Section 3A Use

3A.1 Summary The following is a summary of the proposed project’s potential impacts to , any necessary mitigation measures, and the level of significance after mitigation.

Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measure(s) after mitigation SANTIAGO HILLS II PLANNED COMMUNITY Potential Impact 3A-1. No mitigation was included in 2000 SEIR 1278. Less than Division of Established No new mitigation is required. significant Community Potential Impact 3A-2. MM-LU-1 from 2000 SEIR 1278 has been implemented by the Less than Conflict with Applicable Land proposed project and would no longer be applicable. (For significant Use Plans MM-LU-2 from 2000 SEIR 1278, see Section 3I, Visual .)

2000 SEIR 1278 mitigation measure that has been partially implemented by the proposed project but the remainder continues to be applicable: MM LU-3. Limit grading (implemented), prepare tree survey (implemented), and provide tree replacement and monitoring to reduce impacts to Irvine Regional Park. No new mitigation is required. Potential Impact 3A-3. No mitigation was included in 2000 SEIR 1278. Less than Conflict with Applicable HCP or No new mitigation is required. significant NCCP EAST ORANGE PLANNED COMMUNITY – AREA 1 Potential Impact 3A-1. No mitigation is required. Less than Division of Established significant Community Potential Impact 3A-2. No mitigation is required. Less than Conflict with Applicable Land significant Use Plans Potential Impact 3A-3. No mitigation is required. Less than Conflict with Applicable HCP or significant NCCP EAST ORANGE PLANNED COMMUNITY – AREAS 2 AND 3 AND REMAINING AREAS Potential Impact 3A-1. No mitigation is required. Less than Division of Established significant Community

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-1 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measure(s) after mitigation Potential Impact 3A-2. No mitigation is required. Less than Conflict with Applicable Land significant Use Plans Potential Impact 3A-3. No mitigation is required. Less than Conflict with Applicable HCP or significant NCCP

3A.2 Introduction This section analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed project on land use and on the project’s consistency with applicable land use plans. Land use plans include the General Plan, the Southern California Association of (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan and Regional Comprehensive Plan, the adopted General Plan and East Orange General Plan, and the City Integrated General Plan.

Public and agency comments received during the review of the notice of preparation and scoping meetings were considered during the analysis of potential impacts to land use. SCAG reminded the City that the EIR must discuss inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable general and regional plans. The County LAFCO requested that this Draft SEIR/EIR address any future amendments to the City’s Sphere of Influence that might result from the proposed development and annexation. (The City does not propose to change the boundaries of its Sphere of Influence at this time, so no further discussion of changes to the Sphere of Influence is included in this document.)

Comments on land use received from the public included requests for other land uses within the project area and questions about the project’s compatibility with local and regional land use plans, policies and regulations. See Appendix A-4 for a list of comments received during scoping.

3A.3 Setting

3A.3.1 Regional Setting The proposed project is in unincorporated Orange County within the eastern portion of the City Sphere of Influence. It adjoins both sides of SR-241 and Santiago Canyon Road, as described in Chapter 2, Project Description, of this Draft SEIR/EIR. The proposed project site and the to its north, south, and east are largely undeveloped and include dedicated parks and open-space lands.

The corporate boundaries of the City encompass a land area of 24 square miles, with a Sphere of Influence of 55 square miles. The Sphere of Influence describes the unincorporated County area adjoining the City that comprises its “probable physical boundaries and service area,” as determined by the County LAFCO ( Code Section 56076). Land must be within the City’s Sphere of Influence before it may be annexed to the City. Until such time as they are annexed, lands within the Sphere of Influence are subject to County (not City) land use policies and regulations.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-2 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

3A.3.2 Existing Site Characteristics The proposed project area consists of a series of steep hills and valleys on the southern flank of the Santa Ana Mountains, with the eastern part of the site being somewhat steeper and more varied than the western part. The Santiago Hills II Planned Community portion of the site is west of SR-241/261. It is undeveloped, with the exception of a 6 million-gallon reservoir owned by IRWD and a Christmas tree farm at the northwest corner of Jamboree Road and Santiago Canyon Road. The proposed Santiago Hills II Planned Community portion of the site is crossed by Santiago Canyon Road and adjoins Jamboree Road.

The East Orange Planned Community is located east of SR-241/261. East Orange Planned Community Area 1 is generally located north of Santiago Canyon Road, west and south of the closed Santiago Canyon Landfill, and east of SR-241/261. East Orange Planned Community Area 2 consists of steep hills and drainages on the north side of Santiago Canyon Road and east of the closed Santiago Canyon Landfill and Irvine Lake. East Orange Planned Community Area 3 is located on the south side of Santiago Canyon Road, east of East Orange Planned Community Area 2. East Orange Planned Community Areas 1, 2, and 3 are adjoined by permanently protected open space, including IRLR and The Reserve, established by the Central/Coastal NCCP.

The now-closed Santiago Canyon Landfill is located adjacent to the west side of Irvine Lake, north of Santiago Canyon Road. The landfill was operated by the County and is currently being capped. Eventually, the landfill slopes will be restored with native communities.

East of the landfill is the 570-acre Irvine Lake, which is fed by flows from Santiago and Limestone Canyon Creeks. Irvine Lake, which is privately owned, offers a variety of recreational activities, including fishing, camping, rental boats, and hiking. Other facilities include a café and a bait and tackle shop. East of the reservoir, Black Star, Santiago, and Limestone Canyons contain well-developed riparian communities.

A concrete batch plant is located on the eastern end of Irvine Lake in the Santiago Creek arm of the reservoir. It adjoins the site of a prior surface operation that is now being reclaimed. Reclamation efforts have resulted in the filling and leveling of the mining areas so that they are now above the level of Irvine Lake.

3A.3.3 Surrounding Land Uses The proposed project site is adjoined by the City of Orange to the west and unincorporated Orange County to the east. The Santiago Hills I residential development adjoins the western end of the proposed project site, as does Santiago Canyon College. Santiago Hills I includes both attached and detached dwellings, a school, police substation, fire station, and a neighborhood commercial center. In general, the lands are urbanized west of the project area in the City, to the southwest in Tustin, to the south in Irvine, and to the north in Anaheim.

Santiago Canyon College is the 82-acre eastern campus of the Rancho Santiago Community College . It offers a full curriculum to a student population exceeding 5,000. On the basis of a $337 million bond for renovation and new construction at Santiago Canyon College and the district’s Santa Ana College, the district will build a new student services building, library/learning center, science building, student activity and sports center, and parking facilities. Upon completion in approximately

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-3 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

2018, Santiago Canyon College will have the capacity to meet the needs of a projected 20,000 students (Santiago Canyon College 2004).

The proposed project area is bisected by SR-241/261 and Santiago Canyon Road and is surrounded by a range of existing land uses. On the west side of SR-241/261, Irvine Regional Park is north of the proposed site and Peters Canyon Regional Park flanks the area to the southwest. East of SR-241/261, extensive areas of natural open space abut the development areas, principally to the north and east. These open space areas include The and IRLR. The western boundary of the Cleveland National is approximately 2 to 3 miles east of the project area’s easternmost point.

