Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

Transcription

1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Site Development Permit SP 11-01P and Use Permit 11-04P (20 Old Ranch Road - North Pacific Developments, Inc.) PREPARED BY: Community Development Department City of Laguna Niguel Crown Valley Parkway Laguna Niguel, CA Contact: John Morgan Senior Planner Phone (949) Fax (949) jmorgan@cityoflagunaniguel.org October 2013

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SECTION 1: Introduction And Project Description Introduction Project Location and Surrounding Uses Site Characteristics Land Use And Zoning Designations Project Overview Background (Previous Related Entitlements) Required Discretionary Approvals... 5 SECTION 2: Environmental Factors Potentially Affected... 7 SECTION 3: CEQA Initial Study Checklist (Environmental Impacts)... 8 SECTION 4: Discussion of Environmental Impacts Aesthetics Agriculture Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance SECTION 5: References IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P October 2013 i

3 LIST OF TABLES 1 Estimated Construction Emissions Estimated Localized Construction Emissions Estimated Operational Emissions Estimated Localized Operational Emissions Annual GHGs Emissions Existing and Post-Development Hydrologic Conditions (with Hydromodification) City of Laguna Niguel Residential Noise Standards (Exterior) City of Laguna Niguel Residential Noise Standards (Interior) Estimated Construction Noise in Project Area Project Trip Generation LIST OF FIGURES 1 Regional Area Map Aerial Exhibit of Project Site and Surrounding Area Key Map: Location of Existing Views and Post Development Renderings Perspective A (Existing View) Perspective A (Post Development Rendering) Perspective B (Existing View) Perspective B (Post Development Rendering) Perspective C (Existing View) Perspective C (Post Development Rendering) Perspective D (Existing View) Perspective D (Post Development Rendering) Perspective E (Existing View) Perspective E (Post Development Rendering) Page Page IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P October 2013 ii

4 APPENDICES (All appendices listed below are contained on the included CD) Appendix A: Air Quality Analysis: prepared by PCR Services Corporation, October Appendix B: Biological Resources Assessment for the 20 Old Ranch Road Project, City of Laguna Niguel, Orange County, California: Prepared by PCR Services Corporation, dated October 3, 2013 Appendix C: Cultural Resources Assessment Letter Report for Approximately 25-Acre Cordero Development Project Area, City of Laguna Niguel, County of Orange, California: prepared by BonTerra Consulting, January 24, Appendix D: Geotechnical Investigation Report (dated February 11, 2011), and supplemental Response to Review Sheet Comments, (dated May 23, 2011, June 12, 2012 and July 9, 2013): prepared by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Appendix E: Greenhouse Gas Assessment: prepared by PCR Services Corporation, October Appendix F: The EDR Radius Map with GeoCheck: prepared by Environmental Data Resources, December 2, Appendix G: Preliminary WQMP: prepared by Brent Engineering, dated May 23, Appendix H: Preliminary Hydrology Study: prepared by Brent Engineering, dated May 16, Appendix I: Appendix J: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Project Plans: Architectural (Material Board, Site Plan, Floor Plan, Roof Plan and Building Elevations), Preliminary Civil/Grading Plans and Preliminary Landscaping Plans. IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P October 2013 iii

