Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeabridge Specific Plan - SE corner of Beach Blvd and Adams (21) r In no case shall individual sewer lines or sewer mains for vi,c: building be pemitted to extend underneath any otter building. 23 . Siena - All signs in the development shall conform co applicable provisions of Arcicle 976 . 24 . Street Sirens - The developer shall install on-site scr-ec name signs ar, the intersections of acr.ess oral►q , as approved by the Director of i.-evelopment Services . Street na-•e s and signs 3h a l l be appr. o ad '.)y ciie ri re D�eparcmenc. 25. Screen 'frees - Street trees along b.jach Blvd. and Adams P.venue shall be provir'ed pursuant to city standards with twenty ( 20 ) inch box trees planter; at approximately forty- five (45) foot interv,al. s . :, plan showing the type ane place- ment of surh trees shp. 11 be approved by the Department of r•ublic Wcrks and the Depart-menc of Devalopmenc Services . ~' An equivalent alternative to Ois3 basic requirement pray be permitted subjecr r.o approval of cha Csipart::tent of Developnenc • Services . 26 . Trash collection Areas - Trash collection areas shall be provided within zwo hundred ( 200 ) feet of the units they are to serve. ;u^h areas shall he esncloFed or screened, and shall be situated in order to minimize noise and viiurl intrusion on adjacent property as well as to eliminate fire hazard co adjace:v: structures . individual crash collection shall be po?rmicted where the intent of chin �- section is met . u.. -23- tiw r.. 27. Vehicular Scorage - Outsidn uncovered and unenclosed areas ,for scorace of boats , trailers , recreational vehicles and other similar vehicles shah bs prohibited un- less speciiicallY desi.gnate6 areas for the exclu,%ive storage of such vehicles are sec aside on the final development plan and ;provided for in the association ' s covenants , conditions , .�. and restrictions , tchere such areas are providee. , they shall bt. screened f'rocr, vier., on a horizonal plane from adjacent areas ay a combinacion of sip. (6 ) root high rasonry wall or permanently s... { ntni.ned landscaping. 28 . Common Areas - Cornon open space shall be .. guaranteed ijl a restrictive covenant describing the open space and ics maintenance and improvement , running with the land for the benefit of residents of the development. The developer shall file vich the Deparcr.enc of Developttwnc Services for recordation with the final subdivision map, legal eocurnncs .. which c,lll provide for restricting the use of common spaces For t:he designated purpose , as approved on the final development plan . All la. .di co be conveyea to the homeowner 's ausociation shall be subject to the right: of the _grantee or grantees co enforce maintenance and improvenencs of the common space. -24- w. 29 . App arrnce Standards - The following standards shall be considered by the Planning Corunission when reviewing a development proposal : (a , A,-chiceccural features and general appearance of -- the proposed cievelopnent shall enhance the oro rly and harmonious development of the Area or ch-.t commun- ity as a whole . (b) Architectural features and complimentary colorz shall 1,3e • incorporated into the design of all vertical w exterior surfaces of the buildings in order to create an aesthetically pleasing project . (c) Par►• icular accencion shall be given to inenrporac- ing the desic-n of signs , including colors of sicnc , into the overall design '3t the entiro development in order to achieve uniformity . (d ) Vehicular accens wayq shall be d :signed wick lan•4- scaping and building variation to eliminate an alley- .o like appearance. two 25 - 30. Landscape Corridor - The Seabridf;* Specific Plan Area is contiguous to the Reach Boulevard Landscape Corridor requiring that special consideration be given to the appearance of the project adjacent to Beach Boulevard. In view of this ? the following nti n f mum stanAardu shall be met: (a) The area between the buildi,ny line t nd the property line which is visia :.-N from the street shall be landscaped and permanently maintained. (b) The theme of the landscape plan shall emphasize mature plantings. (c) Street trees equivalent to one twenty ( 20 ) inch box MA tree shall be planted at approximately forty- five (45) Coot intervals. The size and placement: of such trees may be rearranged `` pursuant to an approved landscape p.. an provided the plan has an equivalent size and number of trees . 60 (d) Water features shall be designed to recreate a natural aftting. (e) The public right-of-way between the curb and property line shall incorporate landscape features to complement the on-site landscaping. 31 . Project Siins - All applicable pror' .ione of Article 976 "Sign Code" shall be complied with . �. MIJ:410.-MERS ' OR Con&MUNITY ASSOCIM 1014 - Approval of all developrmnt propc!ials shall be subject to s►�hmissi.on of a legal instrument or instruments setting forth a plan or mannar of permanent care and naintenance of open spaces , recreational areas , and eormunity facilities . No such ' instruttrant shall be r. acceptable until apprevoQd L)y the City Attorney as to legal form and effect, and by the Director of Developmental Services as to r. suitability for the proposed use of the open space arias . w 25 w w. a.. If the cormnon open spaces are to be conveyed to a homeowners ' association , the developer r+hall file a declaration of cov- enants to be submitted with the application for approval , that will govern the association . 1 . The homeowners ' association shall be established prior to the sale of the last dwelling unit. 2. Membership shall be mandatory for each buyer And &Ay successive buyer . 3 . The open space restrictions shall be permanent . 4 . Provisions to prohibit parking upon other than .. approved and developed parking spaces shall be written into the covenants , conditions , and restrictions for each project. ` 5 . If the development is constructed in increments or phases wiiich require one or more f t na 1 maps, reciprocal cov- enants, conditions , and restrictions and reciprocal management and maintenance agreements shall be established which will cause a merging of increments as they are completed , and embody one homeowners ' association with common areas fcr the total development. L. APPROVAL PERIOD - Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 584 , Conditional Use Permits , each Conditional Use Permit author- ised under this Article shalt become null and void within two (2 ) yeirs unless a final tract map has been recorded with the County Recorders office on any portion of the approved plans within such two (2 ) year period. Extensions of time may be granted pursuant to the provisions for extending approval of the tentative tract map . 10 27 - M. DEFINITIONS - The following definitions shall apply :c, the Seabridge Specific Plan . Terms not described under this ... section shall be subject to the definitions contained in Article 970 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code . Grade (Adjacent Ground Elevation) - is the lowest point of elevation of the finished .surface of the ground, paving or sidewalk within the area between the building and the property line or, when the property line is more than five (5) feet from the building, between the buildii-.,.'( and a line five (5) too feet from the building. �. Height of Building - is the vertical distance above a reference datum measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line -of a mansard roof or the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. They reference datum shall be selected by either of the following, whichever yields a greater height of buildinq : 1. The elevation of the highest adjoining sidewalk or ground surface within a 5-foot horizontal distance of the exterior wall of the building when such sidewalk or ground surface is not more - than 10 feet above the lowest grade . 2 . An elevation 10 feet higher than the lowest grade when the sidewalk or ground surface described in Item 1 above is more than 10 feet abovo lowest grade. The height of a stepped or terraced building is tho maximum height of any segment of the building. Perimeter Setba::k - shall mean the required setback distance between the specific plan boundary line and any proposed buildings along said boundary lines . Specific Plan - shall swan the Seabridge Specific plan as hdapted by the City Council of t%* City of Huntington Beach. SgjS fic Plan gee - shall moan the map described in Section B. 21 - `• I Ii• t,' ��I. /� � �\ .may_ / ,� \ /` ` ` ✓_.�_. - ��� I ,' � �.+►�`+� Ny\n"'�'�r�A-r-+ram•^^-�p-:ram•�_.r� ..�+. '- �..""� t�l -.i er.r. w-.,r�.•o �� pjj 71 Ems ,. ..` _ --.__-..... Il�. . •'• IT ��Tr BEAC�f DEPT. IRK& ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 81%w3 SEABRIDGE PLAN Beach Boulevard and Adams ,Avenge City ail Huntln ton � Beach FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 81-3 w t SEABRIDGE PROJECT Beach Boulevard/Aciams Avenue I+q City of Huntington Beech Department of Development Services P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648 Contact Person; .� James R. Barnes (714) 536-5554 poll Prepared By: EDAW, Inc. Newport Beach, California < < jonunrry 11, 1982 we i.: s TABLE Of Ca%4TENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .. . . .. . ... . .. . . ... . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . ... . ... 1 ► 2.0 SUMMARY.. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . ... . 2 ;.. 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . ... ... . . . .. . . . . . . .. . .y. . .. . . .. . . 4 t � 4 3.1 Location . ... . . .. . ... . .. . . ... . . .. . . .. 0 ... . 60606901. 0 4. � 3.2 Objectives of( the Project. . . ... . Is sof- . .. . ... . ... . ... .. 4 3.3 Project Characteristics .. . ,. . . . . ,. . . . . . .. . ... . ... . .. 4 3.4 Project Background.. . . . . . .. . . . . ,. . ., . . .. . . ,. . ... . .. 7 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGA710N .. . .. 8 4.1 Landforms . . ... . .. • ••, . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . ., . . . .. , . .. 13 4.2 Geology/Soils/Seismicity . .. , . ... . . . . . .. . ... . . . .. . ... 8 4.3 Hydrology. . .. . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. ., . . .. . . .. 10 4.4 Biotic Resources .. . . . . . ■ . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ... . . .. . 6009 11 4.5 Land Use. . . .. . . .. . ... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . ... . ... . ... . 16 4.6 Cultural Resources . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... . ... . 17 ` 4.7 Population . . . . ... . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . see .,,. . , . . . I8 4.8 Transportation/Circulation . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . 19 4.9 Noise .. .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . ... . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . ... .. 22 .� 4.10 Air Quality. . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . ... . . .,, . . 2.5 4.11 Visual Resources . . .. . ... . .. . . . .. . . ... . .. . . .. . . ... .. 28 4.12 Public Services and Utilities .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . ... . .. . . .. 30 4.13 Fiscal Anctilysis. . . ... . . . . .. . . . ... . . .. . . . . .. .. . .. . . .. 35 5.0 UNAVOIDA8LE ADVERSE IMPACTS . .. . . . . o. . .. . ... . ... . . .. 36 6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT . . . .. . . ... . ... 38 7.0 GROWTH INDUCEMENT) IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES AND SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT VS. LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY. . 01 * 006 6116 . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . 41 8.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED. . . . . 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t 42 9.0 REFERENCES . 44 APPENDICES «. A Cammmts to the Notice of Preparation R Specific Plan F C Geotechnical and Soils Investigations D List of Wildlife Species E Archaeological Report r F Traffic Analysis G Noise Analysis H Air Quality Analysis COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO THE DRAFT EIR w LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number Following Page Number 1. Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . e s $ 004, 0666 . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . .. 4 2. Project Boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . e e • 6 .00 some . e m . . . . . s . . . 4 V. Conceptual Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . s . .. . . .. o . . . 4 4. Design Concepts - Perimeter Landscape Buffer.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Design Concepts - Relationship with Public Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Design Concepts - Typical Motor Court .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 4 7. Design Concepts - Oil Productico/Landscope Buffer w. and Typical Lake Grading Section. . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . 4 1 • 8. Geology and Fault Location. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . 8 . M 9. Drainage Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m . . . . .. . . .. . 10 �. 10. Biotic Resources . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 12 11. Project Related Traf f ice Volumes . . e . . .. s . 00 . . . . . . .♦ s . o . . . s . m 010 21 fl. 12. Existing Plus Project Related Traffic Volumes . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 21 13 Wise Contours 24 14. Cross Sections .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 29 r .m w. w. ii ' j LIST OF TABLES Table Page Number AStatistical Summary , , ,, . . . . . , , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . S B Summary o;'• Trip Generation Characteristics .. . . . . . . . . . 20 C CNEL Noise Levels of Existing Traffic Conditions . