Camino Las Ramblas Site

Camino Las Ramblas Site Request for Initiation of a Zoning Overlay December 1S, 217 Submitted by the Capistrano Unified School District TTCHMENT 1

Overview The Forster Canyon Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP 81-1) was first adopted in March 1981 and changed the Existing General Plan Designation for the subject property from High Density (18 DU/C) to Planned Community (PC). In June 1992 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14196 was approved for the southerly half of the Forster Canyon rea (Pacific Point) and the accompanying Environmental Impact Report was certified. This plan called for 233 single family lots, two multifamily lots totaling 117 units, two R&D/office lots, a potential school site, two park lots, one lot for RV storage, and various lettered landscape and open space lots. The subject property was designated as Village Residential (VR) and Recreational Open Space (ROS). In September 23, the Rezone 2-3 was approved relocating the residential development and park and moving the potential school use to the subject property, changing the designation to Public Institutional (PI). In March 216, the Capistrano Unified School District ("District") entered into a Purchase and Sale greement with the owner of the property, Pacific Point Development Partners, LLC, to acquire the subject property. In February 217, the District Board of Trustees voted to pursue there-entitlement of the subject property to allow for Public Institutional and Residential Use. On September 19, 217, the City Council considered a request to initiate an mendment to permit an overlay with a residential designation of "High Density," which was denied. s a result of that action, community outreach meetings were held at which the District committed to a 64% reduction in density to a maximum of 47 homes. This reduced density is the basis of this revised request for the initiation of an mendment. Reason for Request The reason for this proposed mendment in land use is that, based upon the recent calculations of student generation rates, the additional homes in the Pacifica San Juan area will not generate a sufficient number of students to warrant the construction of a new school. Students from this development can be accommodated on existing District campuses. s a result, the District has completed an evaluation of its properties and has determined that the highest and best use for this property is residential land use. Pacific Point Development Partners, LLC, the current property owner, supports the District's request and has consented to the addition of the overlay. This request for the initiation of an mendment to CDP 81-1 will allow the City staff to study the Residential Land Use option to determine an acceptable level of development to the environment and the community. Funds from the proceeds of the development of this site will be utilized by the District to enhance the physical campuses of the surrounding schools.

Project Description The project will consist of a maximum of forty-seven (47) dwelling units which, at less than 7 homes per acre, is lower than the density permitted in the City's RS-4 Zone. This density will be consistent with other recently approved developments in Pacifica San Juan, "The Cove" which is 7 homes at 11 units per acre and "The Pearl" which is 59 homes at 8 units per acre. The final configuration of the homes will be studied and finalized during the City staff review process. The architectural design of the homes will be compatible with the architectural guidelines for the Pacifica San Juan development. Building height will respect the maximum of 35 feet above the existing grade. ll parking needs for residents and visitors will be accommodated on site. The site must remain at the current elevation to provide a buttress for the adjacent slope. The remaining 18, cubic yards of the dirt stockpile will be utilized to fill the temporary detention basin. ccess to the site will be located off of venida California. The development is planned to have gated access. The site will have a community fence around the sides facing public streets. The edges along Camino Las Ramblas and Via De gua will be enhanced with landscaping and sidewalks to improve public safety. Camino Las Ramblas I " J"ft,MN2

