJECT SITE wa £ o Warner Ave �- 2d1 Fountain 6� c 0 Ellis Ave Valley c rn P" �p�9 e ptl =� Irvine /. Huntington Al. %a Beach A c Cta osMesa o�anv 00 1y,, 0 3i ke Forest �n sr ' Mission Viejo Newport Beach y�Y Laguna Woods `4F Q�' �dQrrR�yrr Laguna Hills a C�sry4 = ons Corr,.11 Oso/'k�y ,tc Aliso Viejo `Laguna Nigu a� °asrywy Laguna Beach ��� c A f C 1 \�Oi = cc N Project Site A— The Bowery Figure 3-1 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 3-4 Draft EIR January 2020 < E Edin �g_ r A v e 0111011' SI Santa Ada E St Andrf?,v u1 u 77 LQ YJ LJ John Wayne Airport John I.'._'r 1, � _ Orang—i-IJ11tv - Airpot t Newport Beach M Project Site The Bowery Draft EIR Irvine Project Location PROJECT SITE Tustin ryLti "»d M anne Corps Air Station -,-J) Tustin Legacy The District A t Tu sti n Legacy -�z National Geographic, Fsri, Garmin, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA, FSA, MFTI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, inc-ri N A Figure 3-2 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 3-6 Draft EIR January 2020 Project Site Aerial Project Site The Bowery Figure 3-3 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 3-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description Irvine Business Complex Areas 0.35 miles to the south and south east of the Project site, across from Dyer Road/Barranca Parkway are in the City of Irvine, within the Irvine Business Complex (IBC), which is a 2,800 -acre master planned community that is a developed urban area. Typical land uses within the IBC include medium- to high-density residential, commercial, institutional, professional/medical offices, industrial manufacturing, research and development, support service retail, restaurants, and hotel/motels. Since early 2004, there has been substantial redevelopment of nonresidential uses to high-density, urban -style residential development sites within in the IBC (IBC 2009). These areas have been traditionally occupied by smaller -scale office and industrial operations and have been evolving to mixed-use neighborhoods (IBC 2009). 3.3. PROJECT OBJECTIVES The following objectives have been identified in order to aid decision makers in their review of the proposed Project and its associated environmental impacts. • Develop a mixed-use Project that constructs new multi -family residential units, which would help meet the region's demand for housing. • Transform an underutilized site with an economically viable development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and Irvine Business Complex (IBC) and combines residential uses with community -serving retail near employment opportunities, freeway access, and transit. • Redevelop existing land uses that would utilize existing infrastructure, including: water, sewer, arterial roadways, transit, and freeways; and provide non -vehicular (pedestrian and bicycle) circulation. • Develop a mix of housing to assist the City in meeting its jobs/housing balance. • Provide onsite uses that reduce vehicular miles traveled (VMT) by providing an internal pedestrian circulation system that links residential uses, recreation areas, and retail/commercial areas onsite. • Implement the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Land Use Policies related to population and housing by providing additional housing near employment centers. 3.4 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS "Project," as defined by the State CEQA Guidelines, means: 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 that is any of the following: (1) ... enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, and the adoption and amendment of local General Plans or elements thereof pursuant to Government Code Sections 65100-65700." (14 Cal. Code of Reg. § 15378(a).) The Project analyzed in this EIR is the adoption of the Project that would be developed in four phases. The EIR analyzes buildout at a Project level of detail, based upon the entitlement applications that are being considered by the City, compared to the existing conditions. 3.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT City of Santa Ana 3-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description Project Overview As described previously in Section 3.2, Description of Adjacent Areas, both the Cities of Tustin and Irvine have developed plans (Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and the IBC) that are adjacent or near the Project site, which encourage mixed-use development providing residential, professional office, retail, flex, industrial, hospitality and institutional uses. The recent and proposed development patterns occurring in the Tustin Legacy and IBC involve a general shift from traditional industrial uses towards more residential and mixed- use development near employment opportunities. The original development and use of the Project site for industrial manufacturing in 1979 and 1981 was consistent with the military and industrial land uses within the adjacent MCAS and nearby IBC. As the original development of the Project site was consistent with development in the MCAS and the IBC, it follows that the land use trends within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area and the IBC could also currently influence land uses within its vicinity. Thus, consistent with the land use and redevelopment trends in the area, the Project site is now being proposed for redevelopment into a mixed-use neighborhood, as detailed below. Proposed Site Redevelopment The Project would redevelop the Project site for new commercial and multi -family residential uses. The proposed Project would demolish the three existing buildings and remove all of the existing improvements, landscaping, and pavement. The Project would then construct a 4 -phase mixed-use development that would include up to 1,150 multi -family residential units and up to 80,000 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant space. The proposed Project would develop 3 mixed use buildings that would be 6 -stories in height and one residential building that would be 5 -stories in height. Each building of these buildings would have an adjacent parking structure. Two parking structures would provide 7 -levels of above ground parking and two would provide 6 levels of above ground parking. In addition, the Project would develop two one-story retail/restaurant commercial buildings and a surface parking lot. The tallest point of the Project would be approximately 94 feet from the ground level, which would be at the top of the architectural trim of the 6 - story buildings. See Figure 3-4, Proposed Site Plan. Parking spaces would be provided at a rate of approximately 1.7 spaces per residential unit and 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. In addition, the Project would include 94 Electrical Vehicle (EV) parking spaces. The proposed development within each phase is listed in Table 3-1. Table 3-1: Project Summary Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Total Residential Units: 295 Total Residential Units: 262 Total Residential Units: 335 Total Residential Units: 258 • Studios: 59 • Studios: 38 • Studios: 69 • Studios: 38 • 1 Bedrooms: 155 • 1 Bedrooms: 145 • 1 Bedrooms: 167 • 1 Bedrooms: 135 • 2 Bedrooms: 81 • 2 Bedrooms: 79 • 2 Bedrooms: 99 • 2 Bedrooms: 85 Residential Parking: 527 Residential Parking: 457 Residential Parking: 570 Residential Parking: 440 EV Spaces: 28 EV Spaces: 27 EV Spaces: 30 EV Spaces: 9 Commercial: 40,000 sf Commercial: 20,000 sf Commercial: 20,000 sf -- Commercial Parking: 200 Commercial Parking: 130 Commercial Parking: 100 The proposed multi -family residential units would be for rental purposes and would be developed at a density of up to 79 dwelling units per acre. The proposed unit mix consists of 204 studios (17.7 percent), 602 one -bedrooms (52.4 percent), and 344 two -bedrooms (29.9 percent) residential units and would range City of Santa Ana 3-10 Draft EIR January 2020 BUILDING D COURTYARD • see sheet L.5 BUILDING C COURTYARD • see sheet L.4 EXISTING INDUSTRIAL ENTRY PLAZA R L U BUILDING A ROOFTOP • see sheet 1.7 BUILDING B ROOFTOP • see sheet 1.8 RETAIL PLAZA • see sheet 1.3 ROOFTOP DECK Proposed Site Plan The Bowery Figure 3-4 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 3-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description in size from approximately 635 square feet to over 1,120 square feet. Residential units would have between 50 square feet and 80 square feet of outdoor terrace area. The proposed 80,000 square feet of commercial space would consist of the following uses: • Retail Shopping Center: 18,000 square feet • Fast Casual Restaurant: 5,000 square feet • Quality Restaurant: 25,000 square feet • High -Turnover Sit -Down Restaurant: 25,000 square feet • Fast Food Restaurant: 5,000 square feet • Coffee/Donut Shop: 2,000 square feet Open Space, Recreation, and Other Amenities The Project would provide open space and recreation amenities for residents that would include: open space plazas, courtyards, roof decks, and interior amenities. As listed in Table 3-2, the Project would provide a total of 174,555 square feet of exterior open space recreation area and approximately 8,008 square feet of interior amenities to total 183,363 square feet of recreational and open space onsite. Table 3-2: Open Space and Recreation Amenities Amenity Square Footage Open Space Plazas 48,662 Courtyards 34,782 Interior Amenities 8,808 Common Areas at Building Perimeters 61,382 Amenity Decks Roof Decks 29,729 Total 183,363 Each of the four residential buildings would have a recreational open space area that would include a pool, spa/hot tub, outdoor kitchen, seating areas, fitness center, club room. See Figure 3-5, Proposed Open Space Plan. Site Access Vehicular access to the Project site would be provided via a full -access driveway and a right-in/right-out driveway on Warner Avenue and a right-in/right-out driveway on Red Hill Avenue. The proposed full -access driveway on Warner Avenue would be slightly offset to the east from the adjacent driveway on the north side of Warner Avenue. This driveway would be signalized with split -phase operation in the northbound and southbound direction. The split phase operation is necessary to ensure safety of ingress and egress for the project and for the driveway on the north side of Warner Avenue. Onsite parking would be provided in 3 parking structures and one surface parking lot. The site design would also include pedestrian/bicycle paths to provide for non -vehicular onsite circulation and connection to existing sidewalks and bike lanes adjacent to the Project site. Architecture and Design The proposed architectural design of the Project would provide a complete community by integrating the buildings, parking structures, and open spaces. Each building would provide a unique, but similar to one another, contemporary and modern architectural design. The architectural style would incorporate stucco, brick veneer, metal decorative panels and awnings, and glass railings as shown in Figure 3-6, Building Elevations. City of Santa Ana 3-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description The proposed design colors are earth tones, including off-white, beige, blue, and grey color shades. Additionally, the proposed mixed-use buildings were designed to reduce the appearance of scale and mass by reinforcing the ground floor of the building and providing recesses and articulation of the second through sixth stories to eliminate uniform solid building frontages. The ground floor retail and restaurant commercial uses would have pedestrian -oriented frontages with building corners and entrance areas that are emphasized by unique architectural elements and signage. Furthermore, the Project would be designed in accordance with applicable City of Santa Ana design guidelines and requirements. The architecture and design of the proposed Project is described further in Section 5.1, Aesthetics. Walls and Fencing The Project site is currently bound on the west and southern sides by a 6 -foot high cement block wall. The proposed Project would retain these existing walls and line them with landscaping as described below. Landscaping and Lighting The Project would provide new ornamental landscaping throughout the Project site that would include a variety of 24- through 48 -inch box trees, 1 — 5 -gallon shrubs, and ground covers. New plant species would be drought -tolerant, non-invasive, and compliant with the City of Santa Ana's landscaping requirements. Likewise, the new irrigation installed onsite would meet the City's requirements for water efficiency (Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-1503; Landscape Water Use Standards). New exterior lighting onsite would be provided for security and to accent the landscaping, signage, light walkways, and parking areas. The new lighting would be focused on the Project site, shield offsite areas, and would be compliant with the City's lighting regulations (Santa Ana Municipal Code, Section 8-210 and Section 41-611.1). Infrastructure The Project would connect to the existing water, sewer, and drainage infrastructure in the Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue rights -of -ways. Water Infrastructure: The Project site is currently served by an existing 12 -inch water pipeline in Warner Avenue. The Project would install new water infrastructure on the Project site that would connect to the existing 12 -inch water pipelines in Warner Avenue. The new onsite water system would be compliant with the CalGreen Plumbing Code (Title 24) for efficient use of water. Wastewater Infrastructure: Wastewater from the Project site currently discharges into an existing City - owned 8 -inch sewer line within Warner Avenue. The Project includes replacing approximately 367 feet of the existing 8 -inch City sewer line in Warner Avenue, between the Project site and the Orange County Sanitation sewer line in Red Hill Avenue, with a 10 -inch sewer. In addition, the Project would install a new onsite sewer system that would connect to off-site City of Santa Ana sewer facilities. Approximately half the Project site would discharge wastewater directly into a City -owned manhole located at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. The other half of the Project site would discharge wastewater into the improved 10 -inch sewer in Warner Avenue to the existing 42 -inch sewer in Red Hill Avenue. Drainage Infrastructure: The existing topography of the Project site is relatively flat and the site is 75 percent impervious. As part of development of the Project a new onsite storm water drainage system would be installed that could convey runoff to four Modular Wetland System units for water quality treatment in the parking lot along Redhill Avenue, which have been sized to treat runoff from the Design Capture Storm (85th percentile, 24-hour) from the proposed Project. The Modular Wetland System units are devices that are manufactured to mimic natural systems such as bioretention areas by incorporating plants, soil, and microbes engineered to provide treatment at higher flow rates or volumes and with smaller footprints than City of Santa Ana 3-14 Draft EIR January 2020 Proposed Open Space Plan LEGEND AT GRADE OPEN SPACE ROOF DECK OPEN SPACE The Bowery Figure 3-5 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 3-16 Draft EIR January 2020 1�I I�t 111 111 Mal 11 1 �!!!!I1 1 1 I 1 11 I 11�11 1111.1 111111 111111 111 1111xi! 11 1 I Il 1 1 11 11 I 1 ,.■ar-;■■■.:u ■?.. � �e..�.. . M. �.. !^_p: r,,n III I:I n1 ui 'II 111 11IIII111 !!1„1111. 111 _.l•• it ■ 1 11 n n n E n n n p n IN n n ■ n n n n I N■ inMI. Ion ■ u 1 n n �! 1'1!1!1'1! 1!I!1!Illl" I'1' 1!1!1!1 111 11 III 111 11 1.1 _ lid w 11_1 n .!1y ;!1 !! 11�t��n u:�1-n n,n .:1.!! ! 11 11 �1 �� 11 !1 II 11 11! ■ 11 IF 11 11 ■ Ili !� i11! 11 IN 11 11 o 1! !11161 II' I !11111'1 ISI!IIf111p I III 1111,! 9 -- -- ._ , 111 ... 1II III ... 111 Al �!■■i, U-1: __ __ .. �_a �� 11 11 1 hr�!1!1' 1111111'.1' 1!1!1!1!1' 1111 IIIIi^I11.. ........... 11 11 11 11 11 11 I !1 11 II Ir 11 1! I! II II II 11 11 1r Ir ■ �� .n 111 _ .. I III ! I I I I 1 1 ... ... a 1111 -.. ., a 1■ 111111 I I ! ! IIIIIIII 11111111 IIIIIIII m (�I�■ �r 1e �� No 11 .11 e 1� 111111 I ! I 1 I 1 I I Moll! F ===== ====== --1111-- --1111-- --1111-- _ l! n !I n n n ■ rr ■ n 1 2. WARNER AVENUE ELEVATION 1111.. e.... I_ ■■■►'1GI UP ` 1:: VII II +I::I Y 11!1111 11 111111 11''1II11 11111 IIIIIIIIIIII _ _ _ .. ■v� n ■u. n ue n■u iii Il I� Ir Il I ®1_ Ilii EI II: 11: EI II: 11: ■I III .-. :® Irl ■® t ■■ 1■: I�, T ®II ■:I ■■ ■■ 1■ II i !I1, I 1�I 11111 111 1!II 11 IIII 111 111111 n� le I� le le I ll 1�: :I 11: 11: EI I�i. It: el ��� � ..1 li■■ ._t � .. 1.: Il: YY - 1 ,:I :• 1 is � YI � 111 11111 111 1.1.11 11 1111 111 111111 ni 1� Imo rrlur rrn ruus e■ nmr ■� mor ■®� --- - � ■®- - 1111 - _--_ -1111-- --- — --- --- -1111-- -== °� � q .EEE EEE EEE -_ ®■A — q■�a �■{ am f���_ d■ 1ua1 7■ 11111 ■■ �"�N■ ........ X11 •-----_•._ 1111��11111�I11 ����' 111111' 1� 111111 It 111111'®®. �I °� "�l!L_' a �� ��0 �1��� ��� �p��� ��� ��ill ■_■ ■� 11 rlmA 11� ���II��� ll�I=_IIQ 1EIr'-111 1. RED HILL AVENUE ELEVATION RAPET • .. .. �_ 1 ! 1r 1 • , 1aLEV 1 (+40' 1 =■ 1 CD 1 ii 1 ■� 1 3 LEVEL cl 1 1 n The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 3-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description their natural counterparts. Treated runoff from the Modular Wetland System units would slowly discharge into the existing 84 -inch storm drain in Red Hill Avenue. General Plan Land Use and Zoning The Project site has an existing General Plan land use designation of Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) and a zoning designation of Light Industrial (M-1). A General Plan Land Use Amendment and zone change are required to allow for the proposed mixed -uses. The Project is requesting to change the General Plan land use designation to District Center (DC) and a zone change to Specific Development (SD). The DC land use designation would allow residential uses up to a maximum of 90 dwelling units per acre; and the SD zoning designation would provide site-specific standards for the mixed-use Project. Construction Activities The proposed Project would be developed in 4 construction phases over a 27 -month period. The construction activities would include the following: (1) demolition of existing building, pavement, removal of infrastructure and landscaping; (2) grading and excavation; (3) construction of drainage, utilities, and subgrade infrastructure; (4) building construction; and (5) paving and application of architectural coatings. Construction activities would be limited to the hours between 7:00 am to 8:00 pm, Monday through Saturday, excluding federal holidays, which would be consistent with the City's Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 18-314; Special Provisions). Initial site preparation would include demolition of the existing buildings, removal of asphaltic concrete pavement, subsurface infrastructure. Onsite soils would be excavated to a minimum of 5 feet below the bottom of the building foundations and 5 feet beyond the building perimeters, reconditioned, and recompacted as engineered fill in compliance the California Building Code (CBC) to support the proposed structures. Approximately 10,000 cubic yards of debris material will be removed during demolition activities, and grading activities are anticipated to involve 60,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. No import or export of soil would be needed for construction. No residential units will be leased until construction of the entire Project is completed and occupancy permits have been received from the City. Table 3-3 shows the anticipated construction schedule for the proposed Project. Table 3-3: Construction Schedule Construction Activity I Work Days Phase 1 1. Demolition 30 2. Site Preparation 45 3. Grading 30 4. Building Construction 420 5. Architectural Coating 60 6. Paving 45 Phase 2 1. Building Construction 420 2. Architectural Coating 60 3. Paving 45 Phase 3 1. Building Construction 420 2. Architectural Coating 60 3. Paving 45 Phase 4 1. Building Construction 1 420 City of Santa Ana 3-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 3. Project Description 2. Architectural Coating 60 3. Paving 45 3.7 GOVERNING DOCUMENTS AND INTENDED USES OF THE EIR Development and operation of the Bowery Mixed -Use Project will be governed by the following: • The City of Santa Ana General Plan, as amended, which establishes policies governing land use, circulation, housing, noise, and safety throughout the City. • A development agreement to include methods for financing, acquisition, and construction of infrastructure. This EIR is intended to serve as the primary environmental document for all actions associated with the proposed Project, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to implement the Project. In addition, this EIR is the primary reference document in the formulation and implementation of a mitigation monitoring program for the proposed Project. This EIR examines the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project and will be considered by the City and others in adopting and implementing the Project. The function of the EIR is to enable the City of Santa Ana, other responsible agencies, and interested parties to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed Project and make informed decisions with respect to the requested entitlements. 3.8 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS AND PERMITS As part of the proposed Project, the following discretionary actions are required: ■ General Plan Amendment (GPA) Land Use Change from Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) to District Center (DC) ■ Amendment Application (AA) for a zone change from Light Industrial (M-1) to a Specific Development (SD) designation ■ Development Agreement to provide methods for financing, acquisition, and construction of infrastructure to implement the proposed Project. As part of the proposed Project, the following discretionary action is also being requested: ■ Development Agreement (DA) to provide methods for financing, acquisition, and construction of infrastructure to implement the proposed Project. City of Santa Ana 3-20 Draft EIR January 2020 4. Environmental Setting The purpose of this section is to provide a "description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the Project, as they exist at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) is published, from both a local and a regional perspective" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a). In addition to the summary below, detailed environmental setting descriptions are provided in each subsection of Section 5 of this Draft EIR. 4.1 PROJECT LOCATION The Project site is 14.58 acres and located at 2300, 2310, and 2320 South Redhill Avenue in the City of Santa Ana and is identified by APN 430-222-01 and 430-222-16. The site is located at the southwest corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. Regional access to the Project site is generally provided via State Route (SR) 55 at the Dyer Road exit. The regional location of the Project site is shown in Figure 3-1 in Section 3.0, Project Description. Access to the Project site is provided by Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The Project site is located within the southeastern most portion of the City of Santa Ana. Areas across from Red Hill Avenue (to the east) are within the City of Tustin and are part of the former Tustin Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), now known as the Tustin Legacy. Areas across from Dyer Road (0.5 mile south of the site) are in the City of Irvine, within the Irvine Business Complex (IBC). The local vicinity is shown is Figure 3-2 in Section 3.0, Project Description. 4.2 PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION The Project site is relatively flat and approximately 60 feet above mean sea level (msl). The site is currently developed with three partially occupied industrial buildings, parking areas, and vehicle circulation drives. The site has little vegetation other than an approximately 2.5 -acre undeveloped grass area at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenues, some ornamental trees scattered throughout the site, and street trees along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The 3 existing buildings total 212,121 square feet and consist of the following structures: • 2300 South Redhill Avenue: 30,129 square foot building with a 3,330 SF square foot mezzanine and 6 loading docks • 2310 South Redhill Avenue: 68,992 square foot building with a 9,992 square foot mezzanine office and 6 loading docks • 2320 South Redhill Avenue: 113,000 square foot building with a 43,000 square foot mezzanine office and 7 loading docks The buildings are currently utilized by various lessees, which include 119,121 square feet that is utilized by warehousing and distribution operations; 5,000 square feet that is utilized for research and development; and 30,000 square feet in the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building that is being utilized as a 200 -bed temporary homeless shelter by the City of Santa Ana. The remaining 53,000 square feet of building area is currently vacant. The Project site was formerly occupied by Ricoh Electronics, Inc., a manufacturer and distributor of thermal paper and toner from approximately 1985 through 2017. The existing buildings include two and three-story high concrete industrial buildings. Building exteriors are distinguished by detailing around the entrances that include steel framed or wood framed doorways, and various loading docks. Wire fencing currently surrounds the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building that is located on the northeastern portion of the Project site, and approximately 6 -foot high retaining wall is City of Santa Ana 4-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting located on the western boundary of the Project site. Lighting is present in parking areas and on the exterior of the buildings, mainly focused on entrances and exits, as well as loading docks. An aerial photograph of the Project site is shown as Figure 3-3 in Section 3.0, Project Description. The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of P (Professional) and is zoned Light Industrial (M-1). 4.3 AESTHETICS Scenic Vistas: The Project site and surrounding areas are either urbanized or planned for urbanization and do not contain any sensitive scenic vistas. The General Plan Scenic Corridors Element identifies street corridors, watercourse corridors, inter -city corridors, City entries, and selected/screened views from a highway that are considered unique visual resources within the City. Exhibit 4 of the Scenic Corridors Element does not identify any scenic resources or vistas at or adjacent to the Project site. The nearest feature identified by the General Plan is Edinger Avenue, a "Secondary Street Corridor", which is approximately 1 mile north of the site. State Scenic Highways: There are no officially designated state scenic highways in the vicinity of the proposed Project (Caltrans 2019). The only officially designated scenic highway within Orange County is a portion of SR -91 that is located between SR -55 to east of the Anaheim city limit (Caltrans 2019), which is not in the vicinity of the Project site. Likewise, there are no County -designated scenic highways that run through the City of Santa Ana. Visual Character of Project Site: The visual character of the Project site is urban and light industrial in nature. The Project site is developed with three large industrial buildings that total 212,121 square feet, parking areas, and vehicle circulation drives. Two of the industrial buildings are two -stories in height and one is three - stories in height. The vegetation on site consists of an approximately 2.5 -acre undeveloped grass area at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenues, some ornamental trees scattered throughout the site, and street trees along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The exterior of the buildings are long and flat, without architectural treatments. The buildings have a typical boxy modern office/industrial structure appearance, with large dark tinted windows line the first and second floors of the 2310 South Redhill building and that make up a large portion of the front of the 2320 South Redhill building. The dark window tinting provides a black appearance from the outside. The 2320 building has exterior metal stairs to access the second story of the building and the 2310 building has very few windows, which adds to the industrial appearance. All three buildings have loading docks and industrial door openings. The buildings are surrounded by asphalt paved surface parking areas, as shown in Figure 5.1-1. The site is surrounded by 5 -foot high wrought iron fencing along Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue, which is setback from the roadways by landscaped setbacks and sidewalks. The other two sides of the Project site, that are adjacent to existing business park uses, are bound by 6 -foot high cement walls. Visual Character of Surrounding Area: The existing visual character of the area surrounding the Project site is urban. There is no consistent architectural or visual theme within the surrounding area and significant visual resources are limited. The parcel adjacent to the Project site on Red Hill Avenue is developed with 3 -story high tilt -up cement light industrial buildings and associated parking areas. Areas across Red Hill Avenue, which is a 6 -lane arterial roadway, from the Project site are within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area and undergoing new urban development. Areas across from the site, on the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, are developed with two-story rectangular urban City of Santa Ana 4-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting buildings that are used for public and social service uses. In addition, the large airplane hangar that was previously used by the no longer existing Naval Air Station is located within middle ground views provides for an urban visual setting. Foreground views include screened chain linked fencing that surrounds a weedy open space area with a tall Tustin Legacy monument sign on the southeast corner of the Redhill Avenue and Warner Avenue intersection. The area directly across Red Hill Avenue from the site currently consists of an undeveloped disturbed area that consists of bare ground, weedy vegetation, cement building pads that are remnants of previous development, areas that appear to be used for construction staging. Foreground views of the areas are dominated by the screened chained link fencing that surrounds the undeveloped area. Long range views include another large airplane hangar that was previously used by the Naval Air Station. Areas across Red Hill Avenue to the southeast, also provides foreground views of the screened chained link fencing that surrounds the undeveloped area. However, middle ground views are of new four-story office structures that are rectangular and modern in design. Longer range views include a new 5 -story hotel located on Barranca that also has a modern rectangular and boxy architecture. The Project site is bounded to the north and northwest by Warner Avenue, which is a 6 -lane arterial roadway with sidewalks and street trees. The parcel adjacent to the Project site on Warner Avenue is developed with one-story linear commercial and business park uses. These buildings have both a modern commercial appearance, with large store front type windows and parking adjacent to the front entrances of the businesses, and an industrial appearance with large roll up doors on the sides and rears of the buildings, some of which can be viewed from Warner Avenue. Areas across the street from the Project site on Warner Avenue are developed with two-story office buildings that are surrounded by surface parking areas, as shown in Figure 5.1-8. These buildings have modern architecture and are rectangular with two-story high black -tinted windows at the building entrances, large rectangular windows on the sides of the building in between the stucco exterior. The character of the areas across Warner Avenue from the Project site are of an office park environment Nighttime Lighting. The Project site is located within an urbanized area that generates the majority of light from vehicular traffic on local streets, street lighting, signage, interior lighting passing through windows, and exterior security lighting. The existing industrial uses on the Project site do not generate substantial light. Light generated by vehicular traffic is from Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, which border the Project site. In addition, both roadways have existing street lighting. 4.4 AIR QUALITY The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The Basin is a 6,600 -square -mile coastal plain bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The Basin includes the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, and all of Orange County. The ambient concentrations of air pollutants are determined by the amount of emissions released by sources and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute such emissions. Natural factors that affect transport and dilution include terrain, wind, atmospheric stability, and sunlight. Therefore, existing air quality conditions in the area are determined by such natural factors as topography, meteorology, and climate, in addition to the amount of emissions released by existing air pollutant sources. The topography and climate of Southern California combine to make the Basin an area of high air pollution potential. The Basin is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific City of Santa Ana 4-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Ocean to the west and high mountains around the rest of the perimeter. The general region lies in the semi- permanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific, resulting in a mild climate tempered by cool sea breezes with light average wind speeds. The usually mild climatological pattern is disrupted occasionally by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. During the summer months, a warm air mass frequently descends over the cool, moist marine layer produced by the interaction between the ocean's surface and the lowest layer of the atmosphere. The warm upper layer forms a cap over the cool marine layer and inhibits the pollutants in the marine layer from dispersing upward. In addition, light winds during the summer further limit ventilation. Furthermore, sunlight triggers the photochemical reactions which produce ozone. SCAQMD maintains monitoring stations that monitor air quality and compliance with associated ambient standards. In 2018, the federal and state ambient air quality standards (NAAQS and CAAQS) were exceeded on one or more days for ozone, PMio, and PM2.5 at most monitoring locations. 4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES Historic The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment that was prepared for the Project site (ESA 2018) describes that between the years of 1938 and 1972, prior to development of the existing site structures, the Project site and adjacent areas were used for agriculture, which resulted in shallow soil disturbances. The Project site is currently developed with three industrial buildings that were developed in the early 1980s, less than 45 years ago. The buildings were previously occupied by Ricoh Electronics Inc. an imaging and electronics company. The onsite buildings are surrounded by loading docks, surface parking areas, and ornamental landscaping. The Project site does not include any historic structures or other resources. In addition, the Project site is not adjacent to any historic structures. Areas surrounding the site consist of modern office, business park, modern public service facilities, and vacant land that is proposed for new development. Archaeologic Most researchers agree that the earliest occupation for the western Riverside County area dates to the early Holocene (11,000 to 8,000 years ago). The material culture related to this time included scrapers, hammer stones, large flaked cores, drills, and choppers, which were used to process food and raw materials. Around 8,000 years ago, subsistence patterns changed, resulting in a material complex consisting of an abundance of milling stones (for grinding food items) with a decrease in the number of chipped stone tools. The material culture from this time period includes large, bifacially worked dart points and grinding stones, handstones and metates. This Encinitas Tradition includes the Sayles or Pauma cultures that were located in inland San Diego County and western Riverside County, where the Project is located. At approximately 3,500 years ago, Pauma groups in the general vicinity of the Project area adopted new cultural traits which transformed the archaeological site characteristics - including mortar and pestle technology. This indicated the development of food storage, largely acorns, which could be processed and saved for the leaner, cooler months of the year. At approximately 1,500 years ago, bow and arrow technology started to emerge, and the Palomar Tradition is attributed to this time. The Palomar Tradition is characterized by soapstone bowls, arrowhead projectile points, pottery vessels, rock paintings, and cremation sites. The shift in material culture assemblages is largely attributed to the emergence of Shoshonean (Ta kic-speaking) people who entered California from the east. City of Santa Ana 4-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting The Geotechnical Report that was prepared for the Project describes that the previous excavation for development of the existing 3 buildings and removal of previous underground storage tanks involved removal of soils and backfill with artificial compacted fill soils ranging between 5 feet and 13 feet in depth, as described below (GEO 2019): • During development of the 2300 South Redhill Avenue building, soils were excavated to depths of approximately 5 feet below existing grade and compacted fill soils were used to backfill the excavation area for the building foundation. • During development of the 2310 South Redhill Avenue building, approximately 9 feet of fill was placed in the building pad area and fill soils were backfilled up to 15 feet beyond the limit of the building foundation (GEO 2019). • The area of the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building pad was excavated to approximately 10 to 13 feet below the existing grade. The foundation was stabilized with approximately 24 inches of gravel and approximately 13 feet of artificial fill was placed under the building and up to 5 feet beyond the building foundations. • During removal of an underground storage tank located between 2310 and 2320 South Redhill Avenue buildings, approximately 10 feet of crushed miscellaneous base and approximately 5 feet of onsite soils were backfilled into the previous underground storage tank location. 4.6 ENERGY Electricity The Southern California Edison Company (SCE) is the electrical purveyor in the City of Santa Ana. SCE provides electricity service to more than 14 million people in a 50,000 square -mile area of central, coastal and Southern California. California utilities are experiencing increasing demands that require modernization of the electric distribution grid to, among other things, accommodate two-way flows of electricity and increase the grids capacity. SCE is in the process of implementing infrastructure upgrades to ensure the ability to meet future demands. In addition, as described by the Edison International 2018 Annual Report, the SCE electrical grid modernization effort supports implementation of California Senate Bill 32 that requires the state to cut greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 in order to help address global climate change. It describes that in 2018 Approximately 35% of power that SCE delivered to customers in 2018 came from renewable sources (SCE 2019). The Project site is currently served by the electricity distribution system that exists adjacent to the Project site along Warner Avenue. Natural Gas The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) is the natural gas purveyor in the City of Santa Ana and is the principal distributor of natural gas in Southern California. SoCalGas estimates that gas demand will decline at an annual rate of 0.5 percent from 2018 to 2035 due to modest economic growth, mandated energy efficiency standards and programs, renewable electricity goals, and conservation savings linked to advanced metering infrastructure (CGEU 2018). The gas supply available to SoCalGas is regionally diverse and includes supplies from California sources (onshore and offshore), Southwestern U.S. supply sources, the Rocky Mountains, and Canada (CGEU 2018). SoCalGas designs its facilities and supplies to provide continuous service during extreme peak demands and has identified the ability to meet peak demands through 2035 in its 2018 report (CGEU 2018). City of Santa Ana 4-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting The Project site is currently served by the natural gas distribution system that exists within the roadways that are adjacent to the Project site. 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Regional Setting. The Project site is generally located within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California, at the eastern edge of the Los Angeles Sedimentary Basin. The Los Angeles Basin is a northwest - plunging synclinal sedimentary deposit that is bounded to the south of the Project site by the broadly uplifted coastal mesa of Newport Beach and the San Joaquin Hills, to the north by the foothills of the Santa Ana mountain range (GEO 2019). The Project site is located on young alluvial fan materials that include previous floodplain deposits. A channelized portion of the Peters Canyon Creek passes approximately two miles away from the site to the east. The creek drains into Upper Newport Bay located south of the site (GEO 2019). Faults and Ground Shaking. The Project site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone and no active faults are known to cross the site. The closest known active faults are associated with the San Joaquin Hills Fault, located approximately 1.5 miles from the site; the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone, approximately 8.4 miles southwest of the site; and the Elsinore Fault Zone, approximately 13.2 miles northeast of the site (GEO 2019). However, all of southern California is seismically active. The amount of motion expected at a building site can vary from none to forceful depending upon the distance to the fault, the magnitude of the earthquake, and the local geology. Greater movement can be expected at sites located on poorly consolidated material such as alluvium located near the source of the earthquake epicenter or in response to an earthquake of great magnitude. Soils. The Geotechnical Report describes that the site is underlain by older artificial fill soils and Quaternary aged young alluvial fan deposits. Older artificial fill was observed in the field explorations up to 7.5 feet below existing grade and consist of slightly moist to moist clays and silts with variable amounts of sand. The Quaternary young alluvial fan deposits underlie the older artificial fill, and consist of moist to wet, medium stiff to hard clays with variable sand content, as well as loose to medium dense, moist to wet clayey and silty sands to the maximum explored depth of approximately 50 feet below existing grade (GEO 2019). Areas of previous excavation and fill rage from 5 feet to 13 feet below the existing grade. Liquefaction, Lateral Spreading, Settlement, and Subsidence. The Geotechnical Report identifies that the Project site is located within a liquefaction hazard zone. Onsite soils include relatively isolated loose to medium dense sand layers, generally located approximately 40 to 50 feet below existing grade that are considered susceptible to liquefaction. In addition, the depth of groundwater is in the range of 24 to 33 feet below ground surface (bgs), but the historic high groundwater is approximately 10 feet below the existing grade (GEO 2019). The Geotechnical Report describes that based on the relatively flat topography of the site, lack of a free face nearby and general lack of potentially liquefiable layers in the upper 40 feet, the potential for lateral spreading on the site is low (GEO 2019). Ground subsidence is the gradual settling or sinking of the ground surface with little or no horizontal movement. As described in the General Plan Seismic Safety Element, the potential for area and focal ground subsidence due to earthquakes is relatively low in Santa Ana. In addition, the Project site is not located within or near a potential subsidence area, as shown on Exhibit 4, Potential Subsidence Areas, in the General Plan Seismic Safety Element. City of Santa Ana 4-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Expansive Soils. the onsite soils consist of moist to wet, medium stiff to hard clays with variable sand content, as well as loose to medium dense, moist to wet clayey and silty sands. Due to the clay content in the onsite soils, the site has the potential for expansion (GEO 2019). Paleontological Resources. The Project site is underlain by Quaternary aged young alluvial fan deposits and older artificial fill. Quaternary alluvial materials in Orange County are assigned a low paleontological resource sensitivity due to their relatively recent age (Eisentraut and Cooper 2002). Likewise, the Orange County General Plan Figure VI -9 shows that the Project site is not located within an area of paleontological sensitivity. 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are called greenhouse gases (GHGs). The major concern with GHGs is that increases in their concentrations are contributing to global climate change. Global climate change is a change in the average weather on Earth that can be measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. Although there is disagreement as to the rate of global climate change and the extent of the impacts attributable to human activities, most in the scientific community agree that there is a direct link between increased emissions of GHGs and long-term global temperature increases. The principal GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). The Project site for is currently developed with 3 industrial buildings. Greenhouse gas emissions associated with the existing buildings is approximately 8,520.07 CO2E, as detailed in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS The existing light industrial buildings on the site were developed in 1979 and 1981. All three buildings were formerly occupied by Ricoh Electronics Inc, an imaging and electronics company. The Ricoh operation included a thermal processing area in the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building, a machine shop in the 2310 South Redhill Avenue building, and toner manufacturing in the 2300 South Redhill Avenue building. The site was vacated by Ricoh in 2018 and the buildings are partially re -occupied and used for storage, electronics recycling, and as temporary housing for the homeless (Phase 1 2019). Former Underground Storage Tanks The Phase II ESA (Phase II 201 8) describes that three former underground storage tanks (UST) were located in the southwest portion of the Project site, behind the 2300 South Redhill Avenue building. The 2018 Phase II testing in this former UST area identified that approximately 5 feet of soil, impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) above residential screening levels, exists from 14 to 19 feet below the ground surface (bgs) within a 4,500 square foot area. The Phase II ESA estimates approximately 850 cubic yards of contaminated soil would require excavation and disposal from this portion of the site. In addition, the Phase II identified that another previous UST located at the northeast corner of the 2310 South Redhill Avenue building that tested positive for TPH-(diesel) concentrations in excess of typical regulatory action levels. It is estimated that roughly 50 cubic yards of TPH contaminated soil would require excavation and offsite disposal. Vapor Intrusion City of Santa Ana 4-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting As described previously, the Project site was previously used for thermal processing, toner manufacturing, and utilized hazardous materials onsite. The Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation that was conducted in 2019 indicated no detectable levels of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in soil gas, and the levels of petroleum hydrocarbons and VOC in soil do not exceed residential use standards (Hilman 2019). Asbestos Asbestos and asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) are considered both a hazardous air pollutant and a human health hazard. The risk to human health is from inhalation of airborne asbestos, which commonly occurs when ACMs are disturbed during such activities as demolition and renovation. The buildings within the Project site were constructed in 1979 and 1981 when asbestos containing materials were commonly used and the Phase I identified that asbestos containing material are possible on the site (Phase 1). Lead The chief concern related to lead-based paint is its cumulative effect on body systems, primarily when paint chips containing lead are ingested. Lead dust is of special concern because the smaller particles are more easily absorbed by the body. Common methods of paint removal, such as sanding, scraping, and burning, create excessive amounts of dust. Lead dust is especially hazardous to young children because they play on the floor and engage in a great deal of hand-to-mouth activity, increasing their potential for exposure. Due to the age of the onsite buildings, it is possible that lead-based paint and other lead containing materials are present in the buildings on the Project site. John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport (JWA) is located approximately 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site under the primary aircraft approach corridor. The Project site is not located within JWA's Airport Safety Zone, as shown in Figure 5.7-1. In addition, the Project site is located outside of both the airport's actual (201 8) and planned 60 CNEL contours (Figures 5.7-2 and 5.7-3 in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials). However, the Project site is located within the AELUP Notification area for JWA (shown on Figure 5.7-4 in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials), within the JWA planning area boundary, and under the FAR Part 77 Notification Imaginary Surface area, but outside of the 200 -foot high surface area (shown on Figure 5.7-5 in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials). 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Watershed The Project site is in the Santa Ana River Watershed and the Newport Bay subwatershed. The Santa Ana River Watershed includes much of Orange County, much of western Riverside County, part of southwestern San Bernardino County, and a small portion of Los Angeles County. The watershed is bounded by the Santa Margarita watershed to the south, on the east by the Salton Sea and Southern Mojave watersheds, and on the north and west by the Mojave and San Gabriel watersheds, respectively. The watershed covers approximately 2,800 square miles in area with about 700 miles of rivers. The Santa Ana River extends 96 miles from the San Bernardino Mountains in San Bernardino County to the Pacific Ocean at the boundary between the Cities of Huntington Beach and Newport Beach. The Santa Ana Watershed is subdivided into several smaller watersheds, and the Project site is in the Newport Bay Watershed. The Newport Bay Watershed spans 152 square miles from the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains in the north to the Pacific Ocean in the south and from the Cities of Santa Ana and City of Santa Ana 4-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Costa Mesa on the west to the City of Lake Forest on the east. Runoff from the Project site flows through existing storm drains to the nearby Barranca Channel, which drains to San Diego Creek (Reach 1), then Upper Newport Bay, and discharges to the ocean at Balboa Beach (WQMP 2019). Water Quality Water Quality Impairments: The San Diego Creek Reach 1 is included on the Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments for: fecal coliform, nutrients, pesticides, sedimentation, selenium, and toxaphene. The Upper Newport Bay is included on the Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments for: chlordane, copper, DDT, metals, nutrients, PCBs, sediment toxicity, and sedimentation. Additionally, the Lower Newport Bay (to which the Upper Newport Bay drains) is included on the Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments for chlordane, DDT, nutrients, PCBs, pesticides, and sediment toxicity (WQMP 2019). Selenium Concentration Area: The Project site is located within the Selenium Concentration Area identified by the Orange County Water District (OCWD), as shown on Figure 5.8-1 in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality (WQMP 2019). In the Newport Bay watershed, selenium derived from ancient marine sediments in local foothills accumulated over the last several thousand years in the Swamp of the Frogs, which stretched from Upper Newport Bay almost to Red Hill Avenue. This ancient swamp, though now drained and filled, has become an active source of selenium because of the high-water table in the area (Meixner 2004). Thus, virtually any activity that mobilizes groundwater to the surface has the potential to increase selenium contamination of surface waters in the Newport Bay watershed. South Basin Groundwater Protection Project: The Project site is located within the South Basin Groundwater Protection Project area, as shown on Figure 5.8-1 in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, which implements groundwater remediation due to a comingled plume of groundwater pollutants that was generated by more than 20 industrial sites (OCWA 2018). The plume occurs predominately in the shallow aquifer at 100 -foot depth which flows into a deeper Principal Aquifer, bringing VOC contaminants with it (OCWA 2018). Due to this condition, infiltration of groundwater is not allowed within the South Basin Groundwater Protection Project area. Tustin Marine Air Base: The Project site is located adjacent to the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area, which was previously used as a Marine Air Base. Past Air Base operations have resulted in releases of hazardous substances within the upper 50 feet pf the shallow aquifer beneath the air base (MCAS Tustin). Hazardous materials were reportedly used in construction of the base and helium purification for blimp use. Daily operation and support activities for helicopters that were used on the Base included the use, storage, transfer, and disposal of hazardous waste that included oil, solvents, fuel, hydraulic fluid, antifreeze, paint thinner, and sludge from cleaning tanks and fuel filters. The federal government is in the processing of implementing remediation programs related to this contamination from past hazardous waste disposal and hazardous material spills within the Air Base (MCAS Tustin). Due to this condition, infiltration of groundwater may not be allowed within the Tustin Marine Air Base area. Groundwater Basin The Orange County Basin underlies an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminates at the Orange County line to the northwest, where the aquifer system continues to the Central Basin in Los Angeles County (WSA 2019). The OC Basin is recharged primarily by four sources including local rainfall, storm and base flows from the Santa Ana River (SAR), purchased MWD imported water; and highly treated recycled wastewater. Basin recharge occurs largely in 4 recharge basins that are in or adjacent to the City of Anaheim. City of Santa Ana 4-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Groundwater Supply Groundwater from the Orange County Basin provides approximately 71 percent of the City's water supply. The remaining supply comes from the Metropolitan Water District (28 percent) and recycled water (1 percent). As described by the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) prepared for the Project, the water production capability of the basin has increased as a result of operation of the Groundwater Replenishment System in Fountain Valley, which turns wastewater into potable drinking water that is used for basin replenishment. The system increases local low-cost water supply reliability (WSA 2019). Storm Drainage Facilities The Project site is currently 75 percent impervious and 25 percent pervious (WQMP 2019). The existing topography of the project site is relatively flat and generally drains from the north to the south. Currently, the Project site drains northwest where flows enter an existing catch basin. The catch basin connects to a six- foot -high by ten -foot -wide culvert that directs flows to an 84 -inch storm drain that flows southeast to a flood control basin. Drainage from the flood control basin is conveyed to the Barranca Channel that connects to San Diego Creek Reach 1 that drains to Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean (WQMP 2019). Soil Infiltration Onsite soils infiltration testing was performed during preparation of the Geotechnical Report, which determined that soils have an infiltration rate of 0.15 inches per hour which, is identified as a low infiltration rate and considered infeasible to support drainage on the Project site (GEO 2019). Flood Zone, Tsunami, Seiche The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for the Project area (06059CO279J) shows that the Project site is located within "Zone X," which is an area of minimal flood hazard potential outside of the 0.2 percent annual chance flood. The Project site is over 8.5 miles from the Pacific Ocean, and outside of the Tsunami Hazard Zone identified by the California Department of Conservation (DOC 2019). A seiche is a surface wave created when a body of water is shaken, usually by earthquake activity. Seiches are of concern relative to water storage facilities because inundation from a seiche can occur if the wave overflows a containment wall, such as the wall of a reservoir, water storage tank, dam, or other artificial body of water. There are no water bodies in the vicinity of the Project site, and no existing risks related to seiche flood hazards exist on or near the site. 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Project Site The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of PAO (Professional & Administration Office) and is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial), as shown on Figures 5.9-1 and 5.9-2. As described previously, the Land Use Element states that the existing PAO land use designation applies to those areas where professional and/or administrative offices are predominant, or where such development is being encouraged. The floor area ratio intensity standard applicable to this land use designation ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. The PAO areas are intended to provide a unique environment for office development in those areas of the City where office uses are the predominant land use and encourage major employment centers at locations which significantly lessen the impact to the City's local street system. The PAO designation includes a range of floor area ratios to differentiate development intensity and character in relation to adjacent land uses. City of Santa Ana 4-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Surrounding Land Uses The Project site is located within an urban area that is either fully developed or planned for urban development. Northwest and Southwest: The site is bounded to the northwest and southwest by existing business park and industrial warehouse buildings, associated parking lot areas, and a portion of an abandoned BNSF rail line spur. North: Warner Avenue (a 6 -lane arterial roadway) bounds the site to the north, followed by commercial office uses. Areas across Warner Avenue from the site are within the City of Tustin. East: Red Hill Avenue (a 6 -lane arterial roadway) is adjacent to the site on the east. Areas across Red Hill Avenue from the site are within the City of Tustin and Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area. Tustin Legacy Specific Plan The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area was formerly used as a U.S. Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) and is a large area that is under redevelopment and planned by the City of Tustin to become a new mixed-use urban center providing: single-family residential, multi -family residential, mixed-use, commercial retail, office, schools, parks, and other public facilities. The Tustin Legacy Land Use Plan consists of 13 Planning Areas and numerous sub -planning areas. Areas directly across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site are within Planning Area 9-12, which is also identified as Neighborhood E — Employment Center. The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan describes that the employment center is to provide a business park setting for a full range of professional offices, research & development, and commercial uses. Currently, this area has been approved for development of 870,000 square feet of modern creative office space and supporting retail that includes: a food hall, a conference center, and outdoor multi -use space. Of this, 470,000 square feet of office space, the food hall, and conference center has been developed and is operational. Additionally, areas across the street from the site, on the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, are within Planning Area 1, Education Village (within Neighborhood A), which is designated to provide a range of public -serving uses that include education, training, park and recreation, and specific social service functions. The Tustin Legacy Planning Areas further west, beyond Planning Areas 9-12 and 1, are identified for both single and multi -family residential uses. The Tustin Legacy is currently partially developed with these new planned uses, including residential units along Edinger Avenue, The District at Tustin Legacy commercial center at the northwest corner of Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway, and public facilities to the northwest of the Red Hill and Warner intersection (Orange County Sheriff Training Academy, Orange County Animal Shelter). Overall, the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan is a large planned development area that is across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site that is planned to include urban development of residential, mixed -uses, commercial, and office space. Irvine Business Complex Areas 0.35 miles to the south and south east of the Project site, across from Dyer Road/Barranca Parkway are in the City of Irvine, within the Irvine Business Complex (IBC), which is a 2,800 -acre master planned community that is a developed urban area. Typical land uses within the IBC include medium- to high-density residential, commercial, institutional, professional/medical offices, industrial manufacturing, research and development, support service retail, restaurants, and hotel/motels. Since early 2004, there has been substantial redevelopment of nonresidential uses to high-density, urban -style residential development sites City of Santa Ana 4-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting within in the IBC (IBC 2009). These areas have been traditionally occupied by smaller -scale office and industrial operations and have been evolving to mixed-use neighborhoods (IBC 2009). The historical development and use of the Project site for industrial manufacturing was consistent with the original land uses within the adjacent IBC. The Project site is now being proposed for redevelopment into a mixed-use neighborhood, as described in Section 3.0, Project Description. Since original development of the Project site was consistent with development in the MCAS and the IBC, it follows that current and future land use trends within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area and the IBC could influence land uses within its vicinity. John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport (JWA) is located approximately 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site under the primary aircraft approach corridor, within the AELUP Notification area and planning area boundary, as detailed in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Because the Project site is located within the AELUP Notification area and planning area boundary (shown on Figures 5.7-4 and 5.7-5 in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials), and the Project proposes a General Plan Amendment and a zone change, the City is required to refer the proposed Project to the ALUC for review, pursuant to the California Public Utilities Code Section 21676, as listed previously. 4.12 NOISE Noise: The primary sources of noise in the Project area includes those related to urban development, such as vehicles on roadways and noise from operating land uses. In the Project area, current onsite noise levels are generated by vehicles and existing industriall uses. Ambient noise measurements identify that existing noise levels on and adjacent to the Project site are between 58.9 dBA CNEL and 65.1 dBA CNEL. As described previously in Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, the Project site is located within the JWA Planning Area's FAR Part 77 Notification Surface; but outside of the airport's 60 CNEL Contour. Vibration: Aside from periodic construction work that may occur in the vicinity of the Project area, other sources of groundborne vibration include heavy-duty vehicular travel (e.g., refuse trucks and delivery trucks) on area roadways. Trucks traveling at a distance of 50 feet typically generate groundborne vibration velocity levels of around 63 VdB (approximately 0.006 in/sec PPV) and could reach 72 VdB (approximately 0.0 16 in/sec PPV) when trucks pass over bumps in the road. City of Santa Ana 4-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING Population The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana 2019 population is 337,716 persons, representing 10.8 percent of Orange County's total population. The Department of Finance data shows that the City's population increased by 13,069 residents (4.0 percent) between 2010 and 2019. In comparison the City of Tustin's population grew 7.7 percent, the City of Irvine's population grew by 31.9 percent, and the County of Orange had a 7.1 percent increase in population between 2010 and 2019, as shown on Table 4-1. Table 4-1: Cities and County Population Estimates and Increase, 2010 - 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 Additionally, it is projected that the population of the County will increase to 3,531,540 by 2040, which would be an increase of 9.6 percent over the County's 2019 population. As shown in Table 4-2, the Center for Demographic Research projects that the population of the City of Santa Ana to increase to 362,863 residents by 2040, which is a 7.4 percent (25,147 resident) increase over the City's 2019 population. However, the Cities if Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to have greater population increases of 11.3 percent and 14.7 percent. Table 4-2: Cities and County Population Projections, 2019 - 2040 2010-2019 2010 2019 Increase City of Santa Ana 324,647 337,716 4.0% City of Tustin 75,540 81,369 7.7% City of Irvine 212,375 280,202 31.9% County of Orange 3,010,232 3,222,498 7.1% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 Additionally, it is projected that the population of the County will increase to 3,531,540 by 2040, which would be an increase of 9.6 percent over the County's 2019 population. As shown in Table 4-2, the Center for Demographic Research projects that the population of the City of Santa Ana to increase to 362,863 residents by 2040, which is a 7.4 percent (25,147 resident) increase over the City's 2019 population. However, the Cities if Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to have greater population increases of 11.3 percent and 14.7 percent. Table 4-2: Cities and County Population Projections, 2019 - 2040 Source: Center for Demographic Research, Orange County Jurisdiction Demographics 2019 Housing The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana contained 78,563 housings units in 2019. As shown in Table 4-3, of the housing units within the City of Santa Ana 45.4 percent are detached single family housing units and 32.4 percent are multi -family units within buildings containing more than five units. The housing types in Santa Ana compared to those in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and the entire County are provided in Table 4-3, which shows that the County has a slightly higher percentage of detached single- family housing units and a lower percentage of multi -family housing units than the City. Conversely, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine have lower percentages of single-family housing, similar rates of multi -family units within buildings containing more than five units, and higher rates of attached single-family and multi -family 2-4 attached units. City of Santa Ana 4-13 Draft EIR January 2020 2019-2040 2019 2040 Increase City of Santa Ana 337,716 362,863 7.4% City of Tustin 81,369 90,576 11.3% City of Irvine 280,202 321,283 14.7% County of Orange 3,222,498 3,531,540 9.6% Source: Center for Demographic Research, Orange County Jurisdiction Demographics 2019 Housing The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana contained 78,563 housings units in 2019. As shown in Table 4-3, of the housing units within the City of Santa Ana 45.4 percent are detached single family housing units and 32.4 percent are multi -family units within buildings containing more than five units. The housing types in Santa Ana compared to those in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and the entire County are provided in Table 4-3, which shows that the County has a slightly higher percentage of detached single- family housing units and a lower percentage of multi -family housing units than the City. Conversely, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine have lower percentages of single-family housing, similar rates of multi -family units within buildings containing more than five units, and higher rates of attached single-family and multi -family 2-4 attached units. City of Santa Ana 4-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Table 4-3: Cities and County Housing Estimates by Type in 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 The Census Factfinder 2017 information for the City identifies that married family households reside in 54.1 percent of the City's housing units and 53.1 percent of these families have household sizes of 4 or more persons. Likewise, the average household size is 4.4 persons per dwelling unit. The information also states that of the renter -occupied units 58.0 percent have 1 occupant or less per room, 21.9 percent have between 1.01 and 1.5 occupants per room, and 20.1 percent have more than 1.5 persons per room. In addition, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana states that in 2018, 46.9 percent of all City households had 3 people or fewer. The California Department of Finance population and housing estimates for 2019 detail that the City of Santa Ana has a vacancy rate of 4.1 percent. In comparison, the vacancy rate in the City of Tustin is 4.9 percent, the rate in Irvine is 6.2 percent, and the Countywide rate is higher at 5.2 percent. The California Department of Finance estimates that number of housing units in the City increased by 1,617 units (2.1 percent) between 2010 and 2019. The City has developed fewer new housing units in comparison to the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and County, as shown in Table 4-4 that provides the California Department of Finance housing estimates for the City of Santa Ana and Orange County in 2010 and 2019. The City of Santa Ana is largely built out and most of the development within the City is similar to the proposed Project and consists of redevelopment of existing developed land uses. Conversely, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and the County of Orange contains much larger areas of vacant developable land that has accommodated the past housing increases shown in Table 4-4. Table 4-4: Cities and County Housing Increase, 2010 - 2019 City of Santa Ana Housing Units City of Tustin Housing Units City of Irvine Housing Units County of Orange Housing Units Unit Type Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Single-family detached 35,692 45.4% 9,867 35.1% 41,798 39.5% 554,030 50.2% Single-family attached 5,799 7.4% 3,578 12.7% 16,722 15.8% 131,446 11.9% Multi -family (2-4 units) 7,563 9.6% 4,050 14.4% 6,696 6.3% 94,403 8.5% Multi -family (5+ units) 25,460 32.4% 9,741 34.6% 1 39,477 37.3% 290,766 26.3% Mobile homes 4,049 5.2% 909 3.2% 1,165 1.1% 33,519 1 3.0% Total 78,563 100% 28,145 100% 105,858 100% 1,104,164 1 100% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 The Census Factfinder 2017 information for the City identifies that married family households reside in 54.1 percent of the City's housing units and 53.1 percent of these families have household sizes of 4 or more persons. Likewise, the average household size is 4.4 persons per dwelling unit. The information also states that of the renter -occupied units 58.0 percent have 1 occupant or less per room, 21.9 percent have between 1.01 and 1.5 occupants per room, and 20.1 percent have more than 1.5 persons per room. In addition, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana states that in 2018, 46.9 percent of all City households had 3 people or fewer. The California Department of Finance population and housing estimates for 2019 detail that the City of Santa Ana has a vacancy rate of 4.1 percent. In comparison, the vacancy rate in the City of Tustin is 4.9 percent, the rate in Irvine is 6.2 percent, and the Countywide rate is higher at 5.2 percent. The California Department of Finance estimates that number of housing units in the City increased by 1,617 units (2.1 percent) between 2010 and 2019. The City has developed fewer new housing units in comparison to the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and County, as shown in Table 4-4 that provides the California Department of Finance housing estimates for the City of Santa Ana and Orange County in 2010 and 2019. The City of Santa Ana is largely built out and most of the development within the City is similar to the proposed Project and consists of redevelopment of existing developed land uses. Conversely, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and the County of Orange contains much larger areas of vacant developable land that has accommodated the past housing increases shown in Table 4-4. Table 4-4: Cities and County Housing Increase, 2010 - 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 Employment The 2019 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana identifies that in 2017, there were 163,503 jobs in the City of Santa Ana. Of these jobs, 23.1 percent are in the professional sector, 18.2 percent are in the education sector, and 11.4 percent are in the manufacturing sector. As shown in Table 4-5 the types of jobs within Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine are similar with the most jobs in the professional, education, and manufacturing sectors. City of Santa Ana 4-14 Draft EIR January 2020 2010-2019 2010 2019 Increase City of Santa Ana 76,919 78,536 2.1% City of Tustin 26,467 28,145 6.3% City of Irvine 81,110 105,858 30.5% County of Orange 1,046,118 1,104,164 5.5% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 Employment The 2019 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana identifies that in 2017, there were 163,503 jobs in the City of Santa Ana. Of these jobs, 23.1 percent are in the professional sector, 18.2 percent are in the education sector, and 11.4 percent are in the manufacturing sector. As shown in Table 4-5 the types of jobs within Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine are similar with the most jobs in the professional, education, and manufacturing sectors. City of Santa Ana 4-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Table 4-5: Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine Jobs by Sector, 2017 Job Sector City of Santa Ana City of Tustin City of Irvine Professional 23.1% 17.7% 26.3% Education 18.2% 16.0% 16.8% Manufacturing 11.4% 11.0% 13.8% Retail 8.5% 12.8% 8.5% Leisure 8.0% 13.2% 8.9% Wholesale 7.0% 5.9% 4.7% Finance 7.0% 9.3% 9.0% Construction 5.3% 6.4% 3.9% Public 4.1% 1.0% 0.8% Other 2.7% 3.8% 1.9% Transportation 2.5% 1.4% 1.5% Information 2.3% 1.3% 3.5% Source: 2017 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana, City of Tustin, and City of Irvine In addition, the Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project describes that there are 119,676 jobs within two -miles of the Project site within the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine and that many of these jobs exist within the following sectors: construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, finance and insurance, professional, scientific/technical services, administrative support, health care, retail, and accommodation services (AECOM 2019). The SCAG 2019 Local Profile for Santa Ana identifies that only 20.8 percent of Santa Ana residents work and live in the City, while 79.2 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Santa Ana the largest percentage commute to the City of Irvine (12.2 percent), Anaheim (6.8 percent), Orange 5.5 (percent), and Costa Mesa (5.3 percent). For Tustin, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile shows that only 7.3 percent of Tustin residents work and live in the City, while 92.7 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Tustin the largest percentage commute to the City of Irvine (18.6 percent), Santa Ana (10.4), Anaheim (5.5 percent), and Orange 5.2 (percent). In comparison, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for Irvine identifies that 30.6 percent of residents work and live in the City, while 69.4 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Irvine the largest percentage commute to the City of Santa Ana (6.5 percent), Newport Beach (5.6 percent), and Los Angeles (5.5 percent). Jobs - Housing Ratio SCAG considers an area balanced when the jobs -housing ratio is 1.36; communities with more than 1.36 jobs per dwelling unit are considered jobs -rich; those with fewer than 1.36 are housing rich (SCAG 2004). As shown in Table 4-6, the City of Santa Ana is jobs rich with 2.08 jobs per housing, which is anticipated to increase to 2.13 jobs per housing unit by 2040. Similarly, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to continue to be jobs rich. In 2040, the City of Tustin is projected to have 2.38 jobs per housing units and the City of Irvine is projected to have 2.59 jobs per housing unit. Hence, the Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine region of the County is jobs rich; and the Project site is located at the center of this regional location. In contrast, Table 4-6 shows that Orange County as a whole has a jobs -housing ratio of 1.56, which is closer to the SCAG preferred jobs - housing ratio of 1.36. However, the SCAG projections anticipate that the City of Santa Ana 4-15 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting number of jobs within the County will increase more than the number of housing units (10 percent increase in jobs versus a 4.4 percent increase in housing units); thus, the County's jobs — housing ratio is anticipated to increase to 1.65 by 2040. Table 4-6: Jobs — Housing Balance Source: SCAG 2019 Local Profiles for Santa Ana and Orange County, SCAG 2016 Growth Projections, CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019. 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Fire protection and emergency medical services in the City of Santa Ana are provided by the OCFA through a contract for services. The OCFA provides fire suppression, emergency medical, rescue, fire prevention, hazardous materials coordination, and wildland management services. OCFA serves 23 cities in Orange County and all unincorporated areas. Within the City of Santa Ana, OCFA provides services from 10 city - owned fire stations. There are currently 6 city -owned fire stations located within 3.5 miles of the Project site. Station 79, which is located 1 mile from the Project site is the first responding unit. The location, equipment, and staffing of the fire stations near the Project site are provided in Table 4-7. As provided by the OCFA 2018 Statistical Annual Report, there were 33,983 calls for service from the 10 fire stations in the City in 2018. Of the calls for service, 65 percent (21,952) were for emergency medical calls, 1.7 percent (565) were for fire incidents, and 13.8 percent (4,703) were for other incidents, which includes: cancelled service calls, ruptures, hazardous conditions, false alarms, and miscellaneous calls. OCFA's Standard of Cover for fire services in urban areas, such as the City of Santa Ana, are listed below. Response times are from receipt of the service call to a unit on scene: First -in engines should arrive on -scene to medical aids and/or fires within 7 minutes and 20 seconds 80 percent of the time. • First -in truck companies should arrive on -scene to fires within 12 minutes 80 percent of the time. • First -in paramedic companies should arrive on -scene at all medical aids within 10 minutes 80 percent of the time. City of Santa Ana 4-16 Draft EIR January 2020 Year Employment Housing Units Jobs — Housing Ratio City of Santa Ana Existing 163,503 78,563 2.08 2040 (projected) 166,000 78,000 2.13 City of Tustin Existing 50,169 28,145 1.78 2040 (projected) 66,400 27,900 2.38 City of Irvine Existing 269,502 105,858 2.55 2040 (projected) 320,000 123,400 2.59 County of Orange Existing 1,726,003 1,104,164 1.56 2040 (projected) 1,898,900 1,152,300 1.65 Source: SCAG 2019 Local Profiles for Santa Ana and Orange County, SCAG 2016 Growth Projections, CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019. 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Fire protection and emergency medical services in the City of Santa Ana are provided by the OCFA through a contract for services. The OCFA provides fire suppression, emergency medical, rescue, fire prevention, hazardous materials coordination, and wildland management services. OCFA serves 23 cities in Orange County and all unincorporated areas. Within the City of Santa Ana, OCFA provides services from 10 city - owned fire stations. There are currently 6 city -owned fire stations located within 3.5 miles of the Project site. Station 79, which is located 1 mile from the Project site is the first responding unit. The location, equipment, and staffing of the fire stations near the Project site are provided in Table 4-7. As provided by the OCFA 2018 Statistical Annual Report, there were 33,983 calls for service from the 10 fire stations in the City in 2018. Of the calls for service, 65 percent (21,952) were for emergency medical calls, 1.7 percent (565) were for fire incidents, and 13.8 percent (4,703) were for other incidents, which includes: cancelled service calls, ruptures, hazardous conditions, false alarms, and miscellaneous calls. OCFA's Standard of Cover for fire services in urban areas, such as the City of Santa Ana, are listed below. Response times are from receipt of the service call to a unit on scene: First -in engines should arrive on -scene to medical aids and/or fires within 7 minutes and 20 seconds 80 percent of the time. • First -in truck companies should arrive on -scene to fires within 12 minutes 80 percent of the time. • First -in paramedic companies should arrive on -scene at all medical aids within 10 minutes 80 percent of the time. City of Santa Ana 4-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Table 4-7: Santa Ana Fire Stations Near the Project Site Jource: UC. A 1V 1 Y. Station 79, which is located 1 mile from the Project is the first responding station to the site. In 2018, Station 79 had 1,995 incidents in its first response area with an on -scene response time of 7:42 minutes, 80 percent of the time. Station 37, which is the 2nd responding station at 1.8 miles from the Project site had 1,656 incidents in its first response area in 2018 with an on -scene response time of 8:12 minutes, 80 percent of the time. Law Enforcement The Santa Ana Police Department provides police services throughout the City, including the Project area. The Police Department headquarters is located west of City Hall (60 Civic Center Plaza), which is approximately 4.7 miles northwest of the Project site. The Police Department also has a Southeast Substation located at 1780 East McFadden Avenue, which is approximately 2.2 miles from the Project site; and a Westend Substation located at 3750 West McFadden Avenue, which is 6.4 miles from the Project site. The Police Department has divided the City into two policing divisions; East and West. These are further divided into four districts overseen by two District Commanders. The Project site is located within the Southeast District, which consists of the City of Santa Ana lands that are south of First Street and east of Flower Street. In 2018, the Santa Ana Police Department had 565 personnel, which included 316 sworn and 249 non - sworn positions. Based on the California Department of Finance estimate that 339,192 residents lived within the City in 2018, the City's sworn officer to population ratio is 1.07 officers per 1,000 population. In 2018, officers responded to 125,681 calls for service and initiated 48,365 policing activities, which totals 174,046 policing activities. Within 2018, the Police Department had the following responses times per service call priority: • Priority One — 8 minutes 10 seconds • Priority Two — 11 minutes 21 seconds • Priority Three — 31 minutes 46 seconds City of Santa Ana 4-17 Draft EIR January 2020 Distance Fire Station Location from Site Equipment Staffing Station 79 1 320 East Warner 1 mile 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Engine 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Station 37 15011 Kensington Park Avenue 1.8 miles 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Engine 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Station 6 3180 Barranca Parkway 2.2 miles 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Engine 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Station 28 17862 Gillette Avenue 2.5 miles 1 Paramedic 2 Fire Captain, Engine, 2 Engineer, 1 Paramedic 4 Firefighters Truck Station 74 1427 S. Broadway Street 2.8 miles 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Engine 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Station 76 950 W. MacArthur Boulevard 3.5 miles 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Truck 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Jource: UC. A 1V 1 Y. Station 79, which is located 1 mile from the Project is the first responding station to the site. In 2018, Station 79 had 1,995 incidents in its first response area with an on -scene response time of 7:42 minutes, 80 percent of the time. Station 37, which is the 2nd responding station at 1.8 miles from the Project site had 1,656 incidents in its first response area in 2018 with an on -scene response time of 8:12 minutes, 80 percent of the time. Law Enforcement The Santa Ana Police Department provides police services throughout the City, including the Project area. The Police Department headquarters is located west of City Hall (60 Civic Center Plaza), which is approximately 4.7 miles northwest of the Project site. The Police Department also has a Southeast Substation located at 1780 East McFadden Avenue, which is approximately 2.2 miles from the Project site; and a Westend Substation located at 3750 West McFadden Avenue, which is 6.4 miles from the Project site. The Police Department has divided the City into two policing divisions; East and West. These are further divided into four districts overseen by two District Commanders. The Project site is located within the Southeast District, which consists of the City of Santa Ana lands that are south of First Street and east of Flower Street. In 2018, the Santa Ana Police Department had 565 personnel, which included 316 sworn and 249 non - sworn positions. Based on the California Department of Finance estimate that 339,192 residents lived within the City in 2018, the City's sworn officer to population ratio is 1.07 officers per 1,000 population. In 2018, officers responded to 125,681 calls for service and initiated 48,365 policing activities, which totals 174,046 policing activities. Within 2018, the Police Department had the following responses times per service call priority: • Priority One — 8 minutes 10 seconds • Priority Two — 11 minutes 21 seconds • Priority Three — 31 minutes 46 seconds City of Santa Ana 4-17 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting • Priority Four — 35 minutes 56 seconds • Priority Five — 47 minutes 39 seconds School Services The Project site is locates within the Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) boundary, which serves a 24 square mile area and has a total of 57 schools, including: thirty-six elementary schools, nine intermediate schools, and six high schools, three educational options secondary schools school, two early college high schools, and one special needs development center (SAUSD 2019). Santa Ana Unified School District's school facilities has an enrollment of 51,482 students in the 2018/2019 school year (CDE 2019). The Project site is in the attendance areas of James Monroe Elementary School (417 E. Central Ave), which is approximately 1.8 miles from the Project site; McFadden Intermediate (2701 S. Raitt Street), which is approximately 3.8 miles from the Project site; and Century High School (1401 S. Grand Avenue), which is approximately 1.8 miles from the Project site (SAUSD 2019). Table 4-8 shows the total capacity, the 2018-2019 school year enrollments, and the remaining capacity of the schools that would serve students residing on the Project site. As shown on Table 4-8, each of the schools have remaining capacity to serve between 275 and 986 additional students. Table 4-8: Existing School Capacity of Schools Serving the Project Site School Total Capacity 2018-19 Enrollment Remaining Capacity James Monroe Elementary 575 300 275 McFadden Intermediate 1,512 1,184 328 Century High 2,646 1,660 986 Total 4,733 3,144 1,589 Sources: cde.ca.gov and SAUSD Facilities Master Plan 4.15 PARKS AND RECREATION The Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element of the Santa Ana General Plan states that the City has approximately 400 acres of public parks and recreational space. Based on the 2019 population estimate of 337,716 residents, the City has approximately 1.2 acres of public park and/or recreational space per every 1,000 residents. The closest park and recreation facilities (within 3 miles of the project site) in the City of Santa Ana that would be most utilized by the residents of the Project are listed in Table 4-9. As shown, the City has 1 1 existing parks that provide 81.88 acres of parkland within 3 miles of the Project site. Table 4-9: Santa Ana Park and Recreation Facilities Within Three Miles of the Project Site Park and Address Amenities Acreage Miles from Travel Time from Project Site Project Site* Delhi Park Ball Diamond, Basketball Courts, 10.40 acres 1.4 miles Driving: 5 minutes 2314 S. Halladay Multi-purpose Field, Parking, Walking: 28 minutes Playground, Restrooms, Handball courts Maple & Occidental Exercise Equipment 0.43 acre 2.2 miles Driving: 8 minutes Maple and Walking: 42 minutes Occidental St. Memorial Park Ball Diamond, Basketball Courts, 17.0 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 8 minutes 2102 S. Flower Handball courts. Multi-purpose Walking: 48 minutes Field, Parking, Playground, Picnic City of Santa Ana 4-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Park and Address Amenities Acreage Miles from Travel Time from Red Hill Avenue and Space Area Project Site Project Site* Barranca Parkway Tables, Restrooms, Swimming Pool, Veterans Sports Park Exercise Equipment 31.5 acres 0.9 mile Driving: 3 minutes Madison Park Ball Diamonds, Basketball Courts, 6.06 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 9 minutes 1528 S Standard Concession Stand, Multipurpose Walking: 49 minutes Avenue Field, Multi-purpose Court, Playground, Parking, Picnic Centennial Park Tables, Restrooms 8.0 acres 1.6 miles Driving: 5 minutes Sandpointe Park Restrooms, Basketball Courts, 6.63 acres 2.8 miles Driving: 9 minutes 3700 S. Birch Street Hiking & Exercise Trail, Multi- Walking: 57 minutes purpose Field, Playground, Picnic Victory Park Tables, Tennis Courts, 4.7 acres 1.8 miles Driving: 6 minutes 3300 Park Avenue Volleyball Walking: 36 minutes Segerstrom Triangle Open Space 1.22 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 9 minutes 1000 W. Hemlock Walking: 59 minutes Wy. Pacific Electric Playground, Picnic Shelter/Tables, 1.39 acres 2.9 miles Driving: 10 minutes Restrooms, Exercise Equipment, Walking: 56 minutes Community Garden Lillie King Park Multi-purpose Field, Parking, 9.60 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 500 West Alton Playground, Picnic Tables Walking: 57 minutes Avenue Bomo Koral Park Ball Diamonds, Multi-purpose 10.40 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 900 W MacArthur Field, Parking, Walking: 62 minutes Boulevard Picnic tables Prentice Park Playgrounds, picnic area 18.75 acre 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 1 801 E. Chestnut Walking: 63 minutes Ave. Total Acreage of Parkland 81.88 acres Source: City of Santa Ana Parks, Recreation and Community Services Website, 2019. * Per Google Earth. In addition, there are 9 existing City of Tustin park facilities that provide 92.9 acres of parkland and 3 existing City of Irvine park facilities within 3 miles of the Project site that provide 63.6 acres of park and recreation space, as listed in Table 4-10. Thus, the total existing parkland within 3 miles of the Project site is 238.38 acres. Table 4-10: Tustin and Irvine Park and Recreation Facilities Within Three Miles of the Project Site Park and Address Amenities Acreage Miles from Travel Time from Project Site Project Site* City of Tustin Parks Tustin Legacy Park Passive Park, with Trails, and Open 26 acres 0.7 mile Driving: 3 minutes Red Hill Avenue and Space Area Walking: 13 minutes Barranca Parkway Veterans Sports Park Basketball, Football, Racquetball, 31.5 acres 0.9 mile Driving: 3 minutes Lansdowne Road and Soccer Walking: 15 minutes Valencia Avenue Softball, Tennis, Volleyball, Open Space, Veterans Memorial, Playground Centennial Park Basketball Court, BBQs, Large Turf 8.0 acres 1.6 miles Driving: 5 minutes 14722 Devonshire Area, Walking: 32 minutes Avenue Picnic Tables, Playground, Restrooms, Sand Volleyball Court Victory Park Large Turf Area, Pavilion, Picnic 4.7 acres 1.8 miles Driving: 6 minutes 3300 Park Avenue Shelters Walking: 36 minutes City of Santa Ana 4-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Park and Address Amenities Acreage Miles from Travel Time from Project Site Project Site* City of Tustin Parks City of Irvine Parks Plaza Park Playground, Reflection Area, 7.7 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 7 minutes 610 Paseo Westpark Restrooms Walking: 51 minutes Frontier Park Disc Golf Course, Fitness Equipment, 4.5 acres 2.0 miles Driving: 7 minutes 1400 Mitchell Avenue Picnic Shelters and Tables, 7.9 acres 2.7 miles Walking: 40 minutes 15 Sweet Shade Playground, Restrooms, Water Walking: 47 minutes Feature Play Area Magnolia Tree Park Basketball Court, Picnic Shelters and 4.2 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 7 minutes 2274 Fig Tree Drive Tables, Playground, Restrooms, Walking: 46 minutes Tennis Court Pine Tree Park Large Turf Area, Picnic Shelters, 4.2 acres 2.7 miles Driving: 10 minutes 1402 Bryan Street Picnic Tables, Playground, Walking: 56 minutes Total of Irvine Parkland Within 3 Miles of the Project Site Restrooms, Sand Volleyball Court, Skate park, Volleyball Peppertree Park Baseball / Softball Diamond, BBQs, 5.5 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 230 W. 1 st Street Bocce Ball Court, Horseshoe Pit, Walking: 67 minutes Parking, Picnic Shelters and Tables, Playground, Restrooms, Water Feature Play Area Camino Real Park Basketball Court, Picnic Shelters and 4.3 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 13602 Parkcenter Lane 1 Tables, Playground, Restrooms Walking: 66 minutes Total of Tustin Parkland Within 3 Miles of the Project Site 1 92.9 acres City of Irvine Parks Plaza Park Playground, Soccer Fields, Baseball 7.7 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 7 minutes 610 Paseo Westpark Field, Walking: 51 minutes Group Picnic Area Sweet Shade Park Multi -Use Building, Playground, 7.9 acres 2.7 miles Driving: 8 minutes 15 Sweet Shade Basketball Courts, BBQs, Group Walking: 47 minutes Picnic Area Bill Barber Park Drinking Fountains, Playground, 48 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 4 Civic Center Plaza Amphitheater, Concession Stand, Walking: 50 minutes Soccer Fields, Tennis Courts, Baseball Courts, Trail Access, Batting Cages, BBQ, Croup Picnic Areas Total of Irvine Parkland Within 3 Miles of the Project Site 63.6 acres Source: City of Tustin Parks, Recreation and Community Services Website, 2019; City of Irvine Park Locator Map, 2019. * Per Google Earth. 4.16 TRANSPORTATION Roadways. Access to the Project site is provided by Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, which are both arterial roadways. Red Hill Avenue has a speed limit of 50 mph near the Project site, and 45 mph north of Valencia Avenue. Warner Avenue has a speed limit of 45 mph west of Red Hill Avenue and 50 mph east of Red Hill Avenue. Red Hill Avenue is a north -south roadway connecting Interstate 405 (1-405) to the south and Interstate 5 (i-5) to the north. Transit. The Project site is served by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Bus Routes 71 (Red Hill) and 72 (Warner), as well as Metrolink Stationlink Route 472 (Red Hill). Bus routes 71 and 72 provide service seven days a week. Route 472 provides service Monday thru Friday. Other Bus Routes servicing City of Santa Ana 4-20 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting areas within the project study area are OCTA bus routes 55, 59, 70, 76, 86, Intracounty OC Express Route 21 3/A, Metrolink Stationlink Route 463, and the IShuttle 400A, 401 B, and 405F. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities. Both Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue have existing sidewalks. Red Hill Avenue has an existing bicycle lane between Barranca Parkway and Reynolds Avenue, and Warner Avenue has an existing bicycle lane to the east of Red Hill Avenue. 4.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES A Sacred Lands File search was requested from the NAHC on February 1, 2019. The NAHC responded on February 6, 2019, stating that there are no known/known sacred lands within 0.5 mile of the Project area, and requested that 18 Native American individuals be contacted for further information regarding the general area vicinity. In compliance with SB 18, AB 52, and the NAHC request, on September 24, 2019, the City sent letters to the following Native American tribes that may have knowledge regarding tribal cultural resources in the Project vicinity. • Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians • Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe • Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians • Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation • Gabrieleno/Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council • Juaneno Band of Mission Indians • Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation • Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation — Romero • La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians • Pala Band of Mission Indians • Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians • Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians • Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians (2 contacts) • San Fernando Band of Mission Indians • San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians • Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians 4.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Water Supply and Demand The City's water supply is a combination of imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin (OC Basin), and recycled water. As shown on Table 4-11, in 2015 the City obtained 71.2 percent of water supply from groundwater, 27.8 percent of water from imported/purchased supplies, and 1.0 percent from recycled water sources. City of Santa Ana 4-21 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Table 4-11: City of Santa Ana Actual Water Supply 2015 Source Volume (acre- Percentage 27,992 feet) 28,025 1 OC Groundwater Basin 26,351 71.2% Imported Purchased 10,305 27.8% Recycled 352 1.0 Total 37,008 100% Source: 2015 UWMP The 2015 UWMP identified that water demands were 36,656 AF from July 2014 to June 2015, which is 352 AF less than the water supply shown in Table 4-11. Thus, sufficient water supply was available to meet demands. In addition, the 2015 UWMP highlights that 2010 UWMP anticipated water demands in 2015 to be much larger at 47,800 AF and detailed the ability of the City to meet the greater anticipated demand. As shown in Table 4-12, the 2015 UWMP estimates that water supplies in the future are anticipated to be obtained through a similar mix of groundwater and imported water. The 2015 UWMP anticipates that the City's water supply will increase from 36,998 acre-feet (AF) in 2020 to 40,036 AF in 2040 (increase of 3,038 AFY) to meet the City's anticipated growth in water demands, which is an 8.2 percent increase. Table 4-12: City of Santa Ana Projected Water Demand and Supply Projections (acre-feet) Source 2020 1 2025 1 2030 1 2035 1 2040 1 2040 OC Groundwater Basin 25,899 1 27,802 1 27,992 1 27,985 1 28,025 1 70.0% Imported Purchased 10,799 11,615 11,697 11,693 11,711 29.20 Recycled 320 320 320 320 320 0.8% Total 36,998 39,717 39,989 39,978 40,036 100% Source: 2015 UWMP The 2040 projections anticipate that 70 percent of supply would be from the OC Basin and 29.3 percent from imported/purchased sources. The 2015 UWMP details that the available supply would meet the projected demand in single dry years and multiple dry years through 2040 with a planned demand increase of 6 percent due to diversified supply and conservation measures. The 2015 UWMP also describes that water demands per capita have been decreasing in recent years due to new state and local regulations related to water conservation. The 2015 UWMP plan describes that the City used 83 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) in 2015, which exceeded the City's target of 116 GPCD for 2020. Water Infrastructure The City maintains 444 miles of transmission and distribution mains, 9 reservoirs with a storage capacity of 49.3 million gallons, 7 pumping stations, 20 wells, and 7 connections to the MWD System that have a transfer capacity of 60,580 gallons per minute (gpm). The Project site is currently served by the City's water utility and is connected to the existing water infrastructure. Warner Avenue contains a 1 2 -inch water main that conveys water supplies to the Project site and adjacent areas. Wastewater In 2015, the City of Santa Ana generated approximately 23,826 acre-feet of wastewater (2015 UWMP). The City of Santa Ana operates and maintains the local sewer system consisting of over 390 miles of pipeline, 7,630 manholes, and two lift stations. Wastewater from the Project site currently discharges into existing City of Santa Ana 4-22 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting City -owned 8 -inch sewer line within Warner Avenue. The existing sewer lines drain southeasterly to a manhole at Red Hill Avenue that are conveyed southeasterly through an existing six-inch double siphon that drains to a 42 -inch trunk OCSD sewer line in Red Hill Avenue that drains southwesterly. The Sewer Study prepared for the proposed Project monitored existing flows in Warner Avenue over a period of two weeks from April 30, 2019 to Mayl 5, 2019, and determined that the capacity of the existing 8 -inch pipeline is 0.35 cfs and that the existing average flows were 0.01 cfs and the existing peak flows were 0.04 (Sewer 2019). The OCSD trunk pipelines, including the one in Red Hill Avenue adjacent to the site, conveys wastewater to the OCSD Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley that has a treatment capacity of 204 million gallons per day (mgd) and an average daily flow of 117 mgd (OCSD 2018). Given the anticipated growth within OCSD's service area, OCSD is currently implementing several infrastructure projects to provide additional capacity (OCSD 2018). Drainage The Project site is currently 75 percent impervious and 25 percent pervious (WQMP 2019). The existing topography of the Project site is relatively flat and generally drains from the north to the south. Currently, the Project site drains northwest where flows enter an existing catch basin. The catch basin connects to a six- foot -high by ten -foot -wide culvert that directs flows to an 84 -inch storm drain that flows southeast to a flood control basin. Drainage from the flood control basin is conveyed to the Barranca Channel that connects to San Diego Creek Reach 1 that drains to Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Onsite soils infiltration testing was performed during preparation of the Geotechnical Report, which determined that soils have an infiltration rate of 0.15 inches per hour which, is identified as a low infiltration rate and considered infeasible to support drainage on the Project site (GEO 2019). Solid Waste In 2018, a majority (87 percent) of the solid waste from the City of Santa Ana, which was disposed of in landfills, went to the Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill (Calrecycle 2019). The Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill is permitted to accept 11,500 tons per day of solid waste and is permitted to operate through 2053. In September 2019, the maximum tonnage received was 9,967 tons. Thus, the facility had additional capacity of 1,533 tons per day (Calrecycle 2019). REFERENCES Bowery Project Air Quality Analysis, Prepared by Urban Crossroads, 2019. Bowery Project Greenhouse Gas Analysis, Prepared by Urban Crossroads, 2019. California Department of Conservation California Official Tsunami Inundation Maps (DOC 2019). Accessed: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps California Department of Education Data Quest (CDE 2019): Accessed: https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ California Department of Finance E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2019 with 2010 Census Benchmark (DOF 2019). Accessed: http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ City of Santa Ana 4-23 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting California Gas and Electric Utilities 2018 California Gas Report (CGEU 2018). Accessed at: https://www.socalgas.com/regulatory/documents/cgr/2018_CaIifornia_Gas_Re port.pdf. CalReycyle Solid Waste Information System (Calrecycle 2019). Accessed at: http://www.caIrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/Search.aspx CalReycyle Disposal Reporting System: Jurisdiction Tons by Facility (Calrecycle 2019). Accessed at: https://www2.caIrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentraI/DisposaIReporting/Destination/DisposaIByFaciIity Center for Demographic Research 2019 Orange County Progress Report for the City of Santa Ana (CDR 2019). Accessed: http://www.fullerton.edu/cdr/_resources/pdf/progressreport/Santa%20Ana.pdf City of Irvine Park Locator Map, 2019. Accessed: https://gis.cityofirvine.org/parks/ City of Santa Ana General Plan. Accessed: http://www.santa- ana.org/generalplan/default.asp#CurrentGPDocs City of Santa Ana Municipal Code. Accessed: https://library.municode.com/ca/santa_ana/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=14452 City of Santa Ana Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Website, 2019. Accessed: https://www.santa-ana.org/parks City of Santa Ana 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, April 2016. Accessed: http://www.ci.santa- ana.ca.us/pwa/documents/DRAFTSantaAnaUWMPApril20l 6.pdf City of Tustin Parks, Recreation and Community Services Website, 2019. Accessed: https://www.tustinca.org/1 49/Parks-Recreation Economic and Fiscal Analysis for the Santa Ana Red Hill Development. Prepared by AECOM, 2019 (AECOM 2019). Eisentraut, P. and J. Cooper 2002. (Eisentraut and Cooper 2002). Development of a Model Curation Program for Orange County's Archaeological and Paleontological Collections. Prepared by California State University, Fullerton and submitted to the County of Orange Public Facilities and Resources Department/Harbors, Parks and Beaches (PFRD/HPB). Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report). Prepared by LGC Geotechnical. 2019 (GEO 2019). Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report, 2019. Prepared by Hillman Consulting (Hillman 2019). Meixner, etal. Sources of Selenium, Arsenic and Nutrients in the Newport Bay Watershed, 2004. Accessed: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/tmdI/docs/Meixner_etal_2004.pdf Orange County Airport Land Use Commission, Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, 2008. Accessed: http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/JWA_AELUP-April-17-2008.pdf Orange County Fire Authority 2018 Statistical Annual Report. Accessed: https://www.ocfa.org/Uploads/Transparency/OCFA%2OAnnual%2OReport%20201 8.pdf City of Santa Ana 4-24 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting Orange County Fire Authority Email Communication. Tamera Rivers Management Analyst, October 1, 2019 (OCFA 2019). Orange County General Plan Figure VI -9, General Areas of Paleontological Sensitivity. Accessed: https://www.ocgov.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=8621 Orange County Sanitation District Sewer Services (OCSD 2019). Accessed at: https://www.ocsd.com/services/regiona I -sewer -service Orange County Water District South Basin #D-1712505 Remedial Investigation Workplan, June 25, 2018 (OCWA 2018). Accessed: https://www.ocwd.com/media/6813/south-basin-project-d1712505-ri-work- plan.pdf. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report, 2018. Prepared by Stantec (Phase 1 2018). Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessment Report, 2018. Prepared by Stantec (Phase 11 2018). Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Fuscoe Engineering (WQMP 2019) Santa Ana Unified School District Master Plan (SAUSD 2019). Accessed: https://www.sausd.us/cros/lib/CA01000471 /Centricity/Domain/47/18- 0710%20SAUSD_Master%20PIa n_FI NAL%20-%20 REDUCED.pdf SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana. Accessed: http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/SantaAna.pdf Sewer Analysis Report prepared by Fuscoe Engineering (Sewer 2019). Southern California Edison. Infrastructure Upgrades. (SCE 2019). Accessed at: http://sce.com/wps/portal/home/about-us/reliability. Water Supply Assessment, prepared by prepared by Fuscoe Engineering, 2019. City of Santa Ana 4-25 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 4. Environmental Setting This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 4-26 Draft EIR January 2020 5.1 Aesthetics 5.1.1 INTRODUCTION This section describes the existing visual setting and aesthetic character of the Project site and vicinity and evaluates the potential for the Project to impact scenic vistas, visual character and quality, and light and glare. This analysis focuses on changes that would be seen from public viewpoints and provides an assessment of whether aesthetic changes from implementation of the Project would result in substantially degraded aesthetic conditions. Aesthetics Terminology • Aesthetic Resources include a combination of numerous elements, such as landforms, vegetation, water features, urban design, and/or architecture, that provide an overall visual impression that is pleasing to, or valued by, its observers. Factors important in describing the aesthetic resources of an area include visual character, scenic resources, and scenic vistas. These factors together not only describe the intrinsic aesthetic appeal of an area, but also communicate the value placed upon a landscape or scene by its observers. • Scenic Resources are visually significant hillsides, ridges, water bodies, and buildings that are critical in shaping the visual character and scenic identity of the area and surrounding region. • Scenic Vistas are defined as panoramic views of important visual features, as seen from public viewing areas. This definition combines visual quality with information about view exposure to describe the level of interest or concern that viewers may have for the quality of a particular view or visual setting. • Visual Character broadly describes the unique combination of aesthetic elements and scenic resources that characterize a particular area. The quality of an area's visual character can be qualitatively assessed considering the overall visual impression or attractiveness created by the particular landscape characteristics. In urban settings, these characteristics largely include land use type and density, urban landscaping and design, architecture, topography, and background setting. 5.1.2 REGULATORY SETTING City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. City policies pertaining to visual character are contained in the Land Use and Urban Design Elements of the General Plan. The existing General Plan goals and policies that are relevant to the Project include the following: Land Use Element Goal 5: Ensure that the impacts of development are mitigated. Urban Design Element Goal 1: Improve the physical appearance of the City through development of districts that project a sense of place, positive community image, and quality environment. Policy 1.1: New development and redevelopment projects must have the highest quality design, materials, finishes, and construction. City of Santa Ana 5.1-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.1 Aesthetics Policy 1.4: Development and other design features that prevent loitering, vandalism, graffiti, and visual deprivation, are to be included in all projects. Policy 1.5: Enhanced architectural forms, textures, colors, and materials are expected in the design of all projects. Policy 2.1: Projects must acknowledge and improve upon their surroundings with the use of creative architectural design, streetscape treatments, and landscaping. Policy 2.2: New development must be consistent with the scale, bulk, and pattern of existing development. Policy 2.11: New developments must re -enforce or help establish district character. Policy 3.15: Create a diverse urban forest through the use of a large variety of trees in medians, parkways, public open space, and as part of private development. City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 33-185, Street Tree Species to Be Planted. This municipal code section includes a list of the official street tree species for the City of Santa Ana. Species other than those included in this list may be planted as street trees with consent from the environmental and transportation advisory committee. Section 33-188, Site Plan Approval. This municipal code section requires the planting of street trees to coincide with the development, redevelopment, renovating of any tract or parcel. The site plan for development or improvement of any tract or parcel of land shall include street trees showing the approximate location, size, and species of all existing trees to be maintained, trees to be removed and trees required for approval of the project. Section 41-611.1. All site lighting shall be arranged as to not unreasonably interfere with adjacent residences. Section 41-1304. All outdoor lighting in parking lots should be reflected away from these sensitive land uses. 5.1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Aesthetic resources include a combination of numerous elements, such as landforms, vegetation, water features, urban design, and/or architecture, that impart an overall visual impression that is pleasing to, or valued by, its observers. Factors important in describing the aesthetic resources of an area include visual character, scenic resources, and scenic vistas. These factors together not only describe the intrinsic aesthetic appeal of an area, but also communicate the value placed upon a landscape or scene by its observers. Scenic Vistas Scenic vistas are panoramic views of important visual features, as seen from public viewing areas. The Project site and surrounding areas are either urbanized or planned for urbanization and do not contain any sensitive scenic vistas. The General Plan Scenic Corridors Element identifies street corridors, watercourse corridors, inter -city corridors, City entries, and selected/screened views from a highway that are considered unique visual resources within the City. Exhibit 4 of the Scenic Corridors Element does not identify any scenic resources or vistas at or adjacent to the Project site. The nearest feature identified by the General Plan is Edinger Avenue, a "Secondary Street Corridor", which is approximately 1 mile north of the site. City of Santa Ana 5.1-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics State Scenic Highway There are no officially designated state scenic highways in the vicinity of the proposed Project (Caltrans 2019). The only officially designated scenic highway within Orange County is a portion of SR -91 that is located between SR -55 to east of the Anaheim city limit (Caltrans 2019), which is not in the vicinity of the Project site. Likewise, there are no County -designated scenic highways that run through the City of Santa Ana. Visual Character of the Project Site The visual character of the Project site is urban and light industrial in nature. The Project site is developed with three large industrial buildings that total 212,121 square feet, parking areas, and vehicle circulation drives. Two of the industrial buildings are two -stories in height and one is three -stories in height. The vegetation on site consists of an approximately 2.5 -acre undeveloped grass area at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenues, some ornamental trees scattered throughout the site, and street trees along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The exteriors of the buildings are long and flat, without architectural treatments. The buildings have a typical boxy modern office/industrial structure appearance, with large dark tinted windows line the first and second floors of the 2310 South Redhill building and that make up a large portion of the front of the 2320 South Redhill building. The dark window tinting provides a black appearance from the outside. The 2320 building has exterior metal stairs to access the second story of the building and the 2310 building has very few windows, which adds to the industrial appearance. All three buildings have loading docks and industrial door openings and are surrounded by asphalt paved surface parking areas, as shown in Figure 5.1 -1, Existing Building Exteriors. The site is surrounded by 5 -foot high wrought iron fencing along Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue, which is setback from the roadways by landscaped setbacks and sidewalks. The other two sides of the Project site, that are adjacent to existing business park uses, are bound by 6 -foot high cement walls. Exterior lighting onsite is provided by security lighting by the building entrances and light posts throughout the parking areas. In addition, street lighting is located along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. Specific Views of the existing Project site from off-site locations are shown in Figure 5.1-2, Viewpoint Locations Key, and are described below. Views 1 and 2: Existing Views from Red Hill Avenue. As shown on Figure 5.1-3, views of the Project site from Red Hill Avenue include views of two-story industrial buildings, set back behind an expansive lawn area, scattered ornamental trees and wrought iron fencing. A sidewalk and street trees exist along Red Hill Avenue, adjacent to the site. The wrought iron fencing is setback 30 -feet from the sidewalk, with grass and scattered ornamental trees located within the setback. The closest building to Red Hill Avenue is the 2300 South Redhill building, which is setback approximately 260 feet from the sidewalk. The closest surface parking area toward Red Hill is setback approximately 90 feet from the sidewalk. Due to these setbacks, forefront views from Red Hill Avenue include scattered trees, grass areas, and fencing. The existing industrial buildings are within middle ground views, which blend into the existing light industrial aesthetics setting adjacent to the east and southeast of the Project site. Views 3 and 4: Existing Views from the Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue Intersection. As shown on Figure 5.1-4, views of the Project site from the Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue intersection include views of two and three-story industrial buildings, set back behind an expansive lawn area, scattered ornamental trees, and wrought iron fencing. A sidewalk and street trees exist along both Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, adjacent to the site. The wrought iron fencing is setback 30 -feet from the sidewalk, with grass and scattered ornamental trees located within the setback. A "Ricoh" monument sign sits within the setback at the intersection. A bus shelter is located on adjacent to the intersection on Red Hill Avenue. Due to the large lawn area on the northwestern corner of the site, and the large surface parking lot that is in City of Santa Ana 5.1-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics between the lawn and onsite structures, the existing industrial buildings are within middle ground views from the intersection of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, as shown in Figure 5.1 -4. Views 5, 6, and 7: Existing Site Views from Warner Avenue. As shown on Figure 5.1-5, views of the Project site from Warner Avenue include forefront views of the three-story high 2320 South Redhill building and the adjacent parking lot, which is set behind wrought iron fencing. A sidewalk exists along Warner Avenue, adjacent to the site. The wrought iron fencing is setback approximately 20 -feet from the sidewalk, with grass and scattered ornamental trees located within the setback. The building and adjacent parking lot are set back approximately 50 feet from the sidewalk. The building frontage along Warner Avenue is over 225 feet in length and is substantial in size as shown in Figure 5.1-5. The front portion of the building that includes the main entrance has an office appearance that consists of approximately 3 story high windows that are tinted black, which are accented by columns that accentuate the height of the building. The front entrance portion of the building is also identified with large Ricoh signage. The eastern and back portions of the Red Hill building have an industrial appearance with venting third story horizontal windows with black tinting and large areas of limited articulation. A drive isle with a gated entrance is located behind the building. Power lines and street lighting are located adjacent to the Project site on Warner Avenue, as shown in Figure 5.1 - 5. Visual Character of Adjacent Areas The existing visual character of the area surrounding the Project site is urban. There is no consistent architectural or visual theme within the surrounding area and significant visual resources are limited. The parcel adjacent to the Project site on Red Hill Avenue is developed with 3 -story high tilt -up cement light industrial buildings and associated parking areas. Areas across Red Hill Avenue, which is a 6 -lane arterial roadway, from the Project site are within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area and undergoing new urban development. As shown in Figure 5.1-6, areas across from the site, on the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, are developed with two-story rectangular urban buildings that are used for public and social service uses. In addition, the large airplane hangar that was previously used by the no longer existing Naval Air Station is located within middle ground views provides for an urban visual setting. Foreground views shown in Figure 5.1-6 include screened chain linked fencing that surrounds a weedy open space area with a tall Tustin Legacy monument sign on the southeast corner of the Redhill Avenue and Warner Avenue intersection. The area directly across Red Hill Avenue from the site currently consists of an undeveloped disturbed area that consists of bare ground, weedy vegetation, cement building pads that are remnants of previous development, areas that appear to be used for construction staging. As shown in Figure 5.1-6, foreground views of the areas are dominated by the screened chained link fencing that surrounds the undeveloped area. Long range views include another large airplane hangar that was previously used by the Naval Air Station. Areas across Red Hill Avenue to the southeast, shown in Figure 5.1-7 also provides foreground views of the screened chained link fencing that surrounds the undeveloped area. However, middle ground views are of new four-story office structures that are rectangular and modern in design. Longer range views include a new 5 -story hotel located on Barranca that also has a modern rectangular and boxy architecture. As part of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan, the currently undeveloped areas directly across Red Hill Avenue from the site are planned to be redeveloped as an employment center. The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan describes that the employment center is to provide a business park setting for a full range of professional offices, research & development, and commercial uses; a portion of which has been developed as shown in Figure 5.1-7. The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Development Standards for the currently undeveloped areas across Red Hill from the Project site allow for 6 -story 70 -foot high buildings that are set back 40 -feet from Red Hill Avenue. City of Santa Ana 5.1-4 Draft EIR January 2020 Existing Onsite Buildings 2320 Redhill The Bowery Figure 5.1-1 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-6 Draft EIR January 2020 t� Project Site Viewpoint Locations The Bowery Figure 5.1-2 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-8 Draft EIR January 2020 0 Views 1 and 2: Existing Views From Red Hill View of the 2300 Redhill building setback 260 feet from the sidewalk behind fencing and landscaping View of the 2310 Redhill building through the gated driveway, landscaping and surface parking. The Bowery Draft EIR Figure 5.1-3 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-10 Draft EIR January 2020 Views 3 and 4: Existing Views From Red Hill and Warner Intersection View of the site across the Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue Intersection. View of the east corner of the site with the Ricoh monument sign. The Bowery Figure 5.1-4 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-12 Draft EIR January 2020 0 Views 5, 6, and 7: Existing Views from Warner Avenue View of the 3 -story high 2320 Redhill building and driveway from Warner Avenue. 6 J4 View of the north corner of the site showing 2320 Redhill building with rear gated entrance. View of the 2320 Redhill building, fencing, landscaping, and gated driveway across Warner Avenue. The Bowery Figure 5.1-5 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-14 Draft EIR January 2020 Northeast Views Across Red Hill Avenue View accross Red Hill Avenue at the Tusting Legacy. View accros Red Hill Avenue of the screened chain linked fencing and airplane hangers. The Bowery Figure 5.1-6 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-16 Draft EIR January 2020 Southeast Views Across Red Hill Avenue View accross Red Hill Avenue of screened chain linked fencing and new 4 -story office buildings. View accros Red Hill Avenue of new 4 -story office buildings and new 5 -story hotel behind a landscaped median and fencing. The Bowery Draft EIR Figure 5.1-7 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics The Project site is bounded to the north and northwest by Warner Avenue, which is a 6 -lane arterial roadway with sidewalks and street trees. The parcel adjacent to the Project site on Warner Avenue is developed with one-story linear commercial and business park uses. These buildings have both a modern commercial appearance, with large store front type windows and parking adjacent to the front entrances of the businesses, and an industrial appearance with large roll up doors on the sides and rears of the buildings, some of which can be viewed from Warner Avenue. Areas across the street from the Project site on Warner Avenue are developed with two-story office buildings that are surrounded by surface parking areas, as shown in Figure 5.1-8. These buildings have modern architecture and are rectangular with two-story high black -tinted windows at the building entrances, large rectangular windows on the sides of the building in between the stucco exterior. The character of the areas across Warner Avenue from the Project site are of an office park environment. Light and Glare Nighttime lighting associated with the existing urban development is present both onsite and within the surrounding area. Existing lighting includes streetlights along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, parking lot and building fa4ade lighting, interior illumination passing through windows, and illumination from vehicle headlights. Sensitive receptors relative to lighting and glare include motorists and pedestrians passing through the Project area. Glare can emanate from many different sources, some of which include direct sunlight, sunlight reflecting from cars or buildings, and bright outdoor or indoor lighting. Glare in the Project area is generated by building and vehicle windows reflecting light. Currently, there are no buildings, structures, or facilities in the area that generate substantial glare since most of the buildings are constructed of non -reflective materials and are not surfaced with a substantial number of windows adjacent to one another that would create a large reflective area. In addition, surface parking lots in the area are not substantially large and are generally separated by buildings, walkways, landscaping and other non -reflective surfaces; therefore, the source of glare from sunlight or exterior light reflecting from car windshields is limited. 5.1.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: AE -1 Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? AE -2 Substantially damage scenic resources, including, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? AE -3 In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? AE -4 Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? City of Santa Ana 5.1-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-20 Draft EIR January 2020 Views Across Warner Avenue View accross Warner Avenue of the two-story office buildings and surface parking areas. View on Warner Avenue at Red Hill Avenue of the two-story office buildings. The Bowery Figure 5.1-8 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-22 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics 5.1.5 METHODOLOGY Aesthetic resources were assessed based on the visual quality of the Project site and surrounding area and the changes that would occur from implementation of the proposed Project. The significance determination for scenic vistas is based on consideration of whether the vista can be viewed from public areas within or near the Project site and the potential for the Project to either hinder views of the scenic vista or result in visual degradation. The assessment of aesthetic character and quality impacts is subjective by nature. Aesthetic character and quality generally refer to the identification of visual resources and the overall visual perception of the environment. The evaluation of aesthetic character identifies the proposed Project's development characteristics and its expected appearance, and compares it to the site's existing appearance and character, and to the character of adjacent existing and future planned uses to determine whether and/or to what extent a degradation of the visual character of the area from public view points could occur (considering factors such as the blending/contrasting of new and existing buildings given the proposed uses, architectural features, density, scale, height, bulk, setbacks, signage, etc.). The analysis of light and glare identifies light-sensitive land uses and describes the Project's proposed light and glare sources, and the extent to which Project lighting, including illuminated signage, could spill off the Project site onto adjacent existing and future light-sensitive areas. The analysis also considers the potential for sunlight to reflect off building surfaces (glare) and the extent to which such glare would interfere with the operation of motor vehicles or other activities. 5.1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT AE -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON A SCENIC VISTA. No Impact. As described previously, the Project site and surrounding areas are either urbanized or planned for urbanization and do not contain any sensitive scenic vistas. The General Plan Scenic Corridors Element identifies street corridors, watercourse corridors, inter -city corridors, City entries, and selected/screened views from a highway that are considered unique visual resources within the City. Exhibit 4 of the Scenic Corridors Element does not identify any scenic resources or vistas at or adjacent to the Project site. The nearest feature identified by the General Plan is Edinger Avenue, a "Secondary Street Corridor", which is approximately 1 mile north of the site. Due to the flat topography and distance, Edinger Avenue it is not visible from the Project site. Because there are no scenic vistas within the viewshed of the Project site, no impacts related to the scenic vistas would occur from implementation of the proposed Project. IMPACT AE -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DAMAGE SCENIC RESOURCES, INCLUDING, TREES, ROCK OUTCROPPINGS, AND HISTORIC BUILDINGS WITHIN A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY. No Impact. As described previously, there are no officially designated state scenic highways in the vicinity of the proposed Project (Caltrans 2019). The only officially designated scenic highway within Orange County is a portion of SR -91 that is located between SR -55 to east of the Anaheim city limit (Caltrans 2019), which is not in the vicinity of the Project site. Likewise, there are no County -designated scenic highways that run through the City of Santa Ana. Further, the proposed Project site is flat and surrounded by an urban built environment, and there are no other scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within the viewshed of the Project. Therefore, no impacts related to scenic resources within a state scenic highway would occur. City of Santa Ana 5.1-23 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.1 Aesthetics IMPACT AE -3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY DEGRADE THE EXISTING VISUAL CHARACTER OR QUALITY OF PUBLIC VIEWS OF THE SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS AND WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE ZONING AND OTHER REGULATIONS GOVERNING SCENIC QUALITY. Construction Less than Significant. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, construction of the proposed Project is anticipated to last approximately 27 -months. The construction -related activities involve the following: demolition, site preparation, grading, paving, construction of structures and infrastructure, and architectural coating. Views of demolition and construction activities would exist from adjacent public view locations along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. During Project demolition and construction, various activities would alter the character of the Project site and its surroundings. Graded surfaces, demolition and construction debris, construction equipment, and truck traffic would be visible. Soil would also be stockpiled and equipment for grading activities would be staged at various locations throughout the site. Construction - related visual impacts would not be constant over the 27 -month construction period (as different construction phases would involve varying activities occurring at different times). Upon completion of construction, these short-term visual impacts would cease. Because the views of construction activities would be temporary and changing as construction progresses, impacts related to the visual degradation of the existing character or quality of the site would be temporary and less than significant. Operation Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the existing development provides views of three large industrial buildings that total 212,121 square feet, parking areas, and vehicle circulation drives. Two of the industrial buildings are two -stories in height and one is three stories in height. The vegetation on site consists of an approximately 2.5 -acre undeveloped grass area at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenues, some ornamental trees scattered throughout the site. The existing development on the Project site does not exhibit any significant architectural or visual resources, nor does it contribute aesthetically to the surrounding area or to views from adjacent roadways. The proposed mixed -used Project would result in a visual change from the existing development on the site to a higher intensity development, consisting of 3 mixed use buildings that would be 6 -stories in height and one residential building that would be 5 -stories in height. Each of these buildings would have an adjacent parking structure for a total of 4 parking structures. Two parking structures would provide 7 levels of above ground parking and would be xx feet in height and two would provide 6 levels of above ground parking and would be xx feet in height. In addition, the Project would develop 2 one-story retail/restaurant commercial buildings and a surface parking lot. The tallest point of the Project would be approximately 94 feet from the ground level, which would be at the top of the architectural trim of the of the 3 mixed use 6 - story buildings. The proposed architectural design of the Project would provide a complete community by integrating the residential buildings, commercial buildings, and green spaces. In terms of visual quality, each building would have contemporary modern architecture that would include brick veneer, earth toned stucco, steel trim, metal awnings and railings. The commercial uses and common areas would be developed as pedestrian -oriented frontages with aluminum storefronts and large pedestrian scale windows. In addition, new landscaping that includes ground cover, shrubs, and trees would be installed throughout the Project site. The increase in number and height of buildings on the site would increase the overall density of the built environment. The Project would be visible from both Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. However, the Project would install architectural and landscaping treatments throughout the site and around the site City of Santa Ana 5.1-24 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.1 Aesthetics perimeter that would reduce the vertical elements and visible hardscape associated of the Project. As shown on Figure 3-4, Section 3.0, Project Description, the boundaries of the site, internal streets, and building frontages would be landscaped with ground covers, shrubs, and trees. Views of the Project site from Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue would be fronted by the new landscaping that would accent the contemporary architecture of the proposed Project. Additionally, the proposed buildings were designed to reduce the appearance of scale and mass by reinforcing the ground floor of the building and providing varying architectural designs that include recesses and articulation of the second through sixth stories to eliminate uniform solid building frontages. The Project proposes setbacks of 12 -feet from Warner Avenue and 20 - feet from Red Hill Avenue. Views 1 and 2: Proposed Project Views from Red Hill Avenue. As described previously, in Views 1 and 2 (shown in Figure 5.1-3), the existing industrial buildings are set back behind a large lawn area, scattered ornamental trees and wrought iron fencing. However, the existing industrial buildings on the Project site do not exhibit any significant architectural or visual resources, nor does it contribute aesthetically to the surrounding area or to views from adjacent roadways. As shown in Figure 5.1-9, implementation of the proposed Project would change these views to that of the proposed one through 6 story buildings set behind landscaping trees and in some locations set behind surface parking lots and outdoor restaurant dining areas. The change in views of the Project site along Red Hill Avenue would result in a higher visually dense urban environment, where urban structures setback in the distance would be forefront structures and dominate views. The existing industrial building views would become higher intensity pedestrian oriented urban community views. The proposed size and scale of the Project would substantially increase the overall visual density of the built environment. Views 3 and 4: Proposed Project Views from the Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue Intersection. As described previously, in Views 3 and 4 (shown in Figure 5.1-4), the existing industrial buildings are set back behind a large lawn area, scattered ornamental trees and wrought iron fencing. As shown in Figure 5.1 -10, implementation of the proposed Project would develop a 6 -story, 94 -foot tall mixed-use building in the currently undeveloped lawn area. This would change views from that of setback industrial structures to forefront views of urban buildings and landscaping. The Project would result in substantially denser urban, but community oriented, views of the site. Views 5, 6, and 7: Proposed Project Views from Warner Avenue. As described previously, in Views 5 through 7 (shown in Figure 5.1 -5), views of the Project site from Warner Avenue include forefront views of the three-story high 2320 South Redhill building and the adjacent parking lot, which is set behind wrought iron fencing. As shown in Figure 5.1 -11, implementation of the proposed Project would result in views of forefront urban structures that would be five and six -stories high. The top of the architectural treatments on the 6 -story building would be 94 -feet from the ground level, which would be substantially taller than the existing three-story high industrial building that currently occupies views of the site from Warner Avenue. Similar to the other view resulting from the Project, the existing views of the industrial building would become views of higher density urban development with pedestrian oriented store frontages along a tree lined street. The proposed size and scale of the Project would substantially increase the overall visual density of the built environment of Views 5, 6, and 7. Overall, implementation of the Project would result in a strong visual contrast from existing conditions but would not degrade the character or quality of the site, which currently has limited visual character or interest. The character of the site would change from setback urban views of industrial uses to a residential, urban mixed-use village that would have a unifying urban modern architectural theme. While implementation of the Project would alter the visual character of the site and surroundings, it is not anticipated that a substantial degradation of the visual character or quality would occur. City of Santa Ana 5.1-25 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics In addition, the proposed Project would be visually compatible with the existing and future built environment in the Project area that includes various high-density, urban -style boxy large buildings and ornamental landscaping. As previously described, the areas in the viewshed of the Project site include urban structures such as, Naval Air Station airplane hangars, two and four-story office structures, and a 5 -story hotel. The undeveloped chained linked areas across from the Project site in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan are planned for employment buildings that would likely be modern in architecture and are permitted to be 6 -stories and 70 -feet in height with a 40 -foot setback from Red Hill Avenue. Although the 94 foot high structure would be 24 -feet higher than development within the Tustin Legacy, and four stories taller than adjacent structures on Red Hill and across Warner Avenue from the site, the modern urban and dense character of the proposed Project would be similar to the existing and planned uses, which generate similar views. As a result, the proposed Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or surrounding area, and impacts would be less than significant. Regarding a potential conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality, the Project includes a zone change that would change the existing zoning designation change from M-1 (Light Industrial) to a Specific Development (SD) to implement the proposed mixed-use Project. As described in the City's Zoning Code Section 41-593.1, the purpose of the SD zone is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by the use of good design principles, maintaining an orderly and harmonious appearance, and encouraging excellence of property development. When development projects are proposed within the SD zone, they are required (per Zoning Code Section 41-593.4) to submit development plans for architectural review to ensure that buildings, structures, and grounds would be in keeping with the neighborhood and would not be detrimental to the harmonious development of the City or impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood. As described above, the proposed Project would create an attractive, cohesive mixed-use community through the use of contemporary architectural materials and landscaping throughout the Project site. As required by the Zoning Code, the proposed Project's development plans would be reviewed by the City to ensure consistency with development standards. Thus, the proposed Project would not conflict with applicable zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality. Overall, impacts would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.1-26 Draft EIR January 2020 Conceptual Renderings from Red Hill Avenue View along Red Hill Avenue toward Warner Avenue. View along Red Hill Avenue at Project Driveway. The Bowery Figure 5.1-9 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-28 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-30 Draft EIR January 2020 Conceptual Renderings from Warner Avenue View from Warner Avenue at Red Hill Avenue. View from Warner Avenue toward Red Hill Avenue. 1Vf The Bowery Figure 5.1-1 1 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-32 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics IMPACT AE -4: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CREATE A NEW SOURCE OF SUBSTANTIAL LIGHT OR GLARE WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT DAY OR NIGHTTIME VIEWS IN THE AREA. Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located within a developed urban area, adjacent to highly used roadways. Existing sources of light in the vicinity of the Project site includes: streetlights along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, parking lot lighting, building illumination, security lighting, landscape lighting, and lighting from building interiors that pass-through windows. The exterior lighting on the Project site includes exterior lighting throughout the parking areas and lighting at building entrances. The proposed Project would include the provision of nighttime lighting for security purposes around all of the buildings and parking structures. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in a higher intensity development on the site than currently exists, which would contribute additional sources to the overall ambient nighttime lighting conditions. However, all outdoor lighting would be hooded, appropriately angled away from adjacent land uses, and would comply with the Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-61 1.1 and Section 41 -1304 that provides specifications for shielding lighting away from adjacent uses and intensity of security lighting. Because the Project area is within an urban area with various sources of existing nighttime lighting, and the Project would be required to comply with the City's lighting regulations that would be verified by the City's Planning and Building Agency during the permitting process, the lighting increase in light that would be generated by the Project would not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Overall, lighting impacts would be less than significant. Reflective light (glare) can be caused by sunlight or artificial light reflecting from finished surfaces such as window glass or other reflective materials. Generally, darker or mirrored glass would have a higher visible light reflectance than clear glass. Buildings constructed of highly reflective materials from which the sun reflects at a low angle can cause adverse glare. However, the proposed Project would not use highly reflective surfaces, or glass sided buildings. Although the residential and commercial buildings would contain windows, the windows would be separated by stucco and architectural treatments, which would limit the potential of glare. In addition, as described previously, onsite lighting would be angled down and shielded, which would avoid the potential on onsite lighting to generate glare. In addition, the majority of vehicle parking would be located within parking structures and the Project does not contain large surface parking lots that could generate glare from numerous windshields aligned in one area. Therefore, the Project would not generate substantial sources of glare, and impacts would be less than significant. 5.1.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Visual Character and Site Quality The cumulative aesthetics study area for the proposed Project is the viewshed from public areas that can view the Project site and locations that can be viewed from the Project site. Of the projects listed provided in Table 5-1 and shown in Figure 5-1, in Section 5.