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 23 4 f) Increase in Existing Noise Levels Due to the Project ... . . .. . , . . . 6 24 ` = E CNEL Noise L�-Yels for Ultimate Traffic Conditions. .. . . . . . . ... . . 24 F Project Contribu?ion to the Basin-wide Air Quality Burden . . . . . . . . 26 1.4 G Comparative Impact Evaio�.tion of Project Alternatives . . . . . .. . . . 39 �-u M Mi i� MN ' iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Intent of this document is to provide an anolysis of the environmental effects Qsso- cia!ed with the development of property near the intersection of Beach Boulevard and Adams Aventie in the City of Huntington Beach, as defined by the Seabridge Specific Plan proposed by the MOLA Development Corporation. The proposed development will require the approval of a Specific Plan and a subsequent tract map and Conditional Use Permit. In preparing this Environmental Irnpor_t Report (EIR), the procedures contained In the "State EIR Guidelines" as amended, have been followed. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was sent to agencies with pzrmit or review authority and to other interested parties. C )rnments received in the NOP cre contained in Appen- dix A. Direct consul fation w?;1,-1 �i,c.se agencies was also conducted during preparation of the EIR. Public input con new be accomplished through written commentary on this Draft EIR, or by contacting the Individual listed on the title page. I 2.0 SUMMARY The Seabridge Development Project is located w. 601 acres along the southeastern corner _ of the Beach Boulevard//darns Airerlue intersection in the City of Huntington Beach. The propety is vacant except for the twenty-five (25) oil production units it no%v con- tains. The proposed uses on the si?e inc►ude: 800 residential units; recreational facilities (i.e., five: recreation centers, each with a swimming pool and spa, and four tennis courts); +�• private open space and parks; and retention of the existing oil production facilities until ih-.� fields are abandoned. The following list denotes the potential significant environmental effects thet could result with implementation of the project and whether mitigation measurers are Included within the project. POTENTIAL MITIGATION r IMPACT INCLUDED II\I EIR Extensive gradirg for building pacts, Yens. Review of grading plans by City c roads, levee improvements, lakes anti Staff. other landscape amenities, garages (west , side) and natural resource ponds. e Geotechnical/site constraints related to YP!r•. Submittal of further soils study and " around-shaking intensities, nigh lique- structural engineering studies for con- faction ind differential compaction strucCon guidelines. potcrOial, expansive soils and saturated peat subsurface conditions. Alteration of existing drainnge pattern. Yes. Improved storm drain system to be constructed based upon County and City requirements. Si•►e within flood hizard area Ye' . Levee improvements and raising building pads to achieve 12 feet msl min- imum for finisher] floors. Nurnero;.-s Irke amenities offer potential Yes. Submittal of the water quality water quality problems. management plans for review by City. Loss of vegetation characterized pis Yes. Development of a new freshwater coastal brackish marsh with direct dis- Fond and eventual saltwater marsh in placement of wildlife including foraging existing resource production area. Initial habitat for a rare species. mitignfion (i.e., the pond) may be con- sidered only partial. Also, required review of wetlond modification by the Department of i"ish and Game. 2 t PQ'rENTIAL MITIGATION IMPACT INCLUDED IN EIR Potential incompatibility of higher den- Yes. Conceptual plan includes numerous sities in project with adjacent single treatments to reduce impact on adjor.ent family neighborhoods. residential areas. Potential incompatibility between pro- Yes. Fencing and screening will separate posed residences and existing oil produc- the two uses. flan. Additional traffic loading on Beach Yes. Roadway improvements to Beach ' Bcmlcvard and Adarns Avenue primarily Boulevard and Adams, odjocent site; impacting the Beach/Adams intersec- installation of a traffic signal at tion. Minor but cumulative impact con- Beach/Memphis intersection; submittal gested intersections along Beach Boule- of trip distribution analyse.s for review vard, north of the project. by City Deportment of Public V:ork& Proposed residential structures fronting Yes. Noise attenuation measures will be Beach 3uulcvara will be within the pro- required and are specified in the Specific jetted 65 CNEL contour. Pion. Proposed structures would be highly Yes. Numerous design and landscape visible from surrounding areas and from treatments are proposed to minimize Beach Boulevard. visual conflicts. Increased demand o;.. public services and None proposed (Net revenue surplus anti- facilities. cipated based on previ0u3 analysis), .+I 3 r- r 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 L:►cation The Seebridge Specific Plan proposed by the MOLA Development Corporation is located on 60f acres along the southeastern corner of the Beach Boulevard/Adams Avenue Inter- section in the City of Huntington Beach. The property is vacant except for the twenty- flve (25) oil production units, active and inactive, it now contains. The site is bisected by Orange County Flood Connol Channel No. D01. A location reference map is shown In Figure 1. t • 3.2 Objectives of the Project It is the objective of the applicant, MOLA Development Corporation to develop an 800-- M unit residential community, with amenities, and a commercial option on the property. The proposed Specific Plan is provided in full in Appendix B. 3.3 Project Characteristics R For descriptive purposes, the site has been divided into two deveir,s;rent areas: Area A lies east of the flood control channel; Area B lies to the west between the flood control c::a•onel and Beach Boulevard (refer to Figure 2). These areas are referenced in various discussions throughout this report. in addition to the development areas, approximately • eight (8) acres will remain in oil production and will eventually he dedicated as cornmon ♦w open space. 3.3.1 Proposed Land Uses The proposed uses on the site include: 800 residential units; recreational facilities (i.e., five recreation centers, each with a swimming pool and spa, and four tennis courts); private open space and parks; and retention of the existing oil production facilities. Area ., A will contain one- and two-story attached dwelling units over a tuck-under garage. Only one-story units over tuck-under parking will be built along the per�lphery of the site , In order to provide a transition from bordering residential neighborhoods. Area B will consist of 1,00 units located in several structures up to four stories in height r over parking garages. The conceptual site plan is shown in Figure 3. Specific design treatments are shown In Figures 4-7. A statistical summary of the project is given in Table A. The option of including - commercial uses or elderly housing at, the northwest corner of the site - in place of approximately 50-60 residential units is containeJ in the Specific Plan. These options are also listed in Table A. 3.3.2 Circulation Concept The major circulation element will consist of a 50' R.O.W. loop road which bridges the chonrml and connects Areas A, and E3. The loop rood will intersect Beach, Boulevard and Adams Avenue at existing intersections. Dire^t access to the individual units will be via secandary roads and parking courts located along the major loop. There will be no access to this adjacent neigFbtwhood streets through the site. Access to the site will be through a controlled entry systarn. 4 'I_-r ..': _ { rwiiJL* '•C......_ �'C"i.'f: i�ll�a+.�.r»�.�.. f �•: 1',�J;. �.1�• .. _. . .__ -♦ r \} T '/ l l '�� , 1 .1. 1,fa�� ••'� �"x+f�••�f � ... 11 w ( ws• �. CF•C ) �I �ti " tl 1 ( �`•.. M1 �•' na!IT �i .~ , 1 ,r C 1` I� �F P'C ~ rI 1 !I � /;, /!t I' j".�" i . }r 1 I ! 1 '" '�r,���t� ii��l �r=j:' r -•• ----11 .,.►ti „• //: / Ir 1..., ,, _I' _1S :_...MI I �'�i.+. .t11!• 7 / •. i.•�( 11 °1 I CF-t ' 1_ � ( !_-• ; `�_ + r -:.,..� r � 1 �.;�j ��:�1��! •r��........7A"1 :>u� :i H/y �...... (t�w+t _._.- . . .. ./� Ire .�1- �!-r 1�•)� 1 �J Ta�.l • 1 ' ! 1,;���•!T�l�ia 1. .::T� '� '�!}4 _ + ' ' � r',1 � r�1�11 'I� �..� � 1....�`•tl � �� � f�•i•��'•t ,r, • � •.l••��l,I'�/` 1}/'�i• �•+��• \ � �.,��MV�, ♦T 1 I I � i .l • ! � 1 1 11 ��.•�1 �{ 7 _ �..:.:.�� � (yam 1 (� f I �• t t.1.1 I � •� 1 1- .� i.'h ,T t ..Jl'� I� �! �L�. R I ; � { SITE C �aa .Y 1 ..+ �•.�..++! I i ; 14 ��;�C �� �' .J��%1:,,.` 1• �a, I 1 � ( II i•i 1 �� ,Fl.:..r:_ "-. _. ;':+'J ., t, 1 .. /.,•) ,C: 1 � 1 '� 71 CF- l'1 ../ 1IIIZi1C .,�, LIA �, .�� ,elf-,�� �--�f f_!L_ •I; .:�,� .��. t_ _ • � t (� ,1 ; � ,,., ��,�1. � �� 11 IL;t' '' +l1 � _, •c �•..+:`� - - , j � i' �, ,,^• Y,;.. HUNtINGTTOM. BEACH. I Is ` ~• ``•A .J{ III11111i�1�I �0 t•�r �1^�, � .- `. CA A. ! I SEA&VADM Mao NTM• Envlronmontal Impact R ►part PROJECT . i,eaih Blvd./Adams Avg. LOCATION ��A1.�t,1 1•� ���• t ""toast*" Beach • 1 . r AVAA49__._.___.. M411 1 ' �� 1 . `ter. - .•^ ._. .. . '� , i Iwl . warwo too pool wm4co.-_ i r 1 i,--------w------ .—f / 1 OIl krAst ;Oil��A•fE zt 1 I 1 1 1 - 1 OR,LEASE I 1 ,, 1 I � t I 1 --w—J �" 1 AREA B ` ' AREA A ;, .E1Mi11 1 I 1 ( 10 I 1 1 ' •c _ eL— IT i 1 1 sm"nAt+t I SUBAREA Al J w w r..r w r wui •l.. 1 r._r r +. w,.wrr r rrwr w � - fp � $EABRIDGE PROJECT BOUNDARYaft-to � '� , � • �arrc �. .Nr� � rn• � �7 �wc�n,c ua IT9 Pl �aN ti • Ile Pw m for Lwws . euffw J AM � �NC-r �f�E�VM�iG -yric7C�5� POMPAOO �f MIMit� L.if�C�! i1 DOOM CONCEPTS PO Olt r f��+1 yF�t�rC; ALL• •'r • F4 Relationship With Public Street �i�rx��►�i u+MS ��c!t iRel ,I, kmwip With Public Straet Lft.vea v** bm. ftowotom IMe^ GoIti"Oft DESIGN CONCEPTS Pfau*$ Is lnM +� Plan , ry • IL s Typical Motor Court Section A-A y11ze w .Typ" Motor Court L!l �r„ Ire. Hwrlln�la� ��„ CiINaM�rr DESIGN CONCEPTS F�o�•� • rtiv 4 -,I i It �-=", vi ro� tlt�� .o tNS. (o.o er t~- r ? ,r .•4 Typical Lake grading Section Olt- • F•� • M A07GL !SIM � ��T ON ProductiorVi.odsC� ouifsr DESIGN CONCEPTS TA13LE A SEABRIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN STATISTICAL SUMMARY AREA A Developable Acreage 34.10 Acres Resource Production 4.00 Acres 38.10 `total Acraa � AREA B Developable Acreage 12.41 Acres (Corner Site-subarea B 1) (2.92) Acres Resource Production 3.95 Acres 16.36 Total Acres Public Streets and Flood Control Channel 5.91 Total Acres i.+ TOTAL GROSS SITE 59.67 ACRES ESTIMATED SITE TABULATIONS Total Site Area A Area B Maximum Units Pei-gritted 800 400 400 Units Per Acre Gross 13.31 M Excluding Streets & C:hannels 15.55 10.50 24.45 Excluding Streets, Channels & Resource Production 17.56 11 .73 32.23 Estimated Building Coverage 6.5 acres N/A 1 Private Street & Drives 8.12 acres N/A I Percent of Building Coverage 25% 45% Parking Spaces Per Unit 2.75 2.20 Total Open Space/Unit Including Resource Production 1525 sq.ft. W/A I Excluding Resource Production 1089 sq.ft. 400 sq.ft. (Calculations not included because development plans for the corner of Adams Avenue .. OM Beach Boulevard hove not been finalized. Source: Richard A. Hanlon, and Associates, 1981. M 3.3.3 Landscge/Open Spoce Concept A dominant element of the project will be the landscape plan which includes extensive landscaping with specimen trees and ponds and streorns throughout the intericx of the development. Setbacks, berms and vegetative screening will also be used to provide acoustical and visual buffers between the project residential units and bordering neigh- borhoods and streets. .Twe natural resource areas, fresh and saltwater marshes, will also be incorporated Into the project as shown on the Concept Plan in Figure 3. 1t is intended that the proposed freshwater pond would result from a reconfiguratian of the existing pond and that the design of the pond will be compatible with the surrounding residential use while enhancing the visual aspects of the area. The freshwater pond, which would be developed up:m plan implementation w1(I have the following features; 1. There will be a naturalized bottom :vith a clay sealer. 2. The shoreline adjacent to Beach ©ouleva d will be somewhat shallower than the other areas of the pond with submerged shelves protruding frorn the shoreline into the pond area. The shelves will be shallow to permit the growth of vegetation. The shoreline adjacent to the residential units will be designed to control the growth of vegetation for a more compatible relationship with the residential units. . 3. With the exception of the shelves, depth of the pond will range from two ' feet to five feet at the deepest point. R 4. The circulation system will be open to improve the water quality. To accom- plish this, we will provide a fresh water supply to the pond. A spillway will be signed to regulate the elevation of the water. The overall design to this system will be subject to City approval. 5. Londscaping along ©each Boulevard will be similar to that found in a fresh water marsh. Landscaping along the interior will be a highly groomed edge to be more compatible with the residential units. No more specific design plans exist for the saltmarsh which would be precisely designed and 17,Alt in the future. 3.3.4 trading Concepts The project will be graded so that the resultant finish elevations of the private roadway system will vary from an elevation of approximately four feet to seven feet above sea level, with the exception of the southwest corner which exists at an elevation of 27.4 feet above sea level. The remaining area, i.e., building pads, beds, landscaped own space, will vary irr elevation from approximately se•;en feet above sea level to approximately 14 feet above sea level. The Orange County Flood Control District has 4 directed that the existing earth fill levees for the North-South flood control channel shall be raised so that the present levee top elevation of seven to eight feet above sea level will be elevated to I I feet above sea level. Floor of habitable areas will be a minirnurn of 12 feet msl to rnee•t the requiren-tnts of 6 I A � the Notianat Flood insurance Program. It is intended that projret constirintian begin at the southerly boundary and proceed northerly at a rate of 40-104 Units per phew. This absorption rate is, of course, highly deper4ent an the prevoil;ng economic conditions. 