5 SECTION 1: Introduction & Project Description 1.1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) is to identify and evaluate the potential environmental impacts that may result from the proposed development of a 13-acre residential hillside property with a new custom single-family residence in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its Guidelines. The project is located at 20 Old Ranch Road (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map ) in the City of Laguna Niguel (City). Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15071, this IS/MND includes a description of the project, an evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of the project, and findings from the environmental review. Pursuant to Section of the CEQA Guidelines the City is the Lead Agency. Implementation of this project would include approval of discretionary actions by the City, Site Development Permit SP 11-01P and Use Permit 11-04P (20 Old Ranch Road - Burch Residence). The City Planning Commission is responsible for approval of the environmental documentation and for approval of the project. Lead Agency Name & Address: City of Laguna Niguel Community Development Department Crown Valley Parkway Laguna Niguel, CA Lead Agency Contact: John Morgan, Senior Planner City of Laguna Niguel Community Development Department Crown Valley Parkway Laguna Niguel, CA Phone (949) jmorgan@cityoflagunaniguel.org Project Title: Site Development Permit SP 11-01P and Use Permit UP 11-04P (20 Old Ranch Road - Burch Residence) Project Applicant s/sponsor s Name & Address: North Pacific Developments, Inc. (Property Owner) Ron Burch 81 Shields Avenue Irvine, CA PROJECT LOCATION AND SURROUNDING USES The project site is located at 20 Old Ranch Road (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map ) in the City of Laguna Niguel. The subject property is in the Bear Brand Ranch residential gated-community, generally located north of Camino Del Avion and east of the Street of the Golden Lantern. A regional area exhibit identifying the subject property is included as Figure 1. The project site is surrounded by two sizeable undeveloped residential hillside parcels within the Bear Brand Ranch community to the north and south (25 Old Ranch Road 13 Old Ranch Road, respectively), a landscaped open space lot (Lot B of Tract 12026) belonging to the Bear Brand Ranch Homeowners Association (HOA) to the west and developed residential properties downhill from the project site along Peppertree Bend within the City of San Juan Capistrano to the east. Refer to Figure 2 for an aerial exhibit of the project site and surrounding area. IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 1 of 67 October 2013

6 1.3 SITE CHARACTERISTICS The subject property is a 13-acre vacant hillside parcel located on an easterly facing slope that consists of undeveloped land that descends eastward from Old Ranch Road. The hillside is covered primarily by disturbed, non-native grass and other ruderal species, which has been annually disked. On-site topography ranges from approximately 330 to 590 feet above mean-sea-level (msl). The natural setting varies from slopes of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) to 4:1. The private driveway that would provide access to the project site from Old Ranch Road would extend through Lot B of Tract The portion of this lettered lot that would be affected by the access driveway consists of moderate to steep topography with ornamental landscaping. 1.4 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS 20 Old Ranch Road is located within Community Profile 12, Sub-profile Area A (Bear Brand) of the Laguna Niguel General Plan. The Land Use Element designates the property as Residential Detached. The site is zoned Rural Residential (RS-1) in the Laguna Niguel Zoning Code. Lot B of Tract 12026, which the access driveway would traverse, is designated in the Land Use Element as Open Space and zoned Open Space (OS). 1.5 PROJECT OVERVIEW Ron Burch with North Pacific Developments, Inc. (the property owner and project applicant) is proposing to develop the 13-acre residential hillside property. Development would include the grading of the property to create an access driveway and building pads (approximately 13,000 cubic yards of cut and 25,400 cubic yards fill grading). Site development would also consist of the construction of a two-story custom home with approximately 18,717 square feet of living area and another 4,045 square feet of garage and mechanical room/storage space. Ancillary site improvements would include a swimming pool, patio areas, gazebo, retaining walls, landscaping and drainage improvements. Project plans, including architectural (site plan, floor plan, roof plan and building elevations), preliminary civil/grading plans and preliminary landscape plans, are included within Appendix J. IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 2 of 67 October 2013

7 Figure 1 (Regional Area Map) Prepared by PCR IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 3 of 67 October 2013

8 Figure 2 (Aerial Exhibit of Project Site and Surrounding Area) OLD RANCH ROAD Access Driveway Across Lot B of TR Old Ranch Road (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map ) Peppertree Bend (City of San Juan Capistrano) IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 4 of 67 October 2013