Irvine Regional Park encompasses approximately 477 acres. The park contains two lakes, an excursion railroad, and the Orange County . A variety of activities are available within the park, including picnicking, horseback , pony rides, and bicycling.

Peters Canyon Regional Park occupies 354 acres west of SR-241/261 and south/east of Irvine Regional Park. It is a with picnic areas and hiking/biking/equestrian .

Portions of the Santiago Hills II and East Orange Planned Communities study area are included in the Central/Coastal NCCP. A reserve and associated implementation agreement specifying additional funding, , and impact minimization measures were developed to protect the target species and habitat. The 37,000-acre reserve the proposed site on the north and south, and includes portions of Irvine Regional Park and Peters Canyon Regional Park. The reserve is administered by The Nature Reserve, which includes representatives of the City, USFWS, CDFG, The Irvine Company, and local environmental groups.

IRLR stretches from Weir Canyon near SR-91 at the north end of Irvine Ranch, connects with the Cleveland National Forest along the northeast of the ranch, continues south to include large regional open space systems in the northern and southern hillsides of Irvine, and extends to the Laguna Coast Park and Crystal Cove State Park near Laguna Beach. This includes portions of the East Orange study area, described in the following section. IRLR and NCCP are not mutually exclusive, and there is substantial overlap of their areas. The total amount of The Irvine Company land set aside for wilderness, greenbelts, parks, and recreation areas is more than 50,000 acres.

East of the proposed site are a number of small communities located along Silverado Canyon and Santiago Canyon roads. These include numerous single-family homes and small commercial establishments. The Silverado–Modjeska Parks and Recreation District maintains and operates a recreational center on Silverado Canyon Road, approximately 2 miles east of the project.

3A.3.4 Regulatory Setting Project land use is affected by the plans and policies of the City, County, OCTA, SCAG, and the State of California. The following discusses the plans and policies that apply to the proposed project.

3A.3.4.1 City of Orange The City adjoins the proposed site, which is within the City’s Sphere of Influence. Until such time as the proposed site is annexed to the City, it is under the land use jurisdiction of the County. However,

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-4 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

LAFCO requires that the City adopt plans and prezone areas that it hopes to annex, as it has done for the East Orange study area, described below.

State planning law requires each city and county to adopt a general plan “for the physical development of the county or city, and of any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency’s judgment bears relation to its planning” (Government Code Section 65300). The City of Orange adopted its general plan in 1989 and in the same year also adopted the East Orange General Plan (amended in 2000). The East Orange General Plan was adopted to provide land use guidance for areas in the East Orange project area. As part of this project, the City is currently revising the general plan and East Orange General Plan, incorporating them into one document as the City of Orange Integrated General Plan. Included in the Integrated General Plan is the East Orange study area (formerly covered by the East Orange General Plan), which is currently outside of the city limits, but wholly within the Sphere of Influence. The East Orange study area portion of the Integrated General Plan establishes the land use policies that would apply to the area upon such time as it is annexed to the City. This consolidation of the policies in the Integrated General Plan would ensure that when the East Orange study area is annexed into the City it would be subject to planning policies and land use designations that are consistent with the City General Plan. State planning law (Government Code Section 65300 et seq.) requires that a general plan maintain internal consistency (i.e., all parts of the plan are in agreement), and the update is intended to meet that requirement. As part of the Integrated General Plan, the existing East Orange General Plan policies are to be revised as general plan policies for the East Orange study area to accommodate proposed revisions to the Santiago Hills II and East Orange Planned Communities described in Chapter 2, Project Description. This East Orange study area portion of the Integrated General Plan would replace the previous East Orange General Plan, which would be rescinded. The East Orange study area plans and policies would not supercede the land use powers of the County; they would become effective only at such time as the land is annexed to the City.

Land uses are regulated through the City’s zoning ordinance. The City proposes to prezone the proposed project site, as allowed under Government Code Section 65859, as part of the annexation proceedings. While the City may identify policies for land outside its jurisdiction in anticipation of eventual annexation, the zoning ordinance has no effect outside the City limits. Prezoning would become effective at such time as the annexation is approved.

Adopted Land Use Designations The adopted East Orange General Plan designated several distinct land uses for the East Orange study area, as listed in Table 3A-1.

Table 3A-1. Adopted East Orange General Plan Land Use Designations

RR – Rural Residential (0.1 to 0.4 dwelling units per acre) ES – Estate Residential (0.4 to 2 dwelling units per acre) LDR – Low Density Residential (2 to 6 dwelling units per acre) LMDR – Low Medium Density Residential (6 to 15 dwelling units per acre) MDR – Medium Density Residential (15 to 24 dwelling units per acre) R – Retail E – Employment MU – Mixed Use OS – Open Space G – Golf Course HS – High School

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-5 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Proposed Land Use Designations The City’s proposed Integrated General Plan provides land use designations for the areas within the City and its Sphere of Influence. The East Orange study area is designated with five distinct land uses: Open Space (OS), Low Density Residential (LDR) (2 to 6 dwelling units per acre), Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) (6 to 15 dwelling units per acre), Medium Density Residential (MDR) (15 to 24 dwelling units per acre), and Recreation Commercial (RC). For each land use designation, the Integrated General Plan sets forth guidance that determines the type of use that would be consistent with the intent of the plan. A description and definition of the land use designation applicable to the project is provided below.

Open Space Open space policy is designed to preserve undeveloped properties for several purposes, including active and passive recreation, protection of ridgelines and scenic vistas, and preservation of environmental sensitive areas.

Low Density Residential The Low Density Residential designation applies to conventional single-family residential development, characterized by single-family homes constructed in with lot sizes ranging from 4,500 to 12,000 square feet, or by custom units build on slightly larger lots. Development densities in this category range from 2 to 6 units per net acre. Corresponding population densities range from 6 to 17 persons per acre.

Low Medium Density Residential The Low Medium Density Residential designation covers a variety of development types, including small lot or zero lot line single-family subdivisions, duplexes, and mobile home parks, as well as lower intensity apartment and condominium complexes. Development densities in this category range from 6 to 15 units per net acre. Corresponding population densities range from 17 to 42 persons per acre.

Medium Density Residential The Medium Density Residential designation allows for construction of apartment and condominium/townhouse units in areas of the City with ready access to major circulation routes, business , and public open space areas. Typically, developments may consist of two- or three-story buildings housing multiple dwelling units and providing some form of open space. Development densities in this category range from 15 to 24 units per gross acre. Corresponding population densities range from 42 to 67 persons per acre.

Recreation Commercial The Recreation Commercial designation allows for outdoor commercial recreation uses such as golf courses and typical recreation commercial facilities including, but not limited to, marinas, boat rental buildings, staging areas, fishing facilities, and other commercial sports facilities. Building intensities shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.35. (Note: This land use designation is from the East Orange General Plan, to be included in the Integrated General Plan.)