Community Outreach On October 26, 217, the District held a Community Forum to discuss the project. In conformance with City policy, residents within 1, feet of the property were notified. Topics discussed at this forum included District's intent to purchase the property, the Pacifica San Juan Mello-Roos District taxes, and other potential uses for the site. It also provided residents with the opportunity to voice their thoughts and identify issues. Preliminary technical studies were then prepared by qualified experts on traffic, emergency evacuation of the Canyon, and the geotechnical and civil engineering aspects of the site. These studies concluded that for a variety of densities, the development of this site would have negligible impact on the neighborhood. On November 28, 217, the District held a second Community Forum to discuss the project and present the findings of the technical studies. This time all seven surrounding Home Owners ssociations in the Canyon were mailed notices of the meeting. dditionally, all 286 property owners in the Canyon that are not in an ssociation were also individually mailed notices for the meeting. Issues discussed included traffic, emergency evacuation, density of development, site elevation, building heights, parks, gated access for the site, and slope landscaping along Camino Las Ramblas. t the conclusion of this forum, the District made the commitment to reduce the development to no more than 47 homes. This represents a 64% reduction in the number of units previously requested and a density that is consistent with the character of the surrounding community. s we go through the Zoning mendment process and further design this community of homes, we look forward to continuing to work with residents and City staff to create a high-quality development that will fit well within the existing community and while also achieving the goals of the District.

LS MEMORNDUM BERKELEY CRLSBD FRESNO IRVINE LOS NGELES PLM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SN LUIS OBISPO DTE: November 22, 217 To: FROM : SUBJECT: Stephen P. Sandland, Project Dimensions, Inc. Danson Liu, LS Camino Las Ramblas Residential Project Traffic Memorandum LS is pleased to submit this traffic analysis memorandum for the proposed 7.292 acre (a c) Camino Las Ram bias Residential Project (project) on the northeast corner of the intersection of venida California and Camino Las Ram bias in San Juan Capistrano. The project site was previously planned as a 7-student elementary school as part ofthe approved Pacific Point development. However, current enrollment estimates from the project applicant are approximately 45 students in this area. This analysis seeks to compare the effects on traffic of developing the project site with residential uses in lieu ofthe approved elementary school. LS considered five alternative residential mixes consistent with City of San Juan Capistrano (City) General Plan Land Use Designation residential densities. These alternatives are: 1. 45 single-family residential units, 2. 65 townhome units, 3. 85 townhome units, 4. 15 townhome units, and 5. 13 townhome units. The project site is bounded by existing residential uses and undeveloped land to the north, Camino Las Ram bias to the south, venida California to the west, and Via De gua to the east. ccess to the project site would be provided via venida California. There would be no direct access from Camino Las Ramblas. METHODOLOGY In order to provide a direct comparison of the proposed residential alternatives to the approved elementary school, this analysis will follow the same methodology and build upon the Pacific Point Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Traffic Study (traffic study) that was approved as part of the original Pacific Point development. To determine the peak-hour operations at signalized intersections within the study area, the intersection capacity utilization {ICU) methodology was used. The ICU methodology compares the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios of conflicting turn movements at an intersection, sums these critical conflicting v/c ratios for each intersection approach, and determines the overaiiicu. The resulting ICU is expressed in terms of level of service (LOS), where LOS represents free-flow activity and LOS F represents overcapacity operation. Parameters consistent with the analysis methodology from 2 Executive Park, Suite 2, Irvine, California 92614 949.553.666 www.lsa.net