9 1.6 BACKGROUND (PREVIOUS RELATED ENTITLEMENTS) The project site was a part of a larger entitlement project previously approved in On January 23, 2007, the Laguna Niguel Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map TPM and Site Development Permit SP 05-08P (13 and 20 Old Ranch Road - Cordero Development). Approval of Tentative Parcel Map allowed for the subdivision of a 26 acre vacant residential parcel (Parcel Map , Parcel 2) into two 13 acre single-family properties, including 20 Old Ranch Road. The subdivision approval also allowed for 116,000 cubic yards of cut-and-fill grading earth movement as well as drainage improvements to facilitate the future construction of a single-family home on each hillside parcel. As a part of the project, an IS/MND was prepared to consider the project's potential environmental effects pursuant to CEQA and its Guidelines. The IS/MND determined that the project s impacts on the environment were either less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation measures or less than significant and did not require mitigation. Condition No. 49 of Resolution No , which approved Tentative Parcel Map , required the approval of a site development permit prior to issuance of a building permit for the ultimate development of the project site. The purpose of the site development permit requirement was to provide the City discretionary review of the ultimate development of each parcel (e.g., consideration of building setbacks, structure height(s), sight coverage, general building design, and landscaping). In accordance with this condition, Site Development Permit SP 05-08P (processed concurrently with Tentative Parcel Map ) approved project plans for a large custom single-family residence on each parcel. The residence approved for 20 Old Ranch Road consisted of approximately 37,000 square feet of gross square footage and included site improvements, such as terraced patios, swimming pools, extensive retaining walls, landscaping, and a tennis court. Subsequent to the entitlement approvals, the parcel map to subdivide the property into two parcels (13 and 20 Old Ranch Road) was recoded, but neither property was developed. The site development permit has since expired. In 2009, 20 Old Ranch Road was purchased by North Pacific Developments, Inc., who now proposes to develop the hillside parcel. 1.7 REQUIRED DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS The proposed project requires the approval of two discretionary permits by the City, the Lead Agency, a site development permit and a minor use permit. The following provides a brief description of these two permits: Site Development Permit SP 11-01P is a request to grade and develop 20 Old Ranch Road with a single-family residence and ancillary site improvements in accordance with Condition No. 49 of Resolution No (as described above). In addition, Section of the Laguna Niguel Zoning Code requires the approval of a site development permit for grading and excavation operations that involve more than 5,000 cubic yards of earth movement. Minor Use Permit UP 11-04P is a request to allow a segment of the proposed 20-foot wide private access driveway to traverse a portion of the adjoining lettered lot (Lot B of Tract 12026) belonging to the Bear Brand Ranch HOA, which is zoned Open Space. The residential parcel lacks direct access to-and-from Old Ranch Road, which is the only viable roadway to serve the residential parcel. A minor use permit is required in order to allow the proposed driveway to cross the Open Space IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 5 of 67 October 2013

10 zoned property per Section of the Laguna Niguel Zoning Code. For reference, there is an existing 30-foot-wide access easement recorded over Lot B of Tract for the benefit of the subject residential property. The applicant is proposing to relocate this access easement in order to reduce both the length of the driveway as well as the extent of grading necessary to create the access driveway to the proposed building pad (the existing easement would be vacated as a part of the recordation of the new easement). IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 6 of 67 October 2013

11 SECTION 2: Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a Potentially Significant Impact as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [ X ] Aesthetics [ ] Agricultural Resources [ ] Air Quality [ X ] Biological Resources [ X ] Cultural Resources [ ] Geology and Soils [ ] Greenhouse Gas Emissions [ ] Hazard and Hazardous Materials [ ] Hydrology and Water Quality [ ] Land Use and Planning [ ] Mineral Resources [ X ] Noise [ ] Populations and Housing [ ] Public Services [ ] Recreation [ ] Transportation/Traffic [ ] Utilities and Service Systems [ X ] Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [ ] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ X ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Daniel Fox, AICP Community Development Director Date IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 7 of 67 October 2013

