Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 00-90RESOLUTION NO. 00-90 A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE REUSE AND DISPOSAL OF THE FORMER MCAS TUSTIN AS COMPLETE AND ADEQUATE PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows' The City Council finds and determines as' follows" A. Marine CorPs Air Station (MCAS) Tustin has been determined surplus to the needs of the federal government and has been approved for disposal by the United States Department of the Navy (DON)in accordance with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act (DBCRA) of 1990 (10 USC 2687) and the pertinent base closure and realignment decisions of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission approved by the President and accepted by.Congress in 1991, 1993, and 1995; and B. The City of Tustin has been approved by the Department of Defense as the Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) for MCAS Tustin and is responsible for preparing a Reuse Plan describing the reuse of the installation and providing recommendations to the DON for disposal of the former base to various public agencies and the homeless. The goal of base disposal, and reuse is economic redevelopment and job creation to help replace the economic stimulus previously provided by the military installation. The LRA submitted the Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin to the DePartment of Defense in October 1996, and an Errata amending the Reuse Plan in. September 1998; and C. The City of Tustin intends to implement the Reuse Plan through the approval , or adoption of a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, adoption of a Specific Plan and other discretionary actions: and D. California State law requires each City to adopt a comprehensive, long-term General Plan for its own physical development and for any land outside its boundaries which bears a relationship .to its planning activities. The General Plan must be periodically updated to ensure that the Plan accurately reflects City policies, conforms to State law, reflects current court decisions, and provides an integrated and internally consistent set of goals and policies designed to reflect any changed characteristics or growth of the community. The closure of MCAS Tustin and implementation of the Reuse Plan would neceSsitate amendment of the Tustin General Plan; and -1- 10 11 12 14 17 18 2O 22 24 25 E. The Tustin City Council has received a request, tO consider proposed General Plan Amendment 00-001 that is intended to amend all General Plan Elements in support of the Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin; and F. On November 28, 2000, the Tustin Planning Commission held .a duly noticed public hearing to provide a further opportunity for the general public to comment on and respond to the proposed General Plan Amendment.00-001. At the conclusion of the Public Hearing the Planning Commission approved Resolution No. 3739 recommending that the Tustin City Council approve General Plan Amendment 00-001; and G. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy'Act (NEPA) as implemented by the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (C'alif. Public Resources Code Sec. et. seq. 21000) and the State Guidelines (Title 14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et. seq.), the. City of Tustin and Department of Navy have completed the followin, g actions in preparing the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Final Environmental Impact Repot[ (FEIS/FEIR): 1. On June 30, 1994, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to prepare a joint · EIS/EIR. and Initial Study was released and published for public review and comment. 2. On July 20, 1994, a Scoping meeting was held to solicit public participation and comments on the NOP for the EIS/EIR for reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. 3. On January 16, 1998, an initial Draft ElS/EIR was released for a 60-day o public review and comment (SCH No. 94071005). The Document assessed the significant environmental impact, mitigation measures, and alternatives associated with the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin, located in Tustin and Irvine, California and the subsequent reuse of those properties and other adjacent proper{ies. 4.. On February 5, 1998, a Public Hearing was held on the initial Draft EIS/EIR. 5. On July 8, 1999, a revised Draft ElS/EIR released for a 45-day public review and comment. A copy was also filed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the State Clearinghouse. The comment period on the revised Draft EIS/EIR closed on August 23, 1999. 6. On August 11, 1999, a Public Hearing was held on the revised Draft EiS/EIR. A Final EIS/EIR (FEIs/FEIR) was then prepared. -2- lO 1] ]2 14 ]5 16 ]? '20 2! 22 23 24 '25 7. On December 23, 1999, the FEIS/FEIR was released for a 30-day public review and comment. The comment period on the FEIS/FEIR closed on January 24, 2000. The FEIS/FEIR proVides the required written responses to each comment on the draft EIS/EIR pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 8. Although not required by CEQA', on November 17, 2000, a Response to Comments document on the FEIS/FEIR was released. The Response to Comments on the FEIS/FEIR has been prepared and distributed to those persons or agencies that commented on the FEIS/FEIR. 9. Prior to approving the proposed action, the City Council must certify that the FEIS/FEIR is complete and adequate; and H. The FEIS/FEIR was prepared to analyze a proposed project addressing the potential environmental effects of the MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan and a wide range of project alternatives. In general, the FEIS/FEIR evaluates the proposed project (Alternative 1-LRA Reuse Plan), two other build-out alternatives (Alternative 2-Ari;erial Grid Pattern/No Core/High Residential and Alternative 3,Arterial Loop Pattern/Reserve Area/Low Residential) and two no project/n© development alternatives (No Action Alternative and Disposal of Navy Property Alternative). For background purposes, Alternatives 1,2 and 3 are briefly summarized as follows: Alternative 1 - LRA Reuse Plan - Alternative 1 is the alternative submitted by the Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) to the DON and HUD and the one that the City of Tustin believes would best meet the community objectives of the reuse planning process. This alternative would result in 4,601 dwelling units (4,049 dwelling units in the.' City of Tustin) and 11,406,975 square feet of commercial/industrial/recreational square footage; Transitional/Emergency Housing for the homeless; a Golf Village with hotel and ancillary retail uses;, an Urban Regional Park developed around the northern blimp hangar; a large Community Core developed with mixed uses including reuse of the southerly blimp hangar if financially feasible; and specialized educational, social service, and law enforcement facilities within a Learning Village campus. Alternative 2- Arterial Grid Pattern/No Core/High Residential.- This alternative proposes a variety of urban uses with a focus on enhancing housing and cultural opportunities for the residents of Tustin, Irvine and. nearby communities'. This alternative would result in 6,205 dwelling units and 9,214,583 square feet of commercial and business uses, Village Mixed-Uses, and Public Institutional/Commercial functions. A large Cultural Center would be developed under this alternative, and the -3- 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Ji northern blimp hangar would be incorporated, if financially feasible. southern blimp hangar would be demolished under this alternative. The Alternative 3- Arterial Loop Pattern/Reserve Area/Low Residential- This alternative proposes a variety of urban uses with a focus on enhancing employment and cultural opportunities for residents of Tustin, Irvine and nearby communities. This alternative would result in 4,340 dwelling units and 10,916,575'square feet of commercial, commercial business, Village Mixed-Use and other business-related uses. A large Cultural Center on 87 acres would be developed under this alternative and would incorporate the northern blimp hangar, if financially feasible. The southern blimp hangar would be demolished. A 179-acre Reserve Area would include residential, commercial/business, and institutional uses in large-scale development; and In accordance with Section 15132 of the State Guidelines, and' the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR pads 1500-1508), the FEIS/FEIR consists of' 1. The initial Draft EIS/EIR, revised Draft EIS/EIR, and Final EIS/EIR including Comments and Responses on the revised Draft EIS/EIR and all appendices and technical reports thereto;. 2. Comments and Responses on the Final.EIS/EIR; 3. Redevelopment Agency staff re.port to the Planning commission dated November 28, 2000; 4. Minutes of the City of Tustin Planning Commission, dated November 28, 2000; 5. Redevelopment Agency staff report to the City Council dated January 16, 2001 including the letters submitted to the Planning Commission, a letter submitted to the Tustin City Council and the City of Tustin's written responses, and ali other attachments; 6. Minutes of the Tustin City Council, dated January 16, 2001; and Section Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15091 of the State Guidelines require that the City Council make one or more of the following findings prior to approving or carrying out a project for which an EIR has been prepared identifying one or more significant effects of the project, together with a statement of facts in support of each finding' 1. Changes or alterations have been required in., or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. 2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for -4- l0 14 l? 20 2! 2.2 24 2.5 !1. !!!. highly trained workers, make' infeasible alternatives identified in the EIR; and the mitigation measures or K. State Guidelines Section 15093(a) requires the City. Council to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project; and L. State Guidelines Section 15093(b) requires that, where the decision of the City Council allows the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in an EIR, but are not at least substantially mitigated,-the City Council must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the' FEIS/FEIR or other information in the record. Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is incorporated here by reference and provided as Exhibit A; and M. A Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program designed to ensure compliance With mitigation measures imposed to avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects identified in the FEIS/FEIR has been drafted to meet the requirements of Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. The Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program, which is incorporated here by reference, and provided as Exhibit B provides a checklist of mitigation measures and..:.implementation measures identified in the FEIS/FE'IR for the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin to ease the process of monitoring the progress of each measure. The following information is identified for each measure listed in the checklist: · The text of the measure is provided which contains the criteria for mitigation, either in the form of adherence to certain adopted regulations or identification of the steps to be taken as mitigation. · The timing of the implementation of the mitigation measures in the table are listed by environmental impact area in the same order as they are listed in the FEIS/FEIR. · The table lists the appropriate responsible or supervising party or agency to perform or enforce the mitigation measure or implementation measure. · Each mitigation and implementation measure is listed by environmental impact area in the same order as they are listed in the FEIS/FEIR; and The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby find and certify that the FEIS/FEIR for MCAS Tustin, in its entirety, is adequate and complete and prepared in compliance with the requirements of CEQA, NEPA, and the State Guidelines; and The City Council hereby finds that the unavoidable significant environmental effects identified in the FEIS/FEIR have been substantially lessened in their severity by the imposition of the proposed mitigation measures. The City CoUncil also finds that the remaining unavoidable significant environmental effects are outweighed by the economic, social, and other benefits of the Community Reuse Plan, as set forth in the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations attached as · '5" ' ]0 ].2 13 14 17 19 20 2] 22 23 24 25 IV. Exhibit A. The City Council adopts the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and The City Council hereby finds that changes have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that will mitigate or avoid the potentially significant adverse effects identified in the. FEIS/FEIR as specifically itemized in Exhibit B, Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program. All mitigation measures contained in the FEIS/FEIR are adopted and shall be incorporated' as conditions of approval at subsequent · discretionary actions at the appropriate level of project implementation. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 16th day of January 2001 TRACY WiLLS(.~0RLi~'¢i"MaYO~- (~ PAMELA.STOKER City Clerk .. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ). COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 00-90 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on January 16, 2001, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBERAYES' WORLEY, THOMAS, BONE, DOYLE, KAWASHTI~ COUNCILMEMER NOES' NONE COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED' NONE COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: NONE CITY CLERK ccresos\00-90.doc -6- Resolution Iqo. 00-90 F indings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. Final Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report For the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin · SCH No. 94071005 City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Date Adopted by Tustin' December 18, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS -.. , ,. · ........ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE; DISPOSAL AND REUSE OF MCAS TUSTIN Section · , I, II. III. FINAL EIS/EIR FOR THE PROJECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD Contents of the Record Location of Administrative Record PURPOSE OF. FINDINGS Page IV. EFFECT OF FINDINGS V~ VI. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS Aesthetics Cultural and Paleontological Resources Agricultural Resources Traffic/Circulation Air Quality Cumulative Impacts FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS REDUCED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS BY MITIGATION MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT Land Use Aesthetics Cultural and Paleontological'Resources Biological Resources Traffi c/C irculati o n Noise 4 4 4 6 6 10 14 18 18 19 19 21 22 23 Disp0s 'a'l' ~m-~J' i~euse of MCAS T~;tin EIsiEiR' ..... S~h No. 94071005 Section · VII. IX. FINDINGS CONbERNING LEsS~THAN'SIGNIFI~AI~T' ' IMPACTS WITH IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES Utilities Public Services FINDINGS OF FACT CONCERNING PROJECT ALTE~ATIVES Introduction Reasonable Range of Alternatives Summary of Comparison of Alternatives ' Project Objectives LRA Reuse Alternative (Alternative 1) Alternative 2 . Alternative 3 Alternative 4: No Action Alternative STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Summary of Overriding Considerations Adoption of Overriding Considerations page 25 25 27 31 40 34 43 43 44 45 47 47 49 TABLES Table -- ,, Table 1 Table 2 Summary Comparison of Land Development and Buildout Characteristics of Alternatives Key Differentiating Factors Between Alternatives Page 32 33 Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin EIS/EIR SCH No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FINDINGS OF FACT..CO ..NCERNING THE PROJECT Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15091 as amended January 1, 1999, the City of Tustin (City) upon review of the Final Joint Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR), including the comments and responses therein, and based on all the information and evidence in the records, hereby makes the Findings set forth herein' I. FINAL EIS/EIR FOR THE PROJECT The FEIS/EIR for the project consists of two volumes ehtitled "Final Volume 1 December, 1999 Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the.Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin" and "Final Volume 2 December, 1999 Environmental Impact Statement~nvironmental Impact Report for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin". In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, an Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (NOP) to prepare a joint EIS/EIR was distributed on June 30, 1994 to regulatory agencies, local jurisdictions, elected officials, and public service providers, among others for a 30-day comment period. On March 9, 1995, a supplement to the NOP was sent for a 30-day comments period to all previously notified parties to inform them of the CiW ofTustin's intent to also utilize the joint EIS/EIR for its applications to pursue a LAMBRA designation with the California Trade and Commence Agency. As part of the EIS/EIR scoping process, the City of · Tustin and the Marine Corps held a public meeting on July 20, 1994 designed to inform the public about disposal and reuse alternatives and to solicit public participation and comments. The Marine Corps also held a public meeting in April 1997 regarding the blimp hangars pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act to describe the Section 106 process and the role of the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) as it relates to the reuse plan and to receive public comments. The initial Draft EIS/EIR was made available for a 45-day public review period on January 16, 1998. Comments received on the initial Draft EIS/EIR indicated the need to expand the traffic/circulation study, and to provide supplementary analysis for the issues of regional growth, schools, biology, water quality, air quality, utilities, noise, public services, and hazardous materials. A revised Draft EIS/EIR was made available for a 45-day public review period on July 8, 1999. The review period for the Draft EIS/EIR ended on August 23, 1999. The Final EIS/EIR was made available for a 30-day review period beginning on December 23 and ending on January 24, 2000. The FEIS/EIR includes extensive analysis of potential environmental impacts under both CEQA and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). These findings pertain only to the requirements of CEQA pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15091. In some cases, the differences between CEQA and NEPA lead to different conclusions, as presented in the DEIS/EIR and FEIS/EIR. NEPA analyses in the DEIS/EIR and FEIS/EIR that do not apply to CEQA are not discussed herein, nor are impacts that are significant under NEPA but less than significant under CEQA. The FEIS/EIR identifies mitigation measures to avoid significant environmental impacts of the project or reduce them to less than significant levels. Mitigation measures are also identified for environmental impacts of the project that are significant and unavoidable even though mitigation is applied. The FEIS/EIR also identifies implementation measures where environmental impacts are less than significant, but to support proposed development within the reuse plan area concurrent with demand, additional measures are required. ~iSposal and ReuSe of McAS Tustin E~S/~iR ..... ~ ' ....... ~CH No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS II. THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD CONTENTS OF THE RECORD The following information is incorporated by reference and made part ofthe record supporting these findings and the actions taken by City in certiBding the FEIS/EIR and approving the project: The FEIS/EIR and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the FEIS/EIR . All testimony, documentary evidence and all correspondence submitted to or delivered to the City in connection with the meetings, workshops and public hearings at which the Draft EIS/EIR (DEIS/EIR) or FEIS/EIR was considered by the City. All testimony, documentary evidence, and correspondence of the Base Closure Task Force in which the DEIS/EIR or FEIS/EIR was considered. . All staff reports, memoranda, maps, slides, letters, minutes of meetings and other documents relied upon or prepared by City staff and consultants relating to the project. 5. Any other documents specified by Public Resources Code section 21167.6(e).. LOCATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD The City is the custodian of the administrative record, including all CEQA documents and the other back~ound documents and materials, which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which City Council decisions to certify the FEIS/EIR and approve the project are based. The administrative record is located at the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency at the City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780. Dispc~'sal ~nd'Reuse of MCAS Tustin EIS/EIR '"SCH NoJ'b4071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS III. PURPOSE OF FINDINGS The FEIS/EIR, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental. Quality Act (CEQA), evaluates the significant adverse environmental impacts that could result from the project. Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the public agency approving or carrying out the project shall make written findings for each significant impact identified in the EIR. These findings include one of the following: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as defined in the EIS/EIR. . Such changes or alterations are within the responsibilitY a. nd jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. . Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, 'make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. These findings accomplish the following: They address the significant environmental effects identified in the EIS/EIR for the approved project. , They incorporate all mitigation measures associated with these significant impacts identified in the FEIS/EIR. They indicate whether a significant effect is avoided or reduced by the adopted mitigation measures to a less-than-significant level, or remain significant and unavoidable, either because there are no feasible mitigation measures or because, even with implementation of mitigation measures, a significant impact will occur. The conclusions presented in these findings are based.on the FEIS/EIR and other substantial evidence in the record of proceedings. Each of the effects that remain potentially significant and unavoidable is considered acceptable by the City based on a determination that the benefits of the project outweigh the risks of the potentially significant environmental effect, as set forth in Section IX. Statement of Overriding Considerations. IV. INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES INTO PROJECT DESIGN The mitigation measures identified in the FEIS/EIR as feasible and within the City's responsibility and jurisdiction to implement are hereby incorporated into the design of the Disposal and Reuse projects as required by CEQA. The City shall implement these measures during project implementation. Where the FEIS/EIR identifies feasible mitigation measures within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, the City finds that these other public agencies have adopted the measures, have agreed to adopt the measures, or can and should adopt them. BisP°~al and Reuse'"of MCAS T~stin EIS/EIt~ ' " ~' SCH No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS V. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS The FEIS/EIR indicates that the project would result in significant unavoidable impacts within six environmental impact issue areas. As described below in the findings for each of these impacts, there are either no feasible mitigation measures or the feasible mitigation measures would only partially mitigate the impact'and the residual effect would remain significant. As set forth in Section IX. Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City finds that these impacts are accePtable in light of the projects benefits. AESTHETICS (FEIS/EIR SECTION 4.5 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) . IMPA CT: VIS UA L IMpA C T Impact: The loss of both hangars would be a significant unavoidable visual impact. Mitigation Mitigation measures to retain both blimp hangars if economically feasible are included in Section 4.6 (Cultural and Paleontological Resources) of the FEIS/EIR and are discussed in Section V. of these findings. If not economically feasible, one or both of the hangars may be demolished to accommodate development. If one hangar is demolished, impact would be less than significant: However, if both hangars are demolished, impact on aesthetics due to the change in views would be significant and unavoidable. Within this context, no mitigation measures exist to reduce this impact to less than significant. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that this impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council also finds that there are no feasible mitigation measure that will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES (SECTION 4.6 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA CT: HISTORIC RESO UR CES IMPA CT impact: All of the two discontinuous historic districts would be eliminated. The intent is to retain both hangars, if financially feasible, but one or both of the blimp hangars could be eliminated. The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will reduce potential impacts associated with the elimination of the historic districts and potentially one or both blimp hangars. However, the residual effect will remain significant. Hist-1 Historic American Building Survey (ttABS)- DON will complete the appropriate recordation for hangars 28 and 29 and the discontiguous historic district prior to conveyance of any property within the discontiguous historic district and shall ensure that copies of the D~ssp°Sai and Reuse of MCAS T'u~tin EIS/EIR ........... ,i ............ SCH No. 9407106'5 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS recordation are made available to SHPO, the City of Tustin, and any local or other archive facilities designated by SHPO. Hist-2 Curation- within 30 days of the execution ofthe Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), DON will donate copies of plans and architectural drawings and other archival materials and records, as available, concerning the layout and the buildings and structures that made up the original Navy lighter-than-air blimp facility to a local curation facility. The City of Tustin or its desi~ee will also be provided with copies of these materials. Hist-3 Hist-4 As specified in the MOA, a substantive effort will be made to determine whether there is an economically viable adaptive use of Hangar 28 and Hangar 29. If the marketing effort identifies an economically viable adaptive use of either of the complexes, that complex will be encumbered by a historic preservation covenant. In the case of the Hangar 28 complex, these measures shall balance the needs of the adaptive use and the needs for effective operation of the Federal Lands to Parks or Historic Monument programs. Hist-5 IfNPS and/or SHPO determine that, despite a marketing effort that complies with the terms of the MOA or as agreed to by the City of Tustin/County of Orange, NPS, and/or SHPO, an economically viable adaptive use of the Hangar 28 complex was not identified, NPS and/or SHPO shall promptly advise DON and notify the City of Tustin/County of Orange that the following measures are required. a. Written History- The City of Tustin/County of Orange .shall prepare an illustrated history report on MCAS TUSTIN, with emphasis on the initial construction of the Air Station and its World War II Navy lighter-than-air operations. b. Exhibit - The City of Tustin/County of Orange shall prepare a professional-quality illustrated interpretive exhibit with emphasis on the initial construction of the air station and its World War II Navy lighter-than-air operations. c. InterPretive Video - The City of Tustin/County of Orange shall prepare a professional-quality documentary video and shall undertake a one-time distribution and outreach program for the .documentary video. DoN, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Department of the Interior (National Park Service), the City of Tustin, and the County of Orange have entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) regarding cultural resources and the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin, which is included as Appendix H of the FEIS/EIR. The MOA specifies how the parties will implement the mitigation measures above and binds the parties to implement the measures. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that this impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that the measures listed above will reduce the impact, but there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce the impact to a less-than- Disposal and ~se of MCAs Tu~tin EIS/EiR .... } ............... SCH ~4o. 94~6710°5 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS significant level. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin, have been adopted by the appropriate agency with approval of an MOA. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES (SECTION 4.8 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA CT: A GRICUL TURAL RESO UR CES IMPA CT Impact: Existing farmland would no longer be cultivated. Project development will result in the conversion of approximately 682 acres of P{ime Farmland and 20 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance for a total of 702 acres of Farmland to.non-a~iculmral use. Mitigation No mitigation measures exist to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Potential alternative mitigation measures to reduce this impact were considered in the FEIS/EIR, but rejected as infeasible. Mitigation measures considered were' a) purchase of off-site a~icultural farmland (infeasible due to Cost' between $210.6 and $421.2 million or 10 to 20 times greater than the City's annual general fund budget); b) purchase and improvement ofnon-a~icultural farmland (infeasible because cost of doing so would exceed cost of buying a~iculmral farmland); c) protecting existing farmland using a~icultural easements (infeasible due to cost of $105 to $210 million), transfer of development rights (infeasible because City has no power to establish program outside its jurisdiction, and does not have and is not contemplating such a program), right-to-farm ordinances (infeasible because neither the City nor the County has adopted such an ordinance, and City's General Plan does not identify agriculture as a long-term use), and/or Williamson Act applied to land elsewhere in county (infeasible since only short-term protection for existing agricultural land would be provided, and program is voluntary, preventing City or County from requiring land owners to enroll). Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that this impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. TRAFFIC/CIRcuLATION (SECTION 4.12 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA CT: LONG-TERM TRAFFIC/CIR cULA TION IMPACTS A T THE INTERSECTIONS OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD AND WALNUT A VENUE, AND JAMBOREE ROAD AND BARRANCA PARKWAY Impact: There would be decreased levels of service at certain intersections and road segments. With feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact, significant traffic impacts would remain at the intersections of Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway under full buildout (year 2020). Disposal 'and Reus~'~'fhcAs ~t~stir~'EIS/EIR · 6 ................. SCH No. 940~!005' FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Mitigation The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will reduce potential impacts associated with the intersections of Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway under full buildout (year 2020). However, the residual effect will remain significant. T/C-2 The City of Tustin and the City of IrVine; as applicable (for that portion of the reuse plan area within Irvine), shall ensure that the arterial intersection improvements required in 2005 and 2020 and as indicated in Tables 4.12-7 and 4.12-9 of the FEIS/EIR are implemented for their respectivejurisdicti0ns according to the cumulative ADT thresholds identified in each table and according to the fair share basis noted. The ADT threshold represents the traffic volume which would result in an impact and the fair share percentage reflects the percent of the traffic impact resulting from the reuse generated traffic. In some cases, reuse traffic would generate 100 percent of the impact, thereby assuming full financial responsibility for the identified improvements. In other cases, reuse traffic would generate only a fraction of the traffic impacting the intersection and financial responsibility would correspond. T/C-3 The City of Tustin and the City oflrvine, as applicable (for that portion of the reuse plan area within Irvine), shall contribute, on a fair share basis, to improvements to freeway ramp intersections as listed in Table 4.12-8 of the FEIS/EIR. The method of implementing the improvements, e.g., restriping, ramp widening, shall be based on special design studies, in association with Caltrans. T/C-4 T/C-5 The City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable (for that portion of the reuse plan area within Irvine), shall ensure that all on-site circulation system improvements for the reuse plan area assumed in the 2005 and 2020 traffic analysis and as shown in Table 4.12-10 of the FEIS/EIR are implemented according to the cumulative ADT thresholds identified in the table. Under this Phasing Plan, the City of Tustin shall monitor all new development within the site, accounting for the cumulative ADT generated by development projects. As each ADT threshold is reached, the roadway improvements listed in Table 4.12-10 of the FEIS/EIR shall be constructed before any additional projects within the reuse plan area would be approved. Prior to approval of a site development, permit or vesting tract, except for financing or conveyance purposes, for all land use designation areas in Alternative 1 with the exception ofthe Learning Village, Community Park, and Regional Park, a project developer shall enter into an agreement with the City of Tustin and City oflrvine, as applicable (for that portion of the reuse plan area within Irvine) which assigns improvements required in the EIS/EIR to the development site and which requires participation in a fair share mechanism to design and construct required on-site and arterial improvements consistent with the ADT generation thresholds shown in Tables 4.12-7, 4.12-8, 4.12-9, and'4.12-10 of the FEIS/EIR.~ T/C-6 The City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable (for that portion of the reuse plan area in Irvine), will monitor new development within the reuse plan area, accounting for the Table references in the mitigation measures have been changed from Final FEIS/EIR to match the correct table numbers in the FEIS/EIR. DispoSal and Reuse of MCA~--Tustin EIS/EIR 7 .............. scH No. 94071005 'T/C-7 T/C-8 T/C-9 IA-1 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMEN'f C~"'OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS cumulative ADTs generated by development projects within the retlse plan area. As each cumulative ADT threshold shown in Table 4.12-102 ofthe FEIS/EIR is reached, the roadway improvements listed shall be constructed before any additional projects within the reuse plan area are approved. The City of Tustin shall adopt a trip budget for individual portions of the reuse plan area to assist in the monitoring of cumulative ADTs and the amount and intensity of permitted non-residential uses as evaluated in the EIS/EIR. , Alternative improvements that provide an equivalent level of mitigation in 2005 or 2020 to what is identified in Tables 4.12-7, 4.12-8, and 4.12-9 ofthe FEIS/EIR may be identified in consultation between the City of Tustin and_'the City of Irvine, as applicable, and the impacted jurisdiction. The City of Tustin shall enter into a~eements with Caltrans and the cities of Santa Ana and Irvine to ensure that the off-site roadway improvements needed to mitigate the effects of the proposed alternative are constructed pursuant to improvement programs established by the respective jurisdiction. In order to properly coordinate the tiniing and improvements in the adjacent jurisdictions, the City of Tustin shall hold a scoping-like meeting with the respective jurisdictions. The purpose of said scoping-like meeting shall be to identify the concerns of the respective jurisdictions prior to the initiation of the fair share study. The purpose of the study would be to fully identify, with each jurisdiction, the scope and costs of feasible improvements (as determined by the respective jurisdiction). The improvements would be acceptable to each jurisdiction toward fulfilling the timing and cost of the transportation improvement obligations as required to mitigate transportation impacts in each jurisdiction. The funding for the improvements to be incorporated into the agreement would be utilized by the respective agency to improve the capacity of the impacted intersections/links or be used for substituted improvements, as determined.by mutual agreement.. Prior to execution of the agreement, each jurisdiction would be allowed ten (10) working days to review the technical report prior to being provided with a copy of the proposed agreement. Each jurisdiction would then have ten (10) working days to review and comment as to its concurrence with the improvement programs contained in the agreement. The comments of each jurisdiction would be considered to ensure that the City of Tustin's responsibility for fair share funding of the improvements in each jurisdiction as stated above is fully addressed. Table 4.12-10 of the FEIS/EIR presents the Phasing Plan for the~ on-site circulation system. The Phasing Plan is based upon traffic circulation impact and mitigation analyses contained in the Traffic Report (Final Appendix F). Under this Phasing Plan, the City of Tustin shall monitor all new development within the Specific'Plan, accounting for the cumulative ADT generated by development projects. As each ADT threshold is reached, the roadway 2 Table references in the mitigation measures have been .changed from Final FEIS/EIR to match the correct table numbers in the FEIS/EIR. ~isposal and 'Reuse of MCAS Tustin EIS/EIR 8 SCH No. 94071005 J' FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS improvements listed in Table 4.12-10 of the FEIS/EIR shall be constructed before any additional projects within the Specific Plan would be approved. IA-2 Table 7-3 of the FEIS/EIR presents the Trip Budget which summarizes the square footage of non-residential uses allocated to each neighborhood by Planning Area and the associated ADT. (Residential uses are shown for information only, they are not part of the budget.) Pursuant to Section 3.2.4 of the Specific Plan, the City of Tustin shall implement the trip budget by neighborhood to control the amount and intensity of non-residential uses. Trip Budget transfers between neighborhoods shall also be implemented as directed in subsection 3.2.4 of the Specific Plan. IA-3 Prior to the approval, of (1) a Planning Area Concept Plan pursuant to Section 4.2 of the Specific Plan, (2) a site development permit, or (3) a vesting tentative map for new square footage (not for financing or conveyance purposes), a project developer shall provide traffic information consistent with the provisions of the Specific Plan, this EIS/EIR and the requirements of the City of Tustin Traffic Engineer. The traffic information shall (a) identify, and assi~ traffic circulation mitigation measures required in the EIS/EIR pursuant to the Phasing Plan described in Table 4.12-10 of the FEIS/EIR; (b) evaluate the effects of either the delay of any previously committed circulation improvements or the construction of currently unanticipated circulation improvements; and (c) utilize the circulation system and capacity assumptions within the EIS/EIR and any additional circulation improvements completed by affected jurisdictions for the applicable timeframe of analysis. IA-4 Prior to the issuance of building permits for new development within planning areas requiring a concept plan, a project developer shall enter into an agreement with the City of Tustin to (a) design and construct roadway improvements consistent with the ADT generation Phasing Plan described in Table 4.12-10 of the FEIS/EIR and (b) address the impact of and specify the responsibility for any previously committed circulation improvements assumed in the EIS/EIR which have not been constructed. IA-5 If a subsequent traffic Phasing Plan demonstrates that certain circulation improvements should be included in a different phase of Specific Plan development (accelerated or delayed) or that a circulation improvement can be substituted, the mitigation Phasing Plan in Table 4.12-10 ofthe FEIS/EIR may be amended, subject to approval of the City of Tustin and any other affected jurisdictions, prov. ided that the same level of traffic mitigation and traffic capacity would be provided. . IA-6 The City of Tustin will enter into agreements with Caltrans and the cities of Santa Ana and Irvine to ensure that the off-site roadway improvements needed to mitigate the effects of the Specific Plan are constructed pursuant to improvement programs established by the respective jurisdiction. In order to properly coordinate the timing and funding of fair'share obligation of Specific Plan improvements in the adjacent jurisdictions, the City of Tustin shall hold a scoping-like meeting with the respective jurisdictions. The purpose of said scoping-like meeting shall be to identify the concerns of the respective jurisdictions prior to the initiation of the fair share study. The purpose of the study would be to fully identify, with each jurisdiction, the scope and costs of feasible improvements (as determined by the respective jurisdiction). The improvements would be acceptable to each jurisdiction toward fulfilling the timing and b.'is'posai and Reuse OfMCAS Tt~tin EIS/EIR sCH No. 9407-1005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS cost of the transportation improvement obligations of the'Specific Plan as required to mitigate transportation impacts in each jurisdiction, as listed above. The funding for the improvements to be incorporated into the agreement would be utilized by the respective agency to improve the capacity of the impacted intersections/links or be used for substituted improvements, as determined by mutual agreement. Prior to execution of the agreement, each jurisdiction would be allowed ten workino days to review the technical report prior to .being provided with a copy of the proposed a~eement. Each jurisdiction would then have ten working days to review and comment as to its concurrence with the improvement programs contained in the agreement. The comments of each jurisdiction would be con. sidered to ensure that the City of Tustin's responsibility for fair share funding of the improvements in each jurisdiction as stated above is fully addressed. IA-7 Each Specific Plan project would contain, to the satisfaction of the City of Tustin and/or City oflrvine, as applicable, a pedestrian circulation Component showing pedestrian access, to regional hiking trails, parks, schools, shopping areas, bus stops, and/or other public facilities. Mitigation measure T/C-9 requires the City of Tustin to enter into a~eements with Caltrans and the cities of Santa Ana and Irvine to ensure that the off-site roadway improvements needed to mitigate traffic effects are constructed pursuant to improvement programs established by the respective jurisdiction. For improvements identified within the jurisdiction of other agencies, those agencies can and should adopt them. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that this impact is significant and tinavoidable. The City Council further finds that the measures listed above will reduce the impact, but there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin can and should be adopted by them. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of' the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. AIR QUALITY (SECTION 4.13 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA CT: A IR Q UA L I T Y IMPA C TS FR OM CONS TR U C TION Impact: Peak reduced emissions of suspended particulates (PM~0), reactive organic compounds (ROC), and oxides of nitrogen (NO0 due to construction activities would 'exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds of significance during some or all phases of the project. Mitigation The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will reduce potential impacts associated with air quality impacts from construction. However, the residual effect will remain significant. Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin EIS/EIR 10 SCH No. 94071005 .-.... '... · · · . . . . . FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AQ-I If determined feasible and appropriate on a project-by-project basis, the Ci~' of Tustin and the CiW oflrvine, as applicable, shall require individual development projects to implement one or more. of the following control measures, if not already required b.y the SCAQMD under Rule 403' AQ-2 Apply water twice daily, or chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging areas or unpaved road surfaces at all actively disturbed sites. Develop a construction traffic management plan that includes, but is not limited to, rerouting construction trucks off congested streets, consolidating truck deliveries, and providing dedicated turn lanes 'for movement of construction trucks and equipment onsite and offsite. Use electrici'ty from power poles rather than temporary diesel or gasoline powered generators. Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 mph or less. Pave'construction roads that have a traffic volume of more than 50 daily trips by construction equipment or 150 total daily trips for all vehicles. Apply approved chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for four days or more). Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply approved soil binders according to manufacturers' specifications, to exposed piles of gravel, sand, or dirt. Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, and maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., minimum vertical distance between top of the load and top of the trailer). Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent roads (use water sweepers with reclaimed water when feasible). Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. Unless determined by the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, to be infeasible on a project-by-project basis due to unique project characteristics, each city shall require individual development projects to use low VOC architectural coatings for all interior and exterior painting operations. Mitigation measures AQ-I and AQ-2 require the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, to require projects to implement measures to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants during construction if determined feasible and appropriate on a project-by-project basis. The City of Irvine can and should adopt these mitigation measures. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that this impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin, can and should be adopted by the City of lrvine. Specific economic, legal, Disposal anti R~Luse ~f McAs Tt~stin"EIS/eiR .... i ! ....... SCH No.'94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDEILATIONS social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. IMPA CT: AIR QUALITY IMPACTS FROM MOBILE (VEHICULAR) AND STA TIONAR Y SOURCES Impact: Long-term operation emissions from mobile (vehicular) and stationary sources would exceed 'SCAQMD thresholds of significance for CO, NO~, and ROC. Mitigation The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and wili be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will reduce potential impacts associated with long-term air quality impacts from mobile (vehicular) and stationary sources. However, the residual effect will remain significant. AQ-3 Prior to the issuance of development permits ~'or new non-residential projects with 100 or more employees, and expanded projects where additional square footage would result in a total of 100 or more employees, the City of Tustin and the City oflrvine, as applicable, shall impose a mix of TDM measures which, upon estimation, would result in an average vehicle ridership of at least 1.5, for each development with characteristics that would be reasonably conducive to successful implementation of such TDM measures. These TDM measures may include one or more of the following, as determined appropriate and feasible by each city on a case-by-case basis: Establish preferential parking for carpool vehicles. Provide bicycle parking facilities. Provide shower and locker facilities. Provide carpool and vanpool loading areas. Incorporate bus stop improvements into facility design. Implement shuttles to shopping, eating, recreation, and/or parking and transit facilities. Construct remote parking facilities. Provide pedestrian circulation linkages. Construct pedestrian grade separations. Establish carpool and vanpool programs. Provide cash allowances, passes, and other public transit and purchase incentives. Establish parking fees for single occupancy vehicles. Provide parking subsidies for rideshare vehicles. Institute a computerized commuter rideshare matching system. Provide a guaranteed ride-home program for ridesharing. Establish alternative work week, flex-time, and compressed work week schedules. Establish telecommuting or work-at-home programs. Provide additional vacation 'and compensatory leave incentives. Provide on-site lunch rooms/cafeterias and commercial services such as banks, restaurants, and small retail. Provide on-site day care facilities. Establish an employee transportation coordinator(s). ~i'sposai and Reuse of MCAS Tustin EIS/EIR 12 SCH No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AQ-4 If not required under each individual development's TDM plan, the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, shall implement the following measures, as determined appropriate or feasible by each city on a case-by-case basis: Reschedule truck deliveries and pickups for off-peak hours. Implement lunch shuttle service from a wovksite(s) to food establishments. Implement compressed work week schedules where weekly work hours are compressed into fewer than five days, such as 9/80, 4/40, or 3/36. Provide on-site child care and after-school facilities or contribute to off-site developments within walking distance. Provide on-site employee services such as cafeterias, banks, etc. Implement a pricing structure for single-occupancy employee parking, and/or provide discounts to ridesharers. Construct off-site pedestrian facility improvements such as overpasses and wider sidewalks. Include retail services within or adjacent to residential subdivisions. Provide shuttles to major rail transit centers or multi-modal stations. Contribute to regional transit systems (e,g., right-of-way, capital improvements, etc.). Synchronize traffic lights on streets impacted by development. Construct, contribute, or dedicate land for the provision of off-site bicycle trails linking the facility to designated bicycle commuting routes. Include residential units within a commercial development. Provide off-site bicycle facility improvements, such as bicycle trails linking the facility to designated bicycle commuting routes, or on-site improvements, such as bicycle paths. Include bicycle Parking facilities such as bicycle lockers. Include showers for bicycling and pedestrian employees' use. Construct on-site pedestrian facility improvements, such as building access which is physically separated from street and parking lot traffic, and walk paths. Mitigation measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 require the. City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, to require projects to implement measures to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants during long-term operation if determined feasible and appropriate on a case-by-case basis. The City of Irvine can and should adopt these mitigation measures. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that this impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that the measures listed above will reduce the impact, but there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less-than,significant level. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City. of Tustin can and should be adopted. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify' approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tusti 'n'klS/l~'i'i~ ........ 'i3 .................. SCH No. 94071005 IMPA C T: Impact: .... , .. , .. ,... ...'. · .. INCONSISTENCY WITH SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN (SCAB) AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (A QMP) · The proposed project has not been included in the modeling assumptions of the 1994 or 1997 AQMPs, and is therefore inconsistent with the AQMP. FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ,, Mitigation No feasible mitigation measures exist to reduce this impact to less than significant. SCAQMD will need to include the proposed project in the 2000 AQMP, such that the proposed project will be consistent with furore AQMPs. However, the project will not be consistent with the existing AQMP, which cannot be amended to include the project at this time. ' Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that the impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant levei. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS (cHAPTER 5.0 AND'CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA C T: CUM ULA TI VE A ES THE TIC IMPA C T Impact: Reuse ofMCAS Tustin and the possible resultant loss of both blimp hangars, in conjunction with other development in Orange County (in particular, reuse of the former MCAS El Toro), would result in a significant change in the visual setting of the area. Mitigation Mitigation measures to retain both blimp hangars if economically feasible are included in Section 4.6 (Cultural and Paleontological Resources) of the FEIS/EIR and are discussed in Section V. of these findings. If not economically feasible, one or both of the hangars may be demolished to accommodate development. If one hangar is demolished, impact would be less than significant. However, if both hangars are demolished, impact on aesthetics due to the change in views would be significant and unavoidable. Within this context, no mitigation measures exist to reduce this impact to less than significant. Hence, the proposed project in conjunction with other development in Orange County, and in particular the disposal and reuse of the former MCAS El Toro, would contribute to significant cumulative visual impacts. · DoN, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Department of the Interior (National Park Service), the City of Tustin, and the County of Orange have entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) regarding the blimp hangars, which is included as Appendix H of the FEIS/EIR. The MOA specifies how the parties will implement the mitigation measures and binds the parties to implement the measures. Disposal and Reuse of l~i'O',~ Tt]stih i~iS/EIR ........ 14 SCH"No. 940~100~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDEt~TIONS Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that this impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. The Cit)' Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin, have been adopted by the appropriate agency. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. IMPA CT: Impact: CUMULATIVE CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL IMPACTS The project would result in irreversibly eliminating most of the two discontiguous eligible historic districts and could result in the demolition of one or both blimp hangars, depending on whether reuse is financially feasible. These actions would contribute to a cumulative loss of World War II United States military development, which is increasingly being demolished due to military base closings. Mitigation Mitigation for historic resources included in the FEIS/EIR and in Section V. of these findings will reduce impacts to the de~ee feasible. However, the residual effect will remain significant. DoN, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Department of the Interior (National Park Service), the City of Tustin, and the Count5' of Orange have entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) regarding cultural and paleontological resources and the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin, which is included as Appendix H of the FEIS/EIR. The MOA specifies how the parties will implement the mitigation measures above and binds the parties to implement the measures. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that this impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin, have been adopted by the appropriate agency. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. IMPA CT: CUMULATIVE A GRICUL TURAL RESO UR CES IMPACTS Impact: The proposed project would result in conversion of approximately 702 acres of Farmland. While this conversion is typical in Orange County, the cumulative impact would be significant because this Farmland and other agricultural land being convened in Orange County represents some of the last remaining agricultural 'land in the County. .: iSisposal and Reuse of ~CAS Tustin EIS/EIR ...... Scft No. 9407166.~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Mitigation No mitigation measures exist to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures to reduce this impact at the project level were considered in the FEIS/EIR, but rejected as infeasible. Mitigation measures considered were: a) purchase of off-site a~icultural farmland (infeasible due to cost between $210.6 and $421.2 million or 10 to 20 times greater than the City's annual general fund budget); b) purchase and' improvement of non-agricultural farmland (infeasible because cost of doino so would exceed cost of buying agricultural farmland); c) protecting-existing farmland using a~icultural easements (infeasible due to cost of $105 to $210 million), transfer of development rights (infeasible because City has no power to establish program outside its jurisdiction, and does not have and is not contemplating such a pro.am), right-to-farm ordinances (infeasible because, neither the City nor the County has adopted such an ordinance, and City's General Plan does not i~lentify a~iculture as a long-term use), and/or Williamson Act applied to land elsewhere in county (infeasible since only short-term protection for existing a~icultural land would be provided, and'program is voluntary, preventing City or County from requiring land owners to enroll). Impact will be significant, irreversible, and unavoidable. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that the impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. IMPA CT: CUMULATIVE TRANSPOR TA TION/CIR CULA TION IMPACTS Impact: The analysis of project-level impacts in the FEIS/EIR consider the project's contribution to cumulative impacts. While most impacts can be mitigated to less-than-significant · levels, significant traffic impacts would remain at the intersections of Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway under full buildout (year 2020) Mitigation Mitigation for transportation/circulation impacts included in the FEIS/EIR and in Section V. of these findings will reduce impacts to the degree feasible. However, the residual effect at the intersections of Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway under full buildout (year 2020) will remain significant. Mitigation measure T/C-9 requires the City of Tustin to enter into agreements with Caltrans and the cities of Santa Ana and Irvine to ensure that the off-site roadway improvements: needed to mitigate traffic effects are constructed pursuant to improvement programs established by the respective jurisdiction. For improvements identified within the jurisdiction of other agencies, those agencies can and should adopt them. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire 'record before the Tustin City Council, the City.Council finds that the impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that there are no feasible DisPosal'and'R'eu'~e of M(~AS Tustin EIs/EIR .......... 16 sCF[No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS mitigation measures that will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin, have been adopted by the appropriate agency, or can and should be adopted. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. IMPA CT: CUMULATIVE AIR ~UALITY IMPACTS Impact: The project, when considered with projected growth in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), will contribute to si~ificant air qua!ity impacts. Mitigation Mitigation for air quality impacts included in the FEIS/EIR and in Section V. of these Findings will reduce impacts to the degree feasible. However, the residual effect will remain significant. Mitigation measures AQ-1 through AQ4 require the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, to require projects to implement measures to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants if determined feasible and appropriate on a project-by-project basis. The City of Irvine can and should adopt these mitigation measures. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that the impact is significant and unavoidable. The City Council further finds that there are no feasible mitigation measures.that will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin, can and should be adopted by the appropriate agency. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations justify approval of the project notwithstanding this impact as more fully described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Disposai-and-Reu'~-e of MCAS Vustin EIS/EI~ 17 ................. 5~C~1 Ngl 9407100~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS _ VI. FINDINGS CONCERN~G SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS REDUCED TO LESS- THAN-SIGNIFICANT LEVELS BY MITIGATION MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT The FEIS/EIR identifies si=onificant impacts that are reduced to a "less-than-significant" level by the inclusion in the project approval of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIS/EIR. It is' hereby determined that these significant environmental impacts of the project will be avoided or substantially lessened by the inclusion of the identified mitigation measures. LAND USE (SECTION 4.11 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA CT: LAND USE Impact: Land use categories would not be consistent with the City.ofTustin General Plan, the Tustin zoning ordinance, the City of Irvine General Plan, and the Irvine zoning ordinance. Planned development may have compatibility impacts between land uses. Mitigation The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will mitigate the impact to less-than-significant levels. LU-1 The City of Tustin shall amend its General Plan and zoning ordinance to be consistent with planned land uses. Any zoning ordinance shall include site design measures such as buffering, landscaping, screening, and setbacks, to ensure high quality development and compatibility between land uses. The goal is to assure that the overall appearance of development on the site is at least similar in quality to other master planned areas in Tustin and other adjacent cities. LU-2 The City of Irvine shall amend its General Plan and zoning ordinance to be consistent with planned land uses. Any zoning ordinance shall include site design measures such as buffering, landscaping, screening, and setbacks, to ensure high quality development and compatibility between land uses. The goal is to assure that the overall appearance of development on the site is at least similar in quality to other master planned areas in Tustin and other adjacent cities. Mitigation measure LU-2 requires the City of Irvine to amend its General Plan and zoning ordinance to be consistent with planned land uses. The City 0fIrvine can and should adopt this mitigation measure. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that will avoid the significant effects as identified in the FEIS/EIR, by reducing potential effects to less-than-significant levels. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or-agencies other than the City of Tustin can and should be adopted. DispOSal and Reuse °f'McXS'Tusti~' EiS/EIR SCH"No. 940710'05 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AESTHETICS (SECTION 4.5 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA C T: VIS UAL Impact: There is the potential for visual impacts if landscaping and urban design do not fully address aesthetic considerations; i.e., do not maintain view corridors, provide screening, or incorporate landscaping. Mitigation Measures The following implementation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These implementation measures will mitigate the iml~acts to less-than-significant levels. Vis-1 In conjunction with any zoning ordinance amendments to implement the reuse plan in Tustin or Irvine, an urban design plan shall be adopted to provide for distinct and cohesive architectural and landscape design, features and treatments, as well as harmony' with adjacent landscaping. The urban desi~ plan shall have the following elements: · landscaping concept and master signage plan; · design review and approval process; · limits on development intensity for each specific land use; · limits on height of structures and lot coverage; · minimum site building setbacks; · minimum on-site landscaping requirements; · buffering requirements, including berms, masonry walls, and landscaping; · lighting regulations, including regulations ensuring that exterior lighting does not negatively impact surrounding property; ... · screening regulations for mechanical equipment and outside storage; and · site signage requirements, including sign'permit approval. Mitigation measure Vis-1 requires the City oflrvine to implement an urban design plan. The City of Irvine can and should adopt this mitigation measure. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that will avoid the significant effects as identified in the FEIS/EIR, by reducing potential effects to less-than-significant levels. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin can and should be adopted. CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES (SECTION 4.5 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA C T: A R CHA E 0 L 0 Gl CA L RES 0 UR CES Impact: Grading in the four-acre parcel, that has not been surveyed may result in impacts to DiSposal and 'R~use or McAs~ ':i'~'s['i'n EIS/t~'IR ' S'~H No. 94671005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEM.E___NT 0/~ OVERRIDIN, ,,G' CONSIDEKA, TIONS ,, , archaeological resources, if they are present. Grading in the reuse plan area may uncover buried archaeological resources. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will mitigate the impacts to less-than-significant levels. Arch-1 Arch-2 Prior to issuance of grading'permits, the four-acre parcel currently outside the boundaries of the Air Station along Harvard Avenue shall be surveyed to determine the presence/absence of archaeological resources prior to grading. Prior to issuance of grading pe .rmits, the cities of Tustin and Irvine shall each require applicants of individual development projects to retain, as appropriate, a county-certified archaeologist. If buried resources are found during grading within the reuse plan area, a qualified archaeologist would need to assess the site significance and perform the appropriate mitigation. The Native American view point Shall be considered during this process. This could include testing or data recovery. Native American consultation shall also be initiated during this process. Mitigation measure Arch-2 requires the City oflrvine to require applicants of individual development projects to retain, as appropriate, a county-certified archaeologist prior to issuance of grading permits. The City of Irvine can and should adopt this mitigation measure. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project th.at will avoid the significant effects as identified in the FEIS/EIR, by reducing potential effects to less-than-significant levels. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin can and should be adopted. IMPA CT: PALEONTOLOGICAL RESO UR CES Impact' Earthwork activities may destroy geological deposits within which unique paleontological resources are buried. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will mitigate the impact to less-than-significant levels. Paleo-I The cities of Tustin and Irvine shall each require applicants of. individual development projects to comply with the requirements established in a PRMP prepared for the site, which details the methods to be used for surveillance of construction grading, assessing finds, and actions to be taken in the event that unique paleontological resources are discovered during construction. DispOsal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin EIS/EIR 2b ..... SCH No. 9407100.~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Palco-2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, project applicants shall provide written evidence to each city, that a county-certified paleontologist has been retained to conduct salvage excavation of unique paleontological resources if they are found. Mitigation measures Paleo-1 and Paleo-2 require the City of Irvine to require applicants of individual development projects to comply with the requirements established in a PRMP prepared for the site. The City of Irvine can and should adopt this mitigation measure. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the TustinCity Council, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that will avoid the significant effects as identified in the FEIS/EIR, by reducing potential effects to less-than-significant levels. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin can and should be adopted. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (SECTION 4.7 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA CT: BIOLOGICAL RESO UR CES Impact: Approximately 12.8 acres of jurisdictional waters would be indirectly impacted by channel improvements by OCFCD. Another 16.2 acres of jurisdictional waters, of which 2.4 acres are classified as vegetated.or seasonal wetlands, would be directly impacted by reuse. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will mitigate the impacts to less-than-significant levels. Bio-1 The project proponents of any development affecting jurisdictional waters of the U.S. or vegetated wetlands shall obtain Section 404, Section 1601, and other permits as necessary. A replacement ratio for affected wetland resources shall be determined in consultation with regulatory agencies as part of the permitting process. The actions proposed on Peters Canyon Channel shall be mitigated by the OCFCD who is the project proponent for flood control' improvements. Bio-2 Based on consultations with CDFG, City of Tustin, or project proponent as applicable, an off-site relocation site for southwestern pond turtles captured on site shall be identified that is as close to the reuse plan area as possible, and that is sustainable in perpetuity. (No appropriate habitat in the City of Tustin is available for relocation.) Potential relocation sites include but are not limited to an old pond (currently thought dry) located in upper Shady Canyon within the Orange County Nature Preserve that could be improved or restored to serve as a relocation site; or San Joaquin Marsh, which is managed by UC Irvine, Irvine Ranch, and the Orange County Water District. Some property owners and public agencies may be adverse to the relocation of species of special concern onto their property or jurisdiction, and it would be speculative to identi~ actual sites prior to completion of consultation with CDFG and with potential property owners and/or appropriate public agencies. Disposal anc~ R'et~se of MC~; Tustin EIs)I~IR scH No. 9407i00~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Bio-3 Permits from the CDFG shall be obtained for live-capture of the turtles and for transporting them to the relocation site. Bio-4 An agreement shall be negotiated with the CDFG, City of Tustin, project proponent, or other agency or organization as appropriate, for contribution of funds to improve, restore, or create the relocation site as turtle habitat. Mitigation measure Bio-1 requires that project proponents of any development affecting jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and OCFCD replace affected wetland resources at a ratio determined in consultation with regulatory agencies as part of the permitting process. Mitigation measures Bio-2 through Bio-4 require that CDFG, the City of Tustin, project proponent, or O{her appropriate agency or organization enter into an agreement to improve, restore, or create a relocation site for turtle habitat and that permits shall be obtained for live-capture of turtles. OCFCD, CDFG, and other appropriate agencies can and' should adopt these mitigation measures. o Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that will avoid the significant effects as identified.in the. FEIS/EIR, by reducing potential effects to less-than-significant levels. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City .of Tustin can and should be adopted. TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION (SECTIONS 4.12 AND 7.2.12 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA CT: SHOR T- TERM TRAFFIC/CIR CULA TION IMPACTS FR OM CONSTRUCTION Impact: There would be potential short-term delay and road closures during construction. There would be decreased levels of service at certain intersections and road segments. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures, are hereby adopted'and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will mitigate the impacts to less-than-significant levels.. T/C-1. In conjunction with the approval of a site development permit, the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable (for that portion of the reuse plan within Irvine), shall require each developer to provide traffic operations and control plans that would minimize the traffic impacts of proposed construction activity. The plans shall address roadway and lane closures, truck hours and routes, and notification procedures for planned short-term or interim changes in traffic patterns. The City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, shall ensure that the plan would minimize anticipated delays at major intersections. Prior to approval, the City of Tustin or the City oflrvine, as applicable shall review the proposed traffic control and operations plans with any affected jurisdiction. Mitigation measure T/C-I requires the City of Irvine to require each developer to provide traffic operations and control plans that would minimize the traffic impacts of proposed construction activity. 'DiSposal and Reu"s~ ~f MCAS Tustin EI~;/EIR 22 SCH NO. 94071005 .. · FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City oflrvine can and should adopt this mitigation measure. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that will avoid the significant effects as identified in the FEIS/EIR, by reducing potential effects to less-than-significant levels. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin can and should be adopted. IMPA CT: Impact: LONG- TERM TRA FFIC/CIR C ULA TION IMPACTS A number of intersections would be si~ificantly impacted at buildout of the project. Most of these impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant. However, significant traffic impacts would remain at the intersections of Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway under full buildout (year 2020). These unmitigable impacts are discussed in Section V. of these findings. All other impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Mitigation Measures The mitigation measures for long-term traffic/circulation impacts listed in Section V. of these findings are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will mitigate the impacts to less-than-significant levels, except at the intersections of Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway under full buildout (year 2020). Mitigation measure T/C-9 requires the City of Tustin to enter into agreements with Caltrans and the cities of Santa Ana and Irvine to ensure that the off-site roadway improvements needed to mitigate traffic effects are constructed pursuant to improvement programs established by the respective jurisdiction. For improvements identified within the jurisdiction of other agencies, those agencies have agreed to adopt the measures, or can and should adopt them. · Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that will avoid the significant effects as identified in the FEIS/EIR, by reducing potential effects to less-than-significant levels. The City Council . further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City Of Tustin can and should be adopted. NOISE (SECTION 4.14 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) IMPA CT: LONG- TERM NOISE IMPACTS FR OM OPERA TION Impact: The proposed extension of Tustin Ranch Road could expose existing residences to noise levels greater than 65 dB(A) CNEL. Some existing residential units within the reuse area may experience noise levels greater than 65 dB(A) CNEL. With reuse and future development, noise levels at residential and park locations adjacent-to Warner Avenue may exceed 65 dB(A)CNEL. DiSpt3'sh~' ~ind Reuse of ~'CAs Tustin EIS/EIR 23 ' ' ..... SCH No. 94071005'- FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT O~ OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP. These measures will mitigate the impact to less-than-significant levels. N-1 N-2 Prior to reuse of any existing residential units within the reuse area for civilian use, the City of Tustin or the City of Irvine, as applicable, and where necessary and feasible, shall require the installation of noise attenuation barriers, insulation, or similar devices to ensure that interior and exterior noise levels at these residential units do not exceed applicable noise standards. During design of the grade-separated intersection of Tustin Ranch Road at Edinger Avenue, the City of Tustin shall evaluate potential noise impacts on surrounding properties to the northeast of Edinger Avenue and shall incorporate into the design of this intersection noise attenuation measures determined appropriate and feasible by the City of Tustin, in order to ensure that these surrounding properties do not experience noise levels that exceed City of Tustin noise standards. N-3 For new development within the reuse area, the City of Tustin and City oflrvine, as applicable, shall ensure that interior and exterior noise levels do not exceed those prescribed by state requirements and local city ordinances and general plans. Plans demonstrating noise regulation conformity shall be submitted for review and approval prior to building permits being issued to accommodate reuse. · N-4 Prior to' the connection of Warner Avenue to the North Loop Road or the South Loop Road, the City of Tustin shall conduct an acoustical study to assess reuse traffic noise impacts to existing sensitive receptors adjacent to Warner Avenue, between Harvard Avenue and Culver Drive. If mitigation of reuse traffic noise impacts is required, the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine shall enter into an agreement that defines required mitigation and which allocates the cost of mitigation between the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine on a fair share basis. Mitigation measures N-l through N-4 require the City of Irvine to take steps to reduce potential noise impacts. The City of Irvine can and should adopt these mitigation measures. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that will avoid the significant effects as identified in the FEIS/£IR, by reducing potential effects to less-than-significant levels. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of an agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin, can and should be adopted. Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustir~ EIS/~IR ' 24 .... SCH No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FINDINGS CONCERN~G LESS~THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WITH IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES The FEIS/EIR i~lentifies implementation measures to ensure that adequate utilities and public services and facilities are provided concurrently with development within the reuse plan area. Implementation measures are to be required where environmental impacts are less than significant, but to support proposed development within the reuse plan area concurrent with demand, additional measures are required. For these purposes, both implementation measures and mitigation measures are identified and are equally enforceable. It is hereby determined that these implementation measures will ensure that utilities and public services and facilities are provided when needed. UTILITIES (SECTION 4.3 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) NEED: Need' PRO VISION OF UTILITIES CONCURRENT WITH DEMAND · To support proposed' development in the reuse plan area, backbone utility systems must be provided concurrent'with demand. Implementation Measures The following implementation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP: : (a) The Ciw of Tustin or City of Irvine,~ as appropriate, shall ensure that infrastructure is constructed in phases as triggered by identified thresholds in Table 4.3-1 of the FEIS/EIR. The Phasing Plan provides an organizational framework to facilitate development Of the reuse plan area i;n tandem with infrastructure necessary to support the planned development. This framework reflects the fact that each component of the infrastructure has its own threshold for accommodating additional development toward build-out of the reuse plan area. The triggering mechanisms that identify timing of key infrastructure provisions are summarized in Table 4.3-1 of the FEIS/EIR. (b) Prior to a final map recordation (except for financing and reconveyance purposes), the- development applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City of Tustin and City of Irvine and any appropriate regional utility agencies, districts, and providers, as applicable, to dedicate all easement,: rights-of-way, or other land determined necessary to construct adequate utility infrastructure and facilities to serve the project as determined by the city, agency, district, or other providers. (c) Prior to any final map recordation (except for financing and conveyance purposes), the development applicant shall enter into a secured agreement with the cities of Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable, to participate on a pro-rated basis in construction of capital improvements necessary to provide adequate utility facilities. (d) Prior to the issuance of permits for any public improvements or development project, a. development applicant shall submit to the City of Tustin and City of Irvine, as applicable, information from IRWD which outlines required facilities necessary to provide adequate potable water and reclaimed water service to the development. 13isposal and Reus'e of M~AS Tustin EiS/EIR J , , .... S-~H N~.' 9403 i~)0~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ......................... (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) ti) (k) Prior to the issuance of the certificates of use and occupancy, the project developer shall ensure that fire hydrants capable of flows in amounts approved by the OCFA are in place and operational to meet fire flow requirements. Prior to the issuance of permits for any public improvements or development project, a development applicant shall submit to the City of Tustin and City of Irvine, as applicable, information fi-om IRWD, OCSD, or the City of Tustin which outlines required facilities necessary to provide adequate sanitary sewage service to the development. Prior to the issuance of grading permits or apl3roval of any subdivision map (except for financing and reconveyance purposes), whichever occurs first, for development within the 100-year flood plain, grading and drainage systems shall be designed by the project developer such that all building pads would be safe from inundation from runoff from all storms up to and including the theoretical 100-year storm, to the satisfaction of the City of Tustin Building Division or the Irvine Public Works Department, as applicable. Grading permits or subdivision maps generated for financing and reconveyance purposes are exempt. Prior to construction of regional flood control facilities, appropriate state and federal approvals, including agreements and permits, shall be obtained. These include but are not limited to Regional Water Quality Control Board permits, including NPDES permits; Section 404 permits from the USACOE, and Section 1601 or 1603 agreements from the CDFG in a manner meeting the approval of the City of Tustin and the Irvine Public Works Department, as applicable. Prior to issuance of any grading permit or approval of any subdivision map (except for financing and conveyance purposes), for any development that is either partially or completely located within the 100-year flood plain of the Flood Insurance Rate Map, the development applicant shall submit all required documentation to the FEMA and demonstrate that the application for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision for changes to the 100-year flood plain is satisfied in a manner meeting the approval of each respective city, as applicable. Prior to the approval of any applicable subdivision map (except for financing and conveyance purposes), the developer-applicant shall design and construct local drainage systems for conveyance of the 10-year runoff. If the facility is in a local sump, it shall be designed to convey the 25-year runoff. Prior to any grading for any new development, the following drainage studies shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Tustin, City of Irvine, and/or OCFCD, as , applicable' (1) A drainage study including diversions (i.e., off-site areas that drain onto and/or through the project site), with justification and appropriate mitigation for any proposed diversion; DispOsal and Reuse";f MCA~'ffustin EiS)EiR ............ '56 .... SCH No. 940'71005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS (2) A drainage study evidencing that proposed drainage patterns would not result in increased 100-year peak discharges within and downstream of the project limits, and would not worsen existing drainage conditions at storm drains, culverts, and other street crossings including regional flood control facilities. The study shall also propose appropriate mitigation for any increased runoff causing a worsening 'condition of any existing facilities within or downstream of project limits. Implementation of appropriate interim or ultimate flood control infrastructure construction must be included. (3) Detailed drainage studies indicating how, in conjunction with. the drainage conveyance systems including applicable swales, channels, street flows, catch basins, storm drains, and flood water retarding, building pads are made safe from runoff inundation which may be expected from all storms up to and including the theoretical 10'0-year flood. (1) Prior to approval of any subdivision map (except for financing or conveyance purposes), an a~eement will be executed with the OCFCD that provides for the identification and contribution of a project-specific fair share contribution toward the construction of ultimate flood control facilities needed to accommodate build-out of the affected project. Interim flood control facilities may be considered for approval provided such facilities meet OCFCD requirements. Nothing shall preclude the City of Tustin from transferring the obligation onto other project developers within the project area. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that these implementation measures have been incorporated into the project. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City of Irvine or other agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin can and should be adopted. PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES (SECTION 4.4 AND CHAPTER 7.0 OF THE FEIS/EIR) NEED: PR 0 VISION OF PUBLIC SER VICES AND FA CILITIES CONCURRENT WITH DEMAND Need' To support proposed development in the reuse plan area, public services and facilities must be provided concurrent with demand. Implementation Measures The following implementation measures are hereby.adopted and will be implemented as set forth in the MMRP: General (m) The City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, each within its respective jurisdiction, shall. · ensure that adequate fire protection, police protection, and parks and recreation facilities Disposal' anti 'ReuSe'Of MCAS Tust'in EIg/EiR SCH No. 9407 !0~)~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS (including bikeways/trails) needed to adequately serve the reuse plan area shall be provided as necessary~ To eliminate any negative impact the project could have on each community's general fund, financing mechanisms including but not limited to developer fees, assessment district financing, and/or tax increment financing (in the event that a redevelopment project area is created for the site), shall be developed and used as determined appropriate by each City. Specifically; (1) Applicants for private development projects shall be required to enter into an agreement with City of Tustin or the City of Irvine, as applicable, to establish a fair-share mechanism to provide needed fire and police protection services and parks and recreation facilities (includi.ng bikeways) through the use of fee schedules, assessment district financing, Community Facility District financing, or other mechanisms as determined appropriate by each respective city. (2) Recipients of property through public conveyance process shall be required to mitigate any impacts of their public uses of property on public services and facilities. (n) The cities of Tustin and Irvine shall jointly consult and coordinate with the OCPFRD/Harbors, Beaches and Parks, Program Management and Coordination Division, in preparation of trail designs for the Peters Canyon and Barranca trails within the reuse plan area. Improvements for each of these trails would be installed upon completion of flood control channel improvements and approval of their joint use by the OCPFRD. Fire Protection/Emergency Medical Services (o) Prior to the first final map recordation or building permit issuance for development (except for financing and reconveyances purposes), the project developer could be required to enter into an agreement with the City of Tustin or citY of Irvine/OCFA, as applicable, to address impacts of the project on fire services. Such agreement could include participation for fire protection, personnel and equipment necessary to serve the project and eliminate any negative impacts on fire protection services. (P) Prior to issuance of building permits, the'project developer shall work closely with the OCFA to.ensure that adequate fire protection measures are implemented in the project. (q) Prior to issuance of building permits for phased projects, the project developer shall submit a construction phasing plan to the OCFA demonstrating that emergency vehicle access is adequate. (r) Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project developer shall submit a fire hydrant location plan for the review and approval of the Fire Chief and ensure that fire hydrants capable of flows in amounts approved by the OCFA are in place and operational to meet fire flow requirements. Police Protection (s) Prior to issuance of building permits, the project developer shall work closely with the DiSposal an~J"i~euse of MCAS Tustin' EiS/EIR .......... ........ SCH '~'o.' 64071055 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS respective Police Department to ensure that adequate security precautions are implemented in the project. Schools (t) Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and occupancy, the project developer shall submit to the respective City proof of payment of appropriate school fees adopted by the applicable school district. Parks and Recreation (u) Prior to the first final map recordation (except: for financing and reconveyance purposes) or building permit issuance for development within the City of Tustin portion of the site, the project developer shall be required to provide evidence, of compliance with all requirements and standards of the City of Tustin Park Code. (v) (w) Prior to the first final map recordation or building permit issuance within the City of Irvine portion of the site, the project developer shall be required to provide evidence of compliance with all requirements and standards of the City of Irvine Park Code. Prior to the first concept plan for tentative tract map in the City of Tustin, the project developer shall file a petition for the creation of a landscape maintenance district for the project area with the City of Tustin. The district shall include public neighborhood parks, landscape improvements, and specific trails (Barranca only), the medians in arterials, or other eligible items mutually a~eed to by the petitioner and the City of Tustin. In the event that a district is not established prior to issuance of the first building permit, maintenance of items mentioned above shall be the responsibility of a community association. (x) "Prior to approval of any subdivision map (except for financing or conveyance purposes), 'an agreement will be executed with the following agencies for the associated trail improvements: ao County of Orange Harbors, Beaches- identification of a project-specific fair share contribution toward the installation of necessary regional bikeway trail improvements within Peters Canyon Channel, to be installed in conjunction with the County of Orange's other channel improvements; b. City of Tustin- the identification of a project-specific fair share contribution 'toward the installation of Class II bicycle trails through the project site. For the area of the site northeast of Irvine Center Drive, a separate agreement would be required to ensure the provision of a bikeway right-of-way easement, and design and construction of a bike trial along the SCRRA/OCTA rail tracks from Harvard Avenue westerly to the Peters Canyon Channel. In addition, project developers of the areas of the site southeast of the Peters Canyon Channel would need to accommodate access to both the Peters Canyon Trail and the trail adjacent to the SCRRA/OCTA tracks in any project site design including dedication of any necessary recreational trail easements; DiSpoSal and ReUS~ of MC~ Tustin EiS/EIR " ~ ...... SCi-I No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Co City of Tustin - the identification of a project-specific fair-share contribution toward installation of Class I bikeway trail improvements northerly of Barranca Parkway after completion of the Barranca Channel improvements. For proposed developments adjacent to Barranca Channel, separate agreements would be required to ensure the establishment of a bikeway right-of-way easement between Jamboree Road and Red Hill Avenue. Findings Based on the FEIS/EIR and the entire record'before the Tustin City Council, the City Council finds that these implementation measures have been incorporated into the project. The City Council further finds that those measures listed above which are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City of Irvine or other agency or agencies other than the City of Tustin can and should be adopted. DisPosal and Ret~se oflV/CAS Tustin EIS/EIR 30 SCH No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS VIII. FINDINGS OF FACT CONCERNING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15091, the City of Tustin (City) upon review of the FEIS/EIR, including the comments and responses therein, and based on all the information and evidence in the records, hereby makes the findings set herein: CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR "describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project or to location'of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the signdicant effects of the project..." (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(a)). If a project alternative will substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of a proposed project, the decision maker shall not approve the proposed project unless it determines that specific economic, legal, social, techn61ogical, or other considerations make the alternatives infeasible. The findings with respect to alternatives to the project identified in the EIR are described in this section. REASON~LE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES The EIS/EIR analyzed a reasonable range of alternatives, including the DON Disposal Alternative, the LRA Reuse Alternative (described in the FEIS/EIR as Alternative 1, for which these findings address), two other alternatives (described in the FEIS/EIR as Alternatives 2 and 3), and the No Action Alternative (described in the FEIS/EIR as Alternative 4). The alternatives presented in the FEIS/EIR were developed' based on applicable laws and from extensive public and other public agency input during the reuse planning process (as described in Chapter 2.0 of the FEIS/EIR). These alternatives 'focused on different programmatic objectives identified by the City, DON, the City's Base Closure Task Force, the public, and other public agencies. Key differences between the three reuse alternatives (Alternatives 1, 2, and 3) are presented in Tables 1 and 2. The City,.as required by federal laws, undertook extensive public outreach to homeless service providers to ~olicit and consider conveyance requests, as discussed in Section 2.2.2 of the FEIS/EIR. Also, a number of additional alternatives for the site were considered but rejected, as discussed in Section 2.3 of the FEIS/EIR. .The DON Disposal Alternative analyzes the direct environmental effects of DON's disposal of MCAS Tustin, without consideration of the reuse options, pursuant to DON NEPA guidelines. Since this disposal action is necessary for the three reuse alternatives, it is inherent to each reuse alternative, and is not considered further in these findings. The No Action Alternative evaluated in the FEIS/EIR is in compliance with NEPA. No Action may be defined as the continuation of an existing plan, policy, or procedure, or as failure to implement an action. CEQA also requires a No Project Alternative. The No Action Alternative and the No Project Alternative are equivalent in the context of the analysis in the FEIS/EIR,' and are considered together as the "No Action Alternative" in the FEIS/EIR. The reuse alternatives considered in the 'FEIS/EIR (Alternatives 1, 2, 3) are analyzed in equal level of detail. Table 1 summarizes the three reuse alternatives (Alternatives 1, 2, and 3) considered in the FEIS/EIR, and Table 2 summarize the key differences between the three reuse alternatives. Disposal ancO'Reuse '~I;"~'CA~S tustin' EIS/EIR SC~H No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Table 1 Summary Comparison of Land Development and Buildout Characteristics of Alternatives Characteristic · . , ,.Alternative 1 1,701(I) 1,479 .4,601 Alternative 2' ~.-[..'.. A~i'ter~ative 3 133,294 4,305,251 713,412 0 315,592 0 '3,630,726 0 280,526 0 1,4i2,651 0 0 40,531 574,992 1,729 2,132 2,344(4) 6a, O5., Res'idential (n'u'~ber' of dwelling units [i~'~ji .............. LOw ~)ensity Residenti~i"'(1-7 Du/AC'~'e) Medium Density Residential (8-15 DU/Acre) Medium to High Density Residential (16-25 DU/Acre) High Density Residential (16-25 DU/Acre) Total Dwelling Units Commercial/Institutional/Recreational (square footage) __ , Transitional/Emergency Housing Commercial/Business Commercial Commercial/Recreation Village Services Village Mixed-Use Community Core Reserve Area ',. Golf Village (includes hotel) Hotel Learning Village Institutional/Commercial Cultural Center Community Park Urban Regional Park · Total Square Feet of Building Floor Area Area (acreage) and Percentage of Development Residential Commercial/B usiness Institutional/Recreational Roadways/Drainage Total Acreage ......... Approximate On-site Population Approximate Employmentts> 11,406,975 445 (28%) 738 (46%) 238 (15%) 186 (12%) 1,606 12,514 77,401 215,093 0 5,623,867 1,258,884 437,560 0 929,420 0 0 0 339,768 0 351,268 570,636 ~ 12,543 0 9,214,585 ....... 558 (35%) 739 (46%) 131 (8%) 178 (11%) 1,606 16,408 67,723 268,130 Approximate Average Daily Vehicle Trips ~1) Includes dwelling units in G01fVillage. (2~ Includes dwelling units in Reserve Area. 1,460 1,865 1,015 (4) 4,340 0 5,142,528 1,219,593 437,560 0 712,467 0 1,702,464 0 283,140 0 467,037 557,568 394,218 0 10,916,575 368 (23%) 915 (57%) 139 (8%) 184 (11%) 1,606 ...... 11,986 66,454 294,887 {3) Includes dwelling units in Community Core, residential density consistent with Irvine General Plan Category. 14) Includes dwelling units in Village Mixed-Use, residential density consistent with Tustin General Plan Category. (5) Rounded to the nearest acre. (6) Includes direct, indirect/induced, and construction. Note: All acreage figures are estimates only. Figures in the text and the tables are included for discussion purposes. More detailed numbers (tenth of an acre) are provided in the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (City of Tustin 1996b) and Errata (City of Tustin 1998) Dis~0sai and Reuse of I~I~AS Tusti'n EI~)~IR :~H Nc~'d ~}40;)!005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT"oP OVERRIDING CONSIDER.~TIONS_ Table 2 Key Differentiating Factors Between Alternatives(3) Issue Unit SOCIOECONOMIC BEbiEFIT'S Housing ..... I',. Aiternativel ',. ......... [ ~ltern..ative2 ] Alternative3 DU 4.601 6.205 4.340 Employment Construction(Direct) Direct (Project) ,. J°,bs, L I ,, Indirect/Induced Jobs (non-construction) ' Total [ 37.468 o ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Aesthetics Impacts to Prominent B lirap l--fangars Visual Features Cultural and Paleontological Resources .... Impacts. to Historic Buildings . .. 3'55081. "'. ....... 33.100 21'380 22.080 .... 11,13'~ .... 11,274 " 6,7,723 _ . 66....454 Ifboih features retained, no[Loss of one feature, not significant impact. Loss of [significant; loss of both one feature, not significant; ! features significant and loss of both features [ unavoidable. significant and I unavoid, able. . ........ ILoss of one feature, not significant: loss of. both features si~ificant and unavoidab~'e. ...... Loss of one hangar, significant and unavoidable. Loss of both hangars significant and unavoidable. Blimp Hangars Retain both hangars, no [ Loss of one hanear. significant impact. Loss of [ significant and one hangar, significant and'/unavoidable. Loss ofboth unavoidable. Loss of both [ hangars significant and hangars significant and -[ unavoidable. ........ unavoidable. . .... [ .... Public Services and Facilities ...... 82/:~9 { ........ Reduce Existing 107 ac. IAcres Created Parkland Deficit [% °fNe,e,d .._ Indirect Impacts to [ No. of Students SAUSD~) [ Genera~t~ed TraffiC/Circulation Number of Significant, [ Y'e'ar 2005 ...... Unmitigable Intersections[. Number of Significant, l Year2020 Unmitigable IntersectionsI .. , Air Qualitym CO i~.;t~nd.'skiaY .... I .... 'Pounds/day [ ...... Pounds(d. ay ..P.~ounds/day I , , P. ounds/day} .... ROC i-3',333-- , -, 867 , .. 3,116 (54) ,. , 241 " 5i 48 "68/45i: .... 17,855 { ......... 18,271 , ,, 1,2521 .... 1,303, 3,891 3,940 ...' 'i3~') ' ._.." ...'"' (343 2951 .. 296. NOx SOx · DU = Dwelling Units ~} Figures represent low/high estimates based on two methods of estimating indirect/induced jobs generated in SAUSD. (27 At buiidout, operations emissions, net from baseline, including mitigation measures. All but PMm,, would exceed SCAQMD thresholds. ~3~ Information regarding air quality, traffic/circulation, and cultural and paleontological resources presented in this table, derived from Table 2-15 of the FEIS/EIR, has been altered to match the body text of the FEIS/EIR. Dispos"al and Re'~'se of Mc)~S Tustin EIS/EIR ...... 33 ............. SCH iq&. 9,ib7100~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT' i_Jr OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objectives of the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin are: (~) (2) (3) (4) (s) Offset the negative socioeconomic effects caused by the Base Realignment And Closure Act; Reuse these properties under an economically viable and balanced reuse plan; Provide housing and employment opportunities; Solve existing community circulation and recreation parkland deficiencies; and Generate sufficient revenue (property tax, sales tax or others) to support the investment in infrastructure required to improve the site for civilian purposes. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED DEIS/EIR Chapter 2.0 (Alternatives Considered) describes the project and other alternatives to the project considered during development of the project (see Table 1). DEIS/EIR Chapters 4.0 and 7.0 and DEIS/EIR Table ES-3 compares the potential environmental impacts of the project and the alternatives, including the DON Disposal Alternative and the No Action Alternative. With the exception of the DON Disposal Alternative and the No Action Alternative, these alternatives would result in significant impacts in the same environmental impact issue areas as the project, as described in Section V. of these findings, primarily due to the scope of the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin. However, the degree Of impact for the project and each alternative in some cases differs, as described later in this Section VIII. .. Except for the significant unavoidable impacts that are'common to each alternative, the impacts associated with each alternative can be reduced to less than significant with mitigation (as described in Section 4.0 of the DEIS/EIR). Thus, the alternatives are not clearly distinguished by the number or type of significant impact they generate, but by the degree of impact they gerierate. Compared to the project (described in the FEIS/EIR as the LRA Reuse Alternative or Alternative 1), the alternatives do result in more or less of some of the impacts. Table 1 provides a brief summary of the key characteristics of the three reuse alternatives, including the project (which is described in the FEIS/EIR as the LRA Reuse Alternative or Alternative 1). A more detailed description of the alternatives is included below. LRA RE USE AL TERNA TIVE (AL TERNA TII/E 1) The project, considered in these findings is Alternative 1 of the EIS/EIR, the LRA Reuse Alternative. This alternative proposes a variety of housing, employment, recreation, educational, and community support uses designed to complement the existing urban character of the surrounding area and strengthen the economic base of Tustin and nearby cities. The development of this alternative would result in the most building space, parkland, and educational uses. Among the three' action alternatives, only this alternative would result in' Transitional/Emergency Housing for the homeless; a Regional Park developed around the northern blimp hangar (which would be reused'if financially feasible); a large Community Core developed with mixed uses; and specialized educational, social service, and law enforcement facilities within a Learning Village campus (see descriptions below). This alternative would permit reuse of some of the existing military structures and facilities, including recreational facilities such as baseball, softball, volleyball, football, and soccer fields plus basketball and Di'sposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin EIS/EIR ......... 