Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-03-06; Planning Commission; Resolution 3195_. * // 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 II 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3195 ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL, AND SPECIAL, USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO DEVELOP A 170 UNIT SENIOR CITIZEN PROFESSIONAL CARE FACILITY. CASE NAME: AYRES SENIOR CENTER CASE NO.: CUP 88-21 (A)/SUP 89-51A) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 6th day of March, 1991, 8 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and 9 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all lo testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information 'X 11 submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning 12 II // Cornmission considered all factors relating to the Conditional Negative Declaration. 13 14 /I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission 15 11 as follows: 16 Exhibit "ND", dated January 10, 1991, "PII", dated December 20, 1990, and Commission hereby APPROVES the Conditional Negative Declaration according to 18 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning I'7 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. l9 I 2o I Appendix P, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: ,,, /I Findings: GA I1 22 1. The initial study shows that the proposed project could have a significant impact because the mitigation measures described in the initial study have been added to 23 on the environment, however, there will not be a significant impact in this case 24 !I the project. 25 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analysis. 26 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed project complied with. 27 according to the traffic report provided that mitigating conditions of approval are 28 0 0 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantly 1 impacted by this project provided that mitigating conditions of approval arc complied with. 2 3 (1 Conditions: 4 5 6 7 €3 9 10 11 12 13 14 1. This project, if approved, is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No.’s 3196 and 3197 plus compliance with the following mitigating conditions: a) Water Ouality - Runoff hm this project is conveyed to environmentally sensitive areas. The developer shall provide adequate means of eliminating grease and oils from drainage prior to discharge. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City hgineer prior to issuance ol any building permits for the site. b) Noise - The following noise mitigation requirements shall be noted on the building plans: I. a. Standard single strength glass, or windows with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 22 or greater for all windows on all elevations of all units of the project. 15 c. All entry doors shall be 1 3/4 inch solid core. 16 b. All sliding glass doors (SGD) shall be 3/16 inch glass. I? /I 11. Since windows and doors must be closed to meet the interior noise 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 standard, mechanical ventilation which meets the air change requirements of the UBC must be provided in units shaded on the attached site plan of the project. Where windows are required to be mopenable or kept closed in order to meet the interior noise standards, mechanical ventilation and cooling, if necessary, shall be provided to &t& a habhable environment- The system SM supply two air changes per hour to each habitable room including 20% (one-fifth) fresh make-up air obtained directly fkom the outdoors. The fkesh air inlet duct shall be of sound attenuating construction and shall consist of a minimum of ten feet of straight or curved duct or six feet plus one sharp 90 degree bend. c) Transportation/Circulation - Partiupate in the reconstruction of the Alga Roam Camino Real intersection as required by the Zone 6 Local Facilities Management Plan. 27 ll 28 11 PC RES0 NO. 3195 -2- Ij i 0 e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planninl Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 6th day of March, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm McFadden, Erwin & Marcus. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 8 ABSTAIN: Commissioner 9 10 11 12 ATTEST: ROBERT HOLMES, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 13 /I 14 15 MICHAEL J. HLZMIXLER PLANNING DIRECTOR 16 17 18 19 I 20 21 22 23 11 24 25 26 27 28 PC RES0 NO. 3195 -3- CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Southwest corner of El Camino Real and Alga Road. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 170 unit professional care facility for senior citizens containing congregate care and assisted living facilities, a community center, pool, reflection pond, tea house, walking course and an underground parking garage on 5.1 acres. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Conditional Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Conditional Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009, Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. DATED: JANUARY 10, 1991 MICHAEL JIUHOLWILLER CASE NO: CUP 88-21(A)/SUP 89-5(A) Planning Director APPLICANT: DONALD B. AYRES JR. (AYRES SENIOR CENTER) PUBLISH DATE: JANUARY 10, 1991 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438-1 161 e ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CUP 88-21 (A)/SUP 89-51P BACKGROUND DATE: December 20. 1990 1. CASE NAME: Ayes Senior Center 2. APPLICANT: Donald B. Awes, Jr. 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 355 Bristol. Suite A Costa Mesa, CA 92626 1714) 540-6060 4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: May 18. 1990 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 170 unit txofess;onal care facilitv for senior citizens containin congregate care and assisted living facilities, a community center, poo reflection pond, tea house, walking course and an undermound parkin parage on 5.1 acres. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct a Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environmen The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checkli: identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project an provides the City with infokmation to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environment: [mpact Report or Negative Declaration. $c A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project o any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checkel to indicate this determination. .'- An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of th project may cause a siRnificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negativ Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemel insinnificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings '"YES-sig" and !'YES-insig respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form unde DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussin, mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. 