12 SECTION 3: CEQA Initial Study Checklist (Environmental Impacts) The following CEQA Initial Study checklist provides an overview of the potential impacts that may result from project implementation. The Initial Study indicates that the proposed project would either not result in a significant impact, or although a significant impact may be anticipated, incorporation of mitigation measure(s) would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. Additional information concerning each of the environmental issues listed in the checklist along with justification for each response is included in the discussion following the checklist below (SECTION 4). 1. AESTHETICS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Impact Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] not limited to, trees, rock out-croppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] 3. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 8 of 67 October 2013

13 violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Impact Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a. Have substantial adverse effect directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in ? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 9 of 67 October 2013

14 d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Impact Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] liquefaction? iv. Landslides? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous material? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 10 of 67 October 2013

15 within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Impact Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net groundwater table level deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local el (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm-water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 11 of 67 October 2013

16 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Impact Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 11. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project result in: [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] a. The loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. The loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] 12. NOISE Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 12 of 67 October 2013

17 e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project are to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Impact Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infra- structure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] 14. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities or generate a need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a. Fire protection? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] b. Police protection? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] c. Schools? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] d. Parks? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] e. Other public facilities? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] 15. RECREATION a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 13 of 67 October 2013

18 Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Impact Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on-roads, or congestion at intersections)? b. Exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] e. Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provided which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projects projected demand in addition to the provider s existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project s solid waste disposal needs? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] g. Comply with federal, state and local statues and [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 14 of 67 October 2013

19 regulations related to solid waste? 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Would the project: a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California History or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects or other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Impact Significant with Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ X ] [ ] IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 15 of 67 October 2013

20 SECTION 4: Discussion of Environmental Impacts 4.1 AESTHETICS Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less Than Significant Impact (a and c). Although the project site currently consists of an undeveloped hillside, it is not designated for Open Space purposes, nor is it a segment of a regional Open Space network in South Orange County according to the Open Space Element of the Laguna Niguel General Plan, Figure OS- 1. There are no scenic vistas present within or surrounding the project site designated by the City. The hillside property and adjoining residentially zoned properties have intentionally been exempted from City s Hillside Protection Ordinance (HPO) within Section (f)(7) of the Zoning Code in order to facilitate development. This hillside area was designated for residential development well before City incorporation, hence the specific exemption from City s HPO. Existing Views of Undeveloped Project Site The residential designation of the project site notwithstanding, there are public views of the hillside property from the Capistrano Valley to the east along the I-5 Freeway and from various perspectives within the City of San Juan Capistrano. In addition to these viewpoints, which are mostly thousands of feet or several miles away, the property is also visible from some of the surrounding residential properties within Bear Brand Ranch and along Peppertree Bend, downhill at the base of the hillside. The majority of the project site is not visible from within Bear Brand Ranch or from other notable perspectives within the City. The inherent surrounding conditions (e.g., existing development, topography, landscaping, etc.) limit views of the property. Current views of the property consist of an undeveloped sparsely landscaped hillside parcel with disturbed annual grassland. As viewed from the Capistrano Valley below, various homes and other development within both the Cities of Laguna Niguel and San Juan Capistrano are apparent in the foreground, along the hillside and ridgeline surrounding the project. Views of the proposed home from above would be negligible considering the portions of the property to be developed with the proposed residence are well below Old Ranch Road and the ridgeline. Site Grading and Development Grading of the property would include cut-and-fill earth movement (approximately 13,000 and 25,400 cubic yards, respectively) to create an access driveway from Old Ranch Road and a building pad. In keeping with sensitive hillside design, efforts to contour and landscape the new slopes to blend into the adjacent terrain, as well as limiting the extent of grading and use of retaining walls (designed not to exceed six feet in height) have been incorporated into the project proposal. The post-grading configuration of the site would primarily feature the natural hillside in its existing state, less than four of the 13 acre project site would be disturbed by grading. Site construction activities would not constitute a significant aesthetic impact, as they IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 16 of 67 October 2013

