HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Meeting 9.11.17 - Fitness Center12411 Seal Beach Boulevard Conditional Use Permit 16-7
Public Hearing regarding Conditional Use Permit CUP 16-7, an appeal of the Planning Commission’s certification of the associated Environmental Impact Report and the denial the CUP to
construct and operate a 37,000 sq. ft. fitness center at 12411 Seal Beach Boulevard.
ITEM # I
1
Application received November 22, 2016
Environmental Quality Control Board (EQCB) April 5, 2017
Planning Commission June 19, 2017, June 27, 2017 and July 17, 2017
Appeal of EIR July
5, 2017
Appeal of CUP July 27, 2017
De Novo meeting
September 11, 2017
Background
2
EQCB comments
Traffic (Sprouts, Rossmoor Center Way)
Air Quality & Noise
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) model
Compatibility with surrounding uses
Noise impacts
Crime
De
Novo meeting
September 11, 2017
Appeal
3
Site Identification
4
Site Plan
5
Elevations
West Elevation
North Elevation
6
Elevations
East Elevation
South Elevation
7
Floor Plan
8
Parking
9
Environmental Determination
In compliance with CEQA requirements, an Initial Study was prepared for the project and circulated for public review.
The Initial Study determined that 4 issues were not dismissed as
less than significant. These areas were in air quality, greenhouse gas, noise and traffic.
A Draft Environmental Impact Report with mitigation monitoring and reporting program was prepared
and circulated for public review.
10
Environmental Quality
Control Board
April 5, 2017 the EQCB held a meeting to collect comments regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report.
After receiving comments and holding a discussion, the EQCB identified four
concerns that should addressed:
1. Evaluate HVAC (heating, ventilation & air conditioning) units and the potential to locate them as far away from residences as possible.
2. Evaluate
the existing Rossmoor Park Association vehicle gate that exists on Rossmoor Center Way and its proximity and potential impact to the four way stop at Rossmoor Center Way and an internal
driveway adjacent to Sprouts and Pei Wei.
3. Requested clarification and further discussion of sample size used for data collection, along with analysis to determine if other factors
such as daylight savings time affected the data collection.
4. Requested a scaled rendering of the northbound left-hand turn lane extension on Seal Beach Boulevard.
11
Final Environmental Impact Report
In compliance with CEQA requirements, the Final EIR was again circulated for public review prior to the Planning Commission Meeting.
12
Institute of Transportation Engineers
City’s Traffic Impact Study Guidelines requires use of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual to establish traffic generation forecasts.
ITE is nationally accepted data
used by various agencies as an industry standard for common land uses.
Fitness Center – ITE model uses 6 samples to determine trip generation. This is a typical land use nationwide
and did not have special uses or peculiarities.
13
Seal BeachShops at Rossmoor Fitness Center Final EIR
City Council Hearing
September 11, 2017
14
Presentation Topics
Purpose of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Potentially significant impacts analyzed
Mitigation measures
Final EIR conclusions
15
EIR Purpose
Informational: informs public and decision makers about a project’s potential environmental impacts; responds to expressed concerns
Problem-solving: identifies ways to avoid or lessen
impacts via mitigation or project alternatives
16
Terms Used
No impact
Less than significant impact
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated
Significant, unavoidable impact
17
Potentially Significant Impacts Analyzed
Air quality: during construction and operational
Greenhouse gas emissions
Noise: during construction and operational
Traffic
18
Unavoidable Significant Impacts
None
19
Air Quality
Use of standard SCAQMD model and thresholds
Analysis of construction impacts and long-term (mobile and stationary source) emissions
Projected emissions of criteria pollutants are substantially
below adopted thresholds
Conclusion: Impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
20
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Analysis methodology per SCAQMD
Projected GHG emissions from vehicles, energy use, water use, wastewater generation, and trash production are well below screening threshold of 3,000
MMTCO2e
Conclusion: Impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
21
Noise – Existing Conditions and Standards
Measurements made November 5-7, 2016 (continuous)
Loudest one-hour equivalent: 53 dBA
56 CNEL at residences to the west
General Plan standard: 65 CNEL for multi-family residential
Noise
code standard: 55 dBA between 7AM and 10PM and 50 dBA between 10PM and 7AM
22
Noise – Construction Activity
Exempt from noise standards:
M0nday-Friday 7AM-8PM
Saturday 8AM-8PM
While impact less than significant, construction mitigation plan required:
Restricted hours per code, designated
truck routes, no equipment idling, use of muffled equipment, complaint hotline
23
Noise – Operations
Noise from parking lot activity: model results reported levels below the 50 dBA threshold at nearest residences
HVAC noise (unshielded) calculated to be 53 dBA at residential property
line (versus 50 dBA standard)
Conclusions:
Parking lot noise would be less than significant.