Land Use Element Policies The land use policies in the proposed City Integrated General Plan are generally the same as those in the adopted City General Plan and the East Orange General Plan, providing goals, policies, and implementation strategies that are intended to preserve some areas of the City, revitalize others, and guide new development in portions of the City and its Sphere of Influence that are currently undeveloped. Those goals, policies, and implementation strategies applicable to land use are provided below.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-6 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

(Italicized references indicate changes in the general plan resulting from integration of the City General Plan with the East Orange General Plan.)

Balanced Development in Orange Goal 1.0—Land use policy will continue to promote a balance of residential, commercial, and industrial development. Policy 1.1—Maintain a balance between jobs and housing, and encourage the types of activities that will provide employment for the City’s existing and future residents, as well as revenue for the City. Policy 1.2—Balance any economic gain from new development with the protection of existing residential neighborhoods. Policy 1.4—Maximize the land use opportunities for the Irvine Lake area by providing a mix of uses, such as lodging, housing, and recreational uses. (This policy is from the East Orange General Plan, to be included in the Integrated General Plan.)

Maintaining a Balanced Inventory of Housing in Orange Goal 5.0—The City will continue to pursue goals to provide housing for all income groups consistent with the goals and policies contained in the Housing Element.

Promoting Quality Urban Design Goal 6.0—The City will continue to promote good urban design. Policy 6.1—Emphasize urban design in new development and encourage rehabilitation projects to incorporate good design features into rehabilitation plans. (This policy includes minor wording changes that were included in the East Orange General Plan and are now to be included in the Integrated General Plan.) • Implementation 6.1.1—Continue to review projects for compliance with accepted City design standards. • Implementation 6.1.2—Identify priority areas for undergrounding of utilities. • Implementation 6.1.4—Continue to review new development and redevelopment projects to ensure light and glare impacts on adjacent properties are minimized while still maintaining adequate safety standards. (This policy is from the East Orange General Plan, to be included in the Integrated General Plan) Urban design policies are also discussed in Section 3I, Visual Resources.

Policy 6.2—Identify districts which can benefit from a design theme, and establish urban design standards. • Implementation 6.2.2—Develop possible incentives and guidelines to encourage implementation of the design standards in districts where design themes have been or will be established. Reducing Potential Land Use Conflicts Goal 9.0—Continue to implement land use policies which focus on reducing land use conflicts. Policy 9.1—Work to reduce land use conflicts between residential and non-residential uses. • Implementation 9.1.1—Revise the zoning code as necessary to ensure that dissimilar uses located adjacent to each other are adequately buffered.

Policy 9.2—Plan transitional areas to minimize any adverse impacts from new development on existing residential development.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-7 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

• Implementation 9.2.1—Ensure that new development in transitional areas is at densities consistent with land use policy. • Implementation 9.2.2—Permit higher density development in transitional areas adjacent to major transportation corridors. Preservation of Open Space Resources Goal 10.0—The City will continue to recognize the need to maintain open space resources for the purpose of providing recreational opportunities, protecting the public from safety hazards, and conserving natural resources.

Maintaining Infrastructure and Utilities Services For a discussion of City policies related to infrastructure and utilities see Section 3M, Public Utilities, and Section 3N, Public Services.

Maintaining Circulation Level of Service For a discussion of City policies related to circulation see Section 3J, Traffic and Circulation.

Need for Coordinated Planning Goal 13.0—The City will continue to recognize the need to coordinate planning efforts both within the City and with other jurisdictions in the . Policy 13.1—Coordinate planning efforts among the various City departments and agencies, property owners, residents, and special districts. Policy 13.2—Coordinate planning efforts with adjacent and agencies.

Public Participation Goal 14.0—The City will continue to involve the public in the planning and decision-making process. Policy 14.1—Emphasize public-private cooperation in preparing future plans and program for economic development.

3A.3.4.2 Orange County The use and development of the proposed project site are subject to the general plan policies and zoning regulations of the County General Plan and zoning ordinance, respectively. General plan policies are implemented through the zoning, subdivision, and other ordinances.

The entire Santiago Hills II and East Orange Planned Communities study area is within the Central/Coastal NCCP/HCP planning area. Consistency with those conservation plans is discussed in Section 3D, Biological Resources.

General Plan The County General Plan is the fundamental policy document of the County, as it defines the framework by which the County’s physical and economic resources are to be managed and utilized over time. The general plan framework is a blueprint for growth and development, and is largely implemented through zoning and subdivision decisions. Accordingly, all subdivisions, capital improvements, development agreements, projects subject to the zoning code, specific plans, and other land use actions must be consistent with the adopted County General Plan. The plan also addresses regional services and facilities

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-8 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

provided by the County, such as regional parks, roads, and control facilities (County of Orange 2000).

The County General Plan contains nine different planning elements: land use, transportation, public services and facilities, resources, recreation, noise, safety, housing, and growth management. Each element contains goals and policies that are to be used to evaluate development plans within the County’s jurisdiction. The general plan uses these categories, goals, and policies to focus on land uses primarily in the unincorporated areas of the County—areas such as the proposed project that are not located within one of the County’s 34 incorporated cities. These areas are generally located in the southern portion of the County, but some large tracts of unincorporated property are located within other areas. Objectives and policies from each general plan element that are applicable to the proposed project are listed below.

Existing Land Use Designations The County General Plan provides land use designations for all areas within its jurisdiction. The East Orange study area is designated with four distinct land uses: Open Space (5), , Public Facilities (4), and Solid Waste Facilities–Landfill Site (LS). For each land use designation, the general plan sets forth guidance that determines the type of use that would be consistent with the intent of the plan. A description and definition of the land use designations applicable to the project are provided below.

Open Space This broad category includes the Open Space (5) land use category and the Open Space Reserve land use overlay. According to the County General Plan, the Open Space category indicates the current and near- term use of the land, most of which is zoned agricultural. It is not necessarily an indication of a long-term commitment to open space uses. Certain property within the Open Space category is committed, through public or private ownership, to remain as open space (see discussion of the NCCP, below), but other property, due to market pressures to serve a growing County population, may ultimately be developed in other ways.

Similarly, certain unincorporated identified as Open Space by the County is within city spheres of influence for which cities have adopted plans with urban uses. This is the case for the Santiago Hills II and East Orange Planned Communities area, which is within the City’s Sphere of Influence. This area’s pre-annexation land uses are discussed above.

The Open Space category in the County provides for limited land uses that do not require a commitment of significant urban infrastructure. Examples of compatible uses include:

land containing nonrenewable and areas, prime agricultural , and water resource areas; materials recovering/recycling facilities if the design of the facility does not adversely impact its open space surroundings, or if the facility is operated in conjunction with other refuse-oriented facilities (e.g., landfills); and employment uses in conjunction with large open space areas if they are consistent with the open space character of the area. The intent is to create opportunities for low-intensity, high-technology industrial uses; research and development facilities; offices; educational uses; and childcare facilities that do not require a commitment of significant urban infrastructure.

Generally, building sites within this category should be large; the area covered by structures and parking should not exceed 20% in order to blend development with the natural surroundings. Innovative design

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-9 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

solutions are encouraged to incorporate building and parking into the natural features of the proposed site, as well as to maximize the efficient use of .