0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT :I,L THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: , Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? :. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? 1, Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? 1. Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? ;. Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? 6. Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? 7. Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? 8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? 9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? 10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 11. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? - -2- 0 YES YES big) (insig) - - - - - - - X - NO X X X x X X X X X X 0 0 BIOLOGICAL, ENVIRONMENT YILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: BS E;) NO 2. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? 3. Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 4. Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? 5. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? 6. Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? HUMAN ENVIRONMENT - - x X - X X - - X YILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (si& (Inslg) .7. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? .8. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? - - X X -3- a HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY 19. Result in the need for new or modifled sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? 20, Increase existing noise levels? 21. Produce new light or glare? 22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? 23. Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 25. Generate substantial additional traffic? 26. Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? 27. Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? !8. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? !9. Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? '0. Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? '1. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? ,2. Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? -4- 0 as E21 - - - X - - - - - - X - - X - - - NO X - X - X X X - X - X X X X X - a 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE [LL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: as YES NO (msig) 1. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 4, Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) 35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively Considerable? ("Cumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) with the effects of past projects, the X - X - X 36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X -5 - a 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Phvsical Environment 1. The site was previously graded to create the two existing pads. The Soils Report submitted for th, project indicates that a large amount of fill was required to create this lot in 1977. Approximate1 20,000 cubic yards of earth will be cut, 10,000 cubic yards filled, and 10,000 cubic yards exported 01 site to create a level building pad so that there are no ramps or steps required between buildings an1 to create the underground parking garage. The applicant will have to obtain a haul route permit fror the Engineering Department. 2. The proposed grading concept will not appreciably change the topography as the northern portion o the site will be lowered in elevation approximately 12 feet at the northeast corner with the southen portion of the site being raised three to six feet. 3. The project provides significant perimeter landscaping and an onsite drainage system containin) numerous catch basins and concrete drainage swales to reduce the amount and rate of surface wate: runoff. Approximately 53 percent of the site will be landscaped so as to not significantly affec. absorption rates. 4. As stated previously, the project site will contain a drainage system which will convey all drainage water leaving the site into the existing approved storm drain system in Manzanita Street. The amount of runoff leaving the site will not have a significant impact as 53 percent of the site will be landscaping so as to reduce the amount of impervious surface on site. 5. The project will generate additional vehicle trips that will produce emissions which will add incrementally to a deterioration in ambient air quality. The project operation will include a shuttle bus to take project residents to various events and appointments which will reduce the incidence of single occupant vehicle trips. 5. The project will not create objectionable odors as the use functions like a residential project. Trash will be contained inside the building in the area on the site plan labeled as "trash room" which is located in the center of the site. The pad level of the project site is located primarily below the level of adjacent streets which will help maintain air movement in addition to the 100 foot s.D.G.&E. easement which will be free of large obstructions to air movement. 7. The project will not substantially change the course or flow of water as drainage from the site will be directed into the existing storm drain system in Manzanita Street. The project design has reduced the amount of impervious surface created to the greatest extent feasible. 3. Runoff from this project is conveyed to environmentally sensitive areas. The developer is required to provide adequate means of eliminating grease and oils from drainage prior to discharge. The proposed grading plan contains a parking lot grease interceptor. Plans for these required improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits for the site in order to mitigate the potential impact. 1. The site has been previously graded. No natural resources exist on site. -6- 0 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (cont’dl 10. The project will not use substantial amounts of fuel or energy. Food will be provided and served at common dining facility. The project is in close walking distance of commercial/governmental facilitie and a shuttle bus will be operated to provide group transportation for project residents. 11. There is no evidence of archeological, paleontological or historical resources on this site as it has bee previously graded and the soils report provided indicates that the present site elevation is the result c a significant amount of fill. No structures exist on the property. 22. There is no environmentally significant plant life on site as it has been previously graded. Existin, vegetation consists primarily of weeds and grasses. 13. Because the project site contains no environmentally significant plant life, the introduction of the plar species indicated on the proposed landscape plan will not create an adverse impact. 