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, three are within the viewshed of the Project. The Heritage Village Residential Project (identified as project S6 on Figure 5-1) is located 0.2 miles from the Project site on Red Hill Avenue and also involves development of multi -family residences on the site, which would be similar to the character to the proposed Project. The two projects would provide similar modern architectural details related to multi -family development and provide similar views along Red Hill Avenue. The Brookfield Residential Project (identified as project T3 on Figure 5-1) on Barranca Parkway at Tustin Ranch Road and can be seen from across the undeveloped portion of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area City of Santa Ana 5.1-33 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics is also a residential development project that includes both single-family and multi -family residential units and would provide a similar multi -family character as the proposed Project. The Flight at Tustin Legacy Project (identified as project T4 on Figure 5-1) is under construction and includes the previously described new four-story office structures that are shown in Figure 5.1-7. As described previously, these 4 -story structures are rectangular and modern in design and have the same urban modern character as proposed by the Project. In addition, as described previously, the currently undeveloped areas directly across Red Hill Avenue from the site are planned to be redeveloped to provide a business park setting that allows for 6 -story 70 -foot high buildings that are set back 40 -feet from Red Hill Avenue. The foreseeable structures within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area are anticipated to be modern structures that are similar to those that currently exist. Overall, the character and quality of the proposed Project would be similar to and consistent with the existing structures in the viewshed and the cumulative projects within the viewshed that are proposed or planned for, but have yet to be constructed, including those within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area. Therefore, implementation of the Project, when combined with the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable cumulative projects, would not result in a cumulatively considerable degradation to the existing visual character or quality of the environment. As a result, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. Light and Glare The cumulative study area for light and glare are areas immediately adjacent to the Project site that could receive light or glare from the Project or could generate daytime glare or nighttime lighting that would be visible within the Project site and could combine with lighting from the Project. Because cumulative projects would result in more intense development than currently exists, the proposed Project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects could create significant cumulative nighttime lighting and daytime glare impacts. However, application of the City's Municipal Code Sections 41-611.1 and 41-1304 require compliance with light and glare standards that would avoid significant effects. Similarly, lighting the City of Tustin areas that are across Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue from the Project site is regulated by the City of Tustin Municipal Code Chapter 7, Section 9270, which states that all exterior lighting shall be designed so as to minimize impacts from light pollution including light trespass and glare to minimize conflict caused by unnecessary illumination and shall be directed, shielded, or located in such a manner that the light source is not directed off-site. With implementation of the existing City of Santa Ana and Tustin Municipal Code regulations, the development that would occur by the related projects would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution of light and glare. Thus, the cumulative effects of development from the Project in combination with cumulative projects related to light and glare would be less than significant. 5.1.8 EXISTING REGULATIONS, STANDARD CONDITIONS, AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES • City of Santa Ana Municipal Code • City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element • City of Santa Ana Citywide Design Guidelines o Chapter 9, Section 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6 o Chapter 7, Section 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, 7.7, 7.10 City of Santa Ana 5.1-34 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics 5.1.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Upon implementation of regulatory requirements and the proposed Project's design criteria, Impacts AE -1 through AE -4 would be less than significant. 5.1.10 MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.1.1 1 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Existing regulatory programs would reduce potential impacts associated with aesthetics to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to aesthetics would occur. REFERENCES Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System (Caltrans 2019). Accessed: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic—highways/ City of Santa Ana Citywide Design Guidelines. Accessed at: https://www.santa-ana.org/pb/planning- division/citywide-design-guidelines City of Santa Ana Scenic Corridors Element. Accessed at: https://www.santa- ana.org/sites/default/files/Documents/ScenicCorridors.pdf City of Santa Ana 5.1-35 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.1 Aesthetics This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.1-36 Draft EIR January 2020 5.2 Air Quality 5.2.1 INTRODUCTION This section provides an overview of the existing air quality within the City of Santa Ana and surrounding region, a summary of applicable regulations, and analyses of potential short-term and long-term air quality impacts from implementation of the proposed Project. Mitigation measures are recommended as necessary to reduce significant air quality impacts. This section is based upon the Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQ 2019), Prepared by Urban Crossroads, 2019, which is included as Appendix B. 5.2.2 REGULATORY SETTING United States Environmental Protection Agency Criteria Air Pollutants At the federal level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has been charged with implementing national air quality programs. The USEPA's air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), which was enacted in 1970. The most recent major amendments to the CAA were made by Congress in 1990. The CAA requires the USEPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The USEPA has established primary and secondary NAAQS for the following criteria air pollutants: ozone, CO, NO2, SO2, PMio, PM2.5, and lead. Table 5.2-1 shows the NAAQS for these pollutants. The CAA also requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan, referred to as a state implementation plan (SIP). The CAA Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) added requirements for states with nonattainment areas to revise their SIPS to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP is modified periodically to reflect the latest emissions inventories, planning documents, and rules and regulations of the air basins, as reported by their jurisdictional agencies. The USEPA is responsible for reviewing all SIPS to determine whether they conform to the mandates of the CAA and its amendments, and to determine whether implementing the SIPS will achieve air quality goals. If the USEPA determines a SIP to be inadequate, a federal implementation plan that imposes additional control measures may be prepared for the nonattainment area. If an approvable SIP is not submitted or implemented within the mandated time frame, sanctions may be applied to transportation funding and stationary sources of air pollution in the air basin. The USEPA also has regulatory and enforcement jurisdiction over emission sources beyond state waters (outer continental shelf), and those that are under the exclusive authority of the federal government, such as aircraft, locomotives, and interstate trucking. The USEPA's primary role at the state level is to oversee state air quality programs. The USEPA sets federal vehicle and stationary source emissions standards and provides research and guidance in air pollution programs. Hazardous Air Pollutants The USEPA has programs for identifying and regulating hazardous air pollutants (HAPS). Title III of the CAAA directed the USEPA to promulgate national emissions standards for HAPS (NESHAP). Major sources are defined as stationary sources with potential to emit more than 10 tons per year (tpy) of any HAP or more than 25 tpy of any combination of HAPS; all other sources are considered area sources. The emissions standards are to be promulgated in two phases. In the first phase (1992-2000), the USEPA developed City of Santa Ana 5.2-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality technology-based emission standards designed to produce the maximum emission reduction achievable. These standards are generally referred to as requiring maximum achievable control technology (MACT). For area sources, the standards may be different, based on generally available control technology. In the second phase (2001-2008), the USEPA promulgated health -risk-based emissions standards when deemed necessary, to address risks remaining after implementation of the technology-based NESHAP standards. Table 5.2-1: Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Averaging Time State Standard National Standard Pollutant Health and Atmospheric Effects Major Pollutant Sources Ozone 1 hour 0.09 ppm --- High concentrations can directly Formed when ROG and NOx react in 8 hours 0.07 ppm 0.075 ppm affect lungs, causing irritation. the presence of sunlight. Major sources Particulate Annual Matter Arithmetic Mean Long-term exposure may cause include on -road motor vehicles, solvent Disturbs gastrointestinal system, Calendar --- damage to lung tissue. evaporation, and commercial Quarter and neuromuscular and industrial mobile equipment. Carbon 1 hour 20 ppm 35 ppm Classified as a chemical Internal combustion engines, primarily Monoxide 8 hours 9.0 ppm 9 ppm asphyxiant, carbon monoxide gasoline -powered motor vehicles. (CO) Nitrogen 1 hour Dioxide Annual (NO2) Arithmetic Mean Sulfur 1 hour Dioxide 3 hours (SO2) 24 hours Annual death. Reduces visibility and results Arithmetic Mean Respirable 24 hours Particulate Annual Matter Arithmetic Mean (PM1o) --- 0.18 ppm 0.100 ppm 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm 0.25 ppm 75 ppb --- 0.50 ppm 0.04 ppm 0.14 ppm --- 0.03 ppm 50 pg/m3 150 pg/m3 20 Ng/m3 --- interferes with the transfer of fresh oxygen to the blood and deprives sensitive tissues of oxygen. Irritating to eyes and respiratory tract. Colors atmosphere reddish - brown. Irritates upper respiratory tract; injurious to lung tissue. Can yellow the leaves of plants, destructive to marble, iron, and steel. Limits visibility and reduces sunlight. May irritate eyes and respiratory tract, decreases in lung capacity, cancer and increased mortality. Produces haze and limits visibility. Fine 24 hours --- 35 Ng/m3 Increases respiratory disease, lung Particulate Annual 12 Ng/m3 12 Ng/m3 damage, cancer, and premature Matter Arithmetic Mean death. Reduces visibility and results (PM2.5) in surface soiling. Lead (Pb) 30 Day Average 1.5 Ng/m3 --- Disturbs gastrointestinal system, Calendar --- 1.5 Ng/m3 and causes anemia, kidney disease, Quarter and neuromuscular and Rolling 3 -Month --- 0.15 Ng/m3 neurological dysfunction (in severe Average cases). Hydrogen 1 hour 0.03 ppm No National Nuisance odor (rotten egg smell), Sulfide Standard headache and breathing difficulties (higher concentrations) Sulfates 24 hour 25 Ng/m3 No National Decrease in ventilatory functions; (SO4) Standard aggravation of asthmatic symptoms; aggravation of cardio- pulmonary disease; vegetation damage; degradation of visibility; property damage. Visibility 8 hour Extinction of No National Reduces visibility, reduced airport Reducing 0.23/km; Standard safety, lower real estate value, Particles visibility of and discourages tourism. 10 miles or more Note: ppm = parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; pg /M3 = micrograms per cubic meter. Motor vehicles, petroleum refining operations, industrial sources, aircraft, ships, and railroads. Fuel combustion, chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing. Dust and fume -producing industrial and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities (e.g., wind -raised dust and ocean sprays). Fuel combustion in motor vehicles, equipment, and industrial sources; residential and agricultural burning; Also, formed from photochemical reactions of other pollutants, including NOx, sulfur oxides, and organics. Present source: lead smelters, battery manufacturing and recycling facilities. Past source: combustion of leaded gasoline. Geothermal power plants, petroleum production and refining Industrial processes. See PM2.5. The CAAA also required the USEPA to promulgate vehicle or fuel standards containing reasonable requirements that control toxic emissions of, at a minimum, benzene and formaldehyde. Performance criteria were established to limit mobile -source emissions of toxics, including benzene, formaldehyde, and 1,3 - City of Santa Ana 5.2-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality butadiene. In addition, Section 219 required the use of reformulated gasoline in selected areas with the most severe ozone nonattainment conditions to further reduce mobile -source emissions. California Air Resources Board Criteria Air Pollutants The California Air Resources Board (CARB), a department of the California Environmental Protection Agency, oversees air quality planning and control throughout California. CARB is responsible for coordination and oversight of state and local air pollution control programs in California and for implementation of the California Clean Air Act (CCAA). The CCAA, which was adopted in 1988, requires CARB to establish the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). CARB has established CAAQS for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, visibility -reducing particulate matter, and the above-mentioned criteria air pollutants. Applicable CAAQS are shown in Table 5.2-1. The CCAA requires all local air districts in the state to endeavor to achieve and maintain the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. The act specifies that local air districts shall focus particular attention on reducing the emissions from transportation and area -wide emission sources and provides districts with the authority to regulate indirect sources. Among CARB's other responsibilities are overseeing compliance by local air districts with California and federal laws, approving local air quality plans, submitting SIPS to the USEPA, monitoring air quality, determining and updating area designations and maps, and setting emissions standards for new mobile sources, consumer products, small utility engines, off-road vehicles, and fuels. Diesel Regulations The CARB and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have adopted several iterations of regulations for diesel trucks that are aimed at reducing diesel particulate matter (DPM). More specifically, the CARB Drayage Truck Regulation, the CARB statewide On -road Truck and Bus Regulation, and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach "Clean Truck Program" (CTP) require accelerated implementation of "clean trucks" into the statewide truck fleet. In other words, older more polluting trucks will be replaced with newer, cleaner trucks as a function of these regulatory requirements. Moreover, the average statewide DPM emissions for Heavy Duty Trucks (HHDT), in terms of grams of DPM generated per mile traveled, will dramatically be reduced due to these regulatory requirements. Diesel emissions identified in this analysis would overstate future DPM emissions because not all the regulatory requirements are reflected in the modeling. Toxic Air Contaminants Air quality regulations also focus on toxic air contaminants (TACs). In general, for those TACs that may cause cancer, there is no concentration that does not present some risk. In other words, there is no safe level of exposure. This contrasts with the criteria air pollutants, for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and for which the ambient standards have been established. Instead, the USEPA and CARB regulate HAPS and TACs, respectively, through statutes and regulations that generally require the use of the maximum achievable control technology or best available control technology for toxics and to limit emissions. These statutes and regulations, in conjunction with additional rules set forth by the districts, establish the regulatory framework for TACs. TACs in California are regulated primarily through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 1807 [Chapter 1047, Statutes of 1983]) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act (Hot Spots Act) (AB 2588 [Chapter 1252, Statutes of 1987]). AB 1807 sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. This includes research, public participation, and scientific peer review before CARB can designate a substance as a TAC. To date, CARB has identified more than 21 TACs and adopted City of Santa Ana 5.2-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality the USEPA's list of HAPs as TACs. Most recently, diesel PM was added to the CARB list of TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB then adopts an airborne toxics control measure for sources that emit that particular TAC. If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate best available control technology to minimize emissions. The Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act requires existing facilities emitting toxic substances above a specified level to prepare a toxic -emission inventory, prepare a risk assessment if emissions are significant, notify the public of significant risk levels, and prepare and implement risk reduction measures. CARB published the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (Handbook), which provides guidance concerning land use compatibility with TAC sources (CARB, 2005). Although it is not a law or adopted policy, the Handbook offers advisory recommendations for the siting of sensitive receptors near uses associated with TACs, such as freeways and high -traffic roads, commercial distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, dry cleaners, gasoline stations, and industrial facilities, to help keep children and other sensitive populations out of harm's way. In addition, CARB has promulgated the following specific rules to limit TAC emissions: • CARB Rule 2485 (13 CCR, Chapter 10 Section 2485), Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel -Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling • CARB Rule 2480 (13 CCR Chapter 10 Section 2480), Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit School Bus Idling and Idling at Schools • CARB Rule 2477 (13 CCR Section 2477 and Article 8), Airborne Toxic Control Measure for In -Use Diesel Fueled Transport Refrigeration Units (TRU) and TRU Generator Sets and Facilities Where TRUs Operate SCAQMD Criteria Air Pollutants South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) attains and maintains air quality conditions in the Basin through a comprehensive program of planning, regulation, enforcement, technical innovation, and promotion of the understanding of air quality issues. The clean air strategy of SCAQMD includes preparation of plans for attainment of ambient air quality standards, adoption and enforcement of rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, and issuance of permits for stationary sources of air pollution. SCAQMD also inspects stationary sources of air pollution and responds to citizen complaints; monitors ambient air quality and meteorological conditions; and implements programs and regulations required by the CAA, CAAA, and CCAA. Air quality plans applicable to the proposed Project are discussed below. Air Quality Management Plan SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are responsible for preparing the air quality management plan (AQMP), which addresses federal and state CAA requirements. The AQMP details goals, policies, and programs for improving air quality in the Basin. In March 2017 AQMD finalized the 2016 AQMP, which provides integrated strategies and control measures to meet the NAAQS, as well as, explore new and innovative methods to reach its goals. Some of these approaches include utilizing incentive programs, recognizing existing co -benefit programs from other sectors, and developing a strategy with fair -share reductions at the federal, state, and local levels. The 2016 AQMP incorporates scientific and technological information and planning assumptions, including SCAG's 2016 RTP/SCS and updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories. City of Santa Ana 5.2-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality SCAQMD Rules and Regulations All projects are subject to SCAQMD rules and regulations. Specific rules applicable to the proposed Project include the following: Rule 401 — Visible Emissions. A person shall not discharge into the atmosphere from any single source of emission whatsoever any air contaminant for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any 1 hour that is as dark or darker in shade as that designated No. 1 on the Ringelmann Chart, as published by the United States Bureau of Mines. Rule 402 — Nuisance. A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or that endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or that cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. The provisions of this rule do not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals. Rule 403 — Fugitive Dust. SCAQMD Rule 403 governs emissions of fugitive dust during and after construction. Compliance with this rule is achieved through application of standard Best Management Practices, such as application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils, covering haul vehicles, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour, sweeping loose dirt from paved site access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25 mph, and establishing a permanent ground cover on finished sites. Rule 403 requires project applicants to control fugitive dust using the best available control measures such that dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. In addition, Rule 403 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a, off-site nuisance. Applicable Rule 403 dust suppression (and PMio generation) techniques to reduce impacts on nearby sensitive receptors may include, but are not limited to, the following: • Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more). • Water active sites at least three times daily. Locations where grading is to occur shall be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving. • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 0.6 meters (2 feet) of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code Section 23114. • Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph) or less. • Suspend all grading activities when wind speeds (including instantaneous wind gusts) exceed 25 mph. • Provide bumper strips or similar best management practices where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. • Replant disturbed areas as soon as practical. • Sweep onsite streets (and off-site streets if silt is carried to adjacent public thoroughfares) to reduce the amount of particulate matter on public streets. All sweepers shall be compliant with SCAQMD Rule 1186.1, Less Polluting Sweepers. City of Santa Ana 5.2-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality Rule 431.2 — Sulfur Content of Liquid Fuels. This rule limits the sulfur content in diesel and other liquid fuels for the purpose of both reducing the formation of sulfur oxides and particulates during combustion and to enable the use of add-on control devices for diesel fueled internal combustion engines. Rule 445 — Wood Burning. This rule prohibits permanently installed wood burning devices into any new development. A wood burning device means any fireplace, wood burning heater, or pellet -fueled wood heater, or any similarly enclosed, permanently installed, indoor or outdoor device burning any solid fuel for aesthetic or space -heating purposes, which has a heat input of less than one million British thermal units per hour. Rule 481 — Spray Coating. This rule applies to all spray painting and spray coating operations and equipment and states that a person shall not use or operate any spray painting or spray coating equipment unless one of the following conditions is met: • The spray coating equipment is operated inside a control enclosure, which is approved by the Executive Officer. Any control enclosure for which an application for permit for new construction, alteration, or change of ownership or location is submitted after the date of adoption of this rule shall be exhausted only through filters at a design face velocity not less than 100 feet per minute nor greater than 300 feet per minute, or through a water wash system designed to be equally effective for the purpose of air pollution control. • Coatings are applied with high-volume low-pressure, electrostatic and/or airless spray equipment. • An alternative method of coating application or control is used which has effectiveness equal to or greater than the equipment specified in the rule. Rule 1108 - Volatile Organic Compounds. This rule governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of asphalt and limits the volatile organic compound (VOC) content in asphalt used in the Basin. This rule also regulates the VOC content of asphalt used during construction. Therefore, all asphalt used during construction of the Project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1108. Rule 1 113 — Architectural Coatings. No person shall apply or solicit the application of any architectural coating within the SCAQMD with VOC content in excess of the values specified in a table incorporated in the Rule. A list of low/no-VOC paints is provided at the following SCAQMD website: www.agmd.gov/prdas/brochures/paintguide.html. All paints will be applied using either high volume low- pressure spray equipment or by hand application. Rule 1 143 — Paint Thinners and Solvents. This rule governs the manufacture, sale, and use of paint thinners and solvents used in thinning of coating materials, cleaning of coating application equipment, and other solvent cleaning operations by limiting their VOC content. This rule regulates the VOC content of solvents used during construction. Solvents used during the construction phase must comply with this rule. Rule 1 186 — Emissions from Paved and Unpaved Roads. The purpose of this rule is to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in the ambient air as a result of vehicular travel and requires that any owner or operator of a paved public road on which there is visible roadway accumulations shall begin removal of such material through street cleaning within 72 hours of any notification of the accumulation and shall completely remove such material as soon as feasible. City of Santa Ana 5.2-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality Rule 1186.1 - Less -Polluting Sweepers. This rule requires public and private sweeper fleet operators to acquire alternative -fuel or otherwise less -polluting sweepers when purchasing or leasing these vehicles for sweeping operations. City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The General Plan Conservation Element includes goals, policies, and objectives to protect public health, safety and welfare through effective management of natural resources such as clean air. The existing Conservation Element goal, objective, and policy relevant to the proposed Project include: Goal 1: Protect the public health, safety and welfare through effective management of natural resources. Objective 1.1: Reduce air pollution emissions to achieve national ambient air quality standards. Policy: • Support local and regional land use and transportation plans that increase mass transit usage and reduce vehicle trips. 5.2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Climate and Meteorology The City of Santa Ana is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The Basin is a 6,600 -square -mile coastal plain bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The Basin includes the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, and all of Orange County. The ambient concentrations of air pollutants are determined by the amount of emissions released by sources and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute such emissions. Natural factors that affect transport and dilution include terrain, wind, atmospheric stability, and sunlight. Therefore, existing air quality conditions in the area are determined by such natural factors as topography, meteorology, and climate, in addition to the amount of emissions released by existing air pollutant sources. Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients interact with the physical features of the landscape to determine the movement and dispersal of air pollutants. The topography and climate of Southern California combine to make the Basin an area of high air pollution potential. The Basin is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and high mountains around the rest of the perimeter. The general region lies in the semi- permanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific, resulting in a mild climate tempered by cool sea breezes with light average wind speeds. The usually mild climatological pattern is disrupted occasionally by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. During the summer months, a warm air mass frequently descends over the cool, moist marine layer produced by the interaction between the ocean's surface and the lowest layer of the atmosphere. The warm upper layer forms a cap over the cool marine layer and inhibits the pollutants in the marine layer from dispersing upward. In addition, light winds during the summer further limit ventilation. Furthermore, sunlight triggers the photochemical reactions which produce ozone. City of Santa Ana 5.2-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality Criteria Air Pollutants The CARB and the USEPA currently focus on the following air pollutants as indicators of ambient air quality: ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PMio), fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5), and lead. These pollutants are referred to as "criteria air pollutants" because they are the most prevalent air pollutants known to be injurious to human health. Extensive health -effects criteria documents regarding the effects of these pollutants on human health and welfare have been prepared over the years.' Standards have been established for each criteria pollutant to meet specific public health and welfare criteria set forth in the federal CAA. California has generally adopted more stringent ambient air quality standards for the criteria air pollutants (CAAQS or state standards) and has adopted air quality standards for some pollutants for which there is no corresponding national standard (NAAQS), such as sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility -reducing particles. Ozone. Ozone, the main component of photochemical smog, is primarily a summer and fall pollution problem. Ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is formed through a complex series of chemical reactions involving other compounds that are directly emitted. These directly emitted pollutants (also known as ozone precursors) include reactive organic gases (ROGs) or volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and oxides of nitrogen (NOx). While both ROGs and VOCs refer to compounds of carbon, ROG is a term used by CARB and is based on a list of exempted carbon compounds determined by CARB. VOC is a term used by the USEPA and is based on its own exempt list. The time period required for ozone formation allows the reacting compounds to spread over a large area, producing regional pollution problems. Ozone concentrations are the cumulative result of regional development patterns rather than the result of a few significant emission sources. Once ozone is formed, it remains in the atmosphere for one or two days. Ozone is then eliminated through reaction with chemicals on the leaves of plants, attachment to water droplets as they fall to earth ("rainout"), or absorption by water molecules in clouds that later fall to earth with rain ("washout"). Short-term exposure to ozone can irritate the eyes and cause constriction of the airways. In addition to causing shortness of breath, ozone can aggravate existing respiratory diseases such as asthma, bronchitis, and emphysema. Carbon Monoxide. CO is a colorless, odorless gas produced by the incomplete combustion of carbon - containing fuels, such as gasoline or wood. CO concentrations tend to be the highest during the winter morning, when little to no wind and surface -based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. Because CO is emitted directly from internal combustion engines, unlike ozone, motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are the primary source of CO in the Basin. The highest ambient CO concentrations are generally found near congested transportation corridors and intersections. Nitrogen Dioxide. NO2 is a reddish -brown gas that is a by-product of combustion processes. Automobiles and industrial operations are the main sources of NO2. Combustion devices emit primarily nitric oxide (NO), which reacts through oxidation in the atmosphere to form NO2. The combined emissions of NO and NO2 are referred to as NOx, which are reported as equivalent NO2. Aside from its contribution to ozone formation, NO2 can increase the risk of acute and chronic respiratory disease and reduce visibility. NO2 may be visible as a coloring component of a brown cloud on high pollution days, especially in conjunction with high ozone levels. 1 Additional sources of information on the health effects of criteria pollutants can be found at CARB and USEPA's websites at httr)://www.arb.ca.ciov/research/health/health.htm and httr)://www.er)a.ciov/air/airr)ollutants.html. respectively. City of Santa Ana 5.2-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality Sulfur Dioxide. SO2 is a colorless, extremely irritating gas or liquid that enters the atmosphere as a pollutant mainly as a result of burning high sulfur -content fuel oils and coal, and from chemical processes occurring at chemical plants and refineries. When SO2 oxidizes in the atmosphere, it forms sulfur trioxide (S03). Collectively, these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides (SOx). Major sources of SO2 include power plants, large industrial facilities, diesel vehicles, and oil -burning residential heaters. Emissions of SO2 aggravate lung diseases, especially bronchitis. This compound also constricts the breathing passages, especially in people with asthma and people involved in moderate to heavy exercise. SO2 potentially causes wheezing, shortness of breath, and coughing. Long-term SO2 exposure has been associated with increased risk of mortality from respiratory or cardiovascular disease. Particulate Matter. PMio and PM2.5 consist of particulate matter that is 10 microns or less in diameter and 2.5 microns or less in diameter, respectively (a micron is one -millionth of a meter). PMio and PM2.5 represent fractions of particulate matter that can be inhaled into the air passages and the lungs and can cause adverse health effects. Acute and chronic health effects associated with high particulate levels include the aggravation of chronic respiratory diseases, heart and lung disease, and coughing, bronchitis and respiratory illnesses in children. Particulate matter can also damage materials and reduce visibility. One common source of PM2.5 is diesel exhaust emissions. PMio consists of particulate matter emitted directly into the air (e.g., fugitive dust, soot, and smoke from mobile and stationary sources, construction operations, fires, and natural windblown dust) and particulate matter formed in the atmosphere by condensation and/or transformation of SO2 and ROG. Traffic generates particulate matter emissions through entrainment of dust and dirt particles that settle onto roadways and parking lots. PMio and PM2.5 are also emitted by burning wood in residential wood stoves and fireplaces and open agricultural burning. PM2.5 can also be formed through secondary processes such as airborne reactions with certain pollutant precursors, including ROGs, ammonia (NH3), NOx, and SOx. Lead. Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment and present in some manufactured products. There are a variety of activities that can contribute to lead emissions, which are grouped into two general categories, stationary and mobile sources. On -road mobile sources include light-duty automobiles; light-, medium-, and heavy-duty trucks; and motorcycles. Emissions of lead have dropped substantially over the past 40 years. The reduction before 1990 is largely due to the phase-out of lead as an anti -knock agent in gasoline for on -road automobiles. Substantial emission reductions have also been achieved due to enhanced controls in the metals processing industry. In the Basin, atmospheric lead is generated almost entirely by the combustion of leaded gasoline and contributes less than one percent of the material collected as total suspended particulates. Existing Conditions SCAQMD maintains monitoring stations within district boundaries that monitor air quality and compliance with associated ambient standards. The Project site is located within the monitoring boundary of the Central Orange County monitoring station (SRA 17), which is 10.2 miles northwest of the Project site. The most recent 3 years of data is shown on Table 5.2-2 and identifies the number of days ambient air quality standards were exceeded in the area. Additionally, data for SO2 has been omitted as attainment is regularly met in the South Coast Air Basin and few monitoring stations measure SO2 concentrations. City of Santa Ana 5.2-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality Table 5.2-2: Air Quality Monitoring Summary 2016-2018 Year Pollutant Standard 2016 1 2017 1 2018 03 Maximum Federal 1 -Hour Concentration (ppm) .103 0.090 0.1 1 2 Maximum Federal 8 -Hour Concentration (ppm) .074 0.076 0.071 Number of Days Exceeding State 1 -Hour Standard > 0.09 ppm 0 1 Number of Days Exceeding State Federal 8 -Hour Standard > 0.070 ppm 4 1 c0 Maximum Federal 1 -Hour Concentration > 35 ppm 2.6 2.5 2.3 Maximum Federal 8 -Hour Concentration > 20 ppm 2.1 2.1 1.9 NO2 Maximum Federal 1 -Hour Concentration > 0.100 ppm 0.064 0.081 0.067 Annual Average 0.015 0.014 0.013 PMto Maximum Federal 24 -Hour Concentration (pg m3) > 150 pg m3 1 4 1 128 1 129 Annual Federal Arithmetic Mean (pg m3) 24.4 26.3 27.2 Number of Days Exceeding Federal 24 -Hour Standard > 150 pg m3 0 0 Number of Days Exceeding State 24 -Hour Standard > 50 pg m3 17 13 PM1 s Number of Days txceedh Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. Both CARB and the USEPA use this type of monitoring data to designate areas according to their attainment status for criteria air pollutants. The purpose of these designations is to identify the areas with air quality problems and thereby initiate planning efforts for improvement. The three basic designation categories are nonattainment, attainment, and unclassified. Nonattainment is defined as any area that does not meet (or that contributes to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet) the primary or secondary ambient air quality standard for the pollutant. Attainment is defined as any area that meets the primary or secondary ambient air quality standard for the pollutant. Unclassifiable is defined as any area that cannot be classified on the basis of available information as meeting or not meeting the primary or secondary ambient air quality standard for the pollutant. In addition, California designations include a subcategory of nonattainment-transitional, which is given to nonattainment areas that are progressing and nearing attainment. In 2018, the federal and state ambient air quality standards (NAAQS and CAAQS) were exceeded on one or more days for ozone, 03, Wo, and PM2.5 at most monitoring locations. No areas of the SCAB exceeded federal or state standards for NO2, or CO. See Table 5.2-3, for attainment designations for the SCAB. City of Santa Ana 5.2-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality Table 5.2-3: Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the SCAB Criteria Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation 03— 1 -hour standard Nonattainment 03— 8 -hour standard Nonattainment Nonattainment PM10 Nonattainment Attainment PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment CO Attainment Unclassifiable Attainment NO2 Attainment Unclassifiable Attainment SO2 Unclassifiable Attainment Unclassifiable Attainment Pb2 Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment an Crossroads, 2019. The Project site is currently developed with three industrial buildings that total approximately 212,121 square feet. The estimated operation -source emissions from the existing industrial uses on the Project site are provided on Table 5.2-4. Table 5.2-4: Existing Industrial Building Operational Air Quality Emissions Existing Industrial Operational Emissions (lbs/day) Activities VOC I NOx CO SOX PMto PM2.5 Summer Scenario Total Maximum Daily Emissions 1 1.14 1 143.55 48.79 0.45 18.81 6.63 Winter Scenario Total Maximum Daily Emissions 10.90 1 146.09 39.59 0.45 18.74 6.61 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Sensitive Land Uses Some people are especially sensitive to air pollution and are given special consideration when evaluating air quality impacts from projects. These groups of people include children, the elderly, individuals with pre- existing respiratory or cardiovascular illness, and athletes and others who engage in frequent exercise. Structures that house these persons or places where they gather to exercise are defined as "sensitive receptors". These structures typically include residences, hotels, hospitals, etc. as they are also known to be locations where an individual can remain for 24 hours. In addition, the SCAQMD LST Methodology states that "LSTs based on shorter averaging periods, such as the NO2 and CO LSTs, could also be applied to receptors such as industrial or commercial facilities since it is reasonable to assume that a worker at these sites could be present for periods of one to eight hours." The nearest receptor where an individual can stay for a 24-hour period is approximately 1,471 feet/ 448 meters south of the Project site. As such, the 440 -meter distance is used to evaluate construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PMio and PM2.5. For evaluation of localized NO2 and CO impacts, the nearest receptor location where an individual can remain onsite for an 8 -hour period is the Sirco Irvine Business Park, located 43 feet/ 13 meters northwest of the Project site. 2 The Federal nonattainment designation for lead is only applicable towards the Los Angeles County portion of the SCAB. City of Santa Ana 5.2-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality 5.2.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: AQ -1 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; AQ -2 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; AQ -3 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or AQ -4 Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. Regional Thresholds The SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds are listed in Table 5.2-5. The SCAQMD's CEQA air quality methodology provides that any projects that result in daily emissions that exceed any of these thresholds would have both an individually (project -level) and cumulatively significant air quality impact. Table 5.2-5: SCAQMD Regional Air Quality Thresholds Pollutant Construction Operations NOx 100 lbs day 55 lbs day VOC 75 lbs day 55 lbs day PMto 150 lbs day 150 lbs day PM2.5 55 lbs day 55 lbs day SOx 150 lbs day 150 lbs day CO 550 lbs day 550 lbs day Lead 3lbs/day 3lbs/day Localized Significance Thresholds SCAQMD has also developed localized significance thresholds (LSTs) that represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards, and thus would not cause or contribute to localized air quality impacts. LSTs are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each of the 38 source receptor areas (SRAs) in the Basin. The localized thresholds, which are found in the mass rate look -up tables in the "Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology" document prepared by SCAQMD, were developed for use on projects that are less than or equal to 5 -acres in size and are only applicable to the following criteria pollutants: NOx, CO, PMio, and PM2.5. The Project's construction activities could actively disturb approximately 1.0 acre per day during demolition, 3.5 acres per day during site preparation, and 4.0 acres per day during grading activities. The applicable SCAQMD localized thresholds from the "Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology" document's mass rate look -up tables are used to evaluate construction emissions. The applicable LSTs construction thresholds are shown in Table 5.2-6. City of Santa Ana 5.2-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality Table 5.2-6: SCAQMD Localized Significance Construction Thresholds Pollutant Construction NOx 81 Ibs day (Demolition) 149 Ibs day (Site Preparation) 160 Ibs day (Grading) CO 485 lbs/day (Demolition) 984 Ibs day (Site Preparation) 1,074 Ibs day (Grading) PM10 141 Ibs day (Demolition) 160 Ibs day (Site Preparation) 163 Ibs day (Grading) PM2.5 74 Ibs day (Demolition) 88 Ibs day (Site Preparation) 91 Ibs day (Grading) Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. CO Hotspots Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called hotspots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to ambient air quality standards is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Hotspots are typically produced at intersections, where traffic congestion is highest because vehicles queue for longer periods and are subject to reduced speeds. With the turnover of older vehicles and introduction of cleaner fuels as well as implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the South Coast Air Basin and the state have steadily declined. The analysis of CO hotspots compares the volume of traffic that has the potential to generate a CO hotspot and the volume of traffic with implemenation of the proposed Project. 5.2.1 METHODOLOGY This analysis focuses on the nature and magnitude of the change in the air quality environment due to implementation of the proposed Project. Air pollutant emissions associated with the proposed Project would result from construction equipment usage and from construction -related traffic. Additionally, emissions would be generated from operations of the future residences and from traffic generated by the new residences. The net increase in emissions generated by these activities and other secondary sources have been quantitatively estimated and compared to the applicable thresholds of significance recommended by SCAQMD. AQMP Consistency SCAQMD's CEQA Handbook suggests an evaluation of the following two criteria to determine whether a project involving a legislative land use action (such as the proposed General Plan land use and zoning designation changes) would be consistent or in conflict with the AQMP: 1. The project would not generate population and employment growth that would be inconsistent with SCAG's growth forecasts. 2. The project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. City of Santa Ana 5.2-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to the SCAG's growth forecast and associated assumptions included in the AQMP. The future air quality levels projected in the AQMP are based on SCAG's growth projections, which are based, in part, on the general plans of cities located within the SCAG region. Therefore, if the level of housing related to the proposed Project are consistent with the applicable assumptions used in the development of the AQMP, the Project would not jeopardize attainment of the air quality levels identified in the AQMP. Consistency Criterion No. 2 refers to the California Ambient Air Quality Standards. An impact would occur if the long-term emissions associated with the proposed Project would exceed SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds for operation -phase emissions. Construction Short-term construction -generated emissions of criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors from development of the Project were assessed in accordance with methods recommended by SCAQMD. The proposed Project's regional emissions were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), as recommended by SCAQMD. CalEEMod was used to determine whether short-term construction -related emissions of criteria air pollutants would exceed applicable regional thresholds and where mitigation would be required. Modeling was based on Project -specific data and predicted short-term construction -generated emissions were compared with applicable SCAQMD regional thresholds for determination of significance. In addition, to determine whether or not construction activities associated with development of the Project would create significant adverse localized air quality impacts on nearby sensitive receptors, the worst-case daily emissions contribution from the proposed Project were compared to SCAQMD's LSTs that are based on the pounds of emissions per day that can be generated by a Project without causing or contributing to adverse localized air quality impacts. The daily total on-site combustion, mobile, and fugitive dust emissions associated with construction were evaluated against SCAQMD's LSTs as appropriate for each activity. Operations Long-term (i.e., operational) regional emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors, including mobile - and area -source emissions from the Project, were also quantified using the CalEEMod computer model. Area - source emissions were modeled according to the size and type of the land uses proposed. Mass mobile - source emissions were modeled based on the increase in daily vehicle trips that would result from the Project. Trip generation rates were available from the traffic impact analysis prepared for the Project (see Appendix B of this EIR). Predicted long-term operational emissions were compared with applicable SCAQMD thresholds for determination of significance. 5.2.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT AQ -1: THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN A CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE AIR QUALITY PLAN. Significant and Unavoidable Impact. The SCAQMD's 2016 AQMP is the applicable air quality plan for the proposed Project. Pursuant to Consistency Criterion No. 1, described in the methodology section previously, projects that are consistent with the regional population, housing, and employment forecasts identified by SCAG are considered to be consistent with the AQMP growth projections, since the forecast assumptions by SCAG forms the basis of the land use and transportation control portions of the AQMP that result in air quality emissions. City of Santa Ana 5.2-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality As detailed in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the proposed 1,150 multi -family residential units at full occupancy would result in a population of approximately 2,081 residents and the proposed 80,000 square feet of commercial space would generate approximately 320 employees at full occupancy. This equates to a 1.5 percent increase in residential units within the City, and the estimated 2,081 residents at complete occupancy would be 0.62 percent of the City's population. Based on SCAG's 2016 Integrated Growth Forecast, a 7.4 percent increase in growth throughout the County is anticipated to occur through 2040. Hence, the cumulative growth with implementation of the proposed Project would be consistent with the SCAG growth forecasts and population base. Development of the proposed Project, in combination with other development projects in the vicinity would result in a cumulative increase in population. However, the Project's portion of the cumulative increase in residential units (1,150) is limited at 2.39 percent. Thus, the proposed multi -family units would be within the SCAG projected growth. The housing added by the Project would also help to meet housing demands from projected employment growth in the Project vicinity, while maintaining a healthy vacancy rate. The Project region is jobs -rich. The existing jobs -housing ratio is 2.06 in Santa Ana and is projected to be 2.13 in 2040. The proposed Project would reduce the jobs -housing ratio slightly to 2.05; and to 2.10 in 2040, as shown in Table 5.11 -8 in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing. The balance of jobs and housing and the existing transit, bicycle, and pedestrian infrastructure adjacent to the Project site that is available for use would reduce vehicle miles traveled and the related air quality emissions, as employees could easily travel to employment opportunities within the vicinity of the Project site, including areas within the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. Thus, the proposed Project would support AQMP objectives to reduce trips, promote infill/redevelopment, and balance jobs and housing, and would not conflict with implementation of the AQMP. In addition, implementing redevelopment of the site, the Project would utilize existing infrastructure such as roadways, drainage, sewer and other infrastructure, and would be consistent with the SCAG objective to "Encourage patterns of urban development and land use that reduce costs in infrastructure construction and make better use of existing facilities." As a result, the proposed Project would comply with Consistency Criterion No. 1 listed above in the Methodology Section. Regarding Consistency Criterion No. 2, which evaluates the potential of the proposed Project to increase the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations; as described previously, an impact related to Consistency Criterion No. 2 would occur if the long-term emissions associated with the proposed Project would exceed SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds for operation -phase emissions. As detailed below in Impact AQ -2, operation of the proposed Project would exceed the threshold of significance for emissions of VOCs and are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce VOC emissions to below the SCAQMD threshold. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in an impact related to Consistency Criterion No. 2. As a result, impacts related to consistency with the AQMP would be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT AQ -2: THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN A CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE NET INCREASE OF A CRITERIA POLLUTANT FOR WHICH THE PROJECT REGION IS IN NON - ATTAINMENT UNDER AN APPLICABLE FEDERAL OR STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD. Construction Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would result in emissions of CO, VOCs, NOx, SOx, PMio, and PM2.5. Pollutant emissions associated with construction would City of Santa Ana 5.2-15 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality be generated from the following: (1) demolition, grading, and excavation; (2) construction workers traveling to and from the Project site; (3) delivery and hauling of construction supplies to, and debris and soils export from, the Project site; (4) fuel combustion by onsite construction equipment; (5) building construction; application of architectural coatings; and paving. These construction activities would temporarily create emissions of dust, fumes, equipment exhaust, and other air contaminants. Construction emissions are short-term and temporary, lasting approximately 27 -months for the proposed Project. The maximum daily construction emissions were estimated using CaIEEMod; and the modeling includes compliance with SCAQMD Rules 403, 431.2, 1113, and 1186 / 1186.1 (described above), which are requirements that would reduce air contaminants during construction. Table 5.2-7 provides the maximum daily emissions of criteria air pollutants from construction of the proposed Project and shows that SCAQMD thresholds would not be exceeded. Thus, impacts related to construction emissions would be less than significant with implementation of required SCAQMD Rules. Table 5.2-7: Maximum Peak Construction Emissions Emissions (lbs/day) Year VOC I NOx I CO I SOX I PMio I PM2.5 Summer Operation Significant and Unavoidable Impact. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants from area sources generated by the proposed commercial and residential uses, such as vehicular emissions, natural gas consumption, landscaping, applications of architectural coatings, and use of consumer products. The emissions from the proposed Project are primarily from vehicle trips. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 11,546 daily trips, with 534 a.m. peak hour trips and 604 p.m. peak hour trips. The operational emissions from the Project are provided on Table 5.2-8. Detailed operation model outputs are provided in Appendix B. As shown, emissions from operation of the proposed Project would exceed the threshold of significance for VOCs. The majority of VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and mobile activity. Consumer products include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics and toiletries, the use of which cannot be controlled by the City. Likewise, vehicular emissions cannot be controlled by either the Project applicant or the City. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce VOC emissions to below the SCAQMD threshold. Therefore, operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable. City of Santa Ana 5.2-16 Draft EIR January 2020 Winter 2020 10.66 76.98 71.87 0.27 19.94 6.65 2021 9.86 70.20 67.51 0.27 19.65 6.36 2022 58.39 66.38 73.73 0.29 22.72 7.13 Maximum Daily Emissions 58.39 76.98 76.68 0.30 22.72 7.13 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No Operation Significant and Unavoidable Impact. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants from area sources generated by the proposed commercial and residential uses, such as vehicular emissions, natural gas consumption, landscaping, applications of architectural coatings, and use of consumer products. The emissions from the proposed Project are primarily from vehicle trips. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 11,546 daily trips, with 534 a.m. peak hour trips and 604 p.m. peak hour trips. The operational emissions from the Project are provided on Table 5.2-8. Detailed operation model outputs are provided in Appendix B. As shown, emissions from operation of the proposed Project would exceed the threshold of significance for VOCs. The majority of VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and mobile activity. Consumer products include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics and toiletries, the use of which cannot be controlled by the City. Likewise, vehicular emissions cannot be controlled by either the Project applicant or the City. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce VOC emissions to below the SCAQMD threshold. Therefore, operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable. City of Santa Ana 5.2-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project Table 5.2-8: Summary of Operational Emissions Emissions (lbs Operational Activities 5.2 Air Quality PM2.s Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 IMPACT AQ -3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS. Localized Construction Emissions Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the daily construction emissions generated onsite by the proposed Project are evaluated against SCAQMD's LSTs to determine whether the emissions would cause or contribute to adverse localized air quality impacts. The closest sensitive receptor to the Project is 13 meters northwest of the Project site. The SCAQMD LST Methodology states that Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters. Therefore, the LSTs for a receptor distance of 25 meters (82 feet) is used to evaluate LST emissions. Table 5.2-9 identifies daily localized onsite emissions that are estimated to occur during construction of the proposed Project. As shown, emissions during the peak construction activity would not exceed any of the SCAQMD's localized significance thresholds. Therefore, LST impacts would be less than significant. Table 5.2-9: Summary of Localized Construction Emissions Summer Scenario NOx I CO I PMio I PM2.1 Area Source 35.19 20.17 103.39 0.13 2.07 2.07 Energy Source 0.86 7.65 5.05 0.05 0.60 0.60 Mobile Source 38.31 68.83 280.70 0.75 73.61 20.13 Total Project Daily Emissions 74.36 96.65 389.14 0.93 76.27 22.80 Existing Emissions 11.14 143.55 48.79 0.45 18.81 6.63 Net Emissions (Project - Existing) 63.23 -052 -0.42 -3.12e-03 -0.04 -0.04 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? Yes No No No No No Winter Scenario Area Source 35.19 20.17 103.39 0.13 2.07 2.07 Energy Source 0.86 7.65 5.05 0.05 0.60 0.60 Mobile Source 40.17 70.98 278.52 0.73 73.60 20.13 Total Project Daily Emissions 76.23 98.80 386.96 0.90 76.26 22.80 Existing Emissions 10.90 146.09 39.59 0.45 18.74 6.61 Net Emissions (Project - Existing) 65.33 -0.52 -0.42 0.00 -0.04 -0.04 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? Yes No No No No No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 IMPACT AQ -3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS. Localized Construction Emissions Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the daily construction emissions generated onsite by the proposed Project are evaluated against SCAQMD's LSTs to determine whether the emissions would cause or contribute to adverse localized air quality impacts. The closest sensitive receptor to the Project is 13 meters northwest of the Project site. The SCAQMD LST Methodology states that Projects with boundaries located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 25 meters. Therefore, the LSTs for a receptor distance of 25 meters (82 feet) is used to evaluate LST emissions. Table 5.2-9 identifies daily localized onsite emissions that are estimated to occur during construction of the proposed Project. As shown, emissions during the peak construction activity would not exceed any of the SCAQMD's localized significance thresholds. Therefore, LST impacts would be less than significant. Table 5.2-9: Summary of Localized Construction Emissions City of Santa Ana 5.2-17 Draft EIR January 2020 Emissions (lbs/day) NOx I CO I PMio I PM2.1 On -Site Demolition Emissions Maximum Daily Emissions 33.20 21.75 5.19 2.08 SCAQMD Localized Threshold 81 485 141 74 Threshold Exceeded? No No No No On -Site Site Preparation Emissions Maximum Daily Emissions 63.79 22.39 11.28 6.59 SCAQMD Localized Threshold 149 984 160 88 Threshold Exceeded? No No No No City of Santa Ana 5.2-17 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality On -Site Grading Emissions Maximum Daily Emissions 60.88 32.40 6.47 3.74 SCAQMD Localized Threshold 160 1,079 163 91 Threshold Exceeded? No No No No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 CO Hotspots Less than Significant. An adverse CO concentration, known as a "hot spot", would occur if an exceedance of the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur. In 2003, the SCAQMD estimated that a Project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix—in order to generate a CO hot spot. As shown on Table 5.2-10, the highest trips on a segment of road with the Project traffic is 9,378 vehicles per hour on Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway. This is much lower than 44,000 vehicles per hour and is not high enough to generate a CO "hot spot" per SCAQMD. Therefore, impacts related to CO "hot spots" from operation of the proposed Project would be less than significant. Table 5.2-10: Opening Year with Project Traffic Volumes Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. IMPACT AQ -4: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN OTHER EMISSIONS (SUCH AS THOSE LEADING TO ODORS) ADVERSELY AFFECTING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not emit other emissions, such as those generating objectionable odors, that would affect a substantial number of people. The threshold for odor is identified by SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which states: A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which 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. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals. The type of facilities that are considered to result in other emissions, such as objectionable odors, include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass City of Santa Ana 5.2-18 Draft EIR January 2020 Peak Traffic Volumes (vehicles per hour) Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection Location (AM/PM) (AM/PM) (AM/PM) (AM/PM) Total (AM/PM) MacArthur Boulevard/ Main Street 3,008/2,744 1,150/1,217 1,421/1,523 881/1,703 6,460/7,187 Jamboree Road/ Barranca Parkway 1,229/3,754 5,243/2,105 910/2,101 932/1,418 8,314/9,378 Jamboree Road/ Alton Parkway 1,536/3,813 3,589/1,776 460/1,359 942/822 6,527/7,770 Jamboree Road/ Main Street 2,266/3,587 3,369/2,154 680/2,109 1,336/1,247 7,651/9,097 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. IMPACT AQ -4: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN OTHER EMISSIONS (SUCH AS THOSE LEADING TO ODORS) ADVERSELY AFFECTING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not emit other emissions, such as those generating objectionable odors, that would affect a substantial number of people. The threshold for odor is identified by SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which states: A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which 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. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals. The type of facilities that are considered to result in other emissions, such as objectionable odors, include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass City of Santa Ana 5.2-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities. The proposed Project would implement retail and restaurant commercial and residential development within the Project area. These land uses do not involve the types of uses that would emit objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. In addition, odors generated by non-residential land uses are required to be in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402, which would prevent nuisance odors. During construction, emissions from construction equipment, architectural coatings, and paving activities may generate odors. However, these odors would be temporary, intermittent in nature, and would not affect a substantial number of people. The noxious odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the construction equipment. Also, the short-term construction -related odors would cease upon the drying or hardening of the odor -producing materials. In addition, all Project -generated solid waste would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with solid waste regulations and would not generate objectionable odors. Therefore, impacts associated with other operation- and construction -generated emissions, such as odors, would be less than significant. 5.2.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As described previously, per SCAQMD's methodology, if an individual project would result in air emissions of criteria pollutants that exceeds the SCAQMD's thresholds for project -specific impacts, then it would also result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of these criteria pollutants. As shown previously in Table 5.2-8, implementation of the proposed Project would result in exceedance of the threshold for VOCs. The majority of VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and mobile activity, the emissions of which cannot be controlled by the City and there are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce VOC emissions to below the SCAQMD threshold. Therefore, impacts related to a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non -attainment would be significant and unavoidable. 5.2.2 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES Plans, Program and Policies The following Plans, Programs, and Policies (PPP) related to hydrology and water quality are incorporated into the Project and would reduce impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. These actions will be included in the Project's mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP): PPP AQ -1: Rule 403. The following measures shall be incorporated into construction plans and specifications as implementation of Rule 403: o All clearing, grading, earth -moving, or excavation activities shall cease when winds exceed 25 mph per SCAQMD guidelines in order to limit fugitive dust emissions. o The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and disturbed areas within the Project are watered at least three (3) times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in the mid-morning, afternoon, and after work is done for the day. City of Santa Ana 5.2-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.2 Air Quality o The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less. PPP AQ -2: Rule 1 1 13. The following measure shall be incorporated into construction plans and specifications as implementation of Rule 1 113. The Project shall only use "Low -Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)" paints (no more than 50 gram/liter of VOC) consistent with SCAQMD Rule 1 113. PPP AQ -3: Rule 445. The following measure shall be incorporated into construction plans and specifications as implementation of Rule 445. Wood burning stoves and fireplaces shall not be included or used in the new development. 5.8.3 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impacts AQ -1 and AQ -2 would be potentially significant. Upon implementation of regulatory requirements Impacts AQ -3 and AQ -4 would be less than significant. 5.2.9 MITIGATION MEASURES Emissions from operation of the proposed Project would exceed SCAQMD's threshold for VOCs. Because the majority of VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and mobile activity that neither the Project applicant nor the City have the ability to reduce emissions of. There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce VOC emissions. Therefore, operational -source VOC emissions from implementation of the proposed Project would be cumulatively considerable, and cumulative air quality impacts would be significant and unavoidable. 5.2.4 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The operational impacts related to VOC emissions cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. Therefore, impacts related to conflict with an air quality plan and a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant would be significant and unavoidable. REFERENCES Air Quality Impact Analysis. Prepared by Urban Crossroads (AQ 2019) City of Santa Ana 5.2-20 Draft EIR January 2020 5.3 Cultural Resources 5.3.1 INTRODUCTION This section describes existing setting of the Project site and surrounding area related to historic resources. This section also addresses potential environmental effects of the proposed Project related to cultural resources, which include historic and archaeological resources. Information within this section includes data from the Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report) that was prepared by LGC Geotechnical (GEO 2019) (Appendix C) and the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by Stantec in 2018 (Phase 1 201 8) (Appendix D). Definitions • Archaeological resources include any material remains of human life or activities that are at least 100 years of age, and that are of scientific interest. A unique or significant archaeological resource is an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it (1) contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; (2) has a special and particular quality, such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; and (3) is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. • Cultural resources are defined as buildings, sites, structures, or objects, each of which may have historic, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or scientific importance, according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). • Historic building or site is one that is noteworthy for its significance in local, state, or national history or culture, its architecture or design, or its works of art, memorabilia, or artifacts. • Historic context refers to the broad patterns of historical development in a community or its region that is represented by cultural resources. A historic context statement is organized by themes such as economic, residential, and commercial development. • Historic integrity is defined as "the ability of a property to convey its significance." • Historical resources are defined as "a resource listed or eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources" (CRHR) (Public Resources Code, Section 5024.1; 14 CCR 15064.5). Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a), the term "historical resources" includes the following: (1) A resource listed in or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Public Resources Code, Section 5024.1). (2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, will be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. (3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, City of Santa Ana 5.3-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be a historical resource, provided the lead agency's determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be "historically significant" if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1) including the following: (A) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage; (B) Is associated with the lives of persons important in California's past; (C) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or (D) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (4) The fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Section 5020.1 (k) of the Public Resources Code), or identified in a historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Section 5024.1 (g) of the Public Resources Code) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be an historical resource as defined in Public Resources Code Sections 5020.1 Q) or 5024.1. 5.3.2 REGULATORY SETTING National Historic Preservation Act The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) established the National Register of Historic Places (National Register), which is the official register of designated historic places. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service, and includes listings of buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historical, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level. To be eligible for the National Register, a property must be significant under one or more of the following criteria per 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 60: a) Properties that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b) Properties that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; c) Properties that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or d) Properties that have yielded, or maybe likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. In addition to meeting one or more of the aforementioned criteria, an eligible property must also possess historic "integrity," which is "the ability of a property to convey its significance." The National Register criteria recognize seven qualities that define integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. City of Santa Ana 5.3-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources Structures, sites, buildings, districts, and objects over 50 years of age can be listed in the National Register as significant historical resources. Properties under 50 years of age that are of exceptional importance or are contributors to a district can also be included in the National Register. Properties listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP are also eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources, and as such, are considered historical resources for CEQA purposes. California Register of Historical Resources The California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) is an inventory of significant architectural, archeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed on the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register listed properties are automatically listed on the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens. The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register. In order for a property to be eligible for listing on the California Register, it must be found significant under one or more of the following criteria: (E) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage; (F) Is associated with the lives of persons important in California's past; (G) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or (H) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. In addition, resources eligible for the National Register of Historic Places are automatically listed on the California Register of Historical Resources. California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5 This code requires that if human remains are discovered on a project site, disturbance of the site shall halt and remain halted until the coroner has conducted an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The existing Conservation Element includes an objective to protect historic and archaeological resources, as listed below. Objective 3.1: Minimize loss of natural aesthetic, historic, archeological and paleontological resources as land is developed. City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 30-3; Application of State Historical Building Code: Any building or structure designated as having historical or architectural importance by inclusion in the city register of historical properties shall be deemed City of Santa Ana 5.3-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources a "qualified historical building or structure" for purposes of applying the state historical building code, as set forth in Part 2.7 (commencing with Section 1 8950) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California and Part 8 of Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. Criteria for Selection (a) Any person or group may request a building, or part thereof, structure, object or site, to be designated to be included on the city register of historical properties (called "register" in this section). The applicant must submit documentation that demonstrates how the nominated building, structure, object or site satisfies the criteria for designation. A building, structure, object, or site may be designated for inclusion on the register if the building, structure, object or site is 50 or more years old and if the commission finds that one or more of the following conditions are met: (1) Buildings, structures or objects with distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or period, that exemplify a particular architectural style or design features; architectural development; (2) Works of notable architects, builders, or designers whose style influenced architectural development; (3) Rare buildings, structures, or objects or original designs; (4) Buildings, structures, objects or sites of historical significance which include places: a. Where important events occurred; b. Associated with famous people, original settlers, renowned organizations and businesses; c. Which were originally present when the city was founded; or d. That served as important centers for political, social, economic, or cultural activity. (5) Sites of archaeological importance; (6) Buildings or structures that were connected with a business or use which was once common but is now ra re. Categorization The historic resources commission shall, by resolution and at a duly noticed public hearing, place all buildings, structures, objects, or sites on the city register of historical properties in one of the following categories based upon one of the criteria in the following categories: (1) Landmark category. a. The building, structure, object or site is on the national register or appears to be eligible to be placed on the register; or b. The building, structure, object or site is on the state register or appears to be eligible to be placed on the register; c. The building, structure, object or site has an historical/cultural significance to the city; d. The building, structure, object or site has a unique architectural significance. (2) Key category. a. The building, structure, object or site has a distinctive architectural style and quality; b. The building, structure, object or site is characteristic of a significant period in the history of the city; c. The building, structure, object or site is associated with a significant person or event in the city. City of Santa Ana 5.3-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources (3) Contributive category. The building, structure, object or site contributes to the overall character and history of a neighborhood or district and is a good example of period architecture. 5.3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Historic The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment that was prepared for the Project site (ESA 2018) describes that between the years of 1938 and 1972, prior to development of the existing site structures, the Project site and adjacent areas were used for agriculture, which resulted in shallow soil disturbances. The Project site is currently developed with three industrial buildings that were developed in the early 1980s, less than 45 years ago. The buildings were previously occupied by Ricoh Electronics Inc. an imaging and electronics company. The onsite buildings are surrounded by loading docks, surface parking areas, and ornamental landscaping. The Project site does not include any historic structures or other resources. In addition, the Project site is not adjacent to any historic structures. Areas surrounding the site consist of modern office, business park, modern public service facilities, and vacant land that is proposed for new development. Archaeologic Most researchers agree that the earliest occupation for the western Riverside County area dates to the early Holocene (11,000 to 8,000 years ago). The material culture related to this time included scrapers, hammer stones, large flaked cores, drills, and choppers, which were used to process food and raw materials. Around 8,000 years ago, subsistence patterns changed, resulting in a material complex consisting of an abundance of milling stones (for grinding food items) with a decrease in the number of chipped stone tools. The material culture from this time period includes large, bifacially worked dart points and grinding stones, handstones and metates. This Encinitas Tradition includes the Sayles or Pauma cultures that were located in inland San Diego County and western Riverside County, where the Project is located. At approximately 3,500 years ago, Pauma groups in the general vicinity of the Project area adopted new cultural traits which transformed the archaeological site characteristics - including mortar and pestle technology. This indicated the development of food storage, largely acorns, which could be processed and saved for the leaner, cooler months of the year. At approximately 1,500 years ago, bow and arrow technology started to emerge, and the Palomar Tradition is attributed to this time. The Palomar Tradition is characterized by soapstone bowls, arrowhead projectile points, pottery vessels, rock paintings, and cremation sites. The shift in material culture assemblages is largely attributed to the emergence of Shoshonean (Ta kic-speaking) people who entered California from the east. The Geotechnical Report that was prepared for the Project describes that the previous excavation for development of the existing 3 buildings and removal of previous underground storage tanks involved removal of soils and backfill with artificial compacted fill soils ranging between 5 feet and 13 feet in depth, as described below (GEO 2019): • During development of the 2300 South Redhill Avenue building, soils were excavated to depths of approximately 5 feet below existing grade and compacted fill soils were used to backfill the excavation area for the building foundation. City of Santa Ana 5.3-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources • During development of the 2310 South Redhill Avenue building, approximately 9 feet of fill was placed in the building pad area and fill soils were backfilled up to 15 feet beyond the limit of the building foundation (GEO 2019). • The area of the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building pad was excavated to approximately 10 to 13 feet below the existing grade. The foundation was stabilized with approximately 24 inches of gravel and approximately 13 feet of artificial fill was placed under the building and up to 5 feet beyond the building foundations. • During removal of an underground storage tank located between 2310 and 2320 South Redhill Avenue buildings, approximately 10 feet of crushed miscellaneous base and approximately 5 feet of onsite soils were backfilled into the previous underground storage tank location. 5.3.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: CUL -1 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. CUL -2 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. CUL -3 Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Historic Resources Thresholds Historic resources are usually 50 years old or older and must meet at least one of the criteria for listing in the California Register (such as association with historical events, important people, or architectural significance), in addition to maintaining a sufficient level of physical integrity (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a][3]). Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b), states that a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that would have a significant effect on the environment. A substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired. The significance of a historical resource is materially impaired when a project: a) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; or b) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or its identification in an historical resources survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1 (g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant; or c) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA. City of Santa Ana 5.3-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources 5.3.5 METHODOLOGY To determine whether a historic related impact would result from the proposed Project, the analysis includes consideration of the history of use and development of the Project site, and whether any of the existing structures are older than 45-50 years of age. The analysis combines these factors to identify the potential of Project to impact any historic resources on the site. In determining whether an archaeological related impact would result from the proposed Project, the analysis includes consideration of the archaeologic sensitivity of the Project area, the past disturbance on the site, and the proposed excavation. The analysis combines these factors to identify the potential of Project construction to impact any unknown archaeological resources. 5.3.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT CUL -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A HISTORICAL RESOURCE PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15064.5. No Impact. The Project site does not contain any historic resources. As described in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment that was prepared for the Project site (Phase 1 2018), aerial photographs between 1938 and 1977 show the site being used for agriculture or being vacant. The existing industrial buildings was constructed in the early 1980s, which are not more than 39 years old and are not historic resources. The industrial buildings were previously used by Ricoh Electronics Inc. for imaging and electronics manufacturing. No historically important activities previously occurred within the existing buildings. Overall, the site does not include any historic resources and implementation of the proposed Project would not impact a historic resource. In addition, the Project site is not adjacent to any historic structures. Areas surrounding the site consist of modern office buildings, business park buildings, modern public service facilities, and vacant land that is proposed for new development. Therefore, redevelopment of the Project site would not result in an indirect effect to any off-site historic resources. Overall, no impacts related to historic resources would occur from implementation of the proposed Project. IMPACT CUL -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15064.5. Less than Significant. As described previously, the site has a long history of ground disturbance from previous agricultural uses and development. The Geotechnical Report describes that artificial fill was observed in field explorations up to 7.5 feet below existing grade and previous excavation and recompaction ranged from 5 feet to 13 feet for development of the existing buildings and removal of underground storage tanks. It is likely that the site disturbance included the undeveloped portion of the site at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenue. The extensive previous excavation, recompaction, and fill soils onsite have limited the potential of the site to contain archaeological resources. Also, as described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the proposed Project would excavate onsite soils to a minimum of 5 feet below the bottom of the building foundations and 5 feet beyond the building perimeters. The soils would be reconditioned and recompacted as engineered fill to support the proposed building structures. The depth of the excavation is within the previously disturbed soil depths, which further reduces the potential of the Project to result in impacts related to archaeological resources. City of Santa Ana 5.3-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources Overall, due to the extent and depth of previous ground disturbances throughout the site, the potential for archaeological resources is limited. Therefore, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resources; and impacts would be less than significant. IMPACT CUL -3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DISTURB ANY HUMAN REMAINS, INCLUDING THOSE INTERRED OUTSIDE OF FORMAL CEMETERIES. Less than Significant. The Project site has been extensively disturbed, as described above, and has not been previously used as a cemetery. Thus, impacts related to human remains are less than significant. However, in the unanticipated event that human remains are found during project construction activities compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 would ensure that human remains are treated with dignity and as specified by law, which would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. As specified by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains are found on the Project site, the County Coroner's office shall be immediately notified and no further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC will make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent. Compliance with the existing California Health and Safety Code regulations, would ensure impacts related to potential disturbance of human remains are less than significant. 5.3.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Historic Resources: Because all historical resources are unique and nonrenewable members of finite classes, all adverse effects or negative impacts erode a dwindling resource base. Federal, state, and local laws and regulations protect historic resources when feasible. However, it is not always feasible to protect historical resources. As described previously, the Project site does not include any historic resources and is not located adjacent to any historic resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not impact, either directly or indirectly, any historic resources. Because no impacts related to historic resources would occur from implementation of the Project, the Project would not result in any cumulative impacts to historic resources. Archaeologic Resources: The cumulative study area for archaeological resources includes the southern California region, which contains the same general prehistoric uses and migration trends as the Project area. As described previously, the disturbance associated with the development and agricultural activities within the Project area have likely eradicated any archaeological resources and the Project would excavate and grade within soils depths that have already been disturbed. Therefore, the Project has a less than significant potential to impact archaeological resources, and similarly, impacts would be less than cumulatively significant. 5.3.3 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES • California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 City of Santa Ana 5.3-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources 5.3.4 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Upon implementation of regulatory requirements, Impacts CR -1 through CR -3 would be less than significant. 5.3.10 MITIGATION MEASURES Impacts related to cultural resources would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. 5.3.5 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Impacts related to historic resources, archaeologic resources, and human remains would be less than significant. REFERENCES City of Santa Ana General Plan. Accessed: http://www.santa- ana.org/generalplan/default.asp#CurrentGPDocs City of Santa Ana Municipal Code. Accessed: https://library.municode.com/ca/santa_ana/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=14452 Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report). Prepared by LGC Geotechnical. 2019 (GEO 2019). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report, 2018. Prepared by Stantec (Phase 1 201 8). City of Santa Ana 5.3-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 5.3 Cultural Resources This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.3-10 Draft EIR January 2020 5.4 Energy 5.4.1 INTRODUCTION This section of the EIR assesses the significance of the use of energy, including electricity, natural gas and gasoline, and diesel fuels, that would result from implementation of the proposed Project. It discusses existing energy use patterns and examines whether the proposed Project (including development and operation) would result in the consumption of large amounts of fuel or energy or use such resources in a wasteful manner. Refer to Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, for a discussion of the relationship between energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and Section 5.15, Utilities and Service Systems, for a discussion of water consumption. The analysis within this section is based on the energy modeling of the Project prepared by Urban Crossroads (UC 2019). 5.4.2 REGULATORY SETTING Energy Independence and Security Act, Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency Standards In response to Massachusetts et al. vs. Environmental Protection Agency et al., the Bush Administration issued an executive order on May 14, 2007, directing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Department of Transportation (USDOT) to establish regulations that reduce GHG emissions from motor vehicles, non -road vehicles, and non -road engines by 2008. On December 19, 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 was signed into law, requiring an increased Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard of 35 miles per gallon (mpg) for the combined fleet of cars and light trucks by the 2020 model year. In addition to setting increased CAFE standards for motor vehicles, the Energy Independence and Security Act includes the following additional provisions: • Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) (Section 202) • Appliance and Lighting Efficiency Standards (Sections 301-325) • Building Energy Efficiency (Sections 41 1-441) Additional provisions of the Act address energy savings in government and public institutions, promoting research for alternative energy, additional research in carbon capture, international energy programs, and the creation of green jobs. California Public Utilities Commission Plans and Programs The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has authority to set electric rates, regulate natural gas utility service, protect consumers, promote energy efficiency, and ensure electric system reliability. The CPUC has established rules for the planning and construction of new transmission facilities, distribution facilities, and substations. Utility companies are required to obtain permits to construct certain power line facilities or substations. The CPUC also has jurisdiction over the siting of natural gas transmission lines. The CPUC regulates distributed energy generation policies and programs for both customers and utilities. This includes incentive programs (e.g., California Solar Initiative) and net energy metering policies. Net energy metering allows customers to receive a financial credit for power generated by their on-site system and fed back to the utility. The CPUC is involved with utilities through a variety of energy procurement programs, including the Renewable Portfolio Standard program. City of Santa Ana 5.4-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy In 2008, the CPUC adopted the Long -Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan, which is a road map to achieving maximum energy savings in California through 2020. Consistent with California's energy policy and electricity "loading order," the Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan indicates that energy efficiency is the highest priority resource in meeting California's energy needs. The CPUC also adopted energy goals that require all new residential construction in California to be zero net energy by 2020. The zero -net energy goal means new buildings must use a combination of improved efficiency and distributed renewable energy generation to meet 100 percent of their annual energy need. In addition to the zero net energy goals for residential buildings by 2020, the CPUC has adopted goals that all new commercial construction in California will be zero net energy by 2030, and 50 percent of existing commercial buildings will be retrofit to zero net energy by 2030. Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 (SB 350) requires that the amount of electricity generated and sold to retail customers per year from eligible renewable energy resources be increased from 33 percent to 50 percent by December 31, 2030, thereby doubling energy efficiency within the state. SB 350 makes revisions to the California Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) Program and to certain other requirements on public utilities and publicly owned electric utilities. SB 350 also requires local publicly -owned electric utilities to establish annual targets for energy efficiency savings and demand reduction consistent with a statewide goal established by the CPUC and provides incentives for electrification of rail facilities. Local utilities would be required to develop more detailed strategies and incentives for use of renewable energy sources, resulting in an increased demand for renewable energy generation. SB 350 emphasizes the important role of electric vehicles in California's overall scheme to combat climate change, declaring that "[d]eploying electric vehicles should assist in grid management, integrating generation from eligible renewable energy resources, and reducing fuel costs for vehicle drivers." The bill promotes the development of additional electric vehicle charging infrastructure to encourage greater use of electric cars and requires electrical utilities to include expansion of electrical vehicle charging facilities as part of their strategies and incentives for reducing overall energy consumption. Assembly Bill 1007 (Pavley, Chapter 371, Statutes of 2005) Assembly Bill 1007 required the California Energy Commission (CEC) to prepare a state plan (State Alternative Fuels Plan) to increase the use of alternative fuels in California. The Commission prepared the State Alternative Fuels Plan in partnership with the California Air Resources Board and in consultation with other state, federal, and local agencies. The final State Alternative Fuels Plan, published in December 2007, attempts to achieve an 80 -percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions associated with personal transportation, even as California's population increases. Measures proposed that would reduce petroleum fuel use include: I. Lowering the energy needed for personal transportation by tripling the energy efficiency of on - road vehicles by 2050 through: a. Conventional gas, diesel, and flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs) averaging more than 40 miles per gallon (mpg). b. Hybrid gas, diesel, and FFVs averaging almost 60 mpg. c. All electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) averaging well over 100 mpg (on a greenhouse gas equivalents [GGE] basis) on the electricity cycle. d. Fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) averaging over 80 mpg (on a GGE basis). 2. Moderating growth in per capita driving, reducing today's average per capita driving miles by about 5 percent or back to 1990 levels. City of Santa Ana 5.4-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy 3. Changing the energy sources for transportation fuels from the current 96 percent petroleum-based to approximately: a. 30 percent from gasoline and diesel from traditional petroleum sources or lower GHG emission fossil fuels such as natural gas. b. 30 percent from transportation biofuels. C. 40 percent from a mix of electricity and hydrogen. 4. Producing transportation biofuels, electricity, and hydrogen from renewable or very low carbon - emitting technologies that result in, on average, at least 80 percent lower life cycle GHG emissions than conventional fuels. 5. Encouraging more efficient land uses and greater use of mass transit, public transportation, and other means of moving goods and people. Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards and California Green Building Standards The 2019 California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6 becomes effective on January 1, 2020. The new standards focus on four key areas: smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and nonresidential lighting requirements. The ventilation measures improve indoor air quality, protecting homeowners from air pollution originating from outdoor and indoor sources. CEC indicates that these Title 24 standards will reduce energy consumption by 7 percent for residential buildings and 30 percent for nonresidential buildings compared to the 2016 Title 24 requirements (CEC 2019). City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The following goals, objectives, and policies contained in the existing Energy Element are relevant to the proposed Project: Goal 1: To reduce consumption of non-renewable energy. Goal 2: To support develop and utilization of new energy sources. Objective 1.1: Reduce transportation -related energy consumption. Objective 1.2: Reduce land use related energy consumption. Objective 1.3: Reduce construction -related energy consumption. Policies • Encourage higher densities of housing and office (mixed use) development to relate to areas of higher transportation access and capacity. • Require and/or provide incentives for energy-efficient subdivision and site planning and building design. 5.4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Electricity The Southern California Edison Company (SCE) is the electrical purveyor in the City of Santa Ana. SCE provides electricity service to more than 14 million people in a 50,000 square -mile area of central, coastal and Southern California. California utilities are experiencing increasing demands that require modernization of the electric distribution grid to, among other things, accommodate two-way flows of electricity and City of Santa Ana 5.4-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy increase the grid's capacity. SCE is in the process of implementing infrastructure upgrades to ensure the ability to meet future demands. In addition, as described by the Edison International 2018 Annual Report, the SCE electrical grid modernization effort supports implementation of California Senate Bill 32 that requires the state to cut greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 in order to help address global climate change. It describes that in 2018 Approximately 35% of power that SCE delivered to customers in 2018 came from renewable sources (SCE 2018). The Project site is currently served by the electricity distribution system that exists adjacent to the site along Warner Avenue. Natural Gas The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) is the natural gas purveyor in the City of Santa Ana and is the principal distributor of natural gas in Southern California. SoCalGas estimates that gas demand will decline at an annual rate of 0.5 percent from 2018 to 2035 due to modest economic growth, mandated energy efficiency standards and programs, renewable electricity goals, and conservation savings linked to advanced metering infrastructure (CGEU 2018). The gas supply available to SoCalGas is regionally diverse and includes supplies from California sources (onshore and offshore), Southwestern U.S. supply sources, the Rocky Mountains, and Canada (CGEU 2018). SoCalGas designs its facilities and supplies to provide continuous service during extreme peak demands and has identified the ability to meet peak demands through 2035 in its 2018 report (CGEU 2018). The Project site is currently served by the natural gas distribution system that exists within the roadways that are adjacent to the Project site. 5.4.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: E-1 Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. E-2 Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. 5.4.5 METHODOLOGY A number of factors are considered when weighing whether a project would use a proportionately large amount of energy or whether the use of energy would be wasteful in comparison to other projects. Factors such as the use of on-site renewable energy features, energy conservation features or programs, and relative use of transit are considered. According to Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines, conserving energy is defined as decreasing overall per capita energy consumption, decreasing reliance on natural gas and oil, and increasing reliance on renewable energy sources. Neither Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines nor Public Resources Code Section 21 100(b)(3) offer a numerical threshold of significance that might be used to evaluate the potential significance of energy consumption of a project. Rather, the emphasis is on reducing "the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy." Construction activities would result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy if construction equipment is old or not well maintained, if equipment is left to idle when not in use, if travel routes are not planned to minimize vehicle miles traveled, or if excess lighting or water is used during construction activities. Energy usage during project operation would be considered "wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary" if the City of Santa Ana 5.4-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy project were to violate federal, state, and/or local energy standards, including Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, inhibit pedestrian or bicycle mobility, inhibit access to transit, or inhibit feasible opportunities to use alternative energy sources, such as solar energy, or otherwise inhibit the conservation of energy. 5.4.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT E-1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN A POTENTILLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DUE TO WASTEFUL, INEFFICIENT, OR UNNECESSARY CONSUMPTION OF ENERGY RESOURCES, DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION. Construction Less than Significant Impact. During construction of the proposed Project energy would be consumed in 3 general forms: I. Petroleum-based fuels used to power off-road construction vehicles and equipment on the Project site, construction worker travel to and from the Project site, as well as delivery truck trips; 2. Electricity associated with providing temporary power for lighting and electric equipment; and 3. Energy used in the production of construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes, and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass. Construction activities related to the proposed Project would not result in demand for fuel greater on a per- unit -of -development basis than other development projects in southern California. Demolition of the existing buildings and infrastructure that exist onsite would need to be undertaken; however, because much of the demolition materials can be recycled, the demolition needed to implement the proposed Project is not considered to be wasteful. In addition, the extent of construction activities that would occur from implementation of the proposed Project is limited. Construction would occur in three phases over a 27 -month period and the demand for construction -related electricity and fuels would be limited to that time frame. Also, CCR Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section 2449(d)(3) Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than 5 minutes, thereby precluding unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. Additionally, construction contractors are required to demonstrate compliance with applicable California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations governing the accelerated retrofitting, repowering, or replacement of heavy duty diesel on- and off-road equipment during the City's construction permitting process. Compliance with existing CARB idling restrictions and the use of newer engines and equipment would reduce fuel combustion and energy consumption. The energy modeling shows hat the Project construction electricity usage over the 24 -month construction period would be approximately 1,674,604 kWh, which is summarized in Table 5.4-1. City of Santa Ana 5.4-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy Table 5.4-1: Estimated Construction Electricity Usage Land Use Proposed Building Square Footage (1,000 SF) Electricity Usage (kWh) High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 25.000 19,575 Regional Shopping Center 18.000 14,094 Quality Restaurant 25.000 19,575 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 10.000 7,830 Fast Food Restaurant without Drive Thru 2.000 1,566 Enclosed Parking Structure w/ Elevator 969.600 759,197 Apartments Mid Rise 1,288.000 852,767 Total Construction Electricity Usage (kWh) 1,674,604.16 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. Also, as shown in Table 5.4-2, construction of the proposed Project is estimated to result in the need for 123,957 gallons of diesel fuel. Table 5.4-2: Estimated Construction Fuel Consumption Activity/ Duration Equipment HP Rating Quantity Usage Hours Load Factor HP- hrs/day Total Fuel Consumption (gal. diesel fuel) Concrete/Industrial Saws 81 1 8 0.73 473 767 Demolition Excavators 158 3 8 0.38 1,441 2,337 (30 days) Rubber Tired Dozers 247 2 8 0.40 1,581 2,563 Site Crawler Tractors 212 4 8 0.43 2,917 7,096 Preparation (45 days) Rubber Tired Dozers 247 3 8 0.40 2,371 5,768 Crawler Tractors 212 2 8 0.43 1,459 2,365 Excavators 158 2 8 0.38 961 1,558 Graders 187 1 8 0.41 613 995 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 247 1 8 0.40 790 1,282 (30 days) Scrapers 367 2 8 0.48 2,819 4,571 Cranes 231 1 8 0.29 536 12,167 Crawler Tractors 212 3 8 0.43 2,188 49,670 Building Forklifts 89 3 8 0.20 427 9,699 Construction Generator Sets 84 1 8 0.74 497 11,290 (420 days) Welders 46 1 8 0.45 166 3,760 Pavers 130 2 8 0.42 874 2,125 Paving Paving Equipment 132 2 8 0.36 760 1,849 (45 days) Rollers 80 2 8 0.38 486 1,183 Architectural Coating (180 days) Air Compressors 78 1 8 0.48 300 2,914 Construction Fuel Demand (Gallons Diesel Fuel) 1 123,957 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Table 5.4-3 shows that construction workers would use approximately 291,025 gallons of fuel to travel to and from the Project site. Tables 5.4-4 and 5.4-5 show that approximately 25,976 gallons of fuel would be City of Santa Ana 5.4-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy used by medium high duty trucks, and 160,174 gallons of fuel would be used for hauling by heavy high duty trucks during construction of the proposed Project. Table 5.4-3: Estimated Construction Worker Fuel Consumption Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Table 5.4-4: Estimated Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption (Medium High Duty Trucks) Worker Trip Vehicle Average Vehicle Estimated Fuel Construction Trips / Length Miles Fuel Economy Consumption Activity Day (miles) Traveled (mpg) (gallons) Demolition (30 days) 15 14.7 6,615 30.73 215 Site Preparation 169 6.9 229,394 8.83 25,976 (45 days) 18 14.7 11,907 30.73 387 Grading 36,846 Demolition (30 days) 20 14.7 8,820 30.73 287 Building Construction (30 days) 1,254 20 752,400 (420 days) 1,376 14.7 8,495,424 31.76 267,504 Paving (45 days) 15 14.7 9,923 32.59 304 Architectural Coating (180 days) 275 14.7 727,650 32.59 22,327 Total Construction Worker Fuel Consumption 291,025 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Table 5.4-4: Estimated Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption (Medium High Duty Trucks) Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Table 5.4-5: Estimated Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption (Heavy High Duty Trucks) Vendor Trip Vehicle Average Estimated Fuel Construction Trips / Length Miles Vehicle Fuel Consumption Activity Day (miles) Traveled Economy (mpg) (gallons) Building Construction (420 days) 169 6.9 229,394 8.83 25,976 Construction Medium -Duty Truck Total 25,976 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Table 5.4-5: Estimated Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption (Heavy High Duty Trucks) Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 City of Santa Ana 5.4-7 Draft EIR January 2020 Trip Vehicle Average Vehicle Estimated Fuel Construction Trips / Length Miles Fuel Economy Consumption Activity Day (miles) Traveled (mpg) (gallons) Vendor Building Construction (420 days) 169 6.9 229,394 6.23 36,846 Construction Heavy -Duty Truck Total (vendor) 36,846 Demolition Hauling (30 days) 1,254 20 752,400 6.10 123,328 Construction Heavy -Duty Truck Total (Hauling) 123,328 Heavy -Duty Truck Total (Vendor + Hauling) 160,174 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 City of Santa Ana 5.4-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy Overall, construction activities would require limited energy consumption, would comply with all existing regulations, and would not use large amounts of energy or fuel in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary manner. Thus, impacts related to construction energy usage would be less than significant. Operation Once operational, the residential and retail/restaurant commercial uses would generate demand for electricity, natural gas, as well as gasoline for motor vehicle trips. Operational use of energy includes the heating, cooling, and lighting of building areas, water heating, operation of electrical systems and appliances, parking lot and outdoor lighting, and the transport of electricity, natural gas, and water to the areas where they would be consumed. This use of energy is typical for urban development, and no operational activities or land uses would occur that would result in extraordinary energy consumption. Additionally, the Project includes features to reduce energy consumptions, such as 94 electric vehicle charging stations, energy efficient appliances, and Title 24 compliant lighting and plumbing fixtures. As detailed in Table 5.4-6, operation of the proposed Project is estimated to result in the annual use of 1,236,920 gallons of fuel. Table 5.4-6: Estimated Annual Operational Automobile Fuel Consumption Vehicle Type Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled Average Vehicle Fuel Economy (mpg) Estimated Annual Fuel Consumption (gallons) LDA 17,115,028 525,156 LDA LDT1 1,319,622 47,996 LDT1 LDT2 6,386,314 250,848 LDT2 MDV 3,409,298 165,242 MDV LHD1 473,929 34,866 LHD1 LHD2 176,675 12,821 LHD2 MHD 787,462 86,629 MHD HHD 522,099 81,952 HHD OBUS 53,262 8,191 OBUS UBUS 47,012 12,278 UBUS MCY 150,182 4,042 MCY SBUS 18,140 2,267 SBUS MH 28,506 4,632 MH TOTAL 30,487,528 1,236,920 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 In addition, Table 5.4-7 details that operation of the proposed Project would use approximately 29,255,440 thousand British thermal units (kBTU) per year of natural gas, and Table 5.4-8 shows that approximately 12,721,140 kilowatt-hour (kWh) per year of electricity would be used for operation. Table 5.4-7: Estimated Annual Operational Natural Gas Demand Natural Gas Demand kBTU/year Apartment Mid Rise 13,141,600 Enclosed Parking Structure w/ Elevator 0 Fast Food Restaurant without Drive Thru 518,640 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 2,593,200 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 6,483,000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces 0 City of Santa Ana 5.4-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy Quality Restaurant 6,483,000 Regional Shopping Center 36,000 Total Natural Gas Demand 29,255,440 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. Table 5.4-8: Estimated Annual Operational Electricity Demand Electricity Demand kWh/year Apartment Mid Rise 4,571,600 Enclosed Parking Structure w/ Elevator 5,681,860 Fast Food Restaurant without Drive Thru 72,960 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 364,800 High Turnover (Sit Down Restaurant) 912,000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces 0 Quality Restaurant 912,000 Regional Shopping Center 205,920 Total Natural Electricity Demand 12,721,140 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. The proposed mixed-use development would be required to meet the current Title 24 energy efficiency standards. The City's administration of the Title 24 requirements and the City's Climate Action Plan includes review of design components and energy conservation measures that occurs during the permitting process, which ensures that all requirements are met. Typical Title 24 measures include insulation; use of energy- efficient heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment (HVAC); solar -reflective roofing materials; energy-efficient indoor and outdoor lighting systems; reclamation of heat rejection from refrigeration equipment to generate hot water; and incorporation of skylights, etc. In complying with the Title 24 standards, impacts to peak energy usage periods would be minimized, and impacts on statewide and regional energy needs would be reduced. All development is required to comply with the adopted California Energy Code (Code of Regulations, Title 24 Part 6). The Project would consist of an urban infill redevelopment that would provide mixed residential and commercial (retail/restaurant) uses. Since it would be undertaken on a currently developed and underutilized site, and would be located near existing off-site employment, commercial, residential, and retail destinations and in proximity to existing public bus stops and freeways, which would result in reduced vehicle trips and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in comparison to a Project of similar size and land without close access to employment, service, and retail, destinations; in addition to public transit and freeways. The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) has provided guidance for mitigating or reducing transportation -related VMT from land use development projects within its guidance document titled Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (CAPCOA 2010). The land use characteristics of the Project are consistent with the CAPCOA guidance related to a reduction of vehicle trip distances that would achieve a reduction in associated transportation -related fuel demand, as described below. • Area Density: CAPCOA identifies that increases in area density, measured in terms of persons, jobs, or dwelling units per unit area, reduces VMT associated with transportation', as it reduces the ' CalEEMod, by default, assumes that trip distances in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) are slightly longer than the statewide average. This is because the commute patterns in the SCAB involve a substantial portion of the population commuting relatively far distances, which is documented in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which shows that in existing and future plan conditions, more than 50 percent of City of Santa Ana 5.4-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy distance people travel for work or services and provides a foundation for the implementation of other strategies such as enhanced transit services (CAPCOA guidance measure LUT -1). According to CAPCOA, the reduction in VMT from increases in area density applies to urban and suburban settings for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects. The Project would provide both residential, retail/restaurant, and employment uses and is located in an urban infill location near other employment opportunities, services, and retail commercial and development. The proposed Project would provide an increase in area residential density and an improvement to the jobs - housing balance. As detailed in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the Project region has an existing and projected future imbalance between the number of jobs and housing units, and per CAPCOA guidance, the addition of residential units within the area would reduce VMT and the VMT- related fuel demand. Therefore, the Project is consistent with infill development that increases area density as described by CAPCOA. Thus, based on the CAPCOA guidance the Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of fuel, and impacts would be less than significant. • Location Efficiency: Location efficiency describes the location of a project relative to the type of urban landscape such as an urban area, compact infill, or suburban center. CAPCOA guidance measure LUT -2.22 describes that a reduction in VMT and the related use of energy occurs from development within urban areas that include residential, retail, office, industrial, mixed -uses, and transportation access. As described previously, the Project is located in an urban infill location and would provide residential units near employment, retail, and services that would provide for efficient use of transportation energy. The Project site location also provides for efficient energy use to access existing freeways (that include 1-5 and SR -55), a regionally serving arterial roadway (Red Hill Avenue), and the Orange County Transit Authority bus lines that runs along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. In addition, the site is surrounded by sidewalks and is within walking and bicycling distance of various existing and planned retail services, such as groceries, restaurants, banks, entertainment, and recreation facilities. According to the CAPCOA guidance, factors that contribute to VMT reductions include pedestrian connectivity between the project site and off-site destinations. The Project would include onsite sidewalks that would connect to the existing offsite sidewalks, and bicycle lanes exist in the Project vicinity. Both walking and bicycling to onsite or nearby destinations would reduce transportation energy use. Thus, the Project site location provides efficient use of transportation energy supplies and is consent with policies for reducing VMT. Thus, the Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of fuel, and impacts would be less than significant. In addition, the Project site is within an area where existing infrastructure would provide for efficient delivery of electricity and natural gas to the Project and the Project would not inhibit the development of other alternative energy sources. Furthermore, other existing and future regulations are likely to result in more efficient use of all types of energy, and reduction in reliance on non-renewable sources of energy. These include the federal Energy Independence and Security Act, the state Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan, SB 350 and AB 1007 (described above), which are designed to reduce reliance on non-renewable energy resources and reduce demand by providing federal tax credits for purchasing fuel-efficient items and improving the renewable fuel, appliance, and lighting standards. Thus, operation of the proposed Project would not use large amounts of energy or fuel in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary manner, and impacts would be less than significant. all work trips are 10 miles or longer (SCAG, Performance Measures Appendix, page 13, 2016). Thus, work trips that would be less than 10 miles would assist in meeting the 2016 RTP/SCS goal of reducing overall VMT in the region. City of Santa Ana 5.4-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy IMPACT E-2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT A STATE OR LOCAL PLAN FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY OR ENERGY EFFICIENTY. No Impact. As described previously, the proposed Project would be required to meet the CCR Title 24 energy efficiency standards in effect during permitting of the Project. The City's administration of the CCR Title 24 requirements includes review of design components and energy conservation measures that occurs during the permitting process, which ensures that all requirements are met. In addition, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct opportunities to use renewable energy, such as solar energy. Redevelopment of the site would not result in obstruction of opportunities for use of renewable energy. Thus, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and impacts would not occur. 5.4.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic context for analysis of cumulative impacts regarding energy includes past, present, and future development within southern California because energy supplies (including electricity, natural gas, and petroleum) are generated and distributed throughout the southern California region. All development projects throughout the region would be required to comply with the energy efficiency standards in the Title 24 requirements. Additionally, some of the developments could provide for additional reductions in energy consumption by use of solar panels, sky lights, or other LEED type energy efficiency infrastructure. With implementation of the existing energy conservation regulations, cumulative electricity and natural gas consumption would not be cumulatively wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. Petroleum consumption associated with the proposed mixed uses would be primarily attributable to transportation, especially vehicular use. However, state fuel efficiency standards and alternative fuels policies (per AB 1007 Pavely) would contribute to a reduction in fuel use, and the federal Energy Independence and Security Act and the state Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan would reduce reliance on non-renewable energy resources. For these reasons, the consumption of petroleum would not occur in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary manner and would be less than cumulatively considerable. 5.4.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES The following standard regulation would reduce potential impacts related to energy: • California Energy Code (Code of Regulations, Title 24 Part 6). 5.4.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Upon implementation of regulatory requirements, Impacts E-1 and E-2 would be less than significant. 5.4.10 MITIGATION MEASURES Impacts related to energy would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. 5.4.10 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Impacts related to energy would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.4-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.4 Energy REFERENCES California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, 2010. Accessed at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/1 1 /CAPCOA-Quantification- Report-9-14-Final.pdf. California Energy Commission 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Standards (CEC 2019). Accessed: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2019- building-energy-efficiency California Gas and Electric Utilities 2018 California Gas Report (CGEU 2018). Accessed: https://www.socalgas.com/regulatory/cgr.shtml. Edison International 2018 Annual Report (SCE 2018). Accessed: https://www.edison.com/home/investors/sec-filings-financials/annual-reports.html Southern California Edison. Accessed: http://sce.com/wps/portal/home/about-us/reliability. City of Santa Ana 5.4-12 Draft EIR January 2020 5.5 Geology and Soils 5.5.1 INTRODUCTION This section addresses potential environmental effects of the proposed Project related to geology, soils, seismicity, and paleontological resources. The impacts examined include risks related to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, liquefaction, expansive soils; impacts on the environment related to soil erosion and sedimentation; and impacts related to paleontological resources. Information within this section includes data from the Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report) that was prepared by LGC Geotechnical (GEO 2019), which is included as Appendix C. 5.5.2 REGULATORY SETTING Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act was enacted in 1997 to "reduce the risks to life and property from future earthquakes in the United States through the establishment and maintenance of an effective earthquake hazards and reduction program." To accomplish this, the Act established the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program that provides characterization, and prediction of hazards and vulnerabilities; improvement of building codes and land use practices; risk reduction through post -earthquake investigations and education; development and improvement of design and construction techniques; improvement of mitigation capacity; and accelerated application of research results. This Act designated the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as the lead agency of the program and assigns it several planning, coordinating, and reporting responsibilities. Programs under this Act provide building code requirements such as emergency evacuation responsibilities and seismic code standards such as those to which development under the proposed Project would be required to adhere. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was passed in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface fault rupture to structures used for human occupancy. The main purpose of the Act is to prevent the construction of buildings for human occupancy on top of the traces of active faults. It was passed into law following the February 1971 magnitude 6.5 San Fernando (Sylmar) Earthquake that resulted in over 500 million dollars in property damage and 65 deaths. Although the Act addresses the hazards associated with surface fault rupture, it does not address other earthquake -related hazards, such as seismically induced ground shaking, liquefaction, or landslides. This Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones, now referred to as Earthquake Fault Zones, around the mapped surface traces of active faults, and to publish appropriate maps that depict these zones. Earthquake Fault Zone maps are publicly available and distributed to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling new or renewed construction. The Act requires local agencies to regulate development within Earthquake Fault Zones. Before a development project can be permitted within an Earthquake Fault Zone, a geologic investigation is required to demonstrate that proposed buildings would not be constructed across active faults. A site-specific evaluation and written report must be prepared by a licensed geologist. If an active fault is found, a structure for human occupancy cannot be placed over the trace of the fault and must be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the fault. City of Santa Ana 5.5-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils Seismic Hazards Mapping Act The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, which was passed by the California legislature in 1990, addresses earthquake hazards related to liquefaction and seismically induced landslides. Under the Act, seismic hazard zones are mapped by the State Geologist in order to assist local governments in land use planning. The Act states "it is necessary to identify and map seismic hazard zones in order for cities and counties to adequately prepare the safety element of their general plans and to encourage land use management policies and regulations to reduce and mitigate those hazards to protect public health and safety." Section 2697(a) of the Act states that "cities and counties shall require, prior to the approval of a project located in a seismic hazard zone, a geotechnical report defining and delineating any seismic hazard." California Building Code The California Building Code (CBC) is included in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. The CBC incorporates the International Building Code, a model building code adopted across the United States. Current State law requires every city, county, and other local public agency enforcing building regulations to adopt the provisions of the CBC within 180 days of its publication. The publication date of the CBC is established by the California Building Standards Commission. The current CBC was adopted by the City and is included in Title 8 of the City's Municipal Code. These codes provide standards to protect property and public safety. They regulate the design and construction of excavations, foundations, building frames, retaining walls, and other building elements, and thereby mitigate the effects of seismic shaking and adverse soil conditions. The codes also regulate grading activities, including drainage and erosion control. California Construction General Permit The State of California adopted a Statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for General Construction Activity (Construction General Permit) on September 2, 2009 (Order No. 2009- 0009-DWQ, as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ). The last Construction General Permit amendment became effective on July 17, 2012. The Construction General Permit regulates construction site storm water management. Dischargers whose projects disturb one or more acres of soil, or whose projects disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the general permit for discharges of storm water associated with construction activity. To obtain coverage under this permit, project operators must electronically file Permit Registration Documents, which include a Notice of Intent, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and other compliance -related documents, including a risk -level assessment for construction sites, an active storm water effluent monitoring and reporting program during construction, rain event action plans, and numeric action levels (NALs) for pH and turbidity, as well as requirements for qualified professionals to prepare and implement the plan. The Construction General Permit requires the SWPPP to identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented to reduce soil erosion. Types of BMPs include preservation of vegetation and sediment control (e.g., fiber rolls). City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The existing General Plan Conservation Element includes the following objective to protect archeological resources: Objective 3.1: Minimize loss of natural aesthetic, historic, archeological and paleontological resources as The following policies contained in the Seismic Safety Element are also relevant to the proposed Project: Goal 1: Provide a safe environment for all Santa Ana residents and workers. City of Santa Ana 5.5-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils Goal 2: Minimize the effects of natural disasters. Objective 1.1: Provide a high level of life safety in structures with high occupancy such as schools and hospitals. Objective 1.3: Minimize seismic risk in the construction of new structures. Policy: Use a higher standard of design for structures with high occupancy than for other structures. City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Municipal Code Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1; California Building Code: The CBC has been amended and adopted as Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1 of the City's Municipal Code (Building Code). This regulates all building and construction projects within the City limits and implements a minimum standard for building design and construction. These minimum standards include specific requirements for seismic safety, excavation, foundations, retaining walls and site demolition. It also regulates grading activities including drainage and erosion control. Section 18-156; Control of Urban Runoff: This code section states that all new development and significant redevelopment within the City shall be undertaken in accordance with the County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP), including but not limited to the development project guidance; and any conditions and requirements established by City agencies related to the reduction or elimination of pollutants in storm water runoff from the project site. Prior to the issuance by the City of a grading permit, building permit or nonresidential plumbing permit for any new development or significant redevelopment, City agencies are required to review the project plans and impose terms, conditions and requirements on the project. The owner of a new development or significant redevelopment project shall implement and adhere to the terms, conditions and requirements on the new development or significant redevelopment project. 5.5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Regional Setting The Project site is generally located within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California, at the eastern edge of the Los Angeles Sedimentary Basin. The Los Angeles Basin is a northwest -plunging synclinal sedimentary deposit that is bounded to the south of the Project site by the broadly uplifted coastal mesa of Newport Beach and the San Joaquin Hills, to the north by the foothills of the Santa Ana mountain range (GEO 2019). The Project site is located on young alluvial fan materials that include previous floodplain deposits. A channelized portion of the Peters Canyon Creek passes approximately two miles away from the site to the east. The creek drains into Upper Newport Bay located south of the site (GEO 2019). Faults and Ground Shaking In 1972, the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act was signed into law. In 1994, it was renamed the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (A -P Act). The primary purpose of the A -P Act is to mitigate the hazard of fault rupture by prohibiting the location of structures for human occupancy across the trace of an active fault. The A -P Act requires the State Geologist (Chief of the California Geology Survey) to delineate "Earthquake Fault Zones" along with faults that are "sufficiently active" and "well-defined." The boundary of an "Earthquake Fault Zone" is generally about 500 feet from major active faults and 200 to 300 feet from well-defined minor faults. The A -P Act dictates that cities and counties withhold development permits for sites within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone until geologic investigations demonstrate that the site zones are not threatened by surface displacements from future faulting. City of Santa Ana 5.5-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils The Project site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone and no active faults are known to cross the site. The closest known active faults are associated with the San Joaquin Hills Fault, located approximately 1.5 miles from the site; the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone, approximately 8.4 miles southwest of the site; and the Elsinore Fault Zone, approximately 13.2 miles northeast of the site (GEO 2019). However, all of southern California is seismically active. The amount of motion expected at a building site can vary from none to forceful depending upon the distance to the fault, the magnitude of the earthquake, and the local geology. Greater movement can be expected at sites located on poorly consolidated material such as alluvium located near the source of the earthquake epicenter or in response to an earthquake of great magnitude. Onsite Soils The Geotechnical Report describes that the site is underlain by older artificial fill soils and Quaternary aged young alluvial fan deposits. Older artificial fill was observed in the field explorations up to 7.5 feet below existing grade and consist of slightly moist to moist clays and silts with variable amounts of sand. The Quaternary young alluvial fan deposits underlie the older artificial fill, and consist of moist to wet, medium stiff to hard clays with variable sand content, as well as loose to medium dense, moist to wet clayey and silty sands to the maximum explored depth of approximately 50 feet below existing grade (GEO 2019). The previous excavation and compaction of soils occurred on the Project site to develop the existing 3 buildings and remove underground storage tanks, as described below (GEO 2019): • During development of the 2300 South Redhill Avenue building, soils were excavated to depths of approximately 5 feet below existing grade and compacted fill soils were used to backfill the excavation area for the building foundation. • During development of the 2310 South Redhill Avenue building, approximately 9 feet of fill was placed in the building pad area and fill soils were backfilled up to 15 feet beyond the limit of the building foundation (GEO 2019). • The area of the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building pad was excavated to approximately 10 to 13 feet below the existing grade. The foundation was stabilized with approximately 24 inches of gravel and approximately 13 feet of artificial fill was placed under the building and up to 5 feet beyond the building foundations. • During removal of an underground storage tank located between 2310 and 2320 South Redhill Avenue buildings, approximately 10 feet of crushed miscellaneous base and approximately 5 feet of onsite soils were backfilled into the previous underground storage tank location. Liquefaction and Settlement Liquefaction occurs when vibrations or water pressure within a mass of soil cause the soil particles to lose contact with one another. As a result, the soil behaves like a liquid, has an inability to support weight, and can flow down very gentle slopes. This condition is usually temporary and is most often caused by an earthquake vibrating water -saturated fill or unconsolidated soil. Soils that are most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose, saturated, and uniformly graded fine-grained sands that lie below the groundwater table within approximately 50 feet below ground surface. Clayey (cohesive) soils or soils which possess clay particles in excess of 20 percent are generally not considered to be susceptible to liquefaction, nor are those soils which are above the historic static groundwater table. Lateral spreading refers to spreading of soils in a rapid fluid-like flow movement similar to water. City of Santa Ana 5.5-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils The Geotechnical Report identifies that the Project site is located within a liquefaction hazard zone. Onsite soils include relatively isolated loose to medium dense sand layers, generally located approximately 40 to 50 feet below existing grade that are considered susceptible to liquefaction. In addition, the depth of groundwater is in the range of 24 to 33 feet below ground surface (bgs), but the historic high groundwater is approximately 10 feet below the existing grade (GEO 2019). Based on these onsite soils and groundwater conditions, the Geotechnical Report determined that the seismic settlement potential is estimated to be 2 inches or less; and differential seismic settlement is estimated as f- inch over a horizontal span of about 40 feet (GEO 2019). Lateral Spreading Lateral spreading is a type of liquefaction induced ground failure associated with the lateral displacement of surficial blocks of sediment resulting from liquefaction in a subsurface layer. Once liquefaction transforms the subsurface layer into a fluid mass, gravity plus the earthquake inertial forces may cause the mass to move downslope towards a free face (such as a river channel or an embankment). Lateral spreading may cause large horizontal displacements and such movement typically damages pipelines, utilities, bridges, and structures. As described previously the Project site contains relatively isolated loose to medium dense sand layers that are susceptible to liquefaction. However, based on the relatively flat topography of the site, lack of a free face nearby and general lack of potentially liquefiable layers in the upper 40 feet, the Geotechnical Report determined that the potential for lateral spreading on the site is low (GEO 2019). Subsidence Ground subsidence is the gradual settling or sinking of the ground surface with little or no horizontal movement, and occur in areas with subterranean oil, gas, or groundwater. Effects of subsidence include fissures, sinkholes, depressions, and disruption of surface drainage. However, as described in the General Plan Seismic Safety Element, the potential for area and focal ground subsidence due to earthquakes is relatively low in Santa Ana. In addition, the Project site is not located within or near a potential subsidence area, as shown on Exhibit 4, Potential Subsidence Areas, in the General Plan Seismic Safety Element. Landslides Landslides and other slope failures are secondary seismic effects that are common during or soon after earthquakes. Areas that are most susceptible to earthquake induced landslides are steep slopes underlain by loose, weak soils, and areas on or adjacent to existing landslide deposits. The Geotechnical Report describes that the existing elevations of the Project site range from approximately 57 to 65 feet above mean sea level (msl) and that the site is not located within a mapped area considered potentially susceptible to seismically induced slope instability (GEO 2019). In addition, the Project site is not adjacent to any hills or slopes that could be subject to a landslide. Expansive Soils Expansive soils are soils containing water -absorbing minerals that expand as they take in water. These soils can damage buildings due to the force they exert as they expand. Expansive soils contain certain types of clay minerals that shrink or swell as the moisture content changes; the shrinking or swelling can shift, crack, or break structures built on such soils. Arid or semiarid areas with seasonal changes of soil moisture experience a much higher frequency of problems from expansive soils than areas with higher rainfall and more constant soil moisture. The Project is in a semiarid region with marked seasonal changes in precipitation: most rain falls in winter, and there is a long dry season in summer and autumn. Therefore, the City's climate City of Santa Ana 5.5-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils is such that a relatively high incidence of soil expansion is expected where soils contain the requisite clay minerals. As described previously, the onsite soils consist of moist to wet, medium stiff to hard clays with variable sand content, as well as loose to medium dense, moist to wet clayey and silty sands (GEO 2019). Due to the clay content in the onsite soils, the site has the potential for expansion (GEO 2019). Paleontological Resources Paleontological resources include any fossilized remains, traces, or imprints of organisms, preserved in or on the earth's crust, that are of paleontological interest and that provide information about the history of life on earth, except that the term does not include any materials associated with an archaeological resource or any cultural item defined as Native American human remains. Significant paleontological resources are defined as fossils or assemblages of fossils that are unique, unusual, rare, uncommon, or important to define a particular time frame or geologic strata, or that add to an existing body of knowledge in specific areas, in local formations, or regionally. As described previously, the Project site is underlain by Quaternary aged young alluvial fan deposits and older artificial fill. Quaternary alluvial materials in Orange County are assigned a low paleontological resource sensitivity due to their relatively recent age (Eisentraut and Cooper 2002). Likewise, the Orange County General Plan Figure VI -9 shows that the Project site is not located within an area of paleontological sensitivity. 5.5.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: GEO-1 Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: GEO-1 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 4), GEO-1 ii Strong seismic ground shaking, GEO-1 iii Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction; GEO-1 iv Landslides; GEO-2 Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; GEO-3 Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse; GEO-4 Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property; GEO-5 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; or GEO-6 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. City of Santa Ana 5.5-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils 5.5.5 METHODOLOGY A Geotechnical Report was conducted for the Project site (GEC) 2019), which included field exploration, exploratory soil borings, obtaining representative soil samples, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and the review of pertinent geological literature. The laboratory testing determined the characteristics of the geology and soils that underlie the site. These subsurface conditions were then analyzed to identify potential significant impacts resulting from Project construction and operation in relation to geology and soils. In determining whether a geotechnical related impact would result from the proposed Project, the analysis includes consideration of state law, including the California Building Code that is integrated into the City's Municipal Code, and implemented/verified during Project permitting approvals. In general, existing state law, building codes, and municipal codes that are implemented by the approving agency provide for an adequate level of safety or reduction of potential effects such that projects developed and operated to code reduce potential of impacts. In determining whether a paleontological related impact would result from the proposed Project, the analysis includes consideration of the types of soils that exist on the Project site, the paleontological sensitivity of those soils, the past disturbance on the site, and the proposed excavation. The analysis combines these factors to identify the potential of Project construction to impact any unknown paleontological resources on the site. 5.5.