Within the Open Space land use area of the County are areas designated as Open Space Reserve. Approximately 15 to 25 percent of the proposed Santiago Hills II and East Orange Planned Communities site is designated as Open Space Reserve. This overlay (so called because it overlays its regulations on an existing zone) identifies major parks, beaches, , harbors, and other territory that, under the County’s jurisdiction, would always remain open space.

Public Facilities The area of the proposed project previously used as a landfill is designated as Public Facilities (4). The Public Facilities (4) land use category identifies major facilities built and maintained for public use. Included are civic buildings, airports, junior colleges, military installations, correctional institutions, hospitals, solid waste facilities, water facilities, and sewer facilities. Childcare facilities will be permitted if appropriate.

Solid Waste Facilities–Landfill Sites This overlay category identifies existing solid waste facilities. When the Solid Waste Facility–Landfill Site (LS) overlay is applied to a land use category, the overlay indicates that the current and near-term use of the land will be limited to landfill operations, which may include materials recovery/recycling facilities and accessory uses (e.g., borrow site areas, buffer areas, and access roads) until the completion of landfill site operations and closure of the landfill facility.

Land Use Element Policies The County General Plan provides objectives, polices, and goals that are intended to guide development and result in a contiguous design and scale for the overall County area. These guidelines are provided and discussed in each respective section of this Draft SEIR/EIR. Accordingly, those objectives, policies, and goals applicable to land use are provided below.

Major Land Use Element Policies Balanced Land Use—To plan urban land uses with a balance of residential, industrial, commercial, and public land uses. Phased Development—To phase development consistent with the adequacy of public services and facilities within the capacity defined by the general plan. Housing Densities—To provide a variety of residential densities that permit a mix of housing opportunities affordable to the County’s labor force. Land Use/Transportation Integration—To plan an integrated land use and transportation system that accommodates travel demand. New Development Compatibility—To require new development to be compatible with adjacent areas. Creative Design Concepts—To encourage innovative concepts that contribute to the solution of land use problems. Enhancement of Environment—To guide development so that the quality of the physical environment is enhanced. Hazardous Waste Management Facilities—To protect the health and welfare of the public and quality of the environment while preserving the economic vitality of the County through a comprehensive countywide program, and to ensure the safe and efficient management of hazardous waste.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-10 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Recycling/Materials Recovery—To encourage and facilitate establishment of recycling/materials recovery facilities to address the state mandate given through the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939).

Zoning Ordinance The County zoning ordinance establishes the basic regulations under which land is developed. This includes allowable uses, building setback requirements, and development standards. Pursuant to state law, the zoning ordinance must be consistent with the County General Plan. The County applies three zoning districts to the lands within the East Orange General Plan: General Agricultural [A1], General Agricultural Public Facilities [A1 (PF)], and Sand and Gravel Extraction [SG].

General Agricultural The General Agricultural [A1] district provides for agriculture, outdoor recreational uses, and those low intensity uses that have a predominantly open space character. It is also intended that this district may be used as an interim zone in those areas that the general plan may designate for more intensive urban uses in the future.

General Agricultural Public Facilities This General Agricultural Public Facilities [A1 (PF)] overlay district applies additional requirements to those A1 zones to which it is attached. It applies to lands that support public facilities; in this case, the now-closed Santiago Canyon Landfill.

Sand and Gravel Extraction Rock, sand, aggregate, gravel, earth, clay, and similar materials are valuable natural resources whose recovery in a responsible manner is encouraged. The Sand and Gravel Extraction [SG] district provides for surface mining, quarrying, and processing of these materials in a manner that is both environmentally sensitive and compatible with existing and future land uses. These regulations are also intended to implement the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) and the regulations of the State Mining and Board (California Code of Regulations [CCR]), Chapter 8, Title 14, Sections 3500 et seq.).

3A.3.4.3 Orange County Transportation Authority

Master Plan of Arterial Highways OCTA is responsible for implementation of the County’s MPAH through a transfer agreement with the County. The MPAH network is integrated with the Long-Range Transportation Plan 2002 to 2030 that OCTA adopted on December 9, 2002 (OCTA 2002).

The County’s MPAH establishes a countywide roadway network that is intended to ensure coordinated transportation system development between the local jurisdictions through an integrated and defined planning process. The roadway network consists of major thoroughfares comprising freeways, transportation corridors, and five main highway classifications: Principal (eight lanes, divided), Major (six lanes, divided), Primary (four lanes, divided), Secondary (four lanes, undivided), and Collector (two lanes, undivided). OCTA developed a steering document, Guidance for Administration of the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways, in November 1995 (amended in 1998). Coordination of roadway location and implementation is managed through the established policies and procedures established in the guide.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-11 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

The MPAH plans for and defines the circulation system to accommodate existing and future land uses. A number of the roads shown on the current East Orange General Plan are identified on the MPAH. SR-241/261 is designated as a transportation corridor. Within the Santiago Hills II Planned Community portion of the proposed project, Jamboree Road, Chapman Avenue, and Santiago Canyon Road are identified as major roads. There are numerous major, primary, and secondary road alignments identified within the East Orange Planned Community, as well as the SR-241/261 transportation corridor. These are described in more detail in Section 3J, Traffic and Circulation.

3A.3.4.4 Southern California Association of Governments SCAG is an organization of within the Southern California region. SCAG functions as the metropolitan planning organization for six : Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. As the designated metropolitan planning organization, SCAG is mandated by the federal and state governments to prepare plans for regional transportation (Regional Transportation Plan and Regional Transportation Improvement Program) and air quality conformity. It is empowered by state housing law to allocate regional housing needs to its constituent counties and cities. In addition, SCAG has taken on the role of planning for regional growth management and hazardous waste management.

Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide The Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide is meant to encourage cities within the SCAG region to undertake consistent, regionwide planning policies. This document contains core policies intended to provide local governments a base on which to ensure consistency of their plans with applicable regional plans under CEQA, and ancillary policies addressing important issues facing the region but do not contain actions or policies required of local government. This plan, however, does not regulate land use, and compliance with SCAG’s regional plan is voluntary.

The Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide was developed in cooperation with numerous agencies, including subregions of Southern California, county transportation commissions, Caltrans, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, the California Energy Commission, the Bureau of of the Department of the Interior, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the Ventura Control District, and other parties, both public and private.

Regional Transportation Plan The Regional Transportation Plan was adopted in April 2001, and includes goals, objectives, policies, and actions. SCAG developed the Regional Transportation Plan to address transportation needs of the Southern California metropolitan area. The plan provides strategic direction for transportation investments and improvements for 2001 to 2025. The purpose of the document is to serve as a catalyst to link various transportation agency investments in the hopes of providing a stable, balanced, and multimodal transportation system. The plan attempts to link the goal of sustaining mobility with the goals of fostering economic development, enhancing the environment, reducing energy consumption, promoting transportation-friendly development patterns, and encouraging fair and equitable access to residents affected by socioeconomic, geographic, and commercial limitations (SCAG 2001).