21 would be temporary, occurring for a relatively brief period of time, limited to the project area, and would not obstruct any scenic views. Site development for residential use would consist of the construction of a two-story custom home with approximately 18,717 square feet of living area and another 4,045 square feet of garage and mechanical room/storage space. Collectively, development would occupy a footprint of only 0.3 acres (13,750 square feet) of the 13 acre property (578,192 square feet), proposed lot coverage of 2%. Also worth noting, excluding the building footprint, access driveway and remaining hardscape areas, over 90% of the parcel would consist of new or existing landscaped slope area. This level of development is far less intense than is allowed for in the City Zoning Code, General Plan and in comparison to surrounding development within both the Cities of Laguna Niguel and San Juan Capistrano. Post-construction, distant views of the proposed custom home would be visible below the ridgeline on the hillside from the Capistrano Valley. Although mostly imperceptible given the distance of the proposed house from these public views below, the house features a split-level design, multiple roof plane changes and wall articulation in order to reduce massing and soften the structure s appearance. To aid in blending the appearance of house into the surrounding hillside background, consistent with the prevailing design in the area, the house architecture incorporates earth-tone building materials and colors (refer to material and color board included within Appendix J). The proposed residence complies with the applicable residential development standards of the Laguna Niguel Zoning Code. This includes exceeding the minimum building property line setbacks (range from eight to 25 feet minimum) and top-of-slope setback (10 feet minimum). The proposed project would provide property line setbacks ranging from 120 to over 600 feet, and over 10 feet to the edge of pad at the top-ofslope. The project also complies with the maximum building height limit (35 feet maximum). The house ranges in height from approximately 18 feet to just under 35 feet (measured from both existing natural grade and finished grade). The project includes the proposed planting of over 2.8 acres of new landscaping, featuring an assortment of native and drought tolerant ground covers, shrubs and trees. Particular attention was given to the hillside slopes radiating out from the pad areas into the natural terrain. Unlike typical ornamental or formalized gardens, the design avoids distinct or drastic visual transitions as developed areas transition into the surrounding hillside in order to create a more naturalistic appearance when viewed from below. Design consideration was also given to softening some of the ancillary site improvements, such as the access road pavement descending from Old Ranch Road to the building pad, retaining walls, and drainage structures (terrace and down drains). Each of these features are identified on the project plans as being earth-tone in color and are surrounded by landscaping. The Preliminary Landscape Plan (Appendix J) is designed to complement the natural hillside setting, as well as softening surrounding views of the project development. Figures 4 through 13 below include a series of photographs of existing views of the undeveloped project site and post development renderings from surrounding vantage points, including the Capistrano Valley and closer perspectives within Bear Brand Ranch and along Peppertree Bend. Of note, in addition to simulating the proposed residence and ancillary structures on the property, these exhibits also depict the proposed grading and landscaping. As described above and exhibited in the view simulations, proposed grading and development of the vacant 13 acre project site with a single-family home would be consistent with the overall visual character of the area, which consists of a combination of scattered low-density residential development and slope landscaping. IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 17 of 67 October 2013

22 The project site is not encumbered by any special scenic or viewshed designation by the City and is surrounded by other residential developments similar to that proposed by this project. Implementation of the project, which has been designed in consideration of the hillside setting, would not substantially damage or degrade views from the Capistrano Valley, especially considering that the most widely viewed perspectives of the project site are thousands of feet or several miles away. The neighboring properties downslope along Peppertree Bend would be setback more than 450 feet from the proposed limits of grading and approximately 600 feet to the proposed residence. These properties would be further buffered from the proposed site development by extensive slope landscaping. With incorporation of the above-discussed project design features, a less than significant aesthetic impact would occur. IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 18 of 67 October 2013

23 Figure 3: Key Map Location of Existing Views and Post Development Renderings IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 19 of 67 October 2013

24 Figure 4: Perspective A (Existing View) Camino Del Avion - Near Marco Forster Middle School IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 20 of 67 October 2013