14. No agricultural crops are grown on the project site which is in an urbanized area and of a size whic is not large enough to support agricultural activities. 15. Due to the disturbed nature of the site as well as its location adjacent to major roadways an surrounding development, very little animal life exists on site. 16. The type of residential development proposed for the project site is not anticipated to add additiona domestic animals to the project site and vicinity. Human Environment 17. The proposed Professional Care Facility is permitted by the existing zoning designation of RD-R provided the findings to grant a Conditional Use Pennit can be made. The General Plan Designatio! for the site of RM (Medium Density, 4-8 DU/AC) permits the proposed building type. The Housin Element contains goals to provide for a variety of housing types which are compatible with adjacen development and have convenient access to facilities and services. The proposed use satisfies thesc goals. The proposed design provides adequate perimeter setbacks to provide a buffer from adjacen uses. 18. The project is located in Local Facilities Management Zone 6. Services will be provided through thr implementation of that zone plan. 19. The developer for the project is required to submit a report detailing the condition of the Ayes sewe: trunkline. Any necessary repair or reconstruction of the Ayes sewer trunkline shall be completed prio to occupancy of any portion of the project unless adequate capacity is demonstrated to exist tc accommodate the project and an agreement and appropriate security is accepted by the City. (This requirement has recently been completed by another developer and all necessary repairs haw been made. 2-25-91) -7- 0 0 DISCUSSlON OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (cont'd) 20. A report titled, "Acoustical Analysis of the Seniors Community Center, Tract No. 72-34 In Carlsbac dated March 21, I989 and updated December 12, 1990 was prepared by Richard Colia, Acoustic Consultant pursuant to Planning Department Administrative Policy No. 17. The conclusions of tl report were that project traffic will not significantly increase existing noise levels. Outdoor areas of tl project will be impacted by projected noise levels of 65 to 67 dB CNEL and less from adjace: roadways. The principle outdoor living areas within the project are set back significant distances fro] adjacent roadways and benefit from building shielding so that projected noise levels will be mitigate to 56.8 dB CNEL for future roadway noise sources, less than the 60 dB CNEL maximum permitted. The required glazing for the project to meet the state and City interior noise criteria of 45 dB CNEL as fallows: a. Standard single strength glass, or windows with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 22 ( greater (all windows on all elevations of all units of the project). b. All sliding glass doors (SGD) should be 3/16 inch glass. c. All entry doors should be 1 3/4 inch solid core. Interior noise levels with these recommendations are calculated to be less than 45 dB CNEL with door and windows closed. Since windows and doors must be closed to meet the interior noise standarc mechanical ventilation must be provided in units shaded on the attached site plan of the project whic meets the air change requirements of the UBC. Where windows are required to be unopenable or ke1 closed in order to meet the interior noise standards, mechanical ventilation and cooling, if necessaq shall be provided to maintain a habitable environment. The system shall supply two air changes pe hour to each habitable room including 20% (one-fifth) fresh make-up air obtained directly from th outdoors. The fresh air inlet duct shall be of sound attenuating construction and shall consist of minimum of ten feet of straight or curved duct or six feet plus one sharp 90 degree bend. 21. The proposed final site grades and site design reduces light and glare impacts to adjacent propertie: Proposed lighting standards will be a maximum height of 12 feet and pedestrian light bollards at height of 3'-6" are also proposed to further reduce the potential for offsite light and glare impacts. 22. The project will not store or require the use of hazardous substances in the daily operation of thc facility. 23. The proposed use will result in a higher population for the site in comparison to the expectec population from development of the site with residential housing units under the applicable Genera Plan designation. Under the General Plan a maximum of 23 residential units could be permitted Utilizing a factor of 2.471 persons per dwelling unit equals a total of 57 persons for the property. Thl proposed project will contain 146 one bedroom units and 24 two bedroom units. The result will bl a total of 194 persons for the property. The increased population can be facilitated on site from ' public facilities standpoint' therefore the impact is not considered to be significant. -8- a e DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (cont’d) 24. The project will provide an alternative form of housing for senior citizens, thereby fulfilling policies o the Housing Element directed at providing a greater diversity of housing types. 25. The project will generate additional vehicular trips over what the Local Facilities Management Plan fo Zone 6 projected for the site. A Tr&c Impact Analysis was prepared for the project focusing on th’ intersection of Alga Road and El Camino Real. The additional trips generated by the Professional Can Facility Project will be offset by projects in the zone that were approved for fewer units than anticipate( by the zone plan. To mitigate impacts caused by the project, the developer will be required tc participate in the reconstruction of the Alga Road/El Camino Real intersection as required by the Zonc 6 Local Facilities Management Plan. This includes dedicating land for an additional lane on the project’ Alga Road and El Camino Real f’rontages and constructing the corresponding improvements. 26. The project proposes parking in excess of that required by the City‘s Zoning Ordinance. The majorit of the parking will be contained in an underground parking garage with surface parking proposed fo the use of employees and visitors. 27. As stated under number 25, the project is required to dedicate land and construct improvements to Alg: Road and El Camino Real to mitigate impacts to the existing circulation system. 28, The project will not alter waterborne, rail or air traffic as the site is not located in close proximity tc a navigable waterway or a rail line. In addition, the project is outside the airport influence area fo McClellan-Palomar Airport. 29. The project will reduce the potential for traffic hazards by constructing the required vehicular, bicyclc and pedestrian improvements identified on the project plans. 