The Regional Transportation Plan provides goals and policies that emphasize subregional and market-based approaches to improve mobility. It was prepared with the input of OCTA.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-12 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and core Regional Transportation Plan policies applicable to the proposed project are listed below.

Policy 3.01—The population, housing, and jobs forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council and that reflect local plans and policies, shall be used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review. Policy 3.03—The timing, financing, and location of public facilities, utility systems, and transportation systems shall be used by SCAG to implement the region’s growth policies. Policy 3.04—Encourage local jurisdictions’ efforts to achieve a balance between the types of jobs they seek to attract and housing prices. Policy 3.05—Encourage patterns of urban development and land use that reduce costs on infrastructure construction and make better use of existing facilities. Policy 3.06—Support public education efforts regarding the costs of various types of growth and development. Policy 3.07—Support subregional policies that recognize agriculture as an industry, support the economic viability of agricultural activities, preserve agricultural land, and provide compensation for property owners holding lands in greenbelt areas. Policy 3.09—Support local jurisdictions’ efforts to minimize the cost of infrastructure and public service delivery, and to seek new sources of funding for the development and the provision of services. Policy 3.11—Support provisions and incentives created by local jurisdictions to encourage housing growth in job-rich subregions and job growth in housing subregions. Policy 3.16—Encourage developments in and around activity centers, transportation corridors, underutilized infrastructure systems, and areas needing recycling and redevelopment. Policy 3.17—Support and encourage settlement patterns, which contain a range of urban densities. Policy 3.18—Encourage planned development in locations least likely to cause adverse environmental impact. Policy 3.20—Support the protection of vital resources, such as wetlands, recharge areas, woodlands, production lands, and land containing unique and endangered and animals. Policy 3.21—Encourage the implementation of measures aimed at the preservation and protection of recorded and unrecorded cultural resources and archaeological sites. Policy 3.22—Discourage development, or encourage the use of special design requirements, in areas with steep slopes, high fire, flood, and seismic hazards. Policy 3.23—Encourage mitigation measures that reduce noise in certain locations, preserve biological and ecological resources, reduce exposure to seismic hazards and minimize earthquake damage, and develop emergency response and recovery plans. Policy 4.02—Transportation investments shall mitigate environmental impacts to an acceptable level. Policy 4.09—Existing and new public transit services, facilities, and/or systems shall be fully accessible to persons with disabilities, as required by applicable sections of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act. Policy 4.10—All existing and new public transit services shall be provided in a manner consistent with Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice, including the prohibition of intentional discrimination and adverse disparate impact with regard to race, ethnicity, or national origin. Policy 5.07—Determine specific programs and associated actions needed (e.g., indirect source rules, enhanced use of telecommunications, provision of community-based shuttle services, provision of

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-13 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

demand-management-based programs, or vehicle-miles-traveled/emission fees) so that options to command and control regulations can be assessed. Policy 5.11—Through the environmental document review process, ensure that plans at all levels of government (regional, air basing, county, subregional, and local) consider air quality, land use, transportation, and economic relationships to ensure consistency and minimize conflicts. Policy 9.01—Provide adequate land resources to meet the outdoor needs of the present and future residents in the region and to promote tourism in the region. Policy 9.02—Increase accessibility to open space lands for . Policy 9.03—Promote self-sustaining regional recreation resources and facilities. Policy 9.04—Maintain open space for adequate protection of and properties against natural and manmade hazards. Policy 9.05—Minimize potentially hazardous developments in hillsides, canyons, areas susceptible to flooding, earthquakes, wildfire, and other known hazards, and areas with limited access for emergency equipment. Policy 9.07—Maintain adequate viable resource production land, particularly lands devoted to commercial agriculture and mining operations. Policy 9.08—Develop well-managed viable ecosystems of known habitats or rare, threatened, and endangered species, including wetlands.

3A.3.4.5 State of California

Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 SMARA was enacted by the California Legislature to address the need for a continuing supply of resources, and to prevent or minimize the negative impacts of surface mining to public health, property, and the environment. Pursuant to SMARA (Public Resources Code 2710 et seq.), the State Mining and Geology Board adopted regulations for the reclamation of mined lands and the conservation of mineral resources. These regulations are found in CCR, Title 14, Section 3500 et seq.

SMARA applies to anyone in California conducting surface mining operations that disturb more than 1 acre or remove more than 1,000 cubic yards of material. The Department of Conservation's Office of Mine Reclamation and the State Mining and Geology Board are jointly charged with ensuring proper administration of SMARA’s requirements. Once a mine has ceased operations, it must comply with reclamation regulations. As described in SMARA and its accompanying regulations, the process of reclamation involves implementing a reclamation plan for protecting water and air quality; minimizing flooding, erosion, and damage to and aquatic habitats caused by surface mining; and providing for beneficial use of mined and reclaimed lands.

The sand and gravel operation that once existed at the east end of Irvine Lake is being reclaimed under County requirements. The mined areas have been filled and stabilized.

Another requirement of SMARA is the classification of land containing mineral resources by the State Mining and Geology Board to assist in the protection and development of mineral resources through the land use planning process. Within the East Orange study area, the board has designated areas around Santiago Creek as “Regionally Significant Aggregate Resource Areas.” This area designates three mineral resource areas: within Santiago Creek upstream of Irvine Lake, within Irvine Lake, and the area

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-14 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

just east of Irvine Lake (where previous mining operations have removed the resource and the mine has closed).

Central/Coastal Natural Communities Conservation Plan The Central/Coastal NCCP, created in 1996, created approximately 38,000 acres of nature reserve in the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains. The NCCP was enabled by AB 2172, the NCCP Act of 1991, which authorized CDFG to enter into agreements with local, state, and/or federal agencies to prepare and implement NCCPs. The NCCP program provides regional or area-wide protection and perpetuation of natural wildlife diversity, while allowing compatible and appropriate development and growth. The NCCP program represents a shift from focusing on preservation of individual species to habitat preservation.

As part of the Central/Coastal NCCP, an HCP and associated implementation agreement were developed to protect target species and habitat. The implementation agreement was signed by the USFWS, CDFG, and participating cities and landowners, including the City and The Irvine Company. The NCCP/HCP provides funding mechanisms, a management program, and mitigation measures, along with the protection of the 37,000-acre reserve area. The reserve is administered by The Nature Reserve, which includes representatives from the City, USFWS, CDFG, The Irvine Company, and local environmental groups.

The NCCP reserve includes portions of the East Orange Planned Communities area, as well as portions of Irvine Regional Park and Peters Canyon Regional Park. The Integrated General Plan conforms to the NCCP in that all areas currently proposed for urban development are areas identified as permitted for development by the NCCP.

For additional information about the Central/Coastal NCCP, see Section 3D, Biological Resources.