3.3.5 Drainage Concept +4 The project crea both east and west of the flood control channel, will be drained narthesrly by overland flow and through a gravity storm strain to an exiting pumping station located on the south side of Adorns Avenue with the exception of the mesa uses which will arain directly into the channel. W appreciable drainage from the project site is to be drained onto or through any surrounding properties. A storm drain, serving a small residential area west of Beach Boulevard currently terminates east of Beach Boulevard with flows running overland across a portion of Area B eventually reaching the flood control channel. It is ontlelpated that storm runoff from this pipe will be ri chomeled directly into the flood control channel or directed to the pumping station if adequate capacity exists. r, 3.4 Project Bockground/Planning Considerations Recent previous action relative to the project site inclwjes the City General Plan Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 on which the 601 acre site was redesignoi ed to a Planned Commiinit district from Resource Production, Commercial and Low Density Residential di;-trict (City Council Resolution No. 5005, adopted June 15, !981). The following policies, further guiding development of the Specific Plan, were also adopted by the City -a Council. 1. The area east of the Orange County Flood Control Channel adjacent to the r existing single-family residential tracks be of a low density residential design with an adequate setback to buffer the Iwo project,. 2. The area east of and immediately adjacent to the flood control channel be of a ww medium density residential design. 3. All units east of the flood control channel be clustered to allow for a maximum amount of open space. Total units not to exceed 400 east of the channel. 4. The area west of the flood control channel be of a high density residential design. This concept should take advantage of the natural topography for development and simultaneously preserve the ponding area in a natural state. 5. Residentia! uniti be clustered throughout the project area which would also occommodate the continuation of resource production activities. Total units for the overall project not to exceed 800. r� 1n addition, Oki March 11, 1981 the Community Services Commission recommended that the pond area of the Mola Property not be required as a City Park o- open space area for future use of local citizens. The development standards for the project are contained in the Specific Plan text. The site (land use) plan is contained In the Project pr-;tript on. This EIR analyzes the standards delineated in the Specific Plan text. 7 M 4.0 EN'VIRONMENTAL SETtING2 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES s►, 4.1 Landforms 4.1 .1 S-et tirM The rectangular shaped site is located of the western edge of the Santa Ana River Gap with por?ions of the Huntington Beach Mesa extending into the southwestern Corner of the property. Elevations range. from 1.5' rnsl in a ponding area odjocent to Beach Boule- vard to 27.4' rnsl on the mesa at the southwestern corner. V4 The property is divided Into two distinct o'eas by the Huntington Beach Flood Control Channel (DOI) which traverses the site paralleling Beach Voulevard. Elevations an the section east of the channel range from approximately four feel to seven feet rnsl. The existing top of the levee elevations are seven feet to eight feet rnsl. 4.1.2 Impacts The project site will undergo extensive topogra0iic alteration as a result of grading activities. It should be emphasized, however, that the basic landform relationships w between the mesa and lowlands and between the project site and adjacent Land will not s be altered through grading. Building mass will be the dominant element In any perceived landform changes. Conceptual plans call for grading the lowland area of the east side (Areu A) to a finished . elevation for the roadway of four feet to seven feet msl. Building pods, artificial lake and stream beds, and landscaped open space will vary in elevation from seven feet to twelve feet msl. Import of fill material will be required for 'these activities as well as cx, for raising the height of the levee along the flood control charnel from its present height of 71-8' rnsl to I I' msl. It is estimated approximately 85,00ri cubic yards of fill will he required (exclusive of the levee for Area A). Portions of the mesa will be excavnted for construction of the parking garages beneath the three- and fair-story residential structures in Area 8. Conceptual grading plans for Area B (south of the resource production area) call for 54,750 cubic yards of cW aid 51 ,550 cubic yard:; or f ii 1. 4. 1..3 Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures ore proposed or otherwise included within the project to offset potentially adverse effects: o Grading plans .for the entire site will be submitted to the City Deportment of Public Works for review. 4.2 Geology/Soils/Sc,•ismicity 4.2.1 Sattinj In the Environment or:; Resources Policies section of the City General Plan (cited December 1976), fl* subject project is shown as traversed by an active fault trace (Fig+ire 24 - Fnult and Geologic Conditions) with portions of the site indicated as exhibit- ing high geo;echnical risk conditions (Figures 8 - Geology and Fault Location). The risk, 8 fivLAEOEND Col. Aluvilufm Ole t'apr % �pu Pi�irtoc rri fir •. - •• - _ _ - , R Q a .�i •, 77. �j + f Cam. • I • • IN Oal j -apm , , { / •, id _-r �� � � �~ r�� .. .. ._ .:ram _�-�._._1/__ .Y � •..��-..,.�..�...1,:- R . - ...._ • _.. . .. _.�. .•_ ..•..-�-.,ter. ., , No L= ---- "Ma►l Impact Report GEOLOGY ANDJF�'d./A� emo &vs.n Moselt FAULT LOCATION by Ef�►AW I**. FEE wi potential was bored upon a variety of factors including potential for ground rupture, the presence of peat deposits and liquefaction potential. This generalized information has been refined by site-specific preliminary geotechnical and soils Investigations recently performed by Action Engineering Consultants and Base- line Consultants, inc. These reports are on file with tlw: City Department of Develop- ment Services and as-e contained In Appendix C. The following discusslon of geotetfi. t-� nical, sails and seismic considerations is derived from those studies. SURFICIAL DEPOSITS Two geologic formvtion.; are found within the site, Quaternary Terrace deposits and ,.y Recent Alluvium. The 1'erroce deposits, composed of fine, silty and gravelly sands, are exposed of the northwestern and southwestern corners of the site. These sediments are typical of the Huntington Beach Mesa which is located Immediately west of the prop- erty. The Recent Alluvium, consisting of cloyesy sands, silty sands, clean sands and peat, covers the majority of the property. These despositis were laid down by the Santa Ana x River and its tributaries. These deposits extend to an average depth of 150 feet. Previous grading and imported fill has resulted In much of the property being mantled with brace fill deposits. The maximum depth of this fill is six feet. Marrow layers and .. lines of peat exist throughout the alluvium at depths of four to eight feet. SEISMICITY The project site is fraversed by four branches of the Newport-Inglewood Fault (refer to Figure 8). Although this fault is considered active by the State of California, south of Seal Beach, the active rating has been questioned due to the lack of surface faul1ng. Four trenches were dug and logged (March, 1980) to determirx+• whether a fault trace was near or present in surface soils. No faults, offset strata, cx• indications of post ground movement were apparent in the natural earth materials as exposed in the trenches (Base- �N line Engineering Consultants, 1980). Therefore, it was the conclusion of' Richard P. Cousineau, California Certified Engineering Geologist No. 321, that the fault could not be considered active. Although it would still be considered potentially active, the New- port-Inglewood Fault is considered to exhibit only a slight probability of ground surface rupture (Clousineau, personal communication, October, 1981; Cixase, personal communi- cation, October, 1981). *� Other seismic related hazards presents a potentially high risk rssociated with lique- faction differential compaction, and severe ground shaking. The primary soils related constraints are tyre highly expans;V cloyey soils and the pres- ence of saturated peat deposits. 4.2.2 Impacts ice++ w Development of fix property on Beach Boulevard and Adams Avent►e would subject struc- tures and future residents to the geotechnical-associated hazard: described In the pre- ceding section. These include risks related to high ground shaking intensities, high lique. faction and differential compaction potential, expansive soils and saturated peat subox- r face conditions. These conditions are not urilque to the site, but commonly found throughout the City and Southern California. Site development is feasible, providing approrwiate treatment of the site in terms of planning, grading cnd foundation desti; it occarplished (Cousineau, 1981 i Packard, 1991; personal communications). 9 Based upon evaluation by Action Engineering Consultants, development east of the flood control dxiinnel can be accommodated with slob-ors-Wode foundations, provided the peat e" conditions are modified either by removal or loading. No foundation recomrnendat ions have been mode for the larger structures west of the channel. 4.2.3 Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures are proposed or otherwise included within the project: o Submittal of a structural engineering study evaluating proposed foundation designs with respect to the groundshaking and liquefaction hazards noted above. o Submittal of a soils study detailing grading and site preparation recornmendv- tions. 4.3 Hydrology 4.3, .1 Settling Surface Water The primary drainage facility in the vicinity is the Huntington Beach Flood Control ` Channel (No. D01) which traverses the property. The Mola property is included In the! larger drainage basin tributary to this channel. The channel bottom at the center of the property is 0.0 feet mst. As this section of the channel is within the tidal influence, and sections of the .Moto property V.,. below the high tide line, portions of the property would be subject to inundation if it were not for the existing levees along the channel. p ..N Currently, storm run-off from the site is carried directly to the channel by storm pipes with flap-gates in the channel (to prevent backwater when high flows fill the channel). On the wer.tern side of the channel, a small area terrned the "ponding area", lies at an elevation 0.7 feet (maximum depth) below the inlet to the storm pipe. This has resulted In ternporar; impoundment following a rainfall or, as the case has been, when the flop- gate is jammed open by debris and tiaal flows back up through the pipe onto the prop- a erty. the flop-gate to the pipe draining the western side of the property was jammed ** open for an undeterminate time but recently cleared by the Environmental Management Agency) (EMA) Development Divisicm. The maximum surface area of the Impoundment is t estimated at 2.0 acres. Drainage from a small area to the west of Beach Boulevard Is channeled under Beach Bcxilevard and empties into Area B. The flow from the pipe is projected to be 28 cfs 025. Flows from this drainage pipe currently drain into the ponding area previously described. One other storm drain easement crosses Area B in the resource production area. A 60-inch pipe within this easement drains directly to the cfxinnel (refer to Figure 9). Projections by the County Environmental Owagement Agency (EMA) Development Division indicate that In a WO-year storm event, the water level within the flood control channel could reach 9.5 ft. msl. The current levee height (seven to eight feet rew) would therefore provide inadequate protection with such a storm. 10 4946 .ter r Mna+w iiKJAA �.a-: - r; �1 I -� —/' e' �f• `1 � —1 '1•r � 1���i i •� :� �1. i• I �i, , 1 �� � � �y ( ,� j�L� � 1 �1�� f � ,,tl�ltili!!tililllitii/!/!///!�/ills/!��'f l J• ��)� • � � '` i�tlSls! � � �+�1!l1111!!1tllitilttassatlii+tttt!!t!►ia.ar.rcrar�r Z IL 1NOW � - !i ..T�� • J ,j• , ;� :1 � ,' L 4 ti I it _;;, i� •� ' � .' '!!l!Clif�lii=iilirriiiisir : 1 ,1 i'1., �, i _ • _ 1#' ' y • ' 1 AA itlll{/!!!l{flit//t/lltOlil � � �.�—•_— ---�---r— • -or- jo � �� { � � -- •:"a.. �1�` Vic,+` � r dip ft 49 j f � V�J , ft --- - . I:-T 3{llasesI {{{ra@it{{{iN{tt/fitm1&"Blvtt///S{t!tlltsi] ,,.�.r.= �'„1�I. '�'_�_ .,•�,'k..`�s.: • or �•- r ;�'�- -, •--` — = i ' "_� - t �—---ram .___ .._.tea.