30. The project will not interfere with emergency response plans as it will make improvements to the existing circulation system in the vicinity of the project to facilitate buildout traffic conditions. Il. The project’s topographic, architectural and landscape site design results in a sensitive aesthetic treatment of the site which is compatible with surrounding projects. In addition, the project complie! with the development standards and design theme of the El Camino Real Corridor Developmen Standards. 32. The project includes onsite recreation facilities including a pool, croquet court, health walk course, reflection pond and other outdoor passive recreation areas. Indoor recreation areas will be provided in the community center building. -9- ALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTEZRNATNES TO THIE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) Phased dlevelopment of the project, b) ahernate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) al.ternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f> alternate sites for the proposed, and g) n13 project alternative. 2 project proposes development of a 170 unit Professional Care Facility for senior citizens on a 5.1 acre '. This type of project is commonly referred to as a Congregate Care Facility. Assist:ed living facilities will provided as well as a community center,, pool, reflection pond, tea house, walking course, and an lerground parking garage. The site has been previously graded and consists of two pads with a slope of feet between them. To the north of the site is Alga Road and the Plaza Paseo Real mmercial/Governmental Center. To the south are single family residences and to t:he west is the 36 unit lport Villas condominium project. To the east is Ell Camino Real and multiple family units. The project ; been designed to be compatible with adjacent uses as it is surrounded on three sides by public streets and .OO foot building; setback will be providedl from properties to the south due to an existing S.D.G.&E. ;ement. a) Phasing of the project would not be an environmentally superior alternative as site grading, infrastructure and amenities would need to be completed in their entirety for even a portion of the project reducing ;any benefits derived from phasing. In addition, the entire site has been previously graded and contains no significant natural resources. b) Alternate site designs have been con.sidered both with the current amendment being requested and during review of the originally proposed Conditional Use Permit. Previous, proposals were for as many as 206 rooms. The present design which consists of 170 rooms all having interior access to the cornrnunity 'center building provides a superior site design which functions in a manner conducive to the age group that will reside in the completed project. c) The prop'osed scde of development is less than previous designs as mentioned under section "b" above. The proposed project design and scale of development complies with. or exceeds all City requirements and can be accommodated osn the site as no significant unmitigable environmental impacts will be created. d) Alternate uses for the site would typically consist of medium density residential uses such as small lot single family homes or townhouses, duplexes, triplexes and low density apartment developments pursuant to the RM (Medium Dens'ity) land use classification of the Gene:ral Plan. The Housing Element provide!; policy direction for the City to provide a variety of housing types which is a goal this project helps to meet. The proposed use is allowed in the RDM zone through the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. -,lo- e 0 ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: e) Development at some future time rather than now would leave the site undeveloped. This WOI be inconsistent with the General Plan and zoning designations for the site as well as the resideni land use guidelines which encourage multi-family uses to locate near commercial centers wh, public facilities and infrastructure will be available to accommodate the proposed use. Developmc at some future time would not provide additional housing opportunities to meet the goals of Housing Element. f) Alternative sites for professional care facilities can be found within the City as they are a permit use or require a Conditional Use Permit in the R-3, R-P, RD-M and C-2 zones. They can also permitted in the P-C zone if a Master Plan provides for it. Alternate sites may not pres environmental benefits or have the advantage of being in close proximity to commercial/governmental center. g) The no project alternative would retain the previously graded lot bordered by development or sides in a vacant condition which is inconsistent with the General Plan and zoning designations the site. -1 1- e e DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: - I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATW DECLARATION will be prepared. x t find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there W: not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. - I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTA IMPACT REPORT is required. 1- 4- 91 Date Signature ++ LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) 1. Water Quality: Runoff from this project is conveyed to environmentally sensitive areas. The develop< shall provide adequate means of eliminating grease and oils from drainage prior to discharge. Plans f( such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits fc the site. 2. Noise: The following noise mitigation requirements shall be noted on the building plans: I. A. Standard single strength glass, or windows with a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 22 ( greater for all windows on all elevations of all units of the project. B. All sliding glass doors (SGD) shall be 3/16 inch glass. C. All entry doors shall be 1 3/4 inch solid core. -12- 0 a - LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE] 11. Since windows and doors must be closed to meet the interior noise standard, mechanical ventilatio: which meets the air change requirements of the UBC must be provided in units shaded on th attached site plan of the project. Where windows are required to be unopenable or kept closed i: order to meet the interior noise standards, mechanical ventilation and cooling, if necessary, sha be provided to maintain a habitable environment. The system shall supply two air changes pe hour to each habitable room including 20% (one-fifth) fresh make-up air obtained directly from th outdoors. The fresh air inlet duct shall be of sound attenuating construction and shall consist c a minimum of ten feet of straight or curved duct or six feet plus one sharp 90 degree bend. 3. TransDortatiodCirculation: Participate in the reconstruction of the Alga Road/El Camino Real intersectio as required by the Zone 6 Local Facixties Management Plan. 4TTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -13- - 0 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION \ -14-