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT GEO-1 is THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CAUSE POTENTIAL SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING THE RISK OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING RUPTURE OF A KNOWN EARTHQUAKE FAULT, AS DELINEATED ON THE MOST RECENT ALQUIST-PRIOLO EARTHQUAKE FAULT ZONING MAP ISSUED BY THE STATE GEOLOGIST FOR THE ARE OF BASED ON OTHER SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF A KNOWN EARTHQUAKE FAULT. No Impact. As described previously, the Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no active faults are known to cross the site. The closest known active faults are associated with the San Joaquin Hills Fault, located approximately 1.5 miles from the site; the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone, approximately 8.4 miles southwest of the site; and the Elsinore Fault Zone, approximately 13.2 miles northeast of the site (GEC) 2019). Because no known faults exist on the site, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects from rupture of a known earthquake fault that is delineated on an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map or other evidence of a fault, and impacts would not occur IMPACT GEO-1 ii: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CAUSE POTENTIAL SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING THE RISK OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING STRONG SEISMIC GROUND SHAKING. Less than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would add residents, employees, and development within the Project site. The Project site is within a seismically active region, with numerous faults capable of producing significant ground motions. The closest known active faults are associated with the San Joaquin Hills Fault, located approximately 1.5 miles from the site; the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone, approximately 8.4 miles southwest of the site; and the Elsinore Fault Zone, approximately 13.2 miles northeast of the site (GEC) 2019). Therefore, Project implementation could subject people and structures to hazards from ground City of Santa Ana 5.5-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils shaking. However, seismic shaking is a risk throughout southern California, and the Project site is not at greater risk of seismic activity or impacts as compared to other areas within the region. The CBC includes provisions to reduce impacts caused by major structural failures or loss of life resulting from earthquakes or other geologic hazards. For example, Chapter 16 of the CBC contains requirements for design and construction of structures to resist loads, including earthquake loads. The CBC provides procedures for earthquake resistant structural design that include considerations for onsite soil conditions, occupancy, and the configuration of the structure including the structural system and height. As described previously, the City of Santa Ana has adopted the CBC as part of the Municipal Code Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1, which regulates all building and construction projects within the City and implements a minimum standard for building design and construction that includes specific requirements for seismic safety, excavation, foundations, retaining walls and site demolition. Structures built in the City are required to be built in compliance with the CBC. The Project would be required to adhere to the provisions of the CBC as part of the building plan check and development review process. Compliance with the requirements of the CBC for structural safety would reduce hazards from strong seismic ground shaking. Because the proposed Project would be required to be constructed in compliance with the CBC and the City's Municipal Code, which would be verified through the City's plan check and permitting process and is included as PPP GEO-1, the proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to strong seismic ground shaking. IMPACT GEO-1 iii: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CAUSE POTENTIAL SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING THE RISK OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING SEISMIC -RELATED GROUND FAILURE, INCLUDING LIQUEFACTION. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the Project site is located within a liquefaction hazard area. In addition, the Geotechnical Report identified that onsite soils include relatively isolated loose to medium dense sand layers, generally located approximately 40 to 50 feet below existing grade that are considered susceptible to liquefaction. In addition, the depth of groundwater is in the range of 24 to 33 feet below ground surface (bgs), but the historic high groundwater is approximately 10 feet below the existing grade (GEC) 2019). Based on these onsite soils and groundwater conditions, the Geotechnical Report determined that the seismic settlement potential is estimated to be 2 inches or less; and differential seismic settlement is estimated as f- inch over a horizontal span of about 40 feet (GEC) 2019). However, as described previously, structures built in the City are required to be built in compliance with the CBC, as included in the City's Municipal Code as Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1 (and in the EIR as PPP GEO-1), which regulates all building and construction projects within the City and implements a minimum standard for building design and construction that includes specific requirements for seismic safety, excavation, foundations, retaining walls and site demolition. The Geotechnical Report (Geo 2019) prepared for the Project site provides CBC seismic design criteria that are specific to the onsite soils and the potential liquefaction and settlement. Compliance with the CBC, as included as PPP GEO-1, would require proper construction of building footings and foundations so that it would withstand the effects of potential ground movement, including liquefaction and settlement. In addition, as described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the soils onsite would be excavated to a minimum of 5 feet below the bottom of the building foundations and 5 feet beyond the building perimeters, reconditioned, and recompacted as engineered fill to support the proposed structures. The compaction of fill would be in compliance with the CBC regulations, as required by PPP GEO-1. The CBC, as currently adopted in the City's Municipal Code Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1, includes provisions to reduce impacts caused by potential major structural failures or loss of life resulting from City of Santa Ana 5.5-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils geologic hazards. For example, the CBC requires that a California Certified Engineering Geologist or California -licensed civil engineer provide site-specific engineering data to demonstrate the satisfactory performance of proposed structures. The City requires the Project specific engineering design recommendations be incorporated into grading plans and building specifications as a condition of construction permit approval. Therefore, the development of the proposed Project would be required to conform to the seismic design parameters of the CBC, as included as PPP GEO-1, which are reviewed by the City for appropriate inclusion as part of the building plan check and development review process. Compliance with the requirements of the CBC and City's municipal code for structural safety (included as PPP GEO-1) would reduce hazards from seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction and settlement to a less than significant level. IMPACT GEO-1 iv: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CAUSE POTENTIAL SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, INCLUDING THE RISK OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING LANDSLIDES. No Impact. The proposed Project site is located in a seismically active region subject to strong ground shaking. However, as described previously, the Geotechnical Report describes that the existing elevations of the Project site range from approximately 57 to 65 feet msl and that the site is not located within a mapped area considered potentially susceptible to seismically induced slope instability (GEO 2019). In addition, the Project site is not adjacent to any hills or slopes that could be subject to a landslide. Thus, the Project site is not located within or adjacent to an earthquake -induced landslide area, and the Project would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects involving landslides, and impacts related to landslides would not occur. IMPACT GEO-2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL SOIL EROSION OR THE LOSS OF TOPSOIL. Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the Project has the potential to contribute to soil erosion and the loss of topsoil. Grading and excavation activities that would be required for the proposed Project would expose and loosen topsoil, which could be eroded by wind or water. The City's Municipal Code Chapter 18-156, Control of Urban Runoff implements the requirements of the Orange County Municipal NDPES Storm Water Permit (Order No. R8-2016-0001). All projects in the City are required to conform to the permit requirements, which includes installation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) in compliance with the NPDES permit, which establishes minimum stormwater management requirements and controls that are required to be implemented for the proposed Project. To reduce the potential for soil erosion and the loss of topsoil, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations to be developed by a QSD (Qualified SWPPP Developer). The SWPPP is required to address site-specific conditions related to specific grading and construction activities. The SWPPP is required to identify potential sources of erosion and sedimentation loss of topsoil during construction, identify erosion control BMPs to reduce or eliminate the erosion and loss of topsoil, such as use of silt fencing, fiber rolls, or gravel bags, stabilized construction entrance/exit, hydroseeding. With compliance with the City's Municipal Code, RWQCB requirements, and the BMPs in the SWPPP that is required to be prepared to implement the Project, construction impacts related to erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant. In addition, the proposed Project includes installation of landscaping, such that during operation of the Project substantial areas of loose topsoil that could erode would not exist. In addition, as described in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, the onsite drainage features that would be installed by the Project have been designed to slow, filter, and slowly discharge stormwater into the offsite drainage system, which would also reduce the potential for stormwater to erode topsoil during Project operations. Furthermore, implementation City of Santa Ana 5.5-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils of the Project requires City approval of a site specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), which would ensure that the City's Municipal Code, RWQCB requirements, and appropriate operational BMPs would be implemented to minimize or eliminate the potential for soil erosion or loss of topsoil to occur. As a result, potential impacts related to substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than significant. IMPACT GEO-3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT BE LOCATED ON A GEOLOGIC UNIT OR SOIL THAT IS UNSTABLE, OR THAT WOULD BECOME UNSTABLE AS A RESULT OF THE PROJECT, AND POTENTIALLY RESULT IN ON- OR OFF-SITE LANDSLIDE, LATERAL SPREADING, SUBSIDENCE, LIQUEFACTION OR COLLAPSE. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the elevation of the site ranges from approximately 57 to 65 feet msl and the site is not located on or adjacent to a hillside or slope. Based on the relatively flat topography of the site, lack of a free face nearby and general lack of potentially liquefiable layers in the upper 40 feet, the Geotechnical Report determined that the potential for lateral spreading on the site is low (GEC) 2019). Thus, impacts related to lateral spreading would be less than significant. Also, as described previously, impacts related to landslides would not occur. However, the Geotechnical Report identified that seismic inducted settlement onsite could be 2 inches or less; and differential seismic settlement is estimated as 1 -inch over a horizontal span of about 40 feet (GEC) 2019). As described in the previous response, the Geotechnical Report prepared for the Project site provides CBC seismic structural design criteria that are specific to the onsite soils, including the soils settlement and minor ground subsidence conditions that could occur. The Project includes excavation and recompaction of soils, and development of foundation systems in compliance with the CBC, as included as PPP GEO-1, which would require proper construction of building foundations to reduce impacts related to settlement and subsidence would not occur onsite. The CBC, as currently adopted in the City's Municipal Code Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1, requires that a California Certified Engineering Geologist or California -licensed civil engineer provide site-specific engineering data for the proposed structures, which are reviewed by the City for appropriate inclusion as part of the building plan check and development review process. Compliance with the requirements of the CBC and City's municipal code for structural safety through implementation of as included as PPP GEO-1 would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. IMPACT GEO-4: THE PROJECT WOULD BE LOCATED ON EXPANSIVE SOIL, AS DEFINED IN TABLE 18-1-B OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (1994) BUT WOULD NOT CREATE SUBSTANTIAL RISKS TO LIFE OR PROPERTY. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the Project site contains medium stiff to hard clays with variable sand content, as well as loose to medium dense, moist to wet clayey and silty sands (GEC) 2019). Due to the clay content in the onsite soils, the site has the potential for expansion (GEC) 2019). However, as described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the soils onsite would be excavated to a minimum of 5 feet below the bottom of the building foundations and 5 feet beyond the building perimeters, reconditioned, and recompacted as engineered fill to support the proposed building structures. As part of reconditioning the compacted engineered fill, the soils would be moisture conditioned, as required by the CBC for expansive soils (GEC) 2019). In addition, the Geotechnical Report includes soil moisture conditioning recommendations. Furthermore, prior to approval of construction, an engineering level design geotechnical report is required to be prepared and submitted to the City that details the project designs that have been included to address potential geotechnical and soil conditions pursuant to the CBC requirements, that are included in the City's Municipal Code Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1, and implemented by PPP GEO-1. Compliance with the CBC, City of Santa Ana 5.5-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils through design level geotechnical specifications that would be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, per PPP GEO-1 would ensure that potential impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant. IMPACT GEO-5: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN SOILS INCAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SUPPORTING THE USE OF SEPTIC TANKS OR ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEMS WHERE SEWERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR DISPOSAL OF WASTEWATER. No Impact. The Project site is currently connected to the City's sewer system, and the proposed Project would install onsite sewer lines that would connect to the existing sewer lines adjacent to the site. The Project would not use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. As a result, impacts related to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would not occur from implementation of the proposed Project. IMPACT GEO-6: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY DESTROY A UNIQUE PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE OR SITE OR UNIQUE GEOLOGIC FEATURE. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the Project site is underlain by Quaternary aged young alluvial fan deposits and older artificial fill. Quaternary alluvial materials in Orange County are assigned a low paleontological resource sensitivity due to their relatively recent age (Eisentraut and Cooper 2002). Likewise, the Orange County General Plan Figure VI -9 shows that the Project site is not located within an area of paleontological sensitivity. In addition, the Project site has been previously disturbed from agricultural and development activity (GEO 2019). As detailed previously, artificial fill was observed in the field explorations up to 7.5 feet below existing grade and previous excavation and recompaction ranged from 5 feet to 13 feet for development of the existing buildings. The extensive previous excavation, recompaction, and fill soils onsite have further reduced the potential of the site to contain paleontological resources. Because the Project site is within an area of low paleontological resource sensitivity, has been previously disturbed, and the depth of Project excavated is within the previously disturbed soil depths, potential impacts related to paleontological resources would be less than significant. 5.5.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The potential cumulative exposure of people or structures to unstable geologic units and/or expansive soils that have the potential to result in on- or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, movement, or collapse tend to be region wide in nature, even though each site-specific development has unique geologic considerations. Site-specific development projects within Santa Ana and adjacent areas within the City of Tustin are subject to uniform site -development policies and construction standards imposed by the Cities that are based on the state requirements in the CBC and site-specific geotechnical studies prepared to define site-specific conditions that might pose a risk to safety, such as those described previously for the proposed Project. While increases in the number of people and structures subject to unstable geologic units and soils would increase in the Project area with cumulative development, given the application of CBC requirements by the City through the construction permitting process, the cumulative effects of development related to unstable geologic units and/or expansive soils; including landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, movement, or collapse would be less than significant. Paleontological Resources: The Project site is within an area of low paleontological sensitivity and has been previously disturbed. The proposed Project would not result in impacts to paleontological resources that could cumulatively combine with impacts other projects. Therefore, impacts would be less than cumulatively significant. City of Santa Ana 5.5-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.5 Geology and Soils 5.5.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES PPP GEO-1: CBC Compliance. The Project is required to comply with the California Building Standards Code (CBC) as included in the City's Municipal Code as Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1, to preclude significant adverse effects associated with seismic and soils hazards. As part of CBC compliance, CBC related and geologist and/or civil engineer specifications for the proposed Project shall be incorporated into grading plans and building specifications as a condition of construction permit approval. 5.5.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Upon implementation of regulatory requirements Impacts GEO-1 through GEO-6 would be less than significant. 5.5.10 MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.5.1 1 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION Compliance with existing regulatory programs would reduce potential impacts associated with potential geotechnical hazards and unique paleontological resource impacts to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to geology and soils and paleontological resources would occur. REFERENCES City of Santa Ana General Plan Public Safety Element. Accessed: https://www.santa-ana.org/general- plan/current-general-plan Eisentraut, P. and J. Cooper 2002. (Eisentraut and Cooper 2002). Development of a Model Curation Program for Orange County's Archaeological and Paleontological Collections. Prepared by California State University, Fullerton and submitted to the County of Orange Public Facilities and Resources Department/Harbors, Parks and Beaches (PFRD/HPB). Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report). Prepared by LGC Geotechnical. 2019 (GEO 2019). Orange County General Plan Figure VI -9, General Areas of Paleontological Sensitivity. Accessed: https://www.ocgov.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=8621 State Water Resources Control Board Construction Storm Water Program. Accessed: http://www.waterboa rds.ca.gov/water issues/prog rams/stormwater/construction.shtm I City of Santa Ana 5.5-12 Draft EIR January 2020 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5.6.1 INTRODUCTION This section evaluates the potential for implementation of the proposed Project to cumulatively contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts. Because no single project is large enough to result in a measurable increase in global concentrations of GHG emissions, impacts of the proposed Project are considered on a cumulative basis. This evaluation is based on the methodology recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). This section also addresses the Project's consistency with applicable plans, policies, and public agency regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. The analysis within this section is based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared for the proposed Project by Urban Crossroads (GHG 2019), included as Appendix E. 5.6.2 REGULATORY SETTING National Climate Action Plan In June 2013, President Obama enacted a national Climate Action Plan (CAP) that consisted of a wide variety of executive actions and had three pillars discussed below. • Cut Carbon in America: The CAP consists of actions to help cut carbon by deploying clean energy such as cutting carbon from power plants, promoting renewable energy, and unlocking long-term investment in clean energy innovation. • Prepare the United States for Impacts of Climate Change: The CAP consists of actions to help prepare for the impacts of climate change through building stronger and safer communities and infrastructure by supporting climate resilient investments and supporting communities as they prepare for impacts, and boosting resilience of building and infrastructure; protecting the economy and natural resources by identifying vulnerabilities, promoting insurance leadership, conserving land and water resources, managing drought, reducing wildfire risks, and preparing for future floods; and using sound science to manage climate impacts. • Lead International Efforts: The CAP consists of actions to help the United States lead international efforts through working with other countries to take action by enhancing multilateral engagements with major economies, expanding bilateral cooperation among major emerging economies, combating short-lived climate pollutants, reducing deforestation and degradation, expanding clean energy use and cutting energy waste, promoting global free trade in environmental goods and services, phasing out subsidies that encourage wasteful use of fossil fuels, and by leading efforts to address climate change through international negotiations. California Assembly Bill 1493 — Pavley In 2002, the California legislature adopted regulations to reduce GHG emissions in the transportation sector. In September 2004, pursuant to AB 1493, the CARB approved regulations to reduce GHG emissions from new motor vehicles beginning with the 2009 model year. In September 2009, CARB adopted amendments to the Pavley regulations to reduce GHG from 2009 to 2016. CARB, EPA, and the U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) have coordinated efforts to develop fuel economy and GHG standards for model 2017-2025 vehicles. The GHG standards are incorporated into the "Low Emission Vehicle" (LEV) Regulations. City of Santa Ana 5.6-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions California Executive Order S-3-05 — Statewide Emission Reduction Targets Executive Order S-3-05 was established by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in June 2005. Executive Order S-3-05 establishes statewide emission reduction targets through the year 2050: • By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels; • By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and • By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. California Assembly Bill 32 - Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 In furtherance of the goals established in Executive Order S-3-05, the legislature enacted AB 32 to mandate the quantification and reduction of GHGs to 1990 levels by the year 2020. The law establishes periodic targets for reductions and requires certain facilities to report emissions of GHGs annually. The legislation authorizes CARB to reduce emissions from certain sectors that contribute the most to statewide emissions of GHGs. Under AB 32, CARB must adopt regulations requiring the reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. This program will be used to monitor and enforce compliance with the established standards. CARB is also required to adopt rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost- effective GHG emission reductions. AB 32 allows CARB to adopt market-based compliance mechanisms to meet the specified requirements. Also, CARB is ultimately responsible for monitoring compliance and enforcing any rule, regulation, order, emission limitation, emission reduction measure, or market-based compliance mechanism adopted. The first action under AB 32 resulted in the adoption of a report listing early action GHG emission reduction measures on June 21, 2007. The early actions include three specific GHG control rules. On October 25, 2007, CARB approved an additional six early action GHG reduction measures under AB 32. The three - original early -action regulations meeting the narrow legal definition of "discrete early action GHG reduction measures" include: • A low -carbon fuel standard to reduce the "carbon intensity" of California fuels. • Reduction of refrigerant losses from motor vehicle air conditioning system maintenance to restrict the sale of "do-it-yourself" automotive refrigerants. • Increased methane capture from landfills to require broader use of state-of-the-art methane capture technologies. The additional six early -action regulations, which were also considered "discrete early action GHG reduction measures," consist of: • Reduction of aerodynamic drag, and thereby fuel consumption, from existing trucks and trailers through retrofit technology. • Reduction of auxiliary engine emissions of docked ships by requiring port electrification. • Reduction of PFCs from the semiconductor industry. • Reduction of propellants in consumer products (e.g., aerosols, tire inflators, and dust removal products). • Requirements that all tune-up, smog check, and oil change mechanics ensure proper tire inflation as part of overall service in order to maintain fuel efficiency. City of Santa Ana 5.6-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Restriction on the use of SF6 from non -electricity sectors if viable alternatives are available. As required under AB 32, on December 6, 2007, CARB approved the 1990 GHG emissions inventory, thereby establishing the emissions limit for 2020. The 2020 emissions limit was set at 427 MTCO2E. In addition to the 1990 emissions inventory, CARB also adopted regulations requiring mandatory reporting of GHGs for large facilities that account for 94 percent of GHG emissions from industrial and commercial stationary sources in California. About 800 separate sources fall under the new reporting rules and include electricity generating facilities, electricity retail providers and power marketers, oil refineries, hydrogen plants, cement plants, cogeneration facilities, and other industrial sources that emit CO2 in excess of specified thresholds. On December 11, 2008, CARB approved the Climate Change Proposed Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change (Scoping Plan; CARB 2008) to achieve the goals of AB 32. The Scoping Plan establishes an overall framework for the measures that will be adopted to reduce California's GHG emissions. The Scoping Plan evaluates opportunities for sector -specific reductions, integrates all CARB and Climate Action Team early actions and additional GHG reduction measures by both entities, identifies additional measures to be pursued as regulations, and outlines the role of a cap -and -trade program. The key elements of the Scoping Plan include: • Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards. • Achieving a statewide renewables energy mix of 33 percent. • Developing a California cap -and -trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system and caps sources contributing 85 percent of California's GHG emissions. • Establishing targets for transportation -related GHG emissions for regions throughout California, and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets. • Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing state laws and policies, including California's clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). • Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high GWP gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State of California's long-term commitment to AB 32 implementation. The AB 32 Scoping Plan also anticipates that local government actions will result in reduced GHG emissions because local governments have the primary authority to plan, zone, approve, and permit development to accommodate population growth and the changing needs of their jurisdictions. The Scoping Plan also relies on the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 375 (discussed below) to align local land use and transportation planning for achieving GHG reductions. The Scoping Plan must be updated every five years to evaluate AB 32 policies and ensure that California is on track to achieve the 2020 GHG reduction goal. In 2014, CARB released the First Update to the Scoping Plan, which builds upon the Initial Scoping Plan with new strategies and recommendations. The First Update identifies opportunities to leverage existing and new funds to further drive GHG emission reductions through strategic planning and targeted low carbon investments. This update defines CARB's climate change priorities for the next five years and sets the groundwork to reach long-term goals set forth in Executive Order 5-3- 05. The update highlights California's progress toward meeting the "near-term" 2020 GHG emission reduction goals in the original 2008 Scoping Plan. It also evaluates how to align the state's "longer-term" City of Santa Ana 5.6-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG reduction strategies with other state policy priorities for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use. On January 20, 2017, CARB released the proposed Second Update to the Scoping Plan, which identifies the State's post -2020 reduction strategy. The Second Update would reflect the 2030 target of a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Key programs that the proposed Second Update builds upon include the Cap -and -Trade Regulation, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and much cleaner cars, trucks and freight movement, utilizing cleaner, renewable energy, and strategies to reduce methane emissions from agricultural and other wastes. The proposed Second Update is undergoing a review period and has not yet been adopted. Senate Bill 375 In August 2008, the legislature passed, and on September 30, 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed, SB 375 (Steinberg), which addresses GHG emissions associated with the transportation sector through regional transportation and sustainability plans. Regional GHG reduction targets for the automobile and light -truck sector for 2020 and 2035, as determined by CARB, are required to consider the emission reductions associated with vehicle emission standards (see SB 1493), the composition of fuels (see Executive Order S- 1-07), and other CARB-approved measures to reduce GHG emissions. Regional metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) will be responsible for preparing a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) within their Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The goal of the SCS is to establish a development plan for the region, which, after considering transportation measures and policies, will achieve, if feasible, the GHG reduction targets. If an SCS is unable to achieve the GHG reduction target, an MPO must prepare an Alternative Planning Strategy demonstrating how the GHG reduction target would be achieved through alternative development patterns, infrastructure, or additional transportation measures or policies. SB 375 provides incentives for streamlining CEQA requirements by substantially reducing the requirements for "transit priority projects," as specified in SB 375, and eliminating the analysis of the impacts of certain residential projects on global warming and the growth -inducing impacts of those projects when the projects are consistent with the SCS or Alternative Planning Strategy. On September 23, 2010, CARB adopted the SB 375 targets for the regional MPOs. Executive Order B-30-15 — 2030 Statewide Emission Reduction Target Executive Order B-30-15 was signed by Governor Jerry Brown on April 29, 2015, establishing an interim statewide GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, which is necessary to guide regulatory policy and investments in California in the midterm, and put California on the most cost-effective path for long-term emission reductions. Under this Executive Order, all state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions are required to continue to develop and implement emissions reduction programs to reach the state's 2050 target and attain a level of emissions necessary to avoid dangerous climate change. According to the Governor's Office, this Executive Order is in line with the scientifically established levels needed in the United States to limit global warming below 2°C - the warming threshold at which scientists say there will likely be major climate disruptions such as super droughts and rising sea levels. Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards and California Green Building Standards The 2019 California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6 becomes effective on January 1, 2020. The new standards focus on four key areas: smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and nonresidential lighting requirements. The ventilation measures improve indoor air quality, protecting homeowners from air pollution originating from outdoor and indoor sources. CEC indicates that these Title 24 standards will reduce energy consumption by 7 percent for City of Santa Ana 5.6-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions residential buildings and 30 percent for nonresidential buildings compared to the 2016 Title 24 requirements (CEC 2019). City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The City of Santa Ana General Plan Conservation Element and Energy Element include goals, policies, and objectives that support the reduction of GHGs. The existing General Plan goals, policies, and objectives relevant to the proposed Project include: Conservation Element Objective 1.1: Reduce air pollution emissions to achieve national ambient air quality standards. Policies: • Support local and regional land use and transportation plans that increase mass transit usage and reduce vehicle trips. • Encourage water conservation through design and facilities features of new developments through the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed -scale retrofits, etc. where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible. Energy Element • Encourage higher densities of housing and office (mixed use) development to relate to areas of higher transportation access and capacity. • Require and/or provide incentives for energy-efficient subdivision and site planning and building design. • Establish, update and/or enforce energy performance requirements in the building code. City of Santa Ana Climate Action Plan The City of Santa Ana adopted a CAP in December 2015 with the goal of reducing carbon emissions and energy use for the community. The CAP includes GHG emissions targets that are consistent with the reduction targets of the State of California and presents a number of strategies for the City to meet the targets. These reduction measures address emissions in five sectors: transportation and land use, energy, solid waste, water, and wastewater. The CAP measures that are relevant to the proposed Project include the following: Transportation and Land Use Measures • Development of Local Retail Service Nodes. Development that provides a mix of housing, commercial space, services, and job opportunities close to public transportation reduces dependency on cars and time spent in traffic and more closely links residents to jobs and services. • Local Residential Nodes near Retail and Employment. Locate new residential development within retail and employment corridors to create a more optimal mix of land uses, which will be conducive to the increase use of transit. • Local Residential Nodes near Residential and Retail Areas. Develop higher levels of mixed-use development, including employment, retail, and housing, to lower vehicle miles traveled (VMT) compared with areas where only one of these uses predominates. • End -of -Trip Facilities in New Projects. End -of -trip facilities can include bike lockers, showers, and changing rooms, which can be used by cyclists and encourage cycling use. City of Santa Ana 5.6-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Design Guidelines for External Bike/Pedestrian/Transit Connectivity. The City plans to create guidelines that will mandate minimum levels of connectivity between various locations and the external transportation network. • Community -wide Bike Sharing Stations. Development of bike -sharing stations at several locations throughout the City, including the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center, major bus stop locations, City Hall, etc. These bicycles will help to extend trips possible through transit or directly substitute automobile trips. Community Measures • Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Financing for Commercial and Residential Properties. PACE financing is available for energy and water saving measures as well as renewable energy generation. Energy efficiency projects financed through the program include air conditioning and heating systems, lighting upgrades, cool roofing materials, and solar installations. • Southern California Edison (SCE) Small and Medium Business Direct Install. Energy efficiency contractors help small business identify ways to save electricity. • Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards. Minimum energy efficiency for new construction in California effective January 1, 2020. Solid Waste, Water, and Wastewater Measures • AB 341. Adopted by the state in 201 1 and requires businesses that generate 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week and multi -family residential dwellings of five units or more to recycle. • Rainwater Harvesting. Collecting and re -using rainwater can minimize the amount of water flowing into storm drains, sewer systems, and local waterways and can reduce potable water consumption and electricity consumption from distribution. The CAP describes that many of the commercial and employment corridors throughout the City have limited or no residential development. The CAP strategy envisions that the City would locate new residential development within these retail and employment corridors to create a more optimal mix of land uses. This mix of land uses could potentially divert some work, shopping, and eating trips from automobile use to bicycle and pedestrian travel; and it would result in reducing vehicle miles traveled. This higher level of mixed-use is also more conducive to the increased use of transit. Additionally, the CAP describes that the City will encourage new residential projects to locate within these commercial and employment corridors. The CAP also describes development of bike sharing stations at several locations throughout the City including the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center, major bus stop locations, City Hall, and other locations. These easily accessible bicycles can extend the trips possible through transit, or directly substitute for automobile trips on their own. 5.6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are called GHGs. The major concern with GHGs is that increases in their concentrations are causing global climate change. Global climate change is a change in the average weather on Earth that can be measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. Although there is disagreement as to the rate of global climate change and the extent of the impacts attributable to human activities, most in the scientific community agree that there is a direct link between increased emissions of GHGs and long-term global temperature increases. City of Santa Ana 5.6-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions The principal GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Because different GHGs have different warming potential, and CO2 is the most common reference gas for climate change, GHG emissions are often quantified and reported as CO2 equivalents (CO2e). For example, SF6 is a GHG commonly used in the utility industry as an insulating gas in circuit breakers and other electronic equipment. SF6, while comprising a small fraction of the total GHGs emitted annually world-wide, is a much more potent GHG, with 22,800 times the global warming potential as CO2. Therefore, an emission of one metric ton (MT) of SF6 could be reported as an emission of 22,800 MT of CO2e. Large emission sources are reported in million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e. The principal GHGs are described below, along with their global warming potential. Carbon dioxide: Carbon dioxide (CO2) is an odorless, colorless, natural GHG. Carbon dioxide's global warming potential is 1. Natural sources include decomposition of dead organic matter; respiration of bacteria, plants, animals, and fungus; evaporation from oceans; and volcanic outgassing. Anthropogenic (manmade) sources are from burning coal, oil, natural gas, and wood. Methane: Methane (CH4) is a flammable gas and is the main component of natural gas. It has a lifetime of 12 years, and its global warming potential is 28. Methane is extracted from geological deposits (natural gas fields). Other sources are landfills, fermentation of manure, and decay of organic matter. Nitrous oxide: Nitrous oxide (N2O) (laughing gas) is a colorless GHG that has a lifetime of 121 years, and its global warming potential is 265. Sources include microbial processes in soil and water, fuel combustion, and industrial processes. Sulfur hexafluoride: Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, and nontoxic, nonflammable gas that has a lifetime of 3,200 years and a high global warming potential of 23,500. This gas is manmade and used for insulation in electric power transmission equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas. Perfluorocarbons: Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) have stable molecular structures and only break down by ultraviolet rays about 60 kilometers above Earth's surface. Because of this, they have long lifetimes, between 10,000 and 50,000 years. Their global warming potential ranges from 7,000 to 11,000. Two main sources of perfluorocarbons are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing. Hydrofluorocarbons: Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are a group of GHGs containing carbon, chlorine, and at least one hydrogen atom. Their global warming potential ranges from 100 to 12,000. Hydrofluorocarbons are synthetic manmade chemicals used as a substitute for chlorofluorocarbons in applications such as automobile air conditioners and refrigerants. Some of the potential effects in California of global warming may include loss in snow pack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more forest fires, and more drought years (CARB, 2009). Globally, climate change has the potential to impact numerous environmental resources through potential, though uncertain, impacts related to future air temperatures and precipitation patterns. The projected effects of global warming on weather and climate are likely to vary regionally, but are expected to include the following direct effects: • Higher maximum temperatures and more hot days over nearly all land areas; • Higher minimum temperatures, fewer cold days and frost days over nearly all land areas; • Reduced diurnal temperature range over most land areas; • Increase of heat index over land areas; and • More intense precipitation events. Also, there are many secondary effects that are projected to result from global warming, including global rise in sea level, impacts to agriculture, changes in disease vectors, and changes in habitat and biodiversity. City of Santa Ana 5.6-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions While the possible outcomes and the feedback mechanisms involved are not fully understood and much research remains to be done, the potential for substantial environmental, social, and economic consequences over the long term may be great. GHGs are produced by both direct and indirect emissions sources. Direct emissions include consumption of natural gas, heating and cooling of buildings, landscaping activities and other equipment used directly by land uses. Indirect emissions include the consumption of fossil fuels for vehicle trips, electricity generation, water usage, and solid waste disposal. Existing California GHG Conditions California has significantly slowed the rate of growth of GHG emissions due to the implementation of energy efficiency programs as well as adoption of strict emission controls; but is still a substantial contributor to the U.S. emissions inventory total. The California Air Resource Board (CARB) compiles GHG inventories for the State of California. Based upon the 2018 GHG inventory data (i.e., the latest year for which data are available) for the 2000-2016 GHG emissions period, California emitted an average 429.4 million metric tons of CO2e (MMTCO2e) per year. Existing Project Site Conditions The Project site is developed with three partially utilized industrial buildings that total approximately 212,121 square feet. The sources of GHG emissions related to existing uses onsite include natural gas used for heating and hot water, electricity usage, vehicle trips, use of landscaping equipment, use of consumer cleaning products, water demand, wastewater generation, and solid waste generation. The estimated GHG emissions from the existing development on the Project site are summarized on Table 5.6-1. Table 5.6-1: Existing Project Site Generated Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emission Source CO2 Existing Emissions (MT/yr) CHa N20 Total CO2E Area Source 0.01 1.00e-05 0.00 0.01 Energy Source 1,048.99 0.04 9.97e-03 1,052.99 Mobile Source (Passenger Cars) 656.00 0.02 0.00 656.45 Mobile Source (Trucks) 6,394.52 0.51 0.00 6,407.34 Waste 53.39 3.16 0.00 132.28 Water Usage 219.07 1.61 0.04 271.01 Total Existing CO2E (All Sources) 8,520.07 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 5.6.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: GHG-1 Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or GHG-2 Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. The City of Santa Ana has not adopted a numeric threshold of significance for GHG emissions. However, the City's CAP has a 1990 emissions target that is based on 2020 projected employment and population, efficiency thresholds. As detailed previously, the CAP's GHG emissions targets are consistent with the City of Santa Ana 5.6-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions reduction targets of the State of California and includes strategies for the City to meet the recommended targets. Projects that demonstrate consistency with the strategies, actions, and emission reduction targets contained in the CAP would have a less than significant impact related to conflict with the CAP. The SCAQMD formed a working group to identify GHG emissions thresholds for land use projects that could be used by local lead agencies in the air basin in 2008. The working group developed several different options that are contained in the SCAQMD Draft Guidance Document — Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas Significance Threshold, that could be applied by lead agencies, which includes the following tiered approach: • Tier 1 consists of evaluating whether or not the project qualifies for any applicable exemption under CEQA. • Tier 2 consists of determining whether the project is consistent with a GHG reduction plan. If a project is consistent with a qualifying local GHG reduction plan, it does not have significant GHG emissions. • Tier 3 consists of screening values. A project's construction emissions are averaged over 30 years and are added to the project's operational emissions. If a project's emissions are below one of the following screening thresholds, then the project is less than significant: o All land use types: 3,000 MTCO2E per year o Based on land use type: ■ Residential: 3,500 MTCO2E per year ■ Commercial: 1,400 MTCO2E per year ■ Mixed use: 3,000 MTCO2E per year • Tier 4 has the following options: o Option 1: Reduce business as usual emissions by a certain percentage; this percentage is currently undefined. o Option 2: Early implementation of applicable AB 32 Scoping Plan measures. o Option 3: A project -level efficiency target of 4.8 MTCO2e per service population as a 2020 target and 3.0 MTCO2e per service population as a 2035 target. The recommended plan - level target for 2020 is 6.6 MTCO2e and the plan level target for 2035 is 4.1 MTCO2e. Based on the information above, the following two-tiered approach is utilized to evaluate GHG emissions, herein: • The SCAQMD's Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e is utilized. Based on guidance from the SCAQMD, if a non -industrial project would emit more than 3,000 MTCO2e per year of GHGs emissions, the project could result in significant impacts and additional analysis is conducted based upon SCAQMD's Tier 4 thresholds. • The SCAQMD's Tier 4 Option 3 thresholds are based on the statewide 1990 emissions target and 2020 projected statewide employment and population in the land use sector and are not specific to any given City. However, the City of Santa Ana CAP has emissions targets that are based on employment and population ratios. This information provides efficiency thresholds that are specific to the City's emissions, population, and employment projections. Thus, for the purpose of this analysis, an efficiency threshold was derived from emissions data included in the City's CAP to assess whether the proposed Project's GHG emissions would result in a significant impact. The efficiency threshold City of Santa Ana 5.6-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions for the opening year of 2022 is 3.16 MTCO2e per service population and an efficiency threshold for 2030 is 2.05 MTCO2e per service population. 5.6.1 METHODOLOGY The California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) v2016.3.2 is the most recent version and has been used to determine construction and operational GHG emissions from the proposed Project. The purpose of this model is to calculate construction -source and operational -source GHG emissions from direct and indirect sources; and quantify applicable air quality and GHG reductions achieved from mitigation measures, if applied. Construction emissions are quantified and per SCAQMD methodology, the total GHG emissions for construction activities are divided by 30 -years, and then added to the annual operational phase of GHG emissions. The state has established GHG emissions reduction targets for specific milestone years (i.e., 1990 emission levels by 2020; 40 percent below 1990 emission levels by 2030; and 80 percent below 1990 emission levels by 2050). Because the City has an adopted CAP that is based on these targets and the Project's opening year is 2022, the City's mass emissions target for 2022 was calculated by interpolating the CAP's 2020 emissions target. Then population and employment data was used to identify the service population (sum of population and employment). From the emissions targets and the service population data, the efficiency metrics were calculated, which identified the efficiency -based target (threshold) of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. 5.6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT GHG-1: THE PROJECT WOULD GENERATE GHG EMISSIONS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, THAT MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Significant and Unavoidable. Construction As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, construction of the proposed Project is anticipated to occur in four phases that would last approximately 27 -months. The construction -related activities involve the following: demolition, site preparation, grading, paving, construction of structures and infrastructure, and architectural coatings. These construction activities would result in the emission of GHGs from equipment exhaust, construction -related vehicular activity and construction worker automobile trips. Total estimated construction related GHG emissions from construction of the proposed Project were amortized over 30 years per SCAQMD methodology, and as shown on Table 5.6-2 would equal approximately 196.38 MTCO2e per year. Table 5.6-2: Summary of Amortized Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Year CO2 Emissions (MT/yr) CHa N20 Total CO2E 2020 944.05 0.14 0.00 947.46 2021 3,280.19 0.26 0.00 3,286.65 2022 1,654.18 0.13 0.00 1,657.36 Total Annual Emissions 1 5,878.42 0.52 0.00 5,891.47 30 Year Amortized Emissions (MTCO2e) 195.95 0.02 0.00 196.38 City of Santa Ana 5.6-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Operation Operation of the proposed Project would generate GHG emissions from vehicle trips, electricity and natural gas consumption, water and wastewater transport (the energy used to pump water), and solid waste generation. GHG emissions from electricity consumed by the proposed Project would be generated off-site by fuel combustion at the electricity provider. GHG emissions from water transport are also indirect emissions resulting from the energy required to transport water from its source. GHG emissions from solid waste disposal is associated with the anaerobic breakdown of material. As shown in Table 5.6-3, the estimated increase in GHG emissions that would be generated from implementation of the proposed Project is estimated to be 9,861.60 MTCO2e per year. Table 5.6-3: Summary of Total Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emissions (MT/vr) Emission Source CO2 CHa N20 Total CO2E Annual construction -related emissions amortized over 30 years 195.95 0.02 0.00 196.38 Area Source 295.60 0.02 5.06e-03 297.71 Energy Source 5,614.41 0.20 0.06 5,638.18 11,023.2 Mobile Source 5 0.79 0.00 11,042.98 Waste 1 204.30 1 12.07 1 0.00 1 506.14 Water Usage 1 598.98 1 3.12 1 0.08 1 700.27 Total Project CO2E (All Sources) 18,381.68 Existing Emissions (Table 5.6-1) -8,520.07 Net Emissions (Project - Existing) 9,861.60 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. This exceeds the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e. Therefore, additional analysis is provided based upon the direction of SCAQMD's Tier 4 thresholds through use of the City's CAP emissions targets and projected service population, which as detailed previously in Section 5.6.5, Methodology, identified a threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population in the Project opening year if 2022. As described in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the Project would result in 2,081 residents and 320 employees at full occupancy. This results in a service population of 2,401 (2,081 residents + 320 employees = 2,401 service population). The Project's net increase in GHG emissions of 9,861.60 MTCO2e per year divided by the service population of the Project would result in 4.10 MTCO2e annually per service population, which exceeds the threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Approximately 60 percent of the GHG emissions would be generated by Project mobile sources (vehicle trips). Neither the Project Applicant nor the Lead Agency (City of Santa Ana) can substantively or materially affect reductions in Project mobile -source emissions. However, the Project is an urban infill redevelopment that would provide mixed residential and commercial (retail/restaurant) uses. The site located near existing off-site employment, commercial, residential, and retail destinations and in proximity to existing public bus stops and freeways, which would result in reduced vehicle trips and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in comparison to a Project of similar size on land without close access to employment, service, and retail, destinations; in addition to public transit and freeways. The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) has provided guidance for mitigating or reducing transportation related VMT from land use development projects within its guidance document titled City of Santa Ana 5.6-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (CAPCOA 2010). The land use characteristics of the Project are consistent with the CAPCOA guidance related to a reduction of VMT: • Area Density: CAPCOA identifies that increases in area density, measured in terms of persons, jobs, or dwelling units per unit area, reduces VMT associated with transportation', as it reduces the distance people travel for work or services and provides a foundation for the implementation of other strategies such as enhanced transit services (CAPCOA guidance measure LUT -1). According to CAPCOA, the reduction in VMT from increases in area density applies to urban and suburban settings for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects. The urban infill/redevelopment Project would provide residential, retail/restaurant, and employment uses and is located near other employment opportunities, services, and retail commercial uses. The proposed Project would provide an increase in area residential density and an improvement to the jobs -housing balance. As detailed in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the Project region has an existing and projected future imbalance between the number of jobs and housing units. Thus, per CAPCOA guidance, the addition of residential units within the area would reduce VMT and the VMT-related GHG emissions. • Location Efficiency: Location efficiency describes the location of a project relative to the type of urban landscape such as an urban area, compact infill, or suburban center. CAPCOA guidance measure LUT -2.22 describes that a reduction in VMT and the related GHG emissions occurs from development within urban areas that include residential, retail, office, industrial, mixed -uses, and transportation access. As described previously, the Project is located in an urban infill location and would provide residential units near employment, retail, and services. Additionally, the Project is located adjacent to the Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) bus lines that runs along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue that makes use of transit efficient. Thus, the location efficiently of the Project would provide for reduced VMT and the related GHG emissions. Also, according to the CAPCOA guidance, factors that contribute to VMT reductions include pedestrian connectivity between the project site and off-site destinations. The Project would include onsite sidewalks that would connect to the existing offsite sidewalks and bicycle lanes exist in the Project vicinity. Both walking and bicycling to onsite or nearby destinations would reduce transportation energy use and the related GHG emissions. Therefore, although the Project Applicant and City cannot reduce GHG vehicular emissions, the Project is consistent with the CAPCOA guidance for mitigating or reducing transportation related VMT from land use development projects. In addition, the Project incorporates various sustainable design features that would reduce GHG emissions, which include: • A minimum of 94 electric vehicle charging stations. • Installation of drought -tolerant plants for landscaping. • Installation of water -efficient irrigation systems, such as weather -based and soil -moisture -based irrigation controllers and sensors, for landscaping according to the California Department of Water Resources Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance. I CalEEMod, by default, assumes that trip distances in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) are slightly longer than the statewide average. This is because the commute patterns in the SCAB involve a substantial portion of the population commuting relatively far distances, which is documented in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which shows that in existing and future plan conditions, more than 50 percent of all work trips are 10 miles or longer (SCAG, Performance Measures Appendix, page 13, 2016). Thus, work trips that would be less than 10 miles would assist in meeting the 2016 RTP/SCS goal of reducing overall VMT in the region. City of Santa Ana 5.6-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Designing buildings to provide CALGreen Standards with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design features for potential certification and would employ energy and water conservation measures in accordance with such standards. This includes design considerations related to the building envelope; heating, ventilating, and air conditioning; lighting; and power systems. • Installation of landscaping in surface parking lots to reduce heat island effect. Trees would be selected and placed to provide canopy and shade for the parking lots. • Implementation of a recycling program in order to meet a 75 percent minimum waste diversion goal. • Utilization of construction materials and interior finish products with zero or low emissions to improve indoor air quality. • Provision of adequate ventilation and high -efficiency in -duct filtration system. • Use of low volatile organic compound paints and wallpapers. Also as described previously, the CEC anticipates that nonresidential buildings built with the 2019 Title 24/CalGreen standards would use approximately 30 percent less energy and residential buildings would use approximately 7 percent less energy compared to development under the 2016 standards. The reduction of energy use results in reduced GHG emissions. Compliance with Title 24 is enforced through the building permit process. The following Title 24 standards are applicable to the proposed Project and would reduce GHG emissions: • Short-term bicycle parking. If a commercial project is anticipated to generate visitor traffic, provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the visitors' entrance, readily visible to passers-by, for 5 percent of visitor motorized vehicle parking capacity, with a minimum of one two - bike capacity rack. • Long-term bicycle parking. For new buildings with 10 or more tenant -occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5 percent of tenant -occupied motorized vehicle parking capacity, with a minimum of one space. • Designated parking. Provide designated parking in commercial projects for any combination of low - emitting, fuel-efficient and carpool van pool vehicles. • Recycling by Occupants. Provide readily accessible areas that serve the entire building and are identified for the depositing, storage and collection of nonhazardous materials for recycling. • Construction waste. A minimum 65 percent diversion of construction and demolition waste from landfills. • Wastewater reduction. Each building shall reduce the generation of wastewater by either installing water -conserving fixtures or using non -potable water systems. • Water use savings. 20 percent mandatory reduction of indoor water use. • Water meters. Separate water meters for buildings in excess of 50,000 sf or buildings projected to consume more than 1,000 gallons per day. • Irrigation efficiency. Moisture -sensing irrigation systems for larger landscaped areas. • Materials pollution control. Utilize low pollutant emitting interior finish materials such as paints, carpet, vinyl flooring, and particleboard. City of Santa Ana 5.6-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Building commissioning. Mandatory inspections of energy systems (i.e., heat furnace, air conditioner, mechanical equipment) for nonresidential buildings over 10,000 sf to ensure that all are working at their maximum capacity according to their design efficiencies. However, there are no feasible Project measures that would reduce vehicular emissions, and approximately 60 percent of the GHG emissions would be generated by Project mobile sources (vehicle trips). Thus, neither the Project Applicant nor the Lead Agency (City of Santa Ana) can substantively or materially affect reductions in Project mobile -source emissions. The Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions of 9,861.60 MTCO2e per year, which would be 4.10 MTCO2e annually per service population. This would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e and exceed the SCAQMD Tier 4/City CAP threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Therefore, impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT GHG-2: THE PROJECT WOULD CONFLICT WITH AN APPLICABLE PLAN, POLICY OR REGULATION OF AN AGENCY ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDUCING THE EMISSION OF GHGS. Significant and Unavoidable. The proposed Project consists of an infill redevelopment project that would help to meet housing demands from projected growth in the region while helping to improve the jobs to housing balance (detailed in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing), which has the potential to reduce GHG emissions from the reduction of vehicle miles traveled. The proposed Project provides for pedestrian infrastructure, such as sidewalks that connect to off-site sidewalks to promote non -vehicular transportation and reduce the vehicle miles traveled and related GHG emissions. In addition, the Project site is adjacent to existing bus routes and bicycle lanes. Providing a mixed-use development in such a location is consistent with the intent of the AB 32 Scoping Plan and SB 375, which is focused on changing land use patterns and improving transportation alternatives. The proposed Project would be implemented pursuant to the 2019 CALGreen Building/Title 24 requirements, and provide new land uses in a sustainable manner. The City's administration of the Title 24 requirements includes review of proposed energy conservation measures during the permitting process, which ensures that all requirements are met. Typical Title 24 measures include insulation; use of energy-efficient heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment; solar -reflective roofing materials; energy-efficient indoor and outdoor lighting systems; reclamation of heat rejection from refrigeration equipment to generate hot water; and incorporation of skylights, etc. In complying with the 2019 Title 24 standards, the Project would be implementing regulations that reduce GHG emissions. Also, the CARB Scoping Plan recommends strategies for implementation at the statewide level to meet the goals of AB 32. The CARB Scoping Plan recommendations serve as statewide measures to reduce GHG emissions levels. The proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable measures established in the 2008 Scoping Plan, as shown in Table 5.6-4. Table 5.6-4: Project Consistency with 2008 CARB Scoping Plan Scoping Plan Action Measure Consistency E-1 E-2 Energy Efficiency CRConsistent. The Project would include a variety of building, water, and solid CR -2 Waste efficiencies consistent with the most current CALGreen requirements. T-6 City of Santa Ana 5.6-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update reflects the 2030 target of a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Table 5.6-5 summarizes the Project's consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan. As described, the Project would not conflict with any of the provisions of the Scoping Plan. Table 5.6-5: Project Consistency with 2017 CARB Scoping Plan Action Responsible Parties Consistency Implement SB 350 by 2030 Increase the Renewables Portfolio Standard to 50 percent of retail sales by 2030 and ensure grid reliability. Establish annual targets for statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reduction that CPUC, will achieve a cumulative doubling of CEC, statewide energy efficiency savings in CARB electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030. Reduce GHG emissions in the electricity sector through the implementation of the above measures and other actions as modeled in Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) to meet GHG emissions reductions planning targets in the IRP process. Load -serving entities and publicly- owned utilities meet GHG emissions City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 Consistent. The Project would use energy from Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE has committed to diversify its portfolio of energy sources by increasing energy from wind and solar sources. The Project would not interfere with or obstruct SCE energy source diversification efforts. Consistent. The Project would be designed and constructed to implement the energy efficiency measures for new residential and commercial developments and would include several measures designed to reduce energy consumption. The Project would not interfere with or obstruct policies or strategies to establish annual targets for statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reduction. Consistent. The proposed Project would be designed and constructed to implement the energy efficiency measures, where applicable by including several measures designed to reduce energy consumption. The proposed Project includes energy efficient fixtures, appliances, heating, and air conditioning systems that would meet the 5.6-15 Scoping Plan Action Measure Consistency Million Solar Consistent. The MSR program sets a goal for use of solar systems throughout the Roofs (MSR) E-4 state as a whole. While the Project currently does not include solar energy generation, the building roof structure would be designed to support solar panels Program in the future, consistent with Title 24 requirements. Green Building GB -1 Consistent. The Project would include a variety of building, water, and solid Strategy waste efficiencies consistent with the current CALGreen requirements. RW -1 Recycling and Consistent. The Project would be required recycle a minimum of 65 percent from RW -2 Waste construction activities and Project operations per State and City requirements. RW 3 Sustainable Consistent. The Project would increase carbon sequestration by increasing on - Forests F 1 site trees per the project landscaping plan. W-1 W-2 W-3 Consistent. The Project would include use of low -flow fixtures and efficient Water landscaping per State requirements. W-4 W-5 W-6 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update reflects the 2030 target of a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels, set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Table 5.6-5 summarizes the Project's consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan. As described, the Project would not conflict with any of the provisions of the Scoping Plan. Table 5.6-5: Project Consistency with 2017 CARB Scoping Plan Action Responsible Parties Consistency Implement SB 350 by 2030 Increase the Renewables Portfolio Standard to 50 percent of retail sales by 2030 and ensure grid reliability. Establish annual targets for statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reduction that CPUC, will achieve a cumulative doubling of CEC, statewide energy efficiency savings in CARB electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030. Reduce GHG emissions in the electricity sector through the implementation of the above measures and other actions as modeled in Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) to meet GHG emissions reductions planning targets in the IRP process. Load -serving entities and publicly- owned utilities meet GHG emissions City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 Consistent. The Project would use energy from Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE has committed to diversify its portfolio of energy sources by increasing energy from wind and solar sources. The Project would not interfere with or obstruct SCE energy source diversification efforts. Consistent. The Project would be designed and constructed to implement the energy efficiency measures for new residential and commercial developments and would include several measures designed to reduce energy consumption. The Project would not interfere with or obstruct policies or strategies to establish annual targets for statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reduction. Consistent. The proposed Project would be designed and constructed to implement the energy efficiency measures, where applicable by including several measures designed to reduce energy consumption. The proposed Project includes energy efficient fixtures, appliances, heating, and air conditioning systems that would meet the 5.6-15 The Bowery Mixed -Use Action reductions planning targets through a combination of measures as described in IRPs. Responsible Parties ment Mobile Source Strategy (Cleaner Technology and At least 1.5 million zero emission and plug-in hybrid light-duty electric vehicles by 2025. At least 4.2 million zero emission and plug-in hybrid light-duty electric vehicles by 2030. Further increase GHG stringency on all light- duty vehicles beyond existing Advanced Clean cars regulations. Medium- and Heavy -Duty GHG Phase 2. Innovative Clean Transit: Transition to a suite of to -be -determined innovative clean transit options. Assumed 20 percent of new urban buses purchased beginning in 2018 will be zero emission buses with the penetration of zero -emission technology ramped up to 100 percent of new sales in 2030. Also, new natural gas buses, starting in 2018, and diesel buses, starting in 2020, meet the optional heavy-duty low-NOx standard. Last Mile Delivery: New regulation that would result in the use of low NOx or cleaner engines and the deployment of increasing numbers of zero -emission trucks primarily for class 3-7 last mile delivery trucks in California. This measure assumes ZEVs comprise 2.5 percent of new Class 3-7 truck sales in local fleets starting in 2020, increasing to 10 percent in 2025 and remaining flat through 2030. Further reduce VMT through continued implementation of SB 375 and regional Sustainable Communities Strategies; forthcoming statewide implementation of SB 743; and potential additional VMT reduction strategies not specified in the Mobile Source Strategy but included in the document CARB, California State Transportation Agency (CaISTA), Strategic Growth Council (SGC), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), CEC, OPR, Local Agencies 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Consistency Title 24 Standards current at the time of permitting. Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or interfere with CARB zero emission and plug- in hybrid light-duty electric vehicle 2025 targets. Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source Strategy. The Project would not obstruct or interfere with CARB zero emission and plug- in hybrid light-duty electric vehicle 2030 targets. Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source Strategy. The Project is a mixed-use development that would not obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts to further increase GHG stringency on all light-duty vehicles beyond existing Advanced Clean cars regulations. Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source Strategy. The Project is a mixed-use development that would not obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts to implement Medium- and Heavy -Duty GHG Phase 2. Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source Strategy. The Project is a mixed-use development that would not obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts improve transit - source emissions. Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source Strategy. The Project is a mixed-use development that would not obstruct or interfere with CARB efforts to improve last mile delivery emissions. Consistent. As further detailed in Section 5.14, Transportation, the Project would not obstruct or interfere with implementation of SB 375 and would therefore not conflict with this measure. City of Santa Ana 5.6-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Action Responsible Parties Consistency "Potential VMT Reduction Strategies for Discussion." Consistent. This is a CARB Mobile Source Strategy. The Project is a mixed-use Increase stringency of SB 375 Sustainable development that would not obstruct or Communities Strategy (2035 targets). CARB interfere with CARB efforts to Increase stringency of SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategy (2035 targets). CaISTA, SGC, OPR, CARB, Governor's Office of Business and Economic Harmonize project performance with Development (GO- Consistent. The Project is a mixed-use emissions reductions and increase Biz), development that would not obstruct or competitiveness of transit and active California interfere with agency efforts to harmonize transportation modes (e.g. via guideline Infrastructure and transportation facility project performance documents, funding programs, project Economic with emissions reductions and increase selection, etc.). Development Bank competitiveness of transit and active (IBank), transportation modes. Department of Finance (DOF), California Transportation Commission (CTC), Caltrans CaISTA, Consistent. The Project is a mixed-use By 2019, develop pricing policies to support Caltrans, development that would not obstruct or low-GHG transportation (e.g. low -emission CTC, interfere with agency efforts to develop vehicle zones for heavy duty, road user, OPR, pricing policies to support low-GHG parking pricing, transit discounts). SGC, CARB transportation. Implement California Sustainable Freight Action Plan Improve freight system efficiency. Deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles and equipment capable of zero emission operation and maximize both zero and near - zero emission freight vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy by 2030. City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 CaISTA, CalEPA, CNRA, CARB, Caltrans, CEC, GO -Biz Consistent. This measure would apply to all trucks accessing the Project site, this may include existing trucks or new trucks that are part of the statewide goods movement sector. The Project would not obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to Improve freight system efficiency. Consistent. The Project would not obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles and equipment capable of zero emission operation and maximize both zero and near -zero emission freight vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy by 2030. 5.6-17 The Bowery Mixed -Use 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Action I Responsible Parties I Consistency Consistent. When adopted, this measure would apply to all fuel purchased and used Adopt a Low Carbon Fuel Standard with a by the Project in the state. The Project would Carbon Intensity reduction of 18 percent. CARIB not obstruct or interfere with agency efforts to adopt a Low Carbon Fuel Standard with a Carbon Intensity reduction of 18 percent. Implement the Short -Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy (SLPS) by 2030 40 percent reduction in methane and hydrofluorocarbon emissions below 2013 levels. 50 percent reduction in black carbon emissions below 2013 levels. By 2019, develop regulations and programs to support organic waste landfill reduction goals in the SLCP and SB 1383. CARIB, Consistent. The Project would be required CalRecycle, to comply with this measure and reduce any CDFA, Project -source SLPS emissions accordingly. SWRCB, The Project would not obstruct or interfere Local Air Districts agency efforts to reduce SLPS emissions. Consistent. The Project would implement CARIB, waste reduction and recycling measures CalRecycle, consistent with State and City requirements. CDFA The Project would not obstruct or interfere SWRCB, agency efforts to support organic waste Local Air Districts landfill reduction goals in the SLCP and SB 1383. Consistent. The Project would be required to comply with any applicable Cap -and - Implement the post -2020 Cap -and -Trade Trade Program provisions. The Project Program with declining annual caps. CARIB would not obstruct or interfere agency efforts to implement the post -2020 Cap - and -Trade Program. By 2018, develop Integrated Natural and Working Lands Implementation Plan to secure California's land base as a net carbon sink City of Santa Ana 5.6-18 Draft EIR January 2020 Consistent. The Project site is not subject to a conservation easement. The Project would Protect land from conversion through not obstruct or interfere agency efforts to conservation easements and other incentives. protect land from conversion through conservation easements and other incentives. Consistent. The Project site is not an area that provides for carbon sequestration. The Increase the long-term resilience of carbon Project would not obstruct or interfere storage in the land base and enhance CNRA, agency efforts to increase the long-term sequestration capacity Departments Within resilience of carbon storage in the land base CDFA, and enhance sequestration capacity. CaIEPA, CARIB Consistent. The Project design incorporates wood and wood products. The Project would Utilize wood and agricultural products to not obstruct or interfere agency efforts to increase the amount of carbon stored in the encourage use of wood and agricultural natural and built environments products to increase the amount of carbon stored in the natural and built environments. Consistent. The Project would not obstruct Establish scenario projections to serve as the or interfere agency efforts to establish foundation for the Implementation Plan scenario projections to serve as the foundation for the Implementation Plan. City of Santa Ana 5.6-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Action Responsible Parties Consistency Consistent. The Project would not obstruct Establish a carbon accounting framework for or interfere agency efforts to establish a natural and working lands as described in SB CARB carbon accounting framework for natural 859 by 2018 and working lands as described in SB 859 by 2018. CNRA, California Consistent. The Project would not obstruct Department of or interfere agency efforts to implement the Implement Forest Carbon Plan Forestry and Fire Forest Carbon Plan. Protection (CAL FIRE), CaIEPA and Departments Within Consistent. The Project would not obstruct Identify and expand funding and financing State Agencies & or interfere agency efforts to identify and mechanisms to support GHG reductions Local Agencies expand funding and financing mechanisms across all sectors. to support GHG reductions across all sectors. Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. The City of Santa Ana's CAP includes reduction measures that would help the City achieve its emissions reduction goal, which is consistent with the statewide goals identified. This includes measures related to transportation and land use, community -wide energy, solid waste, water, and wastewater. The CAP describes that many of the commercial and employment corridors throughout the City have limited or no residential development. The proposed Project is consistent with City's CAP strategy of locating new mixed- use development within employment corridors to create a more optimal mix of land uses and reduce vehicle miles traveled. The proposed Project would be consistent with the relevant measures of the City's CAP as described in Table 5.6-6. Table 5.6-6: Project Consistency with Santa Ana CAP CAP Measure Project Consistency Transportation and Land Use Measures Development of Local Retail Service Nodes. Consistent. The proposed urban infill/redevelopment Project Development that provides a mix of housing, that includes a mix of housing and commercial space would commercial space, services, and job opportunities close provide services, restaurants, and job opportunities. The to public transportation reduces dependency on cars Project is also located near existing employment, services, and time spent in traffic and more closely links retail, and is adjacent to existing bus stops, which would result residents to jobs and services. in reduced VMT in comparison to a project of similar size and land without close access to employment, service, retail, and transit. As described in Section 5.11 Population and Housing, the Project would assist in improving the jobs to housing balance. These Project aspects would reduce dependency on cars and time spent in traffic and more closely link residents to jobs and services. Local Residential Nodes near Retail and Consistent. The Project would develop a mixed -uses that Employment. Locate new residential development would include residential, commercial (retail/restaurant), and within retail and employment corridors to create a employment opportunities near areas of existing or planned City of Santa Ana 5.6-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions CAP Measure Project Consistency more optimal mix of land uses, which will be conducive employment and retail uses that is adjacent to existing bus to the increase use of transit. routes. Local Employment Nodes near Residential and Consistent. The proposed urban infill/redevelopment Project Retail Areas. Develop higher levels of mixed-use would provide mixed residential and commercial uses and is development, including employment, retail, and located near existing employment and retail uses, which housing, to lower vehicle miles traveled (VMT) would result in reduced VMT in comparison to an area where compared with areas where only one of these uses only one of these uses predominates. As described in Section predominates. 5.11, Population and Housing, the Project would assist in Business Direct Install. Energy efficiency contractors improving the jobs to housing balance. End -of -Trip Facilities in New Projects. End -of -trip Consistent. The Project includes secure bicycle parking, which facilities can include bike lockers, showers, and would encourage cycling use. changing rooms, which can be used by cyclists and Consistent. The Project currently does not specifically include encourage cycling use. the use of solar photovoltaic systems. However, beginning in Design Guidelines for External Consistent. The Project would provide connectivity between Bike/Pedestrian/Transit Connectivity. The City plans the Project site and the existing off-site bicycle, pedestrian, to create guidelines that will mandate minimum levels and transit infrastructure by including sidewalks and of connectivity between various locations and the walkways onsite that would connect to the existing off-site external transportation network. infrastructure. Communitv Measures Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Financing Consistent. The Project includes energy efficient for Commercial and Residential Properties. PACE infrastructure, such as 2019 Title 24 compliant irrigation and financing is available for energy and water saving plumbing systems, energy efficient appliances, solar - measures as well as renewable energy generation. reflective roofing materials, and a minimum of 94 electric Energy efficiency projects financed through the vehicle charging stations. Financial programs such as PACE program include air conditioning and heating systems, can provide assistance to the developer to implement these lighting upgrades, cool roofing materials, and solar measures. installations. Southern California Edison (SCE) Small and Medium Consistent. The Project incorporates energy saving measures Business Direct Install. Energy efficiency contractors into the Project design, as described in the previous response. help small business identify ways to save electricity. Programs such as SCE Direct Install can assist the developer with implementing these measures. Solar Photovoltaic Systems—New Private Installs. Consistent. The Project currently does not specifically include The City is offering solar incentives that include permit the use of solar photovoltaic systems. However, beginning in fee waivers, free plan check services, and free 2020 the California Building Code will include a requirement building inspections for solar photovoltaic systems. for new residential buildings to include solar rooftop panels. In addition, the solar incentives offered by the state could be used to assist the developer with solar photovoltaic installations. Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards. Minimum Consistent. The Project would be developed and operated in energy efficiency for new construction in California compliance with the Title 24 Energy Standards that are effective January 1, 2020. current at the time of construction. Solid Waste, Water, and Wastewater Measures AB 341. Adopted by the state in 2011 and requires Consistent. The Project would implement a solid waste businesses that generate 4 cubic yards or more of recycling system in compliance with state and local commercial solid waste per week and multi -family regulations. residential dwellinas of five units or more to recycle. However, as described in Impact GHG-1, the CAP includes emissions targets based on state GHG reduction requirements, which were used to identify the 2022 efficiency -based threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in 4.10 MTCO2e annually per service population, which would exceed the threshold. As described previously, the Project would include sustainable design features and comply with Title 24/CalGreen standards; however, approximately 60 percent of the GHG emissions would be generated by vehicle trips. Neither the Project Applicant nor the Lead Agency (City of Santa Ana) can substantively or materially reduce the vehicular -source GHG emissions. Thus, the City of Santa Ana 5.6-20 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Project would result in an exceedance of the CAP's emissions target and impacts would be significant and unavoidable. 5.6.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS GHG emissions impacts are assessed in a cumulative context, since no single project can cause a discernible change to climate. Climate change impacts are the result of incremental contributions from natural processes, and past and present human -related activities. Therefore, the area in which a proposed Project in combination with other past, present, or future projects, could contribute to a significant cumulative climate change impact would not be defined by a geographical boundary such as a project site or combination of sites, city or air basin. GHG emissions have high atmospheric lifetimes and can travel across the globe over a period of 50 to 100 years or more. Even though the emissions of GHGs cannot be defined by a geographic boundary and are effectively part of the global issue of climate change, CEQA places a boundary for the analysis of impacts at the state's borders. Thus, the geographic area for analysis of cumulative GHG emissions impacts is the State of California. Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Nunez), recognizes that California is the source of substantial amounts of GHG emissions. The statute begins with several legislative findings and declarations of intent, including the following: Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well-being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health-related problems" (California Health and Safety Code, Section 38501(a)). Thus, AB 32 recognizes the significance of the statewide cumulative impact of GHG emissions from sources throughout the state and sets a performance standard for mitigation of that cumulative impact. The analysis of GHG emission impacts under CEQA contained in this EIR effectively constitutes an analysis of a project's contribution to the significant cumulative impact of GHG emissions. As described previously, the Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions of 9,861.60 MTCO2e per year, which would be 4.10 MTCO2e annually per service population. This would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e and exceed the SCAQMD Tier 4/City CAP threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Therefore, impacts related to GHG emissions would be cumulatively significant and unavoidable. 5.6.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES The following requirements would reduce impacts related to GHG emissions. • California Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley) • California Executive Order S-3-05 • Assembly Bill 32 (Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) • Senate Bill 375 (Steinberg) • California Executive Order B-30-15 • California Energy Code • California Green Building Standards Code City of Santa Ana 5.6-21 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Santa Ana CAP 5.6.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impacts GHG-1 and GHG-2 would be potentially significant. 5.6.10 MITIGATION MEASURES The Project would include sustainable design features and comply with Title 24/CalGreen standards; however, approximately 60 percent of the GHG emissions would be generated by vehicle trips. Neither the Project Applicant nor the Lead Agency (City of Santa Ana) can substantively or materially reduce the vehicular -source GHG emissions. 5.6.3 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The impacts related to GHG emissions cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. Therefore, impacts related to generation of GHG emissions and conflict with an applicable plan adopted for the purpose of reducing GHGs would be significant and unavoidable. Furthermore, impacts related to GHG emissions would be cumulatively significant and unavoidable. REFERENCES California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, 2010. Accessed at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/1 1 /CAPCOA-Quantification- Report-9-14-Final.pdf. California Energy Commission 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Standards (CEC 2019). Accessed: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2019- building-energy-efficiency City of Santa Ana Climate Action Plan, 2015. Accessed at: http://www.santa-ana.org/climateactionpIan/ Greenhouse Gas Analysis. Prepared by Urban Crossroads (GHG 2019). City of Santa Ana 5.6-22 Draft EIR January 2020 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.7.1 INTRODUCTION This section considers the nature and range of foreseeable hazardous materials and physical hazards impacts that would result from implementation of the proposed Project. It identifies the ways that hazardous materials and other types of hazards could expose people and the environment to various health and safety risks during construction activities and operation of proposed Project. This section also describes routine hazardous materials that are likely to be used, handled, or processed within the Project area, and the potential for upset and accident conditions in which hazardous materials could be released. The impact analysis identifies ways in which hazardous materials might be routinely used, stored, handled, processed, or transported, and evaluates the extent to which existing and future populations could be exposed to hazardous materials. The term "hazardous material" is defined as any material that, because of quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment.' The analysis in this section is based in part the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by Stantec in 2018 (Phase 1 2018), the Phase 11 ESA prepared by Stantec in 2018 (Phase 11 2018), and the Limited Phase 11 Subsurface Investigation Report prepared by Hillman Consulting in 2019 (Hillman 2019), provided in Appendix F of this EIR. 5.7.2 REGULATORY SETTING Hazardous Materials Management The primary federal agencies responsible for hazardous materials management include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 Federal hazardous waste regulations are generally promulgated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Pursuant to RCRA, the USEPA regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste in a "cradle to grave" manner. RCRA was designed to protect human health and the environment, reduce/eliminate the generation of hazardous waste, and conserve energy and natural resources. The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 both expanded the scope of RCRA and increased the level of detail in many of its provisions, reaffirming the regulation from generation to disposal and to prohibiting the use of certain techniques for hazardous waste disposal. The USEPA has largely delegated responsibility for implementing the RCRA program in California to the State, which implements this program through the California Hazardous Waste Control Law. ' State of California, Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.95, Section 25501 (o). City of Santa Ana 5.7-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials RCRA regulates landfill siting, design, operation, and closure (including identifying liner and capping requirements) for licensed landfills. In California, RCRA landfill requirements are delegated to the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), which is discussed in detail below. RCRA allows the USEPA to oversee the closure and post -closure of landfills. Additionally, the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, 40 CFR Part 141, gives the USEPA the power to establish water quality standards and beneficial uses for waters from below- or above -ground sources of contamination. For the Project area, water quality standards are administered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). RCRA also allows the USEPA to control risk to human health at contaminated sites. Vapor intrusion presents a significant risk to human populations overlying contaminated soil and groundwater and is considered when conducting human health risk assessments and developing Remedial Action Objectives. Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 Federal and state occupational health and safety regulations also contain provisions regarding hazardous waste management through the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (amended), which is implemented by OSHA. Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations (29 CFR) requires special training of handlers of hazardous materials; notification to employees who work in the vicinity of hazardous materials; acquisition from the manufacturer of material safety data sheets (MSDS), which describe the proper use of hazardous materials; and training of employees to remediate any hazardous material accidental releases. OSHA regulates administration of 29 CFR. OSHA also establishes standards regarding safe exposure limits for chemicals to which construction workers may be exposed. Safety and Health Regulations for Construction (29 CFR Part 1926.65 Appendix C) contains requirements for construction activities, which include occupational health and environmental controls to protect worker health and safety. The guidelines describe the health and safety plan(s) that must be developed and implemented during construction, including associated training, protective equipment, evacuation plans, chains of command, and emergency response procedures. Adherence to applicable hazard -specific OSHA standards are required to maintain worker safety. For example, methane is regulated by OSHA under 29 CFR Part 1910.146 with regard to worker exposure to a "hazardous atmosphere" within confined spaces where the presence of flammable gas vapor or mist is in excess of 10 percent of the lower explosive limit. Title 49 of the CFR governs the manufacture of packaging and transport containers, packing and repacking, labeling, and the marking of hazardous material transport. Title 42, Part 82 governs solid waste disposal and resource recovery. Hazardous Materials Transportation Act The transportation of hazardous materials is regulated by the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA), which is administered by the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) of the US Department of Transportation (USDOT). The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act provides USDOT with a broad mandate to regulate the transport of hazardous materials, with the purpose of adequately protecting the nation against risk to life and property, which is inherent in the commercial transportation of hazardous materials. The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act governs the safe transportation of hazardous materials by all modes, excluding bulk transportation by water. The Research and Special Programs Administration carries out these responsibilities by prescribing regulations and managing a user - funded grant program for planning and training grants for states and Indian tribes. USDOT regulations that govern the transportation of hazardous materials are applicable to any person who transports, ships, causes to be transported or shipped, or are involved in any way with the manufacture or testing of hazardous materials packaging or containers. USDOT regulations pertaining to the actual movement govern every aspect of the movement, including packaging, handling, labeling, marking, placarding, operational City of Santa Ana 5.7-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials standards, and highway routing. Additionally, USDOT is responsible for developing curriculum to train for emergency response and administers grants to states and Indian tribes for ensuring the proper training of emergency responders. Hazardous Materials Transportation Act was enacted in 1975 and was amended and reauthorized in 1990, 1994, and 2005. Federal Regulation 49 Code of Federal Regulation Part 77 The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) is the federal agency that identifies potential impacts related to air traffic and related safety hazards. The Federal Regulation 49 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part 77 establishes standards and notification requirements for objects affecting navigable airspace. This notification serves as the basis for: • Evaluating the effect of the proposed construction or alteration on operating procedures, • Determining the potential hazardous effect of the proposed construction on air • navigation, • Identifying mitigating measures to enhance safe air navigation, and • Charting of new objects. FAA FAR Part 77 includes the establishment of imaginary surfaces (airspace that provides clearance of obstacles for runway operation) that allows the FAA to identify potential aeronautical hazards in advance, thus preventing or minimizing adverse impacts to the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace. The regulations identify three-dimensional imaginary surfaces through which no object should penetrate. The imaginary surface for JWA consists of a 100:1 slope extending outward for 20,000 feet from the nearest runway. Section 77.17 (Obstruction Standards) also states that an object would be an obstruction to air navigation if it is higher than 200 feet above ground level. Exceedance of 200 feet above ground level or the 100:1 imaginary surface requires notification to FAA (per FAR Part 77). An object that would be constructed or altered within the height restriction or imaginary surface area of the airport is not necessarily incompatible (ALUP 2008) but would be subject to FAA notification and an FAA aeronautical study to determine whether the proposed structures would constitute a hazard to air navigation. Hazardous Materials Management and Waste Handling In the regulation of hazardous waste management, California law often mirrors or is more stringent than federal law. The California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) are the primary state agencies responsible for hazardous materials management. Additionally, the California Emergency Management Agency (CaIEMA) administers the California Accidental Release Prevention (CaIARP) program. The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), which is a branch of CaIEPA, regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal hazardous waste, as well as the investigation and remediation of hazardous waste sites. The California DTSC program incorporates the provisions of both federal (RCRA) and State hazardous waste laws. Excavated soil containing hazardous substances and hazardous building materials would be classified as a hazardous waste if they exhibit the characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity (CCR, Title 22, Division 4.5, Chapter 11, Article 3). State and federal laws require detailed planning to ensure that hazardous materials are properly handled, used, stored, and disposed of, and in the event that such materials are accidentally released, to prevent or to mitigate injury to health or the environment. These laws and regulations are overseen by a variety of state and local agencies. The California Integrated Waste Management Board and the RWQCB specifically address management of hazardous materials and waste handling in their adopted regulations (CCR, Title 14 and CCR, Title 27). City of Santa Ana 5.7-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials In Orange County (including the City of Santa Ana) the Orange County Health Care Agency Environmental Health Division is designated as the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) responsible for implementing the following program elements: • Hazardous Materials Disclosure Programs; • Business Emergency Plans; • Underground Storage Tanks • Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Program (Hazardous Materials Disclosure or "Community -Right -to Know"); • California Accidental Release Prevention Program (Cal ARP); and • Uniform Fire Code Plans and Inventory Requirements. The laws and regulations that established these programs require that businesses that use or store certain quantities of hazardous materials submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) that describes the hazardous materials usage, storage, and disposal to the local oversight agency (CUPA). Hazardous Waste Control Act The Hazardous Waste Control Act was passed in 1972 and established the California Hazardous Waste Control Program within the Department of Health Services. California's hazardous waste regulatory effort became the model for the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). California's program, however, was broader and more comprehensive than the federal system, regulating wastes and activities not covered by the federal program. California's Hazardous Waste Control Law was followed by emergency regulations in 1973 that clarified and defined the hazardous waste program, as follows: • Included definitions of what was a waste and what was hazardous as well as what was necessary for appropriate handling, processing, and disposal of hazardous and extremely hazardous waste in a manner that would protect the public, livestock, and wildlife from hazards to health and safety. • The early regulations also established a tracking system for the handling and transportation of hazardous waste from the point of waste generation to the point of ultimate disposition, as well as a system of fees to cover the costs of operating the hazardous waste management program. • Advancing the newly developing awareness of hazardous waste management issues, the program established a technical reference center for public and private use dealing with all aspects of hazardous waste management. California Government Code Section 65962.5 (a), Cortese List The Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites List (Cortese List) is a planning document used by the State, local agencies, and developers to comply with CEQA requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. The Department of Toxic Substances Control is responsible for a portion of the information contained in the Cortese List. Other state and local government agencies are required to provide additional hazardous material release information for the Cortese List. Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and Hazardous Waste Control Law, Chapter 6.5 The Department of Toxic Substances Control regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste under RCRA and the California Hazardous Waste Control Law. Both laws impose "cradle -to -grave" regulatory systems for handling hazardous waste in a manner that protects human City of Santa Ana 5.7-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials health and the environment. CaIEPA has delegated some of its authority under the Hazardous Waste Control Law to county health departments and other Certified Unified Program Agencies. Title 23, Division 3, Chapter 16 of the California Code of Regulations, Underground Storage Tank Regulations The Title 23, Division 3, Chapter 16 regulations are intended to protect waters of the state from discharges of hazardous substances from underground storage tanks. These regulations establish construction requirements for new underground storage tanks; establish separate monitoring requirements for new and existing underground storage tanks; establish uniform requirements for unauthorized release reporting, and for repair, upgrade, and closure of underground storage tanks. Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations, Solid Waste Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations contains a waste classification system that applies to solid wastes that cannot be discharged directly or indirectly to waters of the State and which therefore must be discharged to waste management sites for treatment, storage, or disposal. CalRecycle and its certified Local Enforcement Agency regulate the operation, inspection, permitting, and oversight of maintenance activities at active and closed solid waste management sites and operations. California Human Health Screening Levels The California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSLs or "Chisels") are concentrations of 54 hazardous chemicals in soil or soil gas that CaIEPA considers to be below thresholds of concern for risks to human health. The CHHSLs were developed by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment on behalf of CaIEPA. The CHHSLs were developed using standard exposure assumptions and chemical toxicity values published by the EPA and CaIEPA. The CHHSLs can be used to screen sites for potential human health concerns where releases of hazardous chemicals to soils have occurred. Under most circumstances, the presence of a chemical in soil, soil gas, or indoor air at concentrations below the corresponding CHHSL can be assumed to not pose a significant health risk to people who may live or work at the site. There are separate CHHSLs for residential and commercial/industrial sites. Occupational Safety: Title 8 — CalOSHA CalOSHA administers federal occupational safety requirements and additional state requirements in accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 8. CalOSHA requires preparation of an Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP), which is an employee safety program of inspections, procedures to correct unsafe conditions, employee training, and occupational safety communication. This program is administered via inspections by the local CalOSHA enforcement unit. CalOSHA regulates lead exposure during construction activities under CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1, Lead, which establishes the rules and procedures for conducting demolition and construction activities such that worker exposure to lead contamination is minimized or avoided. Compliance with CalOSHA regulations and associated programs would be required for the proposed Project due to the potential hazards posed by onsite construction activities and contamination from former uses. Emergency Response to Hazardous Materials Incidents California has developed an emergency response plan to coordinate emergency services provided by federal, state, and local government, and private agencies. The plan is administered by the California Emergency Management Agency and includes response to hazardous materials incidents. The California Emergency Management Agency coordinates the response of other agencies, including CaIEPA, California City of Santa Ana 5.7-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Highway Patrol, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board, South Coast Air Quality Management District, County Fire Department, and the County Health Department. California Public Utilities Code, Section 21676, Airport Land Use Commission Prior to the amendment of a general plan or specific plan, or the adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation within the planning boundary established by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), the local agency shall first refer the proposed action to the commission. If the commission determines that the proposed action is inconsistent with the commission's plan, the referring agency shall be notified. The local agency may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this article, which are to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses. At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the commission, the local agency governing body shall provide the commission and the division a copy of the proposed decision and findings. The commission and the division may provide comments to the local agency governing body within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. If the commission or the division's comments are not available within this time limit, the local agency governing body may act without them. The comments by the division or the commission are advisory to the local agency governing body. The local agency governing body shall include comments from the commission and the division in the public record of any final decision to overrule the commission, which may only be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the governing body. South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1403 SCAQMD Rule 1403 governs the demolition of buildings containing asbestos materials. Rule 1403 specifies work practices to minimize asbestos emissions during building demolition and renovation activities, including the removal and associated disturbance of asbestos containing materials. The requirements for demolition and renovation activities include asbestos surveying, notification, asbestos containing materials removal procedures and time schedules, handling and cleanup procedures, storage, and disposal requirements for asbestos containing waste materials. California Emergency Services Act The California Emergency Services Act (Government Code Section 8550 et seq.) was adopted to establish the State's roles and responsibilities during human -made or natural emergencies that result in conditions of disaster and/or extreme peril to life, property, or the resources of the State. This act is intended to protect health and safety by preserving the lives and property of the people of the State. Emergency Response The City of Santa Ana contracts with the Orange County Sheriff Department and the Orange County Fire Authority for coordination of emergency response to the City. The Standardized Emergency Management System is required under Government Code Section 8607(a) for managing responses to multiagency and multi -jurisdiction emergencies in the State. The Standardized Emergency Management System was established to standardize key elements of the emergency management system, so that mobilization, deployment, utilization, tracking, and demobilization of mutual aid resources are implemented effectively. Mutual aid is voluntary aid and assistance by the provision of services and facilities, including fire, sheriff, medical, health, communication, transportation, and utilities. City of Santa Ana 5.7-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport The JWA is within the oversight of the Orange County ALUC. The ALUC is required to prepare and adopt an airport land use plan for each of the airports within its jurisdiction. The ALUC prepared the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for JWA (amended April 17, 2008). The AELUP intends "to safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the plan seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace." Land uses within the AELUP planning area boundaries are required to conform to safety, noise, and height restrictions. Public Utilities Code Section 21675(c) requires that area surrounding any airport which affects, or is affected by, aircraft operations be embraced by the boundaries of its compatibility plan (i.e., AELUP). The planning area sets limits of the area within which proposed land use projects are to be referred to the ALUC for review. Planning area boundaries are determined by the location and configuration of the airport included in the plan, and the extent of the noise and safety impacts associated with that airport, with certain exceptions. The overall planning area is the furthest extent of the 60 CNEL contour, the FAR Part 77 Notification Imaginary Surface area, and the runway safety zones associated with the airport. In most instances, the airport influence area is designated by the ALUC as its planning area boundary for the airport and the two terms can be considered synonymous. Building Height Restrictions: The ALUC has adopted the FAR Part 77 as the criteria for determining height restrictions in Orange County. These regulations are the only definitive standard available and the standard most generally used (AELUP 2008). The allowable height of structures surrounding an airport is described in FAR Part 77 as the allowable height at which safe movement of aircraft occurs. The regulation requires that notice be given to the FAA if there is a proposal to construct a structure that would exceed a 100:1 slope of an imaginary surface extending outward for 20,000 feet from the nearest runway at JWA. Beyond the 100:1 imaginary surface, FAR Part 77 requires notification to FAA for any project that will be more than 200 feet in height above the ground level. Policies: The following policies in the ALUC Airport Environs Land Use Plan are relevant to the Project: Policy 3.2.1: Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be inconsistent with the AELUP which; 1. Places people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, 2. Concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, 3. Permits structures of excessive height in areas which would affect adversely the continued operation of the airport, or 4. Permits activities or facilities that would affect adversely aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.4: Noise Impact Zone "2" - Moderate Noise Impact (60 dB CNEL or greater, less than 65 dB CNEL). Noise impacts in this area are sufficient to require sound attenuation as set forth in the California Noise Insulation Standards, Title 25, California Code of Regulations. Single noise events in this area create serious disturbances to many inhabitants. Even though the Commission would not find residential units incompatible in this area, the Commission strongly recommends that residential units be limited or excluded from this area unless sufficiently sound attenuated. The residential use interior sound attenuation requirement shall be a CNEL value not exceeding an interior level of 45 dB. In addition, it is recommended that designated outdoor common or recreational areas within Noise Impact Zone 2 provide outdoor signage informing the public of the presence of operating aircraft. City of Santa Ana 5.7-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Policy 3.2.5: Runway Protection Zone "RPZ," Extreme Crash Hazard. The severe potential for loss of life and property due to accidents prohibits most land uses in this area. Only airport related uses and open space uses, including agriculture and certain types of transportation and utility uses are permitted. No buildings intended for human habitation are permitted in the RPZ. Furthermore, because of the proximity to aeronautical operations, uses in this area must not attract birds nor emit excessive glare or light, nor produce or cause steam, smoke, dust, or electronic interference so as to interfere with, or endanger, aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.6: Height Restriction Zone. Any object, which by reason of its height or location would interfere with the established, or planned, airport flight procedures, patterns, or navigational systems, is unacceptable. This will ensure the stability of local air transportation, as well as promote land uses that are compatible with the airport environs. However, any object which rises above the height of surrounding development, or which is located in close proximity to any of the various flight paths, must be clearly visible during hours of twilight or darkness and must not threaten, endanger, or interfere with aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.7: Airspace/Airport Inconsistency. Any structure, either within or outside of the planning area, is inconsistent with this AELUP if it: 1. Is determined to be a "Hazard" by the FAA; 2. Would raise the ceiling or visibility minimums at an airport for an existing or planned instrument procedure (i.e., a procedure consistent with the FAA approved airport layout plan or a proposed procedure formally on file with the FAA); 3. Would result in a loss in airport utility, e.g. in a diminution of the established operational efficiency and capacity of the airport, such as by causing the usable length of the runway (s) to be reduced; or 4. Would conflict with air space used for the airport traffic pattern or enroute navigation to and from the airport. Policy 3.3.6: Condition which may serve to mitigate a project/action and thus may permit the ALUC to make a finding of consistency includes providing noticing that states: "Notice of Airport in Vicinity. This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you." City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The following goals and policies from the existing General Plan Airport Environs Element are relevant to the proposed Project: Goal 1: Protect sensitive land uses from airport related noise impacts. Policy 1.1: Residential development within the JWA 65 dBA CNEL Noise Contour or greater is not supported. Policy 1.2: Advocate that future flight path selection be directed away from existing noise sensitive land uses. Policy 1.3: Require all residential land uses in 60 dBA CNEL or 65 dBA CNEL Noise Contours to be sufficiently mitigated so as not to exceed an interior standard of 45 dB(A) CNEL. City of Santa Ana 5.7-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Goal 2: Protect the safety of the general public from aircraft hazards. Policy 2.1: Comply with FAA regulations and ALUC requirements on new development and redevelopment located within the height restriction zone for John Wayne Airport per PUC Section 21676. Policy 2.2: Minimize hazards to aeronautical operations by ensuring land uses do not emit excessive glare, light, steam, smoke, dust, or electronic interference in compliance with FAA regulations and the JWA AELUP. Policy 2.3: Comply with FAR Part 77 and the AELUPs for JWA and Heliports as they may be amended from time to time. Policy 2.4: Prior to the amendment of the City's general plan or a specific plan, or the adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation within the planning boundary established by the ALUC, and pursuant to PUC Section 21676, the local agency shall first refer the proposed action to the ALUC. 5.7.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The existing light industrial buildings on the site were developed in 1979 and 1981. All three buildings were formerly occupied by Ricoh Electronics Inc, an imaging and electronics company. The Ricoh operation included a thermal processing area in the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building, a machine shop in the 2310 South Redhill Avenue building, and toner manufacturing in the 2300 South Redhill Avenue building. The site was vacated by Ricoh in 2018 and the buildings are partially re -occupied and used for storage, electronics recycling, and as temporary housing for the homeless (Phase 1 2019). Former Underground Storage Tanks The Phase II ESA (Phase II 2018) describes that three former underground storage tanks (UST) were located in the southwest portion of the Project site, behind the 2300 Red Hill Avenue building. The 2018 Phase II testing in this former UST area identified that approximately 5 feet of soil, impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) above residential screening levels, exists from 14 to 19 feet bgs within a 4,500 square foot area. The Phase II ESA estimates approximately 850 cubic yards of contaminated soil would require excavation and disposal from this portion of the Project site. In addition, the Phase II identified that another previous UST located at the northeast corner of the 2310 Red Hill Avenue building that tested positive for TPH-(diesel) concentrations in excess of typical regulatory action levels. It is estimated that roughly 50 cubic yards of soil at a depth of 14 to 19 feet bgs would require excavation and offsite disposal. Vapor Intrusion As described previously, the Project site was previously used for thermal processing, toner manufacturing, and utilized hazardous materials onsite. The Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation that was conducted in 2019 indicated no detectable levels of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in soil gas, and the levels of petroleum hydrocarbons and VOC in soil do not exceed residential use standards (Hilman 2019). City of Santa Ana 5.7-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Asbestos Asbestos is a naturally occurring fibrous material that was used as a fireproofing and insulating agent in building construction before such uses were banned by the USEPA in the 1970s, although some nonfriable2 use of asbestos in roofing materials still exists. The presence of asbestos can be found in materials such as ducting insulation, wallboard, shingles, ceiling tiles, floor tiles, insulation, plaster, floor backing, and many other building materials. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulation 29 CFR 1926.1 101 requires certain construction materials to be presumed to contain asbestos, for purposes of this regulation. All thermal system insulation), surfacing material, and asphalt/vinyl flooring that are present in a building constructed prior to 1981 and have not been appropriately tested are "presumed asbestos - containing material". Asbestos and asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) are considered both a hazardous air pollutant and a human health hazard. The risk to human health is from inhalation of airborne asbestos, which commonly occurs when ACMs are disturbed during such activities as demolition and renovation. The buildings within the Project site were constructed in 1979 and 1981 when asbestos containing materials were commonly used and the Phase I identified that asbestos containing material are possible on the site (Phase 1). Lead In 1978, the Consumer Product Safety Commission set the allowable lead levels in paint at 0.06 percent by weight in a dry film of newly applied paint. In the 1970s, the chief concern for lead-based paint was its cumulative effect on body systems, primarily when paint chips containing lead were ingested by children. Research in the early 1980s showed that lead dust is of special concern because the smaller particles are more easily absorbed by the body. Common methods of paint removal, such as sanding, scraping, and burning, create excessive amounts of dust. Lead dust is especially hazardous to young children because they play on the floor and engage in a great deal of hand-to-mouth activity, increasing their potential for exposure. Due to the age of the onsite buildings, it is possible that lead-based paint and other lead containing materials are present in the buildings on the Project site. John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport (JWA) is located approximately 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site under the primary aircraft approach corridor. The Project site is not located within JWA's Airport Safety Zone, as shown in Figure 5.7-1. In addition, the Project site is located outside of both the airport's actual (2018) and planned 60 CNEL contours (Figures 5.7-2 and 5.7-3). However, the Project site is located within the AELUP Notification area for JWA (shown on Figure 5.7-4), within the JWA planning area boundary, and under the FAR Part 77 Notification Imaginary Surface area (shown on Figure 5.7-5). The ALUC has adopted Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 as the criteria for determining height restrictions in Orange County. FAR Part 77 requires notification to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for any project that would be more than 200 feet in height above ground level or within the imaginary surface of a 100:1 slope extending outward for 20,000 feet from the nearest runway. As shown on Figure 5.7-5, the Project site is located outside of the 200 -foot -high imaginary surface area for JWA. Therefore, FAA notification for the proposed Project would not be required. Because the Project site is located within the AELUP Notification area for JWA and within the JWA planning area boundary (shown on Figures 5.7-4 and 5.7-5), and the Project proposes a General Plan Amendment 2 Nonfriable asbestos refers to ACMs that contain asbestos fibers in a solid matrix that does not allow for them to be easily released. City of Santa Ana 5.7-10 Draft EIR January 2020 SANTA j ANA John Wayne Airport Saftey Zone m TU ST1 y John Wayne Airport LEGEND The Bowery Draft EIR SAFETY GOMPATIBIUTY ZONES FOR RUNWAY1L & 19R (A MEDIUM 1� GENERAL AVIATION RUNWAYAS DESCRIBED IN THE CALIFORNIA AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING HANDBOOK, JANUARY 2092 EDITION) SAFETY COMPATIBILITY ZONES FOR RUNWAY 1R & 19L ((A SHORT 1fi GENERAL AVIATION RUNWAY AS DESCRIBED IN THE CAEIFORMA AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING HANDBOOK, JANUARY 2002 EDITICN) Project Site Figure 5.7-1 1. RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE 2. INNER APPROACH /DEPARTURE ZONE rN4, 3. INNER TURNING ZONE OUTER APPROACH /DEPARTURE ZONE 5. SIDELINE ZONE S. TRAFFIC PATTERN ZONE The Bowery Draft EIR SAFETY GOMPATIBIUTY ZONES FOR RUNWAY1L & 19R (A MEDIUM 1� GENERAL AVIATION RUNWAYAS DESCRIBED IN THE CALIFORNIA AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING HANDBOOK, JANUARY 2092 EDITION) SAFETY COMPATIBILITY ZONES FOR RUNWAY 1R & 19L ((A SHORT 1fi GENERAL AVIATION RUNWAY AS DESCRIBED IN THE CAEIFORMA AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING HANDBOOK, JANUARY 2002 EDITICN) Project Site Figure 5.7-1 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.7-12 Draft EIR January 2020 John Wayne Noise Impact Zones Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in white. LEGEND —60— CNEL CONTOUR r—1 Project Site RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE —••-- CITY BOUNDARIES AIRPORT BOUNDARIES The Bowery Figure 5.7-2 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.7-14 Draft EIR January 2020 N •N • 2S 6S v.. or it • i� ,So 1 _.•: ,��. 0. VIP �11 1K • 2S 6S v.. The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.7-16 Draft EIR January 2020 AELUP Notification Area for JWA Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in white. FAR PART 77 Notification Area for John Wayne Airport: 20,000' Radius at 100:1 Slope LEGEND OrN--- 20,000'Radius r—q Project Site 4, ---- CITY BOUNDARIES AIRPORT BOUNDARIES The Bowery Figure 5.7-4 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.7-18 Draft EIR January 2020 John Wayne Airport Planning Boundaries and Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in white. FAR PART 77 LEGEND —•-- CITY BOUNDARIES Project Site AIRPORT BOUNDARIES The Bowery Figure 5.7-5 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.7-20 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials and a zone change, the City is required to refer the proposed Project to the ALUC for review, pursuant to the California Public Utilities Code Section 21676, as listed previously. 5.7.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: HAZ-1 Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials; HAZ-2 Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; HAZ-3 Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school; HAZ-4 Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment; HAZ-5 Result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area for a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such plan has not been adopted, be within 2 miles of a public airport use airport or public use airport; HAZ-6 Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or HAZ-7 Expose people or structures either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. 5.7.5 METHODOLOGY This evaluation of the significance of potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials considers both direct effects to the resource and indirect effects in a local or regional context. Potentially significant impacts would generally result in the loss or degradation of public health and safety or conflict with local, state, or federal agency regulations. Information for this section was obtained, in part, from the Phase I and Phase II ESAs and the Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report. The methodology for the evaluation of potential Project impacts related to the operation of JWA focuses on potential hazards associated with development of the Project site's structure and ongoing operation of JWA. The proposed Project was evaluated for compliance with existing FAA guidelines and regulations related to siting structures near an operating airport and consistency with the policies of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for JWA that are related to implementation of the proposed Project. 5.7.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT HAZ-1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH THE ROUTINE TRANSPORT, USE OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. City of Santa Ana 5.7-21 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction The proposed construction activities would involve the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials such as paints, solvents, oils, grease, and caulking during construction activities. In addition, hazardous materials would routinely be needed for fueling and servicing construction equipment on the site. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous, and all storage, handling, use, and disposal of these materials are regulated by federal and state regulations that are implemented by the City of Santa Ana during building permitting for construction activities. As a result, hazardous material impacts related to construction materials would be less than significant. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment determined that asbestos -containing materials and lead-based paint may exist due to the date of construction of the existing buildings. Therefore, asbestos surveys and abatement would be required prior to demolition or renovation of the existing building pursuant to the existing South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Cal/OSHA, and the sections of the California Health and Safety Code, which are described above in the Regulatory Setting. These requirements were developed to protect human health and the environment from the hazards associated with exposure to lead based materials and airborne asbestos fibers. Compliance with these existing regulations, as ensured through the permitting process and included as PPP HAZ-1 and PPP HAZ-2, would reduce impacts related to routine transport and disposal of asbestos -containing materials and lead-based paint during construction activities to a less than significant level. In addition, as described previously, the Project site contains approximately 900 cubic yards of contaminated soil that would require excavation and disposal as part of excavation and grading activities. This includes approximately, 850 cubic yards of TPH contaminated soils (above residential screening levels) and 80 cubic yards of TPH-(diesel) contaminated soils. These contaminated soils would need to be excavated and removed during Project excavation and grading activities as required by DTSC, California Integrated Waste Management Board, RWQCB, OCFA, and the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA). Due to the existence of the contaminated soils and excavation activities that would occur during Project construction, implementation of the proposed Project has the potential to result in a hazard to the public or environment. As a result, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would be implemented to reduce the potential risks related to accidental release and exposure of people and the environment to the contaminated soils. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 requires that a qualified consultant prepare a Soil Management Plan (SMP) to be used by construction workers to remove and dispose of the areas of TPH impacted soil. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 requires excavation of contaminated soils be completed pursuant to existing DTSC and RWQCB requirements, soils sampling ensure all contaminated soils are removed, and that a certified hazardous waste hauler remove and transport all TPH impacted soil and other potentially hazardous materials per California Hazardous Waste Regulations to a landfill permitted by the state to accept hazardous materials. Excavated soil containing hazardous substances would be classified as a hazardous waste if they exhibit the characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity (CCR, Title 22, Division 4.5, Chapter 1 1, Article 3). The SMP would detail hazardous materials excavation and disposal methods and requirements pursuant to the regulation of Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (CalOSHA) and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) that regulates the removal, transportation, and disposal of hazardous waste to protect human health and the environment. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 impacts related to hazards from contaminated soils would be less than significant. Operation Operation of the proposed Project includes activities related to retail commercial, restaurant, and multi- family residential development, which generally uses common hazardous materials, including: solvents, City of Santa Ana 5.7-22 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials cleaning agents, paints, pesticides, batteries, and aerosol cans. Although the Project would utilize common types of hazardous materials, normal routine use of these products pursuant to existing regulations would not result in a significant hazard to the environment, residents, or workers in the vicinity of the Project. Therefore, operational impacts related to routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during operation of the Project would be less than significant. IMPACT HAZ-2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT THROUGH REASONABLY FORESEEABLE UPSET OR ACCIDENT CONDITIONS INVOLVING THE RELEASE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INTO THE ENVIRONMENT. Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction Accidental Releases. While the routine use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials in accordance with applicable regulations during demolition, excavation, grading, and construction activities would not pose health risks or result in significant impacts; improper use, storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes could result in accidental spills or releases, posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. Thus, implementation of the proposed Project could potentially result in the accidental release of hazardous materials. The use of BMPs during construction implemented as part of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System General Construction Permit (and included as PPP WQ-1) would minimize potential adverse effects to workers, the public, and the environment. Construction contract specifications would include strict on-site handling rules and BMPs that include, but are not limited to: • Establishing a dedicated area for fuel storage and refueling activities that includes secondary containment protection measures and spill control supplies; • Following manufacturers' recommendations on the use, storage, and disposal of chemical products used in construction; • Avoiding overtopping construction equipment fuel tanks; • Properly containing and removing grease and oils during routine maintenance of equipment; and • Properly disposing of discarded containers of fuels and other chemicals. Contaminated Soils. as described previously, the Project site contains approximately 900 cubic yards of contaminated soil that would require excavation and disposal pursuant to the requirements of the DTSC, California Integrated Waste Management Board, RWQCB, OCFA, and the OCHCA. Due to the existence of the contaminated soils and excavation activities that would occur during Project construction, implementation of the proposed Project has the potential to result in upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. As a result, Mitigation Measure Haz-1 is included to require a Soil Management Plan (SMP) to be prepared and used by construction workers to remove and dispose of the areas of TPH impacted soil. Mitigation Measure Haz-1 requires excavation of contaminated soils be completed pursuant to existing DTSC and RWQCB requirements, soils sampling ensure all contaminated soils are removed, and that a certified hazardous waste hauler remove and transport all TPH impacted soil and other potentially hazardous materials per California Hazardous Waste Regulations to a landfill permitted by the state to accept hazardous materials. With implementation of Mitigation Measure Haz-1 impacts related to hazards from contaminated soils would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.7-23 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Asbestos Containing Materials. Buildings on the Project site were constructed in 1979 and 1981 when many structures were constructed with what are now recognized as hazardous building materials, such as lead and asbestos. Demolition of these structures could result in the release of hazardous materials. However, asbestos abatement contractors must follow state regulations contained in California Code of Regulations Sections 1529, and 341.6 through 341.14 as implemented by SCAQMD Rule 1403 to ensure that asbestos removed during demolition or redevelopment of the existing buildings is transported and disposed of at an appropriate facility. The contractor and hauler of the material are required to file a Hazardous Waste Manifest which details the hauling of the material from the site and the disposal of it. Section 19827.5 of the California Health and Safety Code requires that local agencies not issue demolition permit until an applicant has demonstrated compliance with notification requirements under applicable federal regulations regarding hazardous air pollutants, including asbestos. These requirements are included as PPP HAZ-1 to ensure that the Project applicant submits verification to the City that the appropriate activities related to asbestos have occurred, which would reduce the potential of impacts related to asbestos to a less than significant level. Lead Based Materials. Lead-based materials may also be located within existing structures on the Project site. The lead exposure guidelines provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development provide regulations related to the handling and disposal of lead-based products. Federal regulations to manage and control exposure to lead-based paint are described in Code of Federal Regulations Title 29, Section 1926.62, and state regulations related to lead are provided in the California Code of Regulations Title 8 Section 1532.1, as implemented by Cal -OSHA. These regulations cover the demolition, removal, cleanup, transportation, storage and disposal of lead -containing material. The regulations outline the permissible exposure limit, protective measures, monitoring and compliance to ensure the safety of construction workers exposed to lead-based materials. Cal/OSHA's Lead in Construction Standard requires project applicants to develop and implement a lead compliance plan when lead-based paint would be disturbed during construction or demolition activities. The plan must describe activities that could emit lead, methods for complying with the standard, safe work practices, and a plan to protect workers from exposure to lead during construction activities. In addition, Cal/OSHA requires 24-hour notification if more than 100 square feet of lead-based paint would be disturbed. These requirements are included as PPP HAZ-2 to ensure that the Project applicant submits verification to the City that the appropriate activities related to lead have occurred, which would reduce the potential of impacts related to lead-based materials to a less than significant level. Undocumented Hazardous Materials. As described previously, the Project site has a long history of various uses that includes use and storage of hazardous materials. As a result, there is the potential for undocumented hazardous material to exist onsite. However, the existing federal and state regulations related to hazardous materials and construction includes procedures to follow in the case hazardous materials are uncovered during construction activities. Excavated soil containing hazardous substances and hazardous building materials would be classified as a hazardous waste if they exhibit the characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity (CCR, Title 22, Division 4.5, Chapter 11, Article 3). State and federal laws require detailed planning to ensure that hazardous materials are properly handled, used, stored, and disposed of, and in the event that such materials are accidentally released, to prevent or to mitigate injury to health or the environment. These regulations are detailed previously and include, but are not limited to, the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act that is implemented by OSHA, and the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. Additionally, the California Integrated Waste Management Board and the RWQCB specifically address management of hazardous materials and waste handling in their adopted regulations (CCR, Title 14 and CCR, Title 27). Furthermore, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would reduce impacts related to other soil contamination, not identified previously. Thus, with implementation of existing regulations City of Santa Ana 5.7-24 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, impacts related to upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant. Operation As described above, the risks related to upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be adequately addressed through compliance with existing federal, state, and local regulations. Development under the proposed Project would involve multi -family, restaurant, and retail commercial uses that would use and store common hazardous materials such as paints, solvents, and cleaning products. Also, building mechanical systems and grounds and landscape maintenance could also use a variety of products formulated with hazardous materials, including fuels, cleaners, lubricants, adhesives, sealers, and pesticides/herbicides. As described previously, normal routine use of these products pursuant to existing regulations would not result in a significant hazard to the environment, residents, or workers in the vicinity of the Project. In addition, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) is required to be implemented for the Project (as further discussed in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water Quality and included as PPP WQ-2) The BMPs that would be implemented as part of the WQMP would protect human health and the environment should any accidental spills or releases of hazardous materials occur during operation of the Project. As a result, operation of the proposed Project would not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, and impacts would be less than significant. IMPACT HAZ-3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT EMIT HAZARDOUS EMISSIONS OR HANDLE HAZARDOUS OR ACUTELY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, SUBSTANCES OR WASTE WITHIN 0.25 MILE OF AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED SCHOOL. Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located 0.7 mile from the closest school, which is Heritage Elementary School, located at 15400 Landsdowne Road, Tustin. Thus, the proposed Project would not be within one-quarter mile of an existing school. Construction As described in the previous responses, Project construction would involve the use and disposal of various hazardous materials. However, all storage, handling, use, and disposal of these materials are regulated by federal and state regulations that are implemented by the City of Santa Ana during construction permitting, such as those included as PPP HAZ-1 and PPP HAZ-2. In addition, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would ensure that contaminated soils are not released into the environment, as described in Impact HAZ-1 and HAZ-2. Also, the hazardous materials would travel to and from the site from the SR -55 freeway, which is directly accessed by Dyer Road, which is the opposite direction of the school facilities. Thus, the hazardous materials handled during construction of the Project would not travel past the school facilities and potential impacts to the schools related to transport of hazardous materials would not occur. Operation As described in response to Impact HAZ-1, operation of the proposed Project includes activities related to retail commercial, restaurant, and multi -family residential development, which generally uses common hazardous materials, including: solvents, cleaning agents, paints, pesticides, batteries, and aerosol cans. Normal routine use of these products pursuant to existing regulations would not result in a significant hazard to the environment or school facilities in the vicinity of the Project. Therefore, operational impacts related to nearby schools would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.7-25 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials IMPACT HAZ-4: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT BE LOCATED ON A SITE THAT IS INCLUDED ON A LIST OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES COMPILED PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65962.5 AND, AS A RESULT, CREATE A SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT. No Impact. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessments that was conducted database searches to determine if the Project area or any nearby properties are identified as currently having hazardous materials. The record searches determined that although the site has a history of various uses, and identified as previously generating hazardous wastes and clean-up activities, the Project site is not located on or near by a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (Phase 1 2018). The Phase I ESA did not identify any nearby or surrounding area sites that are included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and as a result, impacts related to hazards from being located on or adjacent to a hazardous materials site would not occur from implementation of the proposed Project. IMPACT HAZ-5: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN A SAFETY HAZARD OR EXCESSIVE NOISE FOR A PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN AN AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN, OR WHERE SUCH A PLAN HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED, BE WITHIN 2 MILES OF A PUBLIC AIRPORT OR PUBLIC USE AIRPORT. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, JWA is located approximately 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site under the primary aircraft approach corridor. The Project site is not located within JWA's Airport Safety Zone, as shown in Figure 5.7-1) and is located outside of the airport's 60 CNEL contours (Figures 5.7-2 and 5.7-3). Table 1 of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport shows that residential land uses outside of the 60 CNEL contour are "normally consistent". However, the Project site is located within the AELUP Notification area for JWA (shown on Figure 5.7-4), within the JWA planning area boundary, and under the FAR Part 77 Notification Imaginary Surface area; but because the Project site is located outside of the 200 -foot -high imaginary surface area for JWA, FAA notification for the proposed Project would not be required. The proposed Project involves redevelopment of the site to provide 5 -story buildings. The tallest point on the buildings would be approximately 94 -feet from ground level. At 2.2 miles from JWA and at a maximum height of 94 -feet, the Project would not create any imaginary surfaces with any of the specific slope characteristics within the imaginary surface area for the airport. As shown on Figure 5.7-3, the Project site is located outside of the actual (201 8) JWA 60 CNEL noise contours, which indicates that noise from aircraft on the Project site is below 60 dB CNEL and is outside of the noise impact area related to JWA operations (also shown on Figure 5.7-2). Thus, impacts related to hazardous noise conditions from operation of JWA would be less than significant. In addition, the proposed Project would not result in hazards related to excessive glare, light, steam, smoke, dust, or electronic interference. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed Project would not generate substantial light or glare. Exterior lighting fixtures and security lighting would be installed in accordance with Municipal Code Division 3, Building Security Regulations, which includes specifications for shielding and intensity of security lighting. In addition, the proposed Project would not use highly reflective surfaces, and does not include large areas of glass on the buildings. Therefore, the Project would not generate substantial sources of glare. City of Santa Ana 5.7-26 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials As described in Section 5.2, Air Quality, operation of the proposed residential and commercial uses would not generate substantial quantities of steam, smoke, or dust emissions. As described, dust emissions are regulated by AQMD requirements and construction related air quality emissions that could include steam, smoke, and dust emissions would be less than significant with implementation of the standard AQMD Rules listed in Section 5.2, Air Quality. The proposed Project consists of residential and commercial uses that would include the use of typical electronics, such as computers, televisions, and other electronics with wireless capability. These types of electronics are currently being used by the existing industrial land uses on the site, and other uses in the vicinity of the site. The new residential and commercial uses on the site would use similar technology that does not cause electronic interference that could affect aircraft. Thus, impacts related to electronic interference with operations of the JWA would not occur. Due to the nature of the required City approvals (i.e., the General Plan and zoning amendment), the City of Santa Ana is required, pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676, to refer the proposed Project to the ALUC for ALUC review. The proposed Project would comply with this ALUC notification and all other applicable rules and regulations as they pertain to JWA and airport safety. Overall, because the Project is not located within the JWA Airport Safety Zone, the Airport Impact Zone, or the JWA 60 CNEL noise contour; and it would not penetrate the imaginary surfaces area or result in hazards related to excessive glare, light, steam, smoke, dust, or electronic interference, the proposed Project would not introduce a safety hazard associated with airport operations for people residing, working, and visiting the Project site. Thus, Project - related hazard and noise impacts associated with JWA operations would be less than significant. IMPACT HAZ-6: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT IMPAIR IMPLEMENTATION OF, OR PHYSICALLY INTERFERE WITH, AN ADOPTED EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN OR EMERGENCY EVACUATION PLAN. Less than Significant Impact. The Orange County Fire Authority (via contract with the City) and the City of Santa Ana Police Department provide coordination of emergency response within the City. Construction The proposed construction activities, including equipment and supply staging and storage, would occur within and adjacent to the Project site and would not restrict access of emergency vehicles to the Project site or adjacent areas. As provided in the Project Description, construction of the proposed Project would include new driveways to the Project site, new sidewalks, and utility improvements and connections that would require the temporary closure of travel lanes, but full roadway closure and traffic detours are not expected to be necessary. Construction activities that may temporarily restrict vehicular traffic would be required to implement adequate measures to facilitate the safe passage of persons and vehicles through/around any required temporary road restrictions in accordance with Section 503 of the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 9), which requires that prior to any activity that would encroach into a right-of-way, the area of encroachment be safeguarded through the installation of safety devices that would be specified by the City's Building and Safety Division during the construction permitting process to ensure that construction activities would not physically interfere with emergency access or evacuation. Therefore, implementation of the Project through the City's permitting process would reduce potential construction related physical interference impacts to emergency access to a less than significant level. City of Santa Ana 5.7-27 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Operation The Project would include vehicular access to the site from driveways on both Warner and Red Hill Avenues. As described in Section 5.13, Transportation, these driveways would provide adequate and safe circulation to, from, and through the Project site and would provide a variety of routes for emergency responders to access the Project site and surrounding areas. During operation of the Project, residents and commercial building tenants would be required to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles as required and verified by the City and the OCFA. Because the Project is required to comply with all applicable City codes, as verified by the City and OCFA, potential impacts related to emergency evacuation or emergency response plans would be less than significant. IMPACT HAZ-7: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT EXPOSE PEOPLE OR STRUCTURES EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY TO A SIGNIFICANT RISK OF LOSS, INJURY, OR DEATH INVOLVING WILDFIRES. No Impact. The Project site is located within an urban developed area and is not located within an identified wildland fire hazard area and is not an area where residences are intermixed with wildlands. In addition, implementation of the proposed Project would be required to adhere to the following chapters of the City's Municipal Code to reduce potential fire hazards: Chapter 8.2 Uniform Building Code, Chapter 8.4 Uniform Mechanical Code, Chapter 8.5 National Electric Code, and Chapter 14 City of Santa Ana Fire Code. Additionally, the Project would be in compliance with any further guidelines from OCFA related to fire prevention and is subject to approval by the City's Building Division. Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildfires. 5.7.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative land use changes within the City would have the potential to expose future area residents, employees, and visitors to chemical hazards through redevelopment of sites and structures that may be contaminated from either historic or ongoing uses. The severity of potential hazards for individual projects would depend upon the location, type, and size of development and the specific hazards associated with individual sites. All hazardous materials users and transporters, as well as hazardous waste generators and disposers are subject to regulations that require proper transport, handling, use, storage, and disposal of such materials to ensure public safety. Thus, if hazardous materials are found to be present on present or future project sites appropriate remediation activities would be required pursuant to standard federal, state, and regional regulations. Compliance with the relevant federal, state, and local regulations during the construction and operation of related projects would ensure that cumulative impacts from hazardous materials would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.7-28 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.7.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES Existing Regulations Federal • United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 42, Sections 6901 et seq.: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act • United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 42, Sections 11001 et seq.: Emergency Planning & Community Right to Know Act • United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 49, Parts 101 et seq.: Regulations implementing the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 49 Sections 5101 et seq.) • United States Code of Federal Regulations Title 15, Sections 2601 et seq.: Toxic Substances Control Act • US Environmental Protection Agency Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act, 40 United States Code of Regulations Section 763 State • California Occupational Safety and Health Administration Regulation 29, CFR Standard 1926.62 • California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2: California Building Code • California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 9: California Fire Code • California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 1532.1, Lead in Construction Standard • California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 1529: Asbestos • Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 1532.1: Lead Regional • South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1403: Asbestos Plans, Program and Policies (PPPs) and Standard Conditions The following Plans, Programs, and Policies (PPP) related to hazards and hazardous materials are incorporated into the Project and would reduce impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. These actions will be included in the Project's mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP): PPP HAZ-1: SCAQMD Rule 1403. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the Project applicant shall submit verification to the City Building and Safety Division that an asbestos survey has been conducted at all existing buildings located on the Project site. If asbestos is found, the Project applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations of South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1403. Rule 1403 regulations require that the following actions be taken: notification of SCAQMD prior to construction activity, asbestos removal in accordance with prescribed procedures, placement of collected asbestos in leak -tight containers or wrapping, and proper disposal. PPP HAZ-2: Lead. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the Project applicant shall submit verification to the City Building and Safety Division that a lead-based paint survey has been conducted at all existing buildings located on the Project site. If lead-based paint is found, the Project applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations for proper removal and disposal of the lead-based paint. Cal - OSHA has established limits of exposure to lead contained in dusts and fumes. Specifically, CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1 provides for exposure limits, exposure monitoring, and respiratory protection, and mandates good working practices by workers exposed to lead. City of Santa Ana 5.7-29 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials PPP WQ-1: NPDES/SWPPP. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the applicant shall provide the City Building and Safety Division evidence of compliance with the NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) requirement to obtain a construction permit from the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB). The permit requirement applies to grading and construction sites of one acre or larger. The Project applicant/proponent shall comply by submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI) and by developing and implementing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a monitoring program and reporting plan for the construction site. PPP WQ-2: WQMP. Prior to the approval of the Grading Plan and issuance of Grading Permits a completed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be submitted to and approved by the City Building and Safety Division. The WQMP shall identify all Post -Construction, Site Design. Source Control, and Treatment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be incorporated into the development project in order to minimize the adverse effects on receiving waters. 5.7.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Without mitigation, Impacts HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 would be potentially significant: Upon implementation of regulatory requirements Impacts HAZ-3, HAZ-4, HAZ-5, HAZ-6, and HAZ-7 would be less than significant. 5.7.10 MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) shall be prepared by a qualified hazardous materials consultant and shall detail procedures and protocols for excavation and disposal of onsite hazardous materials, including: • A certified hazardous waste hauler shall remove all potentially hazardous soils. Excavation of contaminated soils shall be removed. In addition, sampling of soil shall be conducted during excavation to ensure that all contaminated soils are removed, and that residential Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for residential uses are not exceeded. Excavated materials shall be transported per California Hazardous Waste Regulations to a landfill permitted by the state to accept hazardous materials. • Any subsurface materials exposed during construction activities that appear suspect of contamination, either from visual staining or suspect odors, shall require immediate cessation of excavation activities. Soils suspected of contamination shall be tested for potential contamination. If contamination is found to be present per the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) ESLs for residential uses, it shall be transported and disposed of per California Hazardous Waste Regulations to an appropriately permitted landfill. • A Health and Safety Plan (HSP) shall be prepared for each contractor that addresses potential safety and health hazards and includes the requirements and procedures for employee protection. The HSP shall also outline proper soil handling procedures and health and safety requirements to minimize worker and public exposure to hazardous materials during construction. • All SMP measures shall be printed on the construction documents, contracts, and project plans prior to issuance of grading permits. City of Santa Ana 5.7-30 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5.7.1 1 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The mitigation measure and existing regulatory programs described previously would reduce potential impacts associated with hazardous materials for Impact HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would occur. REFERENCES City of Santa Ana Airport Environs Element, 2009. Accessed: https://www.santa- ana.org/sites/default/files/Documents/AirportEnvirons.pdf Orange County Airport Land Use Commission, Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, 2008. Accessed: http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/JWA_AELUP-April-17-2008.pdf, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report, 2018. Prepared by Stantec (Phase 1 2018). Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Report, 2018. Prepared by Stantec (Phase II 2018). Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report, 2019. Prepared by Hillman Consulting (Hillman 2019). City of Santa Ana 5.7-31 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.7-32 Draft EIR January 2020 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 5.8.1 INTRODUCTION This section describes the environmental and regulatory settings and identifies potential impacts for hydrology and water quality resources. The analysis in this section is based on information from the Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report) that was prepared by LGC Geotechnical (GEO 2019), which is included as Appendix C, the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Fuscoe Engineering (WQMP 2019) (included as Appendix G) and the Water Supply Assessment, prepared by prepared by Fuscoe Engineering (included as Appendix H). 5.8.2 REGULATORY SETTING Clean Water Act The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is the federal agency that implements the Clean Water Act (CWA), which is responsible for water quality management. The purpose of the CWA is to protect and maintain the quality and integrity of the nation's waters by requiring states to develop and implement state water plans and policies. CWA Section 303, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL): Section 303 of the CWA requires states to establish water quality standards consisting of designated beneficial uses of water bodies and water quality standards to protect those uses for all Waters of the United States. Under Section 303(d) of the CWA, states, territories, and authorized tribes are required to develop lists of impaired waters. Impaired waters are waters that do not meet water quality standards, even after point sources of pollution have installed the minimum required levels of pollution control technology. The law requires that these jurisdictions establish a priority ranking for listed waters and develop action plans to improve their water quality. This process includes development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) that set discharge limits for non -point source pollutants. A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still safely meet water quality standards. The Ducheny Bill (AB 1740) requires the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) to post this list and to provide an estimated completion date for each TMDL. CWA Section 402, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit: Direct discharges of pollutants into Waters of the United States are not allowed, except in accordance with the NPDES program established in Section 402 of the CWA. The main goal of the NPDES program is to protect human health and the environment. Pursuant to the NPDES program, permits that apply to storm water discharges from municipal storm drain systems, specific industrial activities, and construction activities (one acre [ac] or more) have been issued. NPDES permits establish enforceable effluent limitations on discharges, require monitoring of discharges, designate reporting requirements, and require the permittee to include use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Industrial (point source) storm water permits are required to meet effluent limitations, while municipal and construction permits are governed by the maximum extent practicable (MEP) or the Best Available Technology (BAT)/Best Control Technology (BCT) application of BMPs. SWRCB are required to require the development of state -specific permits that comply with the NPDES Permit. City of Santa Ana 5.8-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality Porter -Cologne Act The Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969, codified as Division 7 of the California Water Code, authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to provide comprehensive protection for California's waters through water allocation and water quality protection. The SWRCB implements the requirements of Clean Water Act (CWA) and establishes water quality standards that have to be set for certain waters by adopting water quality control plans under the Porter -Cologne Act. The Porter -Cologne Act establishes the responsibilities and authorities of the 9 Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB), including preparing water quality plans for areas in the region, and identifying water quality objectives and waste discharge requirements (WDRs). Water quality objectives are defined as limits or levels of water quality constituents and characteristics established for reasonable protection of beneficial uses or prevention of nuisance. Beneficial uses consist of all the various ways that water can be used for the benefit of people and/or wildlife. The project site is within the Santa Ana River Watershed. The Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Plan was adopted in February 2016. This Basin Plan gives direction on the beneficial uses of the waters, describes the water quality that must be maintained to support such uses, and provides programs, projects, and other actions necessary to achieve the established standards. California Anti -Degradation Policy A key policy of California's water quality program is the State's Anti -Degradation Policy. This policy, formally known as the Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality Waters in California (SWRCB Resolution No. 68-16), restricts degradation of surface and ground waters. In particular, this policy protects water bodies where existing quality is higher than necessary for the protection of beneficial uses. Under the Anti -Degradation Policy, any actions that can adversely affect water quality in all surface and ground waters must (1) be consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the state; (2) not unreasonably affect present and anticipated beneficial use of the water; and (3) not result in water quality less than that prescribed in water quality plans and policies (i.e., will not result in exceedances of water quality objectives). California Construction General Permit The State of California adopted a Statewide NPDES Permit for General Construction Activity (Construction General Permit) on September 2, 2009 (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ). The last Construction General Permit amendment became effective on July 17, 2012. The Construction General Permit regulates construction site stormwater management. Dischargers whose projects disturb one or more acres of soil, or whose projects disturb less than one acre, but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the general permit for discharges of stormwater associated with construction activity. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground, such as stockpiling or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. To obtain coverage under this permit, project operators must electronically file Permit Registration Documents, which include a Notice of Intent, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and other compliance -related documents, including a risk -level assessment for construction sites, an active stormwater effluent monitoring and reporting program during construction, rain event action plans, and numeric action levels for pH and turbidity as well as requirements for qualified professionals to prepare and implement the plan. An appropriate permit fee must also be mailed to SWRCB. City of Santa Ana 5.8-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality The Construction General Permit requires project applicants to file a Notice of Intent with the SWRCB to discharge stormwater, and to prepare and implement a SWPPP for projects that will disturb greater than 1 acre of soil. The SWPPP would include a site map, description of stormwater discharge activities, and best management practices (BMPs) taken from the menu of BMPs set forth in the California Stormwater Quality Association BMP Handbook that will be employed to prevent water pollution. The SWPPP is required to include BMPs that will be used to control soil erosion and discharges of other construction -related pollutants (e.g., petroleum products, solvents, paints, cement) that could contaminate nearby water resources. It must demonstrate compliance with local and regional erosion and sediment control standards, identify responsible parties, provide a detailed construction timeline, and implement a BMP monitoring and maintenance schedule. The Construction General Permit also requires the SWPPP to identify BMPs that will be implemented to reduce controlling potential chemical contaminants from impacting water quality. Types of BMPs include erosion control (e.g., preservation of vegetation), sediment control (e.g., fiber rolls), non-stormwater management (e.g., water conservation), and waste management. The SWPPP is also required to include BMPs to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges after all construction phases have been completed at the site (post -construction BMPs). California Water Resources Control Board Low Impact Development Policy The SWRCB adopted the Low Impact Development (LID) Policy which, at its core, promotes the idea of "sustainability" as a key parameter to be prioritized during the design and planning process for future development. The SWRCB has directed its staff to consider sustainability in all future policies, guidelines, and regulatory actions. LID is a proven approach to manage stormwater. The RWQCBs are advancing LID in California in various ways, including provisions for LID requirements in renewed Phase I municipal stormwater NPDES permits. Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Quality Control Plan The City of Santa Ana is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB. The RWQCB sets water quality standards for all ground and surface waters within its region through implementation of a Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan). The Basin Plan describes existing water quality conditions and establishes water quality goals and policies. The Basin Plan is also the basis for the Regional Board's regulatory programs. To this end, the Basin Plan establishes water quality standards for all the ground and surface waters of the region. The term "water quality standards," as used in the federal Clean Water Act, includes both the beneficial uses of specific water bodies and the levels of quality which must be met and maintained to protect those uses. The Basin Plan includes an implementation plan describing the actions that are necessary to achieve and maintain target water quality standards. The goal of the Basin Plan is to protect public health and welfare and maintain or enhance water quality and potential beneficial uses of the water. Santa Ana Regional Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit The Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit for the Santa Ana Region regulates urban runoff from areas under jurisdiction of the Permit's various permittees, which include Orange County, Orange County Flood Control District, and the incorporated cities within Orange County including the City of Santa Ana. When discharged, urban runoff (or stormwater) has the potential to mix with and carry various pollutants into receiving waters. The Permit lists allowable and unallowable discharges and requires implementation of LID infrastructure, which are engineered facilities that are designed to retain and/or biotreat runoff on the project site. Developments that qualify as a development or redevelopment project, which includes the proposed project as specified by criteria in the MS4 Permit, are required to develop a site-specific water quality management plan (WQMP), which includes site design, source control and treatment control elements to reduce the discharge of pollutants in runoff. The WQMP is required to be approved prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit, and post -construction BMPs are required to City of Santa Ana 5.8-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality be implemented. The MS4 Permit requires priority projects to infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspire, or biotreat/biofilter, the 85th percentile of a 24-hour storm event (Design Capture Volume). The MS4 Permit also requires the evaluation and use of LID features using the following hierarchy of treatment: infiltration, evapotranspiration, harvest/reuse, and biotreatment. Biotreatment BMPs are a broad class of LID BMPs that reduce storm water volume to the maximum extent practicable, treat storm water using a suite of treatment mechanisms characteristic of biologically active systems, and discharge water to the downstream storm drain system or directly to receiving waters. Treatment mechanisms include media filtration (though biologically -active media), vegetative filtration (straining, sedimentation, interception, and stabilization of particles resulting from shallow flow through vegetation), general sorption processes (i.e., absorption, adsorption, ionexchange, precipitation, surface complexation), biologically -mediated transformations, and other processes to address both suspended and dissolved constituents. Examples of biotreatment BMPs include bioretention with underdrains, vegetated swales, constructed wetlands, and proprietary biotreatment systems. County of Orange Drainage Area Management Plan The Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) is the County's primary policy, planning and implementation document for NPDES Stormwater Permit compliance. The DAMP describes the agreements, structures and programs that: • Provide the framework for the program management activities and plan development; • Provide the legal authority for prohibiting unpermitted discharges into the storm drain system and for requiring BMPs in new development and significant redevelopment; • Ensure that all new development and significant redevelopment incorporates appropriate Site Design, Source Control, and Treatment Control BMPs to address specific water quality issues; • Ensure that construction sites implement control practices that address construction related pollutants including erosion and sediment control and onsite hazardous materials and waste management; The DAMP requires that new development and significant redevelopment projects (or priority projects), such as the proposed Project, develop and implement a Preliminary WQMP that includes BMPs and LID design features that would provide onsite treatment of stormwater to prevent pollutants from onsite uses from leaving the site. City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The following objectives and policies from the existing General Plan Conservation Element are relevant to the proposed Project: Objective 1.2: Provide sufficient water of adequate quality for all users. Objective 2.1: Conserve water resources in commercial, industrial, residential and recreational uses. Policies: • Encourage water conservation through design and facilities features of new developments through the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed -scale retrofits, etc. where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible. • Provide for appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from the development site. City of Santa Ana 5.8-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality • Minimize changes in hydrology and pollutant loading; require incorporation of control, including structural and non-structural and Best Management Practices to mitigate the projected increases in pollutant loads and flows. • Ensure that post -development runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream erosion and stream habitat. City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 18-156; Control of Urban Runoff: This code section states that all new development and significant redevelopment within the City shall be undertaken in accordance with the County DAMP, including but not limited to the development project guidance; and any conditions and requirements established by City agencies related to the reduction or elimination of pollutants in storm water runoff from the project site. Prior to the issuance by the City of a grading permit, building permit or nonresidential plumbing permit for any new development or significant redevelopment, City agencies are required to review the project plans and impose terms, conditions and requirements on the project. The owner of a new development or significant redevelopment project shall implement and adhere to the terms, conditions and requirements on the new development or significant redevelopment project. 5.8.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Watershed The Project site is in the Santa Ana River Watershed and the Newport Bay sub -watershed. The Santa Ana River Watershed includes much of Orange County, much of western Riverside County, part of southwestern San Bernardino County, and a small portion of Los Angeles County. The watershed is bounded by the Santa Margarita watershed to the south, on the east by the Salton Sea and Southern Mojave watersheds, and on the north and west by the Mojave and San Gabriel watersheds, respectively. The watershed covers approximately 2,800 square miles in area with about 700 miles of rivers. The Santa Ana River extends 96 miles from the San Bernardino Mountains in San Bernardino County to the Pacific Ocean at the boundary between the Cities of Huntington Beach and Newport Beach. The Santa Ana Watershed is subdivided into several smaller watersheds, and the Project site is in the Newport Bay Watershed. The Newport Bay Watershed spans 152 square miles from the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains in the north to the Pacific Ocean in the south and from the Cities of Santa Ana and Costa Mesa on the west to the City of Lake Forest on the east. Runoff from the Project site flows through existing storm drains to the nearby Barranca Channel, which drains to San Diego Creek (Reach 1), then Upper Newport Bay, and discharges to the ocean at Balboa Beach (WQMP 2019). Water Quality Water Quality Impairments: Section 303(d) of the federal CWA requires states to identify water bodies that are "impaired," or those that do not meet water quality standards and are not supporting their beneficial uses. Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) are then designed to serve as pollution control plans for these specific pollutants. The San Diego Creek Reach 1 is included on the Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments for: fecal coliform, nutrients, pesticides, sedimentation, selenium, and toxaphene. The Upper Newport Bay is included on the Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments for: chlordane, copper, DDT, metals, nutrients, PCBs, sediment toxicity, and sedimentation. Additionally, the Lower Newport Bay (to which the City of Santa Ana 5.8-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality Upper Newport Bay drains) is included on the Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments for chlordane, DDT, nutrients, PCBs, pesticides, and sediment toxicity (WQMP 2019). Selenium Concentration Area: The Project site is located within the Selenium Concentration Area identified by the Orange County Water District (OCWD), as shown on Figure 5.8-1 (WQMP 2019). In the Newport Bay watershed, selenium derived from ancient marine sediments in local foothills accumulated over the last several thousand years in the Swamp of the Frogs, which stretched from Upper Newport Bay almost to Red Hill Avenue. This ancient swamp, though now drained and filled, has become an active source of selenium because of the high-water table in the area (Meixner, 2004). Thus, virtually any activity that mobilizes groundwater to the surface has the potential to increase selenium contamination of surface waters in the Newport Bay watershed. South Basin Groundwater Protection Project: The Project site is located within the South Basin Groundwater Protection Project area, as shown on Figure 5.8-1, which implements groundwater remediation due to a comingled plume of groundwater pollutants that was generated by more than 20 industrial sites (OCWA 2018). The plume occurs predominately in the shallow aquifer at 100 -foot depth which flows into a deeper Principal Aquifer, bringing VOC contaminants with it (OCWA 2018). Due to this condition, infiltration of groundwater is not allowed within the South Basin Groundwater Protection Project area. Tustin Marine Air Base: The Project site is located adjacent to the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area, which was previously used as a Marine Air Base. Past Air Base operations have resulted in releases of hazardous substances within the upper 50 feet pf the shallow aquifer beneath the air base (MCAS Tustin). Hazardous materials were reportedly used in construction of the base and helium purification for blimp use. Daily operation and support activities for helicopters that were used on the Base included the use, storage, transfer, and disposal of hazardous waste that included oil, solvents, fuel, hydraulic fluid, antifreeze, paint thinner, and sludge from cleaning tanks and fuel filters. The federal government is in the processing of implementing remediation programs related to this contamination from past hazardous waste disposal and hazardous material spills within the Air Base (MCAS Tustin). Due to this condition, infiltration of groundwater may not be allowed within the Tustin Marine Air Base area. Groundwater Basin The Orange County Basin underlies an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminates at the Orange County line to the northwest, where the aquifer system continues to the Central Basin in Los Angeles County (WSA 2019). The OC Basin is recharged primarily by four sources including local rainfall, storm and base flows from the Santa Ana River (SAR), purchased MWD imported water; and highly treated recycled wastewater. Basin recharge occurs largely in 4 recharge basins that are in or adjacent to the City of Anaheim. OCWD manages the Orange County Basin through a Basin Production Percentage (BPP) that is determined each water year based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, water year precipitation, SAR runoff, and basin management objectives. While there is no legal limit as to how much an agency pumps from the Orange County Basin, there is a financial disincentive to pump above the BPP. For example, if the BPP is set at 75 percent, all pumpers within the Basin, including the City, can supply 75 percent of their water needs from groundwater supplies at a cost significantly less than the cost of City of Santa Ana 5.8-6 Draft EIR January 2020 Orange County Groundwater Protection Areas Tustim W S—:. A— oNd Saqta Ana Tu in 11� 2L W dV Z W R::IGD11 P.— I. C3 LtlirR Aqr YY Ed -r qe A— 1. Project Site W Ajim &,- Lq w mnrAimw u "I'l— IN E—I -iii�nr 13�-,- I rvi rk, - L rx,7-- ..,Lk. Or e t j,w u >.2 AA FM—] South Basin Groundwater Protection Project Ir lVz, El Toro Marine Base FM—] Tustin Marine Air Base Son Approximate Selenium Contamination Area The Bowery Figure 5.8-1 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality This figure intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.8-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality imported water. If groundwater production is equal to or less than the BPP (i.e. less than 75 percent in the example above), all producers within the Basin pay a replenishment assessment (RA) fee which is used to fund groundwater replenishment and recharge programs aimed at ensuring the long-term viability and stability of the Basin. In 2019, the BPP was 75 percent and OCWD's goal is to provide a stable 75 percent BPP through management of the basin (WSA 2019). As required by Senate Bill 1262, the WSA prepared for the proposed Project describes that the Orange County Basin is designated as a medium -priority basin and has operated within its sustainable yield over a period of at least 10 years without experiencing significant and unreasonable (1) lowering of groundwater levels, (2) reduction in storage, (3) water quality degradation, (4) seawater intrusion, (5) inelastic land subsidence, or (6) depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water. In addition, the Orange County Basin has not been in conditions of critical overdraft. Groundwater Supply Groundwater from the Orange County Basin provides approximately 71 percent of the City's water supply. The remaining supply comes from the Metropolitan Water District (28 percent) and recycled water (1 percent). As described by the WSA prepared for the Project, the water production capability of the basin has increased as a result of operation of the Groundwater Replenishment System in Fountain Valley, which turns wastewater into potable drinking water that is used for basin replenishment. The system increases local low-cost water supply reliability (WSA 2019). Storm Drainage Facilities The Project site is currently 75 percent impervious and 25 percent pervious (WQMP 2019). The existing topography of the project site is relatively flat and generally drains from the north to the south. Currently, the Project site drains northwest where flows enter an existing catch basin. The catch basin connects to a six foot high by ten foot wide culvert that directs flows to an 84 -inch storm drain that flows southeast to a flood control basin. Drainage from the flood control basin is conveyed to the Barranca Channel that connects to San Diego Creek Reach 1 that drains to Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Soil Infiltration Onsite soils infiltration testing was performed during preparation of the Geotechnical Report, which determined that soils have an infiltration rate of 0.15 inches per hour which, is identified as a low infiltration rate and considered infeasible to support drainage on the Project site (GEO 2019). Flood Zone, Tsunami, Seiche The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for the Project area (06059CO279J) shows that the Project site is located within "Zone X," which is an area of minimal flood hazard potential outside of the 0.2 percent annual chance flood. A tsunami is a series of ocean waves caused by a sudden displacement of the ocean floor, most often due to earthquakes. The Project site is over 8.5 miles from the Pacific Ocean, and outside of the Tsunami Hazard Zone identified by the California Department of Conservation (DOC 2019). A seiche is a surface wave created when a body of water is shaken, usually by earthquake activity. Seiches are of concern relative to water storage facilities because inundation from a seiche can occur if the wave overflows a containment wall, such as the wall of a reservoir, water storage tank, dam, or other artificial City of Santa Ana 5.8-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality body of water. There are no water bodies in the vicinity of the Project site, and no existing risks related to seiche flood hazards exist on or near the site. 5.8.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: WQ-1 Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality; WQ-2 Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin; WQ-3 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; WQ-4 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; WQ-5 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; WQ-6 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows; WQ-7 In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation; or WQ-8 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. 5.8.5 METHODOLOGY This evaluation of the significance of potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality is based on a review of published information and reports regarding regional hydrology, groundwater conditions, and surface water quality. The potential impacts on hydrology and water quality were evaluated by considering the general type of pollutants that operation of the Project would generate during construction and operation. In determining the level of significance, the analysis recognizes that development under the proposed Project would be required to comply with relevant federal, state, and regional laws and regulations that are designed to ensure compliance with applicable water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. Because the regional and local regulations related to water quality standards have been developed to reduce the potential of pollutants in the water resources (as described in the Regulatory Setting Section above), and are implemented to specific waterbodies, such as 303(d) TMDL requirements, or development projects such as grading and construction permit regulations, implementation of all relevant City of Santa Ana 5.8-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality water quality and hydrology requirements would limit the potential of the proposed Project to a less than significant impact. 5.8.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACTS WQ-1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT VIOLATE ANY WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS OR OTHERWISE SUBSTANTIALLY DEGRADE SURFACE OR GROUND WATER QUALITY. Less than Significant Impact. Construction Implementation of the proposed Project includes development involving demolition of the existing structures and pavement, site preparation, construction of new buildings, and infrastructure improvements. Demolition of existing structures, removal of existing contaminated soils, grading, stockpiling of materials, excavation and the import/export of soil and building materials, construction of new structures, and landscaping activities would expose and loosen sediment and building materials, which have the potential to mix with stormwater and urban runoff and degrade surface and receiving water quality. Additionally, construction generally requires the use of heavy equipment and construction -related materials and chemicals, such as concrete, cement, asphalt, fuels, oils, antifreeze, transmission fluid, grease, solvents, and paints. In the absence of proper controls, these potentially harmful materials could be accidentally spilled or improperly disposed of during construction activities and could wash into and pollute surface waters or groundwater, resulting in a significant impact to water quality. Pollutants of concern during construction activities generally include sediments, trash, petroleum products, concrete waste (dry and wet), sanitary waste, and chemicals. Each of these pollutants on its own or in combination with other pollutants can have a detrimental effect on water quality. In addition, chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products (such as paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete -related waste may be spilled or leaked during construction, which would have the potential to be transported via storm runoff into nearby receiving waters and eventually may affect surface or groundwater quality. During construction activities, excavated soil would be exposed, thereby increasing the potential for soil erosion and sedimentation to occur compared to existing conditions. In addition, during construction, vehicles and equipment are prone to tracking soil and/or spoil from work areas to paved roadways, which is another form of erosion that could affect water quality. However, the use of BMPs during construction implemented as part of a SWPPP as required by the NPDES General Construction Permit and included as PPP WQ-1 would serve to ensure that Project impacts related to construction activities resulting in a degradation of water quality would be less than significant. Furthermore, an Erosion and Sediment Transport Control Plan prepared by a qualified SWPPP developer (QSD) is required to be included in the SWPPP for the Project, and typically includes the following types of erosion control methods that are designed to minimize potential pollutants entering stormwater during construction: • Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas; • Perimeter gravel bags or silt fences to prevent off-site transport of sediment; • Storm drain inlet protection (filter fabric gravel bags and straw wattles), with gravel bag check dams within paved roadways; • Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction and soil binders for forecasted wind storms; City of Santa Ana 5.8-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality • Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal; • Contained equipment wash-out and vehicle maintenance areas; • Erosion control measures including soil binders, hydro mulch, geotextiles, and hydro seeding of disturbed areas ahead of forecasted storms; • Construction of stabilized construction entry/exits to prevent trucks from tracking sediment on City roadways; • Construction timing to minimize soil exposure to storm events; and • Training of subcontractors on general site housekeeping. Therefore, compliance with the Statewide General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit requirements, included as PPP WQ-1, which would be verified during the City's construction permitting process, would ensure that Project impacts related to construction activities resulting in a degradation of water quality would be less than significant. Operation The proposed Project includes operation of retail and restaurant commercial and multi -family residential uses. Potential pollutants associated with the proposed uses include various chemicals from cleaners, pathogens from pet wastes, nutrients from fertilizer, pesticides and sediment from landscaping, trash and debris, and oil and grease from vehicles. If these pollutants discharge into surface waters, it could result in degradation of water quality. As described previously, San Diego Creek Reachl and the Upper Newport Bay, to which the Project site ultimately drains, are currently listed as impaired on the EPA's 303(d) list for various pollutants. Therefore, additional pollutant discharge could create new or exacerbate existing impairments within these waterbodies, which could result in a significant impact related to water quality. However, operation of the proposed Project would be required to comply with the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional MS4 Permit to develop of a project -specific WQMP (included as PPP WQ-2) that would describe implementation of LID infrastructure and non-structural, structural, and source control and treatment control BMPs to protect surface water quality. A Preliminary WQMP has been developed (included as Appendix G) per these requirements and recommends various BMPs to be incorporated into the Project. The WQMP is required to be approved prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. The MS4 Permit identifies the use of infiltration BMPs, which could assist in recharge groundwater. However, as described previously, the Project site is located within the Selenium Concentration Area and the South Basin Groundwater Protection Project area, and is adjacent to the Tustin Marine area, as shown on Figure 5.8-1. Infiltration into the groundwater is prohibited by OCWD within these areas. As such, infiltration of water quality pollutants from the Project would not occur, which would reduce potential impacts to groundwater quality. In addition, as described previously the onsite soils have a low infiltration rate and are considered infeasible to support drainage on the Project site (GEC) 2019). Therefore, the proposed Project would install four Modular Wetland System units for water quality treatment in the parking lot along Redhill Avenue, which have been sized to treat runoff from the Design Capture Storm (85th percentile, 24-hour) from the proposed Project. The Modular Wetland System units are devices that are manufactured to mimic natural systems such as bioretention areas by incorporating plants, soil, and microbes engineered to provide treatment at higher flow rates or volumes and with smaller footprints than their natural counterparts. The Modular Wetland System units proposed for the Project consist of biotreatment systems that utilize multi- stage treatment processes including screening media filtration, settling, and biofiltration. The pre-treatment chamber contains a catch basin inlet filter to capture trash, debris, gross solids and sediments, a settling City of Santa Ana 5.8-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality chamber for separating out larger solids, and a media filter cartridge for capturing fine silts, metals, nutrients, and bacteria. Runoff then flows through the wetland chamber where treatment of the water is done through a variety of physical, chemical, and biological processes. As storm water passes down through the planting soil, pollutants are filtered, adsorbed, biodegraded and sequestered by the soil and plants, functioning similar to bioretention systems. The discharge chamber at the end of the unit collects treated flows and discharges it into the existing storm drain in Red Hill Avenue (WSA 2019). The preliminary WQMP (Appendix H) includes detailed calculations of each drainage area on the site and the capacity of the Modular Wetland System units. As described previously, the WQMP is required to be approved prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. The Project's WQMP would be reviewed and approved by the City to ensure it complies with the Santa Ana RWQCB MS4 Permit regulations. In addition, the City's permitting process would ensure that all BMPs in the WQMP would be implemented with the Project. Overall, implementation of the WQMP pursuant to the existing regulations would ensure that operation of the proposed Project would not violate any water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or otherwise degrade water quality; and impacts would be less than significant. IMPACT WQ-2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY DECREASE GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES OR INTERFERE SUBSTANTIALLY WITH GROUNDWATER RECHARGE SUCH THAT THE PROJECT MAY IMPEDE SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT OF THE BASIN. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the Orange County Basin provides approximately 71 percent of the City's water supply. The remaining supply comes from the Metropolitan Water District (28 percent) and recycled water (1 percent) (WSA 2019). The OCWD manages basin water supply through the Basin Production Percentage (BPP), which is set based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported supplies, and precipitation. As shown on Table 5.8-1, the City's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) shows that the anticipated production of groundwater would remain steady from 2020 through 2040 and that in 2040 approximately 70 percent of supply would be from the Orange County Basin and 29.3 percent from imported purchased sources. Table 5.8-1: City of Santa Ana Projected Water Supply Projections (acre-feet) Source 1 2020 1 2025 1 2030 1 2035 1 2040 1 2040 OC Groundwater Basin 25,899 1 27,802 1 27,992 1 27,985 1 28,025 1 70.0% Imported Purchased 10,799 11,615 11,697 11,693 11,711 29.2% Recycled 320 320 320 320 320 0.8% Total 36,998 39,717 39,989 1 39,978 40,036 100% Source: 2015 UWMP. As detailed in Section 5.16, Utilities and Service Systems, the supply of water listed in Table 5.8-2 would be sufficient during both normal years and multiple dry year conditions between 2020 and 2040 to meet all of the City's estimated needs, including the proposed Project. Therefore, the Project would not result in changes to the projected groundwater pumping that would decrease groundwater supplies. Thus, impacts related to groundwater supplies would be less than significant. In addition, as described previously the onsite soils have a low infiltration rate and do not currently provide onsite infiltration (GEO 2019). Also, as described previously, the Project site is located within an infiltration constraints area (see Figure 5.8-1) and infiltration is prohibited due to existing pollutant plumes under or adjacent to the site. As such, infiltration of water to the existing groundwater basin is neither currently City of Santa Ana 5.8-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality occurring, nor would occur by the proposed Project. Therefore, impacts related to interference with groundwater recharge would be less than significant. IMPACT WQ-3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE AREA, INCLUDING THROUGH THE ALTERATION OF THE COURSE OF A STREAM OR RIVER, IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL EROSION OR SILTATION ON- OR OFF-SITE. Less than Significant Impact. The Project site does not include, and is not adjacent to, a stream or river. Implementation of the Project would not alter the course of a stream or river. Construction Construction of the proposed Project would require demolition of the existing building structures, including foundations and floor slabs, that would expose and loosen building materials and sediment, which has the potential to mix with storm water runoff and result in erosion or siltation off-site. However, the Project site does not include any slopes, which reduces the erosion potential and the large majority of soil disturbance would be related to excavation and backfill for installation of building foundations and underground utilities. The existing NPDES Construction General Permit and Orange County DAMP require preparation and implementation of a SWPPP by a Qualified SWPPP Developer for the proposed construction activities (included as PPP WQ-1). The SWPPP is required to address site-specific conditions related to potential sources of sedimentation and erosion and would list the required BMPs that are necessary to reduce or eliminate the potential of erosion or alteration of a drainage pattern during construction activities. Common types of construction BMPs include: • Silt fencing, fiber rolls, or gravel bags • Street sweeping and vacuuming • Storm drain inlet protection • Stabilized construction entrance/exit • Vehicle and equipment maintenance, cleaning, and fueling • Hydroseeding • Material delivery and storage • Stockpile management • Spill prevention and control • Solid waste management • Concrete waste management In addition, a Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (QSP) is required to ensure compliance with the SWPPP through regular monitoring and visual inspections during construction activities. The SWPPP would be amended and BMPs revised, as determined necessary through field inspections, in order to protect against substantial soil erosion, the loss of topsoil, or alteration of the drainage pattern. Compliance with the Construction General Permit and a SWPPP prepared by a QSD and implemented by a QSP (per PPP WQ-1) would prevent construction -related impacts related to potential alteration of a drainage pattern or erosion from development activities. Overall, with implementation of the existing construction regulations that would be verified by the City during the permitting approval process, impacts related to alteration of an existing drainage pattern during construction that could result in substantial erosion, siltation, and increases in stormwater runoff would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.8-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality Operation The Project site currently includes 10.96 acres of impermeable surfaces, which equates to 75 percent of the site. After completion of Project construction, the site would have a greater amount of (12.64 acres or 86 percent of the site) impermeable surfaces. As shown on Table 5.8-2, the increase in impervious surfaces would result in an increase the 2 -year, 24-hour storm volume by 37 percent and the time of concentration (Tc) would increase by 26 percent. Table 5.8-2: 2 -Year, 24 -Hour Storm Summary Condition Time of concentration (min) Peak Runoff (cfs) Volume (ac -ft) Pre -Development 10.33 14.9 1.241 Post -Development 13.06 16.3 1.699 Difference +2.73 +1.4 +0.458 Percent Change +26% +9.4% +37% Source: WQMP, 2019 As described previously, due to poor infiltration of soils and the site being located within Selenium Concentration Area and the South Basin Groundwater Protection Project area, and adjacent to the Tustin Marine area (Figure 5.8-1), infiltration of the additional runoff that would be generated by the proposed Project is not feasible. The proposed Project would maintain the existing drainage pattern. The runoff from the Project area would be collected by roof drains, surface flow designed pavement, curbs, and area drains and conveyed to one of four Modular Wetland System units (described previously) for treatment. Treated runoff would be conveyed to the existing 84 -inch drain located within Red Hill Avenue. From there, flows would travel southeast and be temporarily detained in an existing flood control basin before entering the Barranca Channel, which discharges into San Diego Creek Reach 1, then the Upper Newport Bay, Lower Newport Bay, and finally to the Pacific Ocean at Balboa Beach. Although the Project related runoff conditions (flow rates and durations) would increase from predevelopment conditions (shown in Table 5.8-1), the Project would manage the increased flow by the four Modular Wetland System units that have been designed to accommodate the increased volume. As described previously the Modular Wetland System units contain catch basin inlet filters to capture trash, debris, gross solids and sediments, a settling chamber for separating out larger solids, and a media filter cartridge for capturing fine silts, metals, nutrients, and bacteria. The treated flows are discharged into the existing storm drain in Red Hill Avenue (WSA 2019). The MS4 permit and DAMP require new development projects to prepare a WQMP (included as PPP WQ- 2) that is required to include BMPs to reduce the potential of erosion and/or sedimentation through site design and structural treatment control BMPs. The Preliminary WQMP has been completed and is included as Appendix G. As part of the permitting approval process, the proposed drainage and water quality design and engineering plans would be reviewed by the City's Engineering Division to ensure that the site- specific design limits the potential for erosion and siltation. Overall, the proposed drainage system and adherence to the existing regulations would ensure that Project impacts related to alteration of a drainage pattern and erosion/siltation from operational activities would be less than significant. IMPACT WQ-4: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE SITE OR AREA, INCLUDING THROUGH THE ALTERATION OF THE COURSE OF A STREAM OR RIVER, OR THROUGH THE ADDITION OF IMPERVIOUS City of Santa Ana 5.8-15 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality SURFACES, IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE RATE OR AMOUNT OF SURFACE RUNOFF IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD RESULT IN FLOODING ON- OR OFF-SITE. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the Project site does not include, and is not adjacent to, a stream or river. Implementation of the Project would not alter the course of a stream or river. Construction Construction of the proposed Project would require demolition of the existing building structures, including foundations, floor slabs, and utilities systems. These activities could temporarily alter the existing drainage pattern of the site and could result in flooding on- or off-site if drainage is not properly controlled. However, as described previously, implementation of the Project requires a SWPPP (included as PPP WQ-1) that would address site specific drainage issues related to construction of the Project and include BMPs to eliminate the potential of flooding or alteration of a drainage pattern during construction activities. This includes regular monitoring and visual inspections during construction activities. Compliance with the Construction General Permit and a SWPPP prepared by a QSD and implemented by a QSP (per PPP WQ- 1) as verified by the City through the construction permitting process would prevent construction -related impacts related to potential alteration of a drainage pattern or flooding on or off-site from development activities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Operation As described previously, and detailed in Table 5.8-1, the proposed Project would result in an increase of in impervious surfaces that would result in an increase the 2 -year, 24-hour storm volume by 37 percent and the time of concentration (Tc) would increase by 26 percent. However, the Project would maintain the existing drainage pattern by collecting runoff in roof drains, curbs, and area drains and conveying it to one of four Modular Wetland System units (described previously) for treatment. Treated runoff would be conveyed to the existing 84 -inch drain located within Red Hill Avenue. Although the Project related runoff conditions (flow rates and durations) would increase from predevelopment conditions (shown in Table 5.8-1), the Project would manage the increased flow with the four Modular Wetland System units that have been designed to accommodate the increased volume pursuant to the MS4 permit and DAMP requirements. The units would retain, filter, and slowly discharge runoff into the existing off-site drain. As part of the permitting approval process, the proposed drainage design and engineering plans would be reviewed by the City's Engineering Division to ensure that the proposed drainage would accommodate the appropriate design flows. Overall, the proposed drainage system and adherence to the existing MS4 permit and DAMP regulations would ensure that Project impacts related to alteration of a drainage pattern or flooding from operational activities would be less than significant. IMPACT WQ-5: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE SITE OR AREA, INCLUDING THROUGH THE ALTERATION OF THE COURSE OF A STREAM OR RIVER OR THROUGH THE ADDITION OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES, IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD CREATE OR CONTRIBUTE RUNOFF WATER WHICH WOULD EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING OR PLANNED STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS OR PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF POLLUTED RUNOFF. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the Project site does not include, and is not adjacent to, a stream or river. Implementation of the Project would not alter the course of a stream or river. City of Santa Ana 5.8-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality Construction As described in the previous response, construction of the proposed Project would require demolition and excavation activities that could temporarily alter the existing drainage pattern of the site and could result in increased runoff and polluted runoff if drainage is not properly controlled. However, as described previously, implementation of the Project requires a SWPPP (included as PPP WQ-1) that would address site specific pollutant and drainage issues related to construction of the Project and include BMPs to eliminate the potential of polluted runoff and increased runoff during construction activities. This includes regular monitoring and visual inspections during construction activities. Compliance with the Construction General Permit and a SWPPP prepared by a QSD and implemented by a QSP (per PPP WQ-1) as verified by the City through the construction permitting process would prevent construction -related impacts related to increases in run-off and pollution from development activities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Operation As described previously and detailed in Table 5.8-1, the proposed Project would result in an increase of the 2 -year, 24-hour storm volume by 37 percent and the time of concentration by 26 percent. However, the Project would manage the increased flow with the four Modular Wetland System units that have been designed to accommodate the increased volume pursuant to the MS4 permit and DAMP requirements. The units would retain, filter, treat, and slowly discharge runoff into the existing off-site drain. As part of the permitting approval process, the proposed drainage design and engineering plans would be reviewed by the City's Engineering Division to ensure that the proposed drainage would accommodate the appropriate design flows. Additionally, the City permitting process would ensure that the drainage system specifications adhere to the existing MS4 permit and DAMP regulations, which would ensure that pollutants are removed prior to discharge. Overall, with compliance to the existing regulations as verified by the City's permitting process, Project impacts related to the capacity of the drainage system and polluted runoff would be less than significant. IMPACT WQ-6: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE SITE OR AREA, INCLUDING THROUGH THE ALTERATION OF THE COURSE OF A STREAM OR RIVER OR THROUGH THE ADDITION OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES, IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD IMPEDE OR REDIRECT FLOOD FLOWS. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, the Project site does not include, and is not adjacent to, a stream or river. Implementation of the Project would not alter the course of a stream or river. In addition, according to the FEMA FIRM for the Project area (06059CO279J), the Project site is located within "Zone X," which is an area determined to be outside of the 0.2 percent annual chance flood. Therefore, there is a low potential for onsite flooding to occur. As detailed in the previous responses, implementation of the Project would result in an increase of impermeable surfaces from 75 percent of the site to 86 percent of the site. However, the Project would maintain the existing drainage pattern; and drainage would be accommodated by onsite by Modular Wetland System units that have been sized to accommodate the DAMP required design storm. Therefore, the Project would not result in impeding or redirecting flood flows by the addition of the impervious surfaces. As detailed previously, the City's permitting process would ensure that the drainage system specifications adhere to the existing MS4 permit and DAMP regulations, and compliance with existing regulations would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.8-17 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality IMPACT WQ-7: THE PROJECT IS NOT IN A FLOOD HAZARD, TSUNAMI, OR SEISHE ZONE THAT COULD RISK RELEASE OF POLLUTANTS DUE TO PROJECT INNUNDATION. No Impact. As described previously, the FEMA FIRM for the Project area (06059CO279J) shows that the Project site is located within "Zone X," which is an area of minimal flood hazard potential outside of the 0.2 percent annual chance flood. Thus, the Project site is not located within a flood hazard area that could be inundated with flood flows and result in release of pollutants. Impacts related to flood hazards and pollutants would not occur from the Project. Also as detailed previously, the Project site is over 8.5 miles from the Pacific Ocean, and outside of the Tsunami Hazard Zone identified by the California Department of Conservation (DOC 2019). Thus, the Project site would not be inundated by a tsunami that could result in the release of pollutants, and impacts would not occur. Additionally, because the Project site is not within the vicinity of a water body, it is not at risk for seiche flood hazards. Therefore, the release of pollutants on the Project site resulting from a seiche inundation would not occur. IMPACT WQ-8: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION OF A WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN OR SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. Less than Significant Impact. As described previously, use of BMPs during construction implemented as part of a SWPPP as required by the NPDES Construction General Permit and PPP WQ-1 would serve to ensure that Project impacts related to construction activities resulting in a degradation of water quality would be less than significant. Thus, construction of the Project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan. Also, as described previously, new development projects are required to implement a WQMP (per the Regional MS4 Permit) that would comply with the Orange County DAMP. The WQMP and applicable BMPs are verified as part of the City's permitting approval process, and construction plans would be required to demonstrate compliance with these regulations. Therefore, operation of the proposed Project would not conflict of obstruct with a water quality control plan. In addition, as detailed previously, the OCWD manages basin water supply through the Basin Production Percentage (BPP), such that, the anticipated production of groundwater would remain steady from 2025 through 2040 (as shown in Table 5.8-1). As described previously and further detailed in Section 5.16, Utilities and Service Systems, the City's supply of water listed in Table 5.8-1 would be sufficient during both normal years and multiple dry year conditions between 2020 and 2040 to meet all of the City's estimated needs, including the proposed Project. Therefore, the Project would be consistent with the groundwater management plan and would not conflict with or obstruct its implementation. Thus, impacts related to water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan would be less than significant. 5.8.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Water Quality: The geographic scope for cumulative impacts related to hydrology and water quality includes the Santa Ana Watershed because cumulative projects and developments pursuant to the proposed Project could incrementally exacerbate the existing impaired condition and could result in new pollutant related impairments. Related developments within the watershed would be required to implement water quality control measures pursuant to the same NPDES General Construction Permit that requires implementation of a SWPPP (for construction), a WQMP (for operation) and BMPs to eliminate or reduce the discharge of pollutants in City of Santa Ana 5.8-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality stormwater discharges, reduce runoff, reduce erosion and sedimentation, and increase filtration and infiltration, in areas permitted. The NPDES permit requirements have been set by the State Water Board and implemented by the RWQCB and the Orange County DAMP to reduce incremental effects of individual projects so that they would not become cumulatively considerable. Therefore, overall potential impacts to water quality associated with present and future development in the watershed would not be cumulatively considerable with compliance with all applicable laws, permits, ordinances and plans. As detailed previously, the proposed Project would be implemented in compliance with all regulations, as would be verified during the permitting process. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to water quality would be less than significant. Drainage: The geographic scope for cumulative impacts related to stormwater drainage includes the geographic area served by the existing stormwater infrastructure for the Project area, from capture of runoff through final discharge points. As described above the proposed Project includes installation of Modular Wetland System units that would retain, slow, filter, and discharge runoff through storm drain connections to the off-site infrastructure in Red Hill Avenue. The Modular Wetland System units would retain runoff and control drainage, pursuant to the required design storm. As a result, the proposed Project would not generate runoff that could combine with additional runoff from cumulative projects that could cumulatively combine to impact drainage. Thus, cumulative impacts related to drainage would be less than significant. Groundwater Basin: The geographic scope for cumulative impacts related to the groundwater basin is the Orange County Basin. As described previously, the volume of water that would be needed by the Project is within the anticipated groundwater pumping volumes. Therefore, the Project would not result in changes to the projected groundwater pumping that would decrease groundwater supplies. As a result, the proposed Project would not generate impacts related to the groundwater basin that have the potential to combine with effects from other projects to become cumulatively considerable. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to the groundwater basin would be less than significant. 5.8.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES • Construction General Permit, Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ • California Water Resources Control Board Low Impact Development (LID) Policy • Santa Ana Region MS4 Permit • Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) • Municipal Code Section 18-156, Control of Urban Runoff Plans, Program and Policies The following Plans, Programs, and Policies (PPP) related to hydrology and water quality are incorporated into the Project and would reduce impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. These actions will be included in the Project's mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP): PPP WO -1: NPDES/SWPPP. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the applicant shall provide the City Building and Safety Division evidence of compliance with the NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) requirement to obtain a construction permit from the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB). The permit requirement applies to grading and construction sites of one acre or City of Santa Ana 5.8-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.8 Hydrology and Water Quality larger. The Project applicant/proponent shall comply by submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI) and by developing and implementing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a monitoring program and reporting plan for the construction site. PPP WQ-2: WQMP. Prior to the approval of the Grading Plan and issuance of Grading Permits a completed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be submitted to and approved by the City Building and Safety Division. The WQMP shall identify all Post -Construction, Site Design. Source Control, and Treatment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be incorporated into the development project in order to minimize the adverse effects on receiving waters. 5.8.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Upon implementation of regulatory requirements Impacts WQ-1 through WQ-8 would be less than significant. 5.8.10 MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.8.1 1 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to hydrology and water quality have been identified and impacts would be less than significant. REFERENCES California Department of Conservation California Official Tsunami Inundation Maps (DOC 2019). Accessed: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps City of Santa Ana Conservation Element, 2009. Accessed: https://www.santa- ana.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Conservation.pdf FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Accessed: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corp Air Station Tustin (MCAS Tustin). Accessed: https://www.tustinca.org/DocumentCenter/View/l 141 /Environmental -Impact -Statement -and- Report - Volume - l - PDF Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report). Prepared by LGC Geotechnical. 2019 (GEO 2019). Meixner, etal. Sources of Selenium, Arsenic and Nutrients in the Newport Bay Watershed, 2004. Accessed: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/tmdI/docs/Meixner_etal_2004.pdf Orange County Water District South Basin #D-1712505 Remedial Investigation Workplan, June 25, 2018 (OCWA 2018). Accessed: https://www.ocwd.com/media/6813/south-basin-project-d1712505-ri-work- plan.pdf. City of Santa Ana 5.8-20 Draft EIR January 2020 5.9 Land Use and Planning 5.9.1 INTRODUCTION In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(d), this section provides a summary of the plans, policies, and regulations of the City of Santa Ana, and regional, state, and federal agencies that have policy and regulatory control over the proposed Project site. Policy conflicts do not, in and of themselves, indicate a significant environmental effect within the meaning of CEQA. To the extent that physical environmental impacts may result from such conflicts, those impacts are analyzed in this EIR in the specific topical sections to which the impact pertains (e.g., noise, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, or transportation and traffic). More specifically, this section examines the potential for the Project to conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, including relevant goals and policies of the City of Santa Ana General Plan (which is currently undergoing a comprehensive update), the City's zoning code, the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). 5.9.2 REGULATORY SETTING California Public Utilities Code, Section 21676, Airport Land Use Commission Prior to the amendment of a general plan or specific plan, or the adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation within the planning boundary established by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), the local agency shall first refer the proposed action to the commission. If the commission determines that the proposed action is inconsistent with the commission's plan, the referring agency shall be notified. The local agency may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this article, which are to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the publics exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses. At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the commission, the local agency governing body shall provide the commission and the division a copy of the proposed decision and findings. The commission and the division may provide comments to the local agency governing body within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. If the commission or the division's comments are not available within this time limit, the local agency governing body may act without them. The comments by the division or the commission are advisory to the local agency governing body. The local agency governing body shall include comments from the commission and the division in the public record of any final decision to overrule the commission, which may only be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the governing body. SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy On April 7, 2016 SCAG's Regional Council adopted the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS), which is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals. The 2016 RTP/SCS Goals include the following: City of Santa Ana 5.9-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning RTP/SCS G1: Align the plan investments and policies with improving regional economic development and competitiveness. RTP/SCS G2: Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region. RTP/SCS G3: Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region. RTP/SCS G4: Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system. RTP/SCS G5: Maximize the productivity of our transportation system. RTP/SCS G6: Protect the environment and health for our residents by improving air quality and encouraging active transportation (e.g., bicycling and walking). RTP/SCS G7: Actively encourage and create incentives for energy efficiency, where possible. RTP/SCS G8: Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and active transportation. RTP/SCS G9: Maximize the security of the regional transportation system through improved system monitoring, rapid recovery planning, and coordination with other security agencies. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport The John Wayne Airport (JWA) is within the oversight of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC is required to prepare and adopt an airport land use plan for each of the airports within its jurisdiction. The ALUC prepared the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for JWA (amended April 17, 2008). The AELUP intends "to safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the plan seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace." Land uses within the AELUP planning area boundaries are required to conform to safety, noise, and height restrictions. Public Utilities Code Section 21675(c) requires that area surrounding any airport which affects, or is affected by, aircraft operations be embraced by the boundaries of its compatibility plan (i.e., AELUP). The planning area sets limits of the area within which proposed land use projects are to be referred to the ALUC for review. Planning area boundaries are determined by the location and configuration of the airport included in the plan, and the extent of the noise and safety impacts associated with that airport, with certain exceptions. The overall planning area is the furthest extent of the 60 CNEL Contour, the FAR Part 77 Notification Surface, and the runway safety zones associated with the airport. In most instances, the airport influence area is designated by the ALUC as its planning area boundary for the airport and the two terms can be considered synonymous. The Project site is located within the JWA Planning Area's FAR Part 77 Notification Surface; but outside of the airport's 60 CNEL Contour. Building Height Restrictions: The ALUC has adopted the FAR Part 77 as the criteria for determining height restrictions in Orange County. These regulations are the only definitive standard available and the standard most generally used (AELUP 2008). The allowable height of structures surrounding an airport is described in FAR Part 77 as the allowable height at which safe movement of aircraft occurs. The regulation requires that notice be given to the FAA if there is a proposal to construct a structure that would exceed a 100:1 slope of an imaginary surface extending outward for 20,000 feet from the nearest runway at JWA. Beyond the 100:1 imaginary surface, FAR Part 77 requires notification to FAA for any project that will be more than 200 feet in height above the ground level pursuant to FAR Part 77 Section 77.13. City of Santa Ana 5.9-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning Airport Environs Land Use Plan Policies: The following policies in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan are relevant to the Project: Policy 3.2.1: Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be inconsistent with the AELUP which: 1. Places people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, 2. Concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, 3. Permits structures of excessive height in areas which would affect adversely the continued operation of the airport, or 4. Permits activities or facilities that would affect adversely aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.4: Noise Impact Zone "2" - Moderate Noise Impact (60 dB CNEL or greater, less than 65 dB CNEL). Noise impacts in this area are sufficient to require sound attenuation as set forth in the California Noise Insulation Standards, Title 25, California Code of Regulations. Single noise events in this area create serious disturbances to many inhabitants. Even though the Commission would not find residential units incompatible in this area, the Commission strongly recommends that residential units be limited or excluded from this area unless sufficiently sound attenuated. The residential use interior sound attenuation requirement shall be a CNEL value not exceeding an interior level of 45 dB. In addition, it is recommended that designated outdoor common or recreational areas within Noise Impact Zone 2 provide outdoor signage informing the public of the presence of operating aircraft. Policy 3.2.5: Runway Protection Zone "RPZ," Extreme Crash Hazard. The severe potential for loss of life and property due to accidents prohibits most land uses in this area. Only airport related uses and open space uses, including agriculture and certain types of transportation and utility uses are permitted. No buildings intended for human habitation are permitted in the RPZ. Furthermore, because of the proximity to aeronautical operations, uses in this area must not attract birds nor emit excessive glare or light, nor produce or cause steam, smoke, dust, or electronic interference so as to interfere with, or endanger, aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.6: Height Restriction Zone. Any object, which by reason of its height or location would interfere with the established, or planned, airport flight procedures, patterns, or navigational systems, is unacceptable. This will ensure the stability of local air transportation, as well as promote land uses that are compatible with the airport environs. However, any object which rises above the height of surrounding development, or which is located in close proximity to any of the various flight paths, must be clearly visible during hours of twilight or darkness and must not threaten, endanger, or interfere with aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.7: Airspace/Airport Inconsistency. Any structure, either within or outside of the planning area, is inconsistent with this AELUP if it: 1. Is determined to be a "Hazard" by the FAA; 2. Would raise the ceiling or visibility minimums at an airport for an existing or planned instrument procedure (i.e., a procedure consistent with the FAA approved airport layout plan or a proposed procedure formally on file with the FAA); 3. Would result in a loss in airport utility, e.g. in a diminution of the established operational efficiency and capacity of the airport, such as by causing the usable length of the runway(s) to be reduced; or 4. Would conflict with air space used for the airport traffic pattern or enroute navigation to and from the airport. Policy 3.3.6: Condition which may serve to mitigate a project/action and thus may permit the ALUC to make a finding of consistency includes providing noticing that states "Notice of Airport in Vicinity: This property is City of Santa Ana 5.9-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you." City of Santa Ana General Plan General Plan Land Use Designations The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of PAO (Professional and Administration Office) and the Project proposes a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the Project site to District Center (DC). Hence, these General Plan land use designations are described below: Professional and Administration Office (PAO): The Land Use Element describes that the PAO (Professional and Administration Office) land use designation applies to those areas where professional and/or administrative offices are predominant, or where such development is being encouraged. The floor area ratio intensity standard applicable to this land use designation ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. The PAO areas are intended to provide a unique environment for office development in those areas of the City where office uses are the predominant land use and encourage major employment centers at locations which significantly lessen the impact to the City's local street system. The PAO designation includes a range of floor area ratios to differentiate development intensity and character in relation to adjacent land uses. District Center (DC): The General Plan Land Use Element states that District Center (DC) designation includes the major activity areas in the City, and the intensity standard for the District Center designation ranges from a floor ratio of 1.0 to 5.0. The Land Use Element states that District Centers are to be developed with an urban character that includes a mixture of high-rise office, commercial, and residential uses which provide shopping, business, cultural, education, recreation, entertainment, and housing opportunities. Residential developments within some District Centers are allowed at a density of up to 90 units per acre when developed as an integral component of a master planned mixed-use project. General Plan Comprehensive Update The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan and has prepared a General Plan Update General Plan Policy Framework document in December 2018, which identified five geographical focus areas for the General Plan update. Through the General Plan Update process, the City identified that these areas are suited for future development or overall improvement. The Project site is located within the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area, which is identified as a regional job corridor with proximity to SR -55, the Orange County business complex, and the airport. The General Plan Policy Framework document also identifies that the area should allow for the changing economy and provide for a jobs -housing balance. The General Plan Policy Framework document identifies the goals for the focus area, which include: • Protect industrial & office employment base • Enhance opportunities for corporate offices • Attract economic activity into the City from surrounding communities • Provide complementary housing at the City's edge • Maintain hotel and commercial uses City of Santa Ana 5.9-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning The General Plan Policy Framework document identifies two alternatives for land use designations for the Project site and surrounding area. Both of the alternatives identify the Project site as a District Center with up to 6 -story buildings that would provide mixed residential and employment uses. General Plan Goals and Policies The General Plan is the City's principal long-range policy and planning document guiding the development, conservation, and enhancement of Santa Ana. The existing General Plan contains 16 Elements that provide a comprehensive collection of goals and policies related to the physical development of the City. The goals and policies of the existing General Plan that are relevant to the proposed Project are listed below by General Plan Element. Airport Environs Element Goal 1: Protect sensitive land uses from airport related noise impacts. Policy 1.1: Residential development within the JWA 65 dBA CNEL Noise Contour or greater is not supported. Policy 1.3: Require all residential land uses in 60 dBA CNEL or 65 dBA CNEL Noise Contours to be sufficiently mitigated so as not to exceed an interior standard of 45 dB(A) CNEL. Goal 2: Protect the safety of the general public from aircraft hazards. Policy 2.1: Comply with FAA regulations and ALUC requirements on new development and redevelopment located within the height restriction zone for JWA per PUC Section 21676. Policy 2.2: Minimize hazards to aeronautical operations by ensuring land uses do not emit excessive glare, light, steam, smoke, dust, or electronic interference in compliance with FAA regulations and the JWA AELUP. Policy 2.3: Comply with FAR Part 77 and the AELUPs for JWA and Heliports as they may be amended from time to time. Policy 2.4: Prior to the amendment of the City's general plan or a specific plan, or the adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation within the planning boundary established by the ALUC, and pursuant to PUC Section 21676, the local agency shall first refer the proposed action to the ALUC. Circulation Element Goal 1: Provide and maintain a comprehensive circulation system that facilitates the efficient movement of people and goods throughout the City and enhances its economic viability. Policy 1.4: Maintain at least a level of service "D" on arterial street intersections, except in major development areas. Policy 1.11: Minimize travel impediments on bicycle and pedestrian paths. Goal 2: Provide design and construction that facilitates safe utilization of the City's transportation systems. Policy 2.1: Limit the number of driveways on arterial streets to reduce vehicular conflict and facilitate traffic flow. Goal 3: Provide a full spectrum of travel alternatives for the community's residents, employees, and visitors. City of Santa Ana 5.9-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning Policy 3.4: Encourage the development of multi -modal transit opportunities within major development areas. Policy 3.5: Enhance sidewalks and pedestrian systems to promote their use as a means of travel. Goal 4: Fully coordinate transportation and land use planning activities. Policy 4.2: Assess land use and transportation project impacts through the development review process. Policy 4.3: Assess all development projects in order to identify their traffic impacts and require that they pay their fair -share of the system improvements necessary to accommodate traffic generated by the project. Goal 5: Create attractive circulation corridors to enhance the City's image. Conservation Element Goal 1: Protect the public health, safety, and welfare through effective management of natural resources. Objective 1.1: Reduce air pollution emissions to achieve national ambient air quality standards. Objective 1.2: Provide sufficient water of adequate quality for all users. Objective 1.3: Provide safe, land -conserving disposal of solid waste. Objective 1.4: Assure adequate sewer treatment facilities to meet population and economic growth requirements. Objective 2.1: Conserve water resources in commercial, industrial, residential and recreational uses. Objective 2.2: Integrate natural and cultural resource protection measures into land use and development activities. Goal 3: Preserve and enhance the aesthetic and environmental quality of the community for the enjoyment of all residents. Objective 3.1: Minimize loss of natural aesthetic, historic, archeological and paleontological resources as land is developed. Objective 3.2: Increase planting of trees, bushes, shrubs and flowers on public and private property. Policies: • Encourage water conservation through design and facilities features of new developments through the use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed -scale retrofits, etc. where such measures are likely to be effective and technically and economically feasible. • Provide for appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from the development site. • Minimize changes in hydrology and pollutant loading; require incorporation of control, including structural and non-structural and Best Management Practices to mitigate the projected increases in pollutant loads and flows. • Ensure that post -development runoff rates and velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact on downstream erosion and stream habitat. Energy Element Goal 1: To reduce consumption of non-renewable energy. City of Santa Ana 5.9-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning Goal 2: To support development and utilization of new energy sources. Objective 1.1: Reduce transportation -related energy consumption. Objective 1.2: Reduce land use related energy consumption. Objective 1.3: Reduce construction -related energy consumption. Policies • Encourage higher densities of housing and office (mixed use) development to relate to areas of higher transportation access and capacity. • Require and/or provide incentives for energy-efficient subdivision and site planning and building design. Growth Management Element Goal 2: To ensure that adequate transportation and public facilities are provided for existing and future residents of the City. These goals shall be accomplished through implementation of the policies and programs set forth in this Element. Objectives: • The circulation system shall be implemented in a manner that achieves a Traffic Level of Service "D" except in the City's major development areas and at those intersections which are impacted by factors beyond the City's control. • All new development shall pay its share of the street improvement costs associated with that development including regional traffic mitigation. • Recognizing the constraints of existing physical development characteristics (Santa Ana is 98 percent built out), it is the City's policy to strive toward achieving a balance of land uses where by residential, commercial and public land uses are proportionally balanced. Housing Element Goal 1: Livable and complete neighborhoods of quality housing conditions, ample parks and community services, well-maintained infrastructure, and public facilities that inspire neighborhood pride and ownership. Policy HE -1.4: Healthy Neighborhoods. Create and maintain parks and open spaces; plant trees, green parkways and medians; support healthy food options, and maintain a continuous pattern of pathways that encourage an active and healthy lifestyle. Policy HE -1.5: Infrastructure and Public Services. Provide quality community facilities, physical infrastructure, traffic management and parking control, and other public services to promote the livability, safety, and vitality of neighborhoods. Goal 2: A diversity of quality housing, affordability levels, and living experiences that accommodate Santa Ana's residents and workforce of all household types, income levels, and age groups to foster an inclusive community. Policy HE -2.2: District Centers. Create high intensity, mixed-use urban villages and pedestrian oriented experiences that support the mid- to high-rise office centers, commercial activity, and cultural activities in the varied District Centers. Policy HE -2.3: Rental Housing. Encourage the construction of rental housing for Santa Ana's residents and workforce, including a commitment to very low, low, and moderate -income residents and moderate -income Santa Ana workers. City of Santa Ana 5.9-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning Policy HE -2.4: Diverse Housing Types. Facilitate diverse types, prices, and sizes of housing, including single- family homes, apartments, townhomes, mixed/multiuse housing, transit -oriented housing, multi -generational housing, and live -work opportunities. Policy HE -2.5: Housing Design. Require excellence in architectural design through the use of materials and colors, building treatments, landscaping, open space, parking, and environmentally sensitive ("green") building and design practices. Goal 3: Increased opportunities for low and moderate -income individuals and families to find quality housing opportunities and afford a greater choice of rental or homeownership opportunities. Land Use Element Goal 1: Promote a balance of land uses to address basic community needs. Policy 1.2: Support high density residential development within the City's District Centers as a part of a mixed-use development. Policy 1.5: Maintain and foster a variety of residential land uses in the City. Policy 2.2: Support commercial land uses in adequate amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and services. Policy 2.4: Support pedestrian access between commercial uses and residential neighborhoods that are in close proximity. Policy 2.10: Support new development which is harmonious in scale and character with existing development in the area. Goal 5: Ensure that the impacts of development are mitigated. Policy 5.1: Promote development which has a net community benefit and enhances the quality of life. Policy 5.2: Protect the community from incompatible land uses. Policy 5.5: Encourage development which is compatible with, and supportive of surrounding land uses. Policy 5.7: Anticipate that the intensity of new development will not exceed available infrastructure capacity. Policy 5.9: Encourage development which provides a clean and safe environment for the City's residents, workers, and visitors. Policy 5.10: Support a circulation system which is responsive to the needs of pedestrians and vehicular travel. Policy 5.11: Encourage development which does not generate obnoxious fumes, toxins, or hazardous materials. Policy 5.12: Provide appropriate permanent measures to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from a development site. Goal 6: Reduce residential overcrowding to promote public health and safety. Noise Element Goal 1: Prevent significant increases in noise levels in the community and minimize the adverse effects of currently -existing noise sources. Objective 1.1: Prevent creation of new and additional sources of noise. City of Santa Ana 5.9-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning Policies: • Require consideration of noise generation potential and susceptibility to noise impacts in the sitting, design and construction of new developments. • Require mitigating site and building design features, traffic circulation alternatives, insulation, and other noise prevention measures of those new developments which generate high noise levels. • Sound insulate and/or buffer sensitive land uses such as housing from adverse noise impacts in noise - prone areas. Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element Goal 1: Provide sufficient open space to meet the recreational and aesthetic needs of the community. Objective 1.1: Protect key open space areas through public ownership. Objective 1.3: Encourage private development of visually accessible open space. Policy: • Provide quality open space in quantities adequate for the type and intensity of surrounding development. Public Safety Element Goal 1: Preserve a safe and secure environment for all Santa Ana residents and workers. Goal 2: Minimize loss of life and property due to natural and man-made catastrophes. Policies: • Assure minimum feasible response time to police calls in all areas of the City. • Assure minimum feasible response time to fire calls in all areas of the City. Strictly enforce safety provisions of building and zoning codes. • Increase the effectiveness of law enforcement activities through expansion of crime prevention measures and the active involvement of the public in local law enforcement programs. Seismic Safety Element Goal 1: Preserve a safe and secure environment for all Santa Ana residents and workers. Objective 1.3: Minimize seismic risk in the construction of new structures. Policy: Use a higher standard of design for structures with high occupancy than for other structures. Urban Design Element Goal 1: Improve the physical appearance of the City through development of districts that project a sense of place, positive community image, and quality environment. Policy 1.1: New development and redevelopment projects must have the highest quality design, materials, finishes, and construction. Policy 1.4: Development and other design features that prevent loitering, vandalism, graffiti, and visual deprivation, are to be included in all projects. Policy 1.5: Enhanced architectural forms, textures, colors, and materials are expected in the design of all projects. City of Santa Ana 5.9-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning Policy 1.7: On and off-site improvements must be pedestrian friendly. Policy 1.8: Shared access, circulation, and parking are encouraged as a means to minimize the amount of asphalt while increasing landscape in parking lots. Policy 2.1: Projects must acknowledge and improve upon their surroundings with the use of creative architectural design, streetscape treatments, and landscaping. Policy 2.2: New development must be consistent with the scale, bulk, and pattern of existing development. Policy 3.2: Street improvements and adjacent development, should be consistently designed to eliminate a haphazard look and visual clutter along corridors. Policy 3.3: Enhanced streetscapes, architectural themes, and landscaping are to be provided to visually strengthen the path and enhance adjacent development. Policy 3.10: Safe and pleasant bicycle and pedestrian routes are to be provided and they should link activity nodes and places of interest. Policy 3.11: Maximize the use of street trees and parkway landscaping to create a pleasant travel experience and positive City image. Policy 3.15: Create a diverse urban forest through the use of a large variety of trees in medians, parkways, public open space, and as part of private development. City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Chapter 41, Zoning The City's Municipal Code Chapter 41, Zoning, regulates the location and uses of specific uses within the city, including residences, businesses, trades, industries, use of buildings, structures, and land, the location, height, bulk, and size of buildings and structures. The zoning standards are implemented to: • Encourage the most appropriate use of land. • Conserve and stabilize property value. • Provide adequate open spaces for light and air and to prevent and fight fires. • Prevent the undue concentration of population. • Lessen congestion on streets and highways. • Promote the health, safety, and the general welfare of the people, all as part of the General Plan of the City. The existing zoning for the Project site is M-1 (Light Industrial). Pursuant the City's Zoning Code Sec. 41-472. Uses permitted in the M1 zone include: • The compounding, processing, or treatment of raw or previously treated materials into a finished or semi -finished product • The manufacture of products from raw or previously treated materials • The assembly of products from raw or previously treated materials • The packaging or distribution of previously prepared products or materials • Wholesale establishments where the primary trade is business to business sale of products, supplies, and equipment. City of Santa Ana 5.9-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning • Storage of previously prepared goods, products or materials for eventual distribution or sales where the goods, products or materials are the property of the owner or operator of the building or structure. • Machine shop or other metal working shops. • Warehousing. • Impound yards (storage only) with no office or dispatching operations. • Laundry and dry cleaning establishments in conjunction with plant operation for such establishment on the premises. • Eating establishments • Research laboratories that do not generate hazardous waste materials. • Service stations with no more than two thousand (2,000) square feet of the gross floor area devoted to non -automotive related product sales. • Truck, boat and heavy equipment sales, rental, and service. • Movie, photography, musical or video production studios. • Bulk products sales (twenty-five (25) cubic feet or greater) when such products are the primary sales activity. • Public utility structures. • Blueprinting, photoengraving, screen printing and other reproduction processes. • Wholesale nursery and plant storage. • Contractor's yard. • Automotive repair and service, including body and fender repair, painting, and engine replacement. • Home improvement warehouse store. • Sales of industrial products, supplies and equipment used for final product manufacture. • Lumberyard, including mill and sash work if entirely within an enclosed building. • Recycling facilities not in excess of forty-five thousand gross square feet. • Adult entertainment businesses. • Storage and distribution of hazardous materials. • Passenger transportation services. Pursuant to the zoning code Section 41-474, the building height limits in the M1 zone are limited to 35 feet in height. Specific Development (SD) Zone: The proposed zoning for the Project site is Specific Development (SD). Pursuant the City's Zoning Code Section 41-593.1, the purpose of the SD zone is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the city and its residents by: • Protecting and enhancing the value of properties by encouraging the use of good design principles and concepts, as related to the division of property, site planning and individual improvements with full recognition of the significance and effect they have on the proper planning and development of adjacent and nearby properties. • Encouraging, securing and maintaining the orderly and harmonious appearance, attractiveness and aesthetic development of structures and grounds in order that the most appropriate use and value thereof be determined and protected. City of Santa Ana 5.9-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning • Providing a method whereby specific development plans are to be based on the general plan as well as other regulations, programs, and legislation as may in the judgment of the city be required for the systematic execution of the general plan. • Recognizing the interdependence of land values and aesthetics and providing a method to implement this interdependence in order to maintain the values of surrounding properties and improvements and encouraging excellence of property development, compatible with the general plan for, and character of, the city, with due regard for the public and private interests involved. • Insuring that the public benefits derived from expenditures of public funds for improvements and beautification of streets and public facilities shall be protected by exercise of reasonable controls over the character and design of private buildings, structures and open spaces. Proposed development projects within the SD zone are required to submit development plans for architectural review as described in Section 41-593.4, and consists of one of the following: • A plan consisting of architectural drawings or sketches and plot plans, all to a workable scale, showing the elevation of the proposed building or structure, signs, proposed landscaping or other treatment of grounds around such building or structure, off-street parking and other physical features such as trees, hydrants, poles, and other installations, and in addition, such other plans, drawings or information as may be determined by the director of planning to be necessary to fully evaluate any requirement for a building permit; or • A plan consisting of standards and regulations pertaining to the following: o The height, location, and bulk of buildings: o The location, arrangement and configuration of open space and building setback; o The location and design of off-street parking areas; o The number, size, and location of all signs; o Such other regulations and standards as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes and intent of this division or to insure the proper execution of the general plan. The plans submitted for development within an SD zone are required to be reviewed to ensure that buildings, structures, and grounds will be in keeping with the neighborhood and will not be detrimental to the harmonious development of the city or impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood. 5.9.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Site The Project site consists of 14.58 -acres of land that is developed with three partially occupied industrial buildings, parking areas, and vehicle circulation drives. The site has little vegetation other than an approximately 2.5 -acre undeveloped grass area at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenues, some ornamental trees scattered throughout the site, and street trees along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The 3 existing buildings total 212,121 square feet and consist of the following structures: • 2300 South Redhill Avenue: 30,129 square foot building with a 3,330 SF square foot mezzanine and 6 loading docks • 2310 South Redhill Avenue: 68,992 square foot building with a 9,992 square foot mezzanine office and 6 loading docks City of Santa Ana 5.9-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning • 2320 South Redhill Avenue: 113,000 square foot building with a 43,000 square foot mezzanine office and 7 loading docks The buildings are currently utilized by various short-term leasers, which include 119,121 square feet that is utilized by warehousing and distribution operations; 5,000 square feet that is utilized for research and development; and 30,000 square feet in the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building that is being utilized as a 200 -bed temporary homeless shelter by the City of Santa Ana. The remaining 53,000 square feet of building area (approximately 25 percent) is currently vacant. The Project site was formerly occupied by Ricoh Electronics, Inc., a manufacturer and distributor of thermal paper and toner from approximately 1985 through 2017. The current tenants began utilizing the site after cessation of the Ricoh Electronics operations. The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of PAO (Professional & Administration Office) and is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial), as shown on Figures 5.9-1 and 5.9-2. As described previously, the Land Use Element states that the existing PAO land use designation applies to those areas where professional and/or administrative offices are predominant, or where such development is being encouraged. The floor area ratio intensity standard applicable to this land use designation ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. The PAO areas are intended to provide a unique environment for office development in those areas of the City where office uses are the predominant land use and encourage major employment centers at locations which significantly lessen the impact to the City's local street system. The PAO designation includes a range of floor area ratios to differentiate development intensity and character in relation to adjacent land uses. Surrounding Land Uses The Project site is located within an urban area that is either fully developed or planned for urban development. Northwest and Southwest: The site is bounded to the northwest and southwest by existing business park and industrial warehouse buildings, associated parking lot areas, and a portion of an abandoned BNSF rail line spur. North: Warner Avenue (a 6 -lane arterial roadway) bounds the site to the north, followed by commercial office uses. Areas across Warner Avenue from the site are within the City of Tustin. East: Red Hill Avenue (a 6 -lane arterial roadway) is adjacent to the site on the east. Areas across Red Hill Avenue from the site are within the City of Tustin and Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area. Tustin Legacy Specific Plan The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area was formerly used as a U.S. Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) and is a large area that is under redevelopment and planned by the City of Tustin to become a new mixed-use urban center providing: single-family residential, multi -family residential, mixed-use, commercial retail, office, schools, parks, and other public facilities. The Tustin Legacy Land Use Plan consists of 13 Planning Areas and numerous sub -planning areas. Areas directly across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site are within Planning Area 9-12, which is also identified as Neighborhood E — Employment Center. The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan describes that the employment center is to provide a business park setting for a full range of professional offices, research & development, and commercial uses. Currently, this area has been approved for development of 870,000 square feet of modern creative office space and supporting retail that includes: a food hall, a conference center, and outdoor multi -use space. Of this, 470,000 square feet of office space, the food hall, and conference center has been developed and is operational. City of Santa Ana 5.9-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.9-14 Draft EIR January 2020 Existing General Plan Land Use Santa Ana Irvine 0 General Commercial 0 Industrial District Center 0 Professional & Administration Office Project Site The Bowery Draft EIR M Urban and Industrial Tustin 0 Tustin Legacy Specific Plan N 0 Industrial Planned Community Commercial/Business Figure 5.9-1 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.9-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.9-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning Additionally, areas across the street from the site, on the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, are within Planning Area 1, Education Village (within Neighborhood A), which is designated to provide a range of public -serving uses that include education, training, park and recreation, and specific social service functions. The Tustin Legacy Planning Areas further west, beyond Planning Areas 9-12 and 1, are identified for both single and multi -family residential uses. The Tustin Legacy is currently partially developed with these new planned uses, including residential units along Edinger Avenue, The District at Tustin Legacy commercial center at the northwest corner of Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway, and public facilities to the northwest of the Red Hill and Warner intersection (Orange County Sheriff Training Academy, Orange County Animal Shelter). Overall, the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan is a large planned development area that is across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site that is planned to include urban development of residential, mixed -uses, commercial, and office space. Irvine Business Complex Areas 0.35 miles to the south and south east of the Project site, across from Dyer Road/Barranca Parkway are in the City of Irvine, within the Irvine Business Complex (IBC), which is a 2,800 -acre master planned community that is a developed urban area. Typical land uses within the IBC include medium- to high-density residential, commercial, institutional, professional/medical offices, industrial manufacturing, research and development, support service retail, restaurants, and hotel/motels. Since early 2004, there has been substantial redevelopment of nonresidential uses to high-density, urban -style residential development sites within in the IBC (IBC 2009). These areas have been traditionally occupied by smaller -scale office and industrial operations and have been evolving to mixed-use neighborhoods (IBC 2009). The historical development and use of the Project site for industrial manufacturing was consistent with the original land uses within the adjacent IBC. The Project site is now being proposed for redevelopment into a mixed-use neighborhood, as described in Section 3.0, Project Description. Since original development of the Project site was consistent with development in the MCAS and the IBC, it follows that current and future land use trends within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area and the IBC could influence land uses within its vicinity. John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport (JWA) is located approximately 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site under the primary aircraft approach corridor, within the AELUP Notification area and planning area boundary, as detailed in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Because the Project site is located within the AELUP Notification area and planning area boundary (shown on Figures 5.7-4 and 5.7-5 in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials), and the Project proposes a General Plan Amendment and a zone change, the City is required to refer the proposed Project to the ALUC for review, pursuant to the California Public Utilities Code Section 21676, as listed previously. 5.9.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: LU -1 Physically divide an established community; or LU -2 Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. City of Santa Ana 5.9-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning 5.9.5 METHODOLOGY The analysis of land use consistency impacts considers whether the proposed Project physically divide an established community and if the Project would be inconsistent with (or conflict with) with regional and local plans, policies, and regulations that are applicable to the proposed Project and Project site, including the: SCAG RTP/SCS, Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, City of Santa Ana General Plan and zoning code. Consistent with the scope and purpose of this EIR, this discussion primarily focuses on those goals and policies that relate to avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts, and an assessment of whether any inconsistency with these standards creates a significant physical impact on the environment. Thus, a project's inconsistency with a policy is only considered significant if such inconsistency would cause significant physical environmental impacts (as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15382). CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(d) requires that an EIR discuss inconsistencies with applicable plans that the decision -makers should address. A project need not be consistent with each and every policy and objective in a planning document. Rather, a project is considered consistent with the provisions of the identified regional and local plans if it meets the general intent of the plans and would not preclude the attainment of the primary goals of the land use plan or policy. 5.9.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT LU -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT PHYSICALLY DIVIDE AN ESTABLISHED COMMUNTIY. Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is currently developed with 3 light industrial buildings that total 212,121 square feet and surface parking areas that was developed in the early 1980s and utilized by Ricoh Electronics, Inc. from approximately 1985 through 2017. The buildings are currently utilized by various short-term leasers; and 53,000 square feet of building area (approximately 25 percent) is vacant. The Project site is surrounded by roadways on two sides and existing business park and industrial warehouse buildings on the other two sides. Areas across Warner Avenue, which is a 6 -lane arterial roadway, include commercial office uses. The land directly across Redhill Avenue (also a 6 -lane arterial roadway) from the Project site is undeveloped land within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area that is planned for employment uses, such as: professional office, business park, and commercial uses. Areas to the northeast of the site, across both Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, are also within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area and are partially developed with public serving uses that include a US Armed Forces Reserve Center, Orange County Sheriff Training Academy, and an animal shelter. In summary, the Project site consists of three light industrial buildings that are partially underutilized and surrounded by a variety of existing and planned employment, commercial, and community uses. The proposed Project would redevelop the site to provide a mixed-use development with 1,150 multi -family residential units, approximately 80,000 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant space, and 183,363 square feet of open space and recreation uses. The Project would provide residences, restaurant, and retail services near employment generating uses, which are complementary community uses. Therefore, the change of the Project site from a partially underutilized light industrial site to a residential and commercial mixed- use site would not physically divide an established community. In addition, the Project would not change roadways or install any infrastructure that would result in a physical division. Thus, the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to physical division of an established community. City of Santa Ana 5.9-20 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning IMPACT LU -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DUE TO A CONFLICT WITH ANY LAND USE PLAN, POLICY, OR REGULATION ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF AVOIDING OR MITIGATING AN ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT. Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The 2016 RTP/SCS Goals that are relevant to the proposed Project focus largely on maximizing mobility, encouraging development patterns and densities that reduce infrastructure costs, and provide for efficiency. The proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable SCAG's 2016 RTP/SCS goals, as detailed in Table 5.9-1. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in conflict with RTP/SCS goals, and impacts would not occur. Table 5.9-1: Consistency with SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy RTP/SCS Goal Proposed Project Consistency with Applicable Goals RTP/SCS G1: Align the plan investments and policies with Not Applicable. This a SCAG regional goal. This goal is improving regional economic development and not a project -specific goal and is not applicable to the competitiveness. proposed Project. RTP/SCS G2: Maximize mobility and accessibility for all Not Applicable. This a SCAG regional goal. This goal is people and goods in the region. not a project -specific goal and is not applicable to the proposed Project. RTP/SCS G3: Ensure travel safety and reliability for all Not Applicable. This a SCAG regional goal. This goal is people and goods in the region. not a project -specific goal and is not applicable to the proposed Project. RTP/SCS G4: Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional Not Applicable. This a SCAG regional goal. This goal is transportation system. not a project -specific goal and is not applicable to the proposed Project. RTP/SCS G5: Maximize the productivity of our Not Applicable. This a SCAG regional goal. This goal is transportation system. not a project -specific goal and is not applicable to the proposed Project. RTP/SCS G6: Protect the environment and health for our Consistent. As described in Section 3.0, Project residents by improving air quality and encouraging Description, the Project includes pedestrian connectivity active transportation (e.g., bicycling and walking). between the onsite residential, retail, restaurant, open space, and recreation. In addition, existing off-site sidewalks and planned bicycle routes would encourage active transportation. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with RTP/SCS Goal 6. RTP/SCS G7: Actively encourage and create incentives Consistent. Although this is a regional goal that is not for energy efficiency, where possible. project -specific, the proposed Project would implement energy efficiently by compliance with existing CalGreen/Title 24 energy standards, and by providing 94 electric vehicle chargers. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with RTP/SCS Goal 7. RTP/SCS G8: Encourage land use and growth patterns Consistent. The Project is located adjacent to existing that facilitate transit and active transportation. public transportation that provides connections to nearby regional Metrolink transit. City of Santa Ana 5.9-21 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning RTP/SCS Goal I Proposed Proiect Consistencv with Applicable Goals RTP/SCS G9: Maximize the security of the regional Not Applicable. This a SCAG regional goal. This goal is transportation system through improved system not a project -specific goal and is not applicable to the monitoring, rapid recovery planning, and coordination proposed Project. with other security agencies. Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport As described previously, JWA is located approximately 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site under the primary aircraft approach corridor and within the AELUP Notification area and planning area boundary for the airport. Table 5.9-2 provides an assessment of the proposed Project's consistency with the JWA AELUP. As detailed, the proposed Project would be consistent with airport land use plan policies with implementation of Mitigation Measure LU -1, which requires resident notification of airport operations and potential annoyances. With implementation of Mitigation Measure LU -1, which is an AELUP policy, the proposed Project would not conflict with the JWA AELUP. Table 5.9-2: Consistency with John Wayne Airport Land Use Plan Policies AELUP Poli Policy 3.2.1: Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be inconsistent with the AELUP which: 1. Places people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, 2. Concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, 3. Permits structures of excessive height in areas which would affect adversely the continued operation of the airport, or 4. Permits activities or facilities that would affect adversely aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.4: Noise Impact Zone "2" - Moderate Noise Impact (60 dB CNEL or greater, less than 65 dB CNEL). Noise impacts in this area are sufficient to require sound attenuation as set forth in the California Noise Insulation Standards, Title 25, California Code of Regulations. Single noise events in this area create serious disturbances to many inhabitants. Even though the Commission would not find residential units incompatible in this area, the Commission strongly recommends that residential units be limited or excluded from this area unless sufficiently sound attenuated. The residential use interior sound attenuation requirement shall be a CNEL value not exceeding an interior level of 45 dB. In addition, it is recommended that designated outdoor common or recreational areas within Noise Impact Zone 2 provide outdoor signage informing the public of the presence of operating aircraft. Proposed Project Consistency with Applicable Policy Consistent. The Project site is outside of the airport's 60 CNEL contour and is not subject to adverse aircraft noise. Noise from airport or aircraft operations would be below 60 dBA CNEL on the Project site. As described in Section 5.10, Noise, the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to airport noise. The Project site is not located within JWA's Airport Safety Zone, as shown in Figure 5.7-1, Section 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials and thus would not concentrate people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents. The Project residential buildings would be a maximum of 6 - stories high and the parking structure would be a maximum of 7 -levels of above ground. These structure heights would not affect airport operations. Similarly, the proposed mixed-use residential and commercial uses would not affect aeronautical operations. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.2.1. Consistent. The Project site is not located within Noise Impact Zone 2. As described in Section 5.1 0, Noise, the proposed Project site is outside of the airport's 60 CNEL contour. Additionally, as described in Section 5.10, Noise, the proposed Project would comply with California Noise Insulation Standards, Title 24 California Code of Regulations, that require interior noise levels to not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.2.4. City of Santa Ana 5.9-22 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning AELUP Policv I Proposed Proiect Consistencv with Applicable Policv Policy 3.2.5: Runway Protection Zone "RPZ," Extreme Crash Hazard. The severe potential for loss of life and property due to accidents prohibits most land uses in this area. Only airport related uses and open space uses, including agriculture and certain types of transportation and utility uses are permitted. No buildings intended for human habitation are permitted in the RPZ. Furthermore, because of the proximity to aeronautical operations, uses in this area must not attract birds nor emit excessive glare or light, nor produce or cause steam, smoke, dust, or electronic interference so as to interfere with, or endanger, aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.6: Height Restriction Zone. Any object, which by reason of its height or location would interfere with the established, or planned, airport flight procedures, patterns, or navigational systems, is unacceptable. This will ensure the stability of local air transportation, as well as promote land uses that are compatible with the airport environs. However, any object which rises above the height of surrounding development, or which is located in close proximity to any of the various flight paths, must be clearly visible during hours of twilight or darkness and must not threaten, endanger, or interfere with aeronautical operations. Policy 3.2.7: Airspace/Airport Inconsistency. Any structure, either within or outside of the planning area, is inconsistent with this AELUP if it: 1 . Is determined to be a "Hazard" by the FAA; 2. Would raise the ceiling or visibility minimums at an airport for an existing or planned instrument procedure (i.e., a procedure consistent with the FAA approved airport layout plan or a proposed procedure formally on file with the FAA); 3. Would result in a loss in airport utility, e.g. in a diminution of the established operational efficiency and capacity of the airport, such as by causing the usable length of the runway(s) to be reduced; or 4. Would conflict with air space used for the airport traffic pattern or enroute navigation to and from the airport. Policy 3.3.6: Condition which may serve to mitigate a project/action and thus may permit the ALUC to make a finding of consistency includes providing noticing that states "Notice of Airport in Vicinity: This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 Consistent. The Project site is not located within JWA's Airport Safety Zone or Runway Protection Zone, as shown in Figure 5.7-1 in Section 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.2.5. Consistent. The Project site is not within the JWA Planning Area's 200 -foot -high FAR Part 77 Notification Surface, which requires notification to FAA for any project that will be more than 200 feet in height above the ground. Additionally, the proposed mixed-use buildings would be a maximum of 6 stories high and parking structures would be seven -levels above ground; the tallest point on the buildings would be 94 -feet from ground level. Thus, the proposed Project would not exceed FAA's notification requirement and the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.2.6. Consistent. The Project is not located within an area, and would not extend into areas, that would adversely affect the JWA operations or result in a hazard. As described previously, and in Section 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the Project location is outside of the Runway Protection Zone and would not result in excessive heights and would not be considered a hazard by the FAA. The proposed mixed-use buildings would be a maximum of 6 stories high and parking structures would be seven - levels above ground; the tallest point on the buildings would be 94 -feet from ground level. Thus, the proposed Project would not require FAA's notification or raise the visibility minimums at JWA airport. The Project would be 94 -feet from ground level and would not extend into air space. Overall, the proposed structures would not adversely affect JWA aeronautical operations. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.2.7. Consistent. Mitigation Measure LU -1 has been included in compliance with this policy, in order to mitigate potential impacts related to inconsistency with a related policy that was adopted for the purpose of mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.3.6. 5.9-23 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning AELUP Policy Proposed Project Consistency with Applicable Policy person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you." General Plan Land Use Consistency: The Project site currently has a General Plan Land Use designation of PAO. As described by the General Plan Land Use Element, the PAO designation is for areas where professional and/or administrative offices are predominant, and the types of uses typically include: service activities such as copy centers, courier services, travel agencies, accountants, attorneys, doctors, engineers, insurance brokers, and restaurants when such uses are an integral component of a development. As shown on Figure 5.9-1, the areas to the southwest and northwest of the site within the City of Santa Ana are also designated as PAO. Areas north of Warner Avenue from the Project site are located within the City of Tustin and have a General Plan Land Use designation of Industrial (1). The City of Tustin General Plan Land Use Element describes that the Industrial land use designation is to provide for a mix of industrial and office uses such as wholesale businesses, light manufacturing, storage, distribution and sales, research and development laboratories, and service commercial business. This area is currently developed as an office park for professional business uses. Areas across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site are within the City of Tustin and the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan which designates land use and zoning for the lands within its boundary. Areas directly across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site are within Planning Area 9-12, which is also identified as Neighborhood E — Employment Center. The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan describes that the employment center is to provide a business park setting for a full range of professional offices, research & development, and commercial uses. Currently, this area has been approved for development of 870,000 square feet of modern creative office space and supporting retail that includes: a food hall, a conference center, and outdoor multi -use space. Of this, 470,000 square feet of office space, the food hall, and conference center has been developed and is operational. Additionally, areas across the street from the site, on the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, are within Planning Area 1, Education Village (within Neighborhood A), which is designated to provide a range of public -serving uses that include education, training, park and recreation, and specific social service functions. As described previously, other areas of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan that are farther to the east provide for a variety of employment, commercial, office, and residential development. Similarly, as described previously, the IBC area that is located 0.35 miles south and southeast of the Project site is a master planned area that provides for medium- to high-density mixed employment, service, and residential uses. Thus, both the Cities of Tustin and Irvine have developed plans (Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and the IBC) to encourage mixed-use development that includes residential, professional office, retail, flex, industrial, hospitality and institutional uses. The recent and proposed development patterns occurring in the Tustin Legacy and IBC are a general shift from traditional industrial uses towards more residential and mixed-use development. Nonetheless, the region within a two-mile radius of the Site maintains a strong concentration of industrial and professional office space that generates employment and economic growth (AECOM 2019). Development of the site for multi -family residential and commercial (retail/restaurant) uses would integrate into the planned development of these adjacent and nearby areas. The site would provide housing for local employees working nearby in Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. The site would also provide commercial retail City of Santa Ana 5.9-24 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning services and restaurants for onsite residents and employees working nearby. The site would provide both vehicular and pedestrian access and would integrate into the land uses of the area. Implementation of the proposed Project would require a General Plan Land Use Amendment to change the land use designation from PAO to DC to allow for the proposed mixed uses. The General Plan Land Use Element states that District Center (DC) designation includes the major activity areas in the City, and the intensity standard for the District Center (DC) designation ranges from a floor ratio of 1.0 to 5.0. In addition, the Land Use Element states that District Centers are to be developed with an urban character that includes a mixture of high-rise office, commercial, and residential uses which provide shopping, business, cultural, education, recreation, entertainment, and housing opportunities. Residential developments are allowed at a density of up to 90 units per acre. Overall, the Project would not result in a land use inconsistency. Rather, designating lands for mixed -uses, including multi -family residential, would provide locational efficiently as it allows people to work, live, and obtain services and restaurants within a small area, which has the potential to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled in comparison to residential development that is farther from employment services and restaurants. Furthermore, the proposed land use designation change from PAO to DC would not conflict with a policy or plan adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The PAO land use designation does not provide avoidance of an environmental effect and the DC land use designation provides for development flexibility to design a project that could avoid an environmental effect. As described throughout this EIR, the proposed Project would not result in significant environmental impacts, such as light, noise, or air quality to the adjacent existing and planned land uses. Therefore, impacts related to land use inconsistency would be less than significant. General Plan Goals, Policies, and Objectives: A detailed analysis of the proposed Project's consistency with the applicable goals, policies, and objectives of the City's General Plan that serve to avoid or mitigate environmental impacts is provided in Table 5.9-3. As described, the proposed Project would be consistent with the relevant goals, policies, and objectives of the City's General Plan that avoid or mitigate environmental impacts, and impacts related to conflict with a General Plan policy related to an environmental effect would be less than significant. Table 5.9-3: Consistency with Relevant General Plan Goals, Policies, and Objectives General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Airport Environs Element Goal 1: Protect sensitive land uses from airport related Consistent. As described in Section 5.10, Noise, the proposed noise impacts. Project is not located within the JWA 60 dBA CNEL noise contour. Thus, the Project would not be subject to airport related noise impacts, which are identified as sound levels of 65 dBA CNEL or higher. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1. Policy 1.1: Residential development within the JWA 65 Consistent. The proposed Project site is not located within the dBA CNEL Noise Contour or greater is not supported. JWA 65 dBA CNEL Noise Contour. Noise from airport or aircraft operations would be below 60 dBA CNEL on the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1 .1 6. City of Santa Ana 5.9-25 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Policy 1.3: Require all residential land uses in 60 dBA Consistent. As described in Section 5.10, Noise, the proposed CNEL or 65 dBA CNEL Noise Contours to be sufficiently Project site is outside of the airport's 60 CNEL contour. mitigated so as not to exceed an interior standard of 45 Additionally, the proposed Project would comply with California dB(A) CNEL. Noise Insulation Standards, Title 24 California Code of Regulations, that require interior noise levels to not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.3. Goal 2: Protect the safety of the general public from Consistent. The Project site is not located within JWA's Airport aircraft hazards. Safety Zone, as shown in Figure 5.7-1, Section 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials and thus would not subject people to aircraft hazards. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 2. Policy 2.1: Comply with FAA regulations and ALUC Consistent. According to the General Plan Airport Environs requirements on new development and redevelopment Element, the Project site is located within the Airport Environs located within the height restriction zone for JWA per Land Use Plan (AELUP) Notification Area for JWA. However, the PUC Section 21676. site is not within the FAR Part 77 200 -foot height restriction area. In addition, the highest point of the Project buildings would be 94 - feet from ground level. Thus, the proposed Project would not exceed the 200 -foot high height restriction zone for JWA, and the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.1. Policy 2.2: Minimize hazards to aeronautical operations Consistent. The proposed Project would not result in hazards by ensuring land uses do not emit excessive glare, light, related to excessive glare, light, steam, smoke, dust, or electronic steam, smoke, dust, or electronic interference in interference. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, substantial compliance with FAA regulations and the JWA AELUP. light or glare would not be generated because exterior light fixtures and security lighting would be installed pursuant to Municipal Code specifications for shielding and intensity of security lighting. The Project would not use highly reflective surfaces and does not include large areas of glass on the buildings. Therefore, the Project would not generate substantial sources of glare. As described in Section 5.2, Air Quality, operation of the Project would not generate substantial quantities of steam, smoke, and dust emissions, and emissions would be regulated by AQMD requirements. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.2. Policy 2.3: Comply with FAR Part 77 and the AELUPs for Consistent. According to the General Plan Airport Environs JWA and Heliports as they may be amended from time Element, the Project site is located within the Airport Environs Land to time. Use Plan (AELUP) Notification Area for JWA. However, the site is not within the FAR Part 77 200 -foot height restriction area. In addition, the highest point of the Project buildings would be 94 - feet from ground level. Thus, the proposed Project would not exceed the 200 -foot high height restriction zone for JWA. Further, the Project does not propose any heliport features and is not located within the vicinity of a heliport. Thus, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.3. Policy 2.4: Prior to the amendment of the City's general Consistent. The City of Santa Ana shall refer the proposed plan or a specific plan, or the adoption or approval of Project to the ALUC prior to being considered for adoption by the a zoning ordinance or building regulation within the City Planning Commission or City Council. Therefore, the proposed planning boundary established by the ALUC, and Project is consistent with Policy 2.4. pursuant to PUC Section 21676, the local agency shall first refer the proposed action to the ALUC. Circulation Element City of Santa Ana 5.9-26 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Goal 1: Provide and maintain a comprehensive Consistent. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, the circulation system that facilitates the efficient movement proposed Project provides an efficient and comprehensive of people and goods throughout the City and enhances circulation system that would route traffic from Red Hill Avenue its economic viability. and Warner Avenue to appropriate parking facilities. In addition, as described in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the Project would provide residences, retail, and restaurants near existing and planned employment areas, which enhances economic viability of the Project site and surrounding area. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1 . Policy 1.4: Maintain at least a level of service "D" on Consistent. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, with arterial street intersections, except in major development implementation of the identified mitigation measures, the areas. proposed Project would maintain at least a LOS D on arterial street intersections, except in major development areas, consistent with this policy. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.4. Policy 1.6: Improve intersection capacity on major Consistent. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, arterials to accommodate increased traffic demands. mitigation measures have been included to improve intersection capacity at all significantly impacted intersections. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.6. Policy 1.11: Minimize travel impediments on bicycle and Consistent. Project implementation would not cause any pedestrian paths. impediments to bicycle and pedestrian paths. In contrast, the proposed Project includes onsite walking paths/sidewalks that would connect to the existing sidewalks surrounding the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1 .1 1 . Goal 2: Provide design and construction that facilitates Consistent. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, the safe utilization of the City's transportation systems. proposed Project has been designed to safely enter and exit the Project site to and from the City's adjacent roadways. In addition, mitigation measures have been included to improve the capacity and safety of roadway intersections. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 2. Policy 2.1: Limit the number of driveways on arterial Consistent. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation the streets to reduce vehicular conflict and facilitate traffic circulation of the proposed Project, including the driveway flow. entrances, have been designed to accommodate vehicular traffic providing direct access to the onsite parking for each of the different uses. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, hazardous driveway conditions would not result from the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.1. Goal 3: Provide a full spectrum of travel alternatives for Consistent. The Project site provides for efficient vehicular travel. the community's residents, employees, and visitors. The site also is adjacent to existing OCTA bus routes, sidewalks, and bicycle routes. The Project would provide non -vehicular onsite circulation, which would connect to the existing sidewalks adjacent to the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 3. Policy 3.4: Encourage the development of multi -modal Consistent. As described in above, the site is adjacent to existing transit opportunities within major development areas. OCTA bus routes, sidewalks, and bicycle routes. In addition, the Project includes onsite sidewalks that would connect to the existing sidewalks adjacent to the Project site. Therefore, the Project encourages multi -modal and transit opportunities and the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.4. City of Santa Ana 5.9-27 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Policy 3.5: Enhance sidewalks and pedestrian systems to Consistent. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, the promote their use as a means of travel. proposed Project includes onsite walking paths/sidewalks that would connect to the existing sidewalks surrounding the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.5. Goal 4: Fully coordinate transportation and land use Consistent. As described above, with implementation of the planning activities. identified mitigation measures, the roadway system would be able to accommodate the proposed Project in addition to other identified projects within the Project vicinity. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 4. Policy 4.2: Assess land use and transportation project Consistent. The land use and transportation Project impacts are impacts through the development review process. being assessed through the development review process within this EIR as described in this Land Use EIR Section, and Section, 5.14, Transportation. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 4.2. Policy 4.3: Assess all development projects in order to Consistent. The traffic impacts from the proposed Project are identify their traffic impacts and require that they pay assessed in Section 5.14, Transportation, which identified their fair -share of the system improvements necessary to mitigation that requires fair -share payments toward accommodate traffic generated by the project. improvements that would reduce Project impacts. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 4.3. Goal 5: Create attractive circulation corridors to enhance Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed the City's image. Project would implement landscaping that would include ground cover, shrubs, and trees within the Project site and along both Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue that would improve the attractiveness of the circulation corridors. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 5. Conservation Element Goal 1: Protect the public health, safety, and welfare through effective management of natural resources. Objective 1.1: Reduce air pollution emissions to achieve national ambient air quality standards. Objective 1.2: Provide sufficient water of adequate quality for all users. City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 Consistent. The proposed Project would protect the public health and safety by compliance with existing federal, state, regional, and local regulations related to natural hazards and natural resources. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1. Consistent. As described in Section 5.2, Air Quality, The Project would help to balance jobs and housing. Also, the existing transit, bicycle, and pedestrian infrastructure adjacent to the Project site that is available for use would reduce vehicle miles traveled and the related air quality emissions, as employees could easily travel to employment opportunities within the vicinity of the Project site, including areas within the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. Thus, the proposed Project would support AQMP objectives to reduce trips, promote infill redevelopment, and balance jobs and housing, which help to achieve national ambient air quality standards. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1.1. Consistent. As described in Section 5.1 b, Utilities and Service Systems, the City of Santa Ana Water Resources Division has adequate water supplies and water quality to provide water to the proposed Project, in addition to the other needs within the City. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1.2. 5.9-28 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Objective 1.3: Provide safe, land -conserving disposal of Consistent. As described in Section 5.16, Utilities and Service solid waste. Systems, all solid waste -generating activities are subject to the state requirements for diversion of a minimum of 75 percent of solid waste after 2020. Implementation of the proposed Project would be consistent with all state regulations. All projects in the City undergo development review prior to permit approval, which includes an analysis of project compliance with these programs that would provide for safe, land -conserving disposal of solid waste. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1.3. Objective 1.4: Assure adequate sewer treatment Consistent. As described in Section 5.16, Utilities and Service facilities to meet population and economic growth Systems, the proposed sewer lines and wastewater treatment requirements. system would have adequate capacity to serve the needs of the proposed Project, in addition to the other needs within the service areas. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1.4. Objective 2.1: Conserve water resources in commercial, Consistent. As described in Section 5.16, Utilities and Service industrial, residential and recreational uses. Systems, the proposed Project would be developed pursuant to the CALGreen Code, which provides for water efficiency in plumbing fixtures and landscape irrigation. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 2.1. Objective 2.2: Integrate natural and cultural resource Consistent. As described in Section 5.15, Tribal Cultural Resources, protection measures into land use and development Mitigation Measure TCR -1 provides tribal cultural resource activities. protection measures related to identification of potential resources encountered during the course of grading or construction. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 2.2. Goal 3: Preserve and enhance the aesthetic and Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed environmental quality of the community for the enjoyment Project would provide a complete community by integrating of all residents. structures, parking, and open space areas. Each building would provide modern architectural expression. The Project would serve to enhance the existing character of the area by reinforcing the established and planned urban aesthetics within the Red Hill and Warner vicinity. Implementation of the Project would install new landscaping throughout the Project site that would enhance the aesthetic and environmental quality of the site. In addition, the environmental quality of the site and surrounding community would not be reduced by the Project. As described throughout this EIR, off-site areas would not be significantly impacted by noise, pollutants, or hazards. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 3. City of Santa Ana 5.9-29 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Objective 3.1: Minimize loss of natural aesthetic, historic, Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed archeological and paleontological resources as land is Project would enhance the existing character of the area by developed. providing modern mixed-use architecture, open space courtyards, and new coordinated landscaping throughout the Project site. The site is currently developed with three industrial buildings and has limited natural aesthetics that consists of a green lawn area in the northeast portion of the site at the corner of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The of loss of the open space lawn area would be minimized by implementation of new landscaping and improved architecture of the onsite buildings. In addition, as described above Mitigation Measure TCR -1 provides tribal cultural resource protection measures to minimize the potential loss of resources. The Project site does not contain historic resources, and past ground disturbance on the site and the shallow excavation required for the Project has limited the potential for the site to impact archaeological and paleontological resources to a less than significant level, as detailed in Section 5.3, Cultural Resources, and Section 5.3, Geology and Soils. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 3.1. Objective 3.2: Increase planting of trees, bushes, shrubs Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed and flowers on public and private property. Project would provide landscaping, including trees, bushes, and shrubs throughout the Project site and along the streetscape. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 3.2. Policy: Encourage water conservation through design Consistent. As described in Section 5.1 b, Utilities and Service and facilities features of new developments through the Systems, the proposed Project would include structural BMPs to use of water quality wetlands, biofiltration swales, filter stormwater through Modular Wetland System units. In watershed -scale retrofits, etc. where such measures are addition, the Project would be developed pursuant to the likely to be effective and technically and economically CALGreen Code, which provides for water efficiency in plumbing feasible. fixtures and landscape irrigation. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Policy: Provide for appropriate permanent measures to Consistent. As described in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from Quality, the proposed Project would include structural BMPs to the development site. filter stormwater through Modular Wetland System units. In addition, a Project specific WQMP is required to ensure that appropriate BMPs are implemented to reduce pollutant loads from the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Policy: Minimize changes in hydrology and pollutant Consistent. As described in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water loading; require incorporation of control, including Quality, the Project would include Modular Wetland System units structural and non-structural and Best Management to filter, retain, and slowly discharge stormwater and Practices to mitigate the projected increases in pollutant implementation of a WQMP to ensure that appropriate BMPs are loads and flows. implemented to reduce pollutant loads from the Project. Hence, the Project would not result in increases to flows and would mitigate increases in pollutant loads onsite. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Policy: Ensure that post -development runoff rates and Consistent. As described in Section 5. 5.8, Hydrology and Water velocities from a site have no significant adverse impact Quality, the Project would reduce the volume and rate of on downstream erosion and stream habitat. stormwater flows through use of Modular Wetland System units, as required by the MS4 permit. Therefore, the Project would not result in additional velocities of stormwater runoff that could impact downstream erosion or habitat. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Energy Element City of Santa Ana 5.9-30 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Goal 1: To reduce consumption of non-renewable Consistent. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the Project energy. includes features to reduce consumption of non-renewable energy, such as 94 electric vehicle charging stations energy efficient appliances, and Title 24 compliant lighting and plumbing fixtures. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1 . Goal 2: To support development and utilization of new Consistent. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the Project would energy sources. utilize new energy sources by providing a minimum of 94 electric vehicle charging stations and Title 24 measures that include solar - reflective roofing materials and energy efficient systems. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 2. Objective 1.1: Reduce transportation -related energy Consistent. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the Project is consumption. located near existing employment, commercial, residential, and retail destinations and in proximity to existing public bus stops and freeways, which would result in reduced vehicle trips and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and the corresponding transportation related energy consumption. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1 .1 . Objective 1.2: Reduce land use related energy Consistent. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the Project is consumption. located near existing employment, commercial, residential, and retail destinations and in proximity to existing public bus stops and freeways, which would result in reduced VMT in comparison to a Project of similar size and land without close access to employment, service, and retail, destinations, public transit, and freeways. The reduction in VMT would reduce land use related energy consumption in addition to implementation of the required energy efficient systems per Title 24. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1.2. Objective 1.3: Reduce construction -related energy Consistent. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the Project would consumption. be constructed in approximately 27 -months that would comply with state regulations, such as CCR Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section 2449(d)(3) Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than 5 minutes, which would provide for efficient construction related energy consumption. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1.3. Policy: Encourage higher densities of housing and office Consistent. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the Project would (mixed use) development to relate to areas of higher result in an overall density of up to 79 dwelling units per acre on transportation access and capacity. the Project site within a mixed-use area that contains, office, retail, employment, and is accessible to high capacity transportation (SR - 55). Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Policy: Require and/or provide incentives for energy- Consistent. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the Project would efficient subdivision and site planning and building be energy efficient through compliance with Title 24 regulations, design. provision of 94 electric vehicle charging stations, being located near shopping, recreation, and employment opportunities that provide for efficient travel between employment, shopping, and leisure activities. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Growth Management Element Goal 2: To ensure that adequate transportation and public facilities are provided for existing and future residents of the City. These goals shall be accomplished through implementation of the policies and programs set forth in this Element. Consistent. As described in Sections 5.12, Public Services, 5.14, Transportation and 5.16, Utilities and Service Systems, adequate transportation and public facilities exist to serve the existing land uses and the uses of the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 2. City of Santa Ana 5.9-31 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Objective: The circulation system shall be implemented in Consistent. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, with a manner that achieves a Traffic Level of Service "D" implementation of the identified mitigation measures, the Project except in the City's major development areas and at would maintain at least a LOS D on arterial street intersections those intersections which are impacted by factors beyond except in the City's major development areas, and in areas the City's control. beyond the City's control. Therefore, the proposed Project is Policy HE -1.4: Healthy Neighborhoods. Create and consistent with this Objective. Objective: All new development shall pay its share of the Consistent. Section, 5.14, Transportation, identifies mitigation that street improvement costs associated with that requires fair -share payments toward improvements that would development including regional traffic mitigation. reduce Project impacts. Therefore, the proposed Project is encourage an active and healthy lifestyle. consistent with this Objective. Objective: Recognizing the constraints of existing Consistent. As described in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, physical development characteristics (Santa Ana is 98 the Project would provide residences, retail, and restaurant uses percent built out), it is the City's policy to strive toward near existing employment, shopping, and other services, and achieving a balance of land uses whereby residential, would assist in improving the jobs to housing ratio. Thus, the Project commercial and public land uses are proportionally would help to proportionally balance the land uses in the Project balanced. vicinity. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this services to promote the livability, safety, and vitality of Objective. Housing Element Goal 1: Livable and complete neighborhoods of quality Consistent. The proposed Project would provide housing, onsite housing conditions, ample parks and community services, recreation facilities, open space, landscaped courtyards, and well-maintained infrastructure, and public facilities that rooftop amenities that provide a complete neighborhood. The inspire neighborhood pride and ownership. onsite management for the apartments would ensure that the site is maintained. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1. Policy HE -1.4: Healthy Neighborhoods. Create and Consistent. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the maintain parks and open spaces; plant trees, green Project includes open space courtyard areas, balcony and patio parkways and medians; support healthy food options, areas, rooftop amenity deck, pools, spas, outdoor and maintain a continuous pattern of pathways that kitchens/barbeques, seating areas, game areas, and other encourage an active and healthy lifestyle. amenities. The Project also includes onsite sidewalks that would connect to the existing sidewalks surrounding the Project site. Thus, the Project would encourage an active and healthy lifestyle. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy HE -1 .4. Policy HE -1.5: Infrastructure and Public Services. Provide Consistent. As described in Sections 5.1 2, Public Services and quality community facilities, physical infrastructure, traffic 5.1 b, Utilities and Service Systems, the existing physical management and parking control, and other public infrastructure is adequate to serve the proposed Project, existing services to promote the livability, safety, and vitality of service demands, and to promote the livability, safety, and vitality neighborhoods. of neighborhoods. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy HE -1.5. Goal 2: A diversity of quality housing, affordability Consistent. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the levels, and living experiences that accommodate Santa project would include a variety of residential units that include Ana's residents and workforce of all household types, range from 635 square foot studios to 1,120 square foot 2 - income levels, and age groups to foster an inclusive bedroom units. Although the proposed Project would not provide community. low income housing on-site, it would provide housing for Santa Ana's moderate -income households. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 2. City of Santa Ana 5.9-32 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Policy HE -2.2: District Centers. Create high intensity, Consistent. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description and mixed-use urban villages and pedestrian oriented Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the Project would provide experiences that support the mid- to high-rise office residences, retail, and restaurants near existing employment, centers, commercial activity, and cultural activities in the shopping, and services, which would create a high intensity urban varied District Centers. village that supports the existing mid- to high-rise office centers, Policy 1.2: Support high density residential development commercial activity, and cultural activities in the Cities of Santa within the City's District Centers as a part of a mixed-use Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. Therefore, the proposed Project is development. consistent with Policy HE -2.2. Policy HE -2.3: Rental Housing. Encourage the construction Consistent. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the of rental housing for Santa Ana's residents and Project would include a variety of residential units that include workforce, including a commitment to very low, low, and range from 635 square foot studios to 1,120 square foot 2 - moderate -income residents and moderate -income Santa bedroom units. Although the proposed Project would not provide Ana workers. low income housing on-site, it would provide housing for Santa specifically defined areas. Ana's moderate -income households. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy HE -2.3. Policy HE -2.4: Diverse Housing Types. Facilitate diverse Consistent. The proposed Project would develop multi -family types, prices, and sizes of housing, including single-family residential units that would facilitate diverse apartment homes, apartments, townhomes, mixed/multiuse housing, opportunities that would range from 635 square foot studios to transit -oriented housing, multi -generational housing, and 1,120 square foot 2 -bedroom units. Therefore, the proposed live -work opportunities. Project is consistent with Policy HE -2.4. Policy HE -2.5: Housing Design. Require excellence in Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed architectural design through the use of materials and Project would provide excellence in architectural design through colors, building treatments, landscaping, open space, the use of materials and colors, building treatments, landscaping, parking, and environmentally sensitive ("green") building and open space courtyards. In addition, as described in Section and design practices. 5.16, Utilities and Service Systems, the proposed Project would be developed pursuant to the CALGreen Code. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy HE -2.5. Goal 3: Increased opportunities for low and moderate- Consistent. The proposed Project would not provide low income income individuals and families to find quality housing housing onsite but would develop multi -family residential units that opportunities and afford a greater choice of rental or would afford a greater choice of rental opportunity for homeownership opportunities. moderate -income households. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 3. Land Use Element Goal 1: Promote a balance of land uses to address basic Consistent. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description and community needs. Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the Project would provide residences, retail, and restaurants near existing employment and services, which would promote a balance of land uses to address basic community needs. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1. Policy 1.2: Support high density residential development Consistent. The Project proposes to create a District Center and within the City's District Centers as a part of a mixed-use develop high density residential as part of a mixed-use development. development. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.2. Policy 1.5: Maintain and foster a variety of residential Consistent. The proposed Project would provide for additional land uses in the City. multi -family residential land uses within the City. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.5. Policy 1.6: Support "live/work" opportunities within Consistent. The Project is a mixed-use development that would specifically defined areas. include both residential and employment opportunities onsite and would be located nearby other employment opportunities. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.6. City of Santa Ana 5.9-33 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Policy 2.2: Support commercial land uses in adequate Consistent. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and mixed-use Project would include development of 80,000 square services. feet of commercial retail/restaurant space. This commercial space would provide goods and services to onsite and nearby residents and employees. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.2. Policy 2.4: Support pedestrian access between Consistent. The proposed Project would provide onsite commercial uses and residential neighborhoods that are pedestrian pathways that would connect to the proposed onsite in close proximity. commercial uses and to the existing offsite sidewalks. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.4. Policy 2.5: Balance the economic and fiscal benefits of Consistent. The proposed Project would provide both economic commercial development with its impacts on the quality benefits by developing commercial retail and restaurant uses on of life in the City. the Project site, and also provide a multi -family residential development with numerous amenities, such as, recreation amenities, roof decks, and courtyards with ornamental landscaping that would provide for quality of life for onsite employees and residents. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.5. Policy 2.6: Encourage the creation of new employment Consistent. The proposed Project includes development of opportunities in developments which are compatible with 80,000 square feet of commercial retail/restaurant space that surrounding land uses and provide a net community would create new employment opportunities and provide a net benefit. community benefit by providing services and goods to onsite residents and other employees in the vicinity of the Project site. In addition, the proposed land uses are compatible with the land uses within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area across from the Project site and the IBC 0.35 mile from the site in Irvine. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.6. Policy 2.9: Support developments that create a business Consistent. As described above, the proposed Project would environment that is safe and attractive. create a business environment through provision of commercial (retail/restaurant) on the Project site. The Project would implement landscaping to provide attractive areas and would implement the crime prevention measures through onsite security and the development plan would be reviewed by the Police Department for security concerns, as described in Section 5.12 ' .12, Public Services. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.9. Policy 2.10: Support new development which is Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed harmonious in scale and character with existing Project would be visually compatible with the existing and future development in the area. built environment in the Project area that includes various high- density, urban -style boxy large buildings and ornamental landscaping. The areas in the existing viewshed of the Project site include urban structures such as, Naval Air Station airplane hangars, two and four-story office structures, and a five -story hotel. The undeveloped chained linked areas across from the Project site in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan are planned for employment buildings that would likely be modern in architecture and are permitted to be 6 -stories and 70 -feet in height with a 40 -foot setback from Red Hill Avenue. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.10. Goal 5: Ensure that the impacts of development are Consistent. This EIR evaluates the potential impacts of the mitigated. proposed Project and includes mitigation measures, where necessary to mitigate the impacts of development. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 5. City of Santa Ana 5.9-34 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Policy 5.1: Promote development which has a net Consistent. The as described in Section 5.1 1, Population and community benefit and enhances the quality of life. Housing, the Project would provide residences near existing employment, shopping, and services. In addition, the Project would assist in the jobs to housing balance and provide additional housing within an area that has limited vacancy; thus, providing a net community benefit. In addition, the Project would include open space and recreation amenities (as listed in Section 3.0, Project Description) that would enhance the quality of life for site residents and employees. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 5.1. Policy 5.2: Protect the community from incompatible land Consistent. The proposed Project is located adjacent to office, uses. business park, and public service land uses. As described in Section, 5.10, Noise and Section 5.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the Project site is not within the JWA 60 dBA CNEL Noise Contour and would not result in hazards to existing or planned uses on or off-site. Thus, no incompatible land uses would occur from the proposed Project, and the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 5.2. Policy 5.5: Encourage development which is compatible Consistent. As described in the previous responses, the proposed with, and supportive of surrounding land uses. Project would provide multi -family residential units and commercial retail and restaurant uses within an employment area. The change of the site from a light industrial use, to residential and commercial uses (although higher in density) would not result in incompatibility. As previously described, the Project is consistent with planned land uses in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area and the IBC, which include similar and compatible employment related uses. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 5.5. Policy 5.7: Anticipate that the intensity of new Consistent. As described in Section 5.16, Utilities and Service development will not exceed available infrastructure Systems, development and full occupancy of the proposed Project capacity. would not exceed the available infrastructure capacity. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 5.7. Policy 5.9: Encourage development which provides a Consistent. The proposed Project would include safety design clean and safe environment for the City's residents, features for security, such as lighting, keypads for building access, workers, and visitors. and security cameras. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 5.9. Policy 5.10: Support a circulation system which is Consistent. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, with responsive to the needs of pedestrians and vehicular implementation of the identified mitigation measures the existing travel. circulation system would accommodate increased traffic demands caused by the Project, and the proposed Project includes onsite sidewalks that would connect to the existing sidewalks surrounding the Project site. Policy 5.11: Encourage development which does not Consistent. As described in Section 5.2, Air Quality and Section generate obnoxious fumes, toxins, or hazardous 5.7, Hazardous Materials, operation of the proposed mixed-use materials. Project would not generate obnoxious fumes, toxins, or hazardous materials. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 5.11. City of Santa Ana 5.9-35 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policv, or Obiective I Proiect Consistencv with Goal, Policv, or Obiective Policy 5.12: Provide appropriate permanent measures Consistent. As described in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water to reduce storm water pollutant loads in storm water from Quality, the proposed Project would include structural BMPs to a development site. filter stormwater through Modular Wetland System units. In addition, a Project specific WQMP is required to ensure that appropriate BMPs are implemented to reduce pollutant loads from the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 5.12. Goal 6: Reduce residential overcrowding to promote Consistent. The Project would develop additional multi -family public health and safety. rental housing within the City to assist in providing additional housing options and improve the rental unit vacancy rate, as described in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 6. Noise Element Goal 1: Prevent significant increases in noise levels in the Consistent. As detailed in the noise analysis provided in Section community and minimize the adverse effects of currently 5.10, Noise, the proposed Project would not generate significant existing noise sources. increases in noises levels. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1. Objective 1.1: Prevent creation of new and additional Consistent. As detailed in the noise analysis provided in Section sources of noise. 5.10, Noise, the proposed Project would not generate significant increases in noises levels. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1 .1 . Policy: Require consideration of noise generation Consistent. As detailed noise analysis provided in Section 5.10, potential and susceptibility to noise impacts in the sitting, Noise, the analysis within this EIR considers the potential of noise design and construction of new developments from the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Policy: Require mitigating site and building design Consistent. As detailed in the noise analysis provided in Section features, traffic circulation alternatives, insulation, and 5.10, Noise, the proposed Project would not generate high noises other noise prevention measures of those new levels. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this developments which generate high noise levels. policy. Policy: Sound insulate and/or buffer sensitive land uses Consistent. As detailed in the noise analysis provided in Section such as housing from adverse noise impacts in noise- 5.10, Noise, the proposed Project is not located within a noise prone areas. prone area, would not result in adverse noise impacts, and would meet interior residential noise standards. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. and Recreation Element Goal 1: Provide sufficient open space to meet the recreational and aesthetic needs of the community. Consistent. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the Project includes 183,363 square feet of courtyard areas, rooftop amenity decks, fitness centers, pools, spas, outdoor kitchens/barbeques, and seating areas. Also, as described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed Project would implement landscaping throughout the site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1 . Objective 1.3: Encourage private development of Consistent. The proposed Project includes open space areas visually accessible open space. adjacent to both Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue, which would be visually accessible open space. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1.3. City of Santa Ana 5.9-36 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policv, or Obiective I Proiect Consistencv with Goal, Policv, or Obiective Objective 3.2: Encourage the use of water quality Consistent. As described in Section 5.8, Hydrology and Water wetlands, biofiltration swales, watershed -scale retrofits, Quality, the proposed Project would include structural BMPs to etc. in existing and new open space, parks and recreation filter stormwater through Modular Wetland System units. In facilities where such measures are likely to be effective addition, the Project would be developed pursuant to the and technically and economically feasible. CALGreen Code, which provides for water efficiency in plumbing fixtures and landscape irrigation. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 3.2. Policy: Provide quality open space in quantities Consistent. As described in Section 5.1 3, Park and Recreation, the adequate for the type and intensity of surrounding Project includes courtyard areas, balcony and patio areas, development. rooftop amenity deck that provides open space in quantities that is adequate for the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Public Safety Element Goal 1: Preserve a safe and secure environment for all Consistent. The proposed Project would protect the public health Santa Ana residents and workers. and safety by compliance with existing federal, state, regional, and local regulations related to natural hazards and other public safety concerns. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1. Goal 2: Minimize loss of life and property due to natural Consistent. As described in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, the and man-made catastrophes. Project would be required to comply with the California Building Code (CBC), as included in the City's Municipal Code (Chapter 8, Article 2, Division 1 ), which includes provisions to safeguard against loss of life and property due to natural and man-made catastrophes. In addition, the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) will review the development plans prior to approval, as part of the City's permitting process, to ensure design measures include safety components and that adequate emergency access is provided. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 2. Policy: Assure minimum feasible response time to police Consistent. As described in Section 5.1 2, Public Services, the calls in all areas of the City. Police Department can and would continue to respond in a timely manner to emergency calls from the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Policy: Increase the effectiveness of law enforcement Consistent. As described in Section 5.12, Public Services, the activities through expansion of crime prevention Project addresses typical residential security concerns by measures and the active involvement of the public in local providing low -intensity security lighting, security cameras, law enforcement programs. electronic access to buildings, and 24-hour security personnel. Pursuant to the City's existing permitting process, the Police Department would review and approve the final site plans to ensure that the crime prevention measures are incorporated appropriately to provide a safe environment and increase the effectiveness of law enforcement activities. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. City of Santa Ana 5.9-37 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policv, or Obiective I Proiect Consistencv with Goal, Policv, or Obiective Policy: Assure minimum feasible response time to fire Consistent. As described in Section 5.1 2, Public Services, there calls in all areas of the City. Strictly enforce safety are 6 existing OCFA stations within 3.5 miles of the Project site, provisions of building and zoning codes. and the existing average response time for Station 79 (the first responding fire station to the site) for emergency calls is 7 minutes 42 seconds 80 percent of the time, which is 22 seconds above the OCFA Standard of Cover of 7 minutes and 20 seconds 80 percent of the time. In addition, OCFA would review the development plans prior to approval, as part of the City's permitting process, to ensure that provisions of building code that provide for emergency access are strictly enforced. The Project would also be required to pay fire facilities fees prior to the issuance of building permits per Chapter 8-46 of the Municipal Code to provide funding to expand fire protection and emergency services. Thus, the Project would implement the building and zoning code and provide for minimum feasible response times to fire calls. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Scenic Corridors Element Goal 1: Improve the public image and expand the Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed functional utility of the City's linear transportation and Project would implement landscaping that would include ground open space corridors. cover, shrubs, and trees within the Project site along both Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue that would improve the attractiveness of those corridors. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1 . Seismic Safety Element Goal 1: Preserve a safe and secure environment for all Consistent. The proposed Project would protect the public health Santa Ana residents and workers. and safety by compliance with existing federal, state, regional, and local regulations related to natural hazards and other public safety concerns. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1. Objective 1.3: Minimize seismic risk in the construction of Consistent. As described previously, and in Section 5.5, Geology new structures. and Soils, the Project would be required to comply with the CBC, as included in the City's Municipal Code which includes provisions to safeguard against seismic risk. Compliance with these requirements are ensured as part of the City's permitting process. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Objective 1.3. Policy: Use a higher standard of design for structures Consistent. As described above, the Project would be constructed with high occupancy than for other structures. in compliance with the CBC to provide seismic safety features in the new structures. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with this policy. Urban Design Element Goal 1: Improve the physical appearance of the City Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed through development of districts that project a sense of Project would develop a mixed-use residential/commercial place, positive community image, and quality community with a sense of place, positive community image, and environment. quality environment that would utilize architecture and site planning to integrate structures, courtyard open spaces, and parking facilities. The Project would improve the physical appearance of the site by providing varied building heights, and architectural treatments to provide scale and character through the use of materials, colors, window treatment, and landscaping. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Goal 1 . City of Santa Ana 5.9-38 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Policy 1.1: New development and redevelopment Consistent. See the previous response and Section 5.1, Aesthetics. projects must have the highest quality design, materials, As described, the proposed Project would have a high-quality finishes, and construction. design, materials, finishes, and would be ensured through the City's permitting process to result in high quality construction. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1 .1 . Policy 1.4: Development and other design features that Consistent. See the previous response and Section 5.1, Aesthetics. prevent loitering, vandalism, graffiti, and visual As described, the proposed Project would have a high-quality deprivation, are to be included in all projects. design, materials, finishes. In addition, security concerns are addressed in the Project by providing low -intensity security lighting and security cameras. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.4. Policy 1.5: Enhanced architectural forms, textures, colors, Consistent. As described previously and in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, and materials are expected in the design of all projects. the proposed Project would provide varied building heights, and architectural treatments to provide scale and character through the use of materials, colors, window treatments, and landscaping. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.5. Policy 1.6: Plazas, open spaces, and courtyards Consistent. The proposed Project includes open space, connecting to public right-of-way so as encourage public courtyards, and landscaping areas with walkways that connect to interaction, will be promoted. the Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue right-of-ways. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.6. Policy 1.7: On and off-site improvements must be Consistent. The proposed Project includes onsite walking pedestrian friendly. paths/sidewalks that would connect to the existing sidewalks surrounding the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 1.7. Policy 1.8: Shared access, circulation, and parking are Consistent. The proposed Project includes shared access, encouraged as a means to minimize the amount of circulation, and parking. The proposed driveways along Red Hill asphalt while increasing landscape in parking lots. Avenue and Warner Avenue would provide shared access to the residential units and the commercial uses on the site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 8.1. Policy 2.1: Projects must acknowledge and improve upon Consistent. As described in the previous response, and in Section their surroundings with the use of creative architectural 5.1, Aesthetics, the design of the Project acknowledges the design, streetscape treatments, and landscaping. surrounding built environment and provides landscaping, architectural treatments, and varied building heights to provide a creative architectural design. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 2.1. Policy 3.2: Street improvements and adjacent Consistent. As required by developments pursuant to the SD development, should be consistently designed to zone, must use of good design principles, maintain an orderly and eliminate a haphazard look and visual clutter along harmonious appearance, and encourage excellence of property corridors. development. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.2. Policy 3.3: Enhanced streetscapes, architectural themes, Consistent. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the proposed and landscaping are to be provided to visually Project includes architectural treatments and landscaping along strengthen the path and enhance adjacent development. the Project site boundaries that would enhance the roadway paths and adjacent development. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.3. Policy 3.10: Safe and pleasant bicycle and pedestrian Consistent. The Project includes pedestrian paths/sidewalks to routes are to be provided and they should link activity provide for non -vehicular onsite circulation, which would connect nodes and places of interest. to the existing sidewalks adjacent to the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.10. City of Santa Ana 5.9-39 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning General Plan Goal, Policy, or Objective Project Consistency with Goal, Policy, or Objective Policy 3.11: Maximize the use of street trees and Consistent. The Project would maintain the existing street trees parkway landscaping to create a pleasant travel and add additional trees as required by the City's streetscaping experience and positive City image. guidelines. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.1 1. Policy 3.15: Create a diverse urban forest through the Consistent. The Project would add a variety of ornamental trees use of a large variety of trees in medians, parkways, throughout the site, especially in open space courtyards and along public open space, and as part of private development. the boundary of the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 3.15. Policy 4.6: Distinctive, innovative, or unique public art Consistent. The Project includes courtyards with amenities that should be provided in plazas, open spaces, and could incorporate public art to promote pedestrian activities. In courtyards to promote pedestrian activity. addition, the site would be developed with sidewalks that connect to existing offsite sidewalks, which would also promote pedestrian activities. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with Policy 4.6. Zoning Code The proposed Project includes a zone change that would change the existing zoning designation change from M-1 (Light Industrial) to a Specific Development (SD) to implement the proposed mixed-use Project. As shown on Figure 5.9-2, currently SD zoned areas are located to the southwest at the northwestern corner of the Red Hill Avenue and Dyer Road intersection, and to the west of the site beyond SR -55. Other areas adjacent to the site within the City of Santa Ana are zoned for M-1 (Light Industrial). Areas in adjacent to the site within the City of Tustin are zoned as the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. As listed previously, the M-1 zone is designated for light industrial uses that include: warehousing, manufacturing, distribution, etc. Structures in the M-1 zone are limited to 35 feet in height, and 10 -foot -wide yards are required adjacent to arterial streets, such as Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. The proposed Project includes minimum setbacks of: 12 -feet from Warner Avenue and 20 -feet from Red Hill Avenue. In addition, courtyard and landscape areas would provide additional setbacks, as shown on Figure 3-5. The proposed setbacks along N. Main Street and Edgewood Road would be greater than the minimum setbacks required in the M-1 zone. A majority of the proposed development consists of development of 6 story mixed use structures and 7 - levels of above ground parking that would be approximately 94 -feet in height at the tallest point. Although these structures would be much taller than the 35 -foot high buildings allowed by the existing M-1 zone, with implementation of the proposed SD zone the proposed Project would not conflict with the zoning code. Also, as described in the City's zoning code, the purpose of the SD zone is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by the use of good design principles, maintaining an orderly and harmonious appearance, and encouraging excellence of property development. When development projects are proposed within the SD zone, they are required (per Zoning Code Section 41-593.4) to submit development plans for architectural review to ensure that buildings, structures, and grounds would be in keeping with the neighborhood and would not be detrimental to the harmonious development of the City or impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood. As described above, the proposed Project would create an attractive, cohesive mixed-use community through the use of contemporary architectural materials and landscaping throughout the Project site. As required by the Zoning Code, the proposed Project's development plans would be reviewed by the City to ensure City of Santa Ana 5.9-40 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning consistency with development standards. Thus, impacts related to zoning would not occur from the proposed Project. 5.9.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative study area for land use and planning includes the City of Santa Ana and the nearby areas in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine. As shown in Table 5-1 and Figure 5-1, the vicinity of the Project site includes numerous projects within the City of Santa Ana, City of Tustin, and City of Irvine. A large portion of these projects consist of multi -family residential development; in addition, the projects include office, mixed -uses, retail commercial, hotel, and hospital uses. These related projects are similar, consistent, and complementary to the proposed SD zone and mixed-use development. As described above, the proposed Project would not result in conflicts with existing land use or zoning designations and would not conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project, which has the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, including applicable regulations, policies, and standards of the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport and the SCAG RTP/SCS. Thus, the Project would not cumulatively contribute to such an impact that could occur from related projects. As a result, cumulative impacts related to land use and planning would not occur from implementation of the proposed Project. 5.9.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES There are no applicable regulations related to land use and planning that would reduce potential impacts. 5.9.3 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Without mitigation, Impact LU -2 would be potentially significant: Impact LU -1 would be less than significant. 5.9.10 MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure LU -1: The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring that all prospective residents of the Project site shall be notified of airport related noise. Notification shall be included in lease/rental agreements and shall state the following: "Notice of Airport in Vicinity. This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations related to noise. Individual sensitivities to noise annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property and determine whether they are acceptable to you." 5.9.1 1 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts associated with land use and planning to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to land use and planning would occur. City of Santa Ana 5.9-41 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.9 Land Use and Planning REFERENCES City of Irvine Business Complex Environmental Impact Report (IBC 2009). Accessed: https://www.cityofirvine.org/community-development/irvine-business-complex City of Santa Ana General Plan. Accessed: http://www.santa- ana.org/generalplan/default.asp#CurrentGPDocs City of Santa Ana General Plan Update General Plan Policy Framework, December 2018. Accessed: https://www.santa- ana.org/sites/default/files/Freeway_Dyer_Rd%20Land%2OUse%20Presentation%20-%20Final%20- No%20Poll.pdf City of Santa Ana Municipal Code. Accessed: https://library.municode.com/ca/santa_ana/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=14452 City of Tustin General Plan. Accessed: https://www.tustinca.org/DocumentCenter/View/71 3/City-of- Tustin-General-Plan- PDF?bid Id= City of Tustin General Plan Land Use Map. Accessed: https://www.tustinca.org/DocumentCenter/View/720/General-Plan-Map-PDF City of Tustin, Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. Accessed: https://www.tustinca.org/DocumentCenter/View/706/Tustin-Legacy-Specific-Plan-PDF?bid Id= Economic and Fiscal Analysis for the Santa Ana Red Hill Development. Prepared by AECOM, 2019 (AECOM 2019). Orange County Airport Land Use Commission, Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, 2008. Accessed: http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/JWA_AELUP-April-17-2008.pdf, SCAG Final 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Accessed: http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx City of Santa Ana 5.9-42 Draft EIR January 2020 5.10 Noise 5.10.1 INTRODUCTION This EIR section evaluates the potential noise impacts that would result from implementation of the proposed Project. It discusses the existing noise environment within and around the Project site, as well as the regulatory framework for regulation of noise. This section analyzes the effect of the proposed Project on the existing ambient noise environment during demolition, construction, and operational activities; and evaluates the Project's noise effects for consistency with relevant local agency noise policies and regulations. The analysis in this section also addresses impacts related to groundborne vibration. Information in this section is based on the Nosie Impact Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (NOI 2019), which is included as Appendix I. Noise and Vibration Terminology Various noise descriptors are utilized in this EIR analysis, and are summarized as follows: dB: Decibel, the standard unit of measurement for sound pressure level. dBA: A -weighted decibel, an overall frequency -weighted sound level in decibels that approximates the frequency response of the human ear. Leq: The equivalent sound level, which is used to describe noise over a specified period of time, typically 1 hour, in terms of a single numerical value. The Leq of a time -varying signal and that of a steady signal are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy over a given time. The Leq may also be referred to as the average sound level. Lmax: The instantaneous maximum noise level experienced during a given period of time. Lmin: The instantaneous minimum noise level experienced during a given period of time. Lx: The sound level that is equaled or exceeded "x" percent of a specified time period. The "x" thus represents the percentage of time a noise level is exceeded. For instance, L50 and L90 represents the noise levels that are exceeded 50 percent and 90 percent of the time, respectively. Ldn: Also termed the "day -night" average noise level (DNL), Ldn is a measure of the average of A -weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, accounting for the greater sensitivity of most people to nighttime noise by weighting noise levels at night (penalizing" nighttime noises). Noise between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. is weighted by adding 10 dBA to take into account the greater annoyance of nighttime noises. CNEL: The Community Noise Equivalent Level, which, similar to the Ldn, is the average A -weighted noise level during a 24-hour day that is obtained after an addition of 5 dBA to measured noise levels between the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after an addition of 10 dBA to noise levels between the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. The "ambient noise level" is the background noise level associated with a given environment at a specified time and is usually a composite of sound from many sources from many directions. City of Santa Ana 5.10-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise Effects of Noise Noise is generally loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired sound that is typically associated with human activity that is a nuisance or disruptive. The effects of noise on people can be placed into four general categories: • Subjective effects (e.g., dissatisfaction, annoyance) • Interference effects (e.g., communication, sleep, and learning interference) • Physiological effects (e.g., startle response) • Physical effects (e.g., hearing loss) Although exposure to high noise levels has been demonstrated to cause physical and physiological effects, the principal human responses to typical environmental noise exposure are related to subjective effects and interference with activities. Interference effects refer to interruption of daily activities and include interference with human communication activities, such as normal conversations, watching television, telephone conversations, and interference with sleep. Sleep interference effects can include both awakening and arousal to a lesser state of sleep. With regard to the subjective effects, the responses of individuals to similar noise events are diverse and are influenced by many factors, including the type of noise, the perceived importance of the noise, the appropriateness of the noise to the setting, the duration of the noise, the time of day and the type of activity during which the noise occurs, and individual noise sensitivity. In general, the more a new noise level exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise level will be by those hearing it. With regard to increases in A -weighted noise levels, the following relationships generally occur: • Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1 dBA cannot be perceived. • Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dBA change in noise levels is considered to be a barely perceivable difference. • A change in noise levels of 5 dBA is considered to be a readily perceivable difference. • A change in noise levels of 10 dBA is subjectively heard as doubling of the perceived loudness. Noise Attenuation Stationary point sources of noise, including mobile sources such as idling vehicles, attenuate (lessen) at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance from the source over hard surfaces to 7.5 dBA per doubling of distance from the source over hard surfaces, depending on the topography of the area and environmental conditions (e.g., atmospheric conditions, noise barriers [either vegetative or manufactured]). Thus, a noise measured at 90 dBA 50 feet from the source would attenuate to about 84 dBA at 100 feet, 78 dBA at 200 feet, 72 dBA at 400 feet, and so forth. Widely distributed noise, such as a large industrial facility spread over many acres or a street with moving vehicles, would typically attenuate at a lower rate, approximately 4 to 6 dBA per doubling of distance from the source. Hard sites are those with a reflective surface between the source and the receiver, such as asphalt or concrete surfaces or smooth bodies of water. No excess ground attenuation is assumed for hard sites and the changes in noise levels with distance (drop-off rate) is simply the geometric spreading of the noise from the source. Soft sites have an absorptive ground surface such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees. In addition to geometric spreading, an excess ground attenuation value of 1.5 dBA (per doubling distance) is normally assumed for soft sites. Line sources (such as traffic noise from vehicles) attenuate at a rate between 3 dBA for hard sites and 4.5 dBA for soft sites for each doubling of distance from the reference measurement. City of Santa Ana 5.10-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise Fundamentals of Vibration Vibration is energy transmitted in waves through the ground or man-made structures. These energy waves generally dissipate with distance from the vibration source. There are several different methods that are used to quantify vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal. The PPV is most frequently used to describe vibration impacts to buildings but is not always suitable for evaluating human response (annoyance) because it takes some time for the human body to respond to vibration signals. Instead, the human body responds to average vibration amplitude often described as the root mean square (RMS). The RMS amplitude is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal and is most frequently used to describe the effect of vibration on the human body. Decibel notation (VdB) is commonly used to measure RMS. VdB serves to reduce the range of numbers used to describe human response to vibration. Typically, ground -borne vibration generated by man-made activities attenuates rapidly with distance from the source of the vibration. Sensitive receivers for vibration include structures (especially older masonry structures), people (especially residents, the elderly, and sick), and vibration -sensitive equipment. The background vibration -velocity level in residential areas is generally 50 VdB. Ground -borne vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a vibration -velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground -borne vibration are construction equipment, steel -wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the ground -borne vibration is rarely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB, which is the typical background vibration -velocity level, to 100 VdB, which is the general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings. 5.10.2 REGULATORY SETTING Caltrans Vibration Guidance Manual There are no vibration standards that are specifically applicable to the proposed Project, hence, California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual guidelines are used as a screening tool for assessing the potential for adverse vibration effects related to structural damage and human perception, which are listed in Table 5.10-1, Vibration Standards. Table 5.10-1: Vibration Screening Standards Peak Particle Velocity for Continuous Sources Caltrans Guidelines (PPV) (in/sec) Building Damage Extremely Fragile Historic Buildings 0.08 Fragile Buildings 0.10 Historic Buildings 0.25 Older Residential Structures 0.30 New Residential Structures 0.50 Modern Industrial/Commercial Buildinas 0.50 Human Annoyance Barely Perceptible 0.01 Distinctly Perceptible 0.04 Strongly Perceptible 0.10 Severe 0.40 Source: Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, September 2013, Tables 19 & 20. City of Santa Ana 5.10-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise Title 24, California Building Code State regulations related to noise include requirements for the construction of new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single-family dwellings that are intended to limit the extent of noise transmitted into habitable spaces. These requirements are collectively known as the California Noise Insulation Standards and are found in California Code of Regulations, Title 24 (known as the Building Standards Administrative Code), Part 2 (known as the California Building Code), Appendix Chapters 12 and 12A. For limiting noise transmitted between adjacent dwelling units, the noise insulation standards specify the extent to which walls, doors, and floor ceiling assemblies must block or absorb sound. For limiting noise from exterior sources, the noise insulation standards set forth an interior standard of DNL 45 dBA in any habitable room and, where such units are proposed in areas subject to noise levels greater than DNL 60 dBA require an acoustical analysis demonstrating how dwelling units have been designed to meet this interior standard. If the interior noise level depends upon windows being closed, the design for the structure must also specify a ventilation or air conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment. The mandatory measures for non-residential buildings states that new construction shall provide an interior noise level that does not exceed an hourly equivalent level of 50 dBA Leq in occupied areas during any hour of operation. Title 24 standards are enforced through the building permit application process in the City. County of Orange General Aviation Noise Ordinance To reduce noise from operation of JWA the General Aviation Noise Ordinance was adopted by the County to regulate the hours of operation and the maximum permitted noise levels associated with general aviation operations. JWA maintains 10 permanent noise monitoring stations. The General Aviation Noise Ordinance specifies noise limits at each noise monitoring station that vary by time of day. The Ordinance also prohibits commercial aircraft departures between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and arrivals between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. City of Santa Ana General Plan Noise Element The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The City's Noise Element includes standards related to excessive noise levels. The following existing goal and policies in the Noise Element are relevant to the proposed Project: Goal 1: Prevent significant increases in noise levels in the community and minimize the adverse effects of currently existing noise sources. Policies: • Require consideration of noise generation potential and susceptibility to noise impacts in the siting, design and construction of new developments. • Require mitigating site and building design features, traffic circulation alternatives, insulation, and other noise prevention measures of those new developments which generate high noise levels. • Sound insulate and/or buffer sensitive land uses such as housing from adverse noise impacts in noise -prone areas. The City's Noise Element also includes standards related to excessive noise levels. The City's General Plan noise standards for noise -sensitive land uses are provided in Table 5.10-2. City of Santa Ana 5.10-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise Table 5.10-2: City of Santa Ana Noise Element Standards Noise Level (dBA CNEL) Land Use Category Sensitive Land Use Interior Exterior Residential Single-family, duplex, multi family 45 65 Institutional Hospital, school classroom playgrounds, church, library 45 65 Open Space Parks 1 65 Source: City of Santa Ana Noise Element City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Pursuant to the City's Municipal Code Section 18-313, noise levels at residential properties are restricted from exceeding certain noise levels for extended periods of time. Table 5.10-3 provides the Municipal Code exterior noise standards that are applied to residential properties. Table 5.10-3: City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Residential Noise Standards Permissible Noise Levels (dBA) Time L50 L25 L8 L2 Lmax 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 50 55 60 65 70 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 55 60 65 70 75 Source: City of Santa Ana Municipal Code, Article VI, Section 18-312 With respect to construction -related noise, Section 18-314 (Special Provisions) of the City's Municipal Code specifies that noise sources associated with construction activities are exempt from the City's established noise standards as long as the activities do not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. 5.10.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Existing Noise Levels To assess the existing noise level environment, 24-hour noise level measurements were taken at 6 locations, which are shown in Figure 5.10-1. A description of these locations and the existing noise levels are provided below and listed in Table 5.10-4. • Location L1 represents the noise levels on Warner Avenue near the existing business complex, across from northeast boundary of the Project site. The noise levels at this location consist primarily of traffic noise from Warner Avenue and commercial parking lot vehicle movements. The noise level measurements collected show an overall 24-hour exterior noise level of 65.1 dBA CNEL. The energy (logarithmic) average daytime noise level was calculated at 62.9 dBA Leq with an average nighttime noise level of 56.7 dBA Leq. • Location L2 represents the noise levels Warner Avenue near Tustin Legacy development, southeast of the Project site. Ambient noise levels at this location account for the daytime operations at the U.S. Armed Forces Reserve Center in addition to traffic noise from Warner Avenue. The noise level measurements collected show an overall 24-hour exterior noise level of 62.9 dBA CNEL. The energy (logarithmic) average daytime noise level was calculated at 61.0 dBA Leq with an average nighttime noise level of 54.2 dBA Leq. • Location L3 represents the noise levels on Red Hill Avenue near the southeast border of the Project site. The noise levels at this location consist primarily of traffic noise from Red Hill Avenue and vehicle movement into business complex parking lot. The noise level measurements collected show an overall City of Santa Ana 5.10-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise 24-hour exterior noise level of 64.3 dBA CNEL. The energy (logarithmic) average daytime noise level was calculated at 61.6 dBA Leq with an average nighttime noise level of dBA L, • Location L4 represents the noise levels south on Red Hill Avenue, across from southeastern boundary of the Project site, near the Tustin Legacy development. The noise level measurements collected show an overall 24-hour exterior noise level of 62.3 dBA CNEL. The energy (logarithmic) average daytime noise level was calculated at 60.9 dBA Leq with an average nighttime noise level of 53.2 dBA Leq. The noise levels at this location consist primarily of traffic noise from Red Hill Avenue. • Location L5 represents the noise levels within Project site boundaries, adjacent to southwestern border of the Project site, near light industrial area. The 24-hour CNEL indicates that the overall exterior noise level is 58.9 dBA CNEL. The energy (logarithmic) average daytime noise level was calculated at 58.0 dBA Leq with an average nighttime noise level of 47.6 dBA Leq. Background industrial activity represents the primary noise source at this location. • Location L6 represents the noise levels northwest of the Project site, adjacent to existing industrial use. The 24-hour CNEL indicates that the overall exterior noise level is 63.8 dBA CNEL. The energy (logarithmic) average daytime noise level was calculated at 63.7 dBA Leq with an average nighttime noise level of 51.9 dBA Leq. Parking lot vehicle movements and background industrial activity represents the primary source of noise at this location. Table 5.10-4: Summary of 24 -Hour Ambient Noise Level Measurements Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime' = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. City of Santa Ana 5.10-6 Draft EIR January 2020 Energy Average Noise Level (dBA L.J Daytime Nighttime Location Description CNEL Located on Warner Avenue near the existing business L1 complex, across from northeast boundary of the Project site. 62.9 56.7 65.1 Located on Warner Avenue near in the Tustin Legacy, L2 southeast of the Project site. 61.0 54.2 1 62.9 Located on Red Hill Avenue near the southeast border of the L3 Project site. 61.6 56.4 64.3 Located on Red Hill Avenue, across from southeastern L4 boundary of the Project site, near the Tustin Legacy. 60.9 53.2 62.3 Located within Project site, adjacent to the southwestern L5 border, near the light industrial area and railroad tracks. 58.0 47.6 58.9 Located northwest of the Project site, adjacent to existing L6 business commercial area. 63.7 51.9 63.8 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime' = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. City of Santa Ana 5.10-6 Draft EIR January 2020 V LEGEND: & Naise Measurement Lacatians Noise Measurement Locations 1 4t. r 4 H sanice�Fsri; nigimfGMIDe, GeaEye, �irrnscar a 6Enyrnphks,flv2VAj6u5Ds, uspA, usgi AeraGRID, 1GN, and [he G75 i1sE coninii zry The Bowery Figure 5.10-1 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.10-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise Sensitive Receptors Sensitive receptors are generally defined as locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could otherwise adversely affect the use of the land. Noise -sensitive land uses are generally considered to include: residences, schools, hospitals, and recreation areas. The Project site is not surrounded by sensitive receptors. The non -sensitive receptors that are in the vicinity of the Project site include office and business park uses. The surrounding uses are described below. R1: Located about 220 feet northeast of the Project site, R1 represents Harvest Time Ministries north of Warner Avenue. A 24-hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L1, to describe the existing ambient noise environment. R2: Location R2 represents the U.S. Armed Forces Reserve Center on the north side of Warner Avenue at approximately 667 feet east of the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement near this location, L2, is used to describe the existing ambient noise environment. R3: Location R3 represents existing offices for OnTrac and Brasstech northeast of Carnegie Avenue at approximately 85 feet from the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement near this location, L5, is used to describe the existing ambient noise environment. R4: Location R4 represents existing offices for in Carnegie Square Business Park north of Carnegie Avenue at approximately 1 1 8 feet from the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement near this location, L5, is used to describe the existing ambient noise environment. R5: Location R5 represents offices in Sirco Irvine Business Park at approximately 64 feet from the Project site. A 24-hour noise measurement near this location, L6, is used to describe the existing ambient noise environment. John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport (JWA) is located approximately 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site and under the primary aircraft approach corridor and within the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) notification area for JWA. As shown on Figure 5.10-2, the Project site is located outside the 55 dBA CNEL aircraft noise level contour boundaries of JWA. In addition, the County of Orange has adopted the General Aviation Noise Ordinance that prohibits commercial aircraft departures from JWA between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and arrivals between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. These restrictions substantially limit the aircraft noise during the noise sensitive nighttime hours for residential use. 5.10.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: NOI-1 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; NOI-2 Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; NOI-3 For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Construction Noise and Vibration • If project -related construction activities: o Occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any City of Santa Ana 5.10-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.10-10 Draft EIR January 2020 John Wayne Airport Noise Level Contours n E•Waraer-Are.v.,r,- a,r 4ii .�"9,� e•Y'. ?r� r. aF v,.a sr Pnr■ y o 1 Dyer a Mill o j===E.Oyar Adj n i LAI— Are. \ , F C-11111111— nre �45rCAll Yl111 FI ' ' ' ` I Inq a O1acArth / urew,v a, � • 1 r` �� � NfINP 00 PL I I 1 r r rI I T 1 � •.00 1 t i r Apf1 Of �a X00, LEGEND: Apt, 55 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 75 dBA CNEL �a. 60 dBA CNEL 70 dBA CNEL Source: Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (Jahn Wayne Airport Imp act Zones) Amended: April 17, 2008. v �`'i , N3 Von Kaman Ham WanlrAye ,314a t,au n Banc h +td tater Lo,r.-. Comw l ho C,"Lc l of 1 u�Ern L� r �A. t� /F P, ry6�4 Arab. !rn no nser,�ae Q,a .lambrr.. 4 lanlar _ TJ i taa.r H>me \p y Of Coryarar A ,3 Y Col oil B-t— IIVlfl! it, York P GIy a kMtl aJaRt, h1� asps yc�`h• eP� t, n P S` ,c`O Sold 4 a+'f, HERE,�rdiin mo � Pix. atncrement P e9rA:; `GEBCQ, USGS,APAq NPS R NRCAN,&6R.tsA7 dz,66 114y6idn'gnce Survey, Esrilapan, k1E71, Esri Chfrio fHang Kong (c) Open5treetn7ap.contribotors, and the GIS The Bowery Figure 5.10-2 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.10-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise o time on Sunday or a federal holiday (City of Santa Ana Municipal Code, Section 18-314(e); o Create noise levels which exceed the 85 dBA Leq acceptable noise level threshold at the nearby sensitive receiver locations (NIOSH, Criteria for Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure); or o Generate temporary Project construction -related noise level increases which exceed the 10 dBA Leq noise level increase threshold at residential noise -sensitive receiver locations. • If Project -related construction activities generate vibration levels which exceed the Caltrans building damage vibration level threshold for older residential structures of 0.3 in/sec PPV, or the distinctly perceptible human annoyance vibration level threshold of 0.04 in/sec PPV at nearby sensitive receiver locations (Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Tables 19 & 20). Off -Site Traffic Noise • When the noise levels at existing and future noise -sensitive land uses (e.g. residential, etc.): o Are less than 60 dBA CNEL and the project creates a readily perceptible 5 dBA CNEL or greater project -related noise level increase; or o Range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL and the project creates a barely perceptible 3 dBA CNEL or greater project -related noise level increase; or o Already exceeds 65 dBA CNEL, and the project creates a community noise level impact of greater than 1.5 dBA CNEL. • When the noise levels at existing and future non -noise -sensitive land uses (e.g. office, commercial, etc.): o are less than the OPR General Plan Guidelines, Figure 2, normally acceptable 70 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a readily perceptible 5 dBA CNEL or greater Project -related noise level increase; or o are greater than the OPR General Plan Guidelines, Figure 2, normally acceptable 70 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a barely perceptible 3 dBA CNEL or greater Project -related noise level increase. On -Site Traffic Noise • If the on-site noise levels: o exceed the exterior noise level standard of 65 dBA CNEL for outdoor areas (e.g., outdoor courtyards); or o exceed an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL for residential uses (City of Santa Ana General Plan Noise Element, Table 1); or o exceed an interior noise level of 50 dBA Leq for non-residential buildings (CALGreen Section 5.507 Environmental Comfort). Operational Noise • If project -related operational (stationary source) noise levels exceed the exterior 55 dBA L50 daytime or 50 dBA L5o nighttime noise level standards for sensitive residential land uses, or 60 dBA L50 for community support uses. These standards shall not be exceeded for a cumulative period of 30 minutes (1-50), or plus 5 dBA cannot be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes (L25) in any hour, or the standard plus 10 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes (Ls) in City of Santa Ana 5.10-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise any hour, or the standard plus 15 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 1 minute (1-2) in any hour, or the standard plus 20 dBA at any time (L...) per Municipal Code, Section 18-312); or • If the existing ambient noise levels at the nearby noise -sensitive receivers near the Project site: o are less than 60 dBA L5o and the project creates a readily perceptible 5 dBA L50 or greater project -related noise level increase; or o range from 60 to 65 dBA L50 and the project creates a barely perceptible 3 dBA L50 or greater project -related noise level increase; or o already exceed 65 dBA 1_5o, and the project creates a community noise level impact of greater than 1.5 dBA L50. 5.10.1 METHODOLOGY Construction Noise To identify the temporary construction noise contribution to the existing ambient noise environment, the construction noise levels anticipated from usage of construction equipment needed to implement the proposed Project were combined with the existing ambient noise level measurements at the sensitive receiver locations. The construction noise levels are compared against the thresholds listed previously to assess the level of significance associated with temporary construction noise level impacts. Operational Noise The primary source of noise associated with the operation of the proposed Project would be from vehicular trips. The expected roadway noise level increases from vehicular traffic were calculated using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) traffic noise prediction model and the average daily traffic volumes from the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the proposed Project. As detailed in Section 5.14, Transportation, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate a net increase of approximately 11,546 daily trips, 534 a.m. peak hour trips and 604 p.m. peak hour trips. The increase in noise levels generated by the vehicular trips have been quantitatively estimated and compared to the applicable noise standards and thresholds of significance listed previously. Secondary sources of noise would include new stationary sources (such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning units) associated with the new buildings on the Project site. The increase in noise levels generated by these activities have been quantitatively estimated and compared to the applicable noise standards listed previously. Vibration Aside from noise levels, groundborne vibration would also be generated during construction of the Project by various construction -related activities and equipment; and could be generated by truck traffic traveling to and from the Project site. The potential ground -borne vibration levels resulting from construction activities occurring from the proposed Project were estimated by data published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Thus, the groundborne vibration levels generated by these sources have also been quantitatively estimated and compared to the applicable thresholds of significance listed previously. City of Santa Ana 5.10-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 5.10.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.10 Noise IMPACT NOI-1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT GENERATE A SUBSTANTIAL TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT IN EXCESS OF STANDARDS ESTABLISHED IN THE LOCAL GENERAL PLAN OR NOISE ORDINANCE, OR APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF OTHER AGENCIES. Construction Less than Significant. Noise generated by construction equipment would include a combination of trucks, power tools, concrete mixers, and portable generators that when combined can reach high levels. Construction is expected to occur in the following stages: demolition, excavation and grading, building construction, architectural coating, paving. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment can range from approximately 59.2 dBA to 73.5 dBA when measured at 50 feet, as shown on Table 5.10-5. Table 5.10-5: Construction Reference Noise Levels ID Noise Source Reference Distance From Source Reference Noise Levels @ Reference Distance (dBA Leq) Reference Noise Levels @ 50 Feet (dBA Leq) 1 Truck Pass-Bys & Dozer Activity 30' 63.6 59.2 2 Dozer Activity 30' 68.6 64.2 3 Construction Vehicle Maintenance Activities 30' 71.9 67.5 4 Foundation Trenching 30' 72.6 68.2 5 Rough Grading Activities 30' 77.9 73.5 6 Framing 30' 66.7 62.3 7 Concrete Mixer Truck Movements 50' 71.2 71.2 8 Concrete Paver Activities 30' 70.0 65.6 9 Concrete Mixer Pour & Paving Activities 30' 70.3 65.9 10 Concrete Mixer Backup Alarms & Air Brakes 50' 71.6 71.6 11 Concrete Mixer Pour Activities 50' 67.7 67.7 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet using a drop off rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance (point source) However, per Section 18-314 (Special Provisions) of the City's Municipal Code noise sources associated with construction activities are exempt from the City's established noise standards as long as the activities do not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. The proposed Project's construction activities would occur pursuant to these regulations. Thus, the proposed Project would be in compliance with the City's construction related noise standards. Construction noise would be temporary in nature as the operation of each piece of construction equipment would not be constant throughout the construction day, and equipment would be turned off when not in use. The typical operating cycle for a piece of construction equipment involves one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three or four minutes at lower power settings. The construction equipment would include a combination of trucks, power tools, concrete mixers, and portable generators. As shown on Table 5.10-6, construction noise at the nearby receiver locations shown on Figure 5.10-3 would range from 51.0 to 71.4 dBA Leq, which would not exceed the 85 dba Leq daytime construction noise level threshold at nearby non-residential non -sensitive receiver locations. Therefore, construction impacts would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.10-15 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.10-16 Draft EIR January 2020 Construction Activity and Reciever Locations The Bowery Noise Impact Analysis EXHIBIT 10-A: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND RECEIVER LOCATIONS Sul `"`9999 ✓�� .y .�„�'' ` a LEGEND: Receiver Locations —• Distance from receiver to Project site boundary (in feet) The Bowery Draft EIR 12282-03 Noise Study eI Figure 5.10-3 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.10-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise Table 5.10-6: Project Construction Noise Jource: Urban Crossroads, 2U I Y. To identify the increase in temporary noise from Project construction, the construction noise levels were combined with the existing ambient noise levels measurements at the off-site receiver locations. The difference between the combined project -construction and ambient noise levels are used to describe the construction noise level contributions. This analysis provides a conservative approach with the highest noise - level -producing equipment for each stage of demolition and construction operating at the closest point from construction activity to the closest receiver locations. This construction activity scenario is limited in time and duration and unlikely to occur during typical daily construction activities and provides the maximum anticipated construction noise levels at the receiver locations. As indicated in Table 5.10-7, the Project would result in construction noise level increases that would not exceed the 12 dBA Leq significance threshold. Therefore, impacts related to substantial increases in ambient noise related to construction activity would be less than significant. Table 5.10-7: Construction Noise Related Ambient Noise Level Increases (dBA Leq) Receiver Location Project Construction Noise Level Construction Noise Levels by Stage (dBA L.J Combined Project and Ambient Receiver Location Demolition Grading Building Construction Architectural Coating Paving Highest Construction Noise Level R1 51.3 60.6 55.3 55.3 58.7 60.6 R2 41.7 51.0 45.7 45.7 49.1 51.0 R3 59.6 68.9 63.6 63.6 67.0 68.9 R4 1 56.7 1 66.0 1 60.7 1 60.7 1 64.1 66.0 R5 62.1 71.4 66.1 66.1 69.5 71.4 Jource: Urban Crossroads, 2U I Y. To identify the increase in temporary noise from Project construction, the construction noise levels were combined with the existing ambient noise levels measurements at the off-site receiver locations. The difference between the combined project -construction and ambient noise levels are used to describe the construction noise level contributions. This analysis provides a conservative approach with the highest noise - level -producing equipment for each stage of demolition and construction operating at the closest point from construction activity to the closest receiver locations. This construction activity scenario is limited in time and duration and unlikely to occur during typical daily construction activities and provides the maximum anticipated construction noise levels at the receiver locations. As indicated in Table 5.10-7, the Project would result in construction noise level increases that would not exceed the 12 dBA Leq significance threshold. Therefore, impacts related to substantial increases in ambient noise related to construction activity would be less than significant. Table 5.10-7: Construction Noise Related Ambient Noise Level Increases (dBA Leq) Receiver Location Project Construction Noise Level Measurement Location Reference Ambient Noise Levels Combined Project and Ambient Temporary Worst -Case Project Contribution Threshold Exceeded? R1 60.6 L1 62.9 64.9 2.0 No R2 51.0 L2 61.0 61.4 0.4 No R3 68.9 L5 1 58.0 1 69.2 1 11.2 1 No R4 66.0 L5 58.0 66.6 8.6 No R5 71.4 L6 63.7 72.0 8.3 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. Operation On -Site Operational Noise Sources Less than Significant. Once the proposed Project is operational, noise levels generated at the Project site would occur from stationary equipment such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units that would be installed for the new development, use of parking facilities, trash removal activity, and activity at outdoor gathering areas. As described previously, there are no off-site sensitive receiver locations in the vicinity of the Project site. However, the Project would develop onsite residences, which would be sensitive receivers. Typical noise levels from onsite operations at 50 feet from the noise source include the following: • Roof -Top Air Conditioning Unit: 54.4 dBA L50 • Trash Enclosure Activity: 49.0 dBA L50 • Parking Lot Vehicle Movements: 33.5 dBA L50 • Outdoor Activity from Pool and Spa: 48.7 dBA L50 City of Santa Ana 5.10-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.10 Noise Typically, rooftop air conditioning units are located away from sensitive receivers and shielded to ensure that noise from operation of the units does not have the potential to result in an impact. Based on these typical noise levels, operation of the Project would not result in an exceedance of the City's Municipal Code Section 1 8-31 3 noise standards. To ensure compliance with municipal code standards, the City's building and plan check permitting process includes verification that the location of operational noise sources would not result in an exceedance of the municipal code standards. Thus, the City's standards development permitting process would ensure that the proposed Project would not generate on-site operational noise that would exceed noise standards. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. On -Site Exterior Traffic Noise Less than Significant. As shown in Figure 3-5 in Section 3.0, Project Description, the Project's outdoor common areas would be located on the rooftops of Building A and Building B and in the courtyard areas by Building C and Building D. The location and design of the multi -family residential outdoor common areas substantially limits their potential exposure to traffic noise from Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. The roof -deck representing the outdoor common areas for Building A, is located on the top of the 6 -story building and is screened from both Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue by the structure itself including the fitness and clubroom buildings. As shown on Table 5.10-8, the exterior noise levels at the multi -family residential outdoor common areas would range from 45.1 to 57.7 dBA CNEL, which is below the General Plan Noise Element 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise level standard for outdoor common areas. Therefore, the on-site traffic noise impacts at the multi -family residential outdoor common areas would be less than significant. Table 5.10-8: Traffic Noise Levels at Residential Exterior Common Areas Outdoor Exterior Noise Level Threshold Threshold Common Area Location Roadway (dBA CNEL) (dBA CNEL) Exceeded? Bldg. A 6 -Story Building Rooftop Warner Ave. 49.7 65 No Bldg. B 6 -Story Building Rooftop Red Hill Ave. 46.1 65 No Bldg. C Street Level Red Hill Ave. 45.1 65 No Bldg. D Street Level Warner Ave. 57.7 65 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Off -Site Traffic Noise Less than Significant The proposed Project would generate traffic related noise from operation. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the proposed Project provides access from Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. To identify the potential of traffic from the proposed Project to generate noise impacts, modeling of vehicular noise on area roadways was conducted by the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix 1). The tables below provide a summary of the exterior traffic noise levels for the 24 study area roadway segments in the without and with Project conditions. Existing with Project Conditions. In the existing with Project conditions (Table 5.10-9) noise would range from 66.8 to 75.8 dBA CNEL. Implementation of the proposed Project A would generate a noise level increase of up to 0.5 dBA CNEL on the study area roadway segments, which is less than the 1.5 dBA CNEL threshold for areas above 65 dBA CNEL. Thus, off-site traffic noise impacts in the existing plus Project condition would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.10-20 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Table 5.10-9: Existing with Project Off -Site Traffic Noise 5.10 Noise ID Road Segment CNEL at Adjacent Land Use (dBA) No With Project Project Project Addition Noise- Sensitive Land Use? Off -Site Traffic Noise Threshold Threshold Exceeded? 1 Grand Ave. s o Warner Ave. 70.9 70.9 0.0 No 3.0 No 2 Newport Ave. n o Valencia Ave. 66.7 66.8 0.1 No 5.0 No 3 Red Hill Ave. n o Walnut Ave. 70.3 70.3 1 0.0 Yes 1.5 No 4 Red Hill Ave. s o Walnut Ave. 70.5 70.5 0.0 Yes 1.5 No 5 Red Hill Ave. n o Valencia Ave. 71.6 71.6 0.0 No 3.0 No 6 Red Hill Ave. s o Valencia Ave. 73.3 73.4 0.1 No 3.0 No 7 Red Hill Ave. s o Warner Ave. 74.1 74.3 0.2 No 3.0 No 8 Red Hill Ave. n o Carnegie Ave. 74.1 74.5 0.4 No 3.0 No 9 Red Hill Ave. s o Carnegie Ave. 74.0 74.4 0.4 No 3.0 No 10 Red Hill Ave. n o Barranca Pkwy. 73.3 73.7 0.4 No 3.0 No 11 Red Hill Ave. s o Barranca Pkwy. 73.3 73.5 0.2 No 3.0 No 12 Red Hill Ave. n o MacArthur Blvd. 75.7 75.8 0.1 No 3.0 No 13 Red Hill Ave. s o MacArthur Blvd. 73.1 73.2 0.1 No 3.0 No 14 Valencia Ave. w/o Red Hill Ave. 67.5 67.7 0.2 No 5.0 No 15 Valencia Ave. e o Red Hill Ave. 68.4 68.5 0.1 No 5.0 No 16 Warner Ave. w/o Grand Ave. 72.5 72.5 0.0 No 3.0 No 17 Warner Ave. e o Grand Ave. 72.2 72.4 0.2 No 3.0 No 18 Warner Ave. w/o Red Hill Ave. 71.4 71.9 0.5 No 3.0 No 19 Warner Ave. e o Red Hill Ave. 70.7 71.1 0.4 No 3.0 No 20 Dyer Rd. w/o Red Hill Ave. 70.6 70.7 0.1 No 3.0 No 21 Barranca Pkwy. e o Red Hill Ave. 73.0 73.1 0.1 No 3.0 No 22 Barranca Pkwy. w/o Tustin Ranch Rd. 73.5 73.6 0.1 No 3.0 No 23 MacArthur Blvd. w/o Red Hill Ave. 73.2 73.2 0.0 No 3.0 No 24 MacArthur Blvd. e/o Red Hill Ave. 72.3 72.3 0.0 No 3.0 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Opening Year (2022) with Project Conditions. In the opening year (2022) with Project conditions (Table 5.10-10) noise would range from 67.4 to 76.2 dBA CNEL. Implementation of the proposed Project would generate a noise level increase of up to 0.5 dBA CNEL on the study area roadway segments, which is less than the 1.5 dBA CNEL threshold for areas above 65 CNEL. Thus, off-site traffic noise impacts in the opening year plus Project condition would be less than significant. Table 5.10-10: Opening Year (2022) with Project Off -Site Traffic Noise ID Road Segment CNEL at Adjacent Land Use (dBA) No With Project Project Project Addition Noise- Sensitive Land Use? Off -Site Traffic Noise Threshold Threshold Exceeded? 1 Grand Ave. s o Warner Ave. 71.1 1 71.1 0.0 No 3.0 No 2 Newport Ave. n o Valencia Ave. 67.3 67.4 0.1 No 5.0 No 3 Red Hill Ave. n o Walnut Ave. 70.7 70.7 0.0 Yes 1.5 No 4 Red Hill Ave. s o Walnut Ave. 70.8 70.8 1 0.0 Yes 1.5 No 5 Red Hill Ave. n o Valencia Ave. 72.0 72.0 0.0 No 3.0 No 6 Red Hill Ave. s o Valencia Ave. 73.5 73.6 0.1 No 3.0 No 7 Red Hill Ave. s o Warner Ave. 74.3 74.5 0.2 No 3.0 No 8 Red Hill Ave. n o Carnegie Ave. 74.3 74.6 0.3 No 3.0 No 9 Red Hill Ave. s o Carnegie Ave. 74.1 74.5 0.4 No 3.0 No 10 Red Hill Ave. n/o Barranca Pkwy. 73.8 74.2 0.4 No 3.0 No City of Santa Ana 5.10-21 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise ID Road Segment CNEL at Adjacent Land Use (dBA) No With Project Project Project Addition Noise- Sensitive Land Use? Off -Site Traffic Noise Threshold Threshold Exceeded? 11 Red Hill Ave. s o Barranca Pkwy. 73.9 74.1 0.2 No 3.0 No 12 Red Hill Ave. n o MacArthur Blvd. 76.1 76.2 0.1 No 3.0 No 13 Red Hill Ave. s o MacArthur Blvd. 73.2 73.3 0.1 No 3.0 No 14 Valencia Ave. w/o Red Hill Ave. 68.2 68.3 0.1 No 5.0 No 15 Valencia Ave. e o Red Hill Ave. 69.4 1 69.5 0.1 No 5.0 No 16 Warner Ave. w/o Grand Ave. 72.8 72.8 0.0 No 3.0 No 17 Warner Ave. e o Grand Ave. 72.5 72.6 0.1 No 3.0 No 18 Warner Ave. w/o Red Hill Ave. 71.6 72.1 0.5 No 3.0 No 19 Warner Ave. e o Red Hill Ave. 71.0 71.4 0.4 No 3.0 No 20 Dyer Rd. w/o Red Hill Ave. 71.2 71.2 0.0 No 3.0 No 21 Barranca Pkwy. e o Red Hill Ave. 73.7 73.9 0.2 No 3.0 No 22 Barranca Pkwy. w/o Tustin Ranch Rd. 74.0 74.1 0.1 No 3.0 No 23 MacArthur Blvd. w/o Red Hill Ave. 73.4 73.4 0.0 No 3.0 No 24 MacArthur Blvd. e/o Red Hill Ave. 72.8 72.9 0.1 No 3.0 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 Year 2040 with Project Conditions. In 2040 with Project conditions (Table 5.10-1 1) noise would range from 69.7 to 76.6 dBA CNEL. Implementation of the proposed Project would generate a noise level increase of up to 0.4 dBA CNEL on the study area roadway segments, which is less than the 1.5 dBA CNEL threshold for areas above 65 CNEL. Thus, off-site traffic noise impacts in the 2040 plus Project condition would be less than significant. Table 5.10-11: Year 2040 with Project Off -Site Traffic Noise Impacts ID Road Segment CNEL at Adjacent Land Use (dBA) No With Project Project Project Addition Noise- Sensitive Land Use? Off -Site Traffic Noise Threshold Threshold Exceeded? 1 Grand Ave. s o Warner Ave. 70.8 70.8 0.0 No 3.0 No 2 Newport Ave. n o Valencia Ave. 69.7 69.7 0.0 No 5.0 No 3 Red Hill Ave. n o Walnut Ave. 71.2 71.2 0.0 Yes 1.5 No 4 Red Hill Ave. s o Walnut Ave. 71.5 71.5 0.0 Yes 1.5 No 5 Red Hill Ave. n o Valencia Ave. 72.8 72.9 0.1 No 3.0 No 6 Red Hill Ave. s o Valencia Ave. 73.8 73.9 0.1 No 3.0 No 7 Red Hill Ave. s o Warner Ave. 74.8 75.0 0.2 No 3.0 No 8 Red Hill Ave. n o Carnegie Ave. 74.6 75.0 0.4 No 3.0 No 9 Red Hill Ave. s o Carnegie Ave. 74.7 75.0 0.3 No 3.0 No 10 Red Hill Ave. n o Barranca Pkwy. 74.3 74.6 0.3 No 3.0 No 11 Red Hill Ave. s o Barranca Pkwy. 74.3 74.5 0.2 No 3.0 No 12 Red Hill Ave. n o MacArthur Blvd. 76.6 76.7 0.1 No 3.0 No 13 Red Hill Ave. s o MacArthur Blvd. 73.6 73.7 0.1 No 3.0 No 14 Valencia Ave. w/o Red Hill Ave. 70.5 70.6 0.1 No 3.0 No 15 Valencia Ave. e o Red Hill Ave. 72.0 72.0 0.0 No 3.0 No 16 Warner Ave. w/o Grand Ave. 73.0 73.1 0.1 No 3.0 No 17 Warner Ave. e o Grand Ave. 73.7 73.8 0.1 No 3.0 No 18 Warner Ave. w/o Red Hill Ave. 73.4 73.8 0.4 No 3.0 No 19 Warner Ave. e o Red Hill Ave. 73.9 74.1 0.2 No 3.0 No 20 Dyer Rd. w/o Red Hill Ave. 71.9 72.0 0.1 No 3.0 No 21 Barranca Pkwy. e o Red Hill Ave. 74.1 74.2 0.1 No 3.0 No 22 Barranca Pkwy. w/o Tustin Ranch Rd. 74.4 74.5 0.1 No 3.0 No 23 MacArthur Blvd. w/o Red Hill Ave. 74.1 74.1 0.0 No 3.0 No City of Santa Ana 5.10-22 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 5.10 Noise Source: Urban Crossroads, 2U I Y. Interior Noise Less than Significant. As described previously, traffic along the roadways near the Project site would generate noise. Thus, the interior noise levels were analyzed by the Nosie Impact Analysis to identify the interior noise reduction measures needed to satisfy the General Plan Noise Element 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standard for units facing Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. Tables 5.10-12 through 5.10-15 show that based with a "windows closed" condition with standard windows with a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) of 27, the interior noise levels of the residential units would be below the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. Therefore, impacts related to interior noise would be less than significant. Table 5.10-12: First Floor Residential Interior Noise Levels (CNEL) Receiver Location Unit Plan Noise Level at Fa ade CNEL at Adjacent Noise- Off -Site Interior Noise Level Threshold Threshold Exceeded? Land Use (dBA) Sensitive Traffic 30.7 No With Project 45 No Land Noise Threshold ID Road Segment Project Project Addition Use? Threshold Exceeded? 24 MacArthur Blvd. e o Red Hill Ave. 73.1 73.2 0.1 No 3.0 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2U I Y. Interior Noise Less than Significant. As described previously, traffic along the roadways near the Project site would generate noise. Thus, the interior noise levels were analyzed by the Nosie Impact Analysis to identify the interior noise reduction measures needed to satisfy the General Plan Noise Element 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level standard for units facing Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. Tables 5.10-12 through 5.10-15 show that based with a "windows closed" condition with standard windows with a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) of 27, the interior noise levels of the residential units would be below the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. Therefore, impacts related to interior noise would be less than significant. Table 5.10-12: First Floor Residential Interior Noise Levels (CNEL) Receiver Location Unit Plan Noise Level at Fa ade Required Interior NR Minimum Calculated Interior NR Upgraded Windows Interior Noise Level Threshold Threshold Exceeded? Al 73.2 28.2 30.7 No 42.5 45 No A3 73.2 28.2 30.6 No 42.6 45 No B2 73.2 28.2 31.3 No 41.9 45 No B5 73.2 28.2 30.5 No 42.7 45 No Bldg. A S1 73.2 28.2 30.4 No 42.8 45 No Warner Ave. S2 73.2 28.2 29.7 No 43.5 45 No Al 73.2 28.2 30.7 No 42.5 45 No A3 73.2 28.2 30.6 No 42.6 45 No Bldg. A B2 73.2 28.2 31.3 No 41.9 45 No Red Hill Ave. B5 73.2 28.2 30.5 No 42.7 45 No Bldg. D S1 73.2 28.2 30.4 No 42.8 45 No Warner Ave. S2 73.2 28.2 29.7 No 43.5 45 No Retail -Warner Ave. 73.1 23.1 25.0 No 48.1 50 No Retail -Red Hill Ave. 72.7 22.7 25.0 No 47.7 50 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. NR = Noise Reduction Table 5.10-13: Second Floor Residential Interior Noise Levels (CNEL) Receiver Location Unit Plan Noise Level at Fa ade Required Interior NR Minimum Calculated Interior NR Upgraded Windows Interior Noise Level Threshold Threshold Exceeded? Al 73.1 28.1 30.7 No 42.4 45 No A3 73.1 28.1 30.6 No 42.5 45 No B2 73.1 28.1 31.3 No 41.8 45 No B5 73.1 28.1 30.5 No 42.6 45 No Bldg. A S1 73.1 28.1 30.4 No 42.7 45 No Warner Ave. S2 73.1 28.1 29.7 No 43.4 45 No Al 70.7 25.7 30.7 No 40.0 45 No A3 70.7 25.7 30.6 No 40.1 45 No Bldg. A B2 70.7 25.7 31.3 No 39.4 45 No Red Hill Ave. B5 70.7 25.7 30.5 No 40.2 45 No City of Santa Ana 5.10-23 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise Receiver Location Unit Plan Noise Level at Fa ade Required Interior NR Minimum Calculated Interior NR Upgraded Windows Interior Noise Level Threshold Threshold Exceeded? S1 70.7 25.7 30.4 No 40.3 45 No S2 70.7 25.7 29.7 No 41.0 45 No Al 68.6 23.6 30.7 No 37.9 45 No A3 68.6 23.6 30.6 No 38.0 45 No Bldg. A B2 68.6 23.6 31.3 No 37.3 45 No Warner Ave. B5 68.6 23.6 30.5 No 38.1 45 No Bldg. B S1 68.6 23.6 30.4 No 38.2 45 No Red Hill Ave. S2 68.6 23.6 29.7 No 38.9 45 No Al 72.2 27.2 30.7 No 41.5 45 No A3 72.2 27.2 30.6 No 41.6 45 No Bldg. A B2 72.2 27.2 31.3 No 40.9 45 No Red Hill Ave. B5 72.2 27.2 30.5 No 41.7 45 No Bldg. C S1 72.2 27.2 30.4 No 41.8 45 No Red Hill Ave. S2 72.2 27.2 29.7 No 42.5 45 No Al 73.1 28.1 30.7 No 42.4 45 No A3 73.1 28.1 30.6 No 42.5 45 No Bldg. B B2 73.1 28.1 31.3 No 41.8 45 No Red Hill Ave. B5 73.1 28.1 30.5 No 42.6 45 No Bldg. D S1 73.1 28.1 30.4 No 42.7 45 No Warner Ave. S2 73.1 28.1 29.7 No 43.4 45 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. NR = Noise Reduction Table 5.10-14: Third Floor Residential Interior Noise Levels (CNEL) Receiver Location Unit Plan Noise Level at Fa ade Required Interior NR Minimum Calculated Interior NR Upgraded Windows Interior Noise Level Threshold Threshold Exceeded? Al 72.9 27.9 30.7 No 42.2 45 No A3 72.9 27.9 30.6 No 42.3 45 No B2 72.9 27.9 31.3 No 41.6 45 No B5 1 72.9 27.9 30.5 No 42.4 45 No Bldg. A S1 72.9 27.9 30.4 No 42.5 45 No Warner Ave. S2 72.9 27.9 29.7 No 43.2 45 No Al 70.7 25.7 30.7 No 40.0 45 No A3 70.7 25.7 30.6 No 40.1 45 No B2 70.7 25.7 31.3 No 39.4 45 No B5 70.7 25.7 30.5 No 40.2 45 No Bldg. A S1 70.7 25.7 30.4 No 40.3 45 No Red Hill Ave. S2 70.7 25.7 29.7 No 41.0 45 No Al 68.6 23.6 30.7 No 37.9 45 No A3 68.6 23.6 30.6 No 38.0 45 No B2 68.6 23.6 31.3 No 37.3 45 No B5 68.6 23.6 30.5 No 38.1 45 No Bldg. B S1 68.6 23.6 30.4 No 38.2 45 No Red Hill Ave. S2 68.6 23.6 29.7 No 38.9 45 No Al 72.1 27.1 30.7 No 41.4 45 No A3 72.1 27.1 30.6 No 41.5 45 No B2 72.1 27.1 31.3 No 40.8 45 No B5 72.1 27.1 30.5 No 41.6 45 No Bldg. C S1 72.1 27.1 30.4 No 41.7 45 No Red Hill Ave. S2 72.1 27.1 29.7 No 42.4 45 No Al 72.9 27.9 30.7 No 42.2 45 No City of Santa Ana 5.10-24 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise Receiver Location Unit Plan Noise Level at Fa ade Required Interior NR Minimum Calculated Interior NR Upgraded Windows Interior Noise Level Threshold Threshold Exceeded? A3 72.9 27.9 30.6 No 42.3 45 No B2 72.9 27.9 31.3 No 41.6 45 No B5 72.9 27.9 30.5 No 42.4 45 No Bldg. D S1 72.9 27.9 30.4 No 42.5 45 No Warner Ave. S2 72.9 27.9 29.7 No 43.2 45 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. NR = Noise Reduction Table 5.10-15: Fourth through Sixth Floors Residential Interior Noise Levels (CNEL) Receiver Location Unit Plan Noise Level at FaSade Required Interior NR Minimum Calculated Interior NR Upgraded Windows Interior Noise Level Threshold Threshold Exceeded? Al 72.6 27.6 30.7 No 41.9 45 No A3 72.6 27.6 30.6 No 42.0 45 No B2 72.6 27.6 31.3 1 No 41.3 45 No B5 72.6 27.6 30.5 No 42.1 45 No Bldg. A S1 72.6 27.6 30.4 No 42.2 45 No Warner Ave. S2 72.6 27.6 29.7 No 42.9 45 No Al 70.6 25.6 30.7 No 39.9 45 No A3 70.6 25.6 30.6 No 40.0 45 No B2 70.6 25.6 31.3 No 39.3 45 No B5 70.6 25.6 30.5 No 40.1 45 No Bldg. A S1 70.6 25.6 30.4 No 40.2 45 No Red Hill Ave. S2 70.6 25.6 29.7 No 40.9 45 No Al 68.5 23.5 30.7 No 37.8 45 No A3 68.5 23.5 30.6 No 37.9 45 No B2 68.5 23.5 31.3 No 37.2 45 No B5 68.5 23.5 30.5 No 38.0 45 No Bldg. B S1 68.5 23.5 30.4 No 38.1 45 No Red Hill Ave. S2 68.5 23.5 29.7 No 38.8 45 No Al 72.0 27.0 30.7 No 41.3 45 No A3 72.0 27.0 30.6 No 41.4 45 No B2 72.0 27.0 31.3 No 40.7 45 No B5 72.0 27.0 30.5 No 41.5 45 No Bldg. C S1 72.0 27.0 30.4 No 41.6 45 No Red Hill Ave. S2 72.0 27.0 29.7 No 42.3 45 No Al 72.6 27.6 30.7 No 41.9 45 No A3 72.6 27.6 30.6 No 42.0 45 No B2 72.6 27.6 31.3 No 41.3 45 No B5 72.6 27.6 30.5 No 42.1 45 No Bldg. D S1 72.6 27.6 30.4 No 42.2 45 No Warner Ave. S2 72.6 27.6 29.7 No 42.9 45 No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. NR = Noise Reduction City of Santa Ana 5.10-25 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise IMPACT NOI-2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT GENERATE EXCESSIVE GROUND -BORNE VIBRATION OR GROUNDBORNE NOISE LEVELS. Construction Less than Significant. Construction activities for the proposed Project would include demolition, excavation, and grading activities, which have the potential to generate low levels of groundborne vibration. People working in close proximity to the Project site could be exposed to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels related to construction activities. The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight structural damage at the highest levels. Site ground vibrations from construction activities very rarely reach the levels that can damage structures, but they can be perceived in the audible range and be felt in buildings very close to a construction site. Demolition, excavation, and grading activities are required for the Project and can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures and soil type. Based on the reference vibration levels provided by the FTA, a large bulldozer represents the peak source of vibration with a reference velocity of 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet. At distances ranging from 85 to 667 feet from construction, vibration levels are anticipated to range from 0.001 to 0.014 in/sec PPV, as shown on Table 5.10-16. These vibration levels would not be sustained during the entire construction period but would occur only during the times that heavy construction equipment is operating in the vicinity of the sensitive receivers. This level of vibration would be below the Caltrans building damage threshold of 0.3 in/sec PPV and vibration standard of 0.04 in/sec PPV for human annoyance at all receiver locations. Therefore, vibration impacts would be less than significant. Table 5.10-16: Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. Operation Less than Significant. Operation of the proposed commercial and multi -family uses would include heavy trucks for residents moving in and out of the rental units, product deliveries to retail and restaurant uses, and garbage trucks for solid waste disposal. Truck vibration levels are dependent on vehicle characteristics, load, speed, and pavement conditions. However, typical vibration levels for the heavy truck activity at normal traffic speeds would be approximately 0.006 in/sec PPV, based on the FTA Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Assessment. Truck movements on site would be travelling at very low speed, so it is expected that truck vibration at nearby sensitive receivers would be less than the vibration threshold of 0.08 in/sec PPV for fragile historic buildings and 0.04 in/sec PPV for human annoyance, and therefore, would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.10-26 Draft EIR January 2020 Distance Receiver Levels (in/sec) PPV Thresholds (in/sec) PPV Threshold Exceeded? Receiver to Const. Activity (Feet) Small Bulldozer (< 80k lbs) Jack- hammer Loaded Trucks Large Bulldozer (> 80k lbs) Highest Vibration Level Human 1 Annoyance Building Damage Human Annoyance Building Damage R1 220' 0.000 0.001 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.04 0.3 No No R2 667' 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.04 0.3 No No R3 85' 0.000 1 0.006 0.012 0.014 0.014 0.04 0.3 No No R4 118' 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.009 0.009 0.04 0.3 No No R5 64' 0.001 1 0.009 0.019 0.022 0.022 0.04 0.3 1 No No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019. Operation Less than Significant. Operation of the proposed commercial and multi -family uses would include heavy trucks for residents moving in and out of the rental units, product deliveries to retail and restaurant uses, and garbage trucks for solid waste disposal. Truck vibration levels are dependent on vehicle characteristics, load, speed, and pavement conditions. However, typical vibration levels for the heavy truck activity at normal traffic speeds would be approximately 0.006 in/sec PPV, based on the FTA Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Assessment. Truck movements on site would be travelling at very low speed, so it is expected that truck vibration at nearby sensitive receivers would be less than the vibration threshold of 0.08 in/sec PPV for fragile historic buildings and 0.04 in/sec PPV for human annoyance, and therefore, would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.10-26 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise IMPACT NOI-3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT EXPOSE PEOPLE RESIDING AND WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA TO EXCESSIVE NOISE LEVELS RELATED TO A PUBLIC AIRPORT. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As described previously, JWA is located approximately 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site and under the primary aircraft approach corridor. The AELUP prepared by the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), identifies noise compatibility policies to safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the AELUP plan seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace. The basic function of the AELUP is to promote compatibility between the airport and the land uses that surround it. The AELUP establishes aircraft noise exposure exterior noise level compatibility thresholds for new developments by land use category. According to the exterior noise thresholds outlined in the AELUP, multi -family residential development is considered normally consistent with exterior noise levels of less than 60 dBA CNEL, conditionally consistent with exterior noise levels between 60 and 65 dBA CNEL and normally inconsistent with exterior noise level above 65 dBA CNEL. For commercial retail land use, exterior noise levels are considered normally consistent with exterior noise levels of less than 65 dBA CNEL and conditionally consistent with exterior noise level above 65 dBA CNEL. As shown on Figure 5.10-2, the Project site is located outside the 55 dBA CNEL aircraft noise level contour boundaries of JWA. Therefore, according to the AELUP, the Project residential and commercial retail land use is considered normally consistent with JWA aircraft noise exposure exterior noise level compatibility thresholds. Also, the airport related noise at the Project site does not exceed the City's municipal code permissible noise levels. Additionally, the County's General Aviation Noise Ordinance that prohibits commercial aircraft departures between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and arrivals between the hours of 1 1:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. These restrictions substantially limit the aircraft noise during the noise sensitive nighttime hours for residential use. However, since the Project site is located within the JWA influence area, all future residents shall be notified of potential aircraft overflight consistent with the requirements of the AELUP, which is included as Mitigation Measure LU -1 follows: "The property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration or odors). Individual sensitives to those annoyances, if any are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine where they are acceptable to you." 5.10.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative noise assessment considers development of the proposed Project in combination with ambient growth and other development projects within the vicinity of the proposed Project. As noise is a localized phenomenon, and drastically reduces in magnitude as distance from the source increases, only projects and ambient growth in the nearby area could combine with the proposed Project to result in cumulative noise impacts. Development of the proposed Project in combination with the related projects would result in an increase in construction -related and traffic -related noise. However, each of the related projects would be subject to the operational noise standards established in Section 18-313 of the City's Municipal Code, which establishes the allowable exterior noise standards for various types of land uses in the City. In addition, Section 18-314 of the City's Municipal Code allows for construction activities to be exempt from the noise standards set forth City of Santa Ana 5.10-27 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise in Sections 1 8-31 2 and 18-313 of the City's Municipal Code as long as these activities do not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or anytime on Sunday or a federal holiday. In addition, the City of Tustin has a similar municipal code requirement related to construction noise. Construction noise is localized in nature and decreases substantially with distance. Consequently, in order to achieve a substantial cumulative increase in construction noise levels, more than one source emitting high levels of construction noise would need to be in close proximity to the proposed Project. The nearest development projects to the Project site include the Heritage Village Residential project and the Flight at Tustin Legacy project, which are both currently under construction; and would be operational and no longer under construction during construction of the proposed Project. Thus, construction noise levels from the projects would not combine to become cumulatively considerable, and cumulative noise impacts associated with construction activities would be less than significant. Cumulative construction could also result in the exposure of people to or the generation of excessive groundborne vibration. As described above, the nearest related projects to the proposed Project are currently under construction, and no overlap of construction activities would occur. In addition, due to this distance to other projects that are farther from the site, and the rapid attenuation of groundborne vibration, the proposed Project would not result in vibration that could combine with other development projects. Thus, the Project would not contribute to cumulative vibration impacts and impacts would be less than significant. Cumulative mobile source noise impacts would occur primarily as a result of increased traffic on local roadways due to the proposed Project and related projects within the study area. Therefore, cumulative traffic -generated noise impacts have been assessed based on the contribution of the proposed Project in the Project opening year (2022) and the year 2040 cumulative traffic volumes on the roadways in the Project vicinity. The noise levels associated with these traffic volumes with the proposed Project were identified previously in Tables 5.10-10 and 5.10-11. As shown, cumulative development along with the proposed Project would increase local noise levels by a maximum of 0.5 dBA CNEL. As the increase is much lower than 1.5 dBA threshold for areas above 65 dBA CNEL, cumulative impacts associated with traffic noise would be less than significant. 5.10.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES • Section 18-314 (Special Provisions) of the City's Municipal Code does not allow construction activities to occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. 5.10.3 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Without mitigation, Impact N0I-3 would be potentially significant: Upon implementation of regulatory requirements Impacts N0I-1 and N0I-2 would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.10-28 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise 5.10.10 MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure LU -1: The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring that all prospective residents of the Project site shall be notified of airport related noise. Notification shall be included in lease/rental agreements and shall state the following: "Notice of Airport in Vicinity. This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations related to noise. Individual sensitivities to noise annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property and determine whether they are acceptable to you." 5.10.1 1 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The mitigation measure and existing regulatory programs described previously would reduce potential impacts associated with noise to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to noise would occur. REFERENCES City of Santa Ana General Plan Noise Element. Accessed: www.santa- ana.org/generalplan/documents/Noise.pdf City of Santa Ana Municipal Code. Accessed: https://library.municode.com/ca/santa_ana Environmental Protection Agency Office of Noise Abatement and Control. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. March 1974. EPA/ONAC 550/9/74-004. Accessed: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/2000L3LN.PDF?Dockey=2000L3LN.PDF Nosie Impact Analysis. Prepared by Urban Crossroads. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), The Noise Guidebook, February 2009. Accessed at: https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/313/hud-noise-guidebook/ City of Santa Ana 5.10-29 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.10 Noise This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.10-30 Draft EIR January 2020 5.1 1 Population and Housing 5.1 1.1 INTRODUCTION This section examines the existing population, housing, and employment conditions in the City of Santa Ana, and assesses the Project's impacts related to unplanned direct and indirect growth. Demographic data presented in this section is from the California Department of Finance data and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2016 growth forecasts, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana, and a Persons per Household Evaluation prepared by Stanly R. Hoffman Associates (PPH 2019), provided as Appendix J. Although evaluation of population, housing, and employment typically involves economic and social, rather than physical environmental issues, population, housing, and employment growth are often precursors to physical environmental impacts. According to Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines, "[a]n economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment." Socioeconomic characteristics should be considered in an EIR only to the extent that they create adverse impacts on the physical environment. 5.1 1.2 REGULATORY SETTING California Housing Element Law California planning and zoning law requires each city and county to adopt a general plan for future growth (California Government Code Section 65300). This plan must include a housing element that identifies housing needs for all economic segments and provides opportunities for housing development to meet that need. At the state level, the California Department of Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) estimates the relative share of California's projected population growth that would occur in each county based on Department of Finance (DOF) population projections and historical growth trends. These figures are compiled by HCD in a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for each region of California. Where there is a regional council of governments, HCD provides the RHNA to the council. Such is the case for the City of Santa Ana, which is a member of SCAG. The council, in this case SCAG, then assigns a share of the regional housing need to each of its cities and counties. The HCD oversees the process to ensure that the council of governments distributes its share of the state's projected housing need. Regional Housing Needs Allocation The RHNA is mandated by state housing law as part of the periodic process of updating housing elements of local general plans. State law requires that housing elements identify RHNA targets set by HCD to encourage each jurisdiction in the state to provide its fair share of very low, low, moderate, and upper income housing. The RHNA provides a long-term outline for housing within the context of local and regional trends and housing production goals. SCAG determines total housing need for each community in southern California based on three general factors: 1) the number of housing units needed to accommodate future population and employment growth; 2) the number of additional units needed to allow for housing vacancies; and 3) the number of very low, low, moderate, and above -moderate income households needed. All cities are required to ensure that sufficient sites are planned and zoned for housing, such that area would be available to accommodate the projected housing needs, and to implement proactive programs that facilitate and encourage the production of housing commensurate with its housing needs. City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) that was adopted by SCAG on April 7, 2016, and since amended three times, most recently on September 6, 2018. The RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals by focusing new housing and employment near existing transit, so that the region can grow sustainably. The 2016 RTP/SCS Land Use Policies that are related to population and housing and relevant to the proposed Project include: • Identify regional strategic areas for infill and investment: Identify strategic opportunity areas for infill development of aging and underutilized areas and increased investment in order to accommodate future growth. This strategy makes efficient use of existing and planned infrastructure, revitalizes communities, and maintains or improves quality of life. Strategic areas are primarily identified as those with potential for transit -oriented development, existing and emerging centers, and small mixed-use areas. • Develop "Complete Communities": Create mixed-use districts or "complete communities" in strategic growth areas through a concentration of activities with housing, employment, and a mix of retail and services, located in close proximity to each other. Focusing a mix of land uses in strategic growth areas creates complete communities wherein most daily needs can be met within a short distance of home, providing residents with the opportunity to patronize their local area and run daily errands by walking or cycling rather than traveling by automobile. • Plan for additional housing and jobs near transit: Pedestrian -friendly environments and more compact development patterns in close proximity to transit serve to support and improve transit use and ridership. Focusing housing in transit -accessible locations will serve to reduce auto use and support more multi- modal travel behavior. • Plan for changing demand in types of housing: Shifts in the labor force, as the large cohort of aging "baby boomers" retires over the next 15 years and is replaced by new immigrants and "echo boomers," will likely induce a demand shift in the housing market for additional development types such as multi- family and infill housing in central locations, appealing to the needs and lifestyles of these large populations. • Continue to protect stable, existing single-family areas: Continue to protect stable existing single- family neighborhoods as future growth and a more diverse housing stock are accommodated in infill locations near transit stations, in nodes along corridors and in existing centers. SCAG Regional Growth Projections SCAG is responsible for producing socioeconomic forecasts and developing, refining, and maintaining macro and small-scale forecasting models. The forecasts are developed in five-year increments. The current SCAG projections are provided through the year 2040. Consistency with the growth forecast, at the sub -regional level, is one criterion that SCAG uses in exercising its federal mandate to review "regionally significant" development projects for conformity with regional plans. As described below, the County of Orange had approximately 3,194,024 residents in 2017. SCAG's 2016 Forecast estimate an increase to 3,461,500 residents by 2040, which would be a total increase of 267,476 residents (8.4 percent). City of Santa Ana General Plan Housing Element The City of Santa Ana's Housing Element 2014-2021, adopted in 2014, provides guidelines to expand the housing supply to meet the present and future needs of the City's population. The element addresses the City of Santa Ana 5.11-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing need for housing for all economic segments in the City and provides goals, strategies, and actions to meet this need. The Housing Element goals and policies related to the proposed Project are listed below. Goal 1: Livable and complete neighborhoods of quality housing conditions, ample parks and community services, well-maintained infrastructure, and public facilities that inspire neighborhood pride and ownership. Goal 2: A diversity of quality housing, affordability levels, and living experiences that accommodate Santa Ana's residents and workforce of all household types, income levels, and age groups to foster an inclusive community. Policy HE -2.2: District Centers. Create high intensity, mixed-use urban villages and pedestrian oriented experiences that support the mid- to high-rise office centers, commercial activity, and cultural activities in the varied District Centers. Policy HE -2.3: Rental Housing. Encourage the construction of rental housing for Santa Ana's residents and workforce, including a commitment to very low, low, and moderate -income residents and moderate -income Santa Ana workers. Policy HE -2.4: Diverse Housing Types. Facilitate diverse types, prices, and sizes of housing, including single- family homes, apartments, townhomes, mixed/multiuse housing, transit -oriented housing, multigenerational housing, and live -work opportunities. Policy HE -2.5: Housing Design. Require excellence in architectural design through the use of materials and colors, building treatments, landscaping, open space, parking, and environmentally sensitive ("green") building and design practices. 5.1 1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Site The Project site consists of 14.53 acres of land that is currently developed with three industrial buildings addressed as 2300, 2310, and 2320 South Redhill Avenue, and associated parking. All three buildings were formerly occupied by Ricoh Electronics Inc, an imaging and electronics company. The Ricoh operation included a thermal processing area in the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building, a machine shop in the 2310 South Redhill Avenue building, and toner manufacturing in the 2300 South Redhill Avenue building. The site was vacated by Ricoh in 2018 and the buildings are partially re -occupied and used for storage, electronics recycling, and as interim 200 -bed homeless shelter. Project Vicinity The Project site is located within an urban area that is either fully developed or planned for urban development. The site is adjacent and near areas in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine that have land use plans (Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and the Irvine Business Complex Vision Plan) that encourage mixed-use development or redevelopment that includes residential, professional office, retail, flex, industrial, hospitality and institutional uses (AECOM 2019). The shift in recent and proposed development patterns occurring in the Tustin Legacy and the Irvine Business Complex (IBC) provides for more residential and mixed-use development near industrial and professional office space that generates employment and economic growth (AECOM 2019). Areas across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site are within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Tustin and within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan; these areas are partially developed and designated for an employment center to provide a business park setting for a full range of professional offices, research & development, and commercial uses. Additionally, areas on the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and City of Santa Ana 5.11-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing Warner Avenue, are designated to provide a range of public serving uses that include education, training, park and recreation, and specific social service functions. Other areas of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan that are farther to the east are planned to provide for a variety of employment, commercial, office, and residential development. Similarly, the IBC area that is located 0.35 miles south and southeast of the Project site is a master planned area that provides for medium- to high-density mixed employment, service, and residential uses. The original development and uses of the Project site were consistent with the industrial type uses that were previously provided in the Marine Corps Air Station and IBC. Thus, it is consistent that current and future land use trends within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and IBC would continue to influence land uses within its vicinity. Therefore, the analyses below includes information about both the Cities of Tustin and Irvine, in addition to Santa Ana, and a two mile radius around the Project site, in order to provide an appropriate overview of anticipated population and housing changes within the Project vicinity. Population The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana 2019 population is 337,716 persons, representing 10.8 percent of Orange County's total population. The Department of Finance data shows that the City's population increased by 13,069 residents (4.0 percent) between 2010 and 2019. In comparison the City of Tustin's population grew 7.7 percent, the City of Irvine's population grew by 31.9 percent, and the County of Orange had a 7.1 percent increase in population between 2010 and 2019, as shown on Table 5.11 -1. Table 5.1 1-1: Cities and County Population Estimates and Increase, 2010 - 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 Additionally, it is projected that the population of the County will increase to 3,531,540 by 2040, which would be an increase of 9.6 percent over the County's 2019 population. As shown in Table 5.1 1 -2, the Center for Demographic Research projects that the population of the City of Santa Ana to increase to 362,863 residents by 2040, which is a 7.4 percent (25,147 resident) increase over the City's 2019 population. However, the Cities if Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to have greater population increases of 1 1.3 percent and 14.7 percent. Table 5.11-2: Cities and County Population Projections, 2019 - 2040 2010 2019 2010-2019 Increase City of Santa Ana 324,647 337,716 4.0% City of Tustin 75,540 81,369 7.7% City of Irvine 212,375 280,202 31.9% County of Orange 3,010,232 3,222,498 1 7.1% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 Additionally, it is projected that the population of the County will increase to 3,531,540 by 2040, which would be an increase of 9.6 percent over the County's 2019 population. As shown in Table 5.1 1 -2, the Center for Demographic Research projects that the population of the City of Santa Ana to increase to 362,863 residents by 2040, which is a 7.4 percent (25,147 resident) increase over the City's 2019 population. However, the Cities if Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to have greater population increases of 1 1.3 percent and 14.7 percent. Table 5.11-2: Cities and County Population Projections, 2019 - 2040 Source: Center for Demographic Research, Orange County Jurisdiction Demographics 2019 Housing The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana contained 78,563 housings units in 2019. As shown in Table 5.1 1 -3, of the housing units within the City of Santa Ana 45.4 percent are City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -4 Draft EIR January 2020 2019-2040 2019 2040 Increase City of Santa Ana 337,716 362,863 7.4% City of Tustin 81,369 90,576 11.3% City of Irvine 280,202 321,283 14.7% County of Orange 1 3,222,498 1 3,531,540 1 9.6% Source: Center for Demographic Research, Orange County Jurisdiction Demographics 2019 Housing The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana contained 78,563 housings units in 2019. As shown in Table 5.1 1 -3, of the housing units within the City of Santa Ana 45.4 percent are City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing detached single family housing units and 32.4 percent are multi -family units within buildings containing more than five units. The housing types in Santa Ana compared to those in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and the entire County are provided in Table 5.1 1 -3, which shows that the County has a slightly higher percentage of detached single-family housing units and a lower percentage of multi -family housing units than the City. Conversely, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine have lower percentages of single-family housing, similar rates of multi -family units within buildings containing more than five units, and higher rates of attached single-family and multi- family 2-4 attached units. Table 5.11-3: Cities and County Housing Estimates by Type in 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 201 Y. The Census Factfinder 2017 information for the City identifies that married family households reside in 54.1 percent of the City's housing units and 53.1 percent of these families have household sizes of 4 or more persons. Likewise, the average household size is 4.4 persons per dwelling unit. The information also states that of the renter -occupied units 58.0 percent have 1 occupant or less per room, 21.9 percent have between 1.01 and 1.5 occupants per room, and 20.1 percent have more than 1.5 persons per room. In addition, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana states that in 2018, 46.9 percent of all City households had 3 people or fewer. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project describes that the inventory of multi- family residential units within two -miles of the site has grown 27 percent since 2010 and that these units have been quickly absorbed to provide a vacancy rate of between three and five percent as new units come online. Also, the demand for the multi -family units is indicated through the gradually increasing rent costs of that total an increase of 17 percent between 2010 and 2018. In addition, the Economic and Fiscal Analysis describes that the continued mixed-use development near areas of employment opportunities within two miles of the site is anticipated to maintain the incremental demand for multi -family residence dwelling units (AECOM 2019). The California Department of Finance population and housing estimates for 2019 detail that the City of Santa Ana has a vacancy rate of 4.1 percent. In comparison, the vacancy rate in the City of Tustin is 4.9 percent, the rate in Irvine is 6.2 percent, and the Countywide rate is higher at 5.2 percent. As described by the City of Santa Ana Housing Element, an adequate supply of housing is essential to maintaining adequate choices for residents, moderating housing prices, and encouraging the normal maintenance of properties. Low vacancy rates result in price and rent escalation, while excess vacancy rates result in price depreciation, rent declines, and deferred maintenance. A housing vacancy rate of 1.5-2.0 percent for ownership units and City of Santa Ana 5.11-5 Draft EIR January 2020 City of Santa Ana Housing Units City of Tustin Housing Units City of Irvine Housing Units County of Orange Housing Units Unit Type Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Single-family detached 35,692 45.4% 9,867 35.1% 41,798 39.5% 554,030 50.2% Single-family attached 5,799 7.4% 3,578 12.7% 16,722 15.8% 131,446 11.9% Multi -family (2-4 units) 7,563 9.6% 4,050 14.4% 6,696 6.3% 94,403 8.5% Multi -family (5+ units) 25,460 32.4% 9,741 34.6% 39,477 37.3% 290,766 26.3% Mobile homes 1 4,049 1 5.2% 1 909 1 3.2% 1 1,165 1 1.1% 1 33,519 1 3.0% Total 1 78,563 1 100% 1 28,145 1 100% 1 105,858 1 100% 1 1,104,164 1 100% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 201 Y. The Census Factfinder 2017 information for the City identifies that married family households reside in 54.1 percent of the City's housing units and 53.1 percent of these families have household sizes of 4 or more persons. Likewise, the average household size is 4.4 persons per dwelling unit. The information also states that of the renter -occupied units 58.0 percent have 1 occupant or less per room, 21.9 percent have between 1.01 and 1.5 occupants per room, and 20.1 percent have more than 1.5 persons per room. In addition, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana states that in 2018, 46.9 percent of all City households had 3 people or fewer. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project describes that the inventory of multi- family residential units within two -miles of the site has grown 27 percent since 2010 and that these units have been quickly absorbed to provide a vacancy rate of between three and five percent as new units come online. Also, the demand for the multi -family units is indicated through the gradually increasing rent costs of that total an increase of 17 percent between 2010 and 2018. In addition, the Economic and Fiscal Analysis describes that the continued mixed-use development near areas of employment opportunities within two miles of the site is anticipated to maintain the incremental demand for multi -family residence dwelling units (AECOM 2019). The California Department of Finance population and housing estimates for 2019 detail that the City of Santa Ana has a vacancy rate of 4.1 percent. In comparison, the vacancy rate in the City of Tustin is 4.9 percent, the rate in Irvine is 6.2 percent, and the Countywide rate is higher at 5.2 percent. As described by the City of Santa Ana Housing Element, an adequate supply of housing is essential to maintaining adequate choices for residents, moderating housing prices, and encouraging the normal maintenance of properties. Low vacancy rates result in price and rent escalation, while excess vacancy rates result in price depreciation, rent declines, and deferred maintenance. A housing vacancy rate of 1.5-2.0 percent for ownership units and City of Santa Ana 5.11-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing 5-6 percent for rental units are optimal and offer a variety of choices for residents. Thus, the Santa Ana vacancy rate of 4.1 percent indicates that additional housing could be needed. The California Department of Finance estimates that number of housing units in the City increased by 1,617 units (2.1 percent) between 2010 and 2019. The City has developed fewer new housing units in comparison to the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and County, as shown in Table 5.11-4 that provides the California Department of Finance housing estimates for the City of Santa Ana and Orange County in 2010 and 2019. The City of Santa Ana is largely built out and most of the development within the City is similar to the proposed Project and consists of redevelopment of existing developed land uses. Conversely, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and the County of Orange contains much larger areas of vacant developable land that has accommodated the past housing increases shown in Table 5.11-4. Table 5.11-4: Cities and County Housing Increase, 2010 - 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 SCAG projects that the number of households the County will increase to 1,152,300 by 2040, which would be a total increase of 10.2 percent over the County's 2019 number of households. As over 7 percent of the County's housing is located within the City of Santa Ana, and the population of the City is projected to increase by 7.4 percent (25,147 residents) by 2040 over the City's 2019 population (CDR 2019) a similar increase in housing is anticipated to occur within the City. Employment The 2019 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana identifies that in 2017, there were 163,503 jobs in the City of Santa Ana. Of these jobs, 23.1 percent are in the professional sector, 18.2 percent are in the education sector, and 11.4 percent are in the manufacturing sector. As shown in Table 5.11-5 the types of jobs within Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine are similar with the most jobs in the professional, education, and manufacturing sectors. Table 5.11-5: Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine Jobs by Sector, 2017 Job Sector City of Santa Ana City of Tustin 2010-2019 Professional 2010 2019 Increase City of Santa Ana 76,919 78,536 2.1% City of Tustin 26,467 28,145 6.3% City of Irvine 81,110 105,858 30.5% County of Orange 1,046,118 1,104,164 1 5.5% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 SCAG projects that the number of households the County will increase to 1,152,300 by 2040, which would be a total increase of 10.2 percent over the County's 2019 number of households. As over 7 percent of the County's housing is located within the City of Santa Ana, and the population of the City is projected to increase by 7.4 percent (25,147 residents) by 2040 over the City's 2019 population (CDR 2019) a similar increase in housing is anticipated to occur within the City. Employment The 2019 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana identifies that in 2017, there were 163,503 jobs in the City of Santa Ana. Of these jobs, 23.1 percent are in the professional sector, 18.2 percent are in the education sector, and 11.4 percent are in the manufacturing sector. As shown in Table 5.11-5 the types of jobs within Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine are similar with the most jobs in the professional, education, and manufacturing sectors. Table 5.11-5: Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine Jobs by Sector, 2017 Job Sector City of Santa Ana City of Tustin City of Irvine Professional 23.1% 17.7% 26.3% Education 18.2% 16.0% 16.8% Manufacturing 11.4% 11.0% 13.8% Retail 8.5% 12.8% 8.5% Leisure 8.0% 13.2% 8.9% Wholesale 7.0% 5.9% 4.7% Finance 7.0% 9.3% 9.0% Construction 5.3% 6.4% 3.9% Public 4.1% 1.0% 0.8% Other 2.7% 3.8% 1.9% Transportation 2.5% 1.4% 1.5% Information 2.3% 1.3% 3.5% :)urce: 2017 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana, City of Tustin, and City of Irvine City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing In addition, the Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project describes that there are 119,676 jobs within two -miles of the Project site within the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine and that many of these jobs exist within the following sectors: construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, finance and insurance, professional, scientific/technical services, administrative support, health care, retail, and accommodation services (AECOM 2019). The SCAG 2019 Local Profile for Santa Ana identifies that only 20.8 percent of Santa Ana residents work and live in the City, while 79.2 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Santa Ana the largest percentage commute to the City of Irvine (12.2 percent), Anaheim (6.8 percent), Orange 5.5 (percent), and Costa Mesa (5.3 percent). For Tustin, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile shows that only 7.3 percent of Tustin residents work and live in the City, while 92.7 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Tustin the largest percentage commute to the City of Irvine (18.6 percent), Santa Ana (10.4), Anaheim (5.5 percent), and Orange 5.2 (percent). In comparison, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for Irvine identifies that 30.6 percent of Santa Ana residents work and live in the City, while 69.4 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Irvine the largest percentage commute to the City of Santa Ana (6.5 percent), Newport Beach (5.6 percent), and Los Angeles (5.5 percent). Jobs — Housing Ratio The jobs -housing ratio is a general measure of the total number of jobs and housing units in a defined geographic area, without regard to economic constraints or individual preferences. The balance of jobs and housing in an area—in terms of the total number of jobs and housing units as well as the type of jobs versus the price of housing—has implications for traffic and air quality. The jobs/housing ratio is one indicator of a project's effect on growth and quality of life in the project area. SCAG applies the jobs -housing ratio at the regional and subregional levels to analyze the fit between jobs, housing, and infrastructure. A major focus of SCAG's regional planning efforts has been to improve this balance. SCAG defines the jobs -housing balance as follows: Jobs and housing are in balance when an area has enough employment opportunities for most of the people who live there and enough housing opportunities for most of the people who work there. The region as a whole is, by definition, balanced.... Job -rich subregions have ratios greater than the regional average; housing -rich subregions have ratios lower than the regional average. Ideally, job -housing balance would... assure not only a numerical match of jobs and housing but also an economic match in type of jobs and housing. SCAG considers an area balanced when the jobs -housing ratio is 1.36; communities with more than 1.36 jobs per dwelling unit are considered jobs -rich; those with fewer than 1.36 are housing rich (SCAG 2004). A job -housing imbalance can indicate potential air quality and traffic problems associated with commuting. As shown in Table 5.1 1-6, the City of Santa Ana is jobs rich with 2.08 jobs per housing, which is anticipated to increase to 2.13 jobs per housing unit by 2040. Similarly, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to continue to be jobs rich. In 2040, the City of Tustin is projected to have 2.38 jobs per housing units and the City of Irvine is projected to have 2.59 jobs per housing unit. Hence, the Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine region of the County is jobs rich; and the Project site is located at the center of this regional location. City of Santa Ana 5.11-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing In contrast, Table 5.11-6 shows that Orange County as a whole has a jobs -housing ratio of 1.56, which is closer to the SCAG preferred jobs — housing ratio of 1.36. However, the SCAG projections anticipate that the number of jobs within the County will increase more than the number of housing units (10 percent increase in jobs versus a 4.4 percent increase in housing units); thus, the County's jobs — housing ratio is anticipated to increase to 1.65 by 2040. Table 5.11-6: Jobs — Housing Balance Source: SCAG 2U I Y Local Protiles for Santa Ana and Urange County, SCAG 2U 16 Growth Projections, CA Depart of Finance, t-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019. 5.1 1.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: POP -1 Induce substantial unplanned 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); or POP -2 Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. 5.11.5 METHODOLOGY CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(e) states that a social or economic change generally is not considered a significant effect on the environment unless the changes can be directly linked to a physical adverse change. Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it would induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure). Therefore, population impacts are considered potentially significant if growth associated with the proposed Project would exceed projections for the area and if such an exceedance would have the potential to create a significant adverse physical change to the environment. The methodology used to determine population, housing, and employment impacts began with data collection regarding existing population and housing trends, which was obtained from the State of California Department of Finance, Center for Demographic Research, and SCAG. The anticipated population that would be generated by the proposed Project was determined in the Persons per Household Evaluation, prepared by Stanly R. Hoffman Associates (Appendix J). Then, the scale of population at build out and full occupancy of the proposed Project was evaluated in comparison to the population growth forecasts for the Project region. The Project area's population and growth trends are examined in the context of existing and projected population, housing, and employment for the City of Santa Ana; in addition to, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine, and Orange County as a whole. If projected growth with the Project would exceed SCAG growth projections and could create a significant change to the environment, the resulting growth would be considered "substantial," and a significant impact would result. City of Santa Ana 5.11-8 Draft EIR January 2020 Year Employment Housing Units Jobs — Housing Ratio City of Santa Ana Existing 163,503 78,563 2.08 2040 (projected) 166,000 78,000 2.13 City of Tustin Existing 50,169 28,145 1.78 2040 (projected) 66,400 27,900 2.38 City of Irvine Existing 269,502 105,858 1 2.55 2040 (projected) 320,000 123,400 2.59 County of Orange Existing 1,726,003 1,104,164 1.56 2040 (projected) 1,898,900 1,152,300 1.65 Source: SCAG 2U I Y Local Protiles for Santa Ana and Urange County, SCAG 2U 16 Growth Projections, CA Depart of Finance, t-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019. 5.1 1.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: POP -1 Induce substantial unplanned 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); or POP -2 Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. 5.11.5 METHODOLOGY CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(e) states that a social or economic change generally is not considered a significant effect on the environment unless the changes can be directly linked to a physical adverse change. Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it would induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure). Therefore, population impacts are considered potentially significant if growth associated with the proposed Project would exceed projections for the area and if such an exceedance would have the potential to create a significant adverse physical change to the environment. The methodology used to determine population, housing, and employment impacts began with data collection regarding existing population and housing trends, which was obtained from the State of California Department of Finance, Center for Demographic Research, and SCAG. The anticipated population that would be generated by the proposed Project was determined in the Persons per Household Evaluation, prepared by Stanly R. Hoffman Associates (Appendix J). Then, the scale of population at build out and full occupancy of the proposed Project was evaluated in comparison to the population growth forecasts for the Project region. The Project area's population and growth trends are examined in the context of existing and projected population, housing, and employment for the City of Santa Ana; in addition to, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine, and Orange County as a whole. If projected growth with the Project would exceed SCAG growth projections and could create a significant change to the environment, the resulting growth would be considered "substantial," and a significant impact would result. City of Santa Ana 5.11-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing 5.1 1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT POP -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT INDUCE SUBSTANTIAL UNPLANNED POPULATION GROWTH IN AN AREA, EITHER DIRECTLY (FOR EXAMPLE, BY PROPOSING NEW HOMES AND BUSINESSES) OR INDIRECTLY (FOR EXAMPLE THROUGH THE EXTENSION OF ROADS OR OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE). Less than Significant. Housing and Population Growth The proposed Project would redevelop the Project site to provide 1,150 multi -family apartments and 80,000 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant space. As described previously, the average number of persons per household in the City of Santa Ana is 4.4. However, this ratio considers all housing types within the City, including single-family residences, which consists of 45.4 percent of the housing within the City and typically attracts and accommodates larger household sizes. As described previously, the Census Factfinder 2017 information for the City identifies that married family households reside in 54.1 percent of the City's housing units and 53.1 percent of these families have household sizes of 4 or more persons. The information also states that 68.5 percent of the housing units have 1 occupant or less per room. The proposed Project's unit mix consists of 204 studios (17.7 percent), 602 one -bedroom (52.4 percent), and 344 two-bedroom (29.9 percent) residential units. The size of the units would range size from 635 square foot studios to 1,120 square foot two-bedroom units. These are smaller multi -family units that would not accommodate or attract large households. The proposed unit mix and smaller unit size of the Project suggests an orientation towards singles and young families that differ significantly in demographic features from the relatively large average Santa Ana household size of approximately 4.4 members per household. Therefore, a more accurate calculation of the anticipated population that would be generated by the proposed Project was determined in the Persons per Household Evaluation (PPH 2019) by utilizing U.S. Census data for a market area that represents similar multi -family residential housing types and costs of rent. The Persons per Household Evaluation determined that the number of persons per dwelling unit is anticipated to rage from 1.17 to 2.73. As shown in Table 5.11-7, at full occupancy the Project would house approximately 2,081 residents. Table 5.11-7: Anticipated Residents at Full Occupancy Unit Type Number of Units Persons per Unit Total Residents Studio 204 1.17 239 One -bedroom 602 1.50 903 Two-bedroom 344 2.73 939 Total 1,150 - 2,081 Source: Stanly R. Hoffman Associates, Appendix J The 2,081 residents at full occupancy would constitute a 0.62 percent increase over the existing (2019) City of Santa Ana population of 337,716. In addition, the 1,150 new multi -family units would constitute a 1.5 percent increase in the total number of residential units in the City, and a 4.5 percent increase in the number of the multi -family residential units (5+ units) within the City. As described previously in Section 5.11.3, Environmental Setting, it is projected that the City and County will experience a population increase of 7.4 percent by 2040. Thus, the population of the Project would be within the projected population growth. Similarly, SCAG anticipates the number of housing units throughout City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing the County would increase by 10.2 percent by 2040. Thus, the 1,150 new multi -family units would also be within the SCAG projected growth. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project determined that the Project would result in an average of one employee per every 250 square feet of commercial space. Thus, the proposed 80,000 square feet of commercial space would generate approximately 320 employees at full occupancy of the commercial space. The additional 320 employment opportunities would be 0.27 percent of the existing jobs within 2 -miles of the Project site; and therefore, would not result in induced unplanned employment growth. Jobs -Housing Balance Effects of the Project on jobs -housing balance is evaluated by adding project -generated jobs and housing units to forecasts of employment and housing. As described previously, the Santa Ana is jobs -rich. The existing jobs -housing ratio is 2.08 in Santa Ana and is projected to be 2.13 in 2040. The proposed Project would reduce the jobs -housing ratio slightly to 2.05; and to 2.10 in 2040, as shown in Table 5.1 1-8. This would be a beneficial effect of providing multi -family housing on the Project site in a jobs -rich area, where employees can easily travel to nearby employment opportunities. Table 5.11-8: Jobs — Housing Balance with the Proposed Project Year Employment Housing Units Jobs — Housing Ratio City of Santa Ana Existing 163,504 78,563 + 1,150 = 79,713 2.05 1 2040 1 166,000 1 78,000 + 1,150 = 79,150 1 2.10 Source: SCAG 2019 Local Profiles for Santa Ana, SCAG 2016 Growth Projections, CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019. In addition, because the area is jobs -rich, the addition of residential units in the area would not require additional jobs that could result in growth. Conversely, the new residents would fill the need for employees that are anticipated by SCAG projections. Thus, the additional residential units would not indirectly result in the need for additional employment opportunities, which could result in growth. Therefore, this indirect impact related to growth would be less than significant. Furthermore, the Project location is in close proximity to existing developed transportation infrastructure that provides mobility for residents to employment opportunities within the region. The Project site is east of the State Route (SR) -55 Freeway that is easily accessible via Dyer Road. In addition, the site is by an existing Orange County Transportation Agency bus route that travels to the Anaheim Regional Transportation Center that provides transit service throughout southern California. In addition, the Project site is bound by sidewalks on both sides of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The residents of the proposed Project would have convenient access to sustainable multimodal transportation that would allow for walking, biking, and the use of existing transit, which could reduce vehicular trips and would reduce the effects of employees traveling to work (such as traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise impacts), which would be an indirect physical benefit of the proposed Project. Infrastructure Infrastructure improvements would not be necessary to accommodate the development of the new residential uses. The Project site is adjacent to existing roadways that would not be extended to serve the Project. Likewise, water and wastewater services would be provided by connections to the existing infrastructure within Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, which would accommodate the proposed Project, as described in Section 5.15, Utilities and Service Systems. Provision of continued (but greater volumes) water and sewer City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -1 0 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing services to the Project site would not result in the need to extend infrastructure. Furthermore, no infrastructure would be extended or constructed to serve areas beyond the Project site, and indirect impacts related to the extension of infrastructure would not occur from implementation of the proposed Project. Overall, the Project would not result in inducement of population growth that would have the potential to create a significant physical change to the environment. As a result, impacts related to population growth are less than significant. IMPACT POP -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DISPLACE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF EXISTING PEOPLE OR HOUSING, NECESSITATING THE CONSTRUCTION OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING ELSEWHERE. Less than Significant. As described previously, the Project site is currently developed with three industrial buildings, one of which is currently being used as a temporary 200 -bed homeless shelter through a short- term lease for use of the site on an interim basis until redevelopment of the site commences. The City of Santa Ana is working on various homeless shelter solutions, including the purchase of a permanent homeless shelter site, that are anticipated to be available for the existing persons on the Project site prior to construction of the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in displacement of substantial numbers of people, such that construction of replacement housing elsewhere would be necessary. As a result, impacts would be less than significant. 5.1 1.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic area in which cumulative impacts to population and housing could occur is the central Orange County area that could be influenced by development on the Project site, which includes the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in 1,150 additional multi -family residential units, which would be a 1.5 percent increase in residential units within the City, and an estimated 2,081 residents at complete occupancy (a conservative estimate as vacancy in the City is 4.1 percent), which is 0.62 percent of the City's population. Table 5-1 (in Section 5.0) lists the development within the vicinity of the proposed Project site. A large majority of these projects are for multi -family residential uses. The projects within the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine include 7,996 multi -family residential units. The total number of units from the proposed Project and the cumulative projects would total 9,146 units. Combined, these projects would represent 19 percent of the anticipated growth of 48,136 units in Orange County through 2040. Based on SCAG's 2016 Integrated Growth Forecast, a 7.4 percent increase in growth throughout the County is anticipated to occur through 2040. Hence, the cumulative growth with implementation of the proposed Project would be consistent with the SCAG growth forecasts and population base. Development of the proposed Project, in combination with other development projects in the vicinity would result in a cumulative increase in population. However, the Project's portion of the cumulative increase in residential units (1,150) is 2.39 percent. Thus, the Project's contribution to the cumulative growth in housing is limited. As described above, the addition of housing within the Project area would have a favorable effect on the jobs -housing balance, which could reduce environmental effects of long commute trips, such as air quality and greenhouse gas emissions (further detailed throughout other sections of this EIR). City of Santa Ana 5.11-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing Also, infrastructure improvements would not be necessary to accommodate the proposed development on the Project site, and the proposed Project would not extend services to areas beyond its boundary. As a result, no extension of infrastructure would occur that could induce growth. Furthermore, infrastructure upgrades and extensions that may be included in related Projects would not affect or be related to the proposed Project. Therefore, Project impacts are less than cumulatively considerable, and therefore, less than significant. 5.1 1.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES There are no applicable regulations related to population and housing. 5.1 1.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impacts POP -1 and POP -2 would be less than significant 5.1 1.10 MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.1 1.1 1 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to population and housing would occur. REFERENCES California Department of Finance E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2019 with 2010 Census Benchmark (DOF 2019). Accessed: http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ Census American FactFinder. Accessed: factfinder.census.gov Center for Demographic Research 2019 Orange County Progress Report for the City of Santa Ana (CDR 2019). Accessed: http://www.fullerton.edu/cdr/_resources/pdf/progressreport/Santa%20Ana.pdf City of Santa Ana General Plan. Accessed: https://www.santa-ana.org/general-plan/current-general- plan Economic and Fiscal Analysis for the Santa Ana Red Hill Development. Prepared by AECOM, 2019 (AECOM 2019). Orange County Facts and Figures, June 2019, Center for Demographic Research, California State University Fullerton. Accessed: http://www.fullerton.edu/cdr/ocff.pdf SCAG) 2016 growth forecasts. Accessed: http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/2016DraftGrowthForecastByJurisd iction.pdf City of Santa Ana 5.1 1-1 2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS). Accessed: http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana. Accessed: http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/SantaAna.pdf SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the County of Orange. Accessed: https://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/0rangeCountyLP.pdf SCAG Final 2016 RTP/SCS. Accessed: http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx City of Santa Ana 5.11-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.11-14 Draft EIR January 2020 5.1 1 Population and Housing 5.1 1.1 INTRODUCTION This section examines the existing population, housing, and employment conditions in the City of Santa Ana, and assesses the Project's impacts related to unplanned direct and indirect growth. Demographic data presented in this section is from the California Department of Finance data and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2016 growth forecasts, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana, and a Persons per Household Evaluation prepared by Stanly R. Hoffman Associates (PPH 2019), provided as Appendix J. Although evaluation of population, housing, and employment typically involves economic and social, rather than physical environmental issues, population, housing, and employment growth are often precursors to physical environmental impacts. According to Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines, "[a]n economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment." Socioeconomic characteristics should be considered in an EIR only to the extent that they create adverse impacts on the physical environment. 5.1 1.2 REGULATORY SETTING California Housing Element Law California planning and zoning law requires each city and county to adopt a general plan for future growth (California Government Code Section 65300). This plan must include a housing element that identifies housing needs for all economic segments and provides opportunities for housing development to meet that need. At the state level, the California Department of Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) estimates the relative share of California's projected population growth that would occur in each county based on Department of Finance (DOF) population projections and historical growth trends. These figures are compiled by HCD in a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for each region of California. Where there is a regional council of governments, HCD provides the RHNA to the council. Such is the case for the City of Santa Ana, which is a member of SCAG. The council, in this case SCAG, then assigns a share of the regional housing need to each of its cities and counties. The HCD oversees the process to ensure that the council of governments distributes its share of the state's projected housing need. Regional Housing Needs Allocation The RHNA is mandated by state housing law as part of the periodic process of updating housing elements of local general plans. State law requires that housing elements identify RHNA targets set by HCD to encourage each jurisdiction in the state to provide its fair share of very low, low, moderate, and upper income housing. The RHNA provides a long-term outline for housing within the context of local and regional trends and housing production goals. SCAG determines total housing need for each community in southern California based on three general factors: 1) the number of housing units needed to accommodate future population and employment growth; 2) the number of additional units needed to allow for housing vacancies; and 3) the number of very low, low, moderate, and above -moderate income households needed. All cities are required to ensure that sufficient sites are planned and zoned for housing, such that area would be available to accommodate the projected housing needs, and to implement proactive programs that facilitate and encourage the production of housing commensurate with its housing needs. City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) that was adopted by SCAG on April 7, 2016, and since amended three times, most recently on September 6, 2018. The RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals by focusing new housing and employment near existing transit, so that the region can grow sustainably. The 2016 RTP/SCS Land Use Policies that are related to population and housing and relevant to the proposed Project include: • Identify regional strategic areas for infill and investment: Identify strategic opportunity areas for infill development of aging and underutilized areas and increased investment in order to accommodate future growth. This strategy makes efficient use of existing and planned infrastructure, revitalizes communities, and maintains or improves quality of life. Strategic areas are primarily identified as those with potential for transit -oriented development, existing and emerging centers, and small mixed-use areas. • Develop "Complete Communities": Create mixed-use districts or "complete communities" in strategic growth areas through a concentration of activities with housing, employment, and a mix of retail and services, located in close proximity to each other. Focusing a mix of land uses in strategic growth areas creates complete communities wherein most daily needs can be met within a short distance of home, providing residents with the opportunity to patronize their local area and run daily errands by walking or cycling rather than traveling by automobile. • Plan for additional housing and jobs near transit: Pedestrian -friendly environments and more compact development patterns in close proximity to transit serve to support and improve transit use and ridership. Focusing housing in transit -accessible locations will serve to reduce auto use and support more multi- modal travel behavior. • Plan for changing demand in types of housing: Shifts in the labor force, as the large cohort of aging "baby boomers" retires over the next 15 years and is replaced by new immigrants and "echo boomers," will likely induce a demand shift in the housing market for additional development types such as multi- family and infill housing in central locations, appealing to the needs and lifestyles of these large populations. • Continue to protect stable, existing single-family areas: Continue to protect stable existing single- family neighborhoods as future growth and a more diverse housing stock are accommodated in infill locations near transit stations, in nodes along corridors and in existing centers. SCAG Regional Growth Projections SCAG is responsible for producing socioeconomic forecasts and developing, refining, and maintaining macro and small-scale forecasting models. The forecasts are developed in five-year increments. The current SCAG projections are provided through the year 2040. Consistency with the growth forecast, at the sub -regional level, is one criterion that SCAG uses in exercising its federal mandate to review "regionally significant" development projects for conformity with regional plans. As described below, the County of Orange had approximately 3,194,024 residents in 2017. SCAG's 2016 Forecast estimate an increase to 3,461,500 residents by 2040, which would be a total increase of 267,476 residents (8.4 percent). City of Santa Ana General Plan Housing Element The City of Santa Ana's Housing Element 2014-2021, adopted in 2014, provides guidelines to expand the housing supply to meet the present and future needs of the City's population. The element addresses the City of Santa Ana 5.11-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing need for housing for all economic segments in the City and provides goals, strategies, and actions to meet this need. The Housing Element goals and policies related to the proposed Project are listed below. Goal 1: Livable and complete neighborhoods of quality housing conditions, ample parks and community services, well-maintained infrastructure, and public facilities that inspire neighborhood pride and ownership. Goal 2: A diversity of quality housing, affordability levels, and living experiences that accommodate Santa Ana's residents and workforce of all household types, income levels, and age groups to foster an inclusive community. Policy HE -2.2: District Centers. Create high intensity, mixed-use urban villages and pedestrian oriented experiences that support the mid- to high-rise office centers, commercial activity, and cultural activities in the varied District Centers. Policy HE -2.3: Rental Housing. Encourage the construction of rental housing for Santa Ana's residents and workforce, including a commitment to very low, low, and moderate -income residents and moderate -income Santa Ana workers. Policy HE -2.4: Diverse Housing Types. Facilitate diverse types, prices, and sizes of housing, including single- family homes, apartments, townhomes, mixed/multiuse housing, transit -oriented housing, multigenerational housing, and live -work opportunities. Policy HE -2.5: Housing Design. Require excellence in architectural design through the use of materials and colors, building treatments, landscaping, open space, parking, and environmentally sensitive ("green") building and design practices. 5.1 1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Site The Project site consists of 14.53 acres of land that is currently developed with three industrial buildings addressed as 2300, 2310, and 2320 South Redhill Avenue, and associated parking. All three buildings were formerly occupied by Ricoh Electronics Inc, an imaging and electronics company. The Ricoh operation included a thermal processing area in the 2320 South Redhill Avenue building, a machine shop in the 2310 South Redhill Avenue building, and toner manufacturing in the 2300 South Redhill Avenue building. The site was vacated by Ricoh in 2018 and the buildings are partially re -occupied and used for storage, electronics recycling, and as interim 200 -bed homeless shelter. Project Vicinity The Project site is located within an urban area that is either fully developed or planned for urban development. The site is adjacent and near areas in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine that have land use plans (Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and the Irvine Business Complex Vision Plan) that encourage mixed-use development or redevelopment that includes residential, professional office, retail, flex, industrial, hospitality and institutional uses (AECOM 2019). The shift in recent and proposed development patterns occurring in the Tustin Legacy and the Irvine Business Complex (IBC) provides for more residential and mixed-use development near industrial and professional office space that generates employment and economic growth (AECOM 2019). Areas across Red Hill Avenue from the Project site are within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Tustin and within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan; these areas are partially developed and designated for an employment center to provide a business park setting for a full range of professional offices, research & development, and commercial uses. Additionally, areas on the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and City of Santa Ana 5.11-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing Warner Avenue, are designated to provide a range of public serving uses that include education, training, park and recreation, and specific social service functions. Other areas of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan that are farther to the east are planned to provide for a variety of employment, commercial, office, and residential development. Similarly, the IBC area that is located 0.35 miles south and southeast of the Project site is a master planned area that provides for medium- to high-density mixed employment, service, and residential uses. The original development and uses of the Project site were consistent with the industrial type uses that were previously provided in the Marine Corps Air Station and IBC. Thus, it is consistent that current and future land use trends within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and IBC would continue to influence land uses within its vicinity. Therefore, the analyses below includes information about both the Cities of Tustin and Irvine, in addition to Santa Ana, and a two mile radius around the Project site, in order to provide an appropriate overview of anticipated population and housing changes within the Project vicinity. Population The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana 2019 population is 337,716 persons, representing 10.8 percent of Orange County's total population. The Department of Finance data shows that the City's population increased by 13,069 residents (4.0 percent) between 2010 and 2019. In comparison the City of Tustin's population grew 7.7 percent, the City of Irvine's population grew by 31.9 percent, and the County of Orange had a 7.1 percent increase in population between 2010 and 2019, as shown on Table 5.11 -1. Table 5.1 1-1: Cities and County Population Estimates and Increase, 2010 - 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 Additionally, it is projected that the population of the County will increase to 3,531,540 by 2040, which would be an increase of 9.6 percent over the County's 2019 population. As shown in Table 5.1 1 -2, the Center for Demographic Research projects that the population of the City of Santa Ana to increase to 362,863 residents by 2040, which is a 7.4 percent (25,147 resident) increase over the City's 2019 population. However, the Cities if Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to have greater population increases of 1 1.3 percent and 14.7 percent. Table 5.11-2: Cities and County Population Projections, 2019 - 2040 2010 2019 2010-2019 Increase City of Santa Ana 324,647 337,716 4.0% City of Tustin 75,540 81,369 7.7% City of Irvine 212,375 280,202 31.9% County of Orange 3,010,232 3,222,498 1 7.1% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 Additionally, it is projected that the population of the County will increase to 3,531,540 by 2040, which would be an increase of 9.6 percent over the County's 2019 population. As shown in Table 5.1 1 -2, the Center for Demographic Research projects that the population of the City of Santa Ana to increase to 362,863 residents by 2040, which is a 7.4 percent (25,147 resident) increase over the City's 2019 population. However, the Cities if Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to have greater population increases of 1 1.3 percent and 14.7 percent. Table 5.11-2: Cities and County Population Projections, 2019 - 2040 Source: Center for Demographic Research, Orange County Jurisdiction Demographics 2019 Housing The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana contained 78,563 housings units in 2019. As shown in Table 5.1 1 -3, of the housing units within the City of Santa Ana 45.4 percent are City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -4 Draft EIR January 2020 2019-2040 2019 2040 Increase City of Santa Ana 337,716 362,863 7.4% City of Tustin 81,369 90,576 11.3% City of Irvine 280,202 321,283 14.7% County of Orange 1 3,222,498 1 3,531,540 1 9.6% Source: Center for Demographic Research, Orange County Jurisdiction Demographics 2019 Housing The California Department of Finance estimates that the City of Santa Ana contained 78,563 housings units in 2019. As shown in Table 5.1 1 -3, of the housing units within the City of Santa Ana 45.4 percent are City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing detached single family housing units and 32.4 percent are multi -family units within buildings containing more than five units. The housing types in Santa Ana compared to those in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and the entire County are provided in Table 5.1 1 -3, which shows that the County has a slightly higher percentage of detached single-family housing units and a lower percentage of multi -family housing units than the City. Conversely, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine have lower percentages of single-family housing, similar rates of multi -family units within buildings containing more than five units, and higher rates of attached single-family and multi- family 2-4 attached units. Table 5.11-3: Cities and County Housing Estimates by Type in 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 201 Y. The Census Factfinder 2017 information for the City identifies that married family households reside in 54.1 percent of the City's housing units and 53.1 percent of these families have household sizes of 4 or more persons. Likewise, the average household size is 4.4 persons per dwelling unit. The information also states that of the renter -occupied units 58.0 percent have 1 occupant or less per room, 21.9 percent have between 1.01 and 1.5 occupants per room, and 20.1 percent have more than 1.5 persons per room. In addition, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana states that in 2018, 46.9 percent of all City households had 3 people or fewer. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project describes that the inventory of multi- family residential units within two -miles of the site has grown 27 percent since 2010 and that these units have been quickly absorbed to provide a vacancy rate of between three and five percent as new units come online. Also, the demand for the multi -family units is indicated through the gradually increasing rent costs of that total an increase of 17 percent between 2010 and 2018. In addition, the Economic and Fiscal Analysis describes that the continued mixed-use development near areas of employment opportunities within two miles of the site is anticipated to maintain the incremental demand for multi -family residence dwelling units (AECOM 2019). The California Department of Finance population and housing estimates for 2019 detail that the City of Santa Ana has a vacancy rate of 4.1 percent. In comparison, the vacancy rate in the City of Tustin is 4.9 percent, the rate in Irvine is 6.2 percent, and the Countywide rate is higher at 5.2 percent. As described by the City of Santa Ana Housing Element, an adequate supply of housing is essential to maintaining adequate choices for residents, moderating housing prices, and encouraging the normal maintenance of properties. Low vacancy rates result in price and rent escalation, while excess vacancy rates result in price depreciation, rent declines, and deferred maintenance. A housing vacancy rate of 1.5-2.0 percent for ownership units and City of Santa Ana 5.11-5 Draft EIR January 2020 City of Santa Ana Housing Units City of Tustin Housing Units City of Irvine Housing Units County of Orange Housing Units Unit Type Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Single-family detached 35,692 45.4% 9,867 35.1% 41,798 39.5% 554,030 50.2% Single-family attached 5,799 7.4% 3,578 12.7% 16,722 15.8% 131,446 11.9% Multi -family (2-4 units) 7,563 9.6% 4,050 14.4% 6,696 6.3% 94,403 8.5% Multi -family (5+ units) 25,460 32.4% 9,741 34.6% 39,477 37.3% 290,766 26.3% Mobile homes 1 4,049 1 5.2% 1 909 1 3.2% 1 1,165 1 1.1% 1 33,519 1 3.0% Total 1 78,563 1 100% 1 28,145 1 100% 1 105,858 1 100% 1 1,104,164 1 100% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 201 Y. The Census Factfinder 2017 information for the City identifies that married family households reside in 54.1 percent of the City's housing units and 53.1 percent of these families have household sizes of 4 or more persons. Likewise, the average household size is 4.4 persons per dwelling unit. The information also states that of the renter -occupied units 58.0 percent have 1 occupant or less per room, 21.9 percent have between 1.01 and 1.5 occupants per room, and 20.1 percent have more than 1.5 persons per room. In addition, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana states that in 2018, 46.9 percent of all City households had 3 people or fewer. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project describes that the inventory of multi- family residential units within two -miles of the site has grown 27 percent since 2010 and that these units have been quickly absorbed to provide a vacancy rate of between three and five percent as new units come online. Also, the demand for the multi -family units is indicated through the gradually increasing rent costs of that total an increase of 17 percent between 2010 and 2018. In addition, the Economic and Fiscal Analysis describes that the continued mixed-use development near areas of employment opportunities within two miles of the site is anticipated to maintain the incremental demand for multi -family residence dwelling units (AECOM 2019). The California Department of Finance population and housing estimates for 2019 detail that the City of Santa Ana has a vacancy rate of 4.1 percent. In comparison, the vacancy rate in the City of Tustin is 4.9 percent, the rate in Irvine is 6.2 percent, and the Countywide rate is higher at 5.2 percent. As described by the City of Santa Ana Housing Element, an adequate supply of housing is essential to maintaining adequate choices for residents, moderating housing prices, and encouraging the normal maintenance of properties. Low vacancy rates result in price and rent escalation, while excess vacancy rates result in price depreciation, rent declines, and deferred maintenance. A housing vacancy rate of 1.5-2.0 percent for ownership units and City of Santa Ana 5.11-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing 5-6 percent for rental units are optimal and offer a variety of choices for residents. Thus, the Santa Ana vacancy rate of 4.1 percent indicates that additional housing could be needed. The California Department of Finance estimates that number of housing units in the City increased by 1,617 units (2.1 percent) between 2010 and 2019. The City has developed fewer new housing units in comparison to the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and County, as shown in Table 5.11-4 that provides the California Department of Finance housing estimates for the City of Santa Ana and Orange County in 2010 and 2019. The City of Santa Ana is largely built out and most of the development within the City is similar to the proposed Project and consists of redevelopment of existing developed land uses. Conversely, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine and the County of Orange contains much larger areas of vacant developable land that has accommodated the past housing increases shown in Table 5.11-4. Table 5.11-4: Cities and County Housing Increase, 2010 - 2019 Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 SCAG projects that the number of households the County will increase to 1,152,300 by 2040, which would be a total increase of 10.2 percent over the County's 2019 number of households. As over 7 percent of the County's housing is located within the City of Santa Ana, and the population of the City is projected to increase by 7.4 percent (25,147 residents) by 2040 over the City's 2019 population (CDR 2019) a similar increase in housing is anticipated to occur within the City. Employment The 2019 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana identifies that in 2017, there were 163,503 jobs in the City of Santa Ana. Of these jobs, 23.1 percent are in the professional sector, 18.2 percent are in the education sector, and 11.4 percent are in the manufacturing sector. As shown in Table 5.11-5 the types of jobs within Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine are similar with the most jobs in the professional, education, and manufacturing sectors. Table 5.11-5: Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine Jobs by Sector, 2017 Job Sector City of Santa Ana City of Tustin 2010-2019 Professional 2010 2019 Increase City of Santa Ana 76,919 78,536 2.1% City of Tustin 26,467 28,145 6.3% City of Irvine 81,110 105,858 30.5% County of Orange 1,046,118 1,104,164 1 5.5% Source: CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019 SCAG projects that the number of households the County will increase to 1,152,300 by 2040, which would be a total increase of 10.2 percent over the County's 2019 number of households. As over 7 percent of the County's housing is located within the City of Santa Ana, and the population of the City is projected to increase by 7.4 percent (25,147 residents) by 2040 over the City's 2019 population (CDR 2019) a similar increase in housing is anticipated to occur within the City. Employment The 2019 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana identifies that in 2017, there were 163,503 jobs in the City of Santa Ana. Of these jobs, 23.1 percent are in the professional sector, 18.2 percent are in the education sector, and 11.4 percent are in the manufacturing sector. As shown in Table 5.11-5 the types of jobs within Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine are similar with the most jobs in the professional, education, and manufacturing sectors. Table 5.11-5: Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine Jobs by Sector, 2017 Job Sector City of Santa Ana City of Tustin City of Irvine Professional 23.1% 17.7% 26.3% Education 18.2% 16.0% 16.8% Manufacturing 11.4% 11.0% 13.8% Retail 8.5% 12.8% 8.5% Leisure 8.0% 13.2% 8.9% Wholesale 7.0% 5.9% 4.7% Finance 7.0% 9.3% 9.0% Construction 5.3% 6.4% 3.9% Public 4.1% 1.0% 0.8% Other 2.7% 3.8% 1.9% Transportation 2.5% 1.4% 1.5% Information 2.3% 1.3% 3.5% :)urce: 2017 SCAG Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana, City of Tustin, and City of Irvine City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing In addition, the Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project describes that there are 119,676 jobs within two -miles of the Project site within the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine and that many of these jobs exist within the following sectors: construction, manufacturing, wholesale trade, finance and insurance, professional, scientific/technical services, administrative support, health care, retail, and accommodation services (AECOM 2019). The SCAG 2019 Local Profile for Santa Ana identifies that only 20.8 percent of Santa Ana residents work and live in the City, while 79.2 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Santa Ana the largest percentage commute to the City of Irvine (12.2 percent), Anaheim (6.8 percent), Orange 5.5 (percent), and Costa Mesa (5.3 percent). For Tustin, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile shows that only 7.3 percent of Tustin residents work and live in the City, while 92.7 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Tustin the largest percentage commute to the City of Irvine (18.6 percent), Santa Ana (10.4), Anaheim (5.5 percent), and Orange 5.2 (percent). In comparison, the SCAG 2019 Local Profile for Irvine identifies that 30.6 percent of Santa Ana residents work and live in the City, while 69.4 percent commute to other places. Of the commuters residing in Irvine the largest percentage commute to the City of Santa Ana (6.5 percent), Newport Beach (5.6 percent), and Los Angeles (5.5 percent). Jobs — Housing Ratio The jobs -housing ratio is a general measure of the total number of jobs and housing units in a defined geographic area, without regard to economic constraints or individual preferences. The balance of jobs and housing in an area—in terms of the total number of jobs and housing units as well as the type of jobs versus the price of housing—has implications for traffic and air quality. The jobs/housing ratio is one indicator of a project's effect on growth and quality of life in the project area. SCAG applies the jobs -housing ratio at the regional and subregional levels to analyze the fit between jobs, housing, and infrastructure. A major focus of SCAG's regional planning efforts has been to improve this balance. SCAG defines the jobs -housing balance as follows: Jobs and housing are in balance when an area has enough employment opportunities for most of the people who live there and enough housing opportunities for most of the people who work there. The region as a whole is, by definition, balanced.... Job -rich subregions have ratios greater than the regional average; housing -rich subregions have ratios lower than the regional average. Ideally, job -housing balance would... assure not only a numerical match of jobs and housing but also an economic match in type of jobs and housing. SCAG considers an area balanced when the jobs -housing ratio is 1.36; communities with more than 1.36 jobs per dwelling unit are considered jobs -rich; those with fewer than 1.36 are housing rich (SCAG 2004). A job -housing imbalance can indicate potential air quality and traffic problems associated with commuting. As shown in Table 5.1 1-6, the City of Santa Ana is jobs rich with 2.08 jobs per housing, which is anticipated to increase to 2.13 jobs per housing unit by 2040. Similarly, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine are anticipated to continue to be jobs rich. In 2040, the City of Tustin is projected to have 2.38 jobs per housing units and the City of Irvine is projected to have 2.59 jobs per housing unit. Hence, the Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine region of the County is jobs rich; and the Project site is located at the center of this regional location. City of Santa Ana 5.11-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing In contrast, Table 5.11-6 shows that Orange County as a whole has a jobs -housing ratio of 1.56, which is closer to the SCAG preferred jobs — housing ratio of 1.36. However, the SCAG projections anticipate that the number of jobs within the County will increase more than the number of housing units (10 percent increase in jobs versus a 4.4 percent increase in housing units); thus, the County's jobs — housing ratio is anticipated to increase to 1.65 by 2040. Table 5.11-6: Jobs — Housing Balance Source: SCAG 2U I Y Local Protiles for Santa Ana and Urange County, SCAG 2U 16 Growth Projections, CA Depart of Finance, t-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019. 5.1 1.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: POP -1 Induce substantial unplanned 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); or POP -2 Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. 5.11.5 METHODOLOGY CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(e) states that a social or economic change generally is not considered a significant effect on the environment unless the changes can be directly linked to a physical adverse change. Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it would induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure). Therefore, population impacts are considered potentially significant if growth associated with the proposed Project would exceed projections for the area and if such an exceedance would have the potential to create a significant adverse physical change to the environment. The methodology used to determine population, housing, and employment impacts began with data collection regarding existing population and housing trends, which was obtained from the State of California Department of Finance, Center for Demographic Research, and SCAG. The anticipated population that would be generated by the proposed Project was determined in the Persons per Household Evaluation, prepared by Stanly R. Hoffman Associates (Appendix J). Then, the scale of population at build out and full occupancy of the proposed Project was evaluated in comparison to the population growth forecasts for the Project region. The Project area's population and growth trends are examined in the context of existing and projected population, housing, and employment for the City of Santa Ana; in addition to, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine, and Orange County as a whole. If projected growth with the Project would exceed SCAG growth projections and could create a significant change to the environment, the resulting growth would be considered "substantial," and a significant impact would result. City of Santa Ana 5.11-8 Draft EIR January 2020 Year Employment Housing Units Jobs — Housing Ratio City of Santa Ana Existing 163,503 78,563 2.08 2040 (projected) 166,000 78,000 2.13 City of Tustin Existing 50,169 28,145 1.78 2040 (projected) 66,400 27,900 2.38 City of Irvine Existing 269,502 105,858 1 2.55 2040 (projected) 320,000 123,400 2.59 County of Orange Existing 1,726,003 1,104,164 1.56 2040 (projected) 1,898,900 1,152,300 1.65 Source: SCAG 2U I Y Local Protiles for Santa Ana and Urange County, SCAG 2U 16 Growth Projections, CA Depart of Finance, t-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019. 5.1 1.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: POP -1 Induce substantial unplanned 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); or POP -2 Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. 5.11.5 METHODOLOGY CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(e) states that a social or economic change generally is not considered a significant effect on the environment unless the changes can be directly linked to a physical adverse change. Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it would induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure). Therefore, population impacts are considered potentially significant if growth associated with the proposed Project would exceed projections for the area and if such an exceedance would have the potential to create a significant adverse physical change to the environment. The methodology used to determine population, housing, and employment impacts began with data collection regarding existing population and housing trends, which was obtained from the State of California Department of Finance, Center for Demographic Research, and SCAG. The anticipated population that would be generated by the proposed Project was determined in the Persons per Household Evaluation, prepared by Stanly R. Hoffman Associates (Appendix J). Then, the scale of population at build out and full occupancy of the proposed Project was evaluated in comparison to the population growth forecasts for the Project region. The Project area's population and growth trends are examined in the context of existing and projected population, housing, and employment for the City of Santa Ana; in addition to, the Cities of Tustin and Irvine, and Orange County as a whole. If projected growth with the Project would exceed SCAG growth projections and could create a significant change to the environment, the resulting growth would be considered "substantial," and a significant impact would result. City of Santa Ana 5.11-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing 5.1 1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT POP -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT INDUCE SUBSTANTIAL UNPLANNED POPULATION GROWTH IN AN AREA, EITHER DIRECTLY (FOR EXAMPLE, BY PROPOSING NEW HOMES AND BUSINESSES) OR INDIRECTLY (FOR EXAMPLE THROUGH THE EXTENSION OF ROADS OR OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE). Less than Significant. Housing and Population Growth The proposed Project would redevelop the Project site to provide 1,150 multi -family apartments and 80,000 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant space. As described previously, the average number of persons per household in the City of Santa Ana is 4.4. However, this ratio considers all housing types within the City, including single-family residences, which consists of 45.4 percent of the housing within the City and typically attracts and accommodates larger household sizes. As described previously, the Census Factfinder 2017 information for the City identifies that married family households reside in 54.1 percent of the City's housing units and 53.1 percent of these families have household sizes of 4 or more persons. The information also states that 68.5 percent of the housing units have 1 occupant or less per room. The proposed Project's unit mix consists of 204 studios (17.7 percent), 602 one -bedroom (52.4 percent), and 344 two-bedroom (29.9 percent) residential units. The size of the units would range size from 635 square foot studios to 1,120 square foot two-bedroom units. These are smaller multi -family units that would not accommodate or attract large households. The proposed unit mix and smaller unit size of the Project suggests an orientation towards singles and young families that differ significantly in demographic features from the relatively large average Santa Ana household size of approximately 4.4 members per household. Therefore, a more accurate calculation of the anticipated population that would be generated by the proposed Project was determined in the Persons per Household Evaluation (PPH 2019) by utilizing U.S. Census data for a market area that represents similar multi -family residential housing types and costs of rent. The Persons per Household Evaluation determined that the number of persons per dwelling unit is anticipated to rage from 1.17 to 2.73. As shown in Table 5.11-7, at full occupancy the Project would house approximately 2,081 residents. Table 5.11-7: Anticipated Residents at Full Occupancy Unit Type Number of Units Persons per Unit Total Residents Studio 204 1.17 239 One -bedroom 602 1.50 903 Two-bedroom 344 2.73 939 Total 1,150 - 2,081 Source: Stanly R. Hoffman Associates, Appendix J The 2,081 residents at full occupancy would constitute a 0.62 percent increase over the existing (2019) City of Santa Ana population of 337,716. In addition, the 1,150 new multi -family units would constitute a 1.5 percent increase in the total number of residential units in the City, and a 4.5 percent increase in the number of the multi -family residential units (5+ units) within the City. As described previously in Section 5.11.3, Environmental Setting, it is projected that the City and County will experience a population increase of 7.4 percent by 2040. Thus, the population of the Project would be within the projected population growth. Similarly, SCAG anticipates the number of housing units throughout City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing the County would increase by 10.2 percent by 2040. Thus, the 1,150 new multi -family units would also be within the SCAG projected growth. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project determined that the Project would result in an average of one employee per every 250 square feet of commercial space. Thus, the proposed 80,000 square feet of commercial space would generate approximately 320 employees at full occupancy of the commercial space. The additional 320 employment opportunities would be 0.27 percent of the existing jobs within 2 -miles of the Project site; and therefore, would not result in induced unplanned employment growth. Jobs -Housing Balance Effects of the Project on jobs -housing balance is evaluated by adding project -generated jobs and housing units to forecasts of employment and housing. As described previously, the Santa Ana is jobs -rich. The existing jobs -housing ratio is 2.08 in Santa Ana and is projected to be 2.13 in 2040. The proposed Project would reduce the jobs -housing ratio slightly to 2.05; and to 2.10 in 2040, as shown in Table 5.1 1-8. This would be a beneficial effect of providing multi -family housing on the Project site in a jobs -rich area, where employees can easily travel to nearby employment opportunities. Table 5.11-8: Jobs — Housing Balance with the Proposed Project Year Employment Housing Units Jobs — Housing Ratio City of Santa Ana Existing 163,504 78,563 + 1,150 = 79,713 2.05 1 2040 1 166,000 1 78,000 + 1,150 = 79,150 1 2.10 Source: SCAG 2019 Local Profiles for Santa Ana, SCAG 2016 Growth Projections, CA Depart of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates, 2010 - 2019. In addition, because the area is jobs -rich, the addition of residential units in the area would not require additional jobs that could result in growth. Conversely, the new residents would fill the need for employees that are anticipated by SCAG projections. Thus, the additional residential units would not indirectly result in the need for additional employment opportunities, which could result in growth. Therefore, this indirect impact related to growth would be less than significant. Furthermore, the Project location is in close proximity to existing developed transportation infrastructure that provides mobility for residents to employment opportunities within the region. The Project site is east of the State Route (SR) -55 Freeway that is easily accessible via Dyer Road. In addition, the site is by an existing Orange County Transportation Agency bus route that travels to the Anaheim Regional Transportation Center that provides transit service throughout southern California. In addition, the Project site is bound by sidewalks on both sides of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The residents of the proposed Project would have convenient access to sustainable multimodal transportation that would allow for walking, biking, and the use of existing transit, which could reduce vehicular trips and would reduce the effects of employees traveling to work (such as traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise impacts), which would be an indirect physical benefit of the proposed Project. Infrastructure Infrastructure improvements would not be necessary to accommodate the development of the new residential uses. The Project site is adjacent to existing roadways that would not be extended to serve the Project. Likewise, water and wastewater services would be provided by connections to the existing infrastructure within Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue, which would accommodate the proposed Project, as described in Section 5.15, Utilities and Service Systems. Provision of continued (but greater volumes) water and sewer City of Santa Ana 5.1 1 -1 0 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing services to the Project site would not result in the need to extend infrastructure. Furthermore, no infrastructure would be extended or constructed to serve areas beyond the Project site, and indirect impacts related to the extension of infrastructure would not occur from implementation of the proposed Project. Overall, the Project would not result in inducement of population growth that would have the potential to create a significant physical change to the environment. As a result, impacts related to population growth are less than significant. IMPACT POP -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT DISPLACE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF EXISTING PEOPLE OR HOUSING, NECESSITATING THE CONSTRUCTION OF REPLACEMENT HOUSING ELSEWHERE. Less than Significant. As described previously, the Project site is currently developed with three industrial buildings, one of which is currently being used as a temporary 200 -bed homeless shelter through a short- term lease for use of the site on an interim basis until redevelopment of the site commences. The City of Santa Ana is working on various homeless shelter solutions, including the purchase of a permanent homeless shelter site, that are anticipated to be available for the existing persons on the Project site prior to construction of the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in displacement of substantial numbers of people, such that construction of replacement housing elsewhere would be necessary. As a result, impacts would be less than significant. 5.1 1.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic area in which cumulative impacts to population and housing could occur is the central Orange County area that could be influenced by development on the Project site, which includes the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in 1,150 additional multi -family residential units, which would be a 1.5 percent increase in residential units within the City, and an estimated 2,081 residents at complete occupancy (a conservative estimate as vacancy in the City is 4.1 percent), which is 0.62 percent of the City's population. Table 5-1 (in Section 5.0) lists the development within the vicinity of the proposed Project site. A large majority of these projects are for multi -family residential uses. The projects within the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine include 7,996 multi -family residential units. The total number of units from the proposed Project and the cumulative projects would total 9,146 units. Combined, these projects would represent 19 percent of the anticipated growth of 48,136 units in Orange County through 2040. Based on SCAG's 2016 Integrated Growth Forecast, a 7.4 percent increase in growth throughout the County is anticipated to occur through 2040. Hence, the cumulative growth with implementation of the proposed Project would be consistent with the SCAG growth forecasts and population base. Development of the proposed Project, in combination with other development projects in the vicinity would result in a cumulative increase in population. However, the Project's portion of the cumulative increase in residential units (1,150) is 2.39 percent. Thus, the Project's contribution to the cumulative growth in housing is limited. As described above, the addition of housing within the Project area would have a favorable effect on the jobs -housing balance, which could reduce environmental effects of long commute trips, such as air quality and greenhouse gas emissions (further detailed throughout other sections of this EIR). City of Santa Ana 5.11-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing Also, infrastructure improvements would not be necessary to accommodate the proposed development on the Project site, and the proposed Project would not extend services to areas beyond its boundary. As a result, no extension of infrastructure would occur that could induce growth. Furthermore, infrastructure upgrades and extensions that may be included in related Projects would not affect or be related to the proposed Project. Therefore, Project impacts are less than cumulatively considerable, and therefore, less than significant. 5.1 1.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES There are no applicable regulations related to population and housing. 5.1 1.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impacts POP -1 and POP -2 would be less than significant 5.1 1.10 MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.1 1.1 1 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to population and housing would occur. REFERENCES California Department of Finance E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2019 with 2010 Census Benchmark (DOF 2019). Accessed: http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ Census American FactFinder. Accessed: factfinder.census.gov Center for Demographic Research 2019 Orange County Progress Report for the City of Santa Ana (CDR 2019). Accessed: http://www.fullerton.edu/cdr/_resources/pdf/progressreport/Santa%20Ana.pdf City of Santa Ana General Plan. Accessed: https://www.santa-ana.org/general-plan/current-general- plan Economic and Fiscal Analysis for the Santa Ana Red Hill Development. Prepared by AECOM, 2019 (AECOM 2019). Orange County Facts and Figures, June 2019, Center for Demographic Research, California State University Fullerton. Accessed: http://www.fullerton.edu/cdr/ocff.pdf SCAG) 2016 growth forecasts. Accessed: http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/2016DraftGrowthForecastByJurisd iction.pdf City of Santa Ana 5.1 1-1 2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS). Accessed: http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the City of Santa Ana. Accessed: http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/SantaAna.pdf SCAG 2019 Local Profile for the County of Orange. Accessed: https://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/0rangeCountyLP.pdf SCAG Final 2016 RTP/SCS. Accessed: http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx City of Santa Ana 5.11-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.11 Population and Housing This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.11-14 Draft EIR January 2020 5.12 Public Services 5.12.1 INTRODUCTION This section describes the existing fire protection, police protection, and schools that serve the Project site and vicinity and evaluates the potential for implementation of the Project to result in an impact. This section of the EIR addresses whether there are physical environmental effects of new or expanded facilities that are necessary to maintain acceptable service levels related to fire, police, and school services. Because CEQA focuses on physical environmental effects, this section analyzes whether any physical changes resulting from an increase in service demands from development pursuant to the proposed Project could result in significant adverse environmental effects. Thus, an increase in staffing associated with public services, an increase in calls for services, would not, by itself, be considered a physical change in the environment. However, physical changes in the environment resulting from the construction of new facilities or an expansion of existing facilities to accommodate the increased staff or equipment needs resulting from the Project could constitute a significant impact. 5.12.2 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES 5.12.2.1 FIRE PROTECTION REGULATORY SETTING California Fire Code State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, which include regulations concerning building standards (as also set forth in Title 24, Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations, the California Building Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices (such as extinguishers and smoke alarms), building evacuation and access standards, and fire suppression training. California Health and Safety Code Additional State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, which includes regulations for building standards, fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers, smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training. California Occupational Safety and Health Administration In accordance with the California Code of Regulations, Title 8 Sections 1270 "Fire Prevention" and 6773 "Fire Protection and Fire Fighting Equipment," California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical services. The standards include, but are not limited to, guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire house sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance, and use of all firefighting and emergency medical equipment. Orange County Fire Authority Fire Prevention Guideline B-09, Fire Master Plans for Commercial and Residential Development The Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) Fire Prevention Guideline B-09 requires new structures to meet standards related to access driveways, siting of hydrants, water supply, and building access, as required by the California Fire Code. The guideline requires specific information be provided during the submittal of plans for development projects to demonstrate compliance with all codes and other regulations governing City of Santa Ana 5.12-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services water availability for firefighting and emergency access to sites and structures within the jurisdictions served by the OCFA. In addition, the guideline requires that plans be reviewed by the OCFA. City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Chapter 14; Fire Code. The Santa Ana Municipal Code includes the California Fire Code as published by the California Building Standards Commission and the International Code Council (with some City -specific amendments). The California Fire Code is Title 24, Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations, and regulates new structures, alterations, additions, changes in use or changes in structures. The Code includes specific information regarding safety provisions, emergency planning, fire-resistant construction, fire protection systems, means of egress and hazardous materials. Fire Facilities Fee. Chapter 8-46 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code requires a fire facilities fee be paid prior to the issuance of building permit for construction of buildings exceeding 2 stories in height (excluding parking structures). Buildings over 2 stories in height require unique firefighting equipment and fire station configurations. The purpose of the fire facilities fee is to provide revenue to pay for equipment needed to fight fires in buildings over 2 stories in height and to improve fire stations in the city as necessary to accommodate such equipment and otherwise augment the City's capability to fight fires in such buildings. All fire facility fee revenues shall be deposited in an account separate and apart from other city revenues and may be expended from such solely to pay for the cost of the facilities identified in Chapter 8-46 of the Municipal Code. City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The existing Public Safety Element of the Santa Ana General Plan includes the following public safety objectives and policies are related to fire protection and the proposed Project. Goal 2: Minimize loss of life and property due to natural and man-made catastrophes. Objective 2.1: Maintain an effective emergency preparedness plan and program. Policy: Assure minimum feasible response time to fire calls in all areas of the City. Strictly enforce safety provisions of building and zoning codes. 5.12.2.2 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Fire protection and emergency medical services in the City of Santa Ana are provided by the OCFA through a contract for services. The OCFA provides fire suppression, emergency medical, rescue, fire prevention, hazardous materials coordination, and wildland management services. OCFA serves 23 cities in Orange County and all unincorporated areas. Within the City of Santa Ana, OCFA provides services from 10 city - owned fire stations. There are currently 6 city -owned fire stations located within 3.5 miles of the Project site. Station 79, which is located 1 mile from the Project site is the first responding unit. The location, equipment, and staffing of the fire stations near the Project site are provided in Table 5.12-1. As provided by the OCFA 2018 Statistical Annual Report, there were 33,983 calls for service from the 10 fire stations in the City in 2018. Of the calls for service, 65 percent (21,952) were for emergency medical calls, 1.7 percent (565) were for fire incidents, and 13.8 percent (4,703) were for other incidents, which includes: cancelled service calls, ruptures, hazardous conditions, false alarms, and miscellaneous calls. OCFA's Standard of Cover for fire services in urban areas, such as the City of Santa Ana, are listed below. Response times are from receipt of the service call to a unit on scene: City of Santa Ana 5.12-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services First -in engines should arrive on -scene to medical aids and/or fires within 7 minutes and 20 seconds 80 percent of the time. • First -in truck companies should arrive on -scene to fires within 12 minutes 80 percent of the time. • First -in paramedic companies should arrive on -scene at all medical aids within 10 minutes 80 percent of the time. Table 5.12-1: Santa Ana Fire Stations Near the Project Site Source: OCFA 2019. Station 79, which is located 1 mile from the Project is the first responding station to the site. In 2018, Station 79 had 1,995 incidents in its first response area with an on -scene response time of 7:42 minutes, 80 percent of the time. Station 37, which is the 2nd responding station at 1.8 miles from the Project site had 1,656 incidents in its first response area in 2018 with an on -scene response time of 8:12 minutes, 80 percent of the time. 5.12.2.3 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services. 5.12.2.4 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE METHODOLOGY The potential impacts related to fire protection services were evaluated based on the ability of existing fire department staffing, equipment, and facilities to meet the additional demand for fire protection and emergency medical services resulting from implementation of the Project. Impacts are considered significant if implementation of the proposed Project would result in inadequate staffing levels, response times, and/or increased demand for services that would require the construction or expansion of new or altered facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. For fire services, a significant impact could occur if the proposed Project generated the need for additional personnel or equipment that could not be City of Santa Ana 5.12-3 Draft EIR January 2020 Distance Fire Station Location from Site Equipment Staffing Station 79 1 320 East Warner 1 mile 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Engine 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Station 37 15011 Kensington Park Avenue 1.8 miles 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Engine 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Station 6 3180 Barranca Parkway 2.2 miles 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Engine 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Station 28 17862 Gillette Avenue 2.5 miles 1 Paramedic 2 Fire Captain, Engine, 2 Engineer, 1 Paramedic 4 Firefighters Truck Station 74 1427 S. Broadway Street 2.8 miles 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Engine 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Station 76 950 W. MacArthur Boulevard 3.5 miles 1 Paramedic 1 Fire Captain, Truck 1 Engineer, 2 Firefighters Source: OCFA 2019. Station 79, which is located 1 mile from the Project is the first responding station to the site. In 2018, Station 79 had 1,995 incidents in its first response area with an on -scene response time of 7:42 minutes, 80 percent of the time. Station 37, which is the 2nd responding station at 1.8 miles from the Project site had 1,656 incidents in its first response area in 2018 with an on -scene response time of 8:12 minutes, 80 percent of the time. 5.12.2.3 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services. 5.12.2.4 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE METHODOLOGY The potential impacts related to fire protection services were evaluated based on the ability of existing fire department staffing, equipment, and facilities to meet the additional demand for fire protection and emergency medical services resulting from implementation of the Project. Impacts are considered significant if implementation of the proposed Project would result in inadequate staffing levels, response times, and/or increased demand for services that would require the construction or expansion of new or altered facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. For fire services, a significant impact could occur if the proposed Project generated the need for additional personnel or equipment that could not be City of Santa Ana 5.12-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services accommodated within the existing stations and would require the construction of a new station or an expansion of an existing station. 5.12.2.5 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT PS -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE PHYSICAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROVISION OF NEW OR PHYSICALLY ALTERED FIRE SERVICE FACILITIES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN ACCEPTABLE SERVICE RATIOS AND RESPONSE TIMES OR OTHER PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES. Less than Significant. The proposed Project would remove the existing industrial buildings and develop 1,150 multi -family residences within four building structures and 80,000 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant uses. Construction and operation of the proposed Project would increase demands for fire protection and emergency medical services over the existing site condition. As described in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the proposed Project is anticipated to result in 2,081 residents and 320 employees at full occupancy. This residential and employee population is expected to create the typical range of service calls to OCFA that are largely related to medical emergencies, which consist of 65 percent of service calls; while fire calls consisted of 1.7 percent of OCFA service calls in Santa Ana during 2018. As described above in the Existing Setting Section, there are 6 existing fire stations within 3.5 miles of the Project site; and the existing average on -scene response time for emergency calls from the first responding unit (Station 79) that is 1 mile from the Project site is 7:42 minutes, 80 percent of the time, which slightly exceeds the Standard of Cover of 7:20, 80 percent of the time. The existing average response time for emergency calls from the second responding unit (Station 37) that is 1.8 miles from the Project site is 8:12 minutes, 80 percent of the time, which also exceeds the Standard of Cover. The calls for service from the additional population at the Project site could result in an increase in response times, further exceeding the Standard of Cover, if the calls coincide with other calls for service. However, fire protection equipment and staffing can be augmented by the City as needed (with assistance from revenue provided by the Project and the fire facilities fee required per Chapter 8-46 of the Municipal Code) to expand fire protection and emergency medical staffing and equipment provided from existing stations and better accommodate simultaneous service calls. Because the Project site is within 3.5 miles of 6 existing fire stations and the Project site is within a developed area that is currently served by these stations, the Project would not result in the requirement to construct a new fire station. In addition, Chapter 8-46 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code requires a fire facilities fee be paid prior to the issuance of building permit for construction of buildings exceeding 2 stories in height, such as the proposed Project. The purpose of the fire facilities fee is to improve fire stations in the City and provide revenue for equipment needed to fight fires in buildings over 2 stories in height. The proposed Project would be required to provide funding to assist in improvement of existing fire facilities and provision of needed equipment. Additionally, the proposed Project would remove the existing buildings, which were constructed pursuant to fire code standards of 1979 and 1981 and develop new building structures pursuant to the most recent California building and fire codes, which would improve the structural fire safety over the existing buildings. California's building/fire codes are published in their entirety every three years and were most recently updated in 2019. As all projects within the City, the proposed Project would be required per City permitting to comply with existing regulations, including the Santa Ana Fire Code and the OCFA Fire Prevention City of Santa Ana 5.12-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services Guideline B-09, Fire Master Plans for Commercial and Residential Development, which include regulations for water supply, built in fire protection systems, adequate emergency access, fire hydrant availability, and fire -safe building materials, such as the following: • Structures would have automatic fire sprinkler systems per National Fire Protection Association Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA 13) as required by the California Building and Fire Codes • A fire alarm system would be installed per the requirements of the California Fire Code • Access to and around structures would meet OCFA and California Fire Code requirements • A water supply system to supply fire hydrants and fire hydrant spacing would meet OCFA and California Fire Code requirements • Turning radius and access in and around the Project site and buildings would be designed to accommodate large fire department vehicles and their weight per OCFA Fire Prevention Guideline B-09 • All electrically operated gates shall install emergency opening devices as approved by the OCFA • High rise provisions would be required for buildings over 75 feet high and the parking structure • The amenity decks are an Assembly Occupancy and proper egress provisions are required • Occupancy permits are required prior to occupancy of any part of the Project Overall, with the 6 existing fire stations within 3.5 miles of the Project site, the area has adequate nearby fire facilities to serve the proposed Project in addition to the existing service needs of the area; and construction of a new or expanded fire station would not be required as a result of the proposed Project. Thus, the Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of, or the need for, new or physically altered fire protection facilities. Also, existing fire protection facilities and staffing could be augmented as needed (with assistance from revenue provided by the Project and the fire facilities fee required prior to the issuance of building permits per Chapter 8-46 of the Municipal Code) to expand fire protection and emergency medical staffing and equipment provided from existing stations. Therefore, impacts related to fire protection services would be less than significant. 5.12.2.6 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic context for cumulative fire protection and emergency services is the OCFA service area within the City of Santa Ana because the City owns and maintains the 10 existing fire stations within the City. Staffing of the fire stations is done through contracting with OCFA. Thus, augmenting the existing fire station facilities, equipment, and staffing is under the jurisdiction of the City. As shown in Table 5-1 and Figure 5-1 there five proposed projects within Santa Ana in the Project vicinity that would combine to generate additional demands for OCFA services near the site. Three of the five other projects are similar multi -family housing developments; one is a hotel development, and the other is an industrial project. Like the proposed Project, these related projects involve redevelopment of existing lands and the projects would be reviewed by City and OCFA staff prior to permit approval to ensure that the projects implement fire protection design features per California building and fire code regulations that would reduce potential fire hazards. Cumulative increased demands for services would also be offset by the City of Santa Ana fire facilities fee that is required for each city development project. City of Santa Ana 5.12-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services Because 6 of the City's 10 existing fire stations are located within 3.5 miles of the Project site, and related projects would be subject to the same impact fees that provide funding for additional equipment and staffing, and fire safe construction requirements, impacts related to fire services from the proposed Project would not combine with other related projects to result in a cumulative impact related to the need for new or physically altered fire service facilities. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with fire services would be less than cumulatively considerable. 5.12.2.7 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS OR POLICIES The following standard regulation would reduce potential impacts related to fire protection services: • OCFA Fire Prevention Guideline B-09, Fire Master Plans for Commercial and Residential Development • Santa Ana Municipal Code Chapter 14; Fire Code • Santa Ana Municipal Code Chapter 8-46; Fire Facilities Fee 5.12.2.8 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impact PS -1 would be less than significant 5.12.2.9 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.12.2.10 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to fire protection services would occur. 5.12.3 POLICE SERVICES 5.12.3.1 POLICE SERVICES REGULATORY SETTING City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The existing Public Safety Element of the Santa Ana General Plan includes the following public safety objectives and policies are related to police services and the proposed Project. Goal 1: Preserve a safe and secure environment for all Santa Ana residents. Policies: • Maintain or increase the level of local law enforcement activity. • Assure minimum feasible response time to police calls in all areas of the City. • Increase the effectiveness of law enforcement activities through expansion of crime prevention measures and the active involvement of the public in local law enforcement programs. 5.12.3.2 POLICE SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Santa Ana Police Department provides police services throughout the City, including the Project area. The Police Department headquarters is located west of City Hall (60 Civic Center Plaza), which is City of Santa Ana 5.12-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services approximately 4.7 miles northwest of the Project site. The Police Department also has a Southeast Substation located at 1780 East McFadden Avenue, which is approximately 2.2 miles from the Project site; and a Westend Substation located at 3750 West McFadden Avenue, which is 6.4 miles from the Project site. The Police Department has divided the City into two policing divisions; East and West. These are further divided into four districts overseen by two District Commanders. The Project site is located within the Southeast District, which consists of the City of Santa Ana lands that are south of First Street and east of Flower Street. In 2018, the Santa Ana Police Department had 565 personnel, which included 316 sworn and 249 non - sworn positions. Based on the California Department of Finance estimate that 339,192 residents lived within the City in 2018, the City's sworn officer to population ratio is 1.07 officers per 1,000 population. In 2018, officers responded to 125,681 calls for service and initiated 48,365 policing activities, which totals 174,046 policing activities. Within 2018, the Police Department had the following responses times per service call priority: • Priority One — 8 minutes 10 seconds • Priority Two — 11 minutes 21 seconds • Priority Three — 31 minutes 46 seconds • Priority Four — 35 minutes 56 seconds • Priority Five — 47 minutes 39 seconds 5.12.3.3 POLICE SERVICES THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police department facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police services. 5.12.3.4 POLICE SERVICES METHODOLOGY The potential impacts related to police services were evaluated based on the ability of existing and planned police department staffing, equipment, and facilities to meet the additional demand for police services resulting from implementation of the Project. Impacts are considered significant if implementation of the proposed Project would result in inadequate staffing levels, response times, and/or increased demand for services that would require the construction or expansion of new or altered facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. For police services, a significant impact could occur if the proposed Project generated the need for additional personnel or equipment that could not be accommodated within the existing station and substations and would require the construction of a new station or an expansion of an existing station. 5.12.3.5 POLICE SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT PS -2 THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE PHYSICAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROVISION OF NEW OR PHYSICALLY ALTERED POLICE SERVICE FACILITIES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN ACCEPTABLE SERVICE RATIOS AND RESPONSE TIMES OR OTHER PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR POLCEERVICES. Less than Significant. The proposed Project would result in an onsite population that would create the need for new police services. During the construction and operation of the Project, the need for police services is expected to grow due to the potential for additional crime and accidents. Crime and safety issues during City of Santa Ana 5.12-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services Project construction may include: theft of building materials and construction equipment, malicious mischief, graffiti, and vandalism. During operation, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate a typical range of police service calls, such as vehicle burglaries, residential thefts, commercial shoplifting, and disturbances. The proposed Project addresses typical residential security concerns by providing low -intensity security lighting, security cameras, electronic access to buildings, and 24-hour security personnel. Pursuant to the City's existing permitting process, the Police Department would review and approve the final site plans to ensure that the City's Crime Prevention through Environmental Design measures are incorporated appropriately to provide a safe environment. The proposed Project would result in an incremental increase in demands on law enforcement services but would not be significant when compared to the current demand levels. As described previously, the residential population of the Project site at full occupancy would be approximately 2,081 residents and based on the Police Department's 2018 staffing of 1.07 officers per thousand population, the proposed Project would require two additional officers, which could be located at the Southeast Substation that is 2.2 miles from the proposed Project and within response distance. Typical police operations deploy coverage to be able to respond to calls from services throughout the area. With these additional personnel, law enforcement personnel are anticipated to be able to respond in a timely manner to emergency calls in the Project area. Providing adequate police personnel is part of the City's annual budgetary process, and it is always the City's priority to provide adequate police officers. The addition of two additional officers on patrol would not require the construction or expansion of the City's existing policing facilities. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the need for, new or physically altered police protection facilities. Thus, substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or expanded facilities would not occur. Thus, impacts are less than significant. 5.12.3.6 POLICE SERVICES CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic context for cumulative police services is the area served by the City of Santa Ana Police Department. As described above, the Project would result in an incremental increase in demands on law enforcement services and based on the Police Department's 2018 staffing of 1.07 officers per thousand population, the proposed Project would require a minimum of two additional officers. Table 5-1 lists 9 projects within the Police Department's Southeast District (shown in Figure 5-1) and would be served by the same Police Department patrol staffing. These projects include 3,652 multi -family residential units and one hotel. Based on the average persons per household estimated for the proposed Project, the 3,652 residential units would result in approximately 6,574 residents, which would require an additional 7 officers to maintain the City's existing officers to population ratio. The addition of two officers from the proposed Project and 7 officers from the other projects within the Police Department's Southeast District would not require the need for, new or physically altered police protection facilities. These new officers would be added to the Police Department staffing, and not working at the same time and would be in the field and on patrol. The expansion of police services are funded by business taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, and utility users' taxes that are generated by each development within the City. Additional Police Department personnel and associated equipment are provided through City's the annual budget review process. Due to the limited number of officers that would be needed to serve the cumulative projects, and because the Project would generate fees for future needed Police Department personnel and equipment, the law enforcement service related impacts from the proposed Project would not combine with other related projects to result in a cumulatively considerable impact. The proposed Project in addition to the related projects would not result City of Santa Ana 5.12-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services in a need to expand or provide new police facilities, which could result in a significant environmental effect. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with police services would be less than significant. 5.12.3.7 POLICE SERVICES EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS OR POLICIES There are no applicable regulations related to police services that would reduce potential impacts. 5.12.3.8 POLICE SERVICES LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impact PS -2 would be less than significant. 5.12.3.9 POLICE SERVICES MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.12.3.10 POLICE SERVICES LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to police services would occur. 5.12.4 SCHOOL SERVICES 5.12.4.1 SCHOOL SERVICES REGULATORY SETTING California State Assembly Bill 2926: School Facilities Act of 1986 In 1986, AB 2926 was enacted to authorize the levy of statutory fees on new residential and commercial/industrial development in order to pay for school facilities. AB 2926 was expanded and revised in 1987 through the passage of AB 1600, which added Sections 66000 et seq. to the Government Code. Under this statute, payment of statutory fees by developers serves as CEQA mitigation to satisfy the impact of development on school facilities. California Senate Bill 50 The passage of SB 50 in 1998 defined the needs analysis process that is codified in Government Code Sections 65995.5 through 65998. Under the provisions of SB 50, school districts may collect fees to offset the costs associated with increasing school capacity as a result of development. Level I fees are assessed based upon the proposed square footage of residential, commercial/industrial, and/or parking structure uses. Level II fees require the developer to provide one-half of the costs of accommodating students in new schools, and the state provides the other half. Level III fees require the developer to pay the full cost of accommodating the students in new schools and are implemented at the time the funds available from Proposition 1 A (approved by the voters in 1998) are expended. School districts must demonstrate to the state their long-term facilities needs and costs based on long-term population growth in order to qualify for this source of funding. 5.12.4.2 SCHOOL SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Project site is located within the Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) boundary, which serves a 24 square mile area and has a total of 57 schools, including: thirty-six elementary schools, nine intermediate schools, and six high schools, three educational options secondary schools, two early college high schools, and one special needs development center (SAUSD 2019). City of Santa Ana 5.12-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services Santa Ana Unified School District's school facilities has an enrollment of 51,482 students in the 2018/2019 school year (CDE 2019). The Project site is in the attendance areas of James Monroe Elementary School (417 E. Central Ave), which is approximately 1.8 miles from the Project site; McFadden Intermediate (2701 S. Raitt Street), which is approximately 3.8 miles from the Project site; and Century High School (1401 S. Grand Avenue), which is approximately 1.8 miles from the Project site (SAUSD 2019). Table 5.12-2 shows the total capacity, the 2018-2019 school year enrollments, and the remaining capacity of the schools that would serve students residing on the Project site. As shown on Table 5.12-2, each of the schools have remaining capacity to serve between 275 and 986 additional students. Table 5.12-2: Existing School Capacity of Schools Serving the Project Site School Total Capacity 2018-19 Enrollment Remaining Capacity James Monroe Elementary 575 300 275 McFadden Intermediate 1,512 1,184 328 Century High 2,646 1,660 986 Total 4,733 3,144 1,589 Sources: cde.ca.gov and SAUSD Facilities Master Plan 5.12.4.3 SCHOOL SERVICES THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered school facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police services. 5.12.4.4 SCHOOL SERVICES METHODOLOGY The potential impacts related to school services were evaluated based on the ability of existing and planned schools to accommodate the student population that would be generated by the proposed Project. Specifically, impacts on schools are determined by analyzing the estimated increase in student population as a result of Project build out and comparing the increase to the capacity of schools that would serve the Project site to determine whether new or altered facilities would be required, the construction of which could result in adverse environmental effects. 5.12.4.5 SCHOOL SERVICE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT PS -3 THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE PHYSICAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROVISION OF NEW OR PHYSICALLY ALTERED SCHOOL FACILITIES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. Less than Significant. The proposed Project would develop 1,150 residential units, which would provide housing for families that have school children. For planning purposes, student generation by number of dwelling units proposed by the Project area were determined using the estimates from the Heritage Mixed Use Project Draft EIR, which was prepared in 2015 and determined using student generation rates from the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample data for students per household by rental unit type (rented single family homes, multi -family rental units and other rental units), which determined that comparable rental projects in Tustin, Irvine, Costa Mesa and Santa Ana have a student per household ratio of 0.29 for occupied multi -family rental units. City of Santa Ana 5.12-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services Based on a student per household ratio of 0.29, which is market area average, the proposed Project would result in 334 students at full occupancy, which is approximately 16 percent of the total 2,081 residents at full occupancy. As shown in 5.12-2, the remaining school capacity in the school facilities that would serve the Project have a total remaining capacity for 1,589, which consists of 275 spaces in James Monroe Elementary School, 328 spaces in McFadden Intermediate School, and 986 spaces in Century High School. As the school children on site would range from kindergarten through 12th grade, with full occupancy of the proposed Project, the schools serving the Project site would be able to accommodate the student from the site and continue to have capacity to serve additional students. In addition, as described within the Regulatory Setting, the need for additional school facilities is addressed through compliance with school impact fee assessment. SB 50 (Chapter 407 of Statutes of 1998) sets forth a state school facilities construction program that includes restrictions on a local jurisdiction's ability to condition a project on mitigation of a project's impacts on school facilities in excess of fees set forth in the Government Code. These fees are collected by school districts at the time of issuance of building permits for commercial, industrial, and residential projects. The existing Santa Ana Unified School District development impact fee is $3.79 per square foot for all new residential development, and $0.61 per square foot for new commercial development. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65995 applicants shall pay developer fees to the appropriate school districts at the time building permits are issued; and payment of the adopted fees provides full and complete mitigation of school impacts. As a result, impacts related to school facilities would be less than significant with the Government Code required fee payments. 5.12.4.6 SCHOOL SERVICES CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic context for cumulative impacts to schools is the Santa Ana Unified School District boundaries. The Project and other development within the Santa Ana Unified School District could generate additional students resulting in the need to expand or construct new schools. As described above, the Project would generate approximately 334 additional students that would be accommodated by the existing schools with additional capacity available for cumulative projects. The attendance boundaries of Monroe Elementary, McFadden Intermediate, Century High School include portions of the City of Santa Ana and Irvine. Both cities are currently anticipating several multi -family residential development projects that are anticipated to generate additional students within the attendance boundaries of these schools. Thus, the proposed Project in combination with related projects would result in the exceedance of capacity at one or more of these facilities. Some of the existing and/or future students could transfer to other schools within the school district that have some capacity; however, one or more school facilities within the Santa Ana Unified School District are likely to be over capacity with implementation of the proposed Project in combination with related projects. However, as described above, the state provided authority for school districts to assess impact fees for both residential and non-residential development projects. Fees collected in accordance with Government Code Section 65995(b) allow the Santa Ana Unified School District to plan and construct for future growth. Furthermore, the payment of those fees constitutes full mitigation for the impacts generated by new development, per Government Code Section 65995, which would reduce potential impacts related to the projects cumulative school service impacts to a less than significant level. 5.12.4.7 SCHOOL SERVICES EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS OR POLICIES • Government Code Section 65995(b) City of Santa Ana 5.1 2-1 1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.12 Public Services 5.12.4.8 SCHOOL SERVICES LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impact PS -3 would be less than significant 5.12.4.9 SCHOOL SERVICES MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.12.4.10 SCHOOL SERVICES LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to school services would occur. REFERENCES California Department of Education Data Quest (CDE 2019): Accessed: https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ Orange County Fire Authority 2018 Statistical Annual Report. Accessed: https://www.ocfa.org/Uploads/Transparency/OCFA%2OAnnual%2OReport%202018.pdf Orange County Fire Authority Operations Division 6 Information. Accessed: https://www.ocfa.org/AboutUs/Departments/OperationsDirectory/Division6.aspx Orange County Fire Authority Website: http://www.ocfa.org/ Orange County Fire Authority Email Communication. Tamera Rivers Management Analyst, October 1, 2019 (OCFA 2019). Santa Ana Police Department. Accessed: http://www.ci.santa-ana.ca.us/pd/ Santa Ana Police Department 2016 Annual Report. Accessed: http://www.ci.santa- ana.ca.us/pd/documents/2016AnnualReport-final.pdf Santa Ana Unified School District Master Plan. Accessed: https://www.sausd.us/cros/Iib/CA01000471 /Centricity/Domain/47/18- 0710%20SAUSD_Master%20PIan_FINAL%20-%20REDUCED.pdf Santa Ana Unified School District School Site Locator. Accessed: http://apps.schoolsitelocator.com/?districtcode=8231 1 City of Santa Ana 5.12-12 Draft EIR January 2020 5.13 Parks and Recreation 5.13.1 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, this section of the EIR analyzes whether the Project would (1) increase the use of existing parks and recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration or degradation of the facilities would occur or be accelerated or that new or expanded facilities would be required; (2) result in substantial adverse construction -related effects associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks and recreational facilities, whether on site or off-site; and/or (3) adversely affect existing recreational facilities. New housing can result in substantial population growth and the need for additional park and recreation facilities. Because CEQA focuses on physical environmental effects, this section analyzes whether any physical changes resulting from an increase in demands for park and recreation facilities from the proposed Project could result in significant adverse environmental effects. Thus, an increase in use of parks would not, by itself, be considered a physical change in the environment. However, physical changes in the environment resulting from the construction of new facilities or an expansion of existing facilities to accommodate the increased staff or equipment needs related to substantial physical deterioration could constitute a significant impact. The proposed Project has also been evaluated to determine its consistency with the City's zoning code provisions related to the provision of park and recreation facilities. 5.13.1 REGULATORY SETTING Mitigation Fee Act The California Mitigation Fee Act, Government Code Sections 66000, et seq., allows cities to establish fees to be imposed upon development projects for the purpose of mitigating the impact that the development projects have upon the city's ability to provide specified public facilities. In order to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act, the city must follow four primary requirements: (1) Make certain determinations regarding the purpose and use of a fee and establish a nexus or connection between a development project or class of project and the public improvement being financed with the fee; (2) Segregate fee revenue from the General Fund in order to avoid commingling of capital facilities fees and general funds; (3) For fees that have been in the possession of the city for five years or more and for which the dollars have not been spent or committed to a project the city must make findings each fiscal year describing the continuing need for the money; and (4) Refund any fees with interest for developer deposits for which the findings noted above cannot be made. As described below, the City of Santa Ana has adopted a park land dedication or in -lieu fee that is included in the Municipal Code Chapter 35. City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 35-108. Santa Ana Municipal Code, Section 35-108 requires that residential development fees be paid for the acquisition, construction, and renovation of park and recreation facilities based on a standard of 2 acres of public park and/or recreational space per 1,000 residents. The fees collected shall be placed in a special fund to be known as the "Park Acquisition and Development Fund." Moneys in such fund shall be expended for the acquisition, construction, and renovation of park and recreation facilities. City of Santa Ana 5.13-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.13 Parks and Recreation Section 35-110. Santa Ana Municipal Code, Section 35-108 requires that any person adding net residential units or converting apartments to condominiums in the City of Santa Ana shall pay to the city fees in such amounts as shall be set by resolution of the city council. The code section states that the purpose of preserving an appropriate balance between the demand by residents for use of park and recreational facilities and the distinctions in fees with respect to types of residential units are to reflect the differences in the demand for use of public park and recreation facilities. Section 35-111. Santa Ana Municipal Code, Section 35-108 requires that park and recreation related fees for addition of residential units be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for any construction which adds net residential units. No building permit shall be issued until such fees are paid. City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The existing Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element of the Santa Ana General Plan includes the following park and recreation objectives and policies that are related to the proposed Project: Goal 1: Provide sufficient open space to meet the recreational and aesthetic needs of the community. Objective 1.3: Encourage private development of visually accessible open space. Goal 2: Ensure ready public access and use of open space facilities. Objective 2.2: Encourage positive linkages between public and private open space. Policies: Provide quality open space in quantities adequate for the type and intensity of surrounding development. • Treat open space development and facilities upgrading as priority investment objectives. • Provide incentives for private enterprise to supplement public open space. 5.13.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element of the Santa Ana General Plan states that the City has approximately 400 acres of public parks and recreational space. Based on the 2019 population estimate of 337,716 residents, the City has approximately 1.2 acres of public park and/or recreational space per every 1,000 residents. The closest park and recreation facilities (within 3 miles of the Project site) in the City of Santa Ana that would be most utilized by the residents of the Project are listed in Table 5.13-1. As shown, the City has 1 1 existing parks that provide 81.88 acres of parkland within 3 miles of the Project site. Table 5.13-1: Santa Ana Park and Recreation Facilities Within Three Miles of the Project Site Park and Address Amenities Acreage Miles from Travel Time from Project Site Project Site* Delhi Park Ball Diamond, Basketball Courts, 10.40 acres 1.4 miles Driving: 5 minutes 2314 S. Halladay Multi-purpose Field, Parking, Walking: 28 minutes Playground, Restrooms, Handball courts Maple & Occidental Exercise Equipment 0.43 acre 2.2 miles Driving: 8 minutes Maple and Walking: 42 minutes Occidental St. Memorial Park Ball Diamond, Basketball Courts, 17.0 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 8 minutes 2102 S. Flower Handball courts. Multi-purpose Walking: 48 minutes City of Santa Ana 5.13-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.13 Parks and Recreation Park and Address Amenities Acreage Miles from Travel Time from Veterans Sports Park Basketball, Football, Racquetball, 31.5 acres Project Site Project Site* Lansdowne Road and Field, Parking, Playground, Picnic Walking: 15 minutes Valencia Avenue Tables, Restrooms, Swimming Pool, Exercise Equipment Madison Park Ball Diamonds, Basketball Courts, 6.06 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 9 minutes 1528 S Standard Concession Stand, Multipurpose 8.0 acres 1.6 miles Walking: 49 minutes Avenue Field, Multi-purpose Court, Walking: 32 minutes Avenue Playground, Parking, Picnic Tables, Restrooms Sandpointe Park Restrooms, Basketball Courts, 6.63 acres 2.8 miles Driving: 9 minutes 3700 S. Birch Street Hiking & Exercise Trail, Multi- Walking: 57 minutes purpose Field, Playground, Picnic Tables, Tennis Courts, Volleyball Segerstrom Triangle Open Space 1.22 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 9 minutes 1000 W. Hemlock Walking: 59 minutes Wy. Pacific Electric Playground, Picnic Shelter/Tables, 1.39 acres 2.9 miles Driving: 10 minutes Restrooms, Exercise Equipment, Walking: 56 minutes Community Garden Lillie King Park Multi-purpose Field, Parking, 9.60 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 500 West Alton Playground, Picnic Tables Walking: 57 minutes Avenue Bomo Koral Park Ball Diamonds, Multi-purpose 10.40 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 900 W MacArthur Field, Parking, Walking: 62 minutes Boulevard Picnic tables Prentice Park Playgrounds, picnic area 18.75 acre 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 1 801 E. Chestnut Walking: 63 minutes Ave. Total Acreage of Parkland 81.88 acres Source: City of Santa Ana Parks, Recreation and Community Services Website, 2019. * Per Google Earth. In addition, there are 9 existing City of Tustin park facilities that provide 92.9 acres of parkland and 3 existing City of Irvine park facilities within 3 miles of the Project site that provide 63.6 acres of park and recreation space, as listed in Table 5.13-2. Thus, the total existing parkland within 3 miles of the Project site is 238.38 acres. Table 5.13-2: Tustin and Irvine Park and Recreation Facilities Within Three Miles of the Project Site Park and Address Amenities Acreage Miles from Travel Time from Project Site Project Site* City of Tustin Parks Tustin Legacy Park Red Hill Avenue and Barranca Parkway Passive Park, with Trails, and Open Space Area 26 acres 0.7 mile Driving: 3 minutes Walking: 13 minutes Veterans Sports Park Basketball, Football, Racquetball, 31.5 acres 0.9 mile Driving: 3 minutes Lansdowne Road and Soccer Walking: 15 minutes Valencia Avenue Softball, Tennis, Volleyball, Open Space, Veterans Memorial, Playground Centennial Park Basketball Court, BBQs, Large Turf 8.0 acres 1.6 miles Driving: 5 minutes 14722 Devonshire Area, Walking: 32 minutes Avenue Picnic Tables, Playground, Restrooms, Sand Volleyball Court City of Santa Ana 5.13-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.13 Parks and Recreation Park and Address Amenities Acreage Miles from Travel Time from Project Site Project Site* Citv of Tustin Parks Victory Park Large Turf Area, Pavilion, Picnic 4.7 acres 1.8 miles Driving: 6 minutes 3300 Park Avenue Shelters Walking: 36 minutes Playground, Reflection Area, Sweet Shade Park Restrooms 7.9 acres 2.7 miles Driving: 8 minutes Frontier Park Disc Golf Course, Fitness Equipment, 4.5 acres 2.0 miles Driving: 7 minutes 1400 Mitchell Avenue Picnic Shelters and Tables, Walking: 40 minutes Bill Barber Park Playground, Restrooms, Water 48 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 4 Civic Center Plaza Feature Play Area Walking: 50 minutes Magnolia Tree Park Basketball Court, Picnic Shelters and 4.2 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 7 minutes 2274 Fig Tree Drive Tables, Playground, Restrooms, Walking: 46 minutes Tennis Court Pine Tree Park Large Turf Area, Picnic Shelters, 4.2 acres 2.7 miles Driving: 10 minutes 1402 Bryan Street Picnic Tables, Playground, Walking: 56 minutes Restrooms, Sand Volleyball Court, Skate park, Volleyball Peppertree Park Baseball / Softball Diamond, BBQs, 5.5 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 230 W. 1 st Street Bocce Ball Court, Horseshoe Pit, Walking: 67 minutes Parking, Picnic Shelters and Tables, Playground, Restrooms, Water Feature Play Area Camino Real Park Basketball Court, Picnic Shelters and 4.3 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 13602 Parkcenter Lane 1 Tables, Playground, Restrooms Walking: 66 minutes Total of Tustin Parkland Within 3 Miles of the Project Site 92.9 acres Citv of Irvine Parks Plaza Park Playground, Soccer Fields, Baseball 7.7 acres 2.5 miles Driving: 7 minutes 610 Paseo Westpark Field, Walking: 51 minutes Group Picnic Area Sweet Shade Park Multi -Use Building, Playground, 7.9 acres 2.7 miles Driving: 8 minutes 15 Sweet Shade Basketball Courts, BBQs, Group Walking: 47 minutes Picnic Area Bill Barber Park Drinking Fountains, Playground, 48 acres 3.0 miles Driving: 10 minutes 4 Civic Center Plaza Amphitheater, Concession Stand, Walking: 50 minutes Soccer Fields, Tennis Courts, Baseball Courts, Trail Access, Batting Cages, BBQ, Croup Picnic Areas Total of Irvine Parkland Within 3 Miles of the Project Site 63.6 acres Source: City of Tustin Parks, Recreation and Community Services Website, 2019; City of Irvine Park Locator Map, 2019. * Per Google Earth. 5.13.3 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to result in: PR -1 Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives; City of Santa Ana 5.13-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.13 Parks and Recreation PR -2 Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or PR -3 Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. 5.13.4 METHODOLOGY The analysis below considers the increase in use of parks and recreation facilities that would be generated by the Project in relation to the ability of existing park and recreation facilities to accommodate the increased use. The analysis considers whether an increase in use would result in the substantial physical deterioration of existing recreational facilities, such as accelerated wear on sports facilities and fields, or in the need for new or expanded facilities. The analysis uses a parkland -to -population ratio to measure demand for recreational facilities that is based upon the City's municipal code requirements. A shortfall in meeting the requirements for provision of park or recreation facilities from the proposed Project would be presumed to increase use of existing parks and recreational facilities and cause deterioration of these existing facilities. The EIR thus evaluates the amount of recreational use areas that would be provided by the proposed Project and the extent of increased usage of existing parks and recreational facilities that might result in the substantial physical deterioration of existing recreational facilities. Anticipated increases to parks were also estimated based on the California State Parks Survey on Public Opinions and Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation in California (2014). In addition, the analysis of construction impacts associated with the development of proposed recreational facilities are considered as part of the overall Project. 5.13.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT PR -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE PHYSICAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROVISION OF NEW OR PHYSICALLY ALTERED PARK FACILITIES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. Less than Significant. The proposed Project would result in development of 1,150 multi -family apartments and would increase demands for park and recreational facilities. As described in Section 4.9, Population and Housing, the proposed Project is anticipated to result in 2,081 residents at full occupancy. However, as described in Section 3.0, Project Description, and shown in Figure 3-4, the proposed Project includes 174,555 square feet of exterior open space recreation area and approximately 8,008 square feet of interior amenities to total 183,363 square feet of recreational and open space onsite. These onsite amenities are anticipated to meet many of the park and recreation needs of Project residents. The new residential population is also anticipated to utilize existing off-site park and recreation facilities. As described listed in Table 5.13-1, there is currently 81.88 acres of Santa Ana parkland within 3 -miles of the Project site. These existing City of Santa Ana parks provide a variety of facilities that include sports fields, exercise equipment, picnic areas, and playgrounds. In addition, there are 92.9 acres of parkland within the City of Tustin and 63.6 acres of parkland within the City of Irvine Park facilities (listed in Table 5.13-2) that are also within 3 miles of the Project site and are likely (due to location) to be used by residents of the proposed Project. This equals approximately 245.38 acres of existing parkland within three miles of the site, which equates to 5,136.35 acres of parkland per Project resident at full occupancy. City of Santa Ana 5.13-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.13 Parks and Recreation Based on a standard of 2 acres of public park and/or recreational space per 1,000 residents (Municipal Code Section 35-108), the proposed Project would require 4.2 acres of parkland to serve the new residents. As described previously, the Project includes a total of 4.2 acres (183,363 square feet) of park and recreation area. Therefore, the Project would include the Municipal Code required park and/or recreational space. Based on the existing amount of 245.38 acres of existing park and recreation facilities within 3 miles of the Project site, the recreation facilities that would be provided as part of the Project, and the number of residents at full capacity of the proposed Project, the Project is not anticipated to require the provision of new or physically altered park facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios. In addition, Municipal Code Sections 35-108, 35-110, and 35-11 1 require that residential development fees be paid for the acquisition, construction, and renovation of park and recreation facilities prior to the issuance of a building permit for any construction which adds net residential units. Thus, the proposed Project would be required to pay park and recreation fees to "preserve an appropriate balance between the demand by residents for use of park and recreational facilities", as stated in Municipal Code Section 35- 110. Therefore, impacts related to park and recreation service facilities would be less than significant. In addition, use of sports fields by approximately 14 percent of adults and 33.1 percent of those under 18 years old that utilize park and recreation facilities is largely used by sports leagues that pay fees to the City for use of the facilities, which is used to fund maintenance and improvements related to use of the facilities. Overall, Project impacts related to the need to provide new or altered park and recreation facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios would be less than significant. IMPACT PR -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN INCREASE OF THE USE OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND REGIONAL PARKS OR OTHER RECREATIONAL FACILITIES SUCH THAT SUBSTANTIAL PHYSICAL DETERIORATION OF THE FACILITY WOULD OCCUR OR BE ACCELERATED. Less than Significant. As described previously in the discussion for Impact PR -1, the Project would provide onsite open space and recreation facilities for residents that is anticipated to reduce the needs for off-site recreation facilities. In addition, the Project site is located within 3 miles of 245.38 acres of parkland; 81.88 acres of which are within Santa Ana. Anticipated visitation increases to these parks were estimated based on the California State Parks Survey on Public Opinions and Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation in California (2014) that established the average distance and travel time people in the Southern California region (which includes the Project site) take to reach the outdoor recreation they most often visit. The travel time is provided for both walking and driving in Table 5.13-3. Table 5.13-3: Average Travel Time in Southern California to Outdoor Recreation Areas Mode <5 min 6-10 min 11-12 min 21-60 min >60 min Driving 20.1% 17.2% 20.8% 31.3% 10.6% Walking 27.5% 20.3% 31.5% 18.9% 1.8% Source: California State Parks, 2014. As shown in Table 5.13-3, over 58 percent of people regularly drive within 12 minutes to reach typical outdoor recreation uses. Another 31.3 percent drive between 20 and 60 minutes. Also, 47.8 percent of people that walk to outdoor recreation typically take less than 10 minutes; and 79.3 percent walk 12 minutes City of Santa Ana 5.13-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.13 Parks and Recreation or less to outdoor recreation. All of the park and recreation facilities previously listed on Tables 5.13-1 and 5.13-2 are within the 1 2 -minute driving distance; however, they are beyond the 1 2 -minute walking distance. The California State Parks Survey on Public Opinions and Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation in California (2014) describes that 16.7 percent of residents visit parks two or more times per week, 13.8 percent visit parks about once a week, 20.6 percent visit once or twice per month, 24.4 percent visit several times a year, and 15.1 percent visit once or twice a year. The facility users in southern California went average of 5.76 days per month and spent an average of approximately 30 minutes per visit. The adult park and recreation users generally engage in the following activities: walking on paved surfaces: 49.8%, playing: 27.9%, picnicking: 22.0%, sedentary activities: 17.6%, sports: 21.4%, running: 15.6%, and dog walking: 10.8 percent. The park and recreation users under 18 years old generally engage in the following activities: playing: 57.8%, sports 33.1 %, other 21.6%, walking on paved surfaces: 16.4%, picnicking: 14.3%, jogging: 14.5%. Based on the California State Parks information for the southern California Region, the anticipated number of Project residents at full occupancy (2,081 residents), the distance and type of recreational facilities near the Project site, it is anticipated that the Project would generate 348 additional park users two or more times per week, 287 additional park users about once per week, 429 additional park users once or twice per month, 508 additional park users several times a year, and 314 additional park users once or twice a year that would utilize the 245.38 acres of parks within 3 miles of the Project site. Based on the existing amount of park and recreation facilities in the vicinity of the Project site, the recreation facilities that would be provided as part of the Project, and the number of residents all full capacity of the proposed Project, the Project is not anticipated to increase the use of existing parks and recreation facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. In addition, as listed Park and Recreation Regulatory Setting Section, the Santa Ana Municipal Code, Section 35-108 requires that residential development fees be paid for the acquisition, construction, and renovation of park and recreation facilities. Also, Sections 35-108 and 35-111 requires that any person adding residential units shall pay the park and recreation fees prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Municipal Code describes that park and recreation fees are for the purpose of preserving an appropriate balance between the demand by residents for use of park and recreational facilities and the availability of such park and recreational facilities. Thus, by payment of the required park fees, the Project would provide funding to offset any increased usage at other park and recreation facilities within Santa Ana. Overall, the proposed Project would not result in substantial physical deterioration of park and recreation facilities, and impacts would be less than significant. IMPACT PR -3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT INCLUDE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES OR REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION OR EXPANSION OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES WHICH MIGHT HAVE AN ADVERSE PHYSICAL EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Less than Significant. As described above, the Project includes recreational facilities that include 183,363 square feet of open space and recreation facilities. The impacts of development of the recreational amenities and access options are considered part of the impacts of the proposed Project as a whole and are analyzed throughout the various sections of this EIR. For example, activities such as excavation, grading, and construction as required for the park and recreational components of this Project are analyzed in the Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, and Transportation Sections. City of Santa Ana 5.13-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.13 Parks and Recreation In addition, while the Project would contribute park development fees pursuant to Municipal Code Sections 35-108, 35-110, and 35-111 to be used towards the future expansion or maintenance parks and recreational facilities, these fees are standard with every residential development, and the proposed Project would not require the construction or expansion of other recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. As a result, impacts would be less than significant. 5.13.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative area of recreation impacts for the proposed Project includes portions of the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine that are within three miles of the Project site. This area was identified as the cumulative area as the residents within this area are most likely to use the same parks and recreation facilities, due to the location of the facilities, pattern of roadway infrastructure, and pattern of urban development in the area. However, other residents of projects located on the periphery of this cumulative area would also use other park and recreation facilities located farther away. As described in the Existing Setting, there are numerous existing park and recreation facilities totaling 245.38 -acres within this cumulative area. As described above, based on a standard of 2 acres of public park and/or recreational space per 1,000 residents (Municipal Code Section 35-108), the proposed Project would require 4.2 acres of parkland to serve the new residents. The 183,363 square feet of park and recreation space provided by the Project equals the required 4.2 acres of area. Therefore, the Project would include the Municipal Code required park and/or recreational space. Although Project residents would also likely use of off-site park facilities, such as the other parks listed in Table 5.15-2, along with the residents of the cumulative projects listed on Table 5-1 and shown on Figure 5-1 (in Section 5.0), these projects would also be required to provide park and recreational facilities and/or pay in -lieu fees as required by each city, which are implemented to preserve an appropriate balance between the demand by residents for use of park and recreational facilities, and as a result reduce cumulative effects of each project. Thus, because the proposed Project would provide the open space and recreation facilities described that meet municipal code requirements and would provide payment of the required park fees, the Project's impact would not be cumulatively considerable, and cumulative impacts related to park and recreation facilities would be less than significant. 5.1 1.7 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES The following standard regulations would reduce potential impacts related to park and recreation services: • California Code Sections 66000 (Mitigation Fee Act) • Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 35-108 • Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 35-110 • Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 35-1 1 1 5.13.8 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impacts PR -1 through PR -3 would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.13-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.13 Parks and Recreation 5.13.9 MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.13.10 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to parks and recreation would occur. REFERENCES California State Parks, Survey on Public Opinions and Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation in California, January 2014 (California State Parks 2014). Accessed: https://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/795/files/201 2%20spoa.pdf City of Irvine Park Locator Map, 2019. Accessed: https://gis.cityofirvine.org/parks/ City of Santa Ana Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Website, 2019. Accessed: https://www.santa- ana.org/parks City of Tustin Parks, Recreation and Community Services Website, 2019. Accessed: https://www.tustinca.org/1 4 9/ Pa rks-Recreation City of Santa Ana 5.13-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.13 Parks and Recreation This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.13-10 Draft EIR January 2020 5.14 Transportation 5.14.1 INTRODUCTION This section describes the existing transportation and circulation conditions, criteria for the level of service, and impacts from implementation of the proposed Project. As necessary, mitigation measures for significant transportation impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed Project are also included. The proposed Project's impacts are analyzed in the context of existing (2019), Project opening (2022), and future (2040) conditions. This analysis is based on information contained in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA 2019), which is included as Appendix K. Traffic Analysis Terminology Level of Service (LOS): is a measure of the quality of operational conditions within a traffic stream and is generally expressed in terms of such measures as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience. Levels range from A to F, with LOS A representing excellent (free- flow) conditions and LOS F representing extreme congestion. Peak Hour: The a.m. peak hour is defined as the one hour of highest traffic volumes occurring between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. The p.m. peak hour is defined as the one hour of highest traffic volumes occurring between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. Volume/Capacity (V/C) Ratio: is one of the most used index to assess traffic status in cities, in which V is the total number of vehicles passing a point in one hour and C for the maximum number of cars that can pass a certain point at the reasonable traffic condition 5.14.2 REGULATORY SETTING Congestion Management Program In 1990, the California Legislature enacted the Congestion Management Program (CMP) to implement Proposition 11 1, a state-wide transportation funding proposal that required local governments to implement mitigation measures to offset the impacts from new development on the regional transportation system. The CMP addresses the impact of local growth on the regional transportation system; the goal is to examine the interactions among land use, transportation, and air quality and to make decisions at the regional and local level in consideration of these interactions. When LOS requirements are not maintained on portions of the CMP highway and roadway system, a deficiency plan is required that analyzes the cause of the deficiency and the implementation costs of various alternatives such as roadway modifications, programs, or actions to measurably improve performance. Highways must maintain at least LOS E, which is essentially one grade better than gridlock and is defined by a level of service where traffic flow fluctuates in terms of speed and flow rates, operating speeds average 35 miles per hour, and delays are significant. For arterial streets, LOS E occurs where long queues of vehicles are waiting upstream of an intersection and it may take several signal cycles for a vehicle to clear the intersection. A jurisdiction failing to comply with the CMP may have its allocation of the state gas tax withheld. Senate Bill 743 On September 27, 2013, Senate Bill (SB) 743 was signed into State law. The California legislature found that with the adoption of the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375), the state had signaled its commitment to encourage land use and transportation planning decisions and City of Santa Ana 5.14-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation investments that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and thereby contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as required by the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). SB 743 started a process that could fundamentally change transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance. These changes will include the elimination of auto delay, LOS, and similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as the basis for determining significant impacts in many parts of California (if not statewide). As part of the new CEQA Guidelines, the new criteria "shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses" (Public Resources Code Section 21099[b][1 ]). On January 20, 2016, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research released revisions to its proposed CEQA guidelines for the implementation of SB 743. Final review and rulemaking for the new guidelines are ongoing. Once the guidelines are prepared and certified, "automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment" (Public Resources Code Section 21099[b][2]). Since the Governor's Office of Planning and Research has not yet amended the CEQA Guidelines to implement this change, automobile delay is still considered a significant impact, and the City of Santa Ana continues to use the established LOS criteria. SCAG 2016 - 2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy On April 7, 2016 SCAG's Regional Council adopted the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS) and the goals and policies relevant to the proposed project are listed below: Goals 1. Align the plan investments and policies with improving regional economic development and competitiveness. 2. Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region. 3. Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region. 4. Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system. 5. Maximize the productivity of our transportation system. 6. Protect the environment and health of our residents by improving air quality and encouraging active transportation (e.g., bicycling and walking). 7. Actively encourage and create incentives for energy efficiency, where possible. 8. Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and active transportation. Orange County Congestion Management Plan The Orange County CMP was established in 1991 to reduce traffic congestion and to provide a mechanism for coordinating land use and development decisions. Compliance with the CMP requirements ensures a city's eligibility to compete for the State gas tax funds for local transportation projects. The Orange County CMP is implemented by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). As part of the CMP, a CMP Highway Network was identified for Orange County that consists of Orange County's State highway system, and highway and arterials from OCTA's Smart Street network. OCTA has implemented an Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) monitoring method, developed with technical staff members from local and State agencies, for measuring the LOS at CMP Highway System (CMPHS) intersections. The CMP requires analysis of off-site intersections potentially affected by the project, which the CMP defines as intersections at which the project is forecast to add 51 or more peak hour trips. The CMP also requires the analysis of freeway segments and ramp merge/diverge areas where a project is forecast to add more than 100 two-way trips. City of Santa Ana 5.14-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation City of Santa Ana General Plan Circulation Element The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The Circulation Element of the Santa Ana General Plan serves as the City's primary guide for transportation planning. The following goals and policies in the existing General Plan Circulation Element are relevant to the proposed Project: Goal 1: Provide and maintain a comprehensive circulation system that facilitates the efficient movement of people and goods throughout the City and enhances its economic viability. Policy 1.4: Maintain at least a level of service "D" on arterial street intersections, except in major development areas. Policy 1.11: Minimize travel impediments on bicycle and pedestrian paths. Goal 2: Provide design and construction that facilitates safe utilization of the City's transportation systems. Policy 2.1: Limit the number of driveways on arterial streets to reduce vehicular conflict and facilitate traffic flow. Goal 3: Provide a full spectrum of travel alternatives for the community's residents, employees, and visitors. Policy 3.4: Encourage the development of multi -modal transit opportunities within major development areas. Policy 3.5: Enhance sidewalks and pedestrian systems to promote their use as a means of travel. Goal 4: Fully coordinate transportation and land use planning activities. Policy 4.2: Assess land use and transportation project impacts through the development review process. Policy 4.3: Assess all development projects in order to identify their traffic impacts and require that they pay their fair -share of the system improvements necessary to accommodate traffic generated by the project. Goal 5: Create attractive circulation corridors to enhance the City's image. Policy 6.1: Implement street design features that discourage through traffic on residential streets. 5.14.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Traffic Study Area and Existing Levels of Service Access to the Project site is provided by Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. Red Hill Avenue is a 7 -lane divided north -south arterial roadway adjacent to the Project site that has a speed limit of 50 mph, and 45 mph north of Valencia Avenue. Red Hill Avenue connects to Interstate 405 (1-405) to the south and Interstate 5 (1-5) to the north. Warner Avenue is a 6 -lane divided east -west arterial roadway that has a speed limit of 45 mph west of Red Hill Avenue and 50 mph east of Red Hill Avenue. The traffic study area for the proposed Project, as determined through coordination with the Cities of Santa Ana, Irvine, and Tustin includes 57 intersections, which are listed in Tables 5.14-1 and shown in Figure 5.14- 1. The existing traffic volumes for intersections based on peak hour intersection turn movement counts and daily counts collected in April and May 2019. Table 5.14-1 shows that all study area intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service. City of Santa Ana 5.14-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Table 5.14-1: Existing Intersection Levels of Service Draft EIR January 2020 Intersection City Signal Control AM Peak V/C or Delay LOS PM Peak V/C or Delay LOS 1. Grand Ave. Edinger Ave. Santa Ana Signal 0.710 C 0.843 D 2. Grand Ave. St. Andrew PI. Santa Ana Signal 0.349 A 0.506 A 3. Grand Ave. St. Gertrude PI. Santa Ana Signal 0.407 A 1 0.484 A 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. Santa Ana Signal 0.549 A 0.716 C 5. Grand Ave. SR 55 SB Off -Ramp Santa Ana Signal 0.486 A 0.509 A 6. SR 55 SB Ramps Dyer Rd. Santa Ana Signal 0.663 B 0.739 C 7. Grand Ave. Dyer Rd. Santa Ana Signal 0.585 A 0.622 B 8. SR 55 NB Ramps Dyer Rd. Santa Ana Signal 0.562 A 0.389 A 9. Wright St. Warner Ave. Santa Ana Signal 0.398 A 0.646 B 10. Pullman St. Warner Ave. Santa Ana Tustin Signal 0.335 A 0.434 A 11. Pullman St. Dyer Rd. Santa Ana Signal 0.467 A 0.702 C 12. SR 55 SB Ramps Edinger Ave. Santa Ana Signal 0.600 A 0.591 A 13. Newport Ave. Edinger Ave. Tustin Signal 0.645 B 0.357 A 14. Newport Ave./SR-55 NB Ramp -Del Amo Ave. Tustin Signal 1 0.461 A 0.613 B 15. Newport Ave. Valencia Ave. Tustin Signal 0.147 A 0.306 A 16. Red Hill Ave. EI Camino Real Tustin Signal 0.610 B 0.534 A 17. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 NB Ramps Tustin Signal 0.618 B 0.582 A 18. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 SB Ramps Tustin Signal 0.724 C 0.666 B 19. Red Hill Ave. Nisson Rd. Tustin Signal 0.561 A 0.606 B 20. Red Hill Ave. Mitchell Ave. Tustin Signal 0.529 A 0.509 A 21. Red Hill Ave. Walnut Ave. Tustin Signal 0.590 A 0.684 B 22. Red Hill Ave. Edinger Ave. Tustin Signal 0.500 A 0.760 C 23. Red Hill Ave. Valencia Ave. Tustin Signal 0.471 A 0.441 A 24. Red Hill Ave. Victory Rd. Tustin Signal 0.357 A 0.409 A 25. Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. Santa Ana Tustin Signal 0.500 A 0.567 A 26. Driveway 1 Warner Ave. Santa Ana Signal - - 27. Driveway 2/Warner Ave. Santa Ana TWSC 28. Red Hill Ave. Driveway 3 Santa Ana TWSC - - 29. Red Hill Ave. Carnegie Ave. Santa Ana Tustin Signal 1 0.334 A 0.382 A 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Santa Ana Tustin Irvine Signal 0.564 A 0.785 C 31. Red Hill Ave. Deere Ave. Santa Ana Irvine Signal 0.410 A 0.699 B 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. Santa Ana Irvine Signal 0.489 A 0.833 D 33. Red Hill Ave. McGaw Ave. Irvine Signal 1 0.462 A 0.719 C 34. Red Hill Ave. MacArthur Blvd. Irvine Signal 0.604 B 0.762 C 35. Halladay St. E Alton Ave. Santa Ana TWSC 10.5 B 9.9 A 36. Halladay St. W Alton Ave. Santa Ana TWSC 12.2 B 11.6 B 37. Daimler St. Alton Pkwy. Santa Ana Irvine AWSC 9.9 A 10.6 B 38. MacArthur Blvd. Sky Park East Irvine Signal 0.328 A 0.503 A 39. MacArthur Blvd. Main St. Irvine Signal 0.533 A 0.696 B 40. MacArthur Blvd./Interstate 405 NB Ramps Irvine Signal 0.759 C 0.696 B 41. MacArthur Blvd./Interstate 405 SB Ramps Irvine Signal 0.533 A 0.643 B City of Santa Ana 5.14-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Caltrans Analysis Intersection City Signal Control AM Peak V/C or Delay LOS PM Peak V/C or Delay LOS 42. Reserve Center Driveway/Warner Ave. Tustin Signal 0.122 A 0.183 A 43. Armstrong Ave. Warner Ave. Tustin Signal 0.153 A 0.196 A 44. Armstrong Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Tustin Irvine Signal 0.433 A 0.681 B 45. Legacy Rd. Warner Ave. Tustin Signal 0.103 A 0.188 A 46. Tustin Ranch Rd. Valencia Ave. Tustin Signal 0.465 A 0.493 A 47. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. N Tustin Signal 0.365 A 0.659 B 48. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. S Tustin Signal 0.386 A 0.543 A 49. Tustin Ranch Rd. Park Ave. Tustin Signal 0.515 A 0.663 B 50. Tustin Ranch Rd. Barranca Pkwy. Tustin Irvine Signal 0.711 C 0.819 D 51. Von Karman Ave. Alton Pkwy. Irvine Signal 0.676 B 0.819 D 52. Park Ave. Warner Ave. Tustin Irvine Signal 0.449 A 0.693 B 53. Millikan Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Tustin Irvine Signal 0.436 A 0.632 B 54. Jamboree Rd. Barranca Pkwy. Tustin Irvine Signal 0.760 C 0.904 E 55. Jamboree Rd. Alton Pkwy. Irvine Signal 0.721 C 0.806 D 56. Jamboree Rd. Main St. Irvine Signal 0.754 C 0.800 C 57. Corporate Park/Barranca Pkwv. Irvine Sianal 0.333 A 0.549 A Caltrans Analysis Source: Appendix K. TWSC = Two -Way Stop Controlled (evaluated using the HCM Methodology) AWSC = All -Way Stop Controlled (evaluated using the HCM Methodology) Volume to Capacity Ratio for Signalized Intersections using ICU methodology. Delay for signalized Caltrans intersections or unsignalized intersections. 2 Level of Service 3 Seconds of control delay Existing Transit Service The Project site is currently served by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Bus Routes 71 (Red Hill) and 72 (Warner), as well as Metrolink Stationlink Route 472 (Red Hill). Bus routes 71 and 72 provide service seven days a week. Route 472 provides service Monday thru Friday. Other Bus Routes servicing areas within the Project area are OCTA bus routes 55, 59, 70, 76, 86, Intracounty OC Express Route 213/A, Metrolink Stationlink Route 463, and the IShuttle 400A, 401 B, and 405F. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities There are several roadways in the Project vicinity that currently have bicycle lanes, which include: • Red Hill Avenue between Barranca Parkway and Reynolds Avenue, • Warner Avenue east of Red Hill Avenue, City of Santa Ana 5.14-5 Draft EIR January 2020 Intersection Signal Control AM Peak Delay LOS PM Peak Delay LOS 5. Grand Ave. SR 55 SB Off -Ramp Signal 11.8 B 14.1 B 6. SR 55 SB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 41.5 D 42.5 D 8. SR 55 NB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 21.8 C 15.2 B 12. SR 55 SB Ramps Edinger Ave. Signal 37.5 D 41.9 D 14. Newport Ave./SR-55 NB Ramp -Del Amo Ave. Signal 30.4 C 38.0 D 17. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 NB Ramps Signal 25.5 C 21.5 C 18. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 SB Ramps Signal 41.8 D 34.1 C 40. MacArthur Blvd./Interstate 405 NB Ramps Signal 33.9 C 20.5 C 41. MacArthur Blvd./Interstate 405 SB Ramps Signal 25.1 C 25.5 C Source: Appendix K. TWSC = Two -Way Stop Controlled (evaluated using the HCM Methodology) AWSC = All -Way Stop Controlled (evaluated using the HCM Methodology) Volume to Capacity Ratio for Signalized Intersections using ICU methodology. Delay for signalized Caltrans intersections or unsignalized intersections. 2 Level of Service 3 Seconds of control delay Existing Transit Service The Project site is currently served by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Bus Routes 71 (Red Hill) and 72 (Warner), as well as Metrolink Stationlink Route 472 (Red Hill). Bus routes 71 and 72 provide service seven days a week. Route 472 provides service Monday thru Friday. Other Bus Routes servicing areas within the Project area are OCTA bus routes 55, 59, 70, 76, 86, Intracounty OC Express Route 213/A, Metrolink Stationlink Route 463, and the IShuttle 400A, 401 B, and 405F. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities There are several roadways in the Project vicinity that currently have bicycle lanes, which include: • Red Hill Avenue between Barranca Parkway and Reynolds Avenue, • Warner Avenue east of Red Hill Avenue, City of Santa Ana 5.14-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation • Tustin Ranch Road, • Von Karman Avenue, • Jamboree Road between Barranca Parkway and Main Street, • Edinger Avenue between Red Hill Avenue and Newport Avenue, • South side of Barranca Parkway west of Jamboree Road, • Alton Parkway between Red Hill Avenue and Jamboree Road, and • Main Street. Additionally, sidewalks currently exist adjacent to the site along both Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. 5.14.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: TR -1 Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities; TR -2 Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b); TR -3 Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or TR -4 Result in inadequate emergency access. Intersection Thresholds City of Santa Ana The City of Santa Ana General Plan Circulation Element indicates that acceptable LOS is LOS D or better, except within the City's defined major development areas where LOS E is considered acceptable. If a signalized intersection is operating at unsatisfactory LOS in the baseline condition, an addition of 0.01 to the ICU value would constitute a significant project impact. For unsignalized intersections, an intersection that operates at an unacceptable LOS E or worse and meets the peak hour signal warrant would constitute a significant project impact. City of Irvine The City of Irvine considers acceptable LOS to be LOS D or better, except within the Irvine Business Complex (IBC) where LOS E is acceptable. If an intersection is operating at unsatisfactory LOS in the baseline condition, an addition of 0.02 (rounded to the 2nd decimal place) to the ICU value would constitute a significant project impact. Every study intersection in the City of Irvine is located in the IBC, where the LOS E standard would apply. City of Tustin The City of Tustin considers acceptable LOS to be LOS D or better. If an intersection is operating at unsatisfactory LOS in the baseline condition, an addition of 0.01 to the ICU value would constitute a significant project impact. Congestion Management Program (CMP) Intersections At CMP intersections, LOS E is considered acceptable. If an intersection is operating at LOS E in the baseline condition, an addition of 0.01 to the ICU value would constitute a significant project impact. The following two intersections are CMP intersections, where the LOS E standard would apply: • #12: SR -55 SB Ramps/Edinger Avenue (City of Santa Ana/Caltrans) • #13: Newport Avenue/Edinger Avenue (City of Tustin) City of Santa Ana 5.14-6 Draft EIR January 2020 Study Area Intersections E Pine St Preni)tr- Tustin y �E chestnut Ave Part 0 C > > Q ` E Main St a 5< E A a °' rn c at ` N u> >. O in Z; tU v c o n dntd Q And P ? S m a 17D © G n Ave LO m E McFadden Ave Q .. rn C7 in . McFadden Ave �"e4 76 z o Q> rn m � 20 V) vi �r �21 e O E Edinger Ave O 12 13 E St Andrew PI G� F St ertn.n_le PI @) 15 Santa Ana ,ve EWarner Avr O O 23 Tustin . 10 24 26 O 2725 y D E v -r Rd Dyer Rd 6 7 g 1 1 O28 42 29 46 43 �, 35 30 all 37 31 wq F 47 52 m 50 Ir m C) 34 ��o�` Pax 5ej e O o � `o hµy Park Cir ccd� 38 55 ^cPa . .9LP Col Bill Baiter N INI11@FAemorial Park V Costa 39 ��� Pe Ole Mesa 40 °§ e pkwy 96 sin Mac\�o 41 Sources Esri, HERE; Ga USGS, Intermap, I E ENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) O contributors, and the GIS Us, N Project Site A The Bowery Figure 5.14-1 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.14-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation 5.14.5 METHODOLOGY Project Trip Distribution Methodology Trip distribution patterns for the proposed Project were developed based on select zone model runs from the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) and consideration of the Project location in relation to the surrounding land uses and regional transportation network. The Project trip generation was applied to the trip distribution patterns to develop the Project trip assignment. Project trip distribution details are provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which is included as Appendix K. Intersection Operations Methodology Intersection operations are evaluated using LOS, which is a measure of the delay experienced by drivers on a roadway facility. LOS A indicates free-flow traffic conditions and is generally the best operating conditions. LOS F is an extremely congested condition and is the worst operating condition from the driver's perspective. In this analysis, LOS at all signalized intersections is calculated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. Intersections under the jurisdiction of Caltrans is also evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 6'h Edition methodology. LOS at unsignalized intersections is calculated using the HCM, 6'h Edition methodology. The ICU methodology is a planning -level operational methodology and provides an estimate of the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio at a signalized intersection. The LOS at the intersection is determined according to the values shown in Table 5.14-2. Table 5.14-2: Relationship between ICU and LOS LOS ICU (V/C Ratio) A < 0.60 B 0.61 to <_ 0.70 C 0.71 to 0.80 D 0.81 to 0.90 E 0.91 to 1.00 F >1.00 Using the HCM methodology, LOS at signalized intersections is defined in terms of the weighted average control delay for the intersection as a whole. Control delay is a measure of the increase in travel time that is experienced due to traffic signal control and is expressed in terms of average control delay per vehicle (in seconds). Control delay is determined based on the intersection geometry and volume, signal cycle length, phasing and coordination along the arterial corridor. Table 5.14-3 shows the relationship between control delay and LOS at a signalized intersection. Table 5.14-3: Relationship between Control Delay and LOS at a Signalized Intersection LOS I Delay (Seconds per Vehicle) A < 10 B >10-20 C >20 — 35 D >35 — 55 E >55 — 80 F >80 There are only two unsignalized intersections in the Project study area and both are two-way stop control (TWSC) intersections. The Highway Capacity Manual TWSC intersection methodology calculates LOS based on the delay experienced by drivers on the minor (stop -controlled) approaches to the intersection. For TWSC intersections, LOS is determined for each minor -street movement, as well as the major -street left -turns. The relationship between delay and LOS at TWSC intersections is shown in Table 5.14-4. City of Santa Ana 5.14-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Table 5.14-4: Relationship between Delay and LOS at a TWSC Intersection LOS I Delay (seconds) A 0-10 B >10— 15 C >15-25 D >25-35 E >35 — 50 F >50 Volume Forecast Methodology Forecast traffic volumes for the Opening Year conditions were developed by applying a growth rate of 1.02 percent per year to the 2019 traffic counts and adding traffic from nearby cumulative development projects (approved and not yet build and those under review). The growth rate was calculated by comparing existing and forecast year 2040 traffic volumes in the study area. Cumulative projects were provided by the Cities of Santa Ana, Irvine and Tustin. The 2040 Buildout traffic volumes were forecast using the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM). At the request of the City of Irvine, the OCTAM land use database was reviewed and modified as needed to include all cumulative development projects identified by the Cities of Irvine and Tustin. OCTAM model data was post -processed using the NCHRP 765 methodology. See the Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix K) for additional detail. 5.14.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT TR -1: THE PROJECT WOULD CONFLICT WITH A PROGRAM, PLAN, ORDINANCE, OR POLICY ADDRESSING THE CIRCULATION SYSTEM, INCLUDING TRANSIT, ROADWAY, BICYCLE, AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES. Significant and Unavoidable Impact. The proposed Project would generate traffic from development of the proposed 1,150 multi -family residential units and the 80,000 square feet of commercial space. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the proposed commercial space would consist of the following uses: • Shopping Center: 18,000 square feet • Fast Casual Restaurant: 5,000 square feet • Quality Restaurant: 25,000 square feet • High -Turnover Sit -Down Restaurant: 25,000 square feet • Fast Food Restaurant (no drive-through): 5,000 square feet • Coffee/Donut Shop (no drive-through): 2,000 square feet Access to the proposed Project would be provided via a full -access driveway and a right-in/right-out driveway on Warner Avenue and a right-in/right-out driveway on Red Hill Avenue. The proposed full -access driveway on Warner Avenue would be slightly offset to the east from the adjacent driveway on the north side of Warner Avenue. This driveway would be signalized with split -phase operation in the northbound and southbound direction. Project Trip Generation Vehicle trips for the Project were generated by using the trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (10th Edition, 2017), and takes credit for the existing development on the site. As shown in Table 5.14-5, the Project is anticipated to generate 11,546 new daily trips, including 534 a.m. peak hour and 604 p.m. peak hour trips. City of Santa Ana 5.14-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Table 5.14-5 Proposed Project Trip Generation A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Land Use Units In I Out I Total In I Out I Total I Daily Future Uses Apartments Trip Generation Rates 1 0.09 0.27 0.36 0.27 0.17 0.44 5.44 Trip Generation 1,150 DU 108 306 414 309 197 506 6,256 Internal Trips 2 (6) (63) (69) (58) (37) (95) (164) Total Net Trip Generation 102 243 345 251 160 477 6,092 High -Turnover Sit Down Restaurant Trip Generation Rates 3 5.47 4.47 9.94 6.06 3.71 9.77 112.18 Trip Generation 25.000 TSF 137 112 249 151 94 245 2,805 Internal Trips 2 (27) (3) (29) (15) (20) (36) (65) External Trips 110 109 220 136 74 209 2,740 Pass -By Trips 0 0 0 (58) (32) (90) (589) Total Net Trip Generation 770 109 220 77 42 719 2,151 Retail Trip Generation Rates 4 0.58 0.36 0.94 1.83 1.98 3.81 37.75 Trip Generation 18.000 TSF 10 7 17 33 36 69 680 Internal Trips 2 (3) (2) (5) (20) (19) (39) (44) External Trips 7 5 12 13 17 30 636 Pass -By Trips (2) (1) (3) (4) (6) (10) (153) Total Net Trip Generation 5 4 9 9 1 1 20 483 Quality Restaurant Trip Generation Rates 5 0.37 0.37 0.73 5.23 2.57 7.80 83.84 Trip Generation 25.000 TSF 9 9 18 131 64 195 2,096 Internal Trips 2 (2) (0) (2) (1 3) (14) (27) (29) External Trips 7 9 16 118 50 168 2,067 Pass -By Trips 0 0 0 (52) (22) (74) (455) Total Net Trip Generation 7 9 16 66 28 94 1,612 Fast Casual Restaurant Trip Generation Rates 6 1.39 0.68 2.07 7.77 6.36 14.13 315.17 Trip Generation 5.000 TSF 7 3 10 39 32 71 1,576 Internal Trips 2 (1) (0) (1) (4) (7) (1 1) (1 2) External Trips 6 3 9 35 25 60 1,564 Pass -By Trips 0 0 0 (15) (11) (26) (336) Total Net Trip Generation 6 3 9 20 14 34 1,228 Fast -Food Restaurant without Drive -Through Window Trip Generation Rates 7 15.06 10.04 25.10 14.17 14.17 28.34 346.23 Trip Generation 5.000 TSF 75 51 126 71 71 142 1,731 Internal Trips 2 (15) (1) (16) (7) (15) (23) (38) External Trips 60 50 110 64 56 119 1,693 Pass -By Trips (24) (19) (43) (26) (22) (48) (660) Total Net Trip Generation 37 30 67 38 33 72 1,033 Coffee/Donut Shop without Drive -Through Window Trip Generation Rates 8 45.38 43.61 88.99 21.69 21.69 43.38 820.38 Trip Generation 2.000 TSF 91 87 178 43 44 87 1,641 Internal Trips 2 (18) (2) (20) (4) (10) (14) (34) External Trips 73 85 158 39 34 73 1,607 Pass -By Trips (61) (71) (1 31) (32) (29) (61) (1,334) Total Net Trip Generation 12 14 27 7 6 12 273 Existing Uses Industrial Park9 Passenger Vehicles 36 9 45 9 36 45 379 Trucks 212.121 TSF 89 25 114 22 92 114 947 Total Net Trip Generation 125 34 159 31 128 159 1,326 Total Net Trip Generation 155 379 1 534 437 167 604 11,546 Source: Appendix K. Trip generation based on rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation (10th Edition) for: Land Use 221 - "Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)". Internal trip capture is from ITE Trip Generation Handbook (3rd Edition). s Land Use 820 - "Shopping Center 4 Land Use 931 - "Quality Restaurant" 5 Land Use 930 - "Fast Casual Restaurant" City of Santa Ana 5.14-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Land Use 933 - "Fast -Food Restaurant without Drive -Through Window" 7 Land Use 937 - "Coffee/Donut Shop without Drive Through Window" 8 Land Use 130 - "Industrial Park" Existing Plus Project The Existing plus Project traffic volumes were determined by adding the net new Project trips to Existing Without Project traffic volumes. Table 5.14-6 provides a comparison between the Existing Without and With Project conditions. As shown, all study area intersections would continue to operate at satisfactory LOS in the Existing plus Project condition. However, the Project driveway on Red Hill Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS F for vehicles leaving the site in the a.m. peak hour. The forecast delay of 53.4 seconds with a queue of six vehicles would be experienced by drivers making an eastbound right -turn out of the Project site. Vehicles traveling along on Red Hill Avenue would not experience a delay. Project traffic using the driveway on Red Hill Avenue could utilize one of the two driveways on Warner Avenue during the a.m. peak hour, should they choose not to wait at the Red Hill Avenue driveway. The signalized driveway on Warner Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS A and the unsignalized driveway on Warner Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS C. Therefore, both of the Warner Avenue driveways have residual capacity to accommodate the additional traffic from the Red Hill Avenue driveway. Because this is an effect at an onsite driveway location, which could be avoided by use of other driveways, impacts would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.14-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Table 5.14-6: Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Intersection Signal Control Existing AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS Existing plus Project AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS V/C Change AM PM Impact? AM PM 1. Grand Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.710 C 0.843 D 0.718 C 0.844 D 0.008 0.001 No No 2. Grand Ave. St. Andrew PI. Signal 0.349 A 0.506 A 0.354 A 0.508 A 0.005 0.002 No No 3. Grand Ave. St. Gertrude PI. Signal 0.407 A 0.484 A 0.410 A 0.491 A 0.003 0.007 No No 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.549 A 0.716 C 0.560 A 0.740 C 0.011 0.024 No No 5. Grand Ave. SR 55 SB Off -Ramp Signal 0.486 A 0.509 A 0.486 A 0.509 A 0.000 0.000 No No 6. SR 55 SB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 0.663 B 0.739 C 0.670 B 0.742 C 0.007 0.003 No No 7. Grand Ave. Dyer Rd. Signal 0.585 A 0.622 B 0.587 A 0.624 B 0.002 0.002 No No 8. SR 55 NB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 0.562 A 0.389 A 0.563 A 0.391 A 0.001 0.002 No No 9. Wright St. Warner Ave. Signal 0.398 A 0.646 B 0.413 A 0.654 B 0.015 0.008 No No 10. Pullman St. Warner Ave. Signal 0.335 A 0.434 A 0.346 A 0.438 A 0.011 0.004 No No 11. Pullman St. Dyer Rd. Signal 0.467 A 0.702 C 0.473 A 0.702 C 0.006 0.000 No No 12. SR 55 SB Ramps Edinger Ave. Signal 0.600 A 0.591 A 0.601 B 0.592 A 0.001 0.001 No No 13. Newport Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.645 B 0.357 A 0.646 B 0.378 A 0.001 0.021 No No 14. Newport Ave./SR-55 NB Ramp -Del Amo Ave. Signal 0.461 A 0.613 B 0.465 A 0.6 1 3 B 0.004 0.000 No No 15. Newport Ave. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.147 A 0.306 A 0.149 A 0.310 A 0.002 0.004 No No 16. Red Hill Ave. EI Camino Real Signal 0.610 B 0.534 A 0.611 B 0.535 A 0.001 0.001 No No 17. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 NB Ramps Signal 0.618 B 0.582 A 0.618 B 0.583 A 0.000 0.001 No No 18. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 SB Ramps Signal 0.724 C 0.666 B 0.724 C 0.666 B 0.000 0.000 No No 19. Red Hill Ave. Nisson Rd. Signal 0.561 A 0.606 B 0.561 A 0.606 B 0.000 0.000 No No 20. Red Hill Ave. Mitchell Ave. Signal 0.529 A 0.509 A 0.529 A 0.510 A 0.000 0.001 No No 21. Red Hill Ave. Walnut Ave. Signal 0.590 A 0.684 B 0.590 A 0.684 B 0.000 0.000 No No 22. Red Hill Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.500 A 0.760 C 0.500 A 0.760 C 0.000 0.000 No No 23. Red Hill Ave. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.471 A 0.441 A 0.485 A 0.447 A 0.014 0.006 No No 24. Red Hill Ave. Victory Rd. Signal 0.357 A 0.409 A 0.357 A 0.409 A 0.000 0.000 No No 25. Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.500 A 0.567 A 0.571 A 0.690 B 0.071 0.123 No No 26. Driveway 1 Warner Ave. Signal - - 0.436 A 0.577 A - - No No 27. Driveway 2/Warner Ave. TWSC 15.5 C 19.1 C No No 28. Red Hill Ave. Driveway 3 TWSC - - 53.4 F 16.2 C No No 29. Red Hill Ave. Carnegie Ave. Signal 0.334 A 0.382 A 0.369 A 0.406 A 0.035 0.024 No No 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.564 A 0.785 C 0.583 A 0.859 D 0.019 0.074 No No 31. Red Hill Ave. Deere Ave. Signal 0.410 A 0.699 B 0.427 A 0.732 C 0.017 0.033 No No 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.489 A 0.833 D 0.503 A 0.859 D 0.014 0.026 No No 33. Red Hill Ave. McGaw Ave. Signal 0.462 A 0.719 C 0.475 A 0.733 C 0.013 0.014 No No 34. Red Hill Ave. MacArthur Blvd. Signal 0.604 B 0.762 C 0.614 B 0.770 C 0.010 0.008 No No 35. Holladay St. E Alton Ave. TWSC 10.5 B 9.9 A 10.5 B 9.9 A 0.000 0.000 No No 36. Holladay St. W Alton Ave. TWSC 12.2 B 11.6 B 12.2 B 11.6 B 0.000 0.000 No No 37. Daimler St. Alton Pkwy. AWSC 9.9 A 10.6 B 10.0 A 10.6 B 0.100 0.000 No No 38. MacArthur Blvd./Sky Park East I Sianal 0.328 A 0.503 A 0.331 A 0.508 A 1 0.003 0.005 No No City of Santa Ana 5.14-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Intersection Signal Control Existing AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS Existing plus Project AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS V/C Change AM PM I Impact? AM PM 39. MacArthur Blvd. Main St. Signal 0.533 A 0.696 B 0.536 A 0.697 B 0.003 0.001 No No 40. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 NB Ramps Signal 0.759 C 0.696 B 0.762 C 0.702 C 0.003 0.006 No No 41. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 SB Ramps Signal 0.533 A 0.643 B 0.534 A 0.645 B 0.001 0.002 No No 42. Reserve Center Driveway Warner Ave. Signal 0.122 A 0.183 A 0.135 A 0.195 A 0.013 0.012 No No 43. Armstrong Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.153 A 0.196 A 0.172 A 0.221 A 0.019 0.025 No No 44. Armstrong Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.433 A 0.681 B 0.450 A 0.687 B 0.017 0.006 No No 45. Legacy Rd. Warner Ave. Signal 0.103 A 0.188 A 0.1 1 2 A 0.199 A 0.009 0.011 No No 46. Tustin Ranch Rd. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.465 A 0.493 A 0.468 A 0.496 A 0.003 0.003 No No 47. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. N Signal 0.365 A 0.659 B 0.371 A 0.669 B 0.006 0.010 No No 48. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. S Signal 0.386 A 0.543 A 0.400 A 0.552 A 0.014 0.009 No No 49. Tustin Ranch Rd. Park Ave. Signal 0.515 A 0.663 B 0.515 A 0.665 B 0.000 0.002 No No 50. Tustin Ranch Rd. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.711 C 0.819 D 0.713 C 0.825 D 0.002 0.006 No No 51. Von Karman Ave. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.676 B 0.819 D 0.679 B 0.820 D 0.003 0.001 No No 52. Park Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.449 A 0.693 B 0.458 A 0.697 B 0.009 0.004 No No 53. Millikan Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.436 A 0.632 B 0.440 A 0.632 B 0.004 0.000 No No 54. Jamboree Rd. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.760 C 0.904 E 0.765 C 0.911 E 0.005 0.007 No No 55. Jamboree Rd. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.721 C 0.806 D 0.723 C 0.808 D 0.002 0.002 No No 56. Jamboree Rd. Main St. Signal 0.754 C 0.800 C 0.754 C 0.800 D 0.000 0.000 No No 57. Corporate Park Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.333 A 0.549 A 0.340 A 0.559 A 0.007 0.010 No No Caltrans Analysis Intersection Signal Control Existing AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Existing plus Project AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay Change AM PM Impact? AM PM 5. Grand Ave. SR 55 SB Off -Ramp Signal 11.8 B 14.1 B 11.8 B 14.3 B 0.00 0.20 No No 6. SR 55 SB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 41.5 D 42.5 D 41.6 D 42.8 D 0.10 0.30 No No 8. SR 55 NB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 21.8 C 15.2 B 21.8 C 15.3 B 0.00 0.10 No No 12. SR 55 SB Ramps Edinger Ave. Signal 37.5 D 41.9 D 37.5 D 42.2 D 0.00 0.30 No No 14. Newport Ave./SR-55 NB Ramp -Del Amo Ave. Signal 30.4 C 38.0 D 32.1 C 41.4 D 1.70 3.40 No No 17. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 NB Ramps Signal 25.5 C 21.5 C 26.2 C 21.6 C 0.70 0.10 No No 18. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 SB Ramps Signal 41.8 D 34.1 C 44.2 D 34.1 C 2.40 0.00 No No 40. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 NB Ramps Signal 35.3 C 20.5 C 34.0 D 21.0 A -1.30 0.50 No No 41. MacArthur Blvd./Interstate 405 SB Ramps Signal 25.1 C 25.5 C 25.3 C 25.5 C 0.20 0.00 No No Source: Appendix K. Notes: Bold = Exceeds LOS Standard; AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control City of Santa Ana 5.14-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Opening Year (2022) Plus Project The Opening Year (2022) traffic volumes were developed by applying a growth rate of 1.02 percent per year to the existing (2019) traffic volumes and adding traffic generated by cumulative projects. The growth rate was calculated assuming a straight-line growth rate between Existing and Year 2040 conditions in the study area, as modeled using the OCTAM traffic model. Approved and pending development projects were obtained from the Cities of Santa Ana, Irvine and Tustin. As shown in Table 5.14-7, the cumulative projects are anticipated to generate 5,095 a.m. peak hour trips, 6,1 10 p.m. peak hour trips, and 69,375 daily trips. Table 5.14-7: Summary of Cumulative Project Trips Santa Ana Units Daily AM Peak Hour 271 PM Peak Hour 1 316 In Out I Total In Out I Total Trip Rates 260 DU 1414 24 69 94 70 45 Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise)' DU 5.440 0.094 0.266 0.360 0.268 0.172 0.440 Shopping Center2 TSF 37.750 0.583 0.357 0.940 1.829 1.981 3.810 Senior Adult Housing - Attached' DU 3.700 0.070 0.130 0.200 0.143 0.117 0.260 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)4 DU 7.320 0.106 0.354 0.460 0.353 0.207 0.560 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive -Through Windows TSF 470.950 20.497 19.693 40.190 16.988 15.682 32.670 Hotel' Rooms 8.360 0.277 0.193 0.470 0.306 0.294 0.600 Quality Restaurant? TSF 83.840 - - - 5.226 2.574 7.800 Industrial Parke TSF 3.370 0.324 0.076 0.400 0.084 0.316 0.400 General Office Building' TSF 9.740 0.998 0.162 1.160 0.184 0.966 1.150 Warehouse') TSF 1.740 0.131 0.039 0.170 0.051 0.139 0.190 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant' TSF 112.180 5.467 4.473 9.940 6.057 3.713 9.770 Gas/Service Station 12 TSF 1265.670 34.295 34.295 68.590 42.275 42.275 84.550 Hospital" TSF 10.720 0.605 0.285 0.890 0.310 0.660 0.970 Sinqle Family Detached Housing14 DU 9.440 0.185 0.555 0.740 0.624 0.366 0.990 Santa Ana 272.00 TSF 1 2649 271 44 1 316 50 1 263 313 S1: Madison Project Residential' 260 DU 1414 24 69 94 70 45 114 S1: Madison Project Retai12 6.50 TSF 245 4 2 6 12 13 25 S2: AMG East First Senior Apartments' 418 DU 1 547 29 54 84 60 49 109 S3: AMG East First Apartments/First Pointe' 552 DU 3003 58 196 254 195 114 309 S4: Wermers Properties Mixed -Use Development Residential 603 DU 3280 56 161 217 162 103 265 S4: Wermers Properties Mixed -Use Development Retai12 8.90 TSF 336 5 3 8 16 18 34 S5: AMCAL First Street Family Apartments4 69 DU 505 7 24 32 24 14 39 S6: Heritage Village Residential' 1221 DU 6642 114 325 440 328 210 537 S7: Legado at the MET' 278 DU 1512 26 74 100 75 48 122 S8: Legacy Multi -Family Residential at Sunflower' 233 DU 1268 22 62 84 63 40 103 S9: Jack In the Box w/ drive-through5 2.66 TSF 1255 55 52 107 45 42 1 87 510: Tapestry by Hilton Hote16 110 Rooms 920 31 21 52 1 34 32 1 66 510: Tapestry by Hilton Restaurant' 5 TSF 561 27 22 50 30 19 49 S11: Shea ITT' 500 TSF 1685 162 38 200 42 158 200 11: 272,000 Office Building on Barranca Pkwy.9 272.00 TSF 1 2649 271 44 1 316 50 1 263 313 11: Existing Office Buildings9 48 TSF 468 48 8 56 9 46 55 12: Alton Residential Project' 357 DU 1942 33 95 129 96 61 157 12: Existing Warehouse'O 200 TSF 348 26 8 34 10 28 38 13: Gillette Ave Apartments' 336 DU 1828 31 90 121 90 58 148 14: Main Street Apartments' 150 DU 816 14 40 54 40 26 66 15: Rockefeller Mixed Use Residential' 285 DU 1550 27 76 103 76 49 1 125 15: Rockefeller Mixed Use Retai12 11.13 TSF 420 6 4 10 20 22 42 16: Trilogy Residential' -17 876 DU 4765 82 233 315 235 150 385 16: Existing Office Buildings9 315 TSF 3068 314 51 365 58 304 362 17: Von Karman Cafe" 5.04 TSF 565 28 23 50 31 19 49 18: Elements Residential' 1600 DU 8704 150 426 576 429 275 704 18: Elements Retai12 17 TSF 642 10 6 16 31 34 65 City of Santa Ana Draft EIR 5.14-15 January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation N1 : Newport Crossings Residential 15 350 DU 1904 31 95 1 126 95 1 59 154 N1 : Newport Crossings Retail15 5.5 TSF 198 4 3 7 9 9 18 N1 : Newport Crossings Restaurant15 2.0 TSF 224 1 1 9 20 12 8 20 N2: Uptown Newport Full Project (1,244 DU and 11.5 TSF of Retail and Restaurant)15 8286 44 499 542 522 204 727 Total Trip Generation 69,375 1,976 3,120 5,095 3,287 2,822 6,110 Source: Appendix K. Trip Generation shown in Italics is existing and is credited to the trip generation total. Trip generation based on rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation (10th Edition) for: 1 Land Use 221 - Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) 2 Land Use 820 - Shopping Center 3 Land Use 252 - Senior Adult Housing - Attached 4 Land Use 220 - Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) 5 Land Use 934 - Fast -Food Restaurant with Drive -Through Window 6 Land Use 310 - Hotel 7 Land Use 931 - "Quality Restaurant" 8 Land Use 130 - "Industrial Park" ' Land Use 710 - General Office Building 11) Land Use 150 - Warehousing 11 Land Use 932 - High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 12 Land Use 944 - Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 13 Land Use 610 - Hospital 14 Land Use 210 - Single Family Detached Housing 16 Project Trips were taken from each projects respective Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Generation 17 Per information provided by the City of Irvine, the retail space included in the project is considered ancillary and is included in the residential trip generation In the Opening Year (2022) with the cumulative project trips listed in Table 5.14-7 and operation of the proposed Project, the Project driveway on Red Hill Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS F for vehicles exiting the site, which is consistent with the Existing Plus Project condition. In 2022, a forecasted delay of 60.4 seconds (6.4 vehicles) is anticipated to be experienced by drivers making an eastbound right -turn out of the Project site. Through vehicles on Red Hill Avenue would not experience any delay. Consistent with the Existing Plus Project condition, drivers leaving the site in the a.m. peak hour could choose to utilize one of the two driveways on Warner and not wait at the Red Hill Avenue driveway. The signalized driveway on Warner Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS A and the unsignalized driveway on Warner Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS C in the Opening Year (2022) plus Project condition. Both of the Warner Avenue driveways have adequate capacity to accommodate the additional traffic from the Red Hill Avenue driveway. Because this is an effect at an onsite driveway location, which could be avoided by use of other driveways, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required for the onsite driveway at Red Hill Avenue. Table 5.14-8 provides a comparison between the Opening Year (2022) Without and With Project conditions. As shown, with the proposed Project, intersections of Red Hill Avenue/Barranca Parkway (#30) would not operate at satisfactory levels of service in the p.m. peak hour and would be impacted with operation of the Project. As a result, improvements for the intersection have been identified, which involve addition of a westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and prohibit southbound U-turns that have been included as Mitigation Measure TR -1. As shown on Table 5.14-9, impacts at the intersection would be reduced to a less than significant impact with implementation of the improvment. However, improvements at City of Santa Ana 5.14-16 Draft EIR January 2020 Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out I Total Tustin T1: The Village at Tustin Legacy Hospital13 69.57 TSF 746 42 20 62 22 46 67 T2: Levity at Tustin Legacy' 161 DU 876 15 43 58 43 28 71 T2: Levity at Tustin Legacy14 57 DU 538 1 1 32 42 36 21 56 T3: Brookfield Residential14 117 DU 1 104 22 65 87 73 43 116 T3: Brookfield Residentia14 129 DU 702 12 34 46 35 22 57 T3: Brookfield Residential' 154 DU 1 127 16 55 71 54 32 86 T4: Flight at Tustin Legacy' 870 TSF 8474 868 141 1009 160 840 1001 T5: Vintage4 140 1 DU 1 1025 1 15 1 50 64 1 49 1 29 1 78 N1 : Newport Crossings Residential 15 350 DU 1904 31 95 1 126 95 1 59 154 N1 : Newport Crossings Retail15 5.5 TSF 198 4 3 7 9 9 18 N1 : Newport Crossings Restaurant15 2.0 TSF 224 1 1 9 20 12 8 20 N2: Uptown Newport Full Project (1,244 DU and 11.5 TSF of Retail and Restaurant)15 8286 44 499 542 522 204 727 Total Trip Generation 69,375 1,976 3,120 5,095 3,287 2,822 6,110 Source: Appendix K. Trip Generation shown in Italics is existing and is credited to the trip generation total. Trip generation based on rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation (10th Edition) for: 1 Land Use 221 - Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) 2 Land Use 820 - Shopping Center 3 Land Use 252 - Senior Adult Housing - Attached 4 Land Use 220 - Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) 5 Land Use 934 - Fast -Food Restaurant with Drive -Through Window 6 Land Use 310 - Hotel 7 Land Use 931 - "Quality Restaurant" 8 Land Use 130 - "Industrial Park" ' Land Use 710 - General Office Building 11) Land Use 150 - Warehousing 11 Land Use 932 - High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 12 Land Use 944 - Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market 13 Land Use 610 - Hospital 14 Land Use 210 - Single Family Detached Housing 16 Project Trips were taken from each projects respective Traffic Impact Analysis Project Trip Generation 17 Per information provided by the City of Irvine, the retail space included in the project is considered ancillary and is included in the residential trip generation In the Opening Year (2022) with the cumulative project trips listed in Table 5.14-7 and operation of the proposed Project, the Project driveway on Red Hill Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS F for vehicles exiting the site, which is consistent with the Existing Plus Project condition. In 2022, a forecasted delay of 60.4 seconds (6.4 vehicles) is anticipated to be experienced by drivers making an eastbound right -turn out of the Project site. Through vehicles on Red Hill Avenue would not experience any delay. Consistent with the Existing Plus Project condition, drivers leaving the site in the a.m. peak hour could choose to utilize one of the two driveways on Warner and not wait at the Red Hill Avenue driveway. The signalized driveway on Warner Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS A and the unsignalized driveway on Warner Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS C in the Opening Year (2022) plus Project condition. Both of the Warner Avenue driveways have adequate capacity to accommodate the additional traffic from the Red Hill Avenue driveway. Because this is an effect at an onsite driveway location, which could be avoided by use of other driveways, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required for the onsite driveway at Red Hill Avenue. Table 5.14-8 provides a comparison between the Opening Year (2022) Without and With Project conditions. As shown, with the proposed Project, intersections of Red Hill Avenue/Barranca Parkway (#30) would not operate at satisfactory levels of service in the p.m. peak hour and would be impacted with operation of the Project. As a result, improvements for the intersection have been identified, which involve addition of a westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and prohibit southbound U-turns that have been included as Mitigation Measure TR -1. As shown on Table 5.14-9, impacts at the intersection would be reduced to a less than significant impact with implementation of the improvment. However, improvements at City of Santa Ana 5.14-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.14 Table 5.14-8: Opening Year 2022 Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Intersection Signal Control Opening Year AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS Opening Year plus Project AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS V/C Change AM PM Impact? AM PM 1. Grand Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.733 C 0.869 D 0.762 C 0.896 D 0.029 0.027 No No 2. Grand Ave. St. Andrew PI. Signal 0.359 A 0.522 A 0.374 A 0.539 A 0.015 0.017 No No 3. Grand Ave. St. Gertrude PI. Signal 0.420 A 0.499 A 0.435 A 0.520 A 0.015 0.021 No No 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.573 A 0.752 C 0.600 B 0.798 C 0.027 0.046 No No 5. Grand Ave. SR 55 SB Off -Ramp Signal 0.520 A 0.549 A 0.535 A 0.565 A 0.015 0.016 No No 6. SR 55 SB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 0.752 C 0.809 D 0.781 C 0.836 D 0.029 0.027 No No 7. Grand Ave. Dyer Rd. Signal 0.634 B 0.690 C 0.653 B 0.711 C 0.019 0.021 No No 8. SR 55 NB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 0.619 B 0.440 A 0.638 B 0.459 A 0.019 0.019 No No 9. Wright St. Warner Ave. Signal 0.413 A 0.678 B 0.440 A 0.705 C 0.027 0.027 No No 10. Pullman St. Warner Ave. Signal 0.352 A 0.461 A 0.373 A 0.470 A 0.021 0.009 No No 11. Pullman St. Dyer Rd. Signal 0.525 A 0.769 C 0.545 A 0.792 C 0.020 0.023 No No 12. SR 55 SB Ramps Edinger Ave. Signal 0.644 B 0.607 B 0.663 B 0.626 B 0.019 0.019 No No 13. Newport Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.670 B 0.382 A 0.691 B 0.406 A 0.021 0.024 No No 14. Newport Ave./SR-55 NB Ramp -Del Amo Ave. Signal 0.489 A 0.662 B 0.508 A 0.683 B 0.019 0.021 No No 15. Newport Ave. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.154 A 0.344 A 0.160 A 0.359 A 0.006 0.015 No No 16. Red Hill Ave. EI Camino Real Signal 0.641 B 0.555 A 0.656 B 0.574 A 0.015 0.019 No No 17. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 NB Ramps Signal 0.643 B 0.616 B 0.663 B 0.636 B 0.020 0.020 No No 18. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 SB Ramps Signal 0.760 C 0.690 B 0.784 C 0.711 C 0.024 0.021 No No 19. Red Hill Ave. Nisson Rd. Signal 0.584 A 0.638 B 0.602 B 0.657 B 0.018 0.019 No No 20. Red Hill Ave. Mitchell Ave. Signal 0.561 A 0.542 A 0.578 A 0.560 A 0.017 0.018 No No 21. Red Hill Ave. Walnut Ave. Signal 0.623 B 0.722 C 0.643 B 0.744 C 0.020 0.022 No No 22. Red Hill Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.515 A 0.807 D 0.532 A 0.831 D 0.017 0.024 No No 23. Red Hill Ave. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.513 A 0.546 A 0.543 A 0.563 A 0.030 0.017 No No 24. Red Hill Ave. Victory Rd. Signal 0.371 A 0.424 A 0.382 A 0.438 A 0.011 0.014 No No 25. Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.520 A 0.595 A 0.609 A 0.722 C 0.089 0.127 No No 26. Driveway 1 Warner Ave. Signal - - 0.463 A 0.625 C - - No No 27. Driveway 2/Warner Ave. TWSC 16.3 C 19.8 C No No 28. Red Hill Ave. Driveway 3 TWSC 60.4 F 16.7 C No No 29. Red Hill Ave. Carnegie Ave. Signal 0.346 A 0.395 A 0.394 A 0.432 A 0.048 0.037 No No 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.641 B 0.908 E 0.687 B 1.007 F 0.046 0.099 No Yes 31. Red Hill Ave. Deere Ave. Signal 0.447 A 0.768 C 0.483 A 0.824 D 0.036 0.056 No No 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.526 A 0.884 D 0.556 A 0.936 E 0.030 0.052 No No 33. Red Hill Ave. McGaw Ave. Signal 0.506 A 0.784 C 0.536 A 0.826 D 0.030 0.042 No No 34. Red Hill Ave. MacArthur Blvd. Signal 0.671 B 0.825 D 0.703 C 0.863 D 0.032 0.038 No No 35. Halladay St. E Alton Ave. TWSC 10.5 B 10.0 B 10.5 B 10.0 B 0.000 0.000 No No 36. Halladay St. W Alton Ave. TWSC 10.9 B 11.8 B 10.9 B 11.8 B 0.000 0.000 No No 37. Daimler St. Alton Pkwy. AWSC 10.1 B 10.8 B 10.1 B 10.9 B 0.000 0.100 No No 38. MacArthur Blvd./Sky Park East Signal 0.356 A 0.544 A 0.370 A 0.568 A 0.014 0.024 No No City of Santa Ana 5.14-17 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Intersection Signal Control Opening Year AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS Opening Year plus Project AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS V/C Change I AM PM Impact? AM PM 39. MacArthur Blvd. Main St. Signal 0.567 A 0.737 C 0.588 A 0.761 C 0.021 0.024 No No 40. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 NB Ramps Signal 0.813 D 0.765 C 0.834 D 0.772 C 0.021 0.007 No No 41. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 SB Ramps Signal 0.572 A 0.710 C 0.601 B 0.753 C 0.029 0.043 No No 42. Reserve Center Driveway Warner Ave. Signal 0.129 A 0.191 A 0.146 A 0.209 A 0.017 0.018 No No 43. Armstrong Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.165 A 0.252 A 0.195 A 0.285 A 0.030 0.033 No No 44. Armstrong Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.519 A 0.766 C 0.547 A 0.803 D 0.028 0.037 No No 45. Legacy Rd. Warner Ave. Signal 0.131 A 0.255 A 0.144 A 0.273 A 0.013 0.018 No No 46. Tustin Ranch Rd. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.510 A 0.529 A 0.529 A 0.549 A 0.019 0.020 No No 47. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. N Signal 0.401 A 0.703 C 0.420 A 0.735 C 0.019 0.032 No No 48. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. S Signal 0.421 A 0.592 A 0.448 A 0.620 B 0.027 0.028 No No 49. Tustin Ranch Rd. Park Ave. Signal 0.568 A 0.754 C 0.586 A 0.778 C 0.018 0.024 No No 50. Tustin Ranch Rd. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.781 C 0.910 E 0.811 D 0.943 E 0.030 0.033 No No 51. Von Karman Ave. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.712 C 0.883 D 0.734 C 0.939 E 0.022 0.056 No No 52. Park Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.477 A 0.736 C 0.501 A 0.762 C 0.024 0.026 No No 53. Millikan Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.473 A 0.667 B 0.491 A 0.686 B 0.018 0.019 No No 54. Jamboree Rd. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.822 D 0.962 E 0.851 D 0.997 E 0.029 0.035 No No 55. Jamboree Rd. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.760 C 0.837 D 0.796 C 0.878 D 0.036 0.041 No No 56. Jamboree Rd. Main St. Signal 0.789 C 0.831 D 0.812 D 0.860 D 0.023 0.029 No No 57. Corporate Park Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.354 A 0.579 A 0.370 A 0.605 B 0.016 0.026 No No Caltrans Analysis Opening Year Opening Year plus Project Delay Change Impact? Intersection Signal Control AM Peak Delay LOS PM Peak Delay LOS AM Peak Delay LOS PM Peak Delay LOS AM PM AM PM 5. Grand Ave. SR 55 SB Off -Ramp Signal 12.2 B 14.7 B 12.2 B 14.7 B 0.00 0.00 No No 6. SR 55 SB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 48.2 D 48.6 D 54.9 D 49.1 D 6.70 0.50 No No 8. SR 55 NB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 23.1 C 14.2 B 23.4 C 14.2 B 0.30 0.00 No No 12. SR 55 SB Ramps Edinger Ave. Signal 38.6 D 46.4 D 39.1 D 46.8 D 0.50 0.40 No No 14. Newport Ave./SR-55 NB Ramp -Del Amo Ave. Signal 29.9 C 48.5 D 35.4 D 50.6 D 5.50 2.10 No No 17. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 NB Ramps Signal 27.7 C 23.2 C 28.9 C 24.0 B 1.20 0.80 No No 18. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 SB Ramps Signal 46.5 D 34.3 C 48.6 D 34.3 D 2.10 0.00 No No 40. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 NB Ramps Signal 39.1 D 26.2 C 39.2 C 26.2 C 0.10 0.00 No No 41. MacArthur Blvd./Interstate 405 SB Ramps Signal 26.3 C 34.5 C 26.4 C 34.7 C 0.10 0.20 No No Source: Appendix K. Notes: Bold = Exceeds LOS Standard; AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control City of Santa Ana 5.14-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation the intersections of Red Hill Avenue/ Barranca Parkway (#30) cannot be guaranteed because they require approval and/or implementation by the City of Tustin. Because implementation of the mitigation measure cannot be guaranteed and may not be implemented by 2022, implementation of the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact at this intersection. Table 5.14-9: Mitigated Opening Year 2022 Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Opening Year Opening Year Plus Project Opening Year Plus Project (Mitigated) PM Peak PM Peak PM Peak Intersection V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS 30. 1 Red Hill Ave./Barranca Pkwy. 0.908 E 1.007 F 0.907 E Source: Appendix K Year 2040 Plus Project Year 2040 plus Project traffic volumes were determined by adding the net new Project trips to the Year 2040 Without Project traffic volumes and accounting for the seven planned intersection improvements that would be implemented by 2040. Consistent with the Existing Plus Project and Opening Year 2022 conditions, the Project driveway on Red Hill Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS F for vehicles exiting the site in the Year 2040 condition. The forecast delay of 49.2 seconds (5.3 vehicles) is anticipated to be experienced by drivers making an eastbound right - turn out of the Project site. Through vehicles on Red Hill Avenue would not be impacted. Drivers leaving the site in the a.m. peak hour could choose to utilize one of the two driveways on Warner Avenue and not wait at the Red Hill Avenue driveway. The signalized driveway on Warner Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS A and the unsignalized driveway on Warner Avenue is forecast to operate at LOS B in the Year 2040 plus Project condition. Both of the Warner Avenue driveways have adequate capacity to accommodate the additional traffic from the Red Hill Avenue driveway. Because this is an effect at an onsite driveway location, which could be avoided by use of other driveways, impacts at this location would be less than significant. However, as detailed in Table 5.14-10, the Project would result in a significant cumulative impact at the following five intersections: • Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue (#4) in the p.m. peak hour • Red Hill Avenue/Warner Avenue (#25) in the pm peak hour • Red Hill Avenue/Barranca Parkway (#30) in the p.m. peak hour • Red Hill Avenue/Alton Parkway (#32) in the p.m. peak hour • Tustin Ranch Road/Warner Avenue North (#47) in the p.m. peak hour Improvements for impacted intersections have been identified and include the following: • Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue (#4) (Santa Ana): Add a westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and prohibit northbound U-turns. • Red Hill Avenue/Warner Avenue (#25) (Santa Ana/Tustin): Add a southbound protected right -turn overlap phase and prohibit eastbound U-turns. • Red Hill Avenue/Barranca Parkway (#30) (Santa Ana/Tustin/Irvine): Add a westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and prohibit southbound U-turns. • Red Hill Avenue/Alton Parkway (#32) (Santa Ana/Irvine): Add a westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and prohibit southbound U-turns. • Tustin Ranch Road/Warner Avenue North (#47) (Tustin): Restripe the 3rd northbound through lane as a shared through -right lane and remove the northbound right turn overlap. City of Santa Ana 5.14-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Table 5.14-10: Year 2040 Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service 5.14 Intersection Signal Control Year 2040 AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS Year 2040 plus Project AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS V/C Change I AM PM Impact? AM PM 1. Grand Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.859 D 1.007 F 0.866 D 1.009 F 0.007 0.002 No No 2. Grand Ave. St. Andrew PI. Signal 0.398 A 0.595 A 0.401 A 0.598 A 0.003 0.003 No No 3. Grand Ave. St. Gertrude PI. Signal 0.486 A 0.583 A 0.490 A 0.590 A 0.004 0.007 No No 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.759 C 1.018 F 0.775 C 1.051 F 0.016 0.033 No Yes 5. Grand Ave. SR 55 SB Off -Ramp Signal 0.511 A 0.504 A 0.511 A 0.504 A 0.000 0.000 No No 6. SR 55 SB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 0.825 D 0.832 D 0.832 D 0.835 D 0.007 0.003 No No 7. Grand Ave. Dyer Rd. Signal 0.639 B 0.735 C 0.640 B 0.737 C 0.001 0.002 No No 8. SR 55 NB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 0.679 B 0.472 A 0.680 B 0.479 A 0.001 0.007 No No 9. Wright St. Warner Ave. Signal 0.550 A 0.861 D 0.554 A 0.869 D 0.004 0.008 No No 10. Pullman St. Warner Ave. Signal 0.499 A 0.591 A 0.510 A 0.595 A 0.011 0.004 No No 11. Pullman St. Dyer Rd. Signal 0.582 A 0.807 D 0.585 A 0.807 D 0.003 0.000 No No 12. SR 55 SB Ramps Edinger Ave. Signal 0.767 C 0.699 B 0.768 C 0.700 C 0.001 0.001 No No 13. Newport Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.660 B 0.683 B 0.661 B 0.684 B 0.001 0.001 No No 14. Newport Ave./SR-55 NB Ramp -Del Amo Ave. Signal 0.532 A 0.649 B 0.536 A 0.649 B 0.004 0.000 No No 15. Newport Ave. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.696 B 0.708 C 0.699 B 0.712 C 0.003 0.004 No No 16. Red Hill Ave. EI Camino Real Signal 0.786 C 0.624 B 0.787 C 0.626 B 0.001 0.002 No No 17. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 NB Ramps Signal 0.714 C 0.647 B 0.715 C 0.648 B 0.001 0.001 No No 18. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 SB Ramps Signal 0.886 D 0.744 C 0.886 D 0.744 C 0.000 0.000 No No 19. Red Hill Ave. Nisson Rd. Signal 0.664 B 0.733 C 0.664 B 0.733 C 0.000 0.000 No No 20. Red Hill Ave. Mitchell Ave. Signal 0.687 B 0.712 C 0.687 B 0.705 C 0.000 -0.007 No No 21. Red Hill Ave. Walnut Ave. Signal 0.750 C 0.823 D 0.750 C 0.823 D 0.000 0.000 No No 22. Red Hill Ave. Edinger Ave. Signal 0.646 B 0.900 E 0.646 B 0.900 E 0.000 0.000 No No 23. Red Hill Ave. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.816 D 0.772 C 0.810 D 0.773 C -0.006 0.001 No No 24. Red Hill Ave. Victory Rd. Signal 0.398 A 0.498 A 0.398 A 0.498 A 0.000 0.000 No No 25. Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.627 B 0.794 C 0.706 C 0.908 E 0.079 0.114 No Yes 26. Driveway 1 Warner Ave. Signal - - 0.428 A 0.592 A - - No No 27. Driveway 2/Warner Ave. TWSC 13.9 B 15.1 C No No 28. Red Hill Ave. Driveway 3 TWSC - - 49.2 E 17.1 C No No 29. Red Hill Ave. Carnegie Ave. Signal 0.449 A 0.519 A 0.485 A 0.544 A 0.036 0.025 No No 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.750 C 0.959 E 0.767 C 1.032 F 0.017 0.073 No Yes 31. Red Hill Ave. Deere Ave. Signal 0.476 A 0.904 E 0.491 A 0.936 E 0.015 0.032 No No 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.628 B 1.011 F 0.640 B 1.037 F 0.012 0.026 No Yes 33. Red Hill Ave. McGaw Ave. Signal 0.537 A 0.825 D 0.550 A 0.839 D 0.013 0.014 No No 34. Red Hill Ave. MacArthur Blvd. Signal 0.790 C 0.892 D 0.800 D 0.900 D 0.010 0.008 No No 35. Halladay St. E Alton Ave. TWSC 9.9 A 107.7 F 9.9 A 107.7 F 0.000 0.000 No No 36. Halladay St. W Alton Ave. TWSC 18.0 C 15.9 C 18.0 C 22.8 C 0.000 6.900 No No 37. Daimler St. Alton Pkwy. AWSC 14.8 B 41.2 E 15.1 C 42.5 E 0.300 1.300 No No 38. MacArthur Blvd./Sky Park East Signal 0.392 A 0.599 A 0.395 A 0.605 B 0.003 0.006 No No City of Santa Ana 5.14-20 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation Intersection Signal Control Year 2040 AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS Year 2040 plus Project AM Peak PM Peak V/C or V/C or Delay LOS Delay LOS V/C Change AM PM I Impact? AM PM 39. MacArthur Blvd. Main St. Signal 0.614 B 0.788 C 0.618 B 0.789 C 0.004 0.001 No No 40. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 NB Ramps Signal 0.799 C 0.766 C 0.802 D 0.769 C 0.003 0.003 No No 41. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 SB Ramps Signal 0.595 A 0.761 C 0.598 A 0.761 C 0.003 0.000 No No 42. Reserve Center Driveway Warner Ave. Signal 0.305 A 0.429 A 0.323 A 0.441 A 0.018 0.012 No No 43. Armstrong Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.314 A 0.417 A 0.321 A 0.442 A 0.007 0.025 No No 44. Armstrong Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.618 B 0.843 D 0.631 B 0.848 D 0.013 0.005 No No 45. Legacy Rd. Warner Ave. Signal 0.233 A 0.358 A 0.245 A 0.374 A 0.012 0.016 No No 46. Tustin Ranch Rd. Valencia Ave. Signal 0.695 B 0.856 D 0.696 B 0.860 D 0.001 0.004 No No 47. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. N Signal 0.575 A 1.006 F 0.582 A 1.016 F 0.007 0.010 No Yes 48. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. S Signal 0.821 D 0.734 C 0.821 D 0.743 C 0.000 0.009 No No 49. Tustin Ranch Rd. Park Ave. Signal 1.050 F 1.135 F 1.050 F 1.136 F 0.000 0.001 No No 50. Tustin Ranch Rd. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.822 D 1.002 F 0.823 D 1.007 F 0.001 0.005 No No 51. Von Karman Ave. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.806 D 0.980 E 0.809 D 0.981 E 0.003 0.001 No No 52. Park Ave. Warner Ave. Signal 0.726 C 0.907 E 0.736 C 0.911 E 0.010 0.004 No No 53. Millikan Ave. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.566 A 0.778 C 0.571 A 0.787 C 0.005 0.009 No No 54. Jamboree Rd. Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.887 D 1.031 F 0.892 D 1.038 F 0.005 0.007 No No 55. Jamboree Rd. Alton Pkwy. Signal 0.825 D 0.935 E 0.826 D 0.936 E 0.001 0.001 No No 56. Jamboree Rd. Main St. Signal 0.828 D 0.877 D 0.828 D 0.878 D 0.000 0.001 No No 57. Corporate Park Barranca Pkwy. Signal 0.450 A 0.674 B 0.457 A 0.684 B 0.007 0.010 No No Caltrans Analvsis Source: Appendix K. Notes: Bold = Exceeds LOS Standard; AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control City of Santa Ana 5.14-21 Draft EIR January 2020 Year 2040 Year 2040 plus Project Delay Change Impact? Intersection Signal Control AM Peak Delay3 I LOS2 PM Peak Delay3 LOS2 AM Peak Delay3 LOS2 PM Peak Delay3 LOS2 AM PM AM PM 5. Grand Ave. SR 55 SB Off -Ramp Signal 12.1 B 14.9 B 12.9 B 14.9 B 0.80 0.00 No No 6. SR 55 SB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 40.1 D 55.8 E 48.4 D 56.3 E 8.30 0.50 No No 8. SR 55 NB Ramps Dyer Rd. Signal 24.6 C 13.5 B 27.1 C 13.6 B 2.50 0.10 No No 12. SR 55 SB Ramps Edinger Ave. Signal 41.2 D 47.2 D 41.3 D 54.7 D 0.10 7.50 No I No 14. Newport Ave./SR-55 NB Ramp -Del Amo Ave. Signal 33.2 C 31.7 C 35.8 D 32.1 C 2.60 0.40 No No 17. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 NB Ramps Signal 27.3 C 22.9 C 28.3 C 23.4 C 1.00 0.50 No No 18. Red Hill Ave. Interstate 5 SB Ramps Signal 47.5 D 43.5 D 47.5 D 49.8 D 0.00 6.30 No No 40. MacArthur Blvd. Interstate 405 NB Ramps Signal 25.5 C 15.7 B 25.7 C 15.7 B 0.20 0.00 No No 41. MacArthur Blvd./Interstate 405 SB Ramps Signal 26.8 C 31.0 C 26.9 C 31.1 C 0.10 0.10 No No Source: Appendix K. Notes: Bold = Exceeds LOS Standard; AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control City of Santa Ana 5.14-21 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation As shown in Table 5.14-11, with implementation of the identified improvements, all impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. However, improvements at the intersections of Red Hill Avenue/ Warner Avenue (#25), Red Hill Avenue/ Barranca Parkway (#30), Red Hill Avenue/Alton Parkway (#32), and Tustin Ranch Road/Warner Avenue North (#47) cannot be guaranteed because they require approval and/or implementation by the City of Tustin or the City of Irvine. In addition, the improvement at the Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue (#4) is required as a result of a is a cumulative impact, as the intersection operates with unsatisfactory LOS in the baseline condition. The Project would be responsible for a fair share of the improvement; however, there is no currently planned improvement at the location, and it is unknown if the Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue improvement would be implemented by 2040. Therefore, implementation of the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact under the Year 2040 Plus Project condition at these five intersections. Table 5.14-11: Year 2040 Peak Hour Levels of Service with Mitigation Source: Appendix K. Notes: Bold = Exceeds LOS Standard Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities As described previously, the Project site is currently served by OCTA Bus Routes 71 (Red Hill) and 72 (Warner), as well as Metrolink Stationlink Route 472 (Red Hill). Bus routes 71 and 72 provide service seven days a week. Route 472 provides service Monday thru Friday. Other Bus Routes servicing areas within the Project area are OCTA bus routes 55, 59, 70, 76, 86, Intracounty OC Express Route 213/A, Metrolink Stationlink Route 463, and the IShuttle 400A, 401 B, and 405F. The existing bus services would allow project site residents and employees to convenient access to transit. The proposed Project would not alter or conflict with existing bus stops and schedules, and impacts related to OCTA transit services would not occur. There are several roadways in the Project vicinity that currently have bicycle lanes, which include: Red Hill Avenue between Barranca Parkway and Reynolds Avenue, Warner Avenue east of Red Hill Avenue, Tustin Ranch Road, Von Karman Avenue, Jamboree Road between Barranca Parkway and Main Street, Edinger Avenue between Red Hill Avenue and Newport Avenue, on the south side of Barranca Parkway west of Jamboree Road, Alton Parkway between Red Hill Avenue and Jamboree Road, and on Main Street. Additionally, sidewalks currently exist adjacent to the site along both Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The Project would not involve any off-site improvements that would remove the existing bicycle lanes or result in any identified impacts to bicycle routes. The existing bicycle routes would provide bicycle transportation opportunities for residents and employees of the Project site. The Project would not conflict with any bicycle facilities. Similarly, the Project site is bound by sidewalks along Redhill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The proposed Project would retain the existing sidewalks, which would facilitate pedestrian use and walking to nearby locations. Therefore, the proposed Project would also not conflict with pedestrian facilities. Overall, Project impacts to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be less than significant. IMPACT TR -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CONFLICT OR BE INCONSISTENT WITH CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15064.3, SUBDIVISION (B). Less than Significant Impact. The Senate Bill 743 was signed by the Governor in 2013 and directed the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify alternative metrics for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA. Recently adopted changes to the CEQA Guidelines include a new section City of Santa Ana 5.14-22 Draft EIR January 2020 Intersection Year 2040 Plus Project AM Peak PM Peak V/C LOS V/C LOS 2040 Plus Project (Mitigated) AM Peak PM Peak V/C LOS V/C LOS 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. 0.775 C 1.051 F 0.77 C 0.993 E 25. Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. 0.706 C 0.908 E 0.706 C 0.893 D 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. 0.767 C 1.032 F 0.767 C 0.931 E 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. 0.64 B 1.037 F 0.64 B 0.979 E 47. Tustin Ranch Rd./Warner Ave. N 0.582 A 1.016 F 0.597 A 1 0.787 C Source: Appendix K. Notes: Bold = Exceeds LOS Standard Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities As described previously, the Project site is currently served by OCTA Bus Routes 71 (Red Hill) and 72 (Warner), as well as Metrolink Stationlink Route 472 (Red Hill). Bus routes 71 and 72 provide service seven days a week. Route 472 provides service Monday thru Friday. Other Bus Routes servicing areas within the Project area are OCTA bus routes 55, 59, 70, 76, 86, Intracounty OC Express Route 213/A, Metrolink Stationlink Route 463, and the IShuttle 400A, 401 B, and 405F. The existing bus services would allow project site residents and employees to convenient access to transit. The proposed Project would not alter or conflict with existing bus stops and schedules, and impacts related to OCTA transit services would not occur. There are several roadways in the Project vicinity that currently have bicycle lanes, which include: Red Hill Avenue between Barranca Parkway and Reynolds Avenue, Warner Avenue east of Red Hill Avenue, Tustin Ranch Road, Von Karman Avenue, Jamboree Road between Barranca Parkway and Main Street, Edinger Avenue between Red Hill Avenue and Newport Avenue, on the south side of Barranca Parkway west of Jamboree Road, Alton Parkway between Red Hill Avenue and Jamboree Road, and on Main Street. Additionally, sidewalks currently exist adjacent to the site along both Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The Project would not involve any off-site improvements that would remove the existing bicycle lanes or result in any identified impacts to bicycle routes. The existing bicycle routes would provide bicycle transportation opportunities for residents and employees of the Project site. The Project would not conflict with any bicycle facilities. Similarly, the Project site is bound by sidewalks along Redhill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The proposed Project would retain the existing sidewalks, which would facilitate pedestrian use and walking to nearby locations. Therefore, the proposed Project would also not conflict with pedestrian facilities. Overall, Project impacts to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be less than significant. IMPACT TR -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CONFLICT OR BE INCONSISTENT WITH CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15064.3, SUBDIVISION (B). Less than Significant Impact. The Senate Bill 743 was signed by the Governor in 2013 and directed the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify alternative metrics for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA. Recently adopted changes to the CEQA Guidelines include a new section City of Santa Ana 5.14-22 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation (15064.3) that specifies that Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. A separate Technical Advisory issued by OPR provides additional technical details on calculating VMT and assessing transportation impacts for various types of projects. The revised CEQA guidelines take effect July 1, 2020. The City of Santa Ana has prepared a guidance document for analysis of VMT and assessment of transportation impacts under SB743. The City's document provides screening thresholds to assess whether further VMT analysis is required based on project location, size, or consistency with the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. According to the City's screening thresholds, and general guidance from OPR, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(1), a project that is located within a Transit Priority Area or a High -Quality Transit Area is presumed to have a less than significant impact to VMT. As described previously, the Project site is served by OCTA routes 71 (Warner Avenue), 72 (Red Hill Avenue), and 472 (Red Hill Avenue). Each of these routes operates approximately every 30 minutes during peak hours in each direction, which results in one stop every 6 minutes during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Additionally, SCAG GIS data identifies that the Project site is located within a 2040 High Quality Transit Area, as shown in Figure 5.14-2. Because the Project site is adjacent to existing transit service with an interval of approximately 6 minutes during the peak commute hours and is located within a SCAG identified 2040 High -Quality Transit Area, the Project would result in a less than a significant impact related to VMT. IMPACT TR -3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE HAZARDS DUE TO A GEOMETRIC DESIGN FEATURE (E.G., SHARPT CURVES OR DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS) OR INCOMPATIBLE USES (E.G., FARM EQUIPMENT). Less than Significant Impact. The Project includes development of mixed uses that include residential, retail/restaurant commercial, and open space recreation. The Project includes community type uses and does not include any incompatible uses, such as farm equipment. The proposed Project would be accessed from one driveway on Red Hill Avenue and two driveways on Warner Avenue that provide direct access to parking areas. The Project would also not increase any hazards related to a design feature. All of the proposed improvements would be required to be installed in conformance with City design standards. The City's construction permitting process includes review Project site plans to ensure that no potentially hazardous transportation design features would be introduced by the Project. For example, sight distance at each Project driveway would be reviewed for conformance with City of Santa Ana sight distance standards at the time of permitting approvals for grading, landscape, onsite circulation construction, and street improvement plans. As a result, impacts related to vehicular circulation design features would be less than significant. IMPACT TR -4: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN INADEQUATE EMERGENCY ACCESS. Less than Significant Impact. Construction The proposed construction activities, including equipment and supply staging and storage, would occur within and adjacent to the Project area and would not restrict access of emergency vehicles to the Project site or adjacent areas. The roadway improvements and installation of driveways that would be implemented during construction of the proposed Project could require the temporary closure of travel lanes, but full roadway closure and traffic detours are not expected to be necessary. However, construction activities may temporarily restrict vehicular traffic that could increase hazards. Therefore, the construction activities would City of Santa Ana 5.14-23 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation be required to implement measures to facilitate the passage of persons and vehicles through/around any required temporary road restrictions, and ensure the safety of passage in accordance with Section 503 of the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 9) and the City of Santa Ana Fire Code included as Municipal Code Chapter 14, which would be ensured through the City's permitting process. Thus, implementation of the Project through the City's permitting process would ensure existing regulations are adhered to and would reduce potential construction related emergency access impacts to a less than significant level. Operation As described previously, the Project includes one driveway on Red Hill Avenue and two driveways on Warner Avenue that provide direct access to parking areas. As described previously, these driveways would provide adequate and safe circulation to and from the Project site and would provide a several routes for emergency responders to access different portions of the Project site and surrounding areas. Additionally, during operation of the Project, building tenants would be required to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles as required and verified by the City and the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) through operational permitting and inspections. Because the Project is required to comply with all applicable City codes, as verified by the City and OCFA potential impacts related to inadequate emergency access would be less than significant. 5.14.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative traffic study area for the proposed Project includes the 57 intersections that are evaluated above. This includes portions of the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. The traffic study area was selected based upon, local access to the Project site and study area, the Project's trip generation, likely Project distribution patterns, a review of existing operations, and coordination with the Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine traffic engineering staffs. The related projects within the cumulative study area for traffic are listed on Table 5.14-7 and shown on Figure 5-1. The proposed Project would add new vehicle trips to the cumulative geographic area. Because the Project's anticipated opening year is 2022, the traffic analysis detailed above analyzed both Year 2022 and Year 2040 traffic conditions, which took into account the cumulative projects and regional growth. As detailed previously, the proposed Project would result in impacts in the cumulative 2040 condition. Mitigation measures have been identified, which would reduce impacts to a less than significant level; however, either implementation of the improvements requires approval or implementation from another jurisdiction, which is out of the control of the City of Santa Ana, or no planned improvement exists, and the timing of the improvement is unknown. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to traffic, and cumulative traffic impacts would be significant and unavoidable. 5.14.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES • Orange County Congestion Management Program • SCAG 2016 - 2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy • City of Santa Ana General Plan Circulation Element • City of Santa Ana Municipal Code City of Santa Ana 5.14-24 Draft EIR January 2020 E RGartrudePl OI h1YC--�'i..�riflFN�c n-.-r.ss� I� M ae Sburces: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, IN N mProject Site High Quality Transit Area Location Py° i U•' / i Fa umn 11r- Di>trr-1 _ F'h:a M T1, lin Locco=v Cyd Ok 40 �7 P�. o�Q ai 6° o Pa cCa ppb" Q c Col. Bill Barber IrNlil@MN emorial Perk %'A Y,pan—, e pkwyh1 at%l?o , Esri China (Hong Kong), Esrkorea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OI contributors, and the GIS Usl N High Quality Transit Areas A The Bowery Figure 5.14-2 Draft EIR The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 5.14-26 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation 5.14.2 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Without mitigation, Impact TR -1 would be potentially significant: Upon implementation of regulatory requirements, Impacts TR -2 through TR -4 would be less than significant. 5.14.9 MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure TR -1: Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue (#4) (Santa Ana): The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring payment of a fair share contribution to the improvement to add an eastbound protected right -turn overlap phase and prohibit northbound U-turns at the intersection of Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue. Mitigation Measure TR -2: Red Hill Avenue/Warner Avenue (#25) (Santa Ana/Tustin): The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring payment of the full cost or implementation of an additional westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and to prohibit southbound U-turns. The installation of this improvement is subject to the approval of the City of Tustin. Mitigation Measure TR -3: Red Hill Avenue/Barranca Parkway (#30) (Santa Ana/Tustin/Irvine): The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring payment of the full cost or implementation of an additional westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and to prohibit southbound U-turns. The installation of this improvement is subject to the approval of the Cities of Tustin and Irvine. Mitigation Measure TR -4: Red Hill Avenue/Alton Parkway (#32) (Santa Ana/Irvine): The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring payment of the full cost or implementation of a westbound protected right -turn overlap phase and to prohibit southbound U-turns. The installation of this improvement is subject to the approval of the City of Irvine. Mitigation Measure TR -5: Tustin Ranch Road/Warner Avenue North (#47) (Tustin): The Development Agreement that is required for implementation of the proposed Project shall include a clause requiring payment of a fair share contribution to restripe the 3rd northbound through lane as a shared through -right lane and remove the northbound right turn overlap. The installation of this improvement is subject to the approval of the City of Tustin. 5.14.10 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION For Impact TR -1, Mitigation Measures TR -1 through TR -5 are included. However, improvements at four of the intersections cannot be guaranteed by the City of Santa Ana because they require approval and/or implementation by the City of Tustin or the City of Irvine. In addition, the improvement at the fifth intersection is not currently planned, and it is unknown if it would be implemented by 2040. Therefore, implementation of the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. Impacts related Impacts TR -2 through TR -4 would be less than significant. City of Santa Ana 5.14-27 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.14 Transportation REFERENCES Caltrans Traffic Impact Study Guidelines, December 2002. Accessed: https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/guide_preparation_traffic_impact_stud i es_ca ltrans.pdf The Bowery Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA 2019), prepared by EPD Solutions, Inc., 2019. City of Santa Ana 5.14-28 Draft EIR January 2020 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources 5.15.1 INTRODUCTION This section addresses potential impacts to tribal cultural resources associated with implementation of the proposed Project. Information within this section is based upon data from the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File search, the Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report) that was prepared by LGC Geotechnical (GEO 2019) (Appendix C), the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by Stantec in 2018 (Phase 12018) (Appendix D), and project - specific coordination and consultation with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project region. 5.15.2 REGULATORY SETTING California Senate Bill 18 Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) (California Government Code Section 65352.3) sets forth requirements for local governments to consult with California Native American tribes identified by the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to aid in the protection of tribal cultural resources. The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early stage of planning to protect, or mitigate impacts on, tribal cultural resources. The Tribal Consultation Guidelines: Supplement to General Plan Guidelines (OPR, 2005), identifies the following contact and notification responsibilities of local governments: Prior to the adoption or any amendment of a general plan or specific plan, a local government must notify the appropriate tribes (on the contact list maintained by the NAHC of the opportunity to conduct consultations for the purpose of preserving, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places located on land within the local government's jurisdiction that is affected by the proposed plan adoption or amendment. Tribes have 90 days from the date on which they receive notification to request consultation, unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe (Government Code Section 65352.3). Prior to the adoption or substantial amendment of a general plan or specific plan, a local government must refer the proposed action to those tribes that are on the NAHC contact list and have traditional lands located within the city or county's jurisdiction. The referral must allow a 45 - day comment period (Government Code Section 65352). Notice must be sent regardless of whether prior consultation has taken place. Such notice does not initiate a new consultation process. • Local government must send a notice of a public hearing, at least 10 days prior to the hearing, to tribes who have filed a written request for such notice (Government Code Section 65092). Because the proposed Project includes a General Plan Amendment, it is subject to the statutory requirements of SB 18 Tribal Consultation Guidelines. California Assembly Bill 52 Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) established a requirement under CEQA to consider "tribal cultural values, as well as scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation." Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21074(a) defines "tribal cultural resources" (TCRs) as "[s]ites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe" that are either "[i]ncluded or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources" or "in a local register of historical resources." Additionally, defined cultural landscapes, historical resources, City of Santa Ana 5.15-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources and archaeological resources may be considered tribal cultural resources. PRC Section 21074(b), (c). The lead agency may also in its discretion treat a resource as a TCR if it is supported with substantial evidence. Projects for which a notice of preparation for a Draft EIR was filed on or after July 1, 2015 are required to have lead agencies offer California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area consultation on CEQA documents prior to submitting an EIR in order to protect TCRs. PRC Section 21080.3.1(b) defines "consultation" as "the meaningful and timely process of seeking, discussing, and considering carefully the views of others, in a manner that is cognizant of all parties' cultural values and, where feasible, seeking agreement." Consultation must "be conducted in a way that is mutually respectful of each party's sovereignty [and] recognize the tribes' potential needs for confidentiality with respect to places that have traditional tribal cultural significance." The consultation process is outlined as follows: 1. California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area submit written requests to participate in consultations. 2. Lead agencies are required to provide formal notice to the California Native American tribes that requested to participate within 14 days of the lead agency's determination that an application package is complete or decision to undertake a project. 3. California Native American tribes have 30 days from receipt of notification to request consultation on a project. 4. Lead agencies initiate consultations within 30 days of receiving a California Native American tribe's request for consultation on a project. 5. Consultations are complete when the lead agencies and California Native tribes participating have agreed on measures to mitigate or avoid a significant impact on a TCR, or after a reasonable effort in good faith has been made and a party concludes that a mutual agreement cannot be reached (PRC Sections 21082.3(a), (b)(1)-(2); 21080.3.1(b)(1)). AB 52 requires that the CEQA document disclose significant impacts on TCRs and discuss feasible alternatives or mitigation to avoid or lessen an impact. California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5 This code requires that if human remains are discovered on a project site, disturbance of the site shall halt and remain halted until the coroner has conducted an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. 5.15.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Native American Tribes The territory of the Gabrieleno at the time of Spanish contact covers much of current -day Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties, which includes the Project site in the City of Santa Ana. The southern region of this cultural area is bound by Aliso Creek, the eastern region is located east of San Bernardino along the Santa Ana River, the northern region includes the San Fernando Valley, and the western region includes portions of the Santa Monica Mountains. The Gabrieleno also occupied several Channel Islands including Santa Barbara Island, Santa Catalina Island, San Nicholas Island, and San Clemente Island. Because of their access to certain resources, including a steatite source from Santa Catalina Island, this group was among the wealthiest and most populous aboriginal groups in southern California. Trade of materials City of Santa Ana 5.15-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources and resources controlled by the Gabrieleno extended as far north as the San Joaquin Valley, as far east as the Colorado River, and as far south as Baja California. The Gabrieleno lived in permanent villages and smaller, resource -gathering camps occupied at various times of the year depending upon the seasonality of the resource. Larger villages comprised of several families or clans, while smaller, seasonal camps typically housed smaller family units. Gabrieleno houses were domed, circular structures made of thatched vegetation. Houses varied in size, and could house from one to several families. Sweathouses—semicircular, earth covered buildings—were public structures used in male social ceremonies. Other structures included menstrual huts and a ceremonial structure called a yuvar, an open-air structure built near the chief's house. Hunting implements included wooden clubs, sinew -backed bows, slings, and throwing clubs. Maritime implements included rafts, harpoons, spears, hook and line, and nets. A variety of other tools included deer scapulae saws, bone and shell needles, bone awls, scrapers, bone or shell flakers, wedges, stone knives and drills, metates, mullers, manos, shell spoons, bark platters, and wooden paddles and bowls. Baskets were made from rush (Juncus sp.), deer grass (Muhlenbergia rigens), and skunkbush (Rhus trilobata). The social structure of the Gabrieleno is little known; however, there appears to have been at least three social classes: 1) the elite, which included the rich, chiefs, and their immediate family; 2) a middle class, which included people of relatively high economic status or long-established lineages; and 3) a class of people that included most other individuals in the society. Villages were politically autonomous units comprised of several lineages. During times of the year when certain seasonal resources were available, the village would divide into lineage groups and move out to exploit them, returning to the village between forays. Each lineage had its own leader, with the village chief coming from the dominant lineage. Several villages might be allied under a paramount chief. Chiefly positions were of an ascribed status, most often passed to the eldest son. Chiefly duties included providing village cohesion, leading warfare and peace negotiations with other groups, collecting tribute from the village(s) under his jurisdiction, and arbitrating disputes within the village(s). The status of the chief was legitimized by his safekeeping of the sacred bundle, a representation of the link between the material and spiritual realms and the embodiment of power. Shamans were leaders in the spirit realm. The duties of the shaman included conducting healing and curing ceremonies, guarding of the sacred bundle, locating lost items, identifying and collecting poisons for arrows, and making rain. Marriages were made between individuals of equal social status and, in the case of powerful lineages, marriages were arranged to establish political ties between the lineages. Men conducted the majority of the heavy labor, hunting, fishing, and trading with other groups. Women's duties included gathering and preparing plant and animal resources, and making baskets, pots, and clothing. Rivers and streams were used as trading routes and travel routes as they provided resources. Thus, many tribal cultural resources are found along rivers, streams, and other known travel or trade routes. The Project site does not include, and is not located near a river, stream, or identified corridor that could have been a travel or trade route. Project Site Ground Disturbances The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment that was prepared for the Project site (ESA 2018) describes that between the years of 1938 and 1972, prior to development of the existing site structures, the Project site and adjacent areas were used for agriculture, which resulted in shallow soil disturbances. The Geotechnical Report that was prepared for the Project describes that the previous excavation for development of the existing 3 buildings and removal of previous underground storage tanks involved removal of soils and backfill with artificial compacted fill soils ranging between 5 feet and 13 feet in depth, as described below (GEO 2019): City of Santa Ana 5.15-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources • During development of the 2300 Red Hill Avenue building, soils were excavated to depths of approximately 5 feet below existing grade and compacted fill soils were used to backfill the excavation area for the building foundation. • During development of the 2310 Red Hill Avenue building, approximately 9 feet of fill was placed in the building pad area and fill soils were backfilled up to 15 feet beyond the limit of the building foundation (GEC) 2019). • The area of the 2320 Red Hill Avenue building pad was excavated to approximately 10 to 13 feet below the existing grade. The foundation was stabilized with approximately 24 inches of gravel and approximately 13 feet of artificial fill was placed under the building and up to 5 feet beyond the building foundations. • During removal of an underground storage tank located between 2310 and 2320 Red Hill Avenue buildings, approximately 10 feet of crushed miscellaneous base and approximately 5 feet of onsite soils were backfilled into the previous underground storage tank location. 5.15.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: • Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1 (k); or • A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, that considers the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. 5.15.5 METHODOLOGY A Sacred Lands File search was requested from the NAHC on February 1, 2019. The NAHC responded on February 6, 2019, stating that there are no known/known sacred lands within 0.5 mile of the Project area, and requested that 18 Native American individuals be contacted for further information regarding the general area vicinity. In compliance with SB 18, AB 52, and the NAHC request, on September 24, 2019, the City sent letters to the following Native American tribes that may have knowledge regarding tribal cultural resources in the Project vicinity. • Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians • Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe • Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians • Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation • Gabrieleno/Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council • Juaneno Band of Mission Indians • Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation City of Santa Ana 5.15-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources • Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation — Romero • La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians • Pala Band of Mission Indians • Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians • Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians • Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians (2 contacts) • San Fernando Band of Mission Indians • San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians • Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians Three responses were received. The Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians responded on October 14, 2019 stating that the Project site is not within the Luiseno Aboriginal Territory. The Pala Band of Mission Indians responded on November 20, 2019 stating that the Project site is not within the boundaries of the recognized Pala Indian Reservation. The project is also beyond the boundaries of the territory that the tribe considers its Traditional Use Area. Mr. Andrew Salas, Chairman of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation, responded on October 1, 2019. A conference call between a City representative and Mr. Salas occurred on October 30, 2019 during which the history of uses and development of the Project site and the depth of previous and existing infrastructure on the site was discussed. Mr. Salas did not provide any specific information or substantial evidence indicating that potential Tribal Cultural Resources could be located within the Project site. 5.15.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT TCR -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCE THAT IS LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES, OR IN A LOCAL REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES AS DEFINED IN PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 5020.1(K). Less than Significant Impact. SB 18 and AB 52 require meaningful consultation between lead agencies and California Native American tribes regarding potential impacts on TCRs. As described above, TCRs are sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either eligible or listed in the California Register of Historical Resources or local register of historical resources (PRC Section 21074). As outlined above, the City sent letters to 18 Native American representatives identified by NAHC, notifying them of the proposed Project in accordance with SB 18 and AB 52. One California Native American tribe request for consultation, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation. Mr. Andrew Salas provided oral information about the use of the Orange County area for Native American village sites and the City provided the history of uses and development of on the Project site, including the depth of previous and existing infrastructure and foundation systems on the site. Based on the consultation conducted, no TCRs were identified. The Project site includes three modern industrial buildings that were developed in the early 1980s and do not involve tribal cultural resources. As described previously, the site has a long history of ground disturbance from previous agricultural uses and development. As detailed previously, artificial fill was observed in geotechnical field explorations up to 7.5 feet below existing grade and previous excavation and recompaction ranged from 5 feet to 13 feet for development of the existing buildings. It is likely that the site disturbance included the undeveloped portion of the site at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenue. City of Santa Ana 5.15-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources The extensive previous excavation, recompaction, and fill soils onsite have limited the potential of the site to contain tribal cultural resources. Also, as described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the proposed Project would excavate onsite soils to a minimum of 5 feet below the bottom of the building foundations and 5 feet beyond the building perimeters. The soils would be reconditioned and recompacted as engineered fill to support the proposed building structures. The depth of the excavation is within the previously disturbed soil depths, which further reduces the potential of the Project to result in impacts related to tribal cultural resources. Overall, the Project site does not include resources that are listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources; and due to the extent and depth of previous ground disturbances throughout the site, the potential for tribal cultural resources is limited. Therefore, Project impacts to tribal cultural resource that are listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or other register of historical resources would be less than significant. IMPACT TCR -2: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A RESOURCE DETERMINED BY THE LEAD AGENCY, IN ITS DISCRETION AND SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, TO BE SIGNIFICANT PURSUANT TO CRITERIA SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISION (C) OF THE PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 5024.1, THAT CONSIDERS THE SIGNIFCANCE OF THE RESOURCES TO A CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE. Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. As described in the previous response, the Project site has been heavily disturbed to substantial depths. The proposed Project involves excavation; however, as discussed in Impact TCR -1 above, no substantial evidence exists that TCRs are present in the Project site. Although, no TCRs have been identified, during the SB 18/AB 52 consultation, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation stated that the Project lies within its ancestral tribal territory within a potentially sensitive area. Therefore, to avoid potential adverse effects to tribal cultural resources, Mitigation Measure TCR -1 has been included to provide for Native American resource sensitivity training, monitoring, and to prescribe activities should any inadvertent discoveries of tribal cultural resources be unearthed by Project construction activities. Additionally, as described previously, California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered in the Project site, disturbance of the site shall halt and remain halted until the coroner has conducted an investigation. If the coroner determines that the remains are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR -1 and the existing regulations, impacts to TCRs would be less than significant. 5.15.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The cumulative study area for tribal cultural resources includes the southern California region, which contains the same general tribal historic setting of the Gabrieleno, as detailed previously in Section 5.15.3, Environmental Setting. Other projects in the vicinity of the Project would involve ground disturbances that could reveal buried TCRs. Cumulative impacts to TCRs would be reduced by compliance with applicable regulations and consultations required by SB 18 and AB 52. As described above, the Project site and vicinity is not known to contain TCRs; however, Mitigation Measure TCR -1 would be implemented to ensure that impacts would not occur in the case of an inadvertent discovery of a potential TCR. This mitigation measure would provide that the Project City of Santa Ana 5.15-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources would not contribute to a cumulative loss of TCRs. Therefore, cumulatively impacts would be less than significant. 5.15.8 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, • California Government Code Sections 5097.9-5097.99 • California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 • California Public Resources Code Sections 21073 et seq. (AB 52) 5.15.9 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Upon implementation of regulatory requirements, Impact TCR -1 would be less than significant. Without mitigation, Impact TCR -2 would be potentially significant: 5.15.10 MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measure TCR -1: Native American Monitoring. Prior to the issuance of any permits for initial site clearing (such as pavement removal, grubbing, tree removals) or issuance of permits allowing ground - disturbing activities that cause excavation to depths greater than artificial fill (including as boring, grading, excavation, drilling, potholing or auguring, and trenching), the City of Santa Ana shall ensure that the project applicant/developer retain qualified Native American Monitor(s). The monitor(s) shall be approved by the tribal representatives of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation and be present on-site during initial site clearing and construction that involves ground disturbing activities that cause excavation to depths greater than artificial fill identified herein. The monitor shall conduct a Native American Indian Sensitivity Training for construction personnel. The training session includes a handout and focus on how to identify Native American resources encountered during earthmoving activities and the procedures followed if resources are discovered. The Native American monitor(s) shall complete monitoring logs on a daily basis, providing descriptions of the daily activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when grading and excavation activities of native soil (i.e., previously undisturbed) are completed, or when the tribal representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for tribal cultural resources, whichever occurs first. In the event that tribal cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during ground -disturbing activities, work must be halted within 50 feet of the find until it can also be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist in cooperation with a Native American monitor to determine if the potential resource meet the CEQA definition of historical (State CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(a)) and/or unique resource (Public Resources Code 21083.2(g)). Construction activities could continue in other areas. If the find is considered an "archeological resource" the archaeologist, in cooperation with a Native American monitor shall pursue either protection in place or recovery, salvage and treatment of the deposits. Recovery, salvage and treatment protocols shall be developed in accordance with applicable provisions of Public Resource Code Section 21083.2 and State CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 and 15126.4. If unique a tribal cultural resource cannot be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state, recovery, salvage and treatment shall be required at the Project applicant's expense. All recovered and salvaged resources shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation in an established accredited professional repository. City of Santa Ana 5.15-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources 5.15.10 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION The mitigation measure and existing regulatory programs described previously would reduce potential impacts associated with TCRs for Impact TCR -2 to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to TCRs would occur. REFERENCES Bean, Lowell John and Charles R Smith. 1978 Gabrielino IN Handbook of North American Indians, California, edited by R.F. Heizer, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C., pp 538-549. Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report). Prepared by LGC Geotechnical. 2019 (GEO 2019). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report, 2018. Prepared by Stantec (Phase 1 201 8). City of Santa Ana 5.15-8 Draft EIR January 2020 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems 5.16.1 INTRODUCTION This section of the EIR evaluates the potential effects on utilities and service systems from implementation of the Project by identifying anticipated demand and existing and planned utility availability. This includes water supply and infrastructure, wastewater, drainage, and solid waste. Electric power, natural gas, telecommunications, and renewable energy resources are described in Section 4.14, Energy Resources. Water supply and infrastructure capacity information in this section is from the Water Supply Assessment prepared (WSA 2019)(included as Appendix H), the City of Santa Ana 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the Sewer Analysis Report (Sewer 2019)(included as Appendix L), and Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP 2019)(included as Appendix G). Because CEQA focuses on physical environmental effects, this section analyzes whether increases in demand for water and wastewater utilities would result from the proposed Project would result in significant adverse physical environmental effects. For example, an increase in wastewater generation, by itself, would not be considered a physical change in the environment; however, physical changes in the environment resulting from the construction of new facilities or an expansion of existing wastewater facilities could constitute a significant impact under CEQA. 5.16.2 WATER 5.16.2.1 WATER REGULATORY SETTING Safe Drinking Water Act The United States Environmental Protection Agency administers the Safe Drinking Water Act, which is the primary federal law that regulates the quality of drinking water and establishes standards to protect public health and safety. The Department of Health Services (DHS) implements the requirements of the Act and oversees public water system quality statewide. DHS establishes legal drinking water standards for contaminates that could threaten public health. California Urban Water Management Planning Act Section 10610 of the California Water Code established the California Urban Water Management Planning Act (CUWMPA), requires urban water suppliers to initiate planning strategies to ensure an appropriate level of reliability in its water service. CUWMPA states that every urban water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that annually provides more than 3,000 acre-feet of water service, should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple -dry years. The CUWMPA describes the contents of UWMP's as well as methods for urban water suppliers to adopt and implement the plans. As described below, the City of Santa Ana has an updated 2015 UWMP that addresses water supply and demand through 2040. Senate Bill 610 Senate Bill (SB) 610 requires public urban water suppliers with 3,000 or more service connections to identify existing and planned sources of water for planned developments of a certain size. It further requires the City of Santa Ana 5.16-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems public water system to prepare a specified water supply assessment (WSA) for projects that meet the following criteria: a) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units; b) A proposed shopping center employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space; c) A commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space; d) A hotel or motel, or both, with more than 500 rooms; e) An industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 sf of floor area; and f) A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects above. The components of a WSA include existing water demand, future water demand by the project, and must ensure that water is available for the project during normal years, a single dry year, and multiple dry years during a 20 -year future projection period. The WSA must also describe whether the project's water demand is accounted for in the water supplier's UWMP. Supplies of water for future water supply must be documented in the WSA. Senate Bill 221 SB 221 requires the local water provider to provide "written verification" of "sufficient water supplies" to serve the project. SB 221 applies only to residential projects of 500 units or more (infill or low-income or very -low-income housing subdivisions are exempt) and requires the land use planning agency to include as a condition of approval of a tentative map, parcel map, or development agreement a requirement that "sufficient water supply" be available. Sufficiency under SB 221 differs from SB 610 in that it is determined by considering the availability of water over the past 20 years; the applicability of any urban water shortage contingency analysis prepared per Water Code Section 10632; the reduction in water supply allocated to a specific use by an adopted ordinance; and the amount of water that can be reasonably relied upon from other water supply projects, such as conjunctive use, reclaimed water, water conservation, and water transfer. In most cases, the WSA prepared under SB 610 meets the requirement for proof of water supply under SB 221. Senate Bill 1262 SB 1262, which amends Section 66473.7 of the Government Code and Section 10910 of the Water Code requires Water Supply Assessments (WSAs) to include additional information regarding sustainable groundwater management if water supply for a project includes groundwater, including: • Whether the department has identified the basin as being subject to critical conditions of overdraft pursuant to Section 12924. • If a groundwater sustainability agency has adopted a groundwater sustainability plan or has an approved alternative, a copy of that alternative or plan. As described below, the City obtains a majority of its water supply from the groundwater basin. Thus, this additional information is provided in the project specific WSA (Appendix H, herein). City of Santa Ana 5.16-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems CalGreen Building Code California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11, establishes the California Green Building Code or CALGreen. The CALGreen Code is updated every three years. It was recently updated in 2019 and is effective January 1, 2020. CALGreen sets forth water efficiency standards (i.e., maximum flow rates) for all new plumbing and irrigation fittings and fixtures. City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The existing Conservation Element of the Santa Ana General Plan includes the following goals and policies are related to water supply and the proposed Project. Goal 1: Protect the public health, safety and welfare through effective management of natural resources. Objective 1.2: Provide sufficient water of adequate quality for all users. Objective 2.1: Conserve water resources in commercial, industrial, residential and recreational uses. City of Santa Ana Municipal Code Municipal Code Section 39-106; Permanent Water Conservation Requirements: The City promotes water use efficiency and only allows outdoor watering to every other day or Monday, Thursday, and Saturday and only between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Municipal Code Section 39-106 establishes permanent water conservation requirements and prohibition against waste that are effective at all times and is not dependent upon a water shortage for implementation that includes: • No washing down hard or paved surfaces • Limit on watering hours • Re -circulating water required for water fountains and decorative water features • Drinking water served upon request only • Limits on washing vehicles • Commercial lodging establishments must provide guests option to decline daily linen services • Restaurants required to use water conserving dish wash spray valves • Obligation to fix leaks, break, or malfunctions • No installation of single pass cooling systems • Commercial car wash systems • No excessive water flow or runoff • No installation of non -recirculating water systems in commercial car wash and laundry systems • No watering during or within 48 hours of measurable rainfall • No irrigation of ornamental turf on public street medians with potable water • Limit on irrigation with potable water of landscapes outside of new construction In an event of a water supply shortage, the ordinance further establishes three levels of water supply shortage response actions to be implemented during times of declared water shortage or declared water shortage emergency, with increasing restrictions on water use in response to worsening drought or emergency conditions and decreasing supplies. City of Santa Ana 5.16-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems Municipal Code Section 41-1503; Landscape Water Use Standards: The City promotes water use efficiency through water efficient landscape requirements that were implemented in January 2016. This code requires that new landscape projects greater than 2,500 square feet comply with the performance requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines that identifies a maximum allowable water use for landscape that is implemented by efficient irrigation systems and drought tolerant landscape species. 5.16.2.2 WATER ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of Santa Ana Water Resources Division provides water services to 27 -square mile service area that includes the City of Santa Ana and a small area of the City of Orange. Water Supply and Demand The City's water supply is a combination of imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin (OC Basin), and recycled water. As shown on Table 5.16-1, in 2015 the City obtained 71.2 percent of water supply from groundwater, 27.8 percent of water from imported/purchased supplies, and 1.0 percent from recycled water sources. Table 5.16-1: City of Santa Ana Actual Water Supply 2015 Source Volume (acre- Percentage 27,992 feet) 28,025 1 OC Groundwater Basin 26,351 71.2% Imported Purchased 10,305 27.8% Recycled 352 1.0 Total 37,008 100% Source: 2015 UWMP The 2015 UWMP identified that water demands were 36,656 AF from July 2014 to June 2015, which is 352 AF less than the water supply shown in Table 5.16-1. Thus, sufficient water supply was available to meet demands. In addition, the 2015 UWMP highlights that 2010 UWMP anticipated water demands in 2015 to be much larger at 47,800 AF and detailed the ability of the City to meet the greater anticipated demand. As shown in Table 5.16-2, the 2015 UWMP estimates that water supplies in the future are anticipated to be obtained through a similar mix of groundwater and imported water. The 2015 UWMP anticipates that the City's water supply will increase from 36,998 acre-feet (AF) in 2020 to 40,036 AF in 2040 (increase of 3,038 AFY) to meet the City's anticipated growth in water demands, which is an 8.2 percent increase. Table 5.16-2: City of Santa Ana Projected Water Demand and Supply Projections (acre-feet) Source 2020 1 2025 1 2030 1 2035 1 2040 1 2040 OC Groundwater Basin 25,899 1 27,802 1 27,992 1 27,985 1 28,025 1 70.0% Imported Purchased 10,799 11,615 11,697 11,693 11,711 29.20 Recycled 320 320 320 320 320 0.8% Total 36,998 39,717 39,989 39,978 40,036 100% Source: 2015 UWMP The 2040 projections anticipate that 70 percent of supply would be from the OC Basin and 29.3 percent from imported/purchased sources. The 2015 UWMP details that the available supply would meet the projected demand in single dry years and multiple dry years through 2040 with a planned demand increase of 6 percent due to diversified supply and conservation measures. City of Santa Ana 5.16-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems The 2015 UWMP also describes that water demands per capita have been decreasing in recent years due to new state and local regulations related to water conservation. The 2015 UWMP plan describes that the City used 83 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) in 2015, which exceeded the City's target of 116 GPCD for 2020. Groundwater: As described previously, a majority of the City's water supply is groundwater that is pumped from the OC Basin. The OC Basin covers an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminates at the Orange County line to the northwest, where its aquifer systems continue into the Central Basin of Los Angeles County. The OC Basin is recharged primarily by four sources including local rainfall, storm and base flows from the Santa Ana River (SAR), purchased MWD imported water; and highly treated recycled wastewater. Basin recharge occurs largely in 4 recharge basins that are in or adjacent to the City of Anaheim. OCWD manages the OC Basin through a Basin Production Percentage (BPP) that is determined each water year based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, water year precipitation, SAR runoff, and basin management objectives. While there is no legal limit as to how much an agency pumps from the OC Basin, there is a financial disincentive to pump above the BPP. For example, if the BPP is set at 75 percent, all pumpers within the Basin, including the City, can supply 75 percent of their water needs from groundwater supplies at a cost significantly less than the cost of imported water. If groundwater production is equal to or less than the BPP (i.e. less than 75 percent in the example above), all producers within the Basin pay a replenishment assessment (RA) fee which is used to fund groundwater replenishment and recharge programs aimed at ensuring the long-term viability and stability of the Basin. In 2015, the BPP was 75 percent and OCWD's goal is to provide a stable 75 percent BPP through management of the basin (WSA 2018). As required by Senate Bill 1262, the WSA prepared for the proposed Project describes that the OC Basin is designated as a medium -priority basin and has operated within its sustainable yield over a period of at least 10 years without experiencing significant and unreasonable (1) lowering of groundwater levels, (2) reduction in storage, (3) water quality degradation, (4) seawater intrusion, (5) inelastic land subsidence, or (6) depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water. In addition, the OC Basin has not been in conditions of critical overdraft. Imported Water: The City of Santa Ana is one of only three retail member agencies of MWD in Orange County. As a member agency the City has preferential rights to a certain percentage of MWD water and receives water directly from MWD, as opposed to other cities in Orange County that obtain their imported MWD water through Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). The MWD imported water is treated at MWD's Robert Diemer Filtration Plant north of Yorba Linda. The City has seven connections to the MWD system. In addition, the City participates in MWD's Conjunctive Use Program, which uses allows for the storage of surplus imported MWD water in the Basin to maintain reliability during dry, drought, and emergency conditions. Approximately 28-29 percent of the City's water supply is imported/purchased from MWD and the OCWD. The 2015 MWD UWMP determined that MWD has supply capabilities that would be sufficient to meet expected demands from 2020 through 2040 under the normal, single dry -year and multiple dry -year conditions. MWD also has proposed programs in place to ensure against water shortages in the future. These programs include projects along the California Aqueduct and the Colorado River Aqueduct in addition to City of Santa Ana 5.16-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems demand reduction projects. In all climate scenarios, MWD estimates potential surpluses in water supply through 2040. In addition, the City participates in MWD's Conjunctive Use Program, which stores surplus imported MWD water in the Basin for use as needed (WSA 2019). Recycled Water: The City obtains recycled water supply from the Orange County Water District (OCWD) for non -potable uses such as irrigation. OCWD provided 352 AF of recycled water to the City of Santa Ana in 2015 as part of the Green Acres Project (GAP), which is a water recycling system that provides up to 8,400 AFY of recycled water as an alternate source of water that is mainly delivered to parks, golf courses, greenbelts, cemeteries, and nurseries in the Cities of Santa Ana, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Newport Beach. The City maintains an agreement with OCWD to supply GAP water to customers where available, and it is anticipated that recycled water supplied to the City will maintain around 300 AFY through 2040 (2015 UWMP). Water Infrastructure The City maintains 444 miles of transmission and distribution mains, 9 reservoirs with a storage capacity of 49.3 million gallons, 7 pumping stations, 20 wells, and 7 connections to the MWD System that have a transfer capacity of 60,580 gallons per minute (gpm). The Project site is currently served by the City's water utility and is connected to the existing water infrastructure. Warner Avenue contains a 12 -inch water main that conveys water supplies to the Project site and adjacent areas. 5.16.2.3 WATER THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: UT -1 Require or result in the construction of new water facilities, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects; or UT -2 Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. 5.16.2.4 WATER SERVICE METHODOLOGY The evaluation of water supply quantifies the amount of water that would be required to support operation of the proposed Project and compares the demand to the City's available water supply to identify if sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Additionally, the water supply infrastructure in the Project area was identified and evaluated to ensure design capacity would be adequate to supply the Project site, or to identify if expansions would be required to serve the proposed development. 5.16.2.5 WATER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT UT -1: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT REQUIRE OR RESULT IN THE RELOCATION OR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW WATER FACILITIES, OR EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITIES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. Less than Significant. The proposed Project would redevelop the Project site, which is currently served by the City's water infrastructure. An existing 12 -inch water pipeline in Warner Avenue currently provide water supplies to the Project site and surrounding adjacent areas. The proposed Project would install new water infrastructure on the Project site that would connect to the existing 1 2 -inch water pipeline in Warner Avenue. The new onsite water system would convey water supplies to the proposed residences, commercial uses, and City of Santa Ana 5.16-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems landscaping through plumbing/landscaping fixtures that are compliant with the CalGreen Plumbing Code for efficient use of water. The proposed Project would continue to receive water supplies through the existing 12 -inch water line located within the Red Hill Avenue rights-of-way that has the capacity to provide the increased water supplies needed to serve the proposed Project, and no extensions or expansions to the water pipelines that convey water to the Project site would be required. Redevelopment of the existing onsite water distribution lines would only serve the proposed Project and would not provide water to any off-site areas. The construction activities related to the onsite water infrastructure that would be needed to serve the proposed multi -family residential and commercial uses is included as part of the proposed Project and would not result in any physical environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this EIR. For example, construction emissions for excavation and installation of the water infrastructure is included in Sections 5.2, Air Quality and 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects, and impacts would be less than significant. IMPACT UT -2: THE CITY WOULD HAVE SUFFICIENT WATER SUPPLIES AVAILABLE TO SERVE THE PROJECT AND REASONABLY FORESEEABLE DEVELOPMENT DURING NORMAL, DRY, AND MULTIPLE DRY YEARS. Less than Significant. The proposed Project would redevelop the Project site, which is currently developed with three partially occupied light industrial buildings and onsite landscaping that is included in the City's existing water demand estimates. Based on the water demand factors from the City of Santa Ana Design Guidelines for Water and Sewer Facilities, an industrial water demand factor of 3,500 gallons per day (gpd) per acre, and a landscape water demand factor of 3,000 gpd/acre was used to identify the water demand that is accounted for in City water entitlements for the site. Because the existing buildings were fully occupied and operational during preparation of the City's UWMP, the demands for the existing buildings are included in the UWMP estimates. The existing onsite landscaping consists of approximately 60,000 square feet. As shown in Table 5.16-3, the estimated water demand for the site, which is included in existing City entitlements is approximately 21,185 gpd or 23.73 acre-feet per year (AFY). Table 5.16-3: Existing Water Demands Assumed in City Entitlements Water Use Square Footage Acreage Equivalent Water Demand Factor (gpd/acre) Water Demand (gpd) Water Demand (AFY) Industrial Buildings 212,121 4.87 3,500 17,045 19.09 Landscaping 60,000 1.38 3,000 4,140 4.64 Total 272,121 6.16 -- 21,185 23.73 iource: WSA, Appendix H The proposed mixed uses would result in an increased demand for water supplies on the Project site. The Project is proposed to include 1,150 multi -family residential units, 80,000 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant space, and 247,506 square feet of landscaping. The estimates for residential water in the WSA were developed by following the Orange County Water Reliability Study by Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC); and the commercial and landscaping water demands factors are from the City of Santa Ana Design Guidelines for Water and Sewer Facilities. City of Santa Ana 5.16-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems As shown in Table 5.16-4, the proposed Project would result in a total demand of 269 AFY at full occupancy, which would be a 245.27 AFY increase in comparison to the water demand from the existing buildings that are included in the UWMP assumptions. Table 5.16-4: Water Demands from Operation of the Project Land Use Type Residences or acreage Unit Water Demand Factor Daily Water Usage (gpd) Annual Water Usage (AFY) Multi -family 1,150 DU 190 gpd/DU' 218,500 244.8 Commercial 1.84 acres 2,500 gpd/acre2 4,591 5.1 Landscaped Areas 5.68 acres 3,000 gpd/acre2 17,046 19.1 Total Project Water Demand 240,137 269 Existing Site Water Demand 21,185 23.73 Change in Water Demand from the Project 218,952 gpd 245.27 AFY Source: WSA, Appendix H DU = Dwelling Units This equates to an 8.1 percent of the anticipated increase in water demand between 2015 and 2040 of 3,028 AFY that is anticipated by the 2015 UWMP. However, the water factors from the City's Design Guidelines are very conservative, higher than the actual average water use, and assumes full occupancy of the proposed Project. Because the proposed Project would result in an increase in demand for water supplies that is 8.1 percent of the 2015 UWMP anticipated increase, the City would have water supplies available to serve the Project. In addition, as shown in Table 5.16-2 and detailed in the WSA included as Appendix H, the City's available supply, including groundwater and imported water, will meet projected demand that includes the proposed Project during normal, single dry and multiple dry years (WSA 2019). Therefore, impacts related to water supplies from the proposed Project would be less than significant. 5.16.2.6 WATER CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative water supply impacts are considered on a citywide basis and are associated with the capacity of the infrastructure system and the adequacy of the City's infrastructure and primary sources of water that include groundwater pumped through City wells, deliveries of imported water from MWD, and recycled water from OCWD. As described previously, during construction of the Project water lines would be installed to serve the proposed buildings and landscaping, which would connect to the existing system that is adjacent to the Project site. The onsite water system has been designed for the proposed Project and would be served by existing off-site adjacent infrastructure. Thus, the proposed Project would not result in the requirement for new or expanded off-site water infrastructure that could combine with other water infrastructure needs to result in an environmental impact. Thus, potential cumulative impacts from off-site water system expansions would not occur from the proposed Project. The WSA that was prepared for the proposed Project describes that the 2015 MWD UWMP details the ability to meet the demands of its member agencies, including the City of Santa Ana, through 2040. In addition, the City of Santa Ana 2015 UWMP confirmed the ability of the local supplies and the OC Basin to meet the growing demands of the City in multiple dry year scenarios. Also, as described previously the increased water demand from the proposed Project would be 8.1 percent of the 2015 UWMP anticipated increase. Thus, the City would have water supplies available to serve the Project from existing entitlements, and cumulative water supply needs would be able to be met as detailed by the MWD and City's UWMPs. City of Santa Ana 5.16-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems As a result, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable increase in water supply demands that would require new or expanded entitlements, and cumulative impacts would be less than significant. 5.16.2.7 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES The following standard regulations would reduce potential impacts related to water: • California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 1 1; the California Green Building Code • Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 39-106; Permanent Water Conservation Requirements • Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-1503; Landscape Water Use Standards 5.16.2.8 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impacts UT -1 and UT -2 would be less than significant. 5.16.2.9 WATER MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.16.2.10 WATER LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to water supplies or water infrastructure would occur. 5.16.3 WASTEWATER 5.16.3.1 WASTEWATER REGULATORY SETTING National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit The NPDES permit system was established in the federal Clean Water Act to regulate both point source discharges (a municipal or industrial discharge at a specific location or pipe) and nonpoint source discharges (diffuse runoff of water from adjacent land uses) to surface waters of the U.S. For point source discharges, such as sewer outfalls, each NPDES permit contains limits on allowable concentrations and mass emissions of pollutants contained in the discharge. State Water Resources Control Board Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sewer Systems The Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems (SWRCB Order No 2006-0003-DWQ) applies to sanitary sewer systems that are greater than one mile long and collect or convey untreated or partially treated wastewater to a publicly owned treatment facility. The goal of Order No. 2006-0003 is to provide a consistent statewide approach for reducing Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs), which are accidental releases of untreated or partially treated wastewater from sanitary sewer systems, by requiring that: I. In the event of an SSO, all feasible steps be taken to control the released volume and prevent untreated wastewater from entering storm drains, creeks, etc. 2. If an SSO occurs, it must be reported to the SWRCB using an online reporting system developed by the SWRCB. 3. All publicly owned collection system agencies with more than one mile of sewer pipe in the State must develop a Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP), which must be updated every five years. City of Santa Ana 5.16-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems The City of Santa Ana has updated its Sewer System Management Plan in compliance with these requirements in 2014. City of Santa Ana General Plan The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive update to the General Plan. The existing Conservation Element of the Santa Ana General Plan includes the following objective related to wastewater and the proposed Project. Objective 1.4: Assure adequate sewer treatment facilities to meet population and economic growth requirements. 5.16.3.2 WASTEWATER ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING In 2015, the City of Santa Ana generated approximately 23,826 acre-feet of wastewater (2015 UWMP). The City of Santa Ana operates and maintains the local sewer system consisting of over 390 miles of pipeline, 7,630 manholes, and two lift stations. Wastewater from the Project site currently discharges into existing City -owned 8 -inch sewer line within Warner Avenue. The existing sewer lines drain southeasterly to a manhole at Red Hill Avenue that are conveyed southeasterly through an existing six-inch double siphon that drains to a 42 -inch trunk OCSD sewer line in Red Hill Avenue that drains southwesterly. The Sewer Study prepared for the proposed Project monitored existing flows in Warner Avenue over a period of two weeks from April 30, 2019 to May 15, 2019, and determined that the capacity of the existing 8 -inch pipeline is 0.35 cfs and that the existing average flows were 0.01 cfs and the existing peak flows were 0.04 (Sewer 2019). The OCSD trunk pipelines, including the one in Red Hill Avenue adjacent to the site, conveys wastewater to the OCSD Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley that has a treatment capacity of 204 million gallons per day (mgd) and an average daily flow of 117 mgd (C)CSD 2018). Given the anticipated growth within OCSD's service area, OCSD is currently implementing several infrastructure projects to provide additional capacity (C)CSD 2018). 5.16.3.3 WASTEWATER THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: UT -3 Require or result in the construction of new wastewater facilities, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects; or UT -4 Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that would serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. 5.16.3.4 WASTEWATER SERVICE METHODOLOGY The evaluation of wastewater infrastructure quantifies the amount of wastewater that would be generated from operation of the proposed Project and compares the demand to the existing and planned sewer infrastructure in the Project area and wastewater treatment plant that treats flows from the Project site. The evaluation identifies if expansions would be required to serve the proposed development, and if those expansions have the potential to result in an environmental impact. City of Santa Ana 5.16-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems 5.16.3.5 WASTEWATER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT UT -3: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT REQUIRE OR RESULT IN THE RELOCATION OR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW WASTEWATER FACILITIES, OR EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITIES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. Less than Significant. The Project site is currently served by the City's 8 -inch sewer line within Warner Avenue. The Project includes replacing approximately 367 feet of the existing 8 -inch City sewer line in Warner Avenue, between the Project site and the Orange County Sanitation sewer line in Red Hill Avenue, with a 10 -inch sewer. In addition, the Project would install a new onsite sewer system that would connect to off-site City of Santa Ana sewer facilities. Approximately half the Project site would discharge wastewater directly into a City -owned manhole located at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. The other half of the Project site would discharge wastewater into the improved 10 -inch sewer in Warner Avenue to the existing 42 -inch sewer in Red Hill Avenue. In order to determine whether the sewer system would be able to adequately handle the wastewater flows from the proposed Project in addition to existing flows, sewer flow monitoring was performed for a period of two weeks to identify the existing average and peak wastewater flow rates. Per the City's Design Criteria, the proposed development would generate an average daily sewage flow of 0.3966 cfs. Per the City's Design Guidelines, Section 300.4.2 Peak Flows, the peak daily flow is calculated as three times the average daily flow, which would equal a peak daily flow of 1.1898 cfs. The Sewer Study also identified that the existing industrial buildings on the Project site generates an average daily flow of 0.0881 cfs and a peak daily flow of 0.2643 cfs. Thus, the proposed Project would result in an increase of flows by an average daily flow of 0.3085 cfs and a peak daily flow of 0.9255 cfs. The Sewer Study (Appendix L, herein) identifies this as very conservative in comparison to actual existing peak flow observed at the location during flow monitoring. Based on results of the sewer flow monitoring and the City's Design Criteria wastewater generation rates, the Sewer Study identified that with replacing 367 feet of the existing 8 -inch sewer line in Warner Avenue with a 10-inc sewer, as proposed, the sewer lines that serve the Project site would have a peak flow half full capacity of 0.65 cfs which would is adequate capacity to accommodate the additional wastewater flows from the proposed Project. The construction activities related to replacing 367 feet of 8 -inch water line with 10 -inch water line within the Warner Avenue right of way and installation of the onsite sewer infrastructure that would serve the proposed Project, is included as part of the proposed Project and would not result in any physical environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this EIR. For example, construction emissions for excavation and installation of the sewer infrastructure is included in Section 5.2, Air Quality and 5.5, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and noise volumes from these activities are evaluated in Section 5.10, Noise. As the proposed Project includes facilities to serve the Project and existing development, it would not result in the need for construction of other new wastewater facilities or expansions, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. IMPACT UT -4: THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN A DETERMINATION BY THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROVIDER THAT WOULD SERVE THE PROJECT THAT IT HAS ADEQUATE CAPACITY TO SERVE THE PROJECTS PROJECTED DEMAND IN ADDITION TO THE PROVODERS EXISTING COMMITMENTS. City of Santa Ana 5.16-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems Less than Significant. The proposed Project would result in an increase of wastewater generation from the site. To evaluate the maximum potential impact of the proposed Project on wastewater treatment facilities, and because wastewater treatment facility capacity is based on mgd not cfs, it has been conservatively assumed that all of the water needed for indoor uses by the proposed Project would be converted to wastewater and need treatment. As described previously in the Impact UT -2 discussion, based on the City's Design Guidelines, the proposed Project would utilize 201,906 gpd of water (without inclusion of the landscaping water need). Assuming all of this needs treatment, the Project would result in a 201,906 gpd increase in flows to the OCSD Reclamation Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley. As noted above, the OCSD 42 -inch sewer in Red Hill Avenue conveys wastewater to the OCSD Reclamation Plant No. 1, which has a treatment capacity of 204 mgd and an average daily flow of 117 mgd. Due to the existing additional capacity of 87 mgd, the existing facilities would be available to accommodate the increase in wastewater flow from full occupancy of the proposed Project that would generate 201,906 gpd. As a result, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in inadequate capacity of the wastewater treatment plant to serve the Project's demand in addition to existing service commitments, and impacts would be less than significant. 5.16.3.6 WASTEWATER CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative wastewater infrastructure impacts are considered on a systemwide basis and are associated with the overall capacity of existing and planned infrastructure. The cumulative system evaluated includes the sewer system that serves the Project site and conveys wastewater to the OCSD wastewater treatment and disposal system. As described previously, with the proposed Project, the sewer system would have sufficient capacity to handle the increased flows resulting from implementation of the proposed Project. The continued regular assessment, maintenance, and upgrades of the sewer system by the City and OCSD would reduce the potential of cumulative development projects to result in a cumulatively substantial increase in wastewater such that new or expanded facilities would be required. Thus, increases in wastewater in the sewer system would result in a less than significant cumulative impact. 5.16.3.7 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES The following standard regulations would reduce potential impacts related to wastewater: • California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 1 1; the California Green Building Code 5.16.3.8 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impacts UT -3 and UT -4 would be less than significant. 5.16.3.9 WASTEWATER MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.16.3.10 WASTEWATER LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to wastewater infrastructure would occur. City of Santa Ana 5.16-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems 5.16.4 DRAINAGE 5.16.4.1 DRAINAGE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Project site is currently 75 percent impervious and 25 percent pervious (WQMP 2019). The existing topography of the Project site is relatively flat and generally drains from the north to the south. Currently, the Project site drains northwest where flows enter an existing catch basin. The catch basin connects to a six- foot -high by ten -foot -wide culvert that directs flows to an 84 -inch storm drain that flows southeast to a flood control basin. Drainage from the flood control basin is conveyed to the Barranca Channel that connects to San Diego Creek Reach 1 that drains to Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Onsite soils infiltration testing was performed during preparation of the Geotechnical Report, which determined that soils have an infiltration rate of 0.15 inches per hour which, is identified as a low infiltration rate and considered infeasible to support drainage on the Project site (GEO 2019). 5.16.4.2 DRAINAGE THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: UT -5 Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. 5.16.4.3 DRAINAGE METHODOLOGY The evaluation of stormwater drainage infrastructure quantifies the amount of impervious surfaces and stormwater runoff that would be generated from the proposed Project and identifies if runoff from the Project would be accommodated by the existing stormwater drainage infrastructure. The evaluation identifies if expansions would be required to serve the proposed development, and if those expansions have the potential to result in an environmental impact. 5.16.4.4 DRAINAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT UT -5: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT REQUIRE OR RESULT IN THE RELOCATION OR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DRAINAGE FACILITIES, OR EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITIES, THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. Less than Significant. The Project site currently includes 10.96 acres of impermeable surfaces, which equates to 75 percent of the site. After completion of Project construction, the site would have a greater amount of (12.64 acres or 86 percent of the site) impermeable surfaces. As shown on Table 5.16-5, the increase in impervious surfaces would result in an increase the 2 -year, 24-hour storm volume by 37 percent and the time of concentration (Tc) would increase by 26 percent. Table 5.16-5: 2 -Year, 24 -Hour Storm Summary Condition Time of concentration (min) Peak Runoff (cfs) Volume (ac -ft) Pre -Development 10.33 14.9 1.241 Post -Development 13.06 16.3 1.699 Difference +2.73 +1.4 +0.458 Percent Change +26% +9.4% +37% Source: WQMP, 2019 City of Santa Ana 5.16-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems The runoff within the Project site would be collected by roof drains, surface flow designed pavement, curbs, and area drains and conveyed to one of four Modular Wetland System units that would be installed as part of the Project to retain, filter, and slowly discharge drainage. The Modular Wetland System units have been sized to treat runoff from the Design Capture Storm (85th percentile, 24-hour) (WQMP 2019). Treated runoff from the Modular Wetland System units would be discharged from the flow controlling Modular Wetland System units to the existing 84 -inch drain located within Red Hill Avenue. From there, flows would travel southeast and be temporarily detained in an existing flood control basin before entering the Barranca Channel, which discharges into San Diego Creek Reach 1, then the Upper Newport Bay, Lower Newport Bay, and finally to the Pacific Ocean at Balboa Beach. Although the Project related runoff conditions (flow rates and durations) would increase from predevelopment conditions (shown in Table 5.15-5), the Project would manage the increased flow by the four Modular Wetland System units that have been designed to accommodate the increased volume (WQMP 2019). As a result, the proposed Project would not result in a need to expand or construct new off-site drainage systems and impacts to stormwater drainage systems would be less than significant. 5.16.4.5 DRAINAGE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic scope for cumulative impacts related to stormwater drainage includes the geographic area served by the existing stormwater infrastructure for the Project area, from capture of runoff through final discharge points. As described above the proposed Project includes installation of Modular Wetland System units that would retain, slow, and discharge runoff through storm drain connections to the off-site infrastructure in Red Hill Avenue. The Modular Wetland System units would retain runoff and control drainage, pursuant to the required design storm. As a result, the proposed Project would not generate runoff that could combine with additional runoff from cumulative projects that could cumulatively combine to impact drainage. Thus, cumulative impacts related to drainage would be less than significant. 5.16.4.6 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impact UT -5 would be less than significant. 5.16.4.7 DRAINAGE MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.16.4.8 DRAINAGE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to drainage would occur. 5.16.5 SOLID WASTE 5.16.5.1 SOLID WASTE REGULATORY SETTING California Assembly Bill 341 On October b, 2011, Governor Brown signed AB 341 establishing a state policy goal that no less than 75 percent of solid waste generated be source reduced, recycled, or composted by 2020, and requiring CalRecycle to provide a report to the Legislature that recommends strategies to achieve the policy goal. City of Santa Ana 5.16-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems California Green Building Standards Section 5.408.1 Construction waste diversion. Recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste. 5.410.1 Recycling by occupants. Provide readily accessible areas that serve the entire building and are identified for the depositing, storage and collection of non -hazardous materials for recycling, including (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics, organic waste, and metals, or meet a lawfully enacted local recycling ordinance, if more restrictive. 5.16.5.2 SOLID WASTE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING In 2018, a majority (87 percent) of the solid waste from the City of Santa Ana, which was disposed of in landfills, went to the Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill (Calrecycle 2019). The Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill is permitted to accept 11,500 tons per day of solid waste and is permitted to operate through 2053. In September 2019, the maximum tonnage received was 9,967 tons. Thus, the facility had additional capacity of 1,533 tons per day (Calrecycle 2019). 5.16.5.3 SOLID WASTE THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it were to: UT -6 Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. UT -7 Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. 5.16.5.4 SOLID WASTE METHODOLOGY Solid waste generation from construction and operation of the Project was estimated using EPA and CalRecycle solid waste generation factors derived for multi -family residential and commercial uses. Solid waste volumes were then compared with recent estimates of remaining disposal capacity of the landfill serving the City. In addition, potential impacts related to compliance with solid waste regulations was evaluated by identifying how the proposed Project would be implement the relevant requirements. 5.16.5.5 SOLID WASTE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IMPACT UT -6: THE PROJECT WOULD NOT GENERATE SOLID WASTE IN EXCESS OF STATE OR LOCAL STANDARDS, OR IN EXCESS OF THE CAPACITY OF LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE, OR OTHERWISE IMPAIR THE ATTAINMENT OF SOLID WASTE REDUCTION GOALS. Less than Significant Impact. Construction Project construction would generate solid waste for landfill disposal in the form of demolition debris from the existing buildings and infrastructure that would be removed from the site. Demolition waste would be properly characterized as required by law and recycled or disposed of at an appropriate type of landfill for such materials. Construction waste in the form of packaging and discarded materials would also be generated by the proposed Project. Utilizing a construction waste factor of 4.34 pounds per square foot (EPA 2003), development of the Project would generate approximately 460 tons of waste during demolition and additional waste during construction, which would occur over a 27 -month period. However, Section 5.408.1 of the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code requires demolition and construction City of Santa Ana 5.16-15 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems activities to recycle or reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste. Thus, the demolition and construction solid waste that would be disposed of at the landfill would be approximately 35 percent of the waste generated. Therefore, demolition activities, which would generate the most solid waste would generate approximately 161 tons of solid waste. As shown in Table 3-3 of Section 3.0, Project Description, demolition activities would occur over a 30 workday (6 week) period. This equates to approximately 5.4 tons of debris per day. As described above, the Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill is permitted to accept 1 1,500 tons per day of solid waste. In September 2019, the maximum tonnage received was 9,967 tons. Thus, the facility had additional capacity of 1,533 tons per day (Calrecycle 2019). Therefore, the Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill would be able to accommodate the addition of 5.4 tons of waste per week during construction of the proposed Project. Operation Based on the daily solid waste generation rates from CalRecycle and previous City estimates', multi -family uses produce 0.46 tons/unit/year and commercial retail uses generate approximately 1.9 tons per year per employee. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project determined that the Project would result in an average of one employee per every 250 square feet of commercial space. Thus, the proposed 80,000 square feet of commercial space would generate approximately 320 employees at full occupancy. Based on this, operation of the Project at buildout would generate approximately 1,137 tons of solid waste per year, at least 75 percent of which is required by California law to be recycled, which would reduce the volume of landfilled solid waste to approximately 284.25 tons per year, or 5.47 tons per week, as shown on Table 5.16-6. Table 5.16-6: Solid Waste Demand from Operation of the Proposed Project Land Use Quantity Generation Rate Solid Waste Demand Multi -Family Units 1,150 units 0.46 tons/unit/year 529 tons per year Commercial Retail 320 employees 1.9 608 tons per year tons/employee/year Total Solid Waste 1,137 tons per year Annual Landfill Disposal with AB 341 (75% Reduction) 1 284.25 tons per year Weekly Landfill Disoosal with AB 341 (75% Reduction) 1 5.47 tons oer week As described previously, the Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill is permitted to accept 11,500 tons per day of solid waste. In September 2019, the maximum tonnage received was 9,967 tons. Thus, the facility had additional capacity of 1,533 tons (Calrecycle 2019). Therefore, the Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill would be able to accommodate the addition of 5.47 tons of waste per week. Thus, the proposed Project would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs and the Project would not impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Impacts related to landfill capacity would be less than significant. IMPACT UT -7: THE PROJECT WOULD COMPLY WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS RELATED TO SOLID WASTE. The solid waste generation rates were previously used in The Heritage Mixed Use Project EIR (2015), which is a similar development near the Project site City of Santa Ana 5.16-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems No Impact. The proposed Project would result in new development that would generate an increased amount of solid waste. All solid waste -generating activities within the City is subject to the requirements set forth in Section 5.408.1 of the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code that requires demolition and construction activities to recycle or reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste, and AB 341 that requires diversion of a minimum of 75 percent of operational solid waste. Implementation of the proposed Project would be consistent with all state regulations, as ensured through the City's development project permitting process. Therefore, the proposed Project would comply with all solid waste statute and regulations; and impacts would not occur. 5.16.5.6 SOLID WASTE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The geographic scope of cumulative analysis for landfill capacity is the service area for the Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, which serves the Project area. The projections of future landfill capacity based on the entire projected waste stream going to these landfills is used for cumulative impact analysis. As described previously, the Frank Bowerman Sanitary Landfill has a maximum permitted capacity of 11,500 tons per day and in September 2019 had a maximum disposal of 9,9767 tons and a remaining capacity of 1,533 tons (CalRecycle 2019). The 5.47 tons of solid waste per week from operation of the proposed Project would be 0.36 percent of the remaining capacity of the landfill. Due to this small percentage, the increase in solid waste from the Projects would be less than cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant. 5.16.2.7 EXISTING STANDARD CONDITIONS AND PLANS, PROGRAMS, OR POLICIES The following standard regulations would reduce potential impacts related to solid waste: • Assembly Bill 341 (Chapter 476, Statutes of 201 1) • California Green Building Standards Code 5.16.2.8 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE BEFORE MITIGATION Impacts UT -6 and UT -7 would be less than significant. 