25 Figure 5: Perspective A (Post Development Rendering) Camino Del Avion - Near Marco Forster Middle School IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 21 of 67 October 2013

26 Figure 6: Perspective B (Existing View) Alipaz Near San Juan City Hall IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 22 of 67 October 2013

27 Figure 7: Perspective B (Post Development Rendering) Alipaz Near San Juan City Hall IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 23 of 67 October 2013

28 Figure 8: Perspective C (Existing View) Near Old Ranch Road Bear Brand Ranch IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 24 of 67 October 2013

29 Figure 9: Perspective C (Post Development Rendering) Near Old Ranch Road Bear Brand Ranch IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 25 of 67 October 2013

30 Figure 10: Perspective D (Existing View) Near Old Ranch Road Bear Brand Ranch) IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 26 of 67 October 2013

31 Figure 11: Perspective D (Post Development Rendering) Near Old Ranch Road Bear Brand Ranch) IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 27 of 67 October 2013

32 Figure 12: Perspective E (Existing View) Base of Hillside Peppertree Bend IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 28 of 67 October 2013

33 Figure 13: Perspective E (Post Development Rendering) Base of Hillside Peppertree Bend IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 29 of 67 October 2013

34 b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock out-croppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact (b). The project site is not located along a state-designated scenic highway 1. The project is located within a 0.25-quarter mile of Street of the Golden Lantern, which is designated as a scenic transportation corridor in the Laguna Niguel General Plan. However, the project would not be visible anywhere along this roadway. No scenic resources including trees, rock outcroppings and historic buildings exist on-site. Thus, no impacts are anticipated in this regard. d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation (d). The proposed project is surrounded by residential uses, that emit light from building interiors that passes through windows and light from exterior sources (i.e., street lighting, building illumination, security lighting, and landscape lighting), which is common within residential areas. The character of the proposed lighting of the project site would be consistent with these surrounding uses. Nevertheless, the project would produce new light and glare sources with the change in land use from an undeveloped area to a residential site. Unless mitigated, light and glare from the proposed development would potentially impact adjacent residential uses located to the east of the project site, notably along Morning Dove and Peppertree Bend. Limiting the effects of lighting on adjacent residential uses would be an important aspect of the design of future development. As a result, implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1 would be necessary to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: AES-1 The proposed lighting shall represent the minimum level of illumination necessary to meet the aesthetic and security needs of the property. Light sources, intensity of light and color of light shall be designed and located to achieve security or decorative lighting goals without causing an adverse impact on neighboring properties. Light sources shall be designed and located to minimize spillover of light or glare onto neighboring properties. Development plans shall specify light fixtures that comply with Section of the Laguna Niguel Zoning Code (Outdoor Lighting). 1. California Department of Transportation, Officially Designated Scenic Highways, accessed September 16, IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 30 of 67 October 2013

35 4.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact (a and b). The project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance as shown on the State maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Development of this project would not result in the conversion of any farmland. The project site is zoned for single-family residential use (RS-1 District). The property is not under a Williamson Act contract. c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact (c and d). The project does not include rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland production. The project also would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land; the project site has been mowed or disked annually and is primarily covered by disturbed annual grassland. e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact (e). This site is currently vacant but is surrounded by residential uses. No environmental changes associated with the proposed project would result in the conversion of farmland or forest land to nonagricultural or non-forest uses. 4.3 AIR QUALITY The information provided below is summarized from the Air Quality Analysis (dated October 2013) prepared by PCR Service Corporation (PCR), Inc. provided in Appendix A. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact (a). The project site is located in Orange County, which is part of the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The Basin is currently designated as a nonattainment area for state and federal ozone and particulate matter ambient air quality standards. The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) adopted by SCAQMD identifies IS/MND: SP 11-01P and UP 11-04P Page 31 of 67 October 2013