LS the traffic study were followed. ccording to the traffic study, LOS at an intersection or roadway is considered to be unsatisfactory when the ICU exceeds.9 (i.e., LOSE or F). The relationship of ICU to LOS is demonstrated in the following table. Levels of Service Volume-to-Capacity Ratio.-.6 B.61-.7 c.71-.8 D.81-.9 E.91-1. F > 1. Source: Highway Capac1ty Manual (Transportation Research Board 21). Roadway link v/c ratios were determined using the traffic study daily capacities. The following table illustrates daily capacities (as contained in the approved traffic study) for San Juan Capistrano roadways: Type of rterial Daily Capacities by Level of Service B c D E 8 lanes divided 45, 52,5 6, 67,5 75, 6 lanes divided 33,9 39,4 45, 5,6 56,3 4 lanes divided 22,5 26,3 3, 33,8 37,5 4 lanes undivided 15, 17,5 2, 22,5 25, 2 lanes divided 11,3 13,2 15, 17, 18,8 2 lanes undivided 7,5 8,8 1, 11,3 12,5.. Source: Pac1f1c Pomt EIR Traffic Study, Table 6-3 EIR =Environmental Impact Report TRIP GENERTION, DISTRIBUTION, ND SSIGNMENT To estimate the number oftrips the project alternatives would add to the nearby roadways, the trip generations ofthe proposed land uses have been calculated using land use-based trip rates in the Institute oftransportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 1th Edition (217). Table summarizes the project trip generation using the ITE trip rates for the proposed land uses. s shown in Table, a 45-student elementary school has been compared to the residential alternatives as opposed to a 7-student elementary school due to updated enrollment estimates of any potential elementary school at this site. The project trip distribution was taken from the approved traffic study in an effort to provide a direct comparison between the alternatives. Of the project trips, 68 percent travel west along Camino Las Ram bias from venida California, and 6 percent travel east along Camino Las Ram bias from venida California, 12 percent travel north along venida California, and 14 percent travel south along venida California. The project trip assignment was calculated by subtracting a 45-student elementary school from the baseline volumes, and then adding traffic from each alternative project. This approach most 11/22/17 «P:\PR171 \doc\ Traffic Memo.docx» 2

LS effectively compares the traffic potential between the residential alternatives and a more realistic elementary school use. Table : Trip Generation Comparison Trip Rates' Land Use Size Unit DT M Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Elementary School Student 1.89.36.31.67.8.9 Single Family Detached Housing DU 9.44.19.56.74.62.37 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise] 2 DU 7.32.11.35.46.35.21 Trip Generation Comparison Elementary School' 45 Student 851 163 139 32 37 4 1 Single Family Detached 45 DU 425 8 25 33 29 16 Residential 2. Townhome 65 DU 476 7 23 3 23 13 3. Townhome 85 DU 622 9 3 39 3 18 4. Townhome 15 DU 769 11 37 48 37 22 5. Townhome 13 DU 952 14 46 6 46 27 Note: Totals may not appear to sum correctly due to rounding. 1 Trip Rates referenced from the Institute oftransportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 1th Edition {217). 2 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) is a category that includes apartments, townhomes, and condominiums. ' The typical PM Peak Hour (4-6 p.m.) is shown in the table. The elementary school's peak after-school trip generation potential is 153 trips {69 inbound, 84 outbound). The elementary school's morning peak trip generation rate occurs within the same period as the a.m. peak hour shown in the table (7:-9: a.m.) and is therefore identical. DT =average daily trips DU =Dwelling Units Total.17.99.56 77 45 36 48 59 73 RODWY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE NLYSIS LS analyzed the roadway segments of Camino Las Ram bias between the Interstate 5 northbound ramps and Via de gua and Camino Las Ram bias east of Via de gua. The existing average daily trip (DT) data were taken in May 217 and provided by the City Traffic Engineer. The roadway DT for each project alternative was calculated in the equation below: Existing DT May 217 +Pacific Point EIR Buildout Project DT -Elementary School DT 45 ostudents +Project lternative DT The roadway segment analyses for the existing, existing plus Pacific Point project and elementary school, and the five project alternative scenarios are shown in Table B. s shown in Table B, four out of the five project alternatives are projected to generate fewer trips than the approved Pacific Point development. Project alternative No.5, 13 Town home units, is estimated to generate 7 more DT than the approved Pacific Point development. The development of any of the studied project alternatives is forecasted to maintain a satisfactory LOS on both of the adjacent sections of Camino Las Ram bias. 11/22/17 «P:\PR171 \doc\ Traffic Memo.docx>J 3