34 SCtt No. 94071005 'FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS tennis courts. In addition, the two blimp hangars, which contain 660,416 square feet of floor area, would be adaptively used if financially feasible. The northern blimp hangar could support regional recreational activities in the form of special events center, sports center, museum, and historical aircraft restorations. The southern hangar could be used for film production, warehouse facilities, or light industrial uses permitted by the plan. Including the hangars, approximately 1.8 million square feet of structures, plus 1,537 housing units, could be reused under this alternative. Key components of the land use plan under this alternative include the following: Residential (LDR, MDR, MHDR) Residential development with 4,601 units are proposed in the northern and southeastern portions of the reuse plan area, adjacent to existing neighborhoods in a variety of housing types at varying densities. This could include rehabilitation or redevelopment of the existing 1,537 attached military family housing units, if economically feasible. An 8-acre neighborhood park is also proposed. Transitional/Emergency Housing (T/EH) , Existing military barracks housing would be reused as a 192-bed Transitional/Emergency Housing facility for the homeless. Commercial/Business (CB) Commercial/Business use (high-tech research and development, professional office, retail, and other specialized employment/merchandising uses) would be concentrated in the southwestern portign ofthe reuse plan area on approximately 265 acres of land. Commercial (C) A regionally oriented commercial district (approximately 55 acres) would be developed within the southern portion of the reuse plan area. The commercial district includes the approximately 17-acre Army Reserve Center parcel, which would be designated as Commercial. Village Services (VS) Local commercial retail and service uses would be provided on 21 acres just northwest of the Tustin Ranch Road extension adjacent to new and existing residential uses. Community Core (CC) The central portion of the reuse plan area would be a Community Core (approximately 225 acres), offering the opportunity tO .maintain flexibility for future large-scale, mixed-use development to offset high infrastructure and demolition costs. The Community Core would, develop as a later or final phase because of the need to remove existing runways and complete hazardous materials cleanup. Opportunities for Residential, and Commercial/Business and Industrial uses in either separate or integrated projects would · exist in this area, along with institutional uses, such as a 40-acre. high school. Up to 891 residential units could be built in the Community Core. The southern blimp hangar within this area could be preserved, if financially feasible. Golf Village (GV) The Golf Village, to be located in the eastern portion of the reuse plan area, would include a 500-room hotel and ancillary commercial retail support services (i.e., restaurants, shops, etc.) in conjunction with the hotel, an 18-hole golf course, and residential development. Other uses would include two neighborhood parks and an elementary school. bisp°Sal' and Reuse'~f MCAS'~:I:'uSti~'iEIS/EIR ..... 3~ .............. S~2H No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF 'C' :'~RRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Learning Village (LV) , · The 128-acre Learning Village, adjacent to the northwestern boundary of the site, would provide a specialized educational environment with a variety of public-serving uses in a campus setting in the western portion of the reuse plan area, and would also 'include an elementary school. The majori~ of existing 'buildings and facilities within the Learning Village area could be reused. CommunitY Park (C?) Located between the Learning Village and residential areas in the no'rthen portion of the reuse plan area, this . approximately 24-acre park would provide both a buffer and a link between the activities of both areas. Urban Regional Park (RP) The Urban Regional Park (approximately 85 acres), located in the north-central portion of the reuse plan area, would serve a number of functions, including open space conservation, historic preservation, recreation, community recreation pro.ams, training, educational and interpretive pro.ams, and supporting uses.. The northern blimp hangar is expected to be preserved for adaptive use, if financially feasible. Circulation A street network would be created to serve the reuse plan area and would create through connections that would partially address regional circulation issues. This system (see Figure 2-1 of the FEIS/EIR) would be oriented around Valencia South Loop Road, which would extend from Valencia Avenue on the northwest, Moffett Avenue on the east, Warner Avenue on the southeast, and Armstrong Avenue on both the west and the north. Armstrong Avenue, Tustin Ranch Road, and Warner Avenue would also be extended through the site. Other streets in the reuse plan area would connect to the arterial street network and be oriented to efficiently serve on-site neighborhoods and districts. Development Phasing Future development based on this alternative would occur incrementally over a 20+ year time frame. The level of development within any given phase would be tied to the availability of the infrastructure' necessary to support such development. Table 2-8 of the FEIS/EIR shows the approximate anticipated timing of development. A L TERNA TI VE 2 This alternative proposes a variety of urban uses with a focus on enhancing housing and cultural opportunities for the residents of Tustin, Irvine, and nearby communities. The development of this alternative (see Table 1) would result in the most housing, the least non-residential floor area, the smallest amount of parkland, and would not contain a Community Core land use designation. A large Cultural Center would be developed under this alternative, and the northern blimp hangar would be incorporated, if financially feasible. This alternative would permit reuse of some existing military structures and facilities. The northern blimp hangar could be reused to support regional cultural activities in the form of a special events center, museum, or other permitted uses. The southern blimp hangar would be demolished under this alternative. Key components of the land use plan under this alternative include the following: Residential (LDR, MDR, HDR) A total of 6,205 residential units would be located in the southeast (adjacent to existing neighborhoods), in DiSi~oSal and ReUse ~)~' I~iCAS Tustin El~iEil~' ' ' .... sd}4 N0. 94o~106~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS the east, in the northeast, and in the central portion of the reuse plan area, including both reuse of existing military housing and construction of new housing. Two eight-acre neighborhood parks and four schools serving the residents would be developed with the residential development. CommerciaFBusiness (CB) High-tech, research and development, professional office, retail, and specialized employment and · merchandising uses would be concentrated on approximately 310 acres in the southwestern portion of the reuse plan area,, adjacent to similar existing urban development. Commercial (C) Commercial activities consisting of regionally oriented retail and service commercial uses would be located in the southern portion of the reuse plan area (approximately .78 acres), adjacent to similar existing urban development, and adjacent to the Hotel and Golf Course (described below). This includes the approximately 17-acre Army Reserve Center parcel, which would be developed as Commercial if DOD disposes .of the property in the future. Commercial/Recreation (CR) A Commercial/Recreation site (approximately 23 acres) would be created west of the intersection of Armstrong Avenue and Warner Avenue and could be developed as an entertainment park, sports facility, and/or other such attraction. Village Mixed-Use (PI-CB (Village)) A mix of uses, consisting of Public Institutional and Commercial/Business (approximately 310 acres) and Residential uses (1,035 dwelling units), would be provided in the northwesterly portion ofthe reuse plan area near the Cultural Center and the Community. Park, and near commercial, industrial, and residential districts. The majority of existing military structures and facilities identified for possible reuse are located within this area and would be incorporated into the Village Mixed-Use development. Hotel (H) A 500-room hotel and associated commercial uses would be developed in the eastern portion of the reuse plan area (approximately 12 acres) adjacent to the Golf Course and Commercial areas. Golf Course (G) A 177-acre, 18-hole golf course encircling low density residential development would be developed in the northeastern portion of the reuse plan area. Public InStitutional/Commercial (PHC) A Public Institutional/Commercial district (approximately 28 acres) would be created on the eastern edge of the reuse plan area, northwest of the future extension of Tustin Ranch Road. Park (PI (Park)) Located between the Village Mixed-Use area, the Cultural Center, and Residential areas in the northern portion of the reuse plan area, this approximately 47-acre park would provide both a buffer and a link between the activities of these areas.. Cultural Center (PI (Cultural)) A Cultural Center (possibly containing a museum amusement-type rides and/or facilities, interpretive centers, and other similar uses) encompassing 56 acres would be located in the center of the northern portion of the reuse plan area. If financially feasible, the northern blimp hangar would be incorporated into the center Disp0~ii and Reuse of MCAS Tustin E'i's/I~IR ' '" 37 ................. SCH ~o. 94071605' FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT Ot~ OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS through adaptive use. Circulation A street network would be' created to serve the reuse plan area and would create through connections that would partially address regional circulation issues (see Figure 2-2 of the FEIS/EIR). This system would be designed in a grid pattern to maximize network efficiency for both local traffic and through traffic. Other streets in the reuse plan area would connect to the arterial grid street network and be oriented to efficiently serve on-site neighborhoods and districts. DeVelopment Phasing Future development under Alternative 2 would occur incrementally over a 20+ year time frame. The level of development within any given phase would be tied to the availability of the infrastructure necessary to support such development. Table 2-11 of the FEIS/EIR shows the approximate anticipated timing of development. TERNA TI VE 3 .. Alternative 3 proposes a variety of urban uses with a focus on enhancing empl'oyment and cultural opportunities for the residents of Tustin, Irvine, and nearby communities. The deyelopment of this alternative (see Table 1) would result in the least housing and the most commercial development. A large Cultural Center on 8'7 acres would be developed under this alternative and would incorporate the northern blimp hangar, if financially feasible. This alternative also would include a small, 179-acre mixed-use Reserve Area similar to the Community Core, in Alternatives 1 and 2 and the largest Golf Course (187 acres) of the three reuse alternatives. This alternative could include reuse of some existing military structures and facilities. The northern blimp hangar could be adaptively reused for activities related to the Cultural Center. The southern blimp hangar would be demolished. Key components of the land use plan under this alternative include the following: Residential (LDR, MDR) A total of 4,340 residential units (including both reuse of existing military housing and a variety of new housing types and densities) would be developed in the southeastern portion of the reuse plan area, adjacent to existing housing areas; in two pockets surrounded by the golf course; and in the nortlieastem portion of' the site. Residential units would also be developed in the Reserve Area and in the Village Mixed-Use area. Two eight-acre neighborhood parks and two schools would be developed in conjunction with the residential ' development. Commercial/Business (CB) Commercial/Business uses would be concentrated in the western portion of the reuse plan area, adjacent to similar existing urban development. Commercial (C) Commercial activities(regionally oriented retail and service commercial uses) would be concentrated in the southwestern and southeastern portions of the reuse plan area, adjacent to similar existing urban development. Disposal and R'euse of MCAS Tusti~' EIS/EIR 38 .... ~i~, So. 9407~o0s FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Commercial/Recreation (CR) A 23-acre Commercial/Recreation site (theme park, sports facility, or similar attraction) would be created at the western comer of Armstrong Avenue and Warner Avenue. Village Mixed Use (PI/CB) · .A mix of uses consisting of Public Institutional and Commercial/Business and Residential uses (1,015 dwelling units) would be provided in the northwesterly portion of the reuse plan area adjacent to the Cultural Center, Community Park, and Commercial and Residential districts. Reserve Area The central portion of the site is Proposed for a 179-acre Reserve Area offering the opportunity to maintain flexibility for furore large-scale, mixed-use development to offset high infrastructure and demolition costs. The Reserve Area is expected to develop later because of the need to remove existing runways and complete hazardous materials cleanup. Opportunities for both Residential and Commercial/Business uses in either separate or integrated projects would exist in.this area, along with Institutional uses if desired. Hotel CH) A 500-room hotel and associated commercial uses would be developed in the eastern portion of the reuse plan area, adjacent to the golf course. Golf Course (G) .. ~n 187-acre, 18-hole golf course encircling low and medium density residential development would be located adjacent to the hotel in the southeastern portion of the reuse plan area. Public Institutional/Commercial (PHC) A mixed-use Public Institutional/Commercial area would be created on the northeastern edge of the reuse plan area, including institutional and commercial uses serving surrounding residential areas. Park (PI (Park)) A 51-acre Community Park would be developed in the northern portion of the site at the intersection of Valencia Avenue and Armstrong Avenue between the Village Mixed-Use area, the Cultural Center, the Reserve Area, and Residential areas. The park would incorporate existing facilities and contain picnic areas, community center buildings, multi-purpose rooms, and supporting uses. Cultural Center (PI (Cultural)) A Cultural Center encompassing 51 acres would be located in the center of the northern portion of the site between the Community Park, Village Mixed-Use, and the Reserve Area. If financially feasible, the northern blimp hangar would be incorporated into the Cultural Center through adaptive use as a special events center (for sports events, cultural events, large concerts, conferences, conventions, etc.), a sports center, a museum, restaurants, picnic areas, a video arcade, or an historic collections facility. The Cultural Center could contain a museum, amusement-type rides and/or facilities, interpretive centers, and other similar uses. Circulation A street network in a central loop pattern would be created to serve the reu.se plan area and would create through connections that would partially address regional circulation issues (see Figure 2-3 ofthe FEIS/EIR). Existing streets within the reuse plan area would connect to the arterial street network and be oriented to efficiently serve on-site neighborhoods and districts. bispo'sal and R'euse o~' MCAS Tustin EIS/~IR " ~9 ........... S~SH 1~o. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMEN'.~::'.: .'.".,VERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Development Phasing Future development based on Alternative 3 would occur incrementally over a 20+ year time frame. The level of development within any given phase would be tied to the availability of the infrastructure necessary to support such development. Table 2-14 of the FEIS/EIR shows the approximate anticipated timing of development. The future market demand forecasted for uses in the reuse plan area and the complexity and timing of environmental cleanup efforts would be the primhry factors influencing this schedule. AL TERNA TIVE 4: NO A CTION AL TERNA TIVE The No Action Alternative evaluated in the EIS/EIR is in compliance with NEPA (40 c.F.R. § 1502.14(d)). No Action may be defined as the continuation of an existing plan, policy, or procedure, or as failure to implement an action. In any case, the No Action Alternative Pro..vides a benchmark to compare the magnitude _ of the environmental effects of the various alternatives. CEQA also requires a No Project Alternative (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, § 15126.6(e) (1998)). The No Action Alternative and the No Project Alternative are equivalent.in the context of this analysis, and will be considered together as the "No Action Alternative" in this document. Under the No Action Alternative, the Marine Corps would retain ownership of approximately 1,585 acres of surplus real property. Except for the existing a~icultural and building leases, all buildings would remain vacant and all other facilities would remain in place but would be unused. The Marine Corps property would remain under caretaker status as discussed in Chapter 1 of the FEIS/EIR. The area would be fenced off, the unleased buildings would be boarded up, and a military security and maintenance staffofapproximately ten persons would be present. The grounds, infrastructure, and buildings would be maintained and repaired as necessary to'prevent deterioration. Site environmental cleanup would continue and be completed. No new construction would occur under this alternative except as allowed by existing lease authorization. 'Approximately 17 acres of property would be transferred to the Army Reserve. SUMMARY OF COMPA~SON BETWEEN ALTE~ATI~S Table 2 summarizes the key differentiating factors between the three reuse alternatives. As shown, in some instances, very little or no environmental impact was projected to occur; in other instances, significant, unmitigable impacts were anticipated. The comparative analysis was structured to focus on key differentiating factors ~ instances where the severity of an impact would be appreciably different among the alternatives. In doing so, it was determined that in several environmental issue areas the impacts were either very minor, or were in essence similar for all three reuse alternatives. These issues included: · Land Use · Utilities · Biological Resources · Agricultural Resources · Soils and Geology · Water Resources · Hazardous Wastes, Materials Substances and · Noise · Cumulative Impacts · Short-term Use and Long-term Productivity · Growth-inducing Impacts · Environmental Justice · Environmental Health and Safety Risksto Children Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin EIS/EIR 40 ' SCH No. 9407100~ ....... . FINDING,S O,F ,FACT AND STA .T...E.MENT OF OVERR!D....~..~ ..C. ONSIDE,P~TIONS In as much as these issues did not contribute to the process of comparing and differentiating bet~veen alternatives, they were eliminated from the comparative analysis. However, through the' process of elimination described in Section 2.5.1 of the EIS/EIR, the analysis was able to focus on key differentiating impacts from the following issue areas: · Socioeconomics · Aesthetics · Public Facilities and Services · Cultural and Paleontological Resources · Traffic/Circulation · Air Quality It should be noted that, even within these six key issue areas, the focus was on only those specific impacts that served to distinguish among the three reuse alternatives. Following the guidance provided in the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA (Cal. Code Re~., Title 14, § 15126.6(d) (1998)), a matrix (Table 2) was developed to display and compare specific discriminating impacts for each of the alternatives. As discussed below, there would be benefits associated with Socioeconomics and Public Facilities and Services (parkland only); the other issue areas are discussed in terms of adverse impacts. SOCIOECONOMICS Employment is considered a socioeconomic benefit as opposed to an environmental impact and because housing has been identified as a purpose of reuse by the Ci~, provision of housing is regarded as a benefit as well. Alternative 2 would generate the most housing units, with more than 1,500 units than Alternative' 1. Alternative 1 would generate 77,401 total jobs consisting of construction jobs, direct jobs in the reuse plan area and indirect/induced jobs (excluding construction). This number is almost 10,000 higher than the next closest alternative (Alternative 2). Given that the primary City goal is to create a reuse that would generate jobs and revenue to allow for other important' goals (housing, parkland etc.), the alternative which best maximizes socioeconomic benefits would be Alternative 1. AESTHETICS Possible distinguishing impacts to aesthetics are related to the blimp hangars which are prominent visual features. Under Alternative 1, one or both of the hangars may be retained if financially feasible. Under Alternatives 2 and 3, the southern blimp hangar would be eliminated and the northern hangar would be retained, if feasible. While there would be a noticeable visual contrast with the loss of one hangar, the remaining hangar would continue to serve as a landmark and the visual impact would be less than significant. The loss ofb°th hangars, however, would result in significant, unmitigable visual impacts.. Therefore, from a visual perspective Alternative I may be preferred if at' least one of the hangars is retained and if both hangars are eliminated under the other, two alternatives. It should be noted that the financial feasibility of retaining the hangars is uncertain, even under Alternative 1, and the impacts may be identical under each. CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES As with aesthetics, the key factors under this topic are the historic hangars.because the eligible discontiguous historic districts would be eliminated under all three alternatives. Under Alternative 1, both hangars may , be retained if financially feasible. This would avoid impacts to these historic features. Under Alternatives 2 and 3' the southern hangar would be eliminated which is a significant and unmitigable impact. If both hangars were to be eliminated there would be a greater relative impact. Therefore, Alternative I may have least relative impact to historic resources, but only if both hangars were to be retained. It is possible that it would not be financially feasible to retain either of the hangars under this alternative. Ifthis is the case, there would be irreversible significant impacts to the hangars under each of the alternatives. 'i~isposal anti Reuse'o'fMCAS Tustin EIs~EIR · ' ....... 41 SCH No. 940'~i005. FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMEN"i ~,-.'OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS PUBLIC SER VICES AND FA CILITIES There are two items of distinction under this issue: parkland and the indirect impact of students generated in the Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD). The City has identified an existing 107-acre parkland deficit in the City of Tustin. All three reuse alternatives would generate parkland, both a large-scale regional-serving park and several smaller neighborhood and community parks. The community and neighborhood parks would generally serve the population associated with the reuse plan area. For comparison purposes, this analysis focuses on the more regional component only. Alternative 1 would create the largest urban regional park (85 acres) and Altema~tive 3 would have the smallest (51 acres). While all three alternatives would contribute a substantial amount (over 45 percent) to reduce the existing parkland deficit, Alternative 1 would involve the ~eatest percentage (almost 80 percent). . All three alternatives could indirectly induce students into the over-capacity SAUSD because employment could result in some new families locating within the district boundaries. There is no single method to calculate the amount of induced growth in the district, so a'low and high range is provided in this analysis. The ~eatest number of students indirectly generated would be under Alternative 1. Given'the wide range of possible fiscal impacts and funding services, should a funding deficit occur, it is anticipated that the SAUSD would not be negatively financially impacted under even Alternative 1. The need for new facilities is not confirmed and there is nO facility design or location to be analyzed for physical impact in this document. The determination of physical impacts, and mitigation as appropriate, would be the responsibility of the SAUSD. TRA FFIC/CIR C ULA TI ON Traffic would be generated.under all three alternatives that would impact the surrounding circulation system. Various mitigation measures are recommended at specific intersections to increase the flow of traffic and reduce or eliminate identified impacts. Even with mitigation, some intersections under all three alternatives would operate below acceptable levels of service. The greatest number of intersections considered unmitigable would be under Alternative 2, with five unmitigable intersections in 2020. Alternative 3 would result in unmitigable impacts at four study intersections in 2020. Alternative 1 would have the least relative traffic impact because it would have two significant unmitigable impacts at the build-out conditions. AIR QUALITY buildout operations air emissions under all three alternatives would exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds,, for all analyzed pollutants except PM 10. The relative emission rates in pounds/day illustrate that Alternative 1 would have the lowest net emissions and therefore the least impact. S UMMAR Y OF COMPARISON Alternative 1 would result in the greatest number ofjobs and greatest amount of parkland, which are two of the purposes of the reuse project. Further, it would have the least relative imPact to aesthetics, traffic/circulation, and air quality. Financial feasibility may preclude the retention of' either blimp hangar; however, under Alternative 1, the land use plan provides for incorporation of both features while under Alternatives 2 and 3 only the northern hangar is incorporated. While it may indirectly generate the greatest number of students to the SAUSD, the eventual impact to the district is uncertain at this time. On balance, Alternative 1 would'result in the least overall adverse environmental impact and is therefore identified as the environmentally superior reuse alternative. Disposal and'Reuse of MCAS Tustin EIS/~'i'I~ ..... ............ sc'iq No. 9407 i 0~-~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT 61:: OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES LRA REUSE AL TERNA TIVE (ALTERNATIVE I) The project considered in these findings is Alternative 1 of the EIS/EIR, the LRA Reuse Alternative. This alternative proposes a variety of housing, employment, recreation, educational, and community, support uses designed to complement the existing urban character of the surrounding area and stren~hen the economic base of Tustin and nearby cities. The development of this alternative would result in the most building space, parkland, and educational uses. Among the three action alternatives, only this alternative would result in: Transitional/Emergency Housing for the homeless; a Regional Park developed around the northern blimp hangar (which would be reused if financially feasible); a large Community Core developed with mixed uses; and specialized educational, social service, and law enforcement facilities within a Learning Village campus. This alternative would permit reuse of some of the existing military structures and facilities, including recreational facilities such as baseball', softball, volleyball, football, and soccer fields plus basketball and tennis courts. In addition, the two blimp hangars, which contain 660,416 square feet of floor area, would be adaptively used if financially feasible. The northern blimp hangar could support regional recreational activities in the form of special events center, sports center, museum, and historical aircraft restorations. The 'southern hangar could be used for film production, warehouse facilities, or li~t industrial uses permitted by the plan. Including the hangars, approximately 1.8 million square feet of structures, plus 1,537 housing units, could be reused under this alternative. AL TERNA TIVE 2 This alternative proposes a variety of urban uses with a focus on enhancing housing and cultural opportunities for the residents of Tustin, Irvine, and nearby communities. The development of this alternative (see Table 1) would result in the most housing, the least non-residential floor area, the smallest amount of parkland, and would not contain a Community Core land use designation. A large Cultural Center would be develoPed under this alternative, and the northern blimp hangar would be incorporated, if financially feasible. This alternative would permit reuse Of some existing military structures and facilities. The northern blimp hangar could be-reused to support regional cultural activities in the form of a special events center, museum, or other permitted uses. The southern blimp hangar would be demolished under this alternative. Findings The City Council finds that Alternative 2 is infeasible within the meaning of PRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental or other considerations. Alternative 2 would create additional significant environmental impacts and'would not meet the project objectives to the degree of Alternative 1' o As discussed on page 2-40 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 2 would result in 9,678 fewer jobs than Alternative I (see Table 2). As discussed on page 2-42 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 2 could result-in the removal of both blimp bispo~al and Reuse of I~IC'As Tustin EI~;/EIR ........... 43 ............. S(51~ No. 94071665 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT Or: OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS hangars, unlike Alternative 1, which would retain both blimp hangars if financially feasible (see Table 2). . As discussed on page 2-42 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 2 would not result in reducing the City's parkland deficit to the degree as Alternative 1 (see Table 2). . As discussed on page 2-43 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 2 would result in significant.unavoidable impacts at more intersections than Alternative 1 in both 2005 and 2020 (see Table 2). o As discussed on page 2-43 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 2 would result in greater emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic compounds (ROC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), suspended particulate matter (PM10), and oxides of nitrogen than Alternative 1' (see Table 2). AL TERNA TIVE 3 Alternative 3 proposes a variety of urban uses with a focus on enhancing employment and cultural opportunities for the residents of Tustin, Irvine, and nearby communities. The development of this alternative (see Table 1) would result in the least housing and the most commercial development. A large Cultural Center on 87 acres would be developed under this alternative and would incorporate the northern.blimp hangar, if financial'ly feasible. This alternative also would include a small, 179-acre mixed-use Reserve Area similar to the Community Core, in Alternatives 1 and 2 and the largest Golf Course (187 acres) of the three reuse alternatives. ... This alternative could include reuse of some existing military structures and facilities. The northern blimp hangar could be adaptively reused for activities related to the Cultural Center. The southern blimp hangar would be demolished. Findings The City Council finds that Alternative 3 is infeasible within the meaning of PRC {} 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental or other considerations. Alternative 3 would create additional significant environmental impacts and would not meet the project objectives to the degree of Alternative 1' .. 1. As discussed on page 2-42 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 3 would result in 10,947 fewer jobs than Alternative 1 (see Table 2). . As shown on page 2-41 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 3 would result in 261 fewer housing units than Alternative 1 (see Table 2). , As discussed on page 2-42 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 3 could result in the removal of both blimp hangars, unlike Alternative 1, which would retain both blimp hangars if financially feasible (see Table 2). . As discussed on page 2-43 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 3 would not result in reducing the City's parkland deficit to the degree as Alternative 1 (see Table 2). o As discussed on page 2-43 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 3 would result in significant unavoidable iSisposal and R~use of MCAS 'ruSti~ EIS/EIR .......... 44 ' ' 'S~h ~o. ~:ioTioos FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS impacts at more intersections than Alternative I in 2020 (see Table 2). . As discussed on page 2-43 of the FEIS/EIR, Alternative 3 would result in ~eater emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic compounds (ROC), oxides of nitrogen (NO.~), suspended paniculate matter (PM10), and oxides of nitrogen than Alternative I (see Table 2). AL TERNA TIVE 4: NO ACTION AL TERNA TIVE Under the No Action Alternative, the Marine Corps would retain ownership of approximately 1,585 acres of surplus real property. Except for the existing agricultural and building leases, all buildings would remain vacant and all other facilities would remain in place but would be unused. The Marine Corps property would remain under caretaker status as discussed in Chapter 1 of the FEIS/EIR. The area would be fenced off, the unleased buildings would be boarded up, and a military security and maintenance staffofapproximately ten persons would be present. The grounds, infrastructure, and buildings would be maintained and repaired as necessary to prevent deterioration. Site environmental cleanup would continue andbe completed. No new construction would occur under this alternative except as allowed by existing lease au{horization. Approximately 17 acres of property would be transferred to the Army Reserve. Findings The Cit3.' Council finds that Alternative 4 is infeasible within the meaning of PRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental or other considerations. Alternative 4 would create additional significant environmental impacts and would.not meet the project objectives to the degree of Alternative 1' 1, o As discussed on page 4-30 of the FEIS/EIR, the No Action Alternative would result in continued land use incompatibility betWeen MCAS Tustin and surrounding areas. As discussed on page 4-30 of the FEIS/EIR, the No Action Alternative would not address economic development needs and thus would not meet the federal objectives stated in Public Law 103-160, concerning public need and revitalization of closed military installations. 3, As discussed on page 4-30 of the FEIS/EIR, the No Action Alternative would not meet the principles of the "Report of the California Military Base Reuse Task force to Governor Pete Wilson' A Strategic Response to Base Reuse Opportunities, January 1994," in that no reuse would take place and no new jobs would be generated. . As discussed on page 4-31 of the FEIS/EIR, the No Action Alternative would not provide additional housing opportunities. Specifically, the No Action Alternative would provide 4,601 fewer dwelling units than Alternative 1. o As discussed on page 4-31 of the FEIS/EIR, the No Action Alternative would not provide additional employment opportunities. Specifically, the No Action Alternative would provide 77,401 fewer direct, indirect/induced, and construction jobs than Alternative 1. · . As discussed on page 4-31 of the FEIS/EIR, the No Action Alternative would not offset the negative socioeconomic effects caused by the Base Realignment and Clbsure Act. 7. As discussed on page 4-79 of the FEIS/EIR, the No Action Alternative would preclude the beneficial DiSpoSal and ReuSi'~' ~2AS Tu'st~n EIS/EIR ............ ~S ....................... scH No. '94071605 o FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT'~"-'0VERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS effect associated with development of parkland, which is a purpose and need of the reuse plan. As discussed on page 4-92 of the FEIS/EIR, reduced staffing and inactivity would effect the character of the site in that once busy neighborhoods and buildings would be under-utilized. There is also the potential for reduced maintenance to effect the visual quality of the site, above~ound utilities would remain, and the beneficial impact due to reducing urban clutter Under Alternative 1 would not be realized. 9~ 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. As discussed on page 4-101 of the FEIS/EIR, the potential for further deterioration through aging would persist. As discussed on page 4-108 of the FEIS/EIR, proposed improvements to Peters Canyon Channel in the · vicinity of the reuse plan area are separate from the proposed action; such improvements and associated mitigable impacts on biological resources coUld occur if OCFCD pursued the project independently. As discussed on page 4-128 of the FEIS/EIR, agricultural production on the leased land would continue to affect water quality with runoff containing pesticides, herbicides, ferti izers, and other common. chemicals used for a~iculture. As discussed on page 4-137 of the FEIS/EIR, hazardous wastes, substances, and materials cleanup efforts would not be accelerated pursuant to the President's fast-track cleanup directive. As discussed on page 4-204 of the FEIS/EIR, implementation of the No Action Alternative would prevent the extension of Tustin Ranch Road/Von Karman Avenue, Valencia Avenue/Moffett Avenue, and Warner Avenue through the reuse plan area, which would contribute to the elimination of existing circulation deficiencies, which is a purpose of the reuse plan. As discussed on page 4-204 of the FEIS/EIR, the continued closure of the reuse plan area would eliminate opportunities for .improved transit service with direct routing of bus lines across the reuse plan area. Additional circulation improvements will be required to accommodate full buildout of local General Plans. As discussed on page 4-205 of the FEIS/EIR, development associated with reuse, or additions to the City of Tustin and City °flrvine Capital Improvement programs, as applicable, would be required to extend arterial roadways through the reuse plan area to avoid traffic circulation impacts. bisposal and R~U~e of MC'AS Tustin EIS/EIR ...... 46 '" .... SCH No. 94071005 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS IX. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS SUMMARY OF OVERRID~G.CONSIDE~TIONS The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a decision-maker, in this case the Tustin City Council, to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the Tustin City Council allows the occurrence of significant effects through approval of a project, it must state its specific reasons for so doing in writing. Such reasons are included in the "statement of overriding considerations." Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines establishes the followin, g requirements for a statement of overriding considerations: (a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable envirgnmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the .adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." (b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects, which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. The City of Tustin (hereafter referred to as "City") adopts and makes the following statement of overriding Considerations regarding the remaining unavoidable impacts identified within the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin. In adopting Resolution .. , the Tustin City Council acknowledges that it has weighed the benefits of the identified LRA Reuse A~ltemative (know as Alternative 1 in the FEIS/EIR).against the adverse significant impacts that have not been avoided or substantially lessened to less-than-significant levels through mitigation. The Tustin City Council hereby determines that the benefits of the LRA Reuse Alternative (Alternative 1) outweigh the unmitigated adverse impacts and the project should be approved. The Tustin City Council finds that to the extent that the identified significant adverse impacts have not been avoided or substantially lessened, there are specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations which support approval of the project. SIGNIFICANT UNA VOIDABLE IMPACTS Unavoidable or potentially unavoidable significant environmental effects ofthe project identified in'the Final EIR/EIS and Findings of Significant Impacts include the following: bisposal anti Reuse'of MCAS Tustin EIS/Eik" S~H No. 94071005 '"'.'." ' ' FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMEN',"'~'i'".'DVERRID1NG CONSIDERATIONS The loss of both hangars would be a significant unmitigable visual impact. All of the two discontinuous historic districts would be eliminated. The intent is to retain both hangars, if financially feasible, but one or both of the blimp hangars could be eliminated. Existing farmland would no longer be cultivated. Project development will result in the conversion of approximately 682 acres of Prime Farmland and 20 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance for a total of 702 acres of Farmland to non-agricultural use. There would be decreased levels of service at certain intersections and road segments. With feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact, significant traffic impacts would remain at the intersections of Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway under full buildout (year 2020). . Peak reduced emissions of suspended particulates (PMl0), reactive organic compounds (ROC), and oxides of nitro~n (NO.,) due to construction activities would exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District (S(}AQMD) thresholds of significance during some or all phases of the project. Long-term operation emissions from mobile (vehicular) and stationary sources would exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for CO, NO~, and ROC. The proposed project has not been included in the modeling assumptions of the 1994 or 1997 AQMPs, and is therefore inconsistent with the AQMP. Reuse ofMCAS Tustin and the possible resultant loss of both blimp hangars, in conjunction with other development in Orange County (in particular, reuse of the former MCAS El Toro), would result in a significant change in the visual setting of the area. The project would result in irreversibly eliminating most of the two discontiguous eligible historic . districts and could result in the demolition of one or both blimp hangars, depending on whether reuse is financially feasible. These actions would contribute to a cumulative loss of World War II United States military development, which is increasingly being demolished due to military base closings. The proposed project would result in conversion of approximately 702 acres of Farmland. While this conversion is typical in Orange County, the cumulative impact would be significant because this Farmland and other agricultural land being converted in Orange'County represents some of the last remaining agricultural land in the County. The analysis of project-level impacts in the FEIS/EIR consider the project's contribution to cumulative impacts. While most impacts can be mitigated to less-than-significant levels, significant traffic impacts would remain at the intersections of Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Barranca Parkway under full buildout (year 2020). The project, when considered with projected growth in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), will' contribute to significant air quality impacts. DiSp~}al and Re'use OfMcAs Tustirl EIS'~;iEIR "' SCH No. 9407100g FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF.OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ADOPTION OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City specifically adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations and finds that: a) as part of the approval provisions, the LRA Reuse Alternative (Alternative 1) has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible; b) other mitigation measures to mitigate the effects associated with the project are within the jurisdiction of other public agencies, and, c) the remaining unavoidable impacts of the project are .acceptable in light of the environmental, economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations set forth herein, 'because the benefits of the project outweigh the significant and adverse impacts. The City finds that each of the overriding considerations set forth below constitutes a separate and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the LRA Re'use Alternative (Alternative 1 ) outweigh its significant adverse environmental impacts and is an overriding consideration warranting approval ofthe LRA Reuse Alternative (Alternative 1). These matters are supported by substantial evidence in the record. FINDINGS OF 0 VERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The adoption of the project (identified in the FEIS/EIR as the LIkA Reuse Alternative, or Alternative I will enable the City of Tustin to offset the negative socioeconomic effects caused by the Base Realignment and Closure Act (BRAC) and the resultant closure of MCAS Tustin to the greatest degree of the alternatives considered. Specifically, the project will provide the greatest number of jobs. The City finds'that the benefits of reuse of MCAS Tustin override the significant impacts associated with the project. The adoption of the project will enable the City of Tustin to reuse the reuse plan area under an economically viable and balanced reuse plan to the greatest degree of the alternatives considered. The City finds that the benefits of reuse of MCAS Tustin override the significant impacts associated with the project. The adoption of the project will enable the City of Tustin to provide a substantial amount of both employment and housing opportunities. Specifically, the project will provide 77,401 jobs, the greatest number of jobs of the alternatives, as well as provide over 4,600 housing units. The City finds that the benefits of reuse of MCAS Tustin override the significant impacts associated with the project. The adoption of the project will enable the City of Tustin to solve existing community circulation and recreation parkland deficiencies to the greatest degree of the alternatives considered. The project will result in approximately 85 acres of parkland, the greatest amount of parkland of the alternatives. The project will connect local and regional thoroughfares and will result in significant unavoidable impacts at two intersections, the least of the reuse alternatives considered. Thus, the project will provide the greatest amount of parkland and least number ofunmitigable traffic impacts.. The City finds that the benefits of reuse of MCAS Tustin override the significant impacts associated with the project. The adoption of the project will enable the City of Tustin to generate' sufficient revenue (property tax, sales tax or others) to support the investment in infrastructure required to improve the site for civilian purposes to the greatest degree of the alternatives considered. The City finds that the benefits of reuse of MCAS Tustin override the significant impacts associated with the project. The adoption of the project will result in the least overall relative environmental impact of the alternatives considered. Specifically, the project will result in the least relative impact to aesthetics, traffic/circulation, and air quality. Moreover, the project could provide for incorporation of both blimp hangars, while i)'iSP°Sal and' ~eus'~-'of MCA~;'Tu~iir~ EIS/EII~. .... 49 .... SCH' k°. 94071605' FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEME..' .::( ~i' 'OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Alternatives 2 and 3 would retain only the northern blimp hangar, if financially feasible. The City finds that the benefits of reuse of MCAS Tustin override the significant impacts associated with the project. L:\env\700S\73 l\finding.wpd ~i'sposal and R~-h'Se of MCA~ ;rU}ii'~ EIS/EIR ......... SCH No. 9407100'~ Exhibit B to Resolution 00-90 Mitigation Monitoring Report for Final EIS/EIR Resolution No. 00-90.. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Final Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report For the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin- SCH No. 94071005 City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 · Date Adopted by Tustin' December 18, 2000 This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 21081.6. Its purpose is to provide for accomplishment of mitigation measures required by the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the disposal and reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin (State Clearinghouse.Number 94071005), located in the City. of Tustin.and the Ciw of lrvine, in the County of Orange (see Figure 1). The Ciw of Tustin has adopted the mitigation measures included in the Final EIS/EIR in order to mitigate or avoid significant impa~ts on the environment. Prior to approval of any discretionary approval in Irvine, Irvine will adopt the measures. This program has been designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. ' Mitigation measures and implementation measures identified in the Final EIS/EIR for the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin'have been incorporated into a checklist.' Each mitigation measure and implementation measure is listed separately on the checkli'st with appropriate spaces for monitoring the progess of implementation of' each measure. Implementation measures are required where environmental impacts are less than significant, but to support proposed development within the reuse plan area concurrent with demand, additional measures are required. For these purposes, both implementation measures and mitigation measures are identified in this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and are equally enforceable. The following information is identified for each measure listed in the checklist: · The timing of implementation of the mitigation measure or implementation measure. The appropriate agency to enforce the mitigation measure or implementation measure. The mitigation measures and implementation measures in the table are listed by environmental impact area in the same order as they are listed in the Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Management The disposal and reuse ofMCAS Tustin is a long-term program that includes a number of mitigation measures. Some of these measures are apPlicable at the individual development project level, and others are applicable tO the overall program or plan. In order to coordinate implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, a regular review of the progress of the program is required. Annual Review Of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program The overall management of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be managed by the City of Tustin, as applicable to the City's jurisdiction. The City will undertake an annual review of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as applicable to Tustin and prepare a brief progress memorandum based on that review. The City of Irvine will prepare a similar EIS/EIR fo~ the ~)isp~}al and Reuse of"~l'C~ Tustin 2 MCAS TUSTIN BOUNDARY REUSE PLAN AR=A BOUNDARY CFI"Y OF SANTA ANA' CFi'Y OF TUSTIN CFt'Y OF IRVlNE TUSTIN SANTA ANA North ,,, No Scale EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin 3 Figure 1 Reuse Plan Area Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program memorandum. The memoranda from each City should be transmitted to each respective agency's City Council for acceptance after completion. The reviewer, the Community Development Director or designee, will check each mitigation measure in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to determine whether or not that implementation measure is complete. If the mitigation measure has been completed for the project, the reviewer should line through the mitigation measure on the form, initial and date the'line indicating that the mitigation measure has been completed. For measures that require a report, program, or plan, the reviewer should determine if that report, program, or plan is due based on the progress of implementing the program to date. If the report, pro.am, or plan is timely, that fact should be reported in the review memorandum to the head of each agency. If no such program is necessary at this time, the memorandum should so state. For measures that are ongoing measures, the memorandum should report whether these measures are actively being pursued, and if not, what 'action is appropriate. If the measures are no longer appropriate or necessary because the environmental effect is no longer an issue, then that fact should be reported in the review memorandum, and the discontinuation of' the mitigation measure recommended. If measures are not being implemented adequately, recommendations should be made to improve the application of the mitigation measure.