- . ._. �. .. . _ ._ �. _ _ ._--�- - - --_- �j7 ; �'- t _ I N 4.3� Invacts air Lmm - The project, as proposed, would require truction of storm drain for.11- Itles thir&s2hout the site and extensive alteration of the existing drainage pattern. As the maximum flood elevotions in the channel are 9.5 ft. msl, areas below that eievotivn on the project site trust drain to the pump station of Adwm Avartm. Areas above that elevation can drain directly to the ct►o ml. Provisions were rrwde within the pump station capacity (projected flaws, 025, ore 52 cfs for the west side of the channel and 60 cfs for the east sicr) to receive drainage from ttra project site. Both Areas A and B, therefore, would have storm drainage systema carrylrwy flows northerly to connect to two existing 42-Inch and 48-Inch drains row Admw Avenue feuding into the pump station system. y The pump station was not designed, however, to accept flows from the area west of Beach Boulevard, which currently drains on to the project site.. The outlet of this drain is below the elevation at which flows could be transmitted directly to the channel and other solutions (e.g., a pump station) troy be required to transmit storm flows directly to the channel. Drainage from the mesa area (west of the channel) could be diverted directly to the Channel (refer to Figure 9). Flooding - Future structures and residents of the site would be susceptible to donx g- 0e Tng flooding without Implementat'on of appropriate flood control measures. The development plans do include such measures. The project engineer, Dan Greek and 4 Associates, in coordination with the County EMA Development Division, have pro- Ot posed that finished floors of all living spaces be constructed at an elevation of 12 ft. msl or above, and improvement of the levee through raising the top of the levee to 11 feet msl. Streets and parking areas Oncluding the tuck-under residential parking) `'� would be subject to flood flows only if the levee failed. Living areas would not be .4 subject to flooding under any conditions. The project includes several amenity-lakes, as well as a freshwater pond and suit- water marsh. The amenity lakes will be a closed, highly managed landscape odjunct. The freshwater pond and saltwater marsh, stressing mtural resource ,r values, will be less "managed" and therefore, more susceptible to potential nuisance water quality problems. 4.3.3 Mi H99tion o Provision of adequate drainage system and flood protection measures are Included in the project aM will be subject to review by County and City :a Engineers. r o Development guidelines for the project should include specific discussions of the lake m(;rsxgwnent systems proposed for both the amenity lakes and freO water pond (with rw,)ect to maintenance of water quality). BIOTIC REsOuRCES 4.4.1 settimcj The following amurnent is Intended to clarify and document the significarca and swrsi- tivity of biotic resources within and immediately surrounding the study area in relation to tiro proposed project p1m. To date, a considerable anent of carre her barn received from wildlife agemlets and private car servation Interests rvWdlrg potentidly vOkOOble "wetlands" on-site. Whereas this sectian otterr1pts to provide Mote badk. 11 ground data about the site in general, the wetlanchs issue is the primary focus. The fin& ings presented below are the result of a thorough rev:tw of available Information and walk-over surveys conducted by Mr. Steve Nelson of EDAW an September 15 and 16, 1981. It should be noted that these surveys did not attempt to compile exhMative lists of plant and animal species. Rather, they attempted to better def Ine and resolve the Integrity, importance and value of on-site wetlorxis vegetation and wildlife habitat for purposes of a more Informed and meaningful review and decision-making process. Existing Vegetation and Wildlife `, Presently, between 80 and 90 percent of the property exists in a highly disturbed eorF- *go dition supporting ruderal vegetation. These conditions persW largely as the result of '�'" ongoing ail extraction, fill and annual discing activities. The dominant and soma plants In these areas are non-native species, considered to be common roadside weeds. These Include wild radish (Rophanus sativus), Russion thistle (Salsola iberica) ripgutgrass +• (Bromys diandruua�), red brorne 6. ru ens , horsewee d (Con zo con i e si 1, cocklebur ant um strurr;arium), sunflower Vielionthus annyus) and mustard Brassica sp.). on Visually dominating he extreme southwest corner of the site, there Is also cluster of large e�"Iyptus trees (Eucalyptus sp.). ,.,, As a consequences of these conditions, natural ecological relationships are severely dis- tressed and habitat diversity and productivity are greatly reduced in these areas. Their ` resulting value to wildlife is low and only a very limited number of comrnon wildlife species, which can adopt to these habitat conditions, are expected. �- A small portion of the site (approximately 10 to 20 percent), locateu in the southwest corner of the property, !;upporis vegetation characteristic of a native coastal salty brackish marsh (refer to Figure 10). The vegetation he; o is dominated by pickleweed (Solicornia vie inica and S. subterminalis), one of the indicator species for coastal salt•• and brackish marshes. Associated with the pickleweed area scattered patches of bulrush (Scirpus californicus and S. robustus), saltgrass (Distichiis s i� cats} and cat-tail QyR 2 dcmingensis which are also species indicative of a coastal marsh environment. The precise histcry of the marsh vegetation on-site is not known. It is plausible, how- ever, that it is a remnant of large coastal marsh complex which formerly existed • throughout ti-e historical delta of the Santa Ana River, prior to Its charuielization. Although probably changed somewhat from ii- original cornposition, It is highly likely that the area's character as a marsh has been maintained over it* years by impounded runoff from on-site odjocent urban developments and the highly saline soils found there. For an unknown period of time the area was subject to tidal action, as well. This occurred by way of a one-way gate on a pipe which drained the area into the adjacent flood control channel. The gate was not operating as intended to shut and keep tidal flows in ih? chonnel from inundating the area and a perennial p:nd of brackish water collected around which the marsh vegetation f louriOwd. Recently, the gate was repaired and standing water no longer exists, except immediately after a storm event. As the ticiol flows were the primary water supply for the pond, if is uncertain to what • extent the cessation of the saltwater source will have on the biotic communities. The pandbng area w;ll experi�nc:e long dig periods; however, temporary fending following storms, relatively high groundwater tables and the residual saline soils will function to ;. support sanm remnant of the "marsh" vegetation for some time. w The area has in the post supported a diversity and nbundcmce of wildlife typical of mms+h habitits. Although several mammals, reptiles, and amphibians are expected, ttlea greatest 12 too RUDINAL VWG1TA P U:1W Ob we Tf; ;� ':• �, • �' �' L,iMI'i�9 OF VE(iEfi1liON CMAIIACT1111211000, j •�� r �• - �-- Ai'GOARTAL ��1?iKItM�MA11fk - '`--"� MAXIMUM LIMIT OF PONDI"a y r ' SUCALYPTU• ySTANDS ` 1 1 5 _w�rr..�A1.�.N11.1.�.1d/IAwMO � SEADMME Environmental Impact Report BIOTIC RESOURCES now" 1tw obetee 80*e r NO •*ALN numbers of species utilizing the area have been birds, Including many water birds and migratory water fowl. A list of wildlife species expected, repwted and observed in the area is provided in Appendix D. Apparently, these species found an adequate food source In the populations of f ish, shore crabs and other crustaceans, molluscs and shellfish which Inhabited the pond. No doubt these were originally introduced and maintained by way of the former tidal connection. Use of the area by wildlife may also be enhanced by its proximity to the flood control channel and nearness to other larger marsh areas. Directly to the north, across Adams Avenue, there is a 10-ocre marshland existing within Bartlett Pork. Downstream there is a much larger marshland approximately one mile to the south. It is presumed that many birds travel to and from these areas along the flood control channel, which connects these areas, and are attracted to the site in this manner. Amon the species found or ex e:ted to use the marsh habitat are a number of "high Interest species" which are of concern to wildlife agencies and private conservation !rw groups. Most noteworthy, one Belding's Savanna sparrow, a state-sonctioned Rare Species, was observed at the site. For this species, stands of pick leweed serve as its sole nesting and primary cover and foraging habitat. It is not known whether or not the ;e species nests on-site; this could only be determined through a spring breeding bird survey. This species has been reported to breed with a high degree of succe.as in degraded saltmarshes with little or no tidal influence, such as in the relict saltmarsh areas along Pacific Coast Highway iNI:st of the Santa Ana River mouth which is approxi- mately a mile from the project site. On the other hand, the species may use the area for foraging only. Po--ticularly after the breeding season, which ends in mid-August, the species is known to leave its nesting grounds and forage widely in upland maritime areas. Additionally, nine species of birds are expected Yo occur on-site, which the National Audubon Society has placed on their "Blue List". This is an "early warning" advisory list of species which recently or currently give indications of non-cyclical popu- lation declines or range contractions. These species are indi:ated on the list of wildlife wN species provided in Appendix B. Ecological Significance and Sensitivity so For purposes of focusing the impact analysis and mitigative efforts, various levels of sig- nificance and/or sensitivity can be assigned to the biological resources of the project ± site. The majority of the site, encompassing areas of ruderal vegetation axl habitats w have little or no ecological significance and do not weigh as an environmental issue. in contrast, the portion of the site possessing vegetation and wildlife habitat of a definite M coastal brackish marsh character is of high ecological significance and would be parti- cularly sensitive to development activities. The area is of significance for several reasons which relate to its importance in contributing to biological diversity within a regional context. First, the marsh vegetation serves as foraging habitat, and possibly breeding habitat for a Rare species. Second, coastal sait and brackish marsh vegetation Is extremely limited in its distribution along the Orange County and California caast- line. According to some researchers, as much as 40 percent of Californiv's original tidal 0 Wassey, B.W. 1979. The l3eldingr varwmh Sparrow. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Ergin**rs under Contract No. DACW09-78-C-08. 2Arbihl R. The Blue List for I ;csJ, American Birds, 33:830-035, 1979. 13 N. areas hove been lost to urbanization and flood control, with some of the most significant losses in the state occurring in Orange County.i And third, at least up until recently, the marsh, mudf lots and pond served as an area of concentrated feeding, resting and winter- ing grounds for migratory water and shore birds and waterfowl. Although in comparison to nearby areas of much larger tidal habitats, such os Upper Newport Bay, Balsa Chica and Anaheim Bay, the numbers of birds is relatively small, their extremely limited dis- tribution makes any such areas, regardless of size and carrying capacity, important. The question has been raised as to the signs icance of the ponding orea without tidal Influence (i.e., the flapgate is maintained operational). As a result of eliminating tidal flow, it Is believed that a considerable decrease in its use by migratory birds will occur. Hnwever, the site will retain some significance as habitat for a rare species and as one t element of the severely limited coastal marsh community. Applicable Laws Policies and Regulations 49 Under the provisions of the California Fish and Game Code Chapter 6, Sections 1601 and �.. 1603, actions which may alter streamGe s or to ces rorn which fish and wildlife resources derive benefits require the review of the Department of Fish and Came. Briefly, the process involves submitting plans indirating the nature of a project to the Department. These are submitted as a 1601 or 1603 agreement. Normally, within thirty days the Department will return the plans with a proposal for reasonable modifications in the project which would allow for the protection and continuance of fish and wildlife resources. Within fourteen days of receipt of the Department's proposal, the affected party notifies the Department as to the proposal's acceptability; if unacceptable, crbi- �. tration is necessary. Based on their response to the Notice of Preparation (refer to Appendix F), the Department of Fish and Game believes the marsh area on-site would fall under the provisions of this code and urges compliance. r 4.4.2 impacts The effects of development on vegetation and wildlife resources can be grouped into two M general categories: 1) the removal or alteration of habitats; and 2) the introduction of increased noise level, exogenous species and other potential disturbances. The primary factor influencing the Seabridge Project is loss of habitat. Construction activities will result in the removal of physical habitats through cut, fill and other grading activities necessary for roads, building pads, utilities and flood control. The proposed grading will, in effect, remove all existing vegetation on the site with the exception of the resource production areas which, temporarily, will not be dis- turbed. From the standpoint of biological diversity (which is directly related to ecolog- ical stability and wag the basis for the existing setting sensitivity analysis), the loss of diverge and/or uncommon plant communities, such as the marsh will have an inherently greater significance than the loss of more common communities. The impact of vegetation loss through direct removal will, in turn, have potentially adverse effects on wildlife. As vegetation is removed i,r otherwise destroyed, the asso- ciated wildlife will either be destroyed, as in the case of less mobile forms, or will be 'Cain, S.A. Statement In: Estuaries Areas: Report of Hearings before the Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representatives, 19th Congress. Serial No. 9-31 . 