3A.4 Impacts and Mitigation

3A.4.1 Methodology The impacts analysis for the project was considered using three distinct approaches:

For Santiago Hills II Planned Community, which has a previously certified environmental document (2000 SEIR 1278), the analysis addresses only substantial changes in the revised Santiago Hills II Planned Community from that previously approved, substantial changes in the setting or regulatory setting related to the Santiago Hills II Planned Community study area, or new information related to the Santiago Hills II Planned Community study area that was not known at the time that 2000 SEIR 1278. Such changes are addressed in the impacts analysis and mitigation is included if necessary. In addition, mitigation measures from the 2000 SEIR 1278 are considered, with a determination as to whether these mitigation measures would be applicable to the revised project or no longer applicable (because the impact would not occur or because the previous mitigation has already been implemented). For the proposed East Orange Planned Community Area 1 activities, a project-level analysis of potential impacts is included in this environmental document because tentative tract maps have been submitted, therefore allowing this level of analysis.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-15 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

For the proposed East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 activities along with remaining areas, a program-level analysis of potential impacts was undertaken reflecting the conceptual level of planning that has occurred to date.

Information was collected regarding the land use plans and regulations that apply to the East Orange study area. The California Mining and Geology Board web site was consulted for information on SMARA and its applicability to the surface mining operation near Irvine Lake. City and County general plans and zoning ordinances were consulted for applicable land use designations and regulations. SCAG was contacted and its web site consulted regarding the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan. This review of SCAG requirements was assisted by the comments submitted by SCAG on the notice of preparation for this Draft SEIR/EIR. The OCTA web site was consulted for information regarding the MPAH.

3A.4.2 Thresholds of Significance Thresholds for land use and planning impacts are based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, as adapted to the circumstances of this project. Both City and County general plan consistency are included because the project is currently under County jurisdiction, although it is being proposed for annexation to the City.

Land use impacts are deemed to be significant if the project would:

physically divide an established community; conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; or conflict with any applicable plan or natural community conservation plan.

3A.4.3 Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project

3A.4.3.1 Santiago Hills II Planned Community

Potential Impact 3A-1 Division of Established Community 2000 SEIR 1278 2000 SEIR 1278 did not address this potential impact.

Revised Santiago Hills II Planned Community Because of the location of Santiago Hills II Planned Community at the edge of the developed area of the City of Orange, no division of an established community would occur.

Mitigation Measures No new mitigation is required.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-16 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

Potential Impact 3A-2 Conflict with Applicable Land Use Plans 2000 SEIR 1278 2000 SEIR 1278 identified the land use impacts that are summarized below.

The 2000 SEIR 1278 project would have resulted in the conversion of open space lands to urban uses on approximately 70 percent of the site. The following mitigation measure for this impact from the 1989 Final Program EIR 1278 was carried forward into 2000 SEIR 1278:

MM LU-1. Uses proposed adjacent to the [Eastern Transportation Corridor] shall require the use of setbacks, noise buffering, visual screening, and other measures necessary to ensure land use compatibility. In addition, refinements to the Land Use Plan should be considered as a means to mitigate potential land use impact should the 21A alignment of the [Eastern Transportation Corridor] be ultimately selected instead of the [Tustin/Irvine/Orange Memorandum of Understanding] alignment.

(Another mitigation measure carried forward from 1989 Final Program EIR 1278 to 2000 SEIR 1278, MM LU-2, addresses visual impacts and is discussed in Section 3I, Visual Resources.)

The 2000 SEIR 1278 project would have resulted in the removal of a Christmas tree farm and produce stand to provide for proposed residential development. This was determined to be less than significant, and no mitigation was required.

Development of the retail center proposed as part of the 2000 SEIR 1278 would preclude the future expansion of Santiago Canyon College to the east. This was determined to be less than significant, and no mitigation was required.

Development proposed as part of the 2000 SEIR 1278 project adjacent to Irvine Regional Park would change the character of the surrounding area. More extensive grading was proposed in the canyon between the low density residential uses and the park than was envisioned in the East Orange General Plan; that is not consistent with the East Orange General Plan policy of preserving trees. The extension of Santiago Canyon Road proposed in the 2000 SEIR 1278 from its existing terminus at Jamboree Road would require that the south side of the south park ridge be graded. The following mitigation measure addressed these impacts in 2000 SEIR 1278:

MM LU-3. During the preparation of the tentative tract map for the low-density residential development adjacent to Irvine Regional Park, existing oak trees outside the limits of grading shall be preserved to the extent feasible. Use of retaining walls and other structures shall be used to limit the grading, to the extent feasible. Prior to submittal of an application for the tree removal permit, a certified arborist shall conduct a detailed tree survey to identify the size, number, general health, and location of all trees to be removed. For those oak trees meeting the criteria outlined in the City of Orange tree preservation ordinance that are not avoided, replacement oak trees planted at a ratio of the new trees for each tree removed shall be planted within the open space in Sector A. The precise location of the replacement trees shall be identified by the project biologist. The replacement trees shall be monitored for five years by the project biologist and the necessary measures taken to ensure the survival and health of the replacement trees. Performance standards shall be established by the project biologist at the time of the restoration plan is developed.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-17 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Revised Santiago Hills II Planned Community Since the 2000 SEIR 1278, the Eastern Transportation Corridor has been completed and tentative tract maps have been developed, incorporating setbacks, noise buffering, visual screening, and similar measures to provide a buffer from the Eastern Transportation Corridor. Therefore, MM-LU-1 has been implemented by the proposed project and is no longer applicable.

Since the 2000 SEIR 1278, MM-LU-3 has been partially implemented. Tentative tract maps have been submitted and limit required grading that would be visible from Irvine Regional Park, mostly because the extension of Santiago Canyon Drive eastward across the site has been eliminated from the project. Dudek and Associates, Inc. has prepared four site-specific tree management and preservation plans that identify tree locations and provide information regarding the condition of those trees that occur within the areas covered by the tentative tract maps for the Santiago Hills II Planned Community (as well as East Orange Planned Community Areas 1, 2, 3 and remaining areas). Therefore, MM-LU-3 has been partially implemented (limiting grading and tree survey), but the remainder is also applicable to the revised project.

Project Consistency with the City of Orange Adopted General Plan and East Orange General Plan Since the 2000 SEIR 1278, revisions have been made to the proposed land uses in the Santiago Hills II Planned Community area (see Figure 2-3 in Chapter 2, Project Description). These changes are minor and represent a slight reconfiguration of proposed land uses. Therefore, there would be no change in the findings in the 2000 SEIR 1278.

Project Consistency with the City of Orange Integrated General Plan Since the 2000 SEIR 1278, the City has proposed revisions to its general plan, including the incorporation of a revision to the adopted East Orange General Plan into an Integrated General Plan. The Santiago Hills II Planned Community, as proposed, is consistent with the proposed land use map and land use policies in the City’s Integrated General Plan.

Project Consistency with the County of Orange General Plan Since the 2000 SEIR 1278, the County has not revised its land use policies as they relate to the Santiago Hills II Planned Community site. The proposed land use revisions under the current proposal represent only a slight reconfiguration of proposed land uses. Therefore, there would be no change in the findings in the 2000 SEIR 1278.