5.16.2.9 SOLID WASTE MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are required. 5.16.2.10 SOLID WASTE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant unavoidable adverse impacts related to solid waste would occur. REFERENCES CalReycyle Solid Waste Information System. Accessed at: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/Search.aspx CalReycyle Disposal Reporting System: Jurisdiction Tons by Facility. Accessed at: https://www2.caIrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentraI/DisposaIReporting/Destination/DisposaIByFaciIity City of Santa Ana Design Guidelines for Water and Sewer Facilities, March 2017. Accessed: http://www.santa-ana.org/pwa/documents/DesignGuidelines.pdf City of Santa Ana 5.16-17 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.16 Utilities and Service Systems City of Santa Ana General Plan. Accessed: http://www.santa- ana.org/generalplan/default.asp#CurrentGPDocs City of Santa Ana Municipal Code. Accessed: https://library.municode.com/ca/santa_ana/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=14452 City of Santa Ana 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, April 2016. Accessed: http://www.ci.santa- ana.ca.us/pwa/documents/DRAFTSantaAnaUWMPApril20l 6.pdf Economic and Fiscal Analysis for the Santa Ana Red Hill Development. Prepared by AECOM, 2019 (AECOM 2019). Geotechnical EIR Due -Diligence Level Report (Geotechnical Report). Prepared by LGC Geotechnical. 2019 (GEO 2019). Orange County Sanitation District Sewer Services (OCSD 2019). Accessed at: https://www.ocsd.com/services/regional-sewer-service National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities. Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ NPDES No. CAS000002. Accessed at: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/prog rams/stormwater/docs/constpermits/wgo2009_000 9_dwq.pdf Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan). Accessed at: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/basin_pIan/ Santa Ana River Watershed: Accessed at: http://www.ocwatersheds.com/programs/ourws/snariver State Water Resources Control Board Construction Water Program: Accessed at: https://www.waterboa rd s.ca.gov/water issues/prog rams/stormwater/construction.htm I City of Santa Ana 5.16-18 Draft EIR January 2020 5.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance 5.17.1 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Section 15126.2(b) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to describe "any significant impacts, including those which can be mitigated but not reduced to a level of insignificance." Potential environmental effects of the proposed Project and mitigation measures are discussed in detail throughout in Chapter 5 of this EIR. Air Quality As detailed, in Section 5.2, Air Quality, implementation of the proposed Project, would result in long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants from vehicular emissions, natural gas consumption, landscaping, applications of architectural coatings, and use of consumer products. The emissions from the proposed Project are primarily from vehicle trips. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 11,546 daily vehicular trips, with 534 a.m. peak hour trips and 604 p.m. peak hour trips. As shown in Table 5.2-8 in Section 5.2, Air Quality, emissions from operation of the proposed Project would exceed the threshold of significance for VOCs. The majority of VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and vehicular activity. Consumer products include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics and toiletries, the use of which cannot be controlled by the City. Likewise, vehicular emissions cannot be controlled by either the Project Applicant or the City. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce VOC emissions to below the SCAQMD threshold. Therefore, Project operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gases As detailed, in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions of 9,861.60 MTCO2e per year, which would be 4.10 MTCO2e annually per service population. This would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e and exceed the SCAQMD Tier 4/City CAP threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Approximately 60 percent of the Project's GHG emissions would be generated by mobile sources (vehicle trips), and there are no feasible Project measures that would reduce vehicular emissions. Thus, neither the Project Applicant nor the Lead Agency (City of Santa Ana) can substantively or materially affect reductions in Project mobile -source emissions. The Project is consistent with the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) guidance for mitigating or reducing transportation related VMT from land use development projects. The Project is an urban infill redevelopment that would provide mixed residential and commercial (retail/restaurant) uses. The site located near existing off-site employment, commercial, residential, and retail destinations and in proximity to existing public bus stops and freeways, which would result in reduced vehicle trips and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in comparison to a Project of similar size on land without close access to employment, service, and retail, destinations; in addition to public transit and freeways. Additionally, the Project would be constructed to current Title 24/CalGreen standards and would be consistent with policies that have been adopted for the purpose of mitigating a GHG effect. However, because the net increase in GHG emissions from the Project would exceed SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e and exceed the SCAQMD Tier 4/City CAP threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population, impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable. City of Santa Ana 5.17-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance Transportation As detailed, in Section 5.14, Transportation (Table 5.14-9), with implementation of the proposed Project with the Year 2040 traffic conditions, the Project would result in impacts at five intersections. Improvements for the impacted intersections have been identified, which would reduce impacts to less than significant. However, improvements at the intersections of Red Hill Avenue Warner Avenue (#25), Red Hill Avenue Barranca Parkway (#30), Red Hill Avenue/Alton Parkway (#32), and Tustin Ranch Road/Warner Avenue North (#47) cannot be guaranteed because they require approval and/or implementation by the City of Tustin or the City of Irvine. The improvement at the Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue (#4) intersection is required as a result of a is a cumulative impact; the intersection operates with unsatisfactory LOS in the baseline condition. The Project would be responsible for a fair share of the improvement through implementation of mitigation; however, there is no currently planned improvement at the location, and it is unknown if the Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue improvement would be implemented by 2040 (the impact year). Therefore, implementation of the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact under the Year 2040 Plus Project condition at these four intersections. 5.17.2 GROWTH INDUCEMENT This section analyzes the growth inducement potential of the proposed Project and the associated secondary effects of growth the Project might permit. As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d), an EIR must: "Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth (a major expansion of a recycled water plant might, for example, allow for more construction in service areas). Increases in the population may tax existing community service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. Also discuss the characteristic of some projects which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment." Thus, based on CEQA, a project could have a direct effect on population growth, for example, if it would involve construction of substantial new housing. A project could also have indirect growth -inducement potential if it would: • Establish substantial new permanent employment opportunities (e.g., commercial, industrial, governmental, or other employment -generating enterprises) or otherwise stimulate economic activity such that is would result in the need for additional housing, businesses, and services to support increased economic activities; • Remove obstacles to growth, e.g., through the construction or extension of major infrastructure facilities that do not presently exist in the project area, or would add substantial capacity that could accommodate additional unplanned growth; • Remove obstacles to growth through changes in existing regulations pertaining to land development; • Result in the need to expand one or more public service facilities to maintain desired levels of service; or • Involve some other action that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment. City of Santa Ana 5.17-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance As CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) states that growth -inducing effects are not to be construed as necessarily beneficial, detrimental or of little significance to the environment; the following information is provided as additional information on ways in which the proposed Project could contribute to significant changes in the environment beyond the direct consequences of developing the land use concepts examined in the preceding sections of this EIR. Establish substantial new permanent employment opportunities or otherwise stimulate economic activity such that is would result in the need for additional housing, businesses, and services to support increased economic activities The Project site has been used Ricoh Electronics Inc., an imaging and electronics company, for light industrial uses that generate employment opportunities since its development in 1979 and 1981. The site was vacated by Ricoh in 2018 and the buildings are partially re -occupied and used for storage, electronics recycling, and as temporary housing for the homeless. The proposed Project would redevelop the Project site to provide 1,150 multi -family residential units and 80,000 square feet of commercial retail space. As detailed in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, this is anticipated to generate approximately 320 employees at full occupancy, which would be 0.27 percent of the existing jobs within 2 -miles of the Project site; and therefore, would not result in induced unplanned employment growth. In addition, the jobs that would be created by the proposed Project would provide new employment opportunities to employees that are already living in Santa Ana and the surrounding cities. Most of the new jobs that would be created by the proposed Project would be positions that do not require a specialized workforce. Thus, it is anticipated that these jobs would be filled by people who would already be living within Santa Ana, Tustin, Irvine and surrounding communities and would not induce an unanticipated influx of new labor into the region. Thus, impacts related to increased growth through the provision of employment opportunities would be less than significant. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis prepared for the proposed Project describes that the Project is oriented towards development patterns occurring in adjacent areas in the Cities of Tustin and Irvine that have seen an expansion in mixed-use properties and other uses beyond industrial and office. The Economic and Fiscal Analysis also determined that the demand for retail and restaurant commercial space will be driven by local spending patterns of residents, workers, and hotel guests in the vicinity of the Project site; and that the Project residents and local market would be able to support the proposed 80,000 square feet of retail commercial space. Overall, the Project site has historically provided employment opportunities and provided for economic activity. The proposed Project would provide for a different variety of employment opportunities and economic activities that are consistent with development occurring and planned for in the Project vicinity. As detailed in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the Project would result in a slight improvement in the jobs - housing balance and the residents and employees of the site would have convenient access to sustainable multimodal transportation that would allow for walking, biking, and the use of existing transit, which could reduce vehicular trips and would reduce the effects of travel (such as traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise impacts), which would be an indirect physical benefit of the proposed Project. In addition, the Project includes development of 1,150 multi -family units. Thus, the Project provides housing and would not result in the need for additional housing. Therefore, the economic effects of the proposed Project would not result in the need for additional development to support the Project and would not result in a substantial impact the environment. City of Santa Ana 5.17-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance Remove Obstacles to Growth, e.g., Through the Construction Or Extension of Major Infrastructure Facilities that do not Presently Exist in the Project Area or Would Add Substantial Capacity that Could Accommodate Additional Unplanned Growth. The elimination of a physical obstacle to growth is considered to be a growth inducing impact. A physical obstacle to growth typically involves the lack of public service infrastructure. The proposed Project would induce growth if it would provide public services or infrastructure with excess capacity to serve lands that would otherwise not be developable or to expand the development potential of redevelopment areas. The proposed Project would redevelop the onsite infrastructure to serve the proposed multi -family residential and commercial uses. New water infrastructure would be installed on the Project site that would connect to the existing 1 2 -inch water pipelines in Warner Avenue. The new onsite water system would convey water supplies to the proposed buildings and landscaping through plumbing landscaping fixtures that are compliant with the CalGreen Plumbing Code for efficient use of water. Also, new sewer infrastructure would be installed onsite and approximately 367 feet of the existing 8 -inch City sewer line in Warner Avenue, between the Project site and the Orange County Sanitation sewer line in Red Hill Avenue, would be replaced with a 10 -inch sewer. As described in Section 5.16, Utilities and Service Systems, with operation of the proposed Project the improved sewer line would have a would have a peak flow half full capacity of 0.65 cfs which is the design capacity of the sewer, and does not leave capacity for any additional unplanned growth. In addition, the Project would install new storm water drainage infrastructure on the Project site that would connect to the existing off-site drain system in Red Hill Avenue that currently serves the Project site. Overall, the proposed Project would redevelop the existing onsite infrastructure systems and provide an off- site sewer line improvement that would connect to the existing off-site systems that currently serve the Project site. The new infrastructure would not provide additional capacity beyond what is needed to serve the proposed Project. In addition, because the Project is within a developed area that is receiving services from existing infrastructure and would connect to the existing infrastructure, development of the proposed Project would not result in an expansion of overall capacity, extension of infrastructure, or provision of services in areas or an unserved area. Therefore, infrastructure improvements would not result in significant growth inducing impacts. Remove Obstacles to Growth Through Changes in Existing Regulations Pertaining to Land Development The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of PAO (Professional and Administrative Office) and a zoning designation of M-1 (Light Industrial). A project could directly induce growth if it would remove barriers to population growth such as change to a jurisdictions general plan and zoning code, which allows new development to occur in underutilized areas. The proposed Project includes amendments to the General Plan and to the zoning code to allow for the redevelopment of the site to provide the proposed mixed-use development as opposed to the existing light industrial building uses. The Project proposes a General Plan land use designation amendment from PAO (Professional and Administrative Office) to District Center, which would allow specific development requirements for the proposed mixed uses. In addition, the Project includes a proposed zoning change from M-1 (Light Industrial) to a Specific Development designation, which would also provide specific development regulations for the mixed-use Project. The proposed Project is redevelopment of an already developed area that has been used for urban uses since 1979 and is surrounded by urban development or areas planned for urban development. The proposed Project would involve a change to development regulations and would result in onsite residents and additional onsite employees. However, the zoning and land use changes are parcel specific and would not result in growth outside of the Project site, because the areas are either completely developed or within City of Santa Ana 5.17-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance development land use plans. Changes to the Project site's land use and zoning designations would not result in removing an obstacle to growth within the Project vicinity. In addition, SCAG policies concerning regional growth -inducement are included as part of Section 5.9, Land Use and Planning, and Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing. As described in those sections, the growth anticipated by SCAG's projections are consistent with the increases in population (2,081 residents) and employees (320 employees) anticipated at full capacity of the Project. Therefore, impacts related to growth from changes in existing regulations pertaining to land development would be less than significant. Result in the Need to Expand One or More Public Service Facilities to Maintain Desired Levels of Service The proposed Project is expected to incrementally increase the demand for fire protection and emergency response, police protection, and school services. However, as described in Section 5.1 2, Public Services, the proposed Project would not require development of additional facilities or expansion of existing facilities to maintain existing levels of service. Based on service ratios and build out projections, the proposed Project would not create a demand for services beyond the capacity of existing facilities. Therefore, an indirect growth inducing impact as a result of expanded or new public facilities that could support other development in addition to the proposed Project would not occur. The proposed Project would not have significant growth inducing consequences that would require the need to expand public services to maintain desired levels of service. Involve Some Other Action that Could Encourage and Facilitate Other Activities that Could Significantly Affect the Environment The proposed Project involves amendments to the City of Santa Ana General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, but those amendments are specific to the allowable land uses on the Project site itself. The proposed Project does not propose changes to any of the City's building safety standards (i.e., building, grading, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, or fire codes). The Project would comply with all applicable City plans, policies, and ordinances. In addition, Project features and mitigation measures have been identified within this EIR to ensure that the Project minimizes environmental impacts. The Project would not involve any precedent -setting action that could encourage and facilitate other activities that significantly affect the environment. Environmental Impacts of Induced Growth All physical environmental effects from construction of development of the proposed Project has been analyzed in all technical sections of this EIR. For example, activities such as excavation, grading, and construction as required for the proposed mixed uses were analyzed in the Sections 5.2, Air Quality, 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 5.10, Noise, and 5.15, Transportation. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project has been analyzed in this EIR and would be adequately mitigated either through implementation of existing regulations and/or mitigation measures contained within Chapter 5 of this EIR. 5.17.3 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE EFFECTS State CEQA Guidelines require the EIR to consider whether "uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely.... Also, irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(c)). "Nonrenewable resource" refers to the physical features of the natural environment, such as land, waterways, mineral resources, etc. These City of Santa Ana 5.17-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance irreversible environmental changes may include current or future uses of non-renewable resources, and secondary or growth -inducing impacts that commit future generations to similar uses. Generally, a project would result in significant irreversible environmental changes if: • The primary and secondary impacts would generally commit future generations to similar uses; • The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources; • The project would involve uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents associated with the project; or • The proposed irretrievable commitments of nonrenewable resources is not justified (e.g., the project involves the wasteful use of energy). The proposed Project would result in or contribute to the following irreversible environmental changes: • Lands in the Project area that are currently developed with light industrial uses would be committed to multi -family residential and commercial retail uses once the proposed buildings are constructed. Secondary effects associated with this irreversible commitment of land resources include: o Changes in views associated with construction of the new buildings and associated development (see Section 5.1, Aesthetics). o Increased traffic on area roadways (see Section 5.14, Transportation). o Emissions of air pollutants associated with Project construction and operation (see Section 5.2, Air Quality). o Consumption of non-renewable energy associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project due to the use of automobiles, lighting, heating and cooling systems, appliances, and the like (see Section 5.4, Energy). o Increased ambient noise associated with an increase in activities and traffic from the Project (see Section 5.10, Noise). • Construction of the proposed Project as described in Section 3.0, Project Description, would require the use of energy produced from non-renewable resources and construction materials. In regard to energy usage from the proposed Project, as demonstrated in the analyses contained in Section 5.4, Energy, the proposed Project would not involve wasteful or unjustifiable use of non-renewable resources, and conservation efforts would be enforced during construction and operation of proposed development. The proposed development would incorporate energy -generating and conserving project design features, including those required by the California Building Code, California Energy Code Title 24, which specify green building standards for new developments. In addition, as listed in Section 3.0, Project Description and Section 5.4, Energy, the proposed Project includes project design features that result in additional energy - efficiency. Project specific information related to energy consumption is provided in Section 5.4, Energy Resources, of this EIR. 5.17.4 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(a) states that "[a]n EIR shall identify and focus on the significant effects on the environment". However, CEQA Guidelines Section 15128 requires that an EIR contain a statement briefly indicating the reasons that various possible effects of a project were determined not to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR. The following environmental issue areas would not be potentially impacted by the proposed Project, as detailed below. City of Santa Ana 5.17-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance Agriculture and Forestry Resources The Project site is developed for urban uses and located in an area that is completely developed for urban uses. The Project site is zoned Professional (P), is not in a Williamson Act contract, and vicinity is void of agricultural uses. The California Department of Conservation Important Farmland mapping identifies the Project site as Urban and Built -Up land (CDC 2019). No areas of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance would be affected by the Project or converted to a non-agricultural use. In addition, the Project site and vicinity is void of forest land or timberland. As the Project site and vicinity do not include these resources, no other changes to the existing environment would occur from implementation of the proposed Project that could result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use or forest/timberland land to non -forest or non -timberland use. Thus, impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources would not occur. Biological Resources The Project site is developed with three large buildings that are surrounded by paved surfaces. Grass turf and ornamental landscaping exists along Warner Avenue and Red Hill Avenue. Limited trees are scattered throughout parking areas. The Project site is located within an urbanized area. No endangered, rare, threatened, or special status plant species (or associated habitats) or wildlife species designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), or California Native Plant Society (CNPS) are known to occur on or adjacent to the site. Project implementation would also not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, with any established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. In addition, the Project site does not contain any natural lands that are subject to an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, impacts related to biological resources would not occur from implementation of the proposed Project. Mineral Resources No active mining operations exist in the City of Santa Ana. The mapping by the California Geological Survey does not indicate that any significant mineral deposits are present within the City. The Project area is developed with urban uses and has no history of mining. Implementation of the Project would not cause the loss of availability of mineral resources valuable to the region or state, and no impact would occur. Wildfire The Project site is located within an urban developed area and is not located within an identified wildland fire hazard area and is not an area where residences or other structures are intermixed with wildlands. In addition, implementation of the proposed Project would be required to adhere to the following chapters of the City's Municipal Code to reduce potential fire hazards: Chapter 8.2 Uniform Building Code, Chapter 8.4 Uniform Mechanical Code, Chapter 8.5 National Electric Code, and Chapter 14 City of Santa Ana Fire Code. Additionally, the Project would be in compliance with any further guidelines from the Orange County Fire Authority related to fire prevention and is subject to approval by the City's Building Division. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in impacts related to wildfires. City of Santa Ana 5.17-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 5.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance REFERENCES California Department of Conservation Important Farmland mapping (CDC 2019). Accessed: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dirp/fmmp California Geological Survey Mineral Resource mapping (CGS 2019). Accessed: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mineralresources/#webmaps City of Santa Ana 5.17-8 Draft EIR January 2020 6.0 Alternatives This section addresses alternatives to the proposed Project and describes the rationale for including them in the EIR. The section also discusses the environmental impacts associated with each alternative and compares the relative impacts of each alternative to those of the proposed Project. In addition, this section describes the extent to which each alternative meets the Project objectives. 6.1 INTRODUCTION The identification and analysis of alternatives to a project is a fundamental part of the environmental review process pursuant to CEQA. Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21002.1 (a) establishes the need to address alternatives in an EIR by stating that in addition to determining a project's significant environmental impacts and indicating potential means of mitigating or avoiding those impacts, "the purpose of an environmental impact report is ... to identify alternatives to the project." Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), an EIR must describe a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project or to the Project's location that would feasibly avoid or lessen its significant environmental impacts while attaining most of the proposed Project's objectives. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b) emphasizes that the selection of project alternatives be based primarily on the ability to reduce impacts relative to the proposed project. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) requires the identification and evaluation of an "Environmentally Superior Alternative." Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(d), discussion of each alternative presented in this EIR Section is intended "to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed project." As permitted by CEQA, the significant effects of each alternative are discussed in less detail than those of the proposed Project, but in enough detail to provide perspective and allow for a reasoned choice among alternatives to the proposed Project. In addition, the "range of alternatives" to be evaluated is governed by the "rule of reason" and feasibility, which requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives that are feasible and necessary to permit an informed and reasoned choice by the lead agency and to foster meaningful public participation (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)). CEQA generally defines "feasible" to mean an alternative that is capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors and other considerations (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091(a)(3), 15364). Based on the CEQA requirements described above, the alternatives addressed in this EIR were selected in consideration of one or more of the following factors: • The extent to which the alternative could avoid or substantially lessen any of the identified significant environmental effects of the proposed Project; • The extent to which the alternative could accomplish the objectives of the proposed Project; • The potential feasibility of the alternative; • The appropriateness of the alternative in contributing to a "reasonable range" of alternatives that would allow an informed comparison of relative advantages and disadvantages of the proposed Project and potential alternatives to it; and City of Santa Ana 6-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives • The requirement of the CEQA Guidelines to consider a "no project" alternative; and to identify an "environmentally superior" alternative in addition to the no project alternative (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)). Neither the CEQA statute, the CEQA Guidelines, nor recent court cases specify a specific number of alternatives to be evaluated in an EIR. Rather, "the range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by the rule of reason that sets forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice" (CEQA Guidelines 15126(f)). 6.2 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS CEQA requires the alternatives selected for comparison in an EIR to avoid or substantially lessen one or more significant effects of the project being evaluated. In order to identify alternatives that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the identified significant environmental effects of implementation of the proposed Project, the significant impacts must be considered, although it is recognized that alternatives aimed at reducing the significant and unavoidable impacts would also avoid or reduce impacts that were found to be less than significant or reduced to below a level of significance with implementation of mitigation measures. The analysis in Chapter 5 of this EIR determined that impacts related to the following would remain significant and unavoidable. Air Quality As detailed, in Section 5.2, Air Quality, implementation of the proposed Project, would result in long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants from vehicular emissions, natural gas consumption, landscaping, applications of architectural coatings, and use of consumer products. The emissions from the proposed Project are primarily from vehicle trips. As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate 11,546 daily vehicular trips, with 534 a.m. peak hour trips and 604 p.m. peak hour trips. As shown in Table 5.2-8 in Section 5.2, Air Quality, emissions from operation of the proposed Project would exceed the threshold of significance for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The majority of VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and vehicular activity. Consumer products include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics and toiletries, the use of which cannot be controlled by the City. Likewise, vehicular emissions cannot be controlled by either the Project Applicant or the City. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce VOC emissions to below the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) threshold. Therefore, Project operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gases As detailed, in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions of 9,861.60 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalence (MTCO2e) per year, which would be 4.10 MTCO2e annually per service population. This would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e and exceed the SCAQMD Tier 4/City CAP threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Approximately 60 percent of the Project's GHG emissions would be generated by mobile sources (vehicle trips), and there are no feasible Project measures that would reduce vehicular emissions. Thus, neither the Project Applicant nor the Lead Agency (City of Santa Ana) can substantively or materially affect reductions in Project mobile -source emissions. City of Santa Ana 6-2 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives The Project is consistent with the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) guidance for mitigating or reducing transportation related (Vehicle Miles Traveled) VMT from land use development projects. The Project is an urban infill redevelopment that would provide mixed residential and commercial (retail/restaurant) uses. The site located near existing off-site employment, commercial, residential, and retail destinations and in proximity to existing public bus stops and freeways, which would result in reduced vehicle trips and VMT in comparison to a Project of similar size on land without close access to employment, service, and retail, destinations; in addition to public transit and freeways. Additionally, the Project would be constructed to current Title 24/CalGreen standards and would be consistent with policies that have been adopted for the purpose of mitigating a GHG effect. However, because the net increase in GHG emissions from the Project would exceed SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e and exceed the SCAQMD Tier 4/City CAP threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population, impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable. Transportation As detailed, in Section 5.14, Transportation (Table 5.14-9), with implementation of the proposed Project with the Year 2040 traffic conditions, the Project would result in impacts at five intersections. Improvements for the impacted intersections have been identified, which would reduce impacts to less than significant. However, improvements at the intersections of Red Hill Avenue/Warner Avenue (#25), Red Hill Avenue/ Barranca Parkway (#30), Red Hill Avenue/Alton Parkway (#32), and Tustin Ranch Road/Warner Avenue North (#47) cannot be guaranteed because they require approval and/or implementation by the City of Tustin or the City of Irvine. The improvement at the Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue (#4) intersection is required as a result of a is a cumulative impact; the intersection operates with unsatisfactory level of service (LOS) in the baseline condition. The Project would be responsible for a fair share of the improvement through implementation of mitigation; however, there is no currently planned improvement at the location, and it is unknown if the Grand Avenue/Warner Avenue improvement would be implemented by 2040 (the impact year). Therefore, implementation of the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact under the Year 2040 Plus Project condition at these five intersections. Thus, this alternatives analysis is focused on the ability to reduce operational air quality emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, and vehicular trips. In addition, this alternative analysis is focused on reducing the need for mitigation. The alternative that would reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts and would require the least mitigation is considered the environmentally superior alternative. The proposed Project would require mitigation related to the following: hazardous materials, land use and planning, transportation, and tribal cultural resources. In addition, this alternatives analysis evaluates the potential of the alternative(s) to meet the Project objectives pursuant to the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines described previously. 6.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The following objectives have been identified in order to aid decision makers in their review of the proposed Project and its associated environmental impacts. • Develop a mixed-use Project that constructs new multi -family residential units, which would help meet the region's demand for housing. • Transform an underutilized site with an economically viable development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and Irvine Business Complex (IBC) and combines residential uses with community -serving retail near employment opportunities, freeway access, and transit. City of Santa Ana 6-3 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Prosect 6.0 Alternatives • Redevelop existing land uses that would utilize existing infrastructure, including: water, sewer, arterial roadways, transit, and freeways; and provide non -vehicular (pedestrian and bicycle) circulation. • Develop a mix of housing to assist the City in meeting its jobs/housing balance. • Provide onsite uses that reduce vehicular miles traveled (VMT) by providing an internal pedestrian circulation system that links residential uses, recreation areas, and retail/commercial areas onsite. • Implement the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Land Use Policies related to population and housing by providing additional housing near employment centers. 6.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT REJECTED Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c), an EIR must briefly describe the rationale for selection and rejection of alternatives. The lead agency may make an initial determination as to which alternatives are potentially feasible and, therefore, merit in-depth consideration, and which are infeasible and need not be considered further. Alternatives that are remote or speculative, or the effects of which cannot be reasonably predicted, need not be considered (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f), (f)(3)). This section identifies alternatives considered by the lead agency but rejected as infeasible and provides a brief explanation of the reasons for their exclusion. Alternatives may be eliminated from detailed consideration in the EIR if they fail to meet most of the project objectives, are infeasible, or do not avoid any significant environmental effects. • Alternate Site Alternative: An alternate site for the proposed Project was eliminated from further consideration. The Project Applicant is the owner of the Project site, and the Project site building is underutilized in the existing condition. The Project objectives are to redevelop an existing underutilized parcel and implement new multi -family housing near employment, provide development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and IBC and utilize existing infrastructure, all of which are consistent with the opportunities provided by the Project site. In addition, due to the urban and built out nature of the City, development of 1,150 multi -family residential units and 80,000 square feet of commercial uses on another 14.58 -acre site at a different location would likely require demolition of existing structures, require similar mitigation, and have similar impacts as the proposed Project. CEQA specifies that the key question regarding alternative site consideration is "whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project at another location." Given the size and nature of the proposed Project and the Project objectives, it would be infeasible to develop and operate the Project on an alternative site with fewer environmental impacts. Therefore, the Alternative Site Alternative was rejected from further consideration. 6.5 ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS Three alternatives to the proposed Project have been identified for further analysis as representing a reasonable range of alternatives that attain most of the objectives of the Project, may avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the proposed Project, and are feasible from a development perspective. These alternatives have been developed based on the criteria identified in Section 6.1, and are described below: Alternative 1: No Project/No Build. Pursuant to Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR is required to "discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice City of Santa Ana 6-4 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives of preparation is published, at the time the environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services." Therefore, under this alternative, no development would occur on the Project site and it would remain in its existing condition with three existing buildings with a total 212,121 square feet. However, as described in Section 6.4, the Project site is located within a completely developed and highly used urban area, near freeways and transit, and contains three existing useable structures. Therefore, it is not reasonable to assume that the Project site would remain underutilized in the long-term. Thus, in the No Project/No Build condition it is reasonably expected that all of the 212,121 square feet of industrial building space would be re- occupied. Hence, this alternative compares impacts of the proposed Project with re -occupation at full capacity of the three existing industrial buildings. Alternative 2: Reduced Project Alternative. Under this alternative, a reduction in the number of residential units and commercial square footage would be built, which would result in increased setbacks and reduced building heights. Pursuant to discussion with City planning staff, it was determined that a reasonable decrease in developed on the Project site is 30 percent of each unit type and a 30 percent reduction in commercial retail space resulting in 345 fewer residential units and 24,000 square feet less of commercial space. Like the proposed Project, 17 percent of the units would be studios, 52 percent would be one -bedroom units, and 29 percent would be 2 -bedroom units. This alternative would develop and operate 805 multi -family residential units and 56,000 square feet of retail and restaurant commercial uses. Reducing these units from the proposed Project would eliminate 100 units from each of the three proposed mixed use buildings and 45 units from the residential only building, which would reduce the height of the three six -story mixed use buildings by two stories and reduce the height of the one five -story building by one story. Thus, each of the mixed-use and residential buildings would be four -stories in height under the Reduced Project Alternative. To support the reduced Project under this alternative parking spaces would be provided at the same rate as the proposed Project of 1.7 spaces per residential unit and 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space within a two four -level parking structures and two five -level parking structures, which would each be two levels lower than the proposed Project. The 24,000 square foot reduction in commercial space would occur from reducing the Phase 1 commercial square footage from 40,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet and from reducing the Phase 3 commercial square footage from 20,000 square feet to 16,000 square feet. Under the Reduced Project Alternative, the recreation amenities would also be reduced by 30 percent; thus, approximately 122,189 square feet of exterior open space recreation area and approximately 5,606 square feet of indoor amenities would be provided by this alternative. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would require a General Plan Amendment from the existing land use designation of PAO (Professional and Administrative Office) to District Center (DC), and a Zone change from M-1 (Light Industrial) to a Specific Development (SD) designation. Alternative 3: Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative. The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) with a designated Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.5 and is zoned Light Industrial (M-1). Under this alternative, the Project site would be redeveloped for a new light industrial business park as allowed by the existing General Plan Land Use designation and the City's Zoning Code Sections 41-472 through 41-483. The Project site has a zoning City of Santa Ana 6-5 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives designation of Light Industrial (M-1), which permits uses such as: warehousing, distribution, manufacture, assembly, and storage. The M-1 zone allows buildings up to 3 -stories or 35 -feet in height. At the allowable 0.5 FAR, the 14.58 -acre site would provide for approximately 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space and building heights of up to 35 -feet. These buildings would require approximately 635 parking spaces (per Municipal Code Section 41-1390 requirement of 2 spaces per 1,000 square feet). The industrial buildings would be surrounded by drought tolerant ornamental landscaping. Under this alternative, the existing onsite development would be demolished, removed, and replaced to provide new building structures that would be developed pursuant to current building requirements, such as energy efficient power systems, drought tolerant landscaping, storm water filtration, and other Low Impact Development (LID) requirements. 6.6 ALTERNATIVE 1: NO PROJECT/NO BUILD Under this alternative, the proposed Project would not be approved, and no development would occur. The existing three industrial buildings would remain. In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the No Project/No Build Alternative for a development project on an identifiable property consists of the circumstance under which the project does not proceed. Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines states that, "In certain instances, the no project alternative means `no build' wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained." In addition, the no project includes what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. Because the Project site is located within a completely developed and highly used urban area, near freeways and transit, and contains three existing useable structures and it is reasonable to assume that all three buildings and the 212,121 square feet industrial building space would be re -occupied. Hence, this alternative compares impacts of the proposed Project with re -occupation at full capacity of the existing industrial buildings. Accordingly, Alternative 1: No Project/No Build provides a comparison between the environmental impacts of the proposed Project in contrast to the result from not approving, or denying, the proposed Project. Thus, this alternative is intended to meet the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e) for evaluation of a no project alternative. 6.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Aesthetics The No Project/No Build Alternative would maintain the existing light industrial character of the Project site. As described in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, the Project site is developed with three large industrial buildings that total 212,121 square feet, parking areas, and vehicle circulation drives. Two of the industrial buildings are two -stories in height and one is three -stories in height. The vegetation on site consists of an approximately 2.5 -acre undeveloped grass area at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenues, some ornamental trees scattered throughout the site, and street trees along Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue. The exteriors of the buildings are long and flat, without architectural treatments. The buildings have a typical boxy modern office/industrial structure appearance, with large dark tinted windows line the first and second floors of the 2310 South Redhill building and that make up a large portion of the front of the 2320 South Redhill building. The dark window tinting provides a black appearance from the outside. The 2320 building has exterior metal stairs to access the second story of the building and the 2310 building has very few City of Santa Ana 6-6 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives windows, which adds to the industrial appearance. All three buildings have loading docks and industrial door openings and are surrounded by asphalt paved surface parking areas. In comparison to the proposed Project, the No Project/No Build Alternative would not increase the building density or change the character of the site from one of light industrial uses to a high-density multi -family residential and commercial development. This alternative would not result in a change in the visual height, scale, and mass of the development on the site. The existing 2.5 -acre undeveloped grass area at the corner of Red Hill and Warner Avenues would remain. However, the landscaping on the Project site would not be improved, and the site would not be redeveloped to be consistent with development within the adjacent Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area. Overall, the No Project/No Build Alternative would not develop taller denser mixed-use structures on the Project site and views of the Project site would not change. In addition, lighting and glare would not increase and would remain the same as existing conditions. Air Quality The proposed Project would result in short-term construction -related emissions and long-term operational emissions that would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to emissions from VOCs. The majority of VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and vehicular emissions. Consumer products include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics and toiletries, the use of which cannot be controlled by the City. Likewise, vehicular emissions cannot be controlled by either the Project Applicant or the City. Therefore, operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable. The No Project/No Build Alternative would avoid the majority of short-term construction -related emissions because only tenant improvements to the existing building could occur under this alternative; and an increase in operational emissions would not occur. However, operation of the existing buildings at full capacity results in an exceedance of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) threshold. The estimated operation -source emissions from operation of the existing 212,121 square feet of industrial uses on the Project site are provided on Table 6-1. Table 6-1: Existing Industrial Building Operational Air Quality Emissions Emissions (lbs/da Industrial Operational Activities I VOC I NOx I CO I SOX I PMio I PM2.5 Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 The No Project/No Build Alternative would avoid the Project's significant impact related to the net increase of a criteria pollutant, as an increase in emissions over the existing condition would not occur. However, operation of the existing industrial buildings at full capacity would also result in an exceedance of a SCAQMD threshold. Cultural Resources As determined in Section 5.3, Cultural Resources, the existing industrial buildings was constructed in the early 1980s, which are not more than 39 years old and are not historic resources. In addition, the Project site is not adjacent to any historic structures. Therefore, no impacts related to historic resources would occur from implementation of the proposed Project. Section 5.3, Cultural Resources, also describes that due to the extent and depth of previous ground disturbances throughout the site, the potential for archaeological resources is City of Santa Ana 6-7 Draft EIR January 2020 Summer Scenario Total Maximum Daily Emissions 11.14 1 143.55 48.79 1 0.45 1 18.81 1 6.63 Winter Scenario Total Maximum Daily Emissions 10.90 146.09 39.59 0.45 18.74 6.61 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceeded? No Yes No No No No Source: Urban Crossroads, 2019 The No Project/No Build Alternative would avoid the Project's significant impact related to the net increase of a criteria pollutant, as an increase in emissions over the existing condition would not occur. However, operation of the existing industrial buildings at full capacity would also result in an exceedance of a SCAQMD threshold. Cultural Resources As determined in Section 5.3, Cultural Resources, the existing industrial buildings was constructed in the early 1980s, which are not more than 39 years old and are not historic resources. In addition, the Project site is not adjacent to any historic structures. Therefore, no impacts related to historic resources would occur from implementation of the proposed Project. Section 5.3, Cultural Resources, also describes that due to the extent and depth of previous ground disturbances throughout the site, the potential for archaeological resources is City of Santa Ana 6-7 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives limited. Therefore, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resources; and impacts would be less than significant. The No Project/No Build Alternative would re -occupy the existing non -historic buildings on the Project site. The alternative would not involve excavation or other construction that has the potential to impact any cultural resources. Thus, the No Project/No Build Alternative would have a reduced potential to impact archaeological resources or human remains, then the less than significant impacts that would result from the proposed Project. Energy The proposed Project would result in new residences and commercial buildings that would require energy supplies. The proposed Project would be developed in compliance with the Calgreen/Title 24 requirements related to energy and includes features to reduce energy consumptions, such as 94 electric vehicle charging stations. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the proposed Project would not use large amounts of energy or fuel in a wasteful manner, and impacts would be less than significant. The No Project/No Build Alternative would re -occupy the existing three light industrial buildings on the Project site, and similar to the proposed Project, this alternative would require energy. The service demand generated by the three light industrial buildings would likely be lower than that of the proposed Project because a 24-hour resident population would not exist. However, the No Project/No Build Alternative would not provide upgraded energy efficient infrastructure, such as electrical, plumbing, and water efficient irrigation. Overall, both the proposed Project and the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to Energy. Geology and Soils No new construction activities, including demolition and grading, would occur under the No Project/No Build Alternative. Therefore, there would be no potential for additional workers, building and structures to experience seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse within the Project site. However, the buildings and structures that exist in the Project site were built before current seismic safety codes; therefore, this alternative, by retaining older buildings and structures, could expose people to greater hazards from strong ground shaking than the proposed Project. Additionally, the Project's impacts to geology and soils were determined to be less than significant with compliance with the California Building Code (CBC). Therefore, the geologic hazard impacts from this alternative would be less than significant, and neutral in comparison to the proposed Project. In addition, because the No Project/No Build Alternative does not involve grading or other ground disturbance activities, potential impacts to paleontological resources would not occur. Thus, impacts under this alternative would be reduced compared to the less than significant impacts of the proposed Project. Greenhouse Gas Emissions As described previously, the proposed Project would result operational GHG emissions that would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e and exceed the SCAQMD Tier 4/City CAP threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Approximately 60 percent of the Project's GHG emissions would be generated by mobile sources (vehicle trips), and there are no feasible Project measures that would reduce vehicular emissions. Thus, Project impacts would be significant and unavoidable. The No Project/No Build Alternative would avoid the majority of short-term construction -related emissions because only tenant improvements could occur under this alternative; and an increase in operational GHG emissions would not occur. Thus, the No Project/No Build Alternative would avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable impact related to the increase in GHG emissions. However, as detailed in Section 5.6, City of Santa Ana 6-8 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives Greenhouse Gas Emissions, operation of the existing industrial buildings on the Project site at full capacity generates 8,520.07 MT/yr of GHGs, which would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e. Therefore, the No Project/No Build Alternative avoid the Project's significant impact related to the net increase of GHG emissions, as an increase in emissions over the existing condition would not occur. However, operation of the existing industrial buildings at full capacity would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold and because no residents would occur onsite a limited service population would exist; and therefore, it would also exceed the service population threshold. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The proposed Project would remove and dispose of approximately 900 cubic yards of contaminated soil during excavation and grading activities. As a result, the Project requires implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 that provides for a Soil Management Plan to be prepared by a qualified hazardous materials consultant that would detail procedures and protocols for excavation and disposal of onsite hazardous materials. The No Project/No Build Alternative would not require this mitigation because the existing onsite contaminated soils would remain in place. Thus, potential impacts related to removal and disposal of contaminated soils would be avoided by this alternative; however, the contaminated soils would remain on the Project site. Hydrology and Water Quality Existing water quality conditions, groundwater supplies, drainage patterns, and runoff water amounts would remain "as is" under the No Project/No Build Alternative because no new development would occur. This alternative would not introduce new sources of water pollutants from either construction on the site or new operations on the site, because no new development or different uses would occur. However, this alternative would not include installation of new low -impact development (LID), source control, site design, and treatment control best management practices (BMPs) to minimize runoff and water pollution, which would occur under the proposed Project. The storm water leaving the site would not be filtered and would continue to contain sediment and other potential pollutants associated with the existing conditions of the site. Therefore, the No Project/No Build Alternative would reduce impacts to hydrology and water quality that would occur from the proposed Project. However, the beneficial improvements would not occur. Overall, hydrology and water quality impacts would be less than significant, and neutral in comparison to the proposed Project. Land Use and Planning The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of PAO (Professional & Administration Office) and is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial). A General Plan Land Use Amendment and zone change are required to allow for the proposed mixed uses. The Project is requesting to change the General Plan land use designation to District Center (DC) and a zone change to Specific Development (SD). Development of the site for multi- family residential and commercial (retail/restaurant) uses would integrate into the planned development of these adjacent and nearby areas. The site would provide housing for local employees working nearby in Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. The site would also provide commercial retail services and restaurants for onsite residents and employees working nearby. The site would provide both vehicular and pedestrian access and would integrate into the land uses of the area. The proposed land use designation change from PAO to DC would not conflict with a policy or plan adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The PAO land use designation does not provide avoidance of an environmental effect and the DC land use designation provides for development flexibility to design a project that could avoid an environmental effect. In addition, the proposed Project would implement many of the SCAG policies related to high-density, infill development, and improvement of the job/housing balance. The No Project/No Build Alternative would operate the existing industrial buildings on the Project site, which would not require a General Plan Amendment or zoning change. No impacts related to land use and planning City of Santa Ana 6-9 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives would occur by retention of the existing onsite uses. Because the No Project/No Build Alternative would not include residential uses, it would not require implementation of Mitigation Measure LU -1, which requires resident notification of airport operations and potential annoyances. Because this alternative would not require implementation of mitigation that would be required by the proposed Project, impacts from implementation of this alternative would be less than those of the proposed Project. However, this alternative would not implement the SCAG policies related to high-density, infill development, and improvement of the job/housing balance and corresponding reduction in vehicle miles traveled. Noise The proposed Project would result a short-term increase in noise from construction and a long-term increase in noise from operation. The short-term construction noise and vibration impacts would be less than significant; and operation of the Project would also result in less than significant impacts. The No Project/No Build Alternative would generate noise sources from full re -occupation of the existing light industrial buildings, possible tenant improvements, and vehicular trips to and from the site. However, the number of vehicular trips generated by this alternative would be less than those generated by the proposed Project; hence, traffic noise under this alternative would be less. Also, this alternative would not involve exterior construction related noise and vibration, as only tenant improvements to the existing buildings would occur under this alternative. Additionally, this alternative would not generate a residential population that could be impacted by roadway noise sources. As a result, the No Project/No Build Alternative would avoid potential impacts related to noise; however, like the proposed Project, the noise generated under this alternative would be less than significant, which is the same as the proposed Project. Population and Housing The proposed Project would develop 1,150 multi -family residential units that would house approximately 2,081 residents at full occupancy and develop 80,000 square feet of commercial retail/restaurant space that would generate approximately 320 employees at full occupancy, which would be within SCAGs projected growth. In addition, the proposed Project would reduce the jobs -housing balance slightly to 2.05; and to 2.10 in 2040, which would be a beneficial effect of providing multi -family housing on the project site, where employees can easily travel to employment opportunities within the Santa Ana, City of Tustin, and City of Irvine, which are jobs -rich, and a corresponding reduction in vehicle miles traveled would occur. The No Project/No Build Alternative would re -occupy the existing building. As described in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, SCAG projections show that the number of jobs will increase through 2040. The No Project/No Build Alternative would provide three industrial buildings to accommodate employment opportunities for the projected growth in jobs but would not result in a benefit to the jobs housing balance and a corresponding reduction in vehicle miles traveled. Overall, the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in a less than significant impact related to population and housing, which is the same as the proposed Project. Public Services The proposed Project would develop 1,150 multi -family residential units that would house approximately 2,081 residents at full occupancy and develop 80,000 square feet of commercial retail/restaurant space that would generate approximately 320 employees at full occupancy, which would require public services, such as fire protection and emergency response, police protection, and schools. However, as described in Section 5.1 2, Public Services, the Project would install security and fire protection systems and there are adequate public service facilities that would be able to meet the service demands of the proposed Project and new or physically altered public service facilities would not be required to serve the proposed Project. City of Santa Ana 6-10 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives The No Project/No Build Alternative would continue use of the existing light industrial buildings on the Project site, and similar to the proposed Project, the employees onsite would require public services. However, the service demand generated by the existing buildings is lower than that of the proposed Project because a 24-hour resident population associated with the proposed Project would not exist, and the employee population onsite is much less than the number of residents generated by the proposed Project. However, the new security and fire protection features that would be implemented by the proposed Project would not occur by this alternative, and the existing older fire system would remain. Overall, both the proposed Project and the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to public services. Parks and Recreation The proposed Project would develop 1,150 multi -family residential units that would house approximately 2,081 residents at full occupancy, which would generate a demand for park and recreation facilities. The proposed Project includes 174,555 square feet of exterior open space recreation area and approximately 8,008 square feet of interior amenities to total 183,363 square feet of recreational and open space onsite. Based on the existing amount of 245.38 acres of existing park and recreation facilities within 3 miles of the Project site, the recreation facilities that would be provided as part of the Project, and the number of residents at full capacity of the proposed Project, the Project would result in less than significant impacts related to parks and recreation. The No Project/No Build Alternative would continue use of the existing light industrial buildings on the Project site. The employees would generate a much lower demand for park and recreation facilities, than the 24- hour resident population associated with the proposed Project. Therefore, both the proposed Project and the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to parks and recreation. Transportation As described in Section 5.14, Transportation, the proposed Project would result in an increase of 534 a.m. peak hour trips and 604 p.m. peak hour trips. The addition of these vehicle trips would result in an impact at five intersection locations, which would require implementation of improvements to reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. However, the improvements cannot be guaranteed because they require approval and/or implementation by the City of Tustin or the City of Irvine; or are a result of a is a cumulative impact in 2040 and there is no currently planned improvement. Therefore, transportation impacts from the Project would remain significant and unavoidable. However, the proposed Project would implement high-density, infill development, that would improve the job/housing balance and thereby reduce the related vehicle miles traveled. The Project is located near existing employment, services, and retail destinations, and is in proximity to existing public bus stops and freeways, which would result in reduced dependency on cars, time spent in traffic, and more closely link residents to jobs and services in comparison to a project of similar size and land without close access to employment, service, retail, public transit, and freeways. As described in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, the Project would assist in improving the jobs to housing balance. As shown on Table 5.14-5 in Section 5.14, Transportation, operation of the existing three light industrial buildings at full capacity would generate 1,326 total vehicle trips, of which 534 are in the a.m. peak hour and 604 in the p.m. peak hour. These are 10,220 fewer vehicular trips per day, 375 fewer a.m. peak hour trips, and 445 fewer p.m. peak hour trips than the proposed Project, which would result in a less than significant impact due to the reduction in trip volume. However, this alternative would not implement high- density, infill development, improve the job/housing balance, or reduce vehicle miles traveled, as under this alternative the site would not provide housing close to the employment center. City of Santa Ana 6-11 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives Tribal Cultural Resources The proposed Project involves construction that could result in inadvertent impacts to unknown buried tribal cultural resources. Therefore, the Project requires mitigation to reduce the potential impacts to these resources that could occur during construction. However, the No Project/No Build Alternative would not involve ground disturbance; no excavation or grading would occur. Hence, this alternative would not have the potential to impact unknown buried tribal cultural resources and mitigation is not required. Thus, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources under the No Project/No Build Alternative would be less than the proposed Project. Utilities and Service Systems The proposed Project would develop 1,150 multi -family residential units that would house approximately 2,081 residents at full occupancy and develop 80,000 square feet of commercial retail/restaurant space that would generate approximately 320 employees at full occupancy, which would require water, wastewater, drainage, and landfill systems. However, as described in Section 5.16, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would redevelop onsite utilities compliant with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and install LID and CalGreen/Title 24 compliant infrastructure that would connect to the existing infrastructure adjacent to the Project site. Additionally, the existing off-site infrastructure is adequate and would be able to meet the service demands of the proposed Project and new or physically altered utility systems would not be required to serve the proposed Project. The No Project/No Build Alternative would operate the existing light industrial buildings on the Project site, and similar to the proposed Project, this alternative would require water, wastewater, and landfill services. The service demand generated by the existing light industrial buildings would be lower than that of the proposed Project because fewer people would be onsite and a 24-hour resident population would not exist. However, because the onsite infrastructure would not be redeveloped, LID and CalGreen/Title 24 compliant infrastructure would not be installed. Overall, both the proposed Project and the No Project/No Build Alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to utilities and service systems. 6.6.2 CONCLUSION Ability to Reduce Impacts The No Project/No Build Alternative would result in operation of the three existing light industrial buildings on the Project site, and development and operation of 1,150 multi -family residences and 80,000 square feet of retail commercial space would not occur. As a result, the No Project/No Build Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable air quality, greenhouse gas, and transportation impacts that would occur from the Project and all of the potential construction impacts. Additionally, operational impacts would be reduced and the mitigation measures that are identified in Chapter 5.0 of this EIR would not be required, which include measures related to hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, transportation and tribal cultural resources. However, the environmental benefits of the Project would also not be realized, such as improvements to storm water quality, removal of contaminated soils, improvements to the jobs/housing balance, and the potential to reduce vehicle miles traveled. The No Project/No Build Alternative would not install storm water filtration features in accordance with DAMP and LID design guidelines that would filter and slow the volume and rate of runoff; the contaminated soils would remain onsite; and this alternative would provide for the projected employment growth but would not improve the jobs to housing balance within the region and could generate more vehicle miles traveled. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives As shown in Table 6-8, the No Project/ No Build Alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives. The site would not be redeveloped to provide housing to help meet the region's demand for housing, would not provide a development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan City of Santa Ana 6-12 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives and IBC, would not develop housing to assist the City in meeting its jobs/housing balance, would not provide onsite uses that reduce VMT, and would not implement SCAG RTP/SCS policies related to providing additional housing near employment centers. Overall, this alternative would not meet any of the objectives of the proposed Project. 6.7 ALTERNATIVE 2: REDUCED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE Under this alternative, a reduction in the number of residential units and commercial square footage would be built, which would result in increased setbacks and reduced building heights. Pursuant to discussion with City planning staff, it was determined that a reasonable decrease in developed on the Project site is 30 percent of each unit type and a 30 percent reduction in commercial retail space resulting in 345 fewer residential units and 24,000 square feet less of commercial space. Like the proposed Project, 17 percent of the units would be studios, 52 percent would be one -bedroom units, and 29 percent would be 2 -bedroom units. This alternative would develop and operate 805 multi -family residential units and 56,000 square feet of retail and restaurant commercial uses. Reducing these units from the proposed Project would eliminate 100 units from each of the three proposed mixed use buildings and 45 units from the residential only building, which would reduce the height of the three six -story mixed use buildings by two stories and reduce the height of the one five -story building by one story. Thus, each of the mixed-use and residential buildings would be four -stories in height under the Reduced Project Alternative. To support the Reduced Project Alternative, parking spaces would be provided at the same rate as the proposed Project of 1.7 spaces per residential unit and 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space within a two four -level parking structures and two five -level parking structures, which would each be two levels lower than the proposed Project. The 24,000 square foot reduction in commercial space would occur from reducing the Phase 1 commercial square footage from 40,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet and from reducing the Phase 3 commercial square footage from 20,000 square feet to 16,000 square feet. Under the Reduced Project Alternative, the recreation amenities would also be reduced by 30 percent; thus, approximately 122,189 square feet of exterior open space recreation area and approximately 5,606 square feet of indoor amenities would be provided by this alternative. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would require a General Plan Amendment from the existing land use designation of PAO (Professional and Administrative Office) to District Center (DC), and a Zone change from M-1 (Light Industrial) to a Specific Development (SD) designation. 6.7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Aesthetics The Reduced Project Alternative would result in a mixed-use development that would be lower in in height and visual density than the proposed Project. Views of the Project site would change from views of five- and six -story mixed-use buildings to those of four-story mixed-use buildings. Views of the six- and seven -level parking structures would change to views of four- and five level -parking structures. The proposed parking structures would each be two levels lower than the proposed Project, which would reduce the urban density of views of the site. Similarly, the 24,000 square foot reduction in commercial space would reduce the visual density of the commercial uses on site. City of Santa Ana 6-13 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives Under the Reduced Project Alternative, the four-story mixed-use buildings and four- and five -level parking structures would be set behind landscaping trees that would be similar to that proposed by the Project. The change in views of the Project site from Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue under this alternative would result in a lower visually dense urban environment compared to the proposed Project. Similar to the proposed Project, the four-story urban structures under the Reduced Project Alternative would change setback views of urban structures to forefront views of mixed-use structures that would dominate views. However, the views of the Reduced Project Alternative would be lower in height and visually less dense than that of the proposed Project. Thus, under this alternative, the development would be reduced in visual scale and height compared to the proposed Project. The Reduced Project Alternative would have a modern and mixed-use character that is consistent with the proposed Project and would be visually compatible with the existing and future built environment in the Project area. Section 5.1, Aesthetics, describes that development across from Red Hill Avenue from the Project site is within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and is planned for development that could be up to six -stories and 70 -feet in height, which would also to be consistent with the visual character of this alternative. Although the Reduced Project Alternative would also reduce exterior recreation amenities by 30 percent, the development would be located on the same site; therefore, additional open space area may occur as a result of the reduction of building square footage and developed recreation amenities. Overall, views of the Project site would be visually less dense and structure heights would be lower with implementation of the Reduced Project Alternative. However, both the Reduced Project Alternative and the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to visual character and quality. Additionally, both the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative would introduce additional sources of light and glare that would result in similar less than significant impacts with implementation of the City's existing Municipal Code lighting regulations that require lights to be directed and shielded away from adjacent land uses to prevent light from shining onto adjacent properties. In addition, exterior building materials would consist of stucco, concrete, stone veneer, and other similar materials that do not have highly reflective surfaces. Therefore, lighting and glare related impacts would be similar and less than significant under both the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative. Air Quality The Reduced Project Alternative would reduce the amount and length of construction activities compared to the proposed Project, which in turn would result in less overall construction -related air quality emissions. Also, as the number of residential units and commercial square footage would be reduced by 30 percent under this alternative and the size of the proposed structures are smaller, less building and architectural coating activities would be needed than those of the proposed Project. However, the demolition, site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, and paving phases would include the entire site; and therefore, would have the same level of maximum daily emissions, which were determined to be less than significant, as detailed in Section 5.2, Air Quality. Thus, like the proposed Project, the Reduced Project Alternative would result in less than significant construction impacts related to air quality. As detailed in Table 5.2-8, in Section 5.2, Air Quality, operation of the Project would result in 65.33 lbs/day of VOC emissions, which is 15.33 lbs/day over the SCAQMD regional threshold of 55 lbs per day. The VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and vehicle trips. However, as detailed in Table 6-2 below, the Reduced Project Alternative would result in 3,955 fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project, resulting in fewer vehicular emissions. In addition, the Reduced Project Alternative would include 345 fewer residential units and 24,000 square feet less of commercial space. This reduction in residential units, square footage of commercial space, and daily vehicular trips would result in reducing VOC emissions by City of Santa Ana 6-14 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives over 15.33 lbs/day. Thus, daily operational emissions from the Reduced Project Alternative would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds and would result in less than significant operational air quality impacts. Therefore, the Reduced Project Alternative would generate less overall air quality emissions than the proposed Project and would reduce the significant and unavoidable impact from the proposed Project to a less than significant level. Cultural Resources The Reduced Project Alternative would develop fewer residential units and less commercial space than the proposed Project; but would require the same site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, which would disturb site soils to the same extent as the proposed Project. However, as described previously, the Project site does not contain any historic resources and due to the extent and depth of previous ground disturbances throughout the site, the potential for archaeological resources or human remains to exist onsite is limited. Therefore, similar to the proposed Project, this alternative would result in a less than significant impact related to cultural resources. Further, like the Project, in the unanticipated event that human remains are found during construction activities compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 would ensure that human remains are treated with dignity and as specified by law and provide that the impact is less than significant. Energy The Reduced Project Alternative would redevelop the Project site to provide multi -family residential units and commercial uses that would require energy supplies. Like the proposed Project, the Reduced Project Alternative would be developed in compliance with the Calgreen/Title 24 requirements related to energy and would include similar features to reduce energy consumptions, such as electric vehicle charging stations. As described in Section 5.4, Energy, the proposed Project would not use large amounts of energy or fuel in a wasteful manner. Because the Reduced Project Alternative would result in 30 percent fewer residential units and 30 percent less commercial square footage and would implement the same energy efficient infrastructure, this alternative would demand less energy. However, both impacts of the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative would not use large amounts of energy or fuel in a wasteful or inefficient manner and impacts in both conditions would be less than significant. Geology and Soils Grading and development of the Project area would still occur under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, and therefore, impacts to geology and soils would be similar to those that would be generated from the proposed Project. The new structures under this alternative would still result in additional persons and structures in the Project area that would be subject to risks associated with seismic ground shaking and geologic hazards. Therefore, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would be required to meet the same regulatory requirements as the proposed Project. Therefore, impacts to geology and soils would be less than significant, which is the same as the proposed Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a similar potential to adversely affect any paleontological resources on the Project site as the proposed Project, despite the reduction in development size. However, like the proposed Project, the potential of paleontological resources to exist onsite is limited due to the previous extensive ground disturbance of the Project site. Thus, like the proposed Project, potential impacts to paleontological resources would also be less than significant. Greenhouse Gas Emissions The Reduced Project Alternative would reduce the amount and length of construction activities compared to the proposed Project, which in turn would result in less overall construction related GHG emissions. In addition, the Reduced Project Alternative would generate fewer emissions from operation of residential units and City of Santa Ana 6-15 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives commercial space because 30 percent fewer residences and 30 percent less commercial square footage would be developed compared to the proposed Project. The Reduced Project Alternative would also result in 3,955 fewer daily vehicular trips. Therefore, the Reduced Project Alternative would generate less GHG emissions than the proposed Project. The net increase in GHG emissions that would be generated from the operation of the proposed Project is 9,861.60 CO2e per year (as shown in Table 5.6-3). Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative GHG emissions would be approximately 30 percent less, which would be approximately 6,903.12 CO2e per year. Therefore, the overall volume of GHG emissions would be reduced in comparison to the proposed Project. However, the volume of GHG emissions would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e. Additionally, the alternative's net increase in GHG emissions of 6,903.12 MTCO2e per year divided by the service population of the Project (1,457 residents + 224 employees) would result in 4.10 MTCO2e annually per service population, which exceeds the threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Therefore, although less emissions would occur, significant and unavoidable impacts related to GHG emissions would still occur from operation of the Reduced Intensity Alternative and impacts under this alternative would be the same as the proposed Project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The demolition, site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, and paving phases that would be needed to develop the Reduced Project Alternative would include the entire site; and therefore, like the proposed Project it would require removal and disposal of contaminated soils during excavation and grading activities. As a result, this alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 to ensure that the contaminated soils are removed and disposed of appropriately. This measure would be required for both the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. In addition, the Reduced Project Alternative would result in similar less than significant hazard impacts related to operations at John Wayne Airport (JWA). JWA is located 2.2 miles southwest of the Project site within the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) Notification Area, but is not the Airport Safety Zone, the Airport Impact Zone, and is outside of the 60 CNEL noise contours, as shown in Section 5.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Figures 5.7-2 and 5.7-3). The Reduced Project Alternative would result in four-story buildings, which are lower than the six -story buildings proposed by the Project. Both the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative would result in similar less than significant impacts related to JWA operational hazards. Therefore, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials from the Reduced Project Alternative would be neutral in comparison to the proposed Project. Hydrology and Water Quality The Reduced Project Alternative would result in similar construction impacts compared to the proposed Project because similar construction activities and soil disturbances would occur. As a result, the Reduced Project Alternative would implement standard BMPs through the City's standard permitting process to reduce potential impacts related to water quality during construction, which is similar to the proposed Project. Therefore, construction related hydrology and water quality impacts from the Reduced Project Alternative would be similar to those of the proposed Project. The Reduced Project Alternative may result in a reduction of the total area of impervious surfaces compared to the Project. However, like the proposed Project, this alternative would introduce new sources of water pollutants from construction and operation activities. Additionally, this alternative would be required to include onsite drainage, LID, source control, site design, and treatment control BMPs that are similar to those included in the proposed Project. Therefore, the Reduced Project Alternative would result in impacts to City of Santa Ana 6-16 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives hydrology and water quality that are similar to those that would occur from the proposed Project. Overall, hydrology and water quality impacts would be less than significant, and neutral in comparison to the proposed Project. Land Use and Planning The Reduced Project Alternative would implement multi -family housing and retail/restaurant commercial land uses on the Project site, and like the proposed Project would require a General Plan Land Use Amendment and zone change to allow for the mixed -uses. Similar to the Project, the Reduced Project Alternative would provide the same land uses that would integrate into the planned development of these adjacent and nearby areas. However, the reduced development would provide fewer housing opportunities for local employees and fewer retail services and restaurants for onsite residents and employees working nearby. Therefore, the Reduced Project Alternative would implement many of the SCAG policies related to high-density, infill development, and improvement of the job/housing balance to a lesser degree than the proposed Project. In addition, because the Reduced Project Alternative would result in an onsite residential population, the alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure LU -1, which requires resident notification of airport operations and potential annoyances. The Reduced Project Alternative would develop similar uses that would be less dense, and two -stories lower in height than the proposed Project. Like the proposed Project, the Reduced Project Alternative would be consistent with the JWA AELUP with implementation of Mitigation Measure LU -1. As a result, the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative would have similar less than significant impacts after implementation of mitigation. Noise The Reduced Project Alternative would reduce the amount and length of construction activities compared to the proposed Project, which in turn would result in less overall construction -related noise and vibration. Thus, like the proposed Project construction noise and vibration impacts would be less than significant under the Reduced Project Alternative. The Reduced Project Alternative would generate noise sources from vehicular trips to and from the site and operation of onsite exterior uses and mechanical equipment. However, the number of vehicular trips generated by this alternative would be less than those generated by the proposed Project; hence, traffic noise under this alternative would be less. Also, the number and type of mechanical systems needed for the Reduced Project Alternative would be similar to those used for the proposed Project. Thus, like the proposed Project, the noise generated under this alternative would be less than significant. Population and Housing The Reduced Project Alternative would reduce the number of residential units on the site by 30 percent of each unit type and reduce the commercial square footage by 30 percent. Thus, this alternative would develop and operate 805 multi -family residential units and 56,000 square feet of retail and restaurant commercial uses. Thus, like the proposed Project 17 percent of the units would be studios, 52 percent would be one -bedroom units, and 29 percent would be 2 -bedroom units. This would result in approximately 1,457 residents at full occupancy, versus the proposed Project's 2,081 residents at full occupancy of the proposed Project, which is a reduction of 624 residents. The reduction in commercial square footage would result in 224 employees, which would be a 96 -employee reduction over the Project's employment of 320 at full occupancy. The reduction in residential units and commercial space by the Reduced Project Alternative would be within SCAGs projected growth, like the proposed Project, but would provide less housing near an employment center and less benefit to the jobs -housing balance. Thus, both the Reduced Project Alternative and the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts City of Santa Ana 6-17 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives related to population and housing; however, the Reduced Project Alternative would result in a reduced beneficial impact by providing fewer multi -family housing units, where fewer employees can travel to local employment opportunities in the jobs -rich area. Reducing the number of residential units on the Project site, as would be done by the Reduced Project Alternative would incrementally reduce the jobs -housing balance. Public Services As described above, under the Reduced Project Alternative, the Project site would be redeveloped to provide 805 multi -family residential units and 56,000 square feet of retail and restaurant commercial uses. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would install security and fire protection systems, and because a new residential and employee population would exist on the Project additional calls for fire and police services would occur. Likewise, the residential population would generate students that would utilize local schools. As the population size associated with the Reduced Project Alternative would also be 30 percent is lower than the proposed Project, this alternative would result in a lower demand for public services, including fire, police, and schools. Because the Project would result in less than significant impacts to public services, the smaller Reduced Project Alternative would also result in less than significant impacts. Thus, overall impacts are the same. Parks and Recreation The Reduced Project Alternative would reduce the onsite recreation amenities by 30 percent. The 1,457 residents at full occupancy would utilize the 122,189 square feet of exterior open space/recreation area and approximately 5,606 square feet of indoor amenities that would be provided by the Reduced Project Alternative. As the population size associated with the Reduced Project Alternative would be reduced by 30 percent, consistent with the reduction in park and recreation amenity, the ratio of residents per area of parkland provided by the Reduced Project Alternative would be the same as the proposed Project. Also, because, the number of residents would be less under this alternative, it would result in an incrementally lower demand for off-site parks and recreation facilities. Therefore, both the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to parks and recreation; thus, overall impacts are the same. Transportation As described previously, the proposed Project would result in an increase of 11,546 daily vehicular trips, including 534 a.m. peak hour trips and 604 p.m. peak hour trips. This increase in vehicle trips would require implementation of improvements to reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. However, the improvements cannot be guaranteed because they require approval and/or implementation by the City of Tustin or the City of Irvine; or are a result of a is a cumulative impact in 2040 and there is no currently planned improvement. Therefore, impacts from the Project would remain significant and unavoidable. The Reduced Project Alternative would decrease the number of residential units and commercial space by 30 percent compared to the proposed Project. This would result in development of 805 multi -family residential units and a total of 56,000 square feet of commercial retail and restaurant space. As shown on Table 6-2, the Reduced Project Alternative would generate 3,955 fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project, resulting in 243 fewer a.m. peak hour trips and 281 fewer p.m. peak hour trips. Table 6-2: Trip Comparison Reduced Project Alternative AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Proposed Project 11,546 155 379 534 437 167 604 Reduced Proiect Alternative 7,591 56 1 235 1 291 1 267 1 56 1 323 City of Santa Ana 6-18 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Decrease in Trips -3,955 1 -99 1 -144 1 -243 1 -170 1 -1 1 1 1 -281 Source: EPD 2019. 6.0 Alternatives As shown in Table 6-3, with implementation of the Reduced Project Alternative, impacts at three out of the five intersections would be reduced to a less than significant level. However, due to the volume of cumulative trips in combination with the Project, an impact would continue to occur at the intersections of Grand Avenue / Warner Avenue (#4) and Red Hill Avenue/ Barranca Parkway (#30) in the year 2040 with implementation of the Reduced Project Alternative. Therefore, implementation of this alternative would reduce some of the impacts from the Project; however, a significant and unavoidable impact would continue to occur. Table 6-3: Comparison of Reduced Project Alternative Year 2040 LOS at Project Impacted Locations Source: EPD 2019 Tribal Cultural Resources The Reduced Project Alternative would require site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, which would disturb site soils to the same extent as the proposed Project; and therefore, this alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR -1 to reduce potential impacts related to unknown buried tribal cultural resources. Thus, impacts under both the Reduced Project Alternative and the proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level with incorporation of mitigation. Utilities and Service Systems The Reduced Project Alternative would redevelop the Project site to provide mixed uses. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would include redevelopment of the onsite utilities compliant with the Orange County DAMP and install LID and CalGreen/Title 24 compliant infrastructure that would connect to the existing infrastructure adjacent to the site. However, this alternative would result in a lower demand for water supplies, wastewater treatment, and landfill capacity because 30 percent fewer residential units and square footage of commercial space would be developed. As described previously, the existing off-site infrastructure is adequate and would be able to meet the service demands of the proposed Project. Therefore, it would also be able to meet the needs of 30 percent fewer residential units and 30 percent less commercial space. Thus, impacts to utilities and service systems would be less than significant under both the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative. 6.7.2 CONCLUSION Ability to Reduce Impacts City of Santa Ana 6-19 Draft EIR January 2020 Year 2040 Plus Proposed Project Year 2040 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. Year 2040 plus Project V/C F 0.033 Yes PM Peak PM Peak Change Impact? V/C or I V/C or Yes 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. 0.959 Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. Source: EPD 2019 Tribal Cultural Resources The Reduced Project Alternative would require site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, which would disturb site soils to the same extent as the proposed Project; and therefore, this alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR -1 to reduce potential impacts related to unknown buried tribal cultural resources. Thus, impacts under both the Reduced Project Alternative and the proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level with incorporation of mitigation. Utilities and Service Systems The Reduced Project Alternative would redevelop the Project site to provide mixed uses. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would include redevelopment of the onsite utilities compliant with the Orange County DAMP and install LID and CalGreen/Title 24 compliant infrastructure that would connect to the existing infrastructure adjacent to the site. However, this alternative would result in a lower demand for water supplies, wastewater treatment, and landfill capacity because 30 percent fewer residential units and square footage of commercial space would be developed. As described previously, the existing off-site infrastructure is adequate and would be able to meet the service demands of the proposed Project. Therefore, it would also be able to meet the needs of 30 percent fewer residential units and 30 percent less commercial space. Thus, impacts to utilities and service systems would be less than significant under both the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative. 6.7.2 CONCLUSION Ability to Reduce Impacts City of Santa Ana 6-19 Draft EIR January 2020 Year 2040 Plus Proposed Project 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. 1.018 F 1.051 F 0.033 Yes 25. Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. 0.794 C 0.908 E 0.114 Yes 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. 0.959 E 1.032 F 0.073 Yes 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. 1.011 F 1.037 F 0.026 Yes 47. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. N 1.006 F 1.016 F 0.010 Yes Year 2040 Plus Reduced Project Alternative 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. 1.018 F 1.037 F 0.019 Yes 25. Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. 0.794 C 0.847 D 0.053 No 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. 0.959 E 1.003 F 0.044 Yes 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. 1.011 F 1.028 F 0.017 No 47. Tustin Ranch Rd./ Warner Ave. N 1.006 F 1.012 F 0.006 No Source: EPD 2019 Tribal Cultural Resources The Reduced Project Alternative would require site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, which would disturb site soils to the same extent as the proposed Project; and therefore, this alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR -1 to reduce potential impacts related to unknown buried tribal cultural resources. Thus, impacts under both the Reduced Project Alternative and the proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level with incorporation of mitigation. Utilities and Service Systems The Reduced Project Alternative would redevelop the Project site to provide mixed uses. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would include redevelopment of the onsite utilities compliant with the Orange County DAMP and install LID and CalGreen/Title 24 compliant infrastructure that would connect to the existing infrastructure adjacent to the site. However, this alternative would result in a lower demand for water supplies, wastewater treatment, and landfill capacity because 30 percent fewer residential units and square footage of commercial space would be developed. As described previously, the existing off-site infrastructure is adequate and would be able to meet the service demands of the proposed Project. Therefore, it would also be able to meet the needs of 30 percent fewer residential units and 30 percent less commercial space. Thus, impacts to utilities and service systems would be less than significant under both the proposed Project and the Reduced Project Alternative. 6.7.2 CONCLUSION Ability to Reduce Impacts City of Santa Ana 6-19 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives The Reduced Project Alternative would result in 345 fewer residential units and 24,000 square feet less of commercial space, which would result in 3,955 fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project. The reduction in vehicular emissions and consumer products from this alternative would reduce operational air quality impacts to a less than significant level. However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions and transportation would continue to occur from implementation of this alternative. Additionally, the mitigation required for implementation of the proposed Project would continue to be required for the Reduced Project Alternative to reduce impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, and tribal cultural resources to a less than significant level. Overall, although the volume of impacts would be less by the Reduced Project Alternative in comparison to the proposed Project, the Reduced Project Alternative would not eliminate all of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project or eliminate the need for mitigation. Furthermore, the Reduced Project Alternative would result in a reduced beneficial impact. Providing fewer multi -family units and less commercial space on the Project site would result in fewer opportunities to improve the jobs -housing balance as fewer residents would have the potential to travel to local employment opportunities. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives As shown in Table 6-8, the Reduced Project Alternative would meet the Project objectives, but not to the same extent as the proposed Project. The site would not redeveloped to provide housing to help meet the region's demand for housing, would provide a development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan and IBC. However, fewer residential units and less commercial space would be provided and a reduced improvement to the jobs -housing balance and VMT would occur. Additionally, the alternative would result in less implementation of SCAG RTP/SCS policies related to providing additional housing near employment centers. Overall, this alternative would meet the objectives of the proposed Project, but not to the same extent as the proposed Project. 6.8 ALTERNATIVE 3: BUILD OUT OF THE EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING ALTERNATIVE The Project site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) with a designated Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.5 and is zoned Light Industrial (M-1). Under this alternative, the Project site would be redeveloped for a new light industrial business park as allowed by the existing General Plan Land Use designation and the City's Zoning Code Sections 41 -472 through 41-483. The Project site has a zoning designation of Light Industrial (M-1), which permits uses such as: warehousing, distribution, manufacture, assembly, and storage. The M-1 zone allows buildings up to 3 -stories or 35 -feet in height. At the allowable 0.5 FAR, the 14.58 -acre site would provide for approximately 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space and building heights of up to 35 -feet. These buildings would require approximately 635 parking spaces (per Municipal Code Section 41 -1390 requirement of 2 spaces per 1,000 square feet). The industrial buildings would be surrounded by drought tolerant ornamental landscaping. Under this alternative, the existing onsite development would be demolished, removed, and replaced to provide new building structures that would be developed pursuant to current building requirements, such as energy efficient power systems, drought tolerant landscaping, storm water filtration, and other Low Impact Development (LID) requirements. City of Santa Ana 6-20 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives 6.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Aesthetics The Build Out of the Existing Zoning Alternative would redevelop the Project site with new light industrial uses that would be three -stories (35 -feet in height) which is less than the proposed six -story buildings that would be 94 -feet in height. At the allowable 0.5 FAR, the industrial buildings would be 317,552 square feet in size and would require approximately 635 parking spaces. The buildings and associated parking would cover a majority of the Project site and would be visually denser than views of the existing site; but the structures developed under this alternative would be smaller in size that the proposed structures. This alternative would renovate the site and retain the industrial visual character of the site by constructing new light industrial buildings, which would have loading dock areas, parking, and limited landscaping around building frontages and parking areas. This would provide a similar character to what currently exists onsite. Although the visual character and quality of the Project site would be different than the proposed Project, impacts related to the visual character or quality of the site would be less than significant, which is the same as what would occur by the proposed Project. Additionally, both the proposed Project and the Build Out of the Existing Zoning Alternative would introduce additional sources of light and glare that would result in similar less than significant impacts with implementation of the City's existing Municipal Code lighting regulations that require lights to be directed and shielded away from adjacent land uses to prevent light from shining onto adjacent properties. In addition, exterior building materials would consist of stucco, concrete, stone veneer, and other similar materials that do not have highly reflective surfaces. Therefore, lighting and glare related impacts would be similar and less than significant under both the proposed Project and the Build Out of the Existing Zoning Alternative. Air Quality The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would require a similar amount, type, and length of construction activities as the proposed Project, which in turn would result in similar construction - related air quality emissions. Also, the demolition, site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, and paving phases would include the entire site; and therefore, would have the same level of maximum daily emissions. Thus, like the proposed Project, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use Zoning Alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to construction emissions. However, operation of the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in substantially fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project (as described in the traffic discussion below); and therefore, would result in substantially less daily vehicular emissions than the proposed Project. As described previously and detailed in Table 5.2-8, in Section 5.2, Air Quality, operation of the Project would result in 65.33 lbs/day of VOC emissions, which is 15.33 lbs/day over the SCAQMD regional threshold of 55 lbs per day. The VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and vehicle trips. However, as detailed in Table 6-5 below, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in 9,559 fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project, resulting in fewer vehicular emissions. This reduction would result in reducing VOC emissions by over 15.33 lbs/day. Thus, daily operational emissions from the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds and would result in less than significant operational air quality impacts. Therefore, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would generate less overall air quality emissions than the proposed Project and would reduce the significant and unavoidable impact from the proposed Project to a less than significant level City of Santa Ana 6-21 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives Cultural Resources Similar to the proposed Project, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would change the site by removing the existing buildings and would require the same site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, which would disturb site soils to the same extent as the proposed Project. However, as described previously, the Project site does not contain any historic resources and due to the extent and depth of previous ground disturbances throughout the site, the potential for archaeological resources or human remains to exist onsite is limited. Therefore, similar to the proposed Project, this alternative would result in a less than significant impact related to cultural resources. Further, in the unanticipated event that human remains are found during construction activities compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 would ensure that human remains are treated with dignity and as specified by law and provide that the impact is less than significant. Thus, both the proposed Project and the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in less than significant impacts. Energy The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would redevelop the Project site to provide 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space that would require energy supplies. Like the proposed Project, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would be developed in compliance with the Calgreen/Title 24 requirements related to energy and is not anticipated to use large amounts of energy in a wasteful or inefficient manner. Thus, both the proposed Project and the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not use large amounts of energy or fuel in an inefficient or wasteful manner, and impacts would be less than significant. Geology and Soils Grading and development of the Project area would still occur under the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative, and therefore, impacts to geology and soils would be similar to those that would be generated from the proposed Project. The new structures under this alternative would still result in additional persons and structures in the Project area that would be subject to risks associated with seismic ground shaking and geologic hazards. Therefore, the Build Out of the Existing Zoning Alternative would be required to meet the same regulatory requirements as the proposed Project. Therefore, impacts to geology and soils would be less than significant, which is the same as the proposed Project. The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in a similar potential to adversely affect any paleontological resources on the Project site as the proposed Project. However, like the proposed Project, the potential of paleontological resources to exist onsite is limited due to the previous extensive ground disturbance of the Project site. Thus, like the proposed Project, potential impacts to paleontological resources would also be less than significant. Greenhouse Gas Emissions The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would require a similar amount, type, and length of construction activities as the proposed Project, which in turn would result in similar construction related GHG emissions. However, operation of the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in substantially fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project (as described in the traffic discussion below); and therefore, would result in substantially less daily vehicular related GHG emissions than the proposed Project. The net increase in GHG emissions that would be generated from the operation of the proposed Project is 9,861.60 CO2e per year (as shown in Table 5.6-3). Under the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative GHG emissions would be approximately 4,234.74 CO2e per year. Therefore, the overall volume of GHG emissions would be reduced in comparison to the proposed Project. However, the volume of GHG City of Santa Ana 6-22 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives emissions would exceed the SCAQMD Tier 3 screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e. Additionally, the alternative's net increase in GHG emissions of 4,234.74 MTCO2e per year divided by the service population of the Project (0 residents + 334 employees, as determined below in the population and housing discussion) would result in 12.68 MTCO2e annually per service population, which exceeds the threshold of 3.16 MTCO2e per service population. Therefore, although less emissions would occur, significant and unavoidable impacts related to GHG emissions would still occur from operation of the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative and impacts under this alternative would be the same as the proposed Project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The demolition, site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, that would be needed to develop the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would include the entire site; and therefore, like the proposed Project it would require removal and disposal of contaminated soils during excavation and grading activities. As a result, this alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ- 1 to ensure that the contaminated soils are removed and disposed of appropriately. This measure would be required for both the proposed Project and the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. In addition, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in similar less than significant hazard impacts related to operations at JWA. The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in buildings that are three -stories (35 -feet in height), which is less than the proposed six -story buildings that would be 94 -feet in height. Both the proposed Project and the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in similar less than significant impacts related to JWA operational hazards. Therefore, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials from the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would be neutral in comparison to the proposed Project. Hydrology and Water Quality The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in similar construction impacts compared to the proposed Project because similar construction activities and soil disturbances would occur. As a result, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would implement standard BMPs through the City's standard permitting process to reduce potential impacts related to water quality during construction, which is similar to the proposed Project. Therefore, construction related hydrology and water quality impacts from the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would be similar to those of the proposed Project. The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in similar areas of impervious surfaces compared to the Project. Also, like the proposed Project, this alternative would introduce new sources of water pollutants from construction and operation activities. Additionally, this alternative would be required to include onsite drainage, LID, source control, site design, and treatment control BMPs that are similar to those included in the proposed Project. Therefore, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in impacts to hydrology and water quality that are similar to those that would occur from the proposed Project. Overall, hydrology and water quality impacts would be less than significant, and neutral in comparison to the proposed Project. Land Use and Planning The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would implement the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations for the Project site and would not require a General Plan amendment or zoning change. Therefore, this alternative would be consistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS, City's General Plan, and zoning code. City of Santa Ana 6-23 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives Because the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not include residential uses, it would not require implementation of Mitigation Measure LU -1, which requires resident notification of airport operations and potential annoyances. Because this alternative would not require implementation of mitigation that would be required by the proposed Project, impacts from implementation of this alternative would be less than those of the proposed Project. However, this alternative would not implement the SCAG policies to the same degree as the proposed Project, because this alternative would not locate new housing near existing jobs and reduce the jobs -housing ratio or the corresponding reduction in vehicle miles traveled. Noise The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would require a similar amount, type, and length of construction activities as the proposed Project, which in turn would result in similar construction - related noise similar construction -related noise and vibration. Thus, like the proposed Project construction noise and vibration impacts would be less than significant. Compared to the proposed residential and commercial retail uses that would be operated by the Project, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would include various light industrial uses (e.g., warehousing, manufacturing, packaging or distribution, service stations, etc.) that typically involve large vehicles and truck trips and operation of these uses may involve machinery or other activities that generally results in higher operational noise levels. Thus, the light industrial uses under the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative are anticipated to generate higher traffic noise levels due to the use of larger fleet mix vehicles (e.g., medium and heavy trucks) than the proposed Project. However, the site is not adjacent to sensitive receptors. Therefore, although noise impacts related to a substantial permanent increase in the ambient noise levels from trucks would be greater under the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative than the proposed Project, sensitive receivers would not be impacted. Therefore, like the proposed Project, noise under the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would be less than significant. Population and Housing The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not develop housing and would not generate an onsite residential population but would provide for the projected increase in jobs. As described previously and in Section 5.1 1, Population and Housing, SCAG projections show that the number of jobs will increase through 2040. This alternative would provide 317,552 square feet of business park space to accommodate some of the projected increase in jobs. Based upon an employee generation rate of 950 square feet per employee for light industrial uses (SA 2015), this alternative would result in approximately 334 employees at build out. However, this alternative would not assist in improving the jobs housing in - balance and would not provide housing on the Project site, where employees could travel to local employment opportunities within the jobs -rich area. However, both the proposed Project and the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to population and housing. Public Services As described above, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would redevelop the Project site into a 317,552 square foot light industrial business park building that would accommodate approximately 334 employees at full capacity. Although this would result in a slight increase in onsite employees, the employee population would not be onsite 24 -hours a day, and employees typically generate fewer fire and police service related calls than resident populations. In addition, the new office building would install adequate security systems, and would be required to install OCFA approved fire protection infrastructure. Also, the employees would not generate a substantial increase in student population. Thus, City of Santa Ana 6-24 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives both the proposed Project and the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in less than significant impacts related to public services. Parks and Recreation As described previously, the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not generate a residential population that would require park and recreation services. The 334 onsite employees generated by this alternative would generate a lower demand for park and recreation facilities than a residential population. Although the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in a lower demand for parks and recreation than the proposed Project, both would result in less than significant impacts. Transportation As described previously, the proposed Project would result in an increase of 11,546 daily vehicular trips, of which there are 534 a.m. peak hour trips and 604 p.m. peak hour trips that would result in significant and unavoidable impacts at five intersections in 2040. As shown on Table 6-4, based on the ITE trip generation rates, Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would generate 1,987 daily trips, of which 235 trips would occur in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Table 6-4: Trip Generation of the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Units Daily In Out Total In Out Total Industrial Park Trip Rates TSF 3.37 0.32 0.08 0.40 0.08 0.32 0.40 Total Vehicle Trip Generation Alternative 3 317.552 TSF 1,070 103 24 127 27 100 127 Vehicle Mixt Percent Passenger Vehicles 52.80% 565 54 13 67 14 53 67 2 -Axle Trucks 4.00% 43 4 1 5 1 4 5 3 -Axle Trucks 3.30% 35 3 1 4 1 3 4 4+ -Axle Trucks 39.80% 426 41 10 51 11 40 51 100% 1,069 103 24 127 27 100 127 PCE Trip Generafion3 PCE Factor Passenger Vehicles 1.0 565 54 13 67 14 53 67 2 -Axle Trucks 1.5 64 6 1 8 2 6 8 3 -Axle Trucks 2.0 71 7 2 8 2 7 8 4+ -Axle Trucks 3.0 1,278 123 29 152 32 120 152 Total PCE Trip Generation 1,978 190 45 235 49 185 235 Source: EPD 2019. TSF = Thousand Square Feet PCE = Passenger Car Equivalent Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generationj Oth Edition, 2017. Land Use Code 130 - Industrial Park. 2 Vehicle Mix from the City of Fontana, Truck Trip Generation Study, August 2003. Classification: Industrial Park. 3 Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) factors from San Bernardino County CMP, Appendix B - Guidelines for CMP Traffic Impact Analysis Reports in San Bernardino County, 2016 Table 6-5 shows that the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would generate 9,559 fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project, resulting in 299 fewer a.m. peak hour trips and 369 fewer p.m. peak hour trips. Table 6-5: Trip Comparison of the Project and Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour Dailv I In I Out I Total I In I Out I Total City of Santa Ana 6-25 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 6.0 Alternatives Proposed Project 1 11,546 1 155 1 379 1 534 1 437 1 167 1 604 Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative 1,987 190 45 235 49 185 235 Change in Trips by the Alternative -9,559 35 -334 -299 -388 18 -369 Source: EPD 2019. As shown in Table 6-6, with implementation of the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative, impacts at all of the intersections that would be impacted by the proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level. Thus, the significant and unavoidable transportation impacts that would result from the proposed Project would not occur by the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative. Table 6-6: Comparison of the Project and Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative Year 2040 LOS at Project Impacted Locations Source: EPD 2019 Tribal Cultural Resources The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would require site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, which would disturb site soils to the same extent as the proposed Project; and therefore, this alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR -1 to reduce potential impacts related to unknown buried tribal cultural resources. Thus, impacts under both the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative and the proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level with incorporation of mitigation. Utilities and Service Systems The Build Out of the Existing Zoning Alternative would redevelop the Project site to provide a 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would include redevelopment of the onsite utilities compliant with the Orange County DAMP and install LID and CalGreen/Title 24 compliant infrastructure that would connect to the existing infrastructure adjacent to the site. However, this alternative would result in a lower demand for water supplies, wastewater treatment, and landfill capacity because residential uses, that includes a 24-hour population and involves bathing, laundry, dishwashing, pools, and spas require a greater volume of water and generate more wastewater and solid waste than the a 317,552 square feet of light industrial uses. As described previously, the existing off-site infrastructure is adequate and would be able to meet the service demands of the proposed Project. Because the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would have a reduced demand compared to the proposed Project, the existing off-site infrastructure would also be able to service the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative. City of Santa Ana 6-26 Draft EIR January 2020 Year 2040 Plus Proposed Project Year 2040 4. Year 2040 plus Project V/C 1.051 F PM Peak PM Peak Change Impact? 0.794 V/C or I V/C or E 0.114 Yes Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS 1.032 F Source: EPD 2019 Tribal Cultural Resources The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would require site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, which would disturb site soils to the same extent as the proposed Project; and therefore, this alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR -1 to reduce potential impacts related to unknown buried tribal cultural resources. Thus, impacts under both the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative and the proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level with incorporation of mitigation. Utilities and Service Systems The Build Out of the Existing Zoning Alternative would redevelop the Project site to provide a 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would include redevelopment of the onsite utilities compliant with the Orange County DAMP and install LID and CalGreen/Title 24 compliant infrastructure that would connect to the existing infrastructure adjacent to the site. However, this alternative would result in a lower demand for water supplies, wastewater treatment, and landfill capacity because residential uses, that includes a 24-hour population and involves bathing, laundry, dishwashing, pools, and spas require a greater volume of water and generate more wastewater and solid waste than the a 317,552 square feet of light industrial uses. As described previously, the existing off-site infrastructure is adequate and would be able to meet the service demands of the proposed Project. Because the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would have a reduced demand compared to the proposed Project, the existing off-site infrastructure would also be able to service the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative. City of Santa Ana 6-26 Draft EIR January 2020 Year 2040 Plus Proposed Project 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. 1.018 F 1.051 F 0.033 Yes 25 Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. 0.794 C 0.908 E 0.114 Yes 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. 0.959 E 1.032 F 0.073 Yes 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. 1.011 F 1.037 F 0.026 Yes 47. Tustin Ranch Rd. Warner Ave. N 1.006 F 1.016 F 0.010 Yes Year 2040 Plus Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative 4. Grand Ave. Warner Ave. 1.018 F 1.021 F 0.003 No 25 Red Hill Ave. Warner Ave. 0.794 C 0.795 C 0.001 No 30. Red Hill Ave. Barranca Pkwy. 0.959 E 0.961 F 0.002 No 32. Red Hill Ave. Alton Pkwy. 1.011 F 1.012 F 0.001 No 47. Tustin Ranch Rd./ Warner Ave. N 1.006 F 1.007 F 0.001 No Source: EPD 2019 Tribal Cultural Resources The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would require site preparation, grading, drainage/utilities/subgrade, which would disturb site soils to the same extent as the proposed Project; and therefore, this alternative would require implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR -1 to reduce potential impacts related to unknown buried tribal cultural resources. Thus, impacts under both the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative and the proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level with incorporation of mitigation. Utilities and Service Systems The Build Out of the Existing Zoning Alternative would redevelop the Project site to provide a 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space. Like the proposed Project, this alternative would include redevelopment of the onsite utilities compliant with the Orange County DAMP and install LID and CalGreen/Title 24 compliant infrastructure that would connect to the existing infrastructure adjacent to the site. However, this alternative would result in a lower demand for water supplies, wastewater treatment, and landfill capacity because residential uses, that includes a 24-hour population and involves bathing, laundry, dishwashing, pools, and spas require a greater volume of water and generate more wastewater and solid waste than the a 317,552 square feet of light industrial uses. As described previously, the existing off-site infrastructure is adequate and would be able to meet the service demands of the proposed Project. Because the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would have a reduced demand compared to the proposed Project, the existing off-site infrastructure would also be able to service the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative. City of Santa Ana 6-26 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives Impacts to utilities and service systems would be less than significant under both the proposed project and the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative. 6.8.2 CONCLUSION Ability to Reduce Impacts The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would redevelop the site with a 3 -story a 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space, which would result in 9,559 fewer daily vehicular trips than the proposed Project. The reduction in vehicular trips from this alternative would reduce the proposed Project's significant and unavoidable operational air quality emissions and transportation/traffic impacts to a less than significant level. However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions would continue to occur from implementation of this alternative. Additionally, the mitigation required for hazards and hazardous materials and tribal cultural resources for the proposed Project would continue to be required for the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative. Mitigation related to land use and planning would not be required because no residences would exist on the site under this alternative. Overall, although the volume of impacts would be less by the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative in comparison to the proposed Project, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not eliminate all of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project or eliminate the need for mitigation. Furthermore, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would result in a reduced beneficial impact, as it would not provide multi -family units on the Project site; and therefore, would not improve the jobs -housing balance. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives As shown in Table 6-8, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would only meet one Project objective, to redevelop existing land uses that would utilize existing infrastructure, including: water, sewer, arterial roadways, transit, and freeways; and provide non -vehicular (pedestrian and bicycle) circulation.. The site would not be redeveloped with new housing near existing employment centers, to meet the regions demand for housing or be developed consistent with the redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area or within the IBC. It would not promote an improved jobs/housing balance and would not meet the related SCAG RTP/SCS land use objectives. 6.9 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE CEQA requires a lead agency to identify the "environmentally superior alternative" when significant environmental impacts result from a proposed Project. The Environmentally Superior Alternative for the proposed project would be the No Project/No Build Alternative. The No Project/No Build alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project and all of the potential construction impacts, reduce many of the operational impacts, and would not be required to implement the mitigation measures that are identified in Chapter 5.0 of this EIR that are related to: hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, transportation, and tribal cultural resources. However, this alternative would not improve the environment by improving storm water runoff quality, removing contaminated soils from the site, improving the jobs/housing balance and the related reduction in vehicle miles traveled. Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(3)(1) states: The "no project" analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the City of Santa Ana 6-27 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. If the environmentally superior alternative is the "no project" alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. (Emphasis added). Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, because the No Project/No Build Alternative has been identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative, the Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other alternatives would be the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative, which would involve redevelopment of the site with 317,552 square feet of light industrial building space and building heights of up to 35 -feet. In addition, approximately 635 parking spaces (per Municipal Code Section 41-1390 requirement of 2 spaces per 1,000 square feet) would be required to be developed for use by the new buildings. The Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would reduce the Project's significant and unavoidable operational air quality and transportation/traffic impacts to a less than significant level, would implement the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations for the Project site, and would not require a General Plan amendment or zoning change. Because the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not include residential uses, it would not require implementation of Mitigation Measure LU -1, which requires resident notification of airport operations and potential annoyances. However, this alternative would continue to require mitigation related to contaminated soils onsite and tribal cultural resources; and would continue to result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to GHG emissions. Therefore, although the volume of impacts would be less by the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative in comparison to the proposed Project, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not eliminate all of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project or eliminate the need for mitigation. In addition, it would not implement the SCAG policies to the same degree as the proposed Project, because this alternative would not locate new housing near existing jobs and reduce the jobs -housing ratio or the corresponding reduction in vehicle miles traveled. In addition, the Build Out of the Existing Land Use and Zoning Alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives. The site would not be redeveloped with new housing near existing employment centers, to meet the regions demand for housing or be developed consistent with the redevelopment in the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan area or within the IBC. It would not promote an improved jobs/housing balance and would not meet the related SCAG RTP/SCS land use objectives. CEQA does not require the Lead Agency (the City of Santa Ana) to choose the environmentally superior alternative. Instead, CEQA requires the City to consider environmentally superior alternatives, weigh those considerations against the environmental impacts of the proposed Project, and make findings that the benefits of those considerations outweigh the harm. Table 6-7 provides, in summary format, a comparison between the level of impacts for each alternative and the proposed Project. In addition, Table 6-8 provides a comparison of the ability of each of the alternatives to meet the objectives of the proposed Project. Table 6-7: Impact Comparison of the Proposed Project and Alternatives City of Santa Ana 6-28 Draft EIR January 2020 Alternative 3: Build Alternative 1: No Alternative 2: Out of the Existing Proposed Project Project/No Build Reduced Project Zoning Aesthetics Less than significant Same as proposed Same as proposed Same as proposed Project, less than Project, less than Project, less than significant significant significant City of Santa Ana 6-28 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use 6.0 Alternatives City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 6-29 Alternative 3: Build Alternative 1: No Alternative 2: Out of the Existing Proposed Project Project/No Build Reduced Project Zoning Air Quality Significant and Less; less than Less, less than Less, less than unavoidable significant but significant significant exceeds threshold Cultural Resources Less than significant Less, but also less Same as proposed Same as proposed than significant Project, less than Project, less than significant significant Energy Less than significant Same as proposed Same as proposed Same as proposed Project, less than Project, less than Project, less than significant significant significant Geology and Soils Less than significant Same as proposed Same as proposed Same as proposed Project, less than Project, less than Project, less than significant significant significant Greenhouse Gas Significant and Less; less than Reduced emissions, Reduced emissions, Emissions unavoidable significant but same as but same as proposed Project, proposed Project, significant and significant and unavoidable unavoidable Hazards and Less than significant Less, no mitigation Same as proposed Same as proposed Hazardous with mitigation required Project; less than Project; less than Materials significant with significant with mitigation mitigation Hydrology and Less than significant Same as proposed Same as proposed Same as proposed Water Quality Project, less than Project, less than Project, less than significant significant significant Land Use and Less than significant Less, no impacts, no Same as proposed Less, no impacts, no Planning with mitigation mitigation required Project; less than mitigation required significant with mitigation Noise Less than significant Less, but also less Same as proposed Same as proposed than significant Project; less than Project; less than significant significant Population and Less than significant Less, but also less Same as proposed Same as proposed Housing than significant Project, less than Project, less than significant significant Public Services Less than significant Less, but also less Less, but also less Less, but also less than significant than significant than significant Parks and Less than significant Less, but also less Less, but also less Less, but also less Recreation than significant than significant than significant Transportation Significant and Less, less than Less, but also Less, less than unavoidable significant significant and significant unavoidable Tribal Cultural Less than significant Less, no impacts, no Same as proposed Same as proposed Resources with mitigation mitigation required Project; less than Project; less than significant with significant with mitigation mitigation Utilities and Service Less than significant Less, but also less Less, but also less Less, but also less Systems than significant than significant than significant Reduce Impacts of the Project? Yes Yes Yes Areas of Reduced Impacts Compared to 5, but requires the 7, but requires the Project 12 same mitigation and mitigation and would result in would result in City of Santa Ana Draft EIR January 2020 6-29 The Bowery Mixed -Use Proiect 6.0 Alternatives Table 6-8: Comparison of the Proposed Project and Alternatives Ability to Meet Objectives Alternative 3: Build Alternative 1: No Alternative 2: Out of the Existing Proposed Project Project/No Build Reduced Project Zoning Proposed significant and significant and Existing unavoidable impacts unavoidable GHG Reduced Project Zoning Develop a mixed-use Project that constructs impacts Table 6-8: Comparison of the Proposed Project and Alternatives Ability to Meet Objectives City of Santa Ana 6-30 Draft EIR January 2020 Alternative Alternative 3: Build Out 1: No of the Proposed Project/No Alternative 2: Existing Project Build Reduced Project Zoning Develop a mixed-use Project that constructs Yes, but not to the new multi -family residential units, which would Yes No same extent as the No help meet the region's demand for housing. proposed Project. Transform an underutilized site with an economically viable development consistent with other regional redevelopment in the Tustin Yes, but not to the Legacy Specific Plan and Irvine Business Complex (IBC) and combines residential uses Yes No same extent as the No with community -serving retail near proposed Project. employment opportunities, freeway access, and transit. Redevelop existing land uses that would utilize existing infrastructure, including: water, sewer, Yes, but not to the arterial roadways, transit, and freeways; and Yes No same extent as the No provide non -vehicular (pedestrian and proposed Project. bicycle) circulation. Yes, but not to the Develop a mix of housing to assist the City in Yes No same extent as the No meeting its jobs/housing balance. proposed Project. Provide onsite uses that reduce vehicular miles traveled (VMT) by providing an internal Yes, but not to the pedestrian circulation system that links Yes No same extent as the No residential uses, recreation areas, and proposed Project. retail/commercial areas onsite. Implement the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Yes, but not to the (RTP/SCS) Land Use Policies related to Yes No same extent as the No population and housing by providing proposed Project. additional housing near employment centers. City of Santa Ana 6-30 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 7.0 Preparers and Persons Contacted 7.0 EIR Preparers and Persons Contacted 7.1 EIR Preparers City of Santa Ana Ali Pezeshkpour, Senior Planner Jerry C. Guevara, Assistant Planner I E I P I D Solutions, Inc. Jeremy Krout, AICP Konnie Dobreva, JD Meghan Macias, TE Lauren Lockwood Alex Garber Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc., Persons Per Household Analysis Dr. Bravish Mallavarapu, PhD, Senior Urban Economist Urban Crossroads, Air Quality Impact Analysis Haseeb Qureshi Jessica Wang Urban Crossroads, Greenhouse Gas Analysis Haseeb Qureshi Alyssa Tamase Urban Crossroads, Noise Impact Analysis Bill Lawson, PE, INCE Fuscoe Engineering, Inc, Water Supply Assessment Stephanie Castle Zinn 7.2 Persons Contacted Michael Claborn, Commander, Santa Ana Police Department, Field Operations Bureau — Support Division Rudy Rosas, Principal Civil Engineer, City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency Tamera Rivers, Management Analyst, Orange County Fire Authority City of Santa Ana 7-1 Draft EIR January 2020 The Bowery Mixed -Use Project 7.0 EIR Preparers and Persons Contacted This page intentionally left blank. City of Santa Ana 7-2 Draft EIR January 2020