14 ' displuCed to adjacent habitat arras where they may crowd and disrupt local populations. Determinants of the severity of these Impacts are the relative importance of habitats lost to local and regional wildlife populations, the abun&me and diversity of wildlife these habitats support, the availability c,f these habitats. and the habitat dep of the associated wildlife. As described in the Setting Section, the marsh habitat on-site is valuable relative to all of these considerations. Ttws, without compensation, its direct Ices may be significant. Displacement impacts may bu significant but will be temporary, lasting for a season or two. increased competition and predation will oct rapidly to return population numbers to habitat carrying capacity levels. The effect will be Increased In magnitude and duration, however, if this impact occurs in the spring, -Ntxn moat wildlife are reproducing. Although the area defined as the "marsh" is somewhat degroded, and the habitat value Is further limited by proper operation of the flap-gote an the flood control channel, the removal of this habitat will adversely irnpoct wildlife population dependent upon it for foraging. Species affected include the Udings Savannah sparrow, nine species on the Audubon Society "Blue List", end many specleas of shorebirds, waterbirds and waterfowl. As indicated in the setting section, significant effects will be limited to the area described as exhibiting coastal marsh characteristics. Ruderal habitats lost will have car: insignificant effect on wildlife. Initially, lasses of wildlife habitat will be partially offset by the construction of a fresh- water pond and marsh area on-site concurrent with the site's development. It is Intended that the freshwater pond will provide replacement habitat for use by waterbirds and waterfowl species which now use the existing marsh. It will be smaller in area and of a different nature than the existing marsh, however, and will provide only partial compen- sation for the habitat lost. The eventual creation of a viable saltwater marsh in the oil production lands west of the channel will distinctly enhance the wildlife opportunities of the site anc+ completely offset losses over the long-term. Thte second biotic impact category is disturbance of habitat related to man's activities. This disturbance (also termed hurrassrnent) is not expected to bp- a major factor in the Seabridge Project as surrounding lands have little habitat value and the 10-acre marsh Ili Bartlett Park to the north is already separated from the project by Adams Avenue. 4.4.3 Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measixes are included within the project or otherwise recorn- mended: o In order to mitigate the loss of the existing coastal marsh habitat, replacement marsh habitat will be included within the project. A freshwater marsh, adja- cent to Beach Boulevard, will be developed immediately in the existing ponding area and will represent partial compensation for hobitais lost. The establish- ment of a salt and brackish marsh will be implemented once the oil activity ceases. This would be expected to provide complete mitigation for habitats lost over the r o The extensive landscaping throughout the: project will provide additional hobi tot for those species of birds common to urban areas. o The applicant may be required to obtain the approval of the State Department of Fish and Game for modification of the existing wetland. Specific plairtc for f* the freshwater pared and saltwater marsh would be reviewed at that time. 15 M� 4.5 Land use 4.5.1 Setting The project site Is presently used for oil resource production. This production occurs on both sides of the flood control charnel and consists of 15 active and ten idle producer e, wells. Production from the field averages 48,545 barrels of oil and 73,000 million cubic feet of natural gas annually. To the north, south and east of the project site lie low density residential subdivisions. Currently under construction north of the Adorns Avenue, along Beoch Boulevard, is the 200,000 square foot Newland Center. The north side of the property Is also adjacent to a designated linear park along the mesas between Adamz Avenue and Yorktown Avemm. West of the project Rite, across Beach Boulevard, exists several medium density resident- V. Val developments. Crxmerclal uses lie adjacent to the site at the southerly project boundary along Beach Boulevard. Nw e: 4.5.2 lmpoct Development of the proposed project war ld not result in loss of the site's current produe- tive use. The applicant has indicated that oil production will be preserved through fire consolidation of operations. The area reserved for oil prexluction, approximately eight acres, is shown on Figure 3. t Following cessation of oiI production, these areas will be retained in open spore eittwr as active or passive activity areas. Funding will be provided by the applicant for -the even- « tual conversion. it should be noted, however, that no date has been estoblishi.d for the conclusion of oil production from this field, and conversion to park land/open spanze may be 20+ years distant. d , Laid uses for the ma'ority of the site, however, will change with implementation of the project as portions o? the site which are presently undeveloped will be used for medimn to high density residential development. One of the primary concerns related to land use is compatibility of uses, both within the project and with respect to adjacent properties. The compatibility issues of this project involve -the: adjacent single family residential areas to the east and south, the: existing oil productio:: equipment, the proposed rnarsh end the proposed residential structures (up to now six stories). Potential incompatibilities exist between these elements which will require spec;.ilized design treatment to mitigate. In order to ensure compatibility of the proposed development with the surrowWing single- family developments, higher density residential development will occur on the west side of the flood control channel adjacent to Beach Boulevard. On the east side of the ... channel, one-story taanhomes over parking will be located adjacent to the low deruity residential subdivisions. A landscaped buffer wil! also separate the existing residences from the project residences. The relationship between these elements Is shown in Figure 4. The success of blending these two residential elements will depend upon the specific design treatment (i.e., primarily elevation difference and landscape treatment). Based upon experience with adjacent subdivisions across Beach Boulevard, the existing oil production facilities can be successfully intermixed with new residential developmernt. The primary potential for problems be with lack of maintenance which could result in ' w nuisance arise corwlitionst. This situatlati, however, can be resolved i4roply by initiating appropriate rnaintenance procedxes. The natural resource valves expectlA from and represented by the marsh will, to 'Same extent, be In emfilet with t?Nt surrounding higher density residential uses test an') pro- posed in the Specific Plan. This effect is a function of the increased Irool of hvrrara activity (I.e., nolsee, distractimo, horrsassment, pets) near the marsh. The QMl rewlt is a corrimponding decease in the habitat value of the mash. The rr► Intwwxtcs of a year- round wetland, will however, act to enhance the re minces value wNon cornptared to exial- ing conditions. The impact of tie taller strw.-Ilirer, will primarily relate: to visual impacts as dirxvsased in Section 4.1 I, Visual Resources. Again, the actual design treatment of the bai)dings will play a major role in the; eventual perception of the public as to the caypatible or intru- sivri nature of the development. 4.5.3 Mitigation Mvisures The ;allowing merisw-es mo., included within the project or otherwise re:cornmixnded. � ssi o The conceptual plan for the project contains numerous elements designed to reduce potential land use Incompatibilities. These include: - Urniting the height of structures adjacent to the existirw� aingie*-family a n icJ*orl vx)ds. Poaviding n locidscope buffer between the project and cxjjaxnt residen- r Val areas cmd a 45-foot setback from property lines. Varying the heights of the proposed residential structures to conform to the existing topography and reduce the perception of building mass. I - Incluriing, within the Specific Pion, development guidelines eznd standards for kvidscope buffering of the oil well area frorn other peas within the project. o A special interest-bearing account will be establisteed In the name of the; Homeowners Association for eventual Improvement of the resource production areas. 4.6 Cultural 4.6.1 Setting An archewological records check and walk-over survey of the site: was conducted by Dr. C.E. Drover, ConsAting Archaeologist. His study is cYsntained in Appendix: E arad is sum.- morized here. Highly fragmented shellfish, abalone fh-lcUotis spp.) and Pismo Clam (Tilmla stuitorurm) were found in very small numbers on the top of the rnesa. Several frog ants of h(stor c ceramic frogmentts and chunks of asphalt were also observed. While the shell fragments and ceramic fragments might seem to indicate human habitation of the mesa, the degree to which the mesa-top has been disturbed in recent r3ars may indicate these items wero introdicrd. Evirknce. exists (broken concrete and asphalt) to suggest thv: area has been 17 r uwsd as a dump wtrich h+as been summarily disced by heavy equipment for weed control. Tin iriesa top was the location of a retail nursery fa' approximately 20 years. W gets. nants of historic: house foxtckitions or discolored soil which might suggest prehistoric (racupwtiorrs were found. The highly disturbed nature of soil combined with only minimal fragmented shell specimens and no observations of lithics (culturally modified stone; would suggest th(rt significant cultural deposits do not exist on the site. 4.6."c Impacts . . ►r Although no cultural resources are thought to exist on--site and therefore no impacts are expected, the presence of shell fragments, the proximity of a registered siteo-358) ' and the sensitivity to such topography to local prehistoric occupation warrant future i.\. grading observation. 4.6.3 MitI22tion Measures It is recommended that a qualified archaeologist byt present in the initial phases of any proposed grading activities on the mesa-top. Such observations would allow for a direct determination as to whether any prehistoric habitation occurred on the- mesa-top during the exposure of subsurface soils. Such grading observation activities could likely be accomplished in one man/day depending on the grading schedulc and should not exceed "- approximately $150.00. •• 4.7 P2e2l ati on r 4.7.1 Setting The project area currently supports no residential population but is generally surratnded by residential development. VM According to the 1980 census figures, the City's ropulation is 170,505 persons. The cer- F., tified figures for January 1981 show a population cf 172,813 persons. A number of documents provide project housing unit and population levels for the City of Huntington Beach. The Orange County Report on the State of the Count 1978-79 offers the fallowirxj projections for Huntington Beach. Date Dwelling Units Population .r. July 1979 62,846 167,842 July 1981 66,962 1732662 " July 1983 709731 181,230 July 1988 60,223 194,147 The Southern California Association of Governments' SCAG 178 Growth Foreccst Policy contains the following projections for Huntington Beach.^ Date Dwelling Units Population wMr.Wry N \r- Y� 1985 729700 178,600 1990 83,000 191,200 1995 88,600 205,1400 _ 2000 909700 210,E00 18 4.7 2 I xMt Development of the project would result In an incraaaed population of 1,672 persons. This calpWatlon aesurnes an aver of 1.96 persons per hevsehold for medlurn density drmlapffwnt, and 2.22 persons peerld for high density development. The City of Huntington Beads has mcKk a short-term population projection for 1985 of 186,tt70 persons. Assuming that this project was completely built and wvcupied by 1985, it would occaLmt for approximately I poweent of the population Increase.. 4.7.3 Mitigation No mitigation measures are proposed. 4.8 TranVatationjOrculation 4.8� l r 5et_ IES A traffic study for the project was prepared by Bosmociyan-Darnell, Inc. (July, 1981). That study, in full, is proviced in Appendix F. The following discussions are taken from that report. With the exception of the resource production areas, the study area is ox. rently undeveloped land, thereby contributing few or no trips to the adjacent circulation system. Access to the eastern portion of the study area is taken from Adorns Avenue, and access to the area west of the Flood Control Chomel Is token from Beach Boulevard. Adams Avenue is classified as a major arterial rood between Beach Boulevard and Brook- hurst Street and as a Primary food westerly of Beach Boulevard. Immediately east of the project site Adams Avenue is fully Improved with curbs, gutters, sidevralk, asphaltic paving and a per;pled median. Adjacent ?o the project, the roadway improvements consist of asphaltic paving to provide two travel lopes in each direction. Lcend located north of the project site has recently been approved for coetstructian of the iVewland Center (a neighbonc�xsd shopping center cormplex). Approval of the Newland Cemtrer project required the applicant to fully improve the northerly half of Adams Avenue east of Beach Boulevard adjacent to the project site. Beach Boulevard (State Route 39) is constructed as a six lane major arterial highway with a raised median. Beach Boulevard set'ves as a north-south vehicular corridor providing access to the beach areas as well as a commuter route for inland destinations within the county. The design capacity of both Beach Boulevard and Adorns Avenue is 45,000 vehicles per day. Existing daily traffic volumes on Beach Eoulevard and Adams Avenue were estimated from the 1978 traffic flow map for Huntington Beach by the Transportation Planning firm of Ekwnaciyan-Darnell, inc. Doily traffic volumes on Eieoch Boulevard north of the Adams Avenue intersection are estimated to be 35,600 ADT; while traffic volumes south of the: Adams Avenue intersection :ire• estimated to be 28,750. The average daily traffic volumes on Adorns Avenue range f r= 16,400 east of Beach Boulevard to 70700 west of Busch 8oulevtvd. Public TrMn Lwto_ tion The project area Is adjacent to existing Orange County Transit Distridi routes an boirh Beach E3oulevord and Adorns Avenue. 