Project Consistency with the Adopted MPAH The proposal is inconsistent with certain aspects of the MPAH. However, amendments to the MPAH are being proposed concurrently with this project and are included in this analysis. With the adoption of the MPAH amendments, all inconsistencies would be resolved. See Section 3A.4.3.4, MPAH Amendments, below.

Project Consistency with the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan During public scoping, SCAG requested that this environmental document address specific policies from the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan. The 2000 SEIR 1278 addressed the project’s consistency with the policies of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (Policies 3.04, 3.05, 3.11, and 9.01). The previous Santiago Hills II Planned Community project was found to be consistent with these policies, and the changes in the project since the 2000 SEIR 1278 would not alter this finding of consistency. Table 3A-2 lists the remaining policies specified by SCAG during scoping and provides a consistency finding for each policy.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-18 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Table 3A-2. Consistency with Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan

Policy Consistency Finding Policy 3.01. The population, housing, and jobs forecasts, Consistent. See Section 3F, Population and Housing. which are adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council and that reflect local plans and policies, shall be used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review. Policy 3.03. The timing, financing, and location of public Consistent. See Section 3J, Traffic and Circulation; Section facilities, utility systems, and transportation systems shall be 3M, Public Utilities; and Section 3N, Public Services. used by SCAG to implement the region’s growth policies. Policy 3.06. Support public education efforts regarding the Consistent. See Section 3N, Public Services. costs of various types of growth and development. Policy 3.07. Support subregional policies that recognize Consistent. The project site does not include agricultural agriculture as an industry, support the economic viability of lands. agricultural activities, preserve agricultural land, and provide compensation for property owners holding lands in greenbelt areas. Policy 3.09. Support local jurisdictions’ efforts to minimize Consistent. See Section 3J, Traffic and Circulation, and the cost of infrastructure and public service delivery, and to Section 3N, Public Services. seek new sources of funding for the development and the provision of services. Policy 3.16. Encourage developments in and around activity Consistent. The project is located adjacent to existing centers, transportation corridors, underutilized infrastructure residential development, including activity centers such as systems, and areas needing recycling and redevelopment. commercial and college land uses, and in close proximity to regional transportation corridors. Policy 3.17. Support and encourage settlement patterns, Consistent. The project includes a range of residential which contain a range of urban densities. densities. Policy 3.18. Encourage planned development in locations Consistent, with mitigation. The project site was least likely to cause adverse environmental impact. previously approved for development. The project has been designed to avoid environmental impacts or includes mitigation to reduce most of these impacts to a less-than- significant level. See remaining portions of Chapter 3. Policy 3.20. Support the protection of vital resources, such Consistent, with mitigation. See Section 3D, Biological as wetlands, areas, woodlands, Resources. production lands, and land containing unique and endangered plants and animals. Policy 3.21. Encourage the implementation of measures Consistent, with mitigation. See Section 3H, Cultural aimed at the preservation and protection of recorded and Resources. unrecorded cultural resources and archaeological sites. Policy 3.22. Discourage development, or encourage the use Consistent, with mitigation. See Section 3B, Water of special design requirements, in areas with steep slopes, Resources; Section 3C, Geology and Soils; and Section 3O, high fire, flood, and seismic hazards. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Policy 3.23. Encourage mitigation measures that reduce Consistent, with mitigation. See Section 3B, Water noise in certain locations, preserve biological and ecological Resources; Section 3C, Geology and Soils; Section 3L, resources, reduce exposure to seismic hazards and minimize Noise; and Section 3O, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. earthquake damage, and develop emergency response and recovery plans. Policy 4.02. Transportation investments shall mitigate Consistent, with mitigation. See remaining portions of environmental impacts to an acceptable level. Chapter 3. Policy 4.09. Existing and new public transit services, Consistent. The project does not propose new public transit facilities, and/or systems shall be fully accessible to persons services, facilities, or systems, and would not restrict access with disabilities, as required by applicable sections of the to existing ones for persons with disabilities. 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-19 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Policy Consistency Finding Policy 4.10. All existing and new public transit services Consistent. The project does not propose new public transit shall be provided in a manner consistent with Title VI of the services and would not preclude transit services from 1964 Civil Rights Act and Executive Order 12898 on complying with Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights or Environmental Justice, including the prohibition of Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice. intentional discrimination and adverse disparate impact with regard to race, ethnicity, or national origin. Policy 5.07. Determine specific programs and associated Consistent. See Section 3J, Traffic and Circulation; and actions needed (e.g., indirect source rules, enhanced use of Section 3K, Air Quality. telecommunications, provision of community-based shuttle services, provision of demand-management-based programs, or vehicle-miles-traveled/emission fees) so that options to command and control regulations can be assessed. Policy 5.11. Through the environmental document review Consistent. This environmental document addresses these process, ensure that plans at all levels of government topics and demonstrates consistency and minimization of (regional, air basing, county, subregional, and local) consider conflicts. See remainder of this section and Section 3J, air quality, land use, transportation, and economic Traffic and Circulation; and Section 3K, Air Quality. relationships to ensure consistency and minimize conflicts. Policy 9.02. Increase accessibility to open space lands for Consistent. The project provides parks, trails, and additional outdoor recreation. access to open space areas. See Section 3E, Recreation. Policy 9.03. Promote self-sustaining regional recreation Consistent. The project provides parks, trails, and additional resources and facilities. access to open space areas, with continuing funding for some of these facilities provided through future homeowners associations. See Section 3E, Recreation. Policy 9.04. Maintain open space for adequate protection of Consistent. The project preserves open space and has been lives and properties against natural and manmade hazards. designed to protect lives. See Section 3E, Recreation and Section 3O, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Policy 9.05. Minimize potentially hazardous developments Consistent. The project has been designed to minimize in hillsides, canyons, areas susceptible to flooding, hazards. See Section 3O, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. earthquakes, wildfire, and other known hazards, and areas with limited access for emergency equipment. Policy 9.07. Maintain adequate viable resource production Consistent. The project would not affect agricultural lands. land, particularly lands devoted to commercial agriculture Mining resources would be preserved, as discussed elsewhere and mining operations. in this section. Policy 9.08. Develop well-managed viable ecosystems of Consistent, with mitigation. See Section 3D, Biological known habitats or rare, threatened, and endangered species, Resources. including wetlands.

Project Consistency with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 There are no identified mineral resources in the Santiago Hills II Planned Community area, and the project would not restrict access to any identified mineral resource areas. Therefore, it is consistent with SMARA.

Mitigation Measures No new mitigation is required.

Residual Impacts Residual impacts would be less than significant.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-20 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Potential Impact 3A-3 Conflict with Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan 2000 SEIR 1278 2000 SEIR 1278 did not address this potential impact.

Revised Santiago Hills II Planned Community The Santiago Hills II Planned Community would not conflict with the Central/Coastal NCCP/HCP, as discussed in Section 3D, Biological Resources.

Mitigation Measures No new mitigation is required.

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

3A.4.3.2 East Orange Planned Community Area 1

Potential Impact 3A-1 Division of Established Community Because of the location of East Orange Planned Community Area 1 is not within or adjacent to an established community, no division of an established community would occur.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required.