LS Table B: Camino Las Ramblas Roadway Capacity Summary Scenario Between Interstate 5 Northbound Ramps and Via de gua Camino Las Ram bias East of Via de gua Capacity' DT v/c LOS Capacity DT v/c LOS Existing 28,2 6,43.228 18,8 4,3.229 Existing Plus Pacific Point Project 28,2 9,64.342 18,8 4,58.244 and Elementary School (pproved Use) Existing Plus Pacific Point Project 28,2 9,35.332 18,8 4,55.242 and 45 Single-Family Residential Units (lternative 1) Existing Plus Pacific Point Project 28,2 9,39.333 18,8 4,56.243 and 65 Town home Units (lternative 2) Existing Plus Pacific Point Project 28,2 9,48.336 18,8 4,57.243 and 85 Townhome Units (lternative 3) Existing Plus Pacific Point Project 28,2 9,58.34 18,8 4,58.244 and 15 Town home Units (lternative 4) Existing Plus Pacific Point Project 28,2 9,71.344 18,8 4,59.244 and 13 Town home Units (lternative 5).. Note: Ex1st1ng volumes come from M ay 217 count s prov1ded by the City of San Juan Capistrano. 1 Roadway Capacity for the three-lane divided roadway segment of Camino Las Ramblas betwee n Interstate 5 Northbound Ramps and Via de gua was calculated by multiplying the two-lane divided capacity by 1.5. DT =verage Daily Trips LOS = level of se rvi ce v/c =volume-to-capacity ratio INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE NLYSIS LS analyzed the signalized intersections of venida California/Camino Las Ram bias and Camino De Vista/Camino Las Ram bias. The baseline peak-hour volumes were taken from Exhibit 5-B (Cumulative Project Without Forster Canyon Road Traffic Volumes) in the approved traffic study. The peak-hour volumes for each project alternative were calculated in the equation below: General Plan Volumes- Elementary School Volumes 45 students +Project lternative Volumes It should be noted that the baseline eastbound-left a.m. peak-hour volume for venida California/Camino Las Ram bias was manually edited in order to provide a more accurate representation of the number of vehicles making that movement. The intersection analyses for General Plan, General Plan with elementary school, and the five project alternative scenarios are shown in Table C. Figure 1 (attached) illustrates the peak-hour volumes for each project alternative. 11/22/17 «P:\PR171\doc\Traffic Memo.docx» 4

LS Table C: Camino Las Ramblas Intersection LOS Summary Scenario 1. venida California/ Camino Las Ramblas M PM General Plan without Elementary ICU.759.824 School Development LOS c D General Plan with Elementary School ICU.94Sl.839 (pproved Use) LOS E D General Plan with 45 Single-Family ICU.775.826 Residential Units (lternative 1) LOS c D General Plan with 65 Townhome ICU.774.826 Units (lternative 2) LOS c D General Plan with 85 Town home ICU.779.826 Units (lternative 3) LOS c D General Plan with 15 Townhome ICU.784.827 Units (lternative 4) LOS c D General Plan with 13 Town home ICU.789.828 Units (lternative 5) LOS c D.. Source: General Plan volumes from approved Pac1f1c Pomt EIR Traffic Study 2. Camino De Vista/ Camino Las Ramblas M PM.386.437.411.445.39.444.39.442.391.444.393.445.394.447 =exceeds City's level of service (LOS) criteria 1 Based on updated trip generation calculations for the elementary school use, the a.m. peak-hour ICU for venida California/Camino Las Ram bias increased to.945 from.915 from the approved Pacific Point EIR Traffic Study. EIR =Environmental Impact Report ICU = intersection capacity ut ilization LOS = level of service s shown in Table C, all project alternatives are projected to result in better LOS than the approved elementary school. This difference between the residential alternatives and the elementary school is most pronounced in the a.m. peak hour at the intersection of venida California and Camino Las Ram bias. This is a result of the higher and more concentrated levels of traffic associated with the student drop-off activity for an elementary school compared to typical residential morning traffic behavior. ll project alternatives are forecast to operate at satisfactory LOS. CONCLUSION Based on the results ofthis analysis, each project alternative for the Camino Las Ram bias Residential Project could be implemented without impacting the surrounding roadway system. Four out of the five project alternatives would generate fewer roadway DT than the approved Pacific Point project. Every project alternative would generate a better intersection LOS than the approved Pacific Point project. The evaluation of the study area intersection LOS with the construction of any of the five project alternatives on site shows that the addition of project traffic would not create any significant adverse impacts. ttachment: Figure 1- Peak Hour Intersection Traffic Volumes 11/22/17 <OP:\PR171\doc\Traffic Memo.docx» 5