19 ... tyevelopmen1 of the, proposed project will require the creation of an interrwi street system responsive to the nerds and estirnote:d average daily trips (ADT%) gawaterd by f` the project. The internal circulation system, as shown in Figure 3, is further detailed in the project description section of this report. To adequately assess the impact of project-related traffic, bath long-term and short-'� term linpactr isiust be addressed. On a short term basis, construction vehicles and the automobiles of workmen will utilize apprortch routes and add to daily traffic volurrm. Long-term impacts om'e those associated with the permanent use of the dwelling units proposed. w' Proposed development on the project site would result in on increase over present traffic ON volumes In the area. The trip generation characteristics for the proposed project are 6F summarized in Table B. The trip generation rates used were taken from the Institute of Traffic Engineers Horwtmk on Trip Generation. These rates were discussed with the W City staff and adjusted accordingly to reflect local variations in trip making character- istics. TABLE B SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS r� Residential Rates - Condominiums Daily 9.4 trip ends per dwelling unit .- AM Peak Hour In 0.2 trip ends per dwelling unit out 0.5 trip ends per dwelling unit � PM Peak Hour In 0.5 trip ends per dwelling unit Out 0.3 trip ends per dwelling unit Trip Generation Summary Daily 7420 trip ends • AM Peak Hour �. In 160 trip ends Out 400 trip ends ~ PM Peak Hour ~' In 400 trip ends Out 240 trip ends NOTE: A trip end is a one-way movement either toward or away from a residence 20 - 1 Based these rates aver dailytri ADT's) associated with the project are esti- mated two total 7,520 tr1pa, Approximately 1,i28of them trips will be directedtoward Adana Avenue, and 6,392 trips to Beach Boulevard, as strown to Figure 11. To examine the impacts of the proposed project, the project-related traffic volumes were added to the anticipated Newland Center traffic and then superimposed on the existing traffic volumes in the area. The results are shown an Figure 12. The resulting cumulative ADT figures for Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue 33,640 and 20,610) are still below the existing capacity !45,000) for both of these roods. The [kepartrnent of Public Works has indicated that the traffic volumes generated by the project will not exceed design capacities on adjacent arterials and will not have a significant effect an local street traf f is flow. I ' Potential traffic impacts can the intersection of Beach Boulevard and Adams Ave xn were' also analyzed using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method Assuming that the intersection improvements required for the Newland Center would be completed and in place, the resulting ICU for this intersection would be 0.80. This ICU value corres- ponds to a Level of Service "C". Based on a review of the anticipated project-related traffic and superimposing of project-related traffic one existing traffic volumes no capacity and/or congestion problems are anticipated. Although the primary impact of the project will be experienced at the Beach Boule- Yard/Adams Avenue intersection, other Intersections within the City will also be affected by the traffic generated by the project. Of p2rticular concern within the City are the Beach/Warner and Beach/Edirxjer intersections. The project will have a minor, but camulative impact on the traffic volumes and level of service at these intersec- (ions. Other projects (e.g., the proposed office building at Beach Boulevard and Worrier Avc-nue) will more directly influence the level of service experienced at these intersec- tions. Access and On-site Circulation Proposed access to/from the project site has been reviewed old determined to be ade- quate for the proposed development (Basmeclyon-L)arnell, July, 1981). This conclusion assumes that full access to/from Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue will be permitted at the new intersections. The preliminary site plan for the proposed project has been reviewed and has been determined to be odequote,. Although traffic volumes generated by the project will not adversely of feet the existing street system, on-site traffic control mechanisms will be required at each entrance to the main roadway. in addition, the access location on Beach Boulevard (aligned with Memphis Avenue) is estimated to war- rant the installation of a traffic signal upon full development of the project. 4.8.3 Mitigation Measures Measures which have been designed into the project to mitigate adverse circulation impacts include: 11-and Use Element Amendment 81-I, Environmental Impact Report 81-2. Huntington Beach Department of Development Services, 1981 . 2Huy, peruml communication, November 1981. 21 h Adams %.1. 587/37 Ave. m— mm •w-�Ib 5/l7 ' - 198/19 r 740/74 39Si/85 (45/5) ....., 165/11-40 i 195 111 620/66 ..CPO, n in w �r 2SS/16 r ,t t WN ( • cc r N i Aq r SCHEMATIC ONLY (not to scale) , • i w 62/4in • t r r• cc to m � rl � r fpsN rl A Mwphis Ave. �'�— 1201/77 Nof� --� " 1178/7S LEGEND tif XXX/YY Daily/PM PeAk Hoar . Traffic V01MG u ; 1w■�e=Derr■6M4=6=9MSaw9 $=I=I=$=@MOO: e •r �1 Environmental Impact IRoport PROJECT RELATED "64h Blvd./Ad6M$ Ave, TRAFFIC VC LU�AES W0089100 Beach Prepared by KDAW Ism ierew: 9ssm9v1yvw--DwneU, kw. HERD 111 20 J8 10, 290 20,610 20,120 77C� 16.,00 161�l00 �16201 Adams Ave. IWO) (1110) x390 2590 2590 IT � � g o •r r1 CO N . r N r SCHWATIC ONLY (not to scale) � � r LEGEND � r r . 1 r XX,X}:X Cumulative ADT Memphis XX, XXX Existing ADT * (estimated) Ave. (X,XXX) Mola Development ADT w X,XXX Newland Center ADT i c o •wr*�r•ar���e+�r�r�wrs�wirs�rr�rw�ssrr�«�w�� M ON 4 1 SEA OE EXISTING PLUS Environmental Impact Report PROJECT RELATED Beach Blvd./Adorns Ave. Huntington @each TRAFFIC VOLUMES Prosrrred by EDAW Inc. Source: sesmaclyeft-DW *119 wee. 1�11�URR !w � 0 8us turnouts aW bus shelters will be provided at designated kcatiarr as rwMrod by the City DW rtmoit of Putrllc Works and Orwip Cady Transit o The ImMilation of stop signs to provide for positive control to be Inoollod In each entrance to the main roadway. o The installation of a traffic signal an Beach Boulevard (oligned with Memphis ' Avenue) upon full development of the project. The signal Installation should Include left turn phasing and be interconnected with the traffic signais, an Bench Soutevcrd. o The project will be reviewed by the Department of Public Works in relation to the signalization of the Beach Bouievord/Aftm Avenue Intersection. S1701 izatian improvements, if required, will be provided by the applicant. o A tripdistribution study evaluating the traffic distribution al*V Beach Boule- vard should be. provided for review by the Department of Public Works to determine the specific impact of the project on critical intersections along Beach Eloulevord. 4.9 Noise 4sttLnq A noise assessment for the Seabridge Project project was pr ed by Vincent Mestre Associates, Acoustical Consultants (included as Appendix C). This study Is on file at the City of Nuntir+gton Beach Planning and Resources Department. The following discussicn Is summarized from the report. Existing noise levels in the vicinity of the project were established in terms of the CiVEL Index by modeling the roadways for current traff is and speed characteristics. The road- ways that were modeled for existing conditioa►s include roadways adjacent to the project Ate. The existing noNe environment was modeled in order to establish a baseline noise level to which the future project alterrwtive can the compared. Traffic data used to project the existing noise level are derived from the traffic study in this EIR. The traffic mix data are based an measurements for roadways In Orange CGurnty (Orange County Traffic Census 1975, Compiled by EMA Development Traffic Engineering) and are considered typical for arterials in this area. Distances to GAL contours for roadways in the vicinity of the project are given In Table C. These represent the distance from the centerline of the road to the contaur values shcrtvn. The results show that the noise levels on the project site ore affected by roadway traffic. The 65 CNEL Contour for Beach Boulevard extends IES feet from the roodwuy centerline on to the project site. 4.Y.2 [Teams Three 'ypes of noise impacts may arise from the project: (1) construction noise may In1poct surrounding land uses, (2) project related traffic mlay increase noise levels an properties located along primary access routes, aid (3) roadway noise may adversely Impact the exterior and interior noise levels of the proposed residential hones. 22 r Cpnstruction Noise I�11 DIY- rAI Construction noise represents a :hart-term Impact an ambient noise levels. Noise gener- ated by construction equipment and construction activities em reach high levels. Wises.- sensitive land use adjacent to the project Includes existing residential homes on all bowWwles of the site. Adherence to the City's noise ordinance that limits the hours ig construction to narrnal weekday hours should minimize any potential noise Impacts. r lnVocts an Swroundin9 Land Uses An important part of a noise analysis is the identification of noise-sensitive land usee that may be impacted by the prc cased project. In the case of the Seabridge Project �I Project, existing roadways that will serve as primary access streets for the project include Beoc.h Boulevard and Adams Avenue. Existing residential homes are located � along sections of both these streets. The impact of the project on these land uses is assessed by determining the existing noise levels an these roadway.% both with and without the project. The difference in noise levels would Ise due to the Increase In the project traffic. Table C Indicates the existing CNEL nosie levels at 100 feet from the centerline of the modeled roadways both with and without the project. Table D gives the increase in noise ie levels along these roodwoys due to the project only. The results show that the noisee levels will increase by less than 0.4 dB. These projected increases in noise levels are not significant when one considers that the human ear is just barely able to dsrcern a noise change of 3 dBA. Therefore, traffic generated by the project will not adversely Impact land uses adjacent to these roadways. TABLE C CNEL. NOISE LEVELS FOR EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR ` ROADWAY SEGMENT FROM ROADWAY CENTER LINE (FEET) w 60-CNEL 65-CNEL. 70-CNEL BEACH BOULEVARD North of Adams 269 125 58 South of Adams 233 108 5Q ADAMS AVENUE Wart of Beoch 97 44 • East of Beech 160 74 34 *� notes that contour does not extend past roadway edge. fin 23 rM TABLE D INCREASE IN EXISTING NOISE LEVELS DUE TO THE PROJECT EXISTING CNEL NOISE LEVEL AT 100 FT. INCREASE ROADWAY SEGMENT Without With QUE TO Project Project PROJECT 14 W BEACH BOULEVARD North of Adams 66.4 66.8 +0.4 pe South of Adams 65.5 65.9 +0.4 M ADAMS AVENUE West of Beach 59.8 59.8 0 East of Beach 63.1 63.5 +0.4 Noise Levels at the Project Site .., The distances to the CNEL contours for future traffic volimes on Beach Boulevard and Adorns Avenue are given in Table E. They represent the distances from the centerline of the road to the contour values shown. Note that the values given in Table E do not take into account the effect of any noise barriers or tapagraphy that may offect ambient noise levels. In addition, existing legislation is expected to reduce noise lavels from future vehicles by 3 dBA or more. This reduction is not Included in these estimates. The 65 CNEL countour for these roadways wil I extend onto the property of the proposed wr project (refer to Figure 13). Based upon the placement of structure in the conceptual plan, the residential units olong Adams Avenue would not fall within ftw. 65CNEL con- tour, bwt portions of the units facing Beach Boulevard rin fall within this mitour (Figure w 13). r•� TABLE E CNEL NOISE LEVELS FOR ULTIMATE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR ROADWAY SEGMENT FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE (FEET) ' ! 60-CNEL 65-CNEL 70-CNEL BEACH BOULEVARD North of Adorns 309 143 66 one South of Adorns 257 119 55 ADAMS AVENUE West of Beach 117 54 +� East of Beach 187 87 40 1 ``)motes that corrtwrr rwt extRR past r way . w 24 slog 9 No r l �mOno ! � f Ai 4511 ArM terra T { � J �t Blit i PCs _ — + • _ ■ ®r, 9-,%C' rz rtil r I c I V rig s s a T11 _ _ .• .. • _'k'• �t- t -ate' '1`. L=_L__.,,► " � l 4.9.3 Miti22tion Measures With proper site design the site can accommodate residential land uses and be compatible r with the Noise Element of the General Piro for the City of i-luntingtan Beach. Measures must be designed to satisfy the City!s requirement that 65 CNEL not be exceeeded in outside living areas. If residential buildings are to be located within these 65 CNEL contours, then mitigation mesoures that con be undertaken Include building setback, can- struction of a noise barrier, or orientation of the buildings Owrnselves to act as o barrier (wall, berm, or combination wall/berm) is the most comnwn way of alleviating traffic noise impacts. o Noise attenuation ;methods detailed in the Specific Plan few structures along Beach Boulevard w:-'! be reviewed by an occousticai engineer for compliance iwith City standards. 