- For measures that apply at the project level, the memorandum should report whether or not such measures are being actively applied to individual projects. If the measures are no longer appropriate or necessary because/he environmental effect is no longer an issue, then that fact should be reported in the review memorandum, and the discontinuation of the mitigation measure recommended. If measures are not being implemented adequately, recommendations should be made to improve the application of the mitigation measure. Implementation of Program-Level Mitigation Measures Program-level mitigation measures are 'measures that do not 'apply to individual development projects, but which apply at the overall program level. They are:implemented through the regular actions of the City of Tustin Community Development Department, City of Irvine Community Development Department, or other applicable departments within both cities' discretionary project review. These measures are reviewed' and monitored through the annual program review discussed above. Implementation of Project-Level Mitigation Measures Project-level mitigation measures are monitored through the appropriate City's (Tustin or Irvine) planning review process and discretionary project review. When a development project within the Reuse Plan Area is submitted for planning review to each City, each respective planning reviewer will have a copy of the Mitigation Monitoring checklist including all pages that contain measures .applicable to that project. Before approving plans, the planning reviewer will ensure that all mitigation measures are incorporated into'building plans, site plans, public improvements plans, etc. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting P'rogra~ (i.e, those that are not project-design mitigation measures). Project-Design Mitigation Measures A project-design mitigation measure is a measure that needs to be incorporated into the project design as part of any project approVal; for example, traffic improvements or exterior lighting plans. Such measures may be normally shown on the building plans, site plans, public improvement plans, specifications, or other project documents. The mitigation monitoring checklist will be used to check off those mitigation measures required. If a mitigation measure is not shown on the appropriate plan sheets, plans will be sent back for incorporation of those mitigation measures or approved equivalents. Plans will not be approved until each mitigation measure is incorporated into the project design. , After plans are approved, and before any component of design is approved as complete by the appropriate. City in its inspection, the project proponents will submit proof that each mitigation measure shown on the plans has been installed or incorporated into the constructed project. Verification of compliance will then be noted on the monitoring checklist and signed off, completing the process for this category of mitigation measure ....... The monitoring program for measures to be incorporated into project desi~ma is the same program that is currently used to verify compliance with applicable City codes in design and construction. No additional staffing is required, except that training may be apPropriate to alert inspectors to the new requirements and t. he use of the monitoring checklist. In case of some specific unique or unusual mitigation measures, it may be appropriate or necessary to contract with consultants for inspection or verification of mitigation measures. Construction Mitigation Measures Construction mitigation measures are measures designed to reduce the 'impacts of construction, and in general are required to be maintained in operation continually during construction. Monitoring will be verified by building, public works, or grading inspectors as appropriate during their regular visits to the sites during construction, and reported to the Public Works Director or designee. Reporting of compliance with mitigation measures should be required at least monthly, with reports of violations made immediately to the appropriate department. OPerational Mitigation Measures Operational mitigation measures are intended to verify the implementation of mitigation measures that will continue after the project is occupied and in operation. These mitigation measures should be verified on an annual basis, and if problems are noted, reinspected on a more regular basis until the measure is operating effectivelY. Monitoring of such measures may be certified by the applicants/operators with verification by the applicable City. In that event, each applicable City shall exercise its independent judgement in verifying compliance. '~IS/Ei~'f~r the DisP'osal an"d R~Se ofMCA 6o fitsiin s" ' mitig~iion monitorin'g'~na RePort'i~g )>rogran~ Mitigation Measures Versus Implementation Measures The Final EIS/EIR for the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin identifies both mitigation measures and implementation measures. Implementation measures are to be required where environmental impacts are less than significant, but to support proposed development within the reuse plan area concurrent with demand, additional measures are required. For these purposes, both implementation measures and mitigation measures are identified in this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and equally are enforceable. Availability of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program · · The completed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program checklist will be retained in each pro.am and project file and will be available for public inspection on proper request. Monitoring Program Fees For major projects fbr which the mitigation monitoring effort is substantial, it may be appropriate to charge mitigation monitoring fees to support the actual costs of project-level mitigation monitoring. In such cases, the appropriate City will charge and collect from the project proponent a fee in the amount of the anticipated actual cost to the City for monitoring all mitigation measures, including consultant services and costs of administration, for a project as described in this program. A deposit may be required by the City to be applied toward this fee, if established by City resolution or ordinance. Any unused portion of the deposit will be refunded. In the case of a project where the applicant will not be associated with the project after construction, the City will charge the anticipated cost of operation of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for an appropriate period in advance. · San ctio n s/P en alti es The applicable City may levy sanctions or penalties established by resolution .or ordinance for violations of conditions listed in the monitoring program. These sanctions and penalties may include- o 4. 5. 6. Civil penalties/fines according to City codes. "Stop work" orders. Revocation of permits. Holding issuance of Certificate of Occupancy until completion of work. Forfeiture of performance bonds. Agency implementation of measures with appropriate charges to the applicant based on Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program agreements. 'EIS/E1R for the [~i$'~gsal'and Reuse of MCAS Tustin 6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Dispute Resolution In the event of a disa~eement between the City and project applicants/operators regarding the monitoring pro.am, including manner of payment, penalties for noncompliance, and financial security, arrangements, the following procedure, or other appropriate procedure as provided for in the applicable Tustin or Irvine Municipal Code, or CEQA Guidelines, will be followed: o o The applicable City's representative will attempt to resolve the disa~eement.' If the disagreement cannot be resolved, the applicable City's representative will prepare a report documenting the source of the dispute and the City's position. · The applicable City's representative will take the report before the Community Development Director, who will determine the resolution of the disagreement. The decision of the Community Development Director may be appealed to the City Council on payment of the City's standard fee for appeal. The decision of the City Council shall determine the outcome of the appeal. EIS/EIR for th"e' 'Disposal and Reuse of M'~'AS T~t'stin Mitigation Monito/i~'g ~d Reporting Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MCAS TUSTIN DISPOSAL AND RUSE Measure I Timing and Implementation Mitigation Measures for Land Use LU -1. The City of Tustin shall amend its General Plan and zoning ordinance to be consistent with planned land uses. Any zoning ordinance shall include site design measures such as buffering, landscaping, screening, and setbacks, to ensure high quality development and compatibility between land uses. Tile goal is to assure that the overall appearance of development on the site is at least similar in quality to other master planned areas in Tustin and other adjacent cities. LU-?. The City of Irvine shall amend its General Plan and zoning ordinance to be consistent with planned land uses. Any zoning ordinance shall include site design measures such as buffering, landscaping, screening, and setbacks, to ensure high quality development and compatibility between land rises. The goal is to assure that the overall appearance of development on the site is at least similar in quality to other master planned areas in Tustin and other adjacent cities. Prior to a final snap recordation (except for financing and reconveyance purposes) within the Reuse Plan Area within the City of Tustin. Prior to a final map recordation (except for financing and reconveyance purposes) within the Reuse Plan Area within the City of Irvine. Mitigation Compharice Iles possibility City of Tustin City of Irvine Mitigation Monitoring an(] Enforcement Responsibility Community Development Department (Tustin) Community Development Department (Irvine) EVEIR far the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin 8 Alfitigalion Alfonitoring and Reporting Program Measure Tinting and Implementation Implementation Measures for Utilities (a) I Tile City of Tustin or City of Irvine, as appropriate, shall See 'fable 4.3-1 of the Final ensure that infrastructure is constructed in pleases as EIS/EIR or Table 1 at the end of triggered by identified tliresliolds in Table 4.3-1 of the this Mitigation Monitoring and Final EIS/EIR (see Table l at the end of this Mitigation Reporting Program for each Monitoring and Reporting Program). The Phasing Pian specific triggering mechanism. provides an organizational framework to facilitate development of the reuse plan area in tandem with infrastructure necessary to support the planned development. This framework reflects the fact that each component of the infrastructure leas its own tliresliold for accommodating additional development toward build -out of the reuse plan area. The triggering meclianisms that identify timing of key infrastructure provisions are summarized in Table 4.3-1 (see Table 1 at the end of this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). (b) Prior to a final map recordation (except for financing and Prior to final inap recordation reconveyance purposes), the development applicant shall (except for financing and enter into an agreement with the City of Tustin and City reconveyance purposes). of Irvine and any appropriate regional utility agencies, districts, and providers, as applicable, to dedicate all easement, rights-of-way, or other land determined necessary to construct adequate utility infi-astructure and facilities to serve the project as determined by the city, agency, district, or other providers. Mitigation Compliance Responsibility City of Tustin and/or City of Irvine, as applicable Project developer Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility Community Development Department (Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable) Community Development Department (Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable) EIS/EIR fvi- the Disposal and Reuse of'AICAS Tustin 9 11Wligalion Monitoring and Reporting Prograin Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility (c) Prior to any filial map recordation (except for financing Prior to final map recordation Project developer Community Development and conveyance purposes), the development applicant (except for Financing and Department (Tustin and/or shall enter into a secured agreement with the cities of reconveyance purposes). Irvine, as applicable) Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable, to participate on a pro -rated basis in construction of capital improvements necessary to provide adequate utility facilities. (d) Prior to the issuance of permits for ally public Prior to the issuance of permits Project developer Community Development improvements or development project, a development for any public improvements or Department (Tustin and/or applicant shall submit to the City of Tustin and City of development project. Irvine, as appropriate) Irvine, as applicable, information from IRWD which outlines required facilities necessary to provide adequate potable water and reclaimed water service to the development. (e), Prior to the issuance of the certificates of use and Prior to the issuance of the Project developer Community Development occupancy, the project developer shall ensure that fire certificates of use and;occupancy. Department (Tustin and/or hydrants capable of flows in amounts approved by the Irvine, as appropriate); OCFA are in place and operational to meet fire flow OCFA requirements. (f) Prior to the issuance of permits for any public Prior to the issuance of permits Project developer Community Development improvements or development project, a development for any public improvements or Department (Tustin and/or applicant shall submit to the City of Tustin and City of development project. Irvine, as applicable) Irvine, as applicable,. information frorn IRWD, OCSD, or the City of Tustin which outlines required facilities necessary to provide adequate sanitary sewage service to the development. EISIEIR.for the Disposal an(I Reuse of WAS Tustin 10 Aliligalion Aloniloring and Reporting Program G' Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility En roreement Responsibility (g} Prior to the issuance of grading permits or approval oi'any Prior to the issuance of grading Project developer Tustin Building Division or subdivision map (except for financing and reconveyance hermits or approval of any . the Irvine Public Works purposes), whichever occurs first, for development within subdivision map (except for Department, as applicable the 100 -year flood plain, grading and drainage systems financing and reconveyance shall be designed by the project developer such that all purposes), whichever occurs f rst. building pads would be safe from inundation from runoff from all storms tip to and including the theoretical 100 -year- storm, to the satisfaction of th-e City of Tustin Building Division or the Irvine Public Works Department, as applicable. Grading permits or subdivision maps generated for financing and reconveyance purposes are exempt. (11) Prior to construction of regional flood control facilities, Prior to construction of regional Project developer Public Works Department appropriate state and federal approvals, including flood control facilities. (Tustin and/or Irvine, as agreements and permits, shall be obtained. These include applicable) but are not limited to Regional Water Quality Control Board permits, including NPDES permits; Section 404 permits from the USACOE, and Section 1601 or 1603 agreements from the CDFG in a manner meeting the approval of the City of Tustin and the Irvine Public Works Department, as applicable. (i} Prior to issuance of any grading permit or approval of any Prior to issuance of any grading Project developer Tustin Building Division or subdivision map (except for financing and conveyance permit or approval of any the Irvine Public Works purposes), for any development that is either partially or subdivision map (except for Department, as applicable completely located within the 100 -year flood plain of the financing and conveyance Flood insurance Rate Map, the development applicant purposes). shall submit all required documentation to the FEMA and demonstrate that the application for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision for changes to the 100 -year flood plain is satisfied in a manner meeting the approval of each respective city, as applicable. EINEIR for IN Disposal and Reuse of AICA S Tustin I I Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility 0) Prior to the approval of any applicable subdivision map Prior to the approval of any Project developer Public Works Department (except for financing and conveyance purposes), the applicable subdivision map (Tustin and/or Irvine, as developer -applicant shall design. and construct local (except for financing and applicable) drainage systems for conveyance of the I o -year runoff. If conveyance purposes). �. . the facility is in a local sump, it shall be designed to convey the 25 -year runoff. (k) Prior to any grading for any new development, the Prior to any grading for any new Project developer Tustin Building Division or following drainage studies shall be submitted to and development. Public Works Department approved by the City of Tustin, City of Irvine, and/or (Tustin and/or Irvine, as OCFCD, as applicable: applicable) (1 } A drainage study including diversions (i.e., Prior to any grading for any new Project developer off-site areas that drain onto and/or through the development. project site), with justification and appropriate mitigation for any proposed diversion. (2) A drainage study evidencing that proposed drainage patterns would not result in increased 100 -year peak discharges within and downstream of the project limits, and would not worsen existing drainage conditions at storm drains, culverts, and other street crossings including regional flood control facilities. Tile study shall also propose appropriate mitigation for any increased runoff causing a worsening condition of any existing facilities within or downstream of project limits. Implementation of appropriate interim or ultimate flood control infrastructure construction must be included. EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin 12 Mitigalion Honitoring and Reporlrng Pi-ograin G' Measure Timing anti Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility (k) (3) Detailed drainage studies indicating low, in Tustin Building Division or (cont.) conjunction with the drainage conveyance Public Works Department systems including applicable swales, channels, (Tustin and/or Irvine, as street flows, catch basins, storm drains, and flood applicable) water retarding, building pads are made safe from runoff inundation which may be expected from all storms lip to and including the theoretical 100 -year flood. ' (1) Prior to approval of any subdivision map (except for Prior to approval of any City of Tustin Tustin Public Works. financing or conveyance purposes), an agreement will be subdivision map (except for Department, Tustin executed with the OCFCD that provides for the financing or conveyance Community Redevelopment identification and contribution of a project -specific fair purposes). Agency share contribution toward the construction of ultimate flood -control facilities needed to accommodate build -out of the affected project. Interim flood control facilities may be considered for approval provided such facilities meet OCFCD requirements. Nothing shall preclude the City of Tustin from transferring the obligation onto other project developers within the project area. EIS/EI R. f )r elle Disposal and Reuse of ' 1l1CII S Tustin 13 l oll igal1 on MO17 l oring and Reporting Prograin Measure Tinning and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility I Enforcement Responsibility Implementation Measures for Public Services and Facilities (m) 1 General The City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, each within its respective jurisdiction, shall ensure that adequate fire protection, police protection, and parks and recreation facilities (including bikeNvays/trails) needed to adequately serve the reuse plait area shall be provided as necessary. To eliminate any negative impact the project could have oil each community's general fund, financing mechanisms including but not limited to developer fees, assessment district financing, and/or tax increment financing (in the event that a redevelopment project area is created for the site), shall be developed and used as determined appropriate by each City. Specifically; (1) Applicants far private development projects shall be required to enter into an agreement with City of Tustin or the City of Irvine, as applicable, to establish a fair -share mechanism to provide needed fire and. police protection services and parks and recreation facilities (including bikeways) through the use of fee schedules, assessment district financing, Community Facility District financing, or other mechanisms as determined appropriate by each respective city. (2) Recipients of property through public conveyance process shall be required to mitigate any impacts of their public uses of property on public services and facilities. Prior to final map recordation or building permit issuance. Project developer Property recipients Tustin Community Development Department, Police -Department, or Parks Department or the City of Irvine, and/or OCFA, as appropriate E1S/ElR for the Disposal and Reuse of 'A4CAS Tustin 14 Uiligation Allonitoring and Reporting Program Measure Timing and impiemcntatiotl Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility (11) The cities of Tustin and Irvine shall jointly consult and Ongoing prior to implementation City of Tustin and City of Community Development coordinate with the OCPFRD/Harbors, Beaches and of Peters Canyon and Barranca- Irvine Department Justin and/or Parks, Program Management and Coordination Division, trails. Irvine, as applicable) in -preparation of trail designs for the Peters Canyon and Barranca trails within the reuse plan area. Improvements for eacli of these trails would be installed upon completion of flood control channel improvements and approval of their joint use by the OCPFRD. (o) Fire Protection/Emergency Medical Services Prior to the first final map Project developer Tustin Community recordation or building permit Redevelopment Agency and Prior to the first final map recordation or building permit issuance for development (except the City of Irvine issuance for development (except for financing and for financing and reconveyances reconveyances purposes), the project developer could be purposes). required to enter into an agreement with the City of Tustin or City of Irvine/OCFA, as applicable, to address impacts of the project on fire services. Such agreement could include participation for fire protection, personnel and equipment necessary to serve the project and eliminate any negative impacts on fire protection services. (p) Prior to issuance of building permits, the project Prior to issuance of building Project developer Community Development developer shall work closely with the OCFA to ensure permits. Department (Tustin and/or that adequate fire protection measures are implemented in Irvine, as applicable) the project. (q) Prior to issuance of building permits for phased projects, Prior to issuance of building Project developer Community Development the project developer shall submit a constructio« pleasing permits for phased projects. Department (Tustin and/or plan to the OCFA demonstrating that emergency vehicle Irvine, as applicable) access is adequate. EINEIR.fvr the Dtsi)osal and Reuse vf'A11CAS Tustin 15 Uiligalion A46niloring and Reporting Arograin Measure 'Tinning annd Implemenztatioln Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility (r) Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project Prior to issuance of building Project developer Community Development developer shall submit a fire hydrant location plan for the permits. Department (Tustin and/or review and approval of the Fire Chief and ensure that fire Irvine, as applicable) hydrants capable of flows in amounts approved by t11e OCFA are in place and operational to meet fire flow I requirements. (s) Police Protection Prior to issuance of building Project developer Community Development permits. Department (Tustin and/or Prior to issuance of building permits, the project Irvine, as applicable) developer shall work closely with the respective Police Department to ensure that adequate security precautions are implemented in the project. (t) Schools Prior to the issuance of Project developer Community Development certificates of use and occupancy. Department (Tustin and/or Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and occupancy, Irvine, as applicable) the project developer shall submit to tine respective City proof of payment of appropriate school fees adopted by the applicable school district. (u) Parks and Recreation Prior to the first final map Project developer Tustin Comrnunity recordation (except for financing Development Department Prior to the first final map recordation (except for and reconveyance purposes) or and Parks and Recreation financing and reconveyance purposes) or building permit building permit issuance. Department issuance for development within the City of Tustin portion of the site, the project developer shall be required to provide evidence of compliance with all requirements and standards of the City of Tustin Park Code. (v) Prior to the first final map recordation or building permit Prior to the first final map Project developer Irvine Community issuance within the City of Irvine portion of the site, the recordation (except for financing Development Department project developer shall be required to provide evidence of and reconveyance purposes) or compliance with all requirements and standards of the building permit issiiance. City of Irvine Park Code. ERVE1R fvt• the Disposal wid Reuse gf*AICAS Tustin 16 Mtltgallot7 Motltlot'ltlg at7d ReRorlh?g Progretin Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility Prior to the first concept plain for tentative tract nuip in the Prior to the first concept plan for Project developer Tustin Public Works City of "Tustin, the project developer sliall file a petition tentative tract map. Department; TLIStin for the creation of a landscape maintenance district for the Community Redevelopment project area with the City of Tustin. The district shall Agency include public neighborhood parks, landscape improve inents, and specific trails (Barranca only), the medians in arterials, or other eligible items mutually. agreed to by the petitioner and the City of Tustin. In the event that a district is not established prior to issuance of the first building permit, maintenance of items mentioned above sliall be the responsibility of a community association. (x) Prior to approval of any subdivision map (except for Prior to approval of any Project developer Community Development financing or conveyance purposes), an agreement will be subdivision map (except for Department (Tustin and/or executed with the following agencies for the associated financing or conveyance Irvine, as applicable) trail improvements: purposes). a. County of Orange Harbors, Beaches — identification of a project -specific fair share contribution toward the installation of necessary regional bikeway trail improvements within Peters Canyon Channel, to be installed in t conjunction with the County of Orange's other channel improvements; EI.S/EIR f Or the Disl)o.sal and Reuse Of WAS Tustin 17 Mitigation A46nitoring and Reporting ProgI ain Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility (x) b. City of Tustin — the identification of a Prior to the first final map Project developer Tustin Community (cont.) project-specific fair share contribution