., ll '.)--"'" "".. l' eooe W>' P<l ea o ' \s\ ca'""ll Capostrano Pointe 4' partmt'fll COmmUiitly V sta Pac llca Ptess,, Raf1'blaS c Camnooe">('l. 9 'b!1''\9'3 \,.,_ ('> «. ;<. ;;; " $\'.1> General Plan with Elementary School General Plan with 4S Single Family Homes General Plan with 65 Townhomes.... r'j > Genc._rcl Pl.sn wt:tb 85Townborntt <g " 1; Gontfll Plan wilh 1Hownha'1.. Gonollll Pion wlthoutej..,.nt.!)' School [! ;! t_ 9118 :2 ;;; N 46128.J I L 1118 11135.J..., t r' 19147 12129 I;; iii " ;;; ' - '!> 1:- " 1 venlda California I Camino Las Ramblas Cl!11 - Ca/fegl 2 g 1._ 111,J 1.. 6951 473 21 9 J..., I r' 2591725 l g! 34126 ' i - Camino De Vista I Camino Las Ramblas General Plan with 13 Town homes 5l 8 1il 1._ 112 ;! t_ 912 :;; ii'i - 46128 v 46128 a; 1._ 9119 46128.J I \... 1118.J I I. r lloibo.j I L.r- 1118 1211 1...,.J ' t r' 161155 J..., t r+ 151151...,.J t r+ 19147 g 19147 Ill 19147 :ll - 12129 12129 ' iii ill 12129 ' iii lll ' ;;; ii'i!</ 1._ 9112 is ( v 46128.J L. 1118 161165.J., t r' 19147-12129 $ ;;; :il - ' t_ 9112 1._ 91121 -!</ o; v 46128 46128..I I L. r uo1ao.j j I..r- 1118 18116...,.J t r+ 19/ 166...,.J t r+ 19147 5' 19147 - - 5' 12129 + ill 12 129 iii ill ' ii'i 1 venfda Cantomla I Camino Las Ramblas 1 ven1da California I Camino Las Ramblas 1 venlda California I Camino Las Ramblas 1 venida California I Camino Las Ramblas 1 venlda California I Camino Las Ramblas 1 venlda CaiTfomla I Camino Las Ramblas : 5' 5' 5' g t_ 1 I 1 g!'l t_ 111 as 1._ 111.J L. 7915..I.. 7121484.J l. 711 I (82 l/ 9 J., t... 219 J.., I r' 219 J..., t r' 37175 5l 1'! 265/745 8 g! 264/741 5l g @ 34126 S! i ' g 34126 S! ' g 34128 + as!'l 1._ 111..I L 716 1485 2/9 J..., t... 26'51745 5l g 34128 ' iii :il 1._ 111.J l. 721 1488 2/9.J.., t r' - - 2f!/175 8 g 34/26 + g - g 1._ 111.J - 726/491 219.J.., t... 268/756 5l g! 34128 ' g 2 Camino De Vista I Camino Las Ramblas 2 CamJno De Vista I Camlno Las Ramblas 2 Camino De VISta I Camino Las Ramblas LS 2 Camino De VISta I Camino Las Ramblas 2 Carrnno De Vista/ Camino Las Ramblas 2 Camino De Visla I Camino Las Ramblas FIGURE 1 XXX/YYY M/ PM Volume Camino Las Ramb/as Residential Project Peak Hour Intersection Traffic Volumes R:\XXXOOO\Intersecllon turn volumes xls 1112/217