4.10 Air Quality 4. 10.1 Setting In order to evaluate the significance of the air quality Impact of a proposed development, that impact, together with existing bcaellne levels, must he compared to the applicable ambient air quality standards (AAGS). This has been done and the findings includt:d in Appendix H. These standards are the levels of air quality that "entry reasonably be ontl- cipated to endanger public health or welfare" (Clean Air Act as amended August, I977). Standards are therefore set such that air quality poses no risk to those people most sus- ceptible to possible respiratory distress such as asthmatics or people with emphysema, young children, the elderly, persons already weak from other disease or illness, ate., called "sensitive receptors." Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to some- what higher concentrations before adverse effects are noted. Standard% are periodically reviewed as new health effects Information is duveloped and the Clean Air Act Is regu- larly renewed. In the current renewal proceedings of the Act, the Reagan Administration Is proposing a revised definition of AAQS that requires levels of air quality to "pose a significant risk" to health and welfare. This proposal stops short of requiring a cost/ benefit analysis for AAG1S that some business Interests have proposed, but the use of "significant risk" versus the current no risk philosophy may lead to some relaxatica of current AADS levels. There Is no long period air quality monitoring near the proposed project site by which to determine the existing baseline air qualify with reslxct to the various clean air stan- dard. The nearest South Cmist Air Quality Management District (AQMD) station Is In w Costa Mesa. While there may be small local differences between the Costa Mese site and the project, their similar exposure with respect to the ocean and surrounding pollu- tion sources cnd very similar wind patterns should make these data quite representative of the project site. Data from Costa Mesa suggest that standards for ozone are exceeded on occasion+ in the summer owl those for carbon monixide (CO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO ZZ) in winter, but not very often. The five violations of the federal ozone slosiord of 0. f1 pp m compares to 146 violatioru at Fontana and 132 of Riverside. The six violations of the eight hour CO standard compares to 70 in Lennox and 63 in Mir bank. Similarly, the two vlolatimn of the NO2 standard conpares to 23 in Burbank and 17 In Anaheim. Thus, while there may be a few Instances of potentially unhealthful air quality In the Huntington Beach area, both the frequency of violations and their magnitude is much leis than in many other por- tic u of Southern Colifornin. 2a 10.:_ lassts While the project-related emissions con be calculated with: reasonable accuracy, the very nature of the primarily mobile source emissions maces It aimost impossible to ironslate these emissions Into a specific Incremental nmblent air quality impact. A general rneo- sure of the significance of project-related emissions can be derived by comparing them to the overali basin emission level, bit this general wolysis does not relate to the project's specific impact at mwne given time and ploce. 'cable F comperes the project emissions in the current 1987 attainment target date with the overall emissions that world still cause all standards to be met in the basin. Asstxm- ing that downwind air quality is proportional to upwind source strength, the data in Table F suggests that the f ieabridge Project may cause an Incremental degradation of clean air standards that range; from 0.035% for 80 ;o 0 043% for CO. Since nest of the pollution levels will opporently not txs down to 4ir attainment targets by 1987, the actual project r Ional air quality impact will be somewhat less than the percentages indicatod. TABLE F PROJECT CONTRIBUTION TO THE BASINWIDE AIR QUALITY BURDEN s� Project Basin Related Attainment Project P Emrnissions* Target'* Contri�tions Pollutants (tonzldav) (tons/day) (`III Reactive Hydrocarbon 0.081 506. 0.016 Oxides of Nitrogen 0.153 800. 0.019 Carbon Mornaxide 1 .265 74W. 0.043 •- Particulates 0.023 242. 0.009 Oxides of Sulfur 0.027 554. 0.005 From vehicular and stationary sowrces - 1987 level. **Fro,n analysis in the current South Coast Air Fusin - AQMP. No matter what the actual small percentoge is, the underlying premise of the regional air q wlity planning pracess is, that there can be both rea. xxable, planed growth and also steadily improving air quality. Since the proposed project is consistent with t:ie Ganrrai Plari, It is by definition consistent with the AQMP althaaght the SCAG,-80 fore is uw.-d In the current AQMP update cycle may still reflect the previous Resmirce Production, Cornn*reial and Los Density Residential designation for ttv protect site In forcer In 1979 when the SCAG-80 forecasts were prepared. in SCAG's next population, housing, employment and land use update, the current Planned Commu"ity district lard use 7f I sr element adopted June 15, I"l will be reflected in those forecasts and the project will be it. consistent with the AQMP., +4 While the regional impoct may be small and somewhat mitigated by emission controls on other- basin sources of Or pollution, the concentration of traffic near the project site, plus existing traffic, pli.s nan-projcct growth could cause Iocolized air quality degrado- tion ("hot spots"). Based upon an analysis using t1w Caline 3 model, at worst, local traffic genercted CO levels on the sidewalk next to the roadway will be less than 13 ppm compared to the hourly standard of 35 ppm. Since neither the rush hour traffic nor the restrictive disper- sion conditions last for 8 hour., the 8-hour stmiderd of 9 ppm will not be threatened new the project site unless regional background levels approach to standard and the small local contribution is enough 'co cause a standard violation. Based on available background qN data and the foregoing molysis, the project site appears to be in an area of good air quality and the proposed project will not significantly alter that situation. 4.10.3 Mitigation With most of the prgiect impact resulting from the automobile whose emission char- acteristics Lire beyond the control of local regulatory agencies or the develo►por, there is little potential fcr effective mitigation. Certain "standard" measures such as supporting transit use or building bicycle paths are to be encourage, but they contribute only min- imally in reducing the project air pollution burden. While any potential for mitigation is indeed small, mea,,;ures that could be incorporated into project design include: Construct ion sot!rces o Min'rnize erosion and run-off to keep silt from washing into traveled streets. o Pf;rform major grayling in spring when soil moisture is higli. w Mobile Sources R„ a Construct attractive and covered transit stoNs on Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue. o Encoeirwe bike or pedestrian use,to nearby commercial areas. M o Incorporate recreational areas into the project to reduce cut-of-project travel. Stationary Sources o Build project using conservation design criteria beyond the minimum Title 24 requi rements. o Provide solcrr assisted heating and hot water systems os a built-in option. -� o Use energy conserving fluorescent lighting in interiors and high-pressure sodium for street lighting. w w 27 i 4.11 VISUAL RESOURCES .. 4.11.1 Setti, i There are presently no structures located on Om project site, and past use: of the land has been limited to resource production. West of the flood control channel there is a total of nine active oil producing wells and three idle wells. On the eastern portion of the site are 13 wells, seven of which are idle. In addition to the pumping equipment at the wells, there are ancillary tanks and piping located on the site. , Eighty to ninety percent of the onsitc: vegetation is in highly disturbed condition. The WA dominant plants visible from the adjacent roads are nonnative species, considered to be OK, common roadside weeds. A large cluster of eucal,,ptus trees located on the southwest corner of the site 13 the only visually dominant vegetation present., Until its recent removal, a retail nursery occupied the mesa (as previously indicated). The ponding area ~ and associated vegetation, visible from each Boulevard, were also noticeable features s' on the site. The reader should refer to the Biological Resources Section of this EIR for information concerning the history and status of this area. -Utility and transmission lines located parallel to Beach Boulevard are: visible from any location within or outside the site, and tend to detract from the Ideal visual charocter. Also contributing to the degraded appearance of the site arc several advertising bill- boards and scattered trash and debris located tiuoughout the site. Surrounding land properties which have visual access for the site consist of: a single!- family residential neighborhood to the east, single-family residential and commercial (MacDon,ild's restaurant on Beach Boulevard) to the south; residential and open space land to the east across, Beach Boulevard; and commercial (a gas station adjacent to the ' property and the new retail uses ccross Adams Avenue) and parkland to the north. 4.1 1.2 impacts Potential effects of the proposed project upon visual quality or aesthetics include the effects of the project upon the surrounding neighborhoods, the effects upon those travel , ing along Beach Boulevard and Adorns Avenue, and the internal oesthetic choracteristics which will affect project residents. For the purposes of this analysis, two factors, density and dominant forms (building moss ' In this core:) will be. used to evaluate the project's impact on visual and community .� character. One of the most significant effects of the project an the surrounding neighborf.00d Mould be the impact of the: proje ct's density upon the existing neighborhood charcL.�er or image. The attached housing and the three and four story structures of the proposed project would contrast with the established single-family character of the adjacent neighborhoods to the. south and east of the site. However, the design of the: project is strongly influenced by efforts to reduce this Impact. The buildings located east of the flood control channel would be one and two-story units over tuck-under parking, arranged in clusters of four to six units. The tallest strI.K tuees would be approximately 33 feet above grade. Building clusters located adjacent to the existing single family residences are each one-story tall (approximately 23 feet high from the lower parking elevation to the roof line). Other building clusters consist of both one � and two-story units. Roof levels at varied height are also proposed to assist In reducing 28 I the perception of building mass. The relationship of the existing neighborhood and proposed structures are shown In Figure 14, which depicts the project and existing structural elevations. These units would be setback 45 feet from 'the south and east par property lines. �i Development in Area B would occur of greater densities than on the Lost side. Tim 400 units proposed would be in a Combination of structures. Building mass or bulk will be the dominant visual element. Building elevations on thi western portion of thl, site are also shown in Figure 14. Similar to the east side, steps have been taken in the design of these residential structures to minimize the perceived bulk of the buildings. Clusters will consist of three and four-story units, with ua to two levels of parking underneath. The visual impact of the building mass has been lessened through both the design of the structures and their placement on the site. Large building clusters have the &-railer two F• and three-story units located on the end and then step up to the four-story units. r� Building clusters located on the mesa have been designed to step up with the natural landforms present with the garage levels stepping down the natural iatAforms. A setback of 85 feet from the property line will be observed in the area where Area B borders adjocent singlo-family residences. Views from the road into the project area will also be substantially altered because ••� residential units will abut on Beach Boulevard and block view across the site. However, landscape and entry features along the project's Beach Boulevard frontage will he Included in the development. rot The primary public views of the project from oft'-site locations other than along Beach 13oulevord, are from the crest of Adorns Avenue west of Beach Boulevard, However, this view is highly obstructed by the existing gas station on Adams Avenue. Views of the site from the medium density residential development located acre..: Beach Boulevard are also bvf fered, by the heavy traf f is levels on Beach Boulevard and existing power lines. r, Although views will be altered, and the new structures will be visually dominant In this are- of Huntington Beach, no major public or substantival private vistas will be. blocked by � the project. Internally, the community will be water artcenity.oriented and built around a system of lakes sand streams, including a small fresh water morsh located where the previous pnrtd- ing occurred. All urilts are oriented inward, focusing on the landscaped crreas. Similar *" developments with this concept have been successfully completed by the project architect and larxiscalm architect. Areas which are currently used for resource production will be fenced and screened by landscape buffers from the residential dovelopment. When resource production ceases, these areas will be turned over to the homeowners association ontd become part of the project's open space network. Resource production units, at first seemingly incompatible within residential neighbor- '~ hoods have been incorporated into residential neighborlwods in Huntington Beach (e.g., gross 13eoch Boulevard) without serious conflict of use. I 27 • �, d lid (� '�.'