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

Potential Impact 3A-2 Conflict with Applicable Land Use Plans Project Consistency with the City of Orange Adopted General Plan and East Orange General Plan The land uses proposed for East Orange Planned Community Area 1 are similar to those designated in the East Orange General Plan, but, in some cases, at lower densities than the general plan designations. In addition, more of the land in and adjacent to East Orange Planned Community Area 1 is planned as open space. Therefore, East Orange Planned Community Area 1 is consistent with the land use designations in the East Orange General Plan.

The proposed East Orange Planned Community Area 1 is consistent with the land uses policies in the adopted City of Orange General Plan and East Orange General Plan.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-21 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Project Consistency with the City of Orange Integrated General Plan The land uses proposed for East Orange Planned Community Area 1 are identical to those designated in the Integrated General Plan. Therefore, East Orange Planned Community Area 1 is consistent with the land use designations and the land use policies in the Integrated General Plan.

Project Consistency with the County of Orange General Plan In the County General Plan, the East Orange Planned Community Area 1 site is designated as Open Space. The County designation of Open Space is not necessarily an indication of a long-term commitment to open space uses. The County General Plan recognizes that they may ultimately be developed in other ways, and that areas within city spheres of influence may be appropriate for urban uses, based on pre- annexation plans by such cities. Therefore, the proposed East Orange Planned Community Area 1 development would not conflict with the County’s land use policies.

Project Consistency with the Adopted MPAH The East Orange Planned Community Area 1 proposal is inconsistent with certain aspects of the MPAH. However, amendments to the MPAH are being proposed concurrently with this project and are included in this analysis. With the adoption of the MPAH amendments, all inconsistencies would be resolved. See Section 3A.4.3.4, MPAH Amendments, below.

Project Consistency with the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan The consistency of East Orange Planned Community Area 1 with SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan policies is similar to that discussed for Santiago Hills II Planned Community in Section 3A.4.3.1, Santiago Hills II Planned Community.

Project Consistency with SMARA There are no identified mineral resources in East Orange Planned Community Area 1, and the project would not restrict access to any identified mineral resource areas. Therefore, it is consistent with SMARA.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required.

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

Potential Impact 3A-3 Conflict with Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan The East Orange Planned Community Area 1 would not conflict with the Central/Coastal NCCP/HCP, as discussed in Section 3D, Biological Resources.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-22 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

3A.4.3.3 East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and Remaining Areas

Potential Impact 3A-1 Division of Established Community Because East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and the remaining areas are not within or adjacent to an established community, no division of an established community would occur.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required.

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

Potential Impact 3A-2 Conflict with Applicable Land Use Plans Project Consistency with the City of Orange Adopted General Plan and East Orange General Plan The land uses proposed for East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and the remaining areas are similar to those designated in the East Orange General Plan, but, in some cases, at lower densities than the general plan designations. In addition, more of the land in and adjacent to these areas is planned as open space. Therefore, East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and the remaining areas are consistent with the land use designations in the East Orange General Plan.

The proposed East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and the remaining areas are consistent with the land use policies in the adopted City of Orange General Plan and East Orange General Plan.

Project Consistency with the City of Orange Integrated General Plan The land uses proposed for East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and the remaining areas are identical to those designated in the Integrated General Plan. Therefore, land uses in these areas are consistent with the Integrated General Plan. The proposed East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and the remaining areas are consistent with the land uses policies in the Integrated General Plan.

Project Consistency with the County of Orange General Plan In the County General Plan, the East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and remaining areas are designated as Open Space. The County designation of Open Space is not necessarily an indication of a long-term commitment to open space uses. The County General Plan recognizes that they may ultimately be developed in other ways, and that areas within city spheres of influence may be appropriate for urban uses, based on pre-annexation plans by such cities. Therefore, the proposed development in East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and remaining areas would not conflict with the County of Orange land use policies.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-23 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

Project Consistency with the Adopted MPAH The East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 proposal is inconsistent with certain aspects of the MPAH. However, amendments to the MPAH are being proposed concurrently with this project and are included in this analysis. With the adoption of the MPAH amendments, all inconsistencies would be resolved. See Section 3A.4.3.4, MPAH Amendments, below.

Project Consistency with the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan The consistency of East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and the remaining areas with SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan policies is similar to that discussed for Santiago Hills II Planned Community in Section 3A.4.3.1.

Project Consistency with SMARA Within the East Orange Planned Community Area 2 study area, the California Division of Mines and Geology has designated the areas within Irvine Lake and just east of Irvine Lake as Regionally Significant Aggregate Resource Areas under SMARA. The mining operation and reclamation within and east of Irvine Lake was completed in 2004. Nothing in the proposed project precludes future mineral extraction. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the SMARA policies.

There are no identified mineral resources in the East Orange Planned Community Areas 3, and the project would not restrict access to any identified mineral resource areas. Therefore, it is consistent with SMARA.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required.

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

Potential Impact 3A-3 Conflict with Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan The East Orange Planned Community Areas 2 and 3 and remaining areas would not conflict with the Central/Coastal NCCP/HCP, as discussed in Section 3D, Biological Resources.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required.

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-24 J&S 03005.03

City of Orange 3A. Land Use

3A.4.3.4 MPAH Amendments The proposed MPAH amendments would delete and downgrade roads in the MPAH due to the reduction in planned development in the East Orange study area and greater amounts of open space. These amendments would not result in land use impacts because they would reduce the intensity of development in the area.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required.

Residual Impacts No mitigation is required, and residual impacts would be less than significant.

3A.4.3.5 Cumulative Impacts A cumulative impact is one that results from the combined effects of numerous past, present, and future projects or activities. Where a significant cumulative impact exists, the key question is whether the project would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to that impact. A project may make a cumulatively considerable contribution even if the project’s individual impact is less than significant. However, a project’s impact may be rendered less than cumulatively considerable when the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure, or take part in a program that is designed to alleviate the impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15130).

Cumulative impact analysis requires this project to be viewed in the context of its contribution to any cumulative significant effect on land use and planning. For land use and planning, the cumulative impact analysis is based on the plan/projections approach, utilizing the Orange County Projections 2000 report to establish the context of cumulative growth and the resulting effects on land use change.

Orange County is expected to undergo substantial growth over the next two decades. The Orange County Projections 2000 report estimates that the County’s population would increase by approximately 460,000 people between 2003 and 2020. This growth would occur as a result of both natural increases in the existing population and the in-migration of new residents to the County and its cities.

If the project is approved and the site annexed to the City, the project would contribute to future residential growth within the City and would convert existing open space to intensified land uses, primarily residential development. In the context of Orange County, the project represents a small amount of growth and a substantially lower level of residential development than forecast in the Orange County Projections 2000 report. In effect, when compared to Orange County Projections 2000, the proposed project would reduce the site’s expected contribution to land use conversion. Therefore, approval of the project would not make a considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact.

Santiago Hills II and East Orange October 2004 Planned Communities Draft SEIR/EIR 3A-25 J&S 03005.03