HVAC noise would exceed threshold and thus requires mitigation.
24
Noise – Mitigation for HVAC
N-1: Options to achieve 50 dBA or lower:
1) Parapet or screen shield
2) Bafflers
3) Quieter HVAC units
Applicant will be required to submit acoustical report to the City documenting
noise reduction.
25
Traffic – Requirements/Process
Consistent with City Guidelines (March 2010) and prevailing City-approved analysis
City Traffic Engineer and third-party consultant involved throughout the preparation
City thresholds
for acceptability and significant impact were followed
26
Traffic – Existing Traffic Counts
National Data and Surveying Services (NDS) utilized. Third-party data collection and surveying company collected traffic data for peak hours, daily counts, and pedestrian/cyclists (field
technicians, pneumatic tube count machines, and cameras)
Counts collected Tuesday October 18, 2016 and Saturday October 22, 2016
27
Traffic – Trip Generation/Distribution
ITE Land Use 492 – Health Fitness Club
Table E, page 18:
1,218 daily trips, 52 weekday a.m. peak hour, 131 weekday p.m. peak hour, and 103 Saturday peak hour
Trips distributed based
on count data and Orange County Traffic Analysis Model (OCTAM)
28
Traffic – Traffic Forecasts
Peak-hour intersection trips shown on figures in the traffic study
Average daily trips counted and in Appendix A
Analyzed existing conditions, 2018, and 2035
Analysis includes all
potential nearby traffic generators such as Village I-605, Fairfield Inn in Los Alamitos, and vacant Marie Callender’s
29
Traffic – Analysis Results
Level of Service (LOS) = grade applied to each intersection and roadway per peak hour and daily basis. Grades “A” through “F”, with grade “A” the best and “F” the worst
All roadways
and intersections found to operate at a City-prescribed acceptable grade LOS “D” or better for all analysis scenarios under existing and future conditions
30
Traffic – Intersection Analysis Results
31
Traffic – Roadway Analysis Results
32
Traffic – Analysis Results
Improvements proposed are not a result of impacts found in the environmental analysis process, but are provided by the project applicant to address existing access issues at Rossmoor
Center Way and Sprouts/Pei Wei driveways
Addition of project traffic to study area roadway facilities do not result in any significant impacts
33
Traffic – Site Access Improvements
NORTH
34
Traffic – Site Access Improvements
NORTH
35
Cumulative and Growth-inducing Impacts
Cumulative traffic impacts identified in traffic study
No other cumulative or growth-inducing impacts
36
Alternatives to the Project
Focused on reducing or avoiding significant project impacts
Alternative 1: commercial, office, or restaurant use
Alternative 2: other location within the Shops at Rossmoor
37
Conclusions
Air quality, greenhouse gas, and traffic impacts are identified as less than significant.
All potentially significant impacts related to noise can be mitigated.
No cumulative impacts
would result.
Alternatives to the project would result in similar effects.
38
CEQA Process
Initial Study to identify potentially significant impacts
Notice of Preparation:
30-day public comment period
Draft EIR
Project description
Potentially significant impacts
Mitigation measures
Alternatives to the project
Cumulative and growth-inducing impacts
45-day
public review and comment period
EQCB ruling on DEIR adequacy
Final EIR and Hearings
Response to comments
Errata
Findings
Statement of Overriding Considerations (not required for this project)
39
Site Plan
40