., . R_ gza 1 SECTK)N D-15 r -.. rr i... •s•}•.• Kb czei7 j MO SECTION A-A t L1 SECTION B-0 cart! rVicialaw stisot im %C.TM C-C EEABRIDGE -CRQ8S. SECTIONS *'"WRIK *4 ...�*..•�..r sr,srs sw.wr.lr.a to rs.ss 4.111.3 Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures have been incorporated into the design of the resi- dential structures and in the design and arrangement of the site to minimize visual impacts and conflicts with the existing community character. o Buildings have been arranged in clusters to allow for more open space araund owl between structures. o Building clusters consist of various types of units with varying heights and rooflines with concentration of the highest roof lines at the center of the cluster %cos lessen the perceived visual bulk or mass. "x o Building clusters along the mesa allow for the two levels of garage to step down with, the natural level forms. a Building clusters located on the eastern portion of the site adjacent to existing single-family neighborhoods consist of one-story units with tuck-under parking. a A landscape buffer will separate the odjocent single family units and the project. The three and four story units will be kept at a minimum of 85 feet from the property line adjacent single family units. 0 A small collector rood off the main loop road system is located along the eastern border of the site, providing additional separation and buffering between the single family neighborhood. a Resource production areas within ttie project will be fenced and/or buffered with landscaping (arid will remain in use in the near-term). 4.12 PUBL : SERVICES AND UTILITIES Np 4.12. 1 Water 4. 12. 1.1 Setting The Huntington Beach CI1), water supply is derived from two primary sources, imported water from the kletropoliton Water District of 'southern California and groundwater from the Orange County Groundvfnter Basin. An existing eight-inch water line In Beach 13oeilevard, extending 600 feet south of Adam -� Avenue, now serves tto project area. The C lepartment of Public Works Indicates that this line would require an extenslon to the study area's southerly boundary to adequately • provide water service to future development. In addition, a 12-inch water main In Adams Avenue, west of Bewch Boulevard, would recNire cap easterly extension to serve the prole rft area. These facility improvements are projected to odecMtely serve the study area, lPersnnal conversation, 9/16/81, Mr. Eric Charlonne, Public Works Dept. � � 30 4.12.1.2 !meads According to the Public Works Department, there are no problems associated with pro- viding adequate domestic wa-Ier service to the proposed project. Line extensions from Ild the existing water lines on Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue, as discussed, will serve the project site. 14 In order to insure adequate water flows for fire protection purposes, the developer of the site would have to install a fire hydrant and water main distribution system for the area, consisting of a six-inch water line loop with fire hydrants. i� The proposed project would contribute cumulatively to the demand for water in Southern California. The maximum peak daily water demo-ids anticipated with development are a's follows: 14 Area A (medium density): 18408M gallcros/day �► Area (high density): 464 424 ac,�ll+xrs da �r Total 2 gallons day These figures are based on the proposed number of dwelling units in each area, the esti- M+ mated number of persons per dwelling unit, and a maximum peak water demand figure of 235 gallons/person/day. 4. 12. 1.3 Mitigation Measures M� The following measures are included within iM project or otherwise recomrntmWed to offset potential adverse effects: o Included within the Specific Plan for the project area is the requirement for the installation of a fire hydrant system to provide adequate fire flow. The fire hydrant system shall be approved by the Fire Marshall prior to the Issuance of any building permits and cihall be in operation prior to the time of consiruction with any combustible: materials. M o The Department of Water Resources also recommnn& hnplerne:>>tation of the following measures in order to conserve: water: ,7. interior: - Supply line pressure: reduced to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure reducing valve. - Flush valve: operated water closets: recommend 3 gallons per flush. - Pipe insuiation: recommended for all hat woter lines. - Laundry facilitlass recommended water-conserving models of washers. Exterior: Landscape with low water-censuring plants. • Extensive use of mulch in all l wtidscapex,' areas. 31 - Pre wve cM protect existing trews and shrubs. - install efficient irrigation ;systerm to minim;,ze run-off and evoporotion. - Use pervious paving material. Preserve existing natural cirainoge wens. 4.12.2 Wastewater 4.I,2.21 SsrttiM The projeect site is located within the service area of the County Sanitation District of Orange County. The area is currently serviced by a 24-inch Orange County trunk line In Adorns AvmA and a 30 irk;h County Sanitation District trunk line new and running parallel to the easterly project boundry. No new sewer facilities are master planned for the area, therefore, any new dev.-lopment within the area of concern could earnect to the existing trunk line. 4.12.LZ imp2, is r According to the Sanitation District, the: project area has been master planned as low density residential with a flow coefficient of 1550 gallons per day per acre. Actual flows from the project are expectetd to greatll= exceed this an-aunt. The Sanitaticn District estimates the flow coefficient for mediurn density residential development to be 38M gallons per day per acre and Sft20 gplloos per day per acre for high density resieantial development. The District would require use of flow reduction features with the development in ardor to accommodate tIv.- higher densities proposed. 4►12.2.3 Miticwtion Measures Flow reduction measures applicable to residential development will be Incorporated In the project (to be spec!fled by the applicantl. .rr 4.112.3 G+ss and Electricai Utilities 4.12.3.1 Setting Natural s service and electrical service are provided by the Southern California Gas Company and the Edison Company, res;x!etiveiy. A four-inch main gas supply line and an overhood I ZKV electrical line runs "st-wect alone Adorns Avenue to w•ver the area of cesncetno Gasp service Is generally provided ca a normal extension of existing foscilitius. Hw*ww the aviailability of natural yes wvice 1i based upon ;►resent conditions of gas supply ns;� regulatory ,policies. As a public 0111411 the Southern California Gas Company Is urKW the juriadinc;tlon of the Culifornia Public Utilities Commission. Federal roqulatary opencle:s a wv n also off w.t gas supply. Should these ogc+vcles take any action which of fects got supply car the conditions under which service Is available, gm service will be provided according to the revised conditions. The Southern California Edison Company has Indicated that electrical load requirements can be met provided that electrical demand does not exceed estimates and there are no uneexpgcted outages to major sources of electrical supply. The total electrical system 32 r demand Is expected to continue to increase annually. If plans to proceed with fLiture construction of new generating facilities are delayed, Edison's capability to serves ail customer loads during peak demand periods could become marginal by 1984 (city from EIR 61-2, City of Huntington Beach). .. 4.12.3.2 IMpacts Based upon the Southern California Gas Company, average consumption rate of q*woxi- mately 772 therms per year/per dwelling unit, the demand for the proposed development Is estimated to be 617,600 therms/year. Consumption raters may be less due to the small square foo:oge of sorre of the smaller condominium units and consumer efforts k, car►- serve$ fse Based upon Southern California Edison Company's average consumption rate of M Kwh s„ per month per dwelling unit, the demand for electricity is estimated to be opproxinwtely 7,680,W) Kwh per year. No significant impacts relative to these utilities are expected. O` foe 4. 12.3.3 Mitig2tion Measures �J The prgxssed concept achieves many energy conserving elements by virtue of the 'Higher w densities. These elements include reduced infrastructure development and asstnciated costs, greater concentrations of population near commercial services and )oh, t:enters ,. thereby reducing transportation need., and a greater potential for use of public transit systems. Within the project itself, the following mitigation measures could be Included to reduce energy consumption: o Encourage the use of passive solar energy techniques in the siting and do-sign of residential structure,. Previous studfies have indicated good passive design con reduce Ixrating and cooling loads by 30 to 50 percent using rather standard techniques. Approaches to passive control d.ral with building design, location, t , orientation, landscaping, color and materials selection. Specific application includes: Landscaping: south fmadf!s shcded in summer by vegetation, uwnings, k shutters or ovenccrxgs. • Color and building materiaist light colored reflective walls and paving used to reflect incoming solar radiation. o Encourage residential structures to be fitted with active solar systerns. Active solar energy systems rely an some combination of mechanical aids, such as pumps, motors, heat exchangers, control systerns, fans or storage tanks, to gother,store cvYJ distribute t1w sun's energy. Such systems corn be utilized for swimnning pool/jocuzzi heating, domestic hot water hratirxi and space heating/cooling systems. •� 33 4.12.4 Solid Waste 4.12.4.1 Setting The rainbow Disposal Company provides solid waste collection to the City of Huntington Beach. Mi 4.12.4.2 Impact Development of the site would result in increased demand for solid waste collection and disposal services. Using a generation factor of 7.5 lbs/persan,/day for residential land M use, the generation of solid waste Is estimated to be 12,5W Ibs/day. Based apart t1W analysts In EIR 81-2 on Land Use Element 81-1, no local service contraints are expected.. w w 4.12.4.3 Mitigation Measures ■ YrYA.�� ,., No mitigation measures ore proposed. 4 '2.5 Schools ■ ' 4.12.S.1 Setting W� The project area lies within the Huntington Beach Ele.w-ntary School District and the Huntington Beach High School District. 4.12.5.2 Impact ■ The proposed development would generate an estimated 80 elementary school aged children and 80 middle school children. These figures are used upon a generation factor of 0.1 child per housing unit. The 1-Wington Beach Elementary School District ..os Indicated that sufficient excess colxrcity exists in ores schools to accommodate the student load. • The development is olso expected to generate 80 additional high school students, boxed on the District's generation factor of 1.1 child per housing unit. These students would attend Edison High School, which is located approximately 1 1/4 miles from tho project area. The capacity of Edison High School Is 3,029 stlxknts and current enrollment for Fall 1981 is estimated to be 2,943 students. District enrollment has been declining for the Iagt two years. However, this declining trend Is expected to level off in future Years, Additional information regwding future enrollment trends will be available in December 1981, when the District will publish a i D-yeor Mosier Plan for the t+jntington •• Beach School District. 'Personal conversation, Mr. Robert La Wi, Huntington Beach Elementary School District. October 20, 1981 ZPersonal Conversation, Mariann Peterson, Nuntington Beach High School District. Oc tour 209 1981. 34 4.12.5.2 Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are proposed. 4. 12.6 Police Protection 4.12.6.1 Setting The Huntington 8eoch Police Department operates a single police facility located at k, Moire Street axed Yorktown Avenue. The preterit authorized level of polite marring is approximately 1.1 S of ficers per 1.000 persons. e„ 4.12.6.2 Impact - ` r Development of the project would require an additional 1.6 police personnel, based upon the projected population of the project at build-out. A full evaluation of the Specific Plan by the Police Deportment will be mode at the Draft EIR stage. sK 4.12.6.3 Mitigation Meaures No mitigation measures are proposed at this time. sW 4.12.7 Fire Protection KI 4.12�.7.11 Setting P" The project area is served by the Lake Fire Station, approximately one-half mile away. Fire stations should be located to provide an average response time of live minutes or less in 90 percent of the incidents. The project area is within this response limit. 4.12.7.2 I....poc t r The proposed development will exert an additional demand on City Fire protection ser- vices. the. fire Deportment will review fix project at the D:of t EIR stare. 4.1� Mitigation W mitigation measures are propmed at this time. 4. 1.3 Fiscal Analysis A fiscal analysis of alternative development concepts for the peach/Admen site was prepared for the Environmental Impact Repot t (W. 61-2) accorropanying tared Use w Element Amendment No. 81-1,which was adopted June, 1901. All of Ov.- citmnative comepts (including the proposed plan) generate a net revenue surplus for the City am the next 10 years. tEIR 8I-7 35