toward recordation (except for financing Development Department the installation of Class 11 bicycle trails through and reconveyance l)urposes) or and/or SCRRA/OCTA, as the project site. For the area of the site northeast building permit issuance. appropriate of Irvine Center Drive, a separate agreement would be required to ensure the provision of a bikeway right-of-way easement, and design and ' corlstructiorl of a bike trial along the SCRRA/OCTA rail tracks from Harvard Avenue westerly to the Peters Canyon Channel. In addition, project developers of the areas of the site southeast of the Peters Canyon Channel would need to accommodate access to both the Peters Canyon Trail and the trail adjacent to the SCRRA/OCTA tracks in any project site design including dedication of any necessary recreational trail easernents; C. City of Tustin — the identification of a Prior to the first final map Project developer Tustin Community project-specific fair-share contribution toward recordation (except for financing Development Department installation of Class I bikeway trail and reconveyance purposes) or improvements northerly of Barranca Parkway building permit issuance. after- completion of the Barranca Channel ' improvements. For proposed developments adjacent to Barranca Channel, separate agreements would be required to ensure the f establishment of a bikeway right-of-way easement between Jamboree Road and Red Hill Avenue. EIS/EIR.f w Ilia Disl)vsal and Reuse vf'A4CAS Tustin Hiligcrlfvn Hvniloring and Reporting I'rogi-um Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility Mitigation Measures for Aesthetics Vis -1 In conjunction with any zoning ordinance amendments to Prior to the first:fnal map City of Tustin and City of Community Development implement the reuse plan in Tustin or Irvine, an urban recordation (except for financing Irvine Department (Tustin and/or. design plan shall be adopted to provide for distinct and and reconveyance purposes) or Irvine, as applicable) cohesive architectural and landscape design, features and building permit issuance. treatments, as well as harmony with adjacent landscaping. The urban design plan shall have the following elements: • landscaping concept and master signage plan; • design review and approval process; • limits on development intensity for each specific land use; • limits on Iieiglit of structures and lot coverage; • minimurn site building setbacks; • minimum on-site landscaping- requirements; • buffering requirements, including berms, masonry walls, and landscaping; • lighting regulations, including regulations ensuring - that exterior lighting does not negatively impact surrounding property; • screening regulations for mechanical equipment and outside storage; and 9 site signage requirements, including sign permit ap- p- proval. proval. EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of WAS Tustin 19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Pi-ograin Measure Tuning and implementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility Mitigation Measures for Cultural and Paleontological Resources 1 -list -1 Historic American Building Survey (FIABS) - DON will Prior to conveyance to City of Department of the Navy Department of the Navy complete the appropriate recordation for hangars 28 and Tustin 29 and the discontiguous historic district prior to conveyance of any property within the discontigtious historic district and shall ensure that copies of the recordation are made available to SHPO, the City of Tustin, and any local or other archive facilities designated by SHPO. }-list-2 Curation - within 30 days of the execution of the MOA, Within 30 days of the execution Department of the Navy Department of the Navy Department of the Navy will Department of the Navyate of the MOA copies of plans and architectural drawings and other archival materials and records, as available, concerning the layout and the buildings and structures that made trp the original Navy lighter -than -air blimp facility to a local curation facility. The City of Tustin or its designee will also be provided with copies of these materials. Arch -1 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the four -acre parcel Prior to issuance of grading Project developer Tustin Community currently outside the boundaries of the Air Station along permits. Development Department Harvard Avenue shall be surveyed to determine the presence/absence of archaeological resources prior- to grading. ES/E1R.fyr the Di.sI)oscrl a17d Reuse of WAS Tus1h7 20 Mitigation Uonitorh7g and Reporlh7g Prograin Meas111•e Timing and implementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility Arch -2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the cities of "I'LlStill Prior to issuance of grading Project developer Community Development and Irvine shall each require applicants of individual permits. Department (Tustin and/or development projects to retain, as appropriate, a Irvine, as applicable) county -certified archaeologist. If buried resources are found during grading within the reuse plan area, a qualified archaeologist would need to assess the site significance and perform the appropriate mitigation. The Native American view point shall be considered during this process. This could include testing or data recovery. Native American consultation shall also be initiated during this process. }-list-3 As specified in the MOA, a substantive effort will be Ongoing, prior to making Department of the Navy and Tustin Community made to determine whether there -is an economically substantial changes to Hangar 28 County of Orange Redevelopment Agency viable adaptive use of Hangar 28 and Hangar 29. or Hangar 29. 1-1ist-4 If the marketing effort identifies an economically viable Prior to making substantial Department of the Navy Tustin Community adaptive use of either of the complexes, that complex will changes to Hangar 28 or Hangar Development Department be encumbered by a historic preservation covenant. In the 29. case of the Hangar 28 complex, these measures shall balance the needs of the adaptive use and the needs for effective operation of the Federal Lands to Parks or Historic Monument programs. Hist -5 If NPS and/or SHP0 determine that, despite a marketing Prior to making substantial Department of the Navy NPS, SHPO, and Department effort that complies with the terms of the MOA or as changes to Hangar 28. of the Navy agreed to by the .City of Tustin/County of Orange, NPS, and/or SHPO, an economically viable adaptive use of the Hangar 28 complex was not identified, NPS and/or SHPO shall promptly advise Department of the Navy and notify the City of Tustin/County of Orange that the following measures are required. EIS/EI R f vl' Me e Disl)osal ands Reuse of A4CAS Tull i ? 21 i if l igall on Monitoring and Reporting Program Measure Timing and Implementation Hist -5 a. Written History - The City of Tustin/County of Prior to making substantial (cont.) Orange shall prepare an illustrated history report changes to Hangar 28. on MCAS TUSTIN, with emphasis on the initial construction of the Air Station and its World War 11 Navy lighter -than -air operations. Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Department of the Navy Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility NPS, SH PO, and Department of the Navy b. Exhibit - The City of Tustin/County of Orange shall prepare a professional -quality illustrated interpretive exhibit with emphasis on the initial construction of the air station and its World War II Navy lighter -than -air operations. C. Interpretive Video - The City of Tustin/County of Orange shall prepare a professional -quality documentary video and shall tindertake a one-time distribution and outreach program for the documentary video. I'aleo- I The cities of Tustin and Irvine shall each require Prior to issuance Of grading Project developer Community Development applicants of individual development projects to comply permits. Department (Tustin and/or with the requirements established in a PRMP prepared for s Irvine as applicable) the site, which details the methods to be used for surveillance of construction grading, assessing finds, and actions to be taken in the event that unique ' paleontological resources are discovered during construction. Paleo-2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, project Prior to issuance of grading applicants shall -provide written evidence to each city, that permits. a county -certified paleontologist has been retained to conduct salvage excavation of unique paleontological resources if they are found. Project developer Community Development Department (Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable) EISIEI R. foi- 1 he Disposal and Rezis' Of MCAS TIISl in 22 Mitigation Monitoring and Repo ing Pt'Ograin Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility Mitigation Measures foi- Biological Resources Bio -I The project proponents of any development affecting Prior to issuance of grading Project developer Tustin Community jurisdictional waters of the U.S. or vegetated wetlands permits or any public Development Department shall obtain Section 404, Section 1601, and other permits improvements within pond turtle and/or OCFCD, as as necessary. A replacement ratio for affected wetland habitat. appropriate resources shall be determined in consultation with. regulatoi-y agencies as part of the permitting process. Tile actions proposed on Peters Canyon Channel shall be mitigated by the OCFCD who is the project proponent for flood control improvements. Bio -2 Based on consultations with CDFG, City of Tustin, or Prior to issuance of grading City of Tustin and/or Tustin Community project proponent as applicable, an off-site relocation site permits or any public project developer, as Development Department for southwestern pond turtles captured on site shall be improvements within pond turtle appropriate identified that is as close to the reuse plan area as habitat. possible, and that is sustainable in perpetuity. (No appropriate habitat in the City of Tustin is available for relocation.) Potential relocation sites include but are not limited to an old pond (currently thought dry) located in tipper Shady Canyon within the Orange County Nature Preserve that could be improved or restored to serve as a relocation site; or San Joaquin Marsh, which is managed by UC Irvine, Irvine Ranch, and the Orange County Water- District. Some property owners and public agencies may be adverse to the relocation of species of special concern onto their property or jurisdiction, and it would.be speculative to identify actual sites prior to completion of consultation with CDFG and with potential property owners and/or appropriate public agencies. Bio -3 Permits from the CDFG shall be obtained for live -capture Prior to issuance of grading Project developer Tustin Community of the turtles and for transporting them to the relocation permits or any publi-c Development Department site. improvements within pond turtle habitat. EIS/EIR fol- the Disl)osal and Reuse of WAS Tustin 23 Mitigation Monitoring and Repot-fing Pi-ogram Measure Timing and implementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility Bio -4 An agreement shall be negotiated with the CDFG, City of Ongoing City of Tustin and/or Tustin Community Tustin, project proponent, or other agency or organization project developer, as Development Department as appropriate, for contribution of funds to improve, appropriate restore, or create the relocation site as turtle habitat. Mitigation Measures for Traffic/Circulation T/C-1 Construction J Prior to site development permit. Project developer Public Works Department (Tustin or Irvine, as In conjunction with the approval of a site development applicable) permit, the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable (for that portion of the reuse plan within Irvine), shall require each developer to provide traffic operations and control plans that would minimize the traffic impacts of proposed construction activity. The plans shall address roadway and lane closures, truck hours and routes, and notification procedures for planned short-term or interim changes in traffic patterns. The City of Tustin and (lie City of Irvine, as applicable, shall ensure that the plan would minimize anticipated delays at major intersections. Prior to approval, the City of Tustin or the City of Irvine, as applicable shall review the proposed traffic control and operations plans with any affected jurisdiction. EINEIR for llie Disposal and Rense of HCAS Tustin 24 Al iligation Aloniloring and Reponing Prog!'ain Measure Timing and implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility T/C-2 Development Prior to issuance of certificates of Project developer Public Works Department occupancy. (Tustin or Irvine, as Tile City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable applicable) (for that portion of the reuse plan area within Irvine), shall ensure that the arterial intersection improvements required in 2005 and 2020 and as indicated in Tables 4.12-7 and 4.12-9 of the Final EIS/EIR (see Tables 2 and 4 and at the end of this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) are implemented for their respective jurisdictions according to the cumulative ADT thresholds identified in each table and according to the fair share basis noted. The -ADT threshold represents the traffic volume which would result in an impact and the fair share percentage reflects the percent of the traffic impact - resulting from the reuse generated traffic. in sorne cases, reuse traffic would generate 100 percent of the impact, thereby assuming frill financial responsibility for the identified improvements. In other cases, reuse traffic would generate only a fraction of the traffic impacting the intersection and financial responsibility would. correspond. T/C-3 Tile City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable See Table 4.12-8 of the Final Project developer Public Works Department (for that portion of the reuse plan area within Irvine), shall EIS/EIR or Table 3 at the end of (Tustin or Irvine, as contribute, on a fair share basis, to improvements to the Mitigation Monitoring and applicable) freeway ramp intersections as listed in Table 4.12-8 of the Reporting Program for each Final EIS/EIR (see Table 3 at the end of the Mitigation specific triggering mechanism. Monitoring and Reporting Program). The method of implementing improvements, e.g., restriping, ramp widening, shall be based on special design studies, in association with Caltrans. ES/EIR for• the Disposal and Rertse of'MCAS Titstin 25 Mitigation Monitot-ing and Deporting Program Measure Timing acid Implementation Mitigation ComplianceMitigation Responsibility Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility T/C-4 Tile City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable Ongoing (see Table 4.12-10 of Project developer Public works Department (for tilat portion of the reuse plan area within Irvine), shall the Final DIS/El It or Table 5 at (Tustill or Irvine, as ensure that all on-site circulation system improvements the end of the Mitigation applicable) for the reuse plan area assumed in the 2005 and 2020 Monitoring and Reporting traffic analysis and as shown in Table 4.12-10 of the Final Program for each specific EIS/EIR (see Table 5 at the end of the Mitigation triggering mechanism. Monitoring and Reporting Program) are implemented according to the ct1111i1lative ADT thresholds identified in the table. Under this Phasing Plan, the City of Tustin shall monitor all new development within the site, accounting for the cumulative ADT generated by development projects. As each ADT threshold is reached, the roadway improvements listed in Table 4.12-10 of the Final EIS/EIR (see Table 5 at the end of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) shall be constructed before any additional projects within the reuse plan area would be approved. EIS/E1 R f or• the Disposal and Reuse of UCAS Tustin 2G Uit igat ion Alfonif oring and Reporting Pt"ogi-am Measure Tinting and Implementation Mitigation) Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility T/C-5' Prior to approval of a site development permit or vesting Ongoing, prior to approval of a Project developer Public Works/Community tract, except for financing or conveyance purposes, for all site development permit or Development Departments land use designation areas in Alternative I with the vesting tract, except for financing (Tustin and/or Irvine, as exception of the Learning Village, Community Park, and or conveyance purposes, based on applicable) Regional Park, a project developer shall enter into an the ADT generation thresholds agreement with the City of Tustin and City of Irvine, as shown in Tables 4.12-7, 4.12-8, applicable (for that portion of tile reuse plan area within 4.12-9, and 4.12-10 of the Final Irvine) which assigns improvements required in the EIS/EIR (see Tables 2 through 5 EIS/EIR to the development site and which requires at the end of the Mitigation participation in a fair share mechanism to design and Monitoring and Reporting construct required oil -site and arterial improvements Program for each specific consistent with the ADT generation thresholds shown in triggering mechanism). Tables 4.12-7, 4.12-8, 4.12-9, and 4.12-10 (see Tables 2 through 5 at the end of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program). T/C-6' Tile City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable Ongoing, based on the ADT Project developer Public Works and (for that portion of the reuse plan area in Irvine), will generation thresholds shown in Community Development monitor new development within the reuse plan area, Table 4.12-10 of the Final Departments (Tustin and/or accounting for the cumulative ADTs generated by EIS/EIR (see Table 5 at the end Irvine, as applicable) development projects within the reuse plan area. As each of the Mitigation Monitoring and cumulative ADT threshold shown in Table 4.12-10 (see Reporting Program for each Table 5 at the end of the Mitigation Monitoring and specific triggering mechanism). Reporting Program) is reached, the roadway improvements listed shall be constructed before any additional projects within the reuse plan area are approved. Table references in the mitigation measures have been changed from Final FEIS/EiR to match the correct table numbers in the f EIS/EIR. EI.S/EI R f v1- the Disposal and Reuse v f HCAS Tics tin 27 Uil igat ion Uonit oi-ing and Reporting Program Measure Timing and Itrlplementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsilaility Enforcement Responsibility T/C-7 The City of Tustin shall adopt a trip budget for individual Within one (1) year of project City of Tustin Tustin Public Works and portions of the reuse plan area to assist in the monitoring approval, and ongoing thereafter. Community Development of cumulative ADTs and the arnount and intensity of Departments permitted non-residential rises as evaluated in the EIS/EIR. T/C-8 Alternative improvements that provide an equivalent level Ongoing City of Tustin and/or City of Public Works and of mitigation in 2005 or 2020 to what is identified in Irvine Community Development Tables 4.12-7, 4.12-8, and 4.12-9 of the Final EIS/EIR Departments (Tustin and/or (see Tables 2 through 4) at the end of the Mitigation Irvine, as applicable) Monitoring and Reporting Program) may be identified in consultation between the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, and the impacted jurisdiction. ..' T/C-9 Tile City of Tustin shall enter into agreements with Within one (1) year of project City of Tustin, City of Public Works and Caltrans and the cities of Santa Ana and Irvine to ensure approval. Irvine Community Development that the off-site roadway improvements needed to mitigate Departments (Tustin and/or the effects of the proposed alternative are constructed Irvine, as applicable) pursuant to improvement programs established by the respective jurisdiction. In order to properly coordinate the timing and improvements in the adjacent jurisdictions, the City of Tustin shall hold a scoping -like meeting with the respective jurisdictions. The purpose of said scoping -like meeting shall be to identify the concerns of the respective jurisdictions prior to the initiation of the fair share study. The purpose of the study would be to fully identify, with each jurisdiction, the scope and costs of feasible . improvements (as determined by the respective jurisdiction). The improvements E1.S/EIR.1b;- the Disposal and Reuse Uf 'A4CAS 7Uslin 28 A4 llga lon A4onifoi•ing and Repot -ting Program Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Iles ponsi1)ility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility T/C-9 would be acceptable to each jurisdiction toward Fulfilling Within one (1) year of project City of 'Tustin, City of Community Development (cont.) the timing and cost of the transportation improvement approval. Irvine and Public Works obligations as required to mitigate transportation impacts Departments of the City of in each.jurisdiction. The funding for the improvements to Tustin and the City of Irvine be incorporated into the agreement would be utilized by the respective agency to improve the capacity of the impacted intersections/links or be used for substituted improvements, as determined by mutual agreement. Prior to .execution of the agreement, each jurisdiction would be allowed ten (10) working days to review the technical report prior to being provided with a copy of the proposed agreement. Each jurisdiction would then have ten (10) working days to review and comment -as to its concurrence with the improvement programs contained in the agreement. Tile comments of each jurisdiction would be considered to ensure that the City of Tustin's responsibility for fair share funding of the improvements in each jurisdiction as stated above is frilly addressed. EIS/E-EIR for Elie Disposal and Reuse (Jf MCAS Tustin 29 H l igat ion Monitoring and Reporting Prograin Measure Timing and Imtilementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility IA -I Table 4.12-10 of the Final EIS/EIR (see Table 5 at the See Table 4.12-10 of the Final City of Tustin Community Development end of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) EIS/EIR or "fable 5 at the end of and Public Works presents the Phasing Plan for the oil -site circulation the Mitigation Monitoring and Departments (Tustin and/or system. The Pleasing Plan is based upon traffic circulation � Reporting Program for each Irvine, as applicable) impact and mitigation analyses contained in the Traffic 1 specific triggering mechanism. Report (Final Appendix F of the Final EIS/EIR). Under this Phasing Plan, the City of Tustin shall monitor all new development within the Specific Plan, accounting for the cumulative ADT generated by development projects. As each ADT threshold is reached, the roadway improvements listed in Table 4.12-10 of the Final EIS/EIR (see Table 5 at the end of the Mitigation I Monitoring and Reporting Program) shall be constructed before any additional projects within the Specific Plan would be approved. IA -2 Table 7-3 of the Final EIS/EIR (see Table 6 at the end of See Table 7-3 of the Final City of'FLIStiil Tustin Community the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) EIS/EIR or Table 6 at the end of Development and Public presents the Trip Budget which summarizes the square the Mitigation Monitoring and Works Departments footage of non-residential uses allocated to each Reporting Program for each neighborhood by Planning Area and the associated ADT. specific triggering mechanism. (Residential uses are shown for information only, they are not part of the budget.) Pursuant to Section 3.2.4 of the Specific Plan, the City of Tustin shall implement the trip. budget by neighborhood to control the amotint and intensity of noirresidential uses. Trip Budget transfers between neighborhoods shall also be implemented as directed in subsection 3.2.4 of the Specific Plan. EIS/EIR.fvr the Disposal and Reuse of MCIIS Tustin 30 1Ulittgation Monitoring arta Reporting. Program Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement ResponsiI)ility IA -3 Prior to the approval of (1) a PIanning Area Concept Plan Prior to the approval of (1) a Project developer Tustin Community Pursuant to Section 4.2 of the Specific Plan, (2) a site Planning Area Concept Plan Development and Public development permit, or (3) a vesting tentative map for pursuant to Section 4.2 of the Works Departments new square footage (not for financing or conveyance Specific Plan, (2) a site purposes), a project developer shall provide traffic development permit, or (3) a inflorination consistent with the provisions of the Specific vesting tentative map for new Plan, this. EIS/EIR and the requirements of the City of square footage (not for financing Tustin Traffic Engineer. The traffic information shall (a) or conveyance purposes). identify and assign traffic circulation mitigation measures required in the EIS/EIR pursuant to the Phasing Plein described in Table 4.12-10 of the Final EIS/EIR (see Table 5 at the end of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program); (b) evaluate the effects of either the delay of any previously committed circulation improvements or the construction of currently unanticipated circulation improvements; and (c) utilize the circulation system and capacity assumptions within the EIS/EIR and any additional circulation improvements completed by affected jurisdictions for the applicable timeframe of analysis. IA -4 Prior to the issuance of building permits for new Prior to the issuance of building Project developer Tustin Community development within planning areas requiring a concept permits. Development and Public plan, a project developer shall enter into an agreement Works Departments with the City of Tustin to (a) design and construct roadway improvements consistent with the ADT generation Phasing Plan described in Table 4.12-10 of the Final EIS/EIR (see Table 5 at the end of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) and (b) address the impact of and specify the responsibility for any previously committed circulation improvements assumed in the E I SIE I R wh ich have riot been constructed. ESVEIR for the Disposal and Reuse of*A4-CAS Tustin 31 Mitigation Alfoniloring and Reporting Program Measure Timing and Impleinent-ation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility IA -5 If a subsequent traffic Phasing Plan demonstrates that Ongoing City of Tustin tustin Public Works and certain circulation improvements should be included in a Community Development different phase of Specific Plan development (accelerated Departments or delayed) or that a circulation improvement can be substituted, the mitigation Phasing Plan in Table 4.12-10 of the Final EISIEIR (see Table 5 at the end of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) may be amended, subject to approval of the City of Tustin and any other affected jurisdictions, provided that the same level of traffic mitigation and traffic capacity would be provided. IA -6 Tile City of Tustin will enter into agreements with Within one (l) year of approval City of Tustin Tustin Public Works and Caltrans and the cities of Santa Ana and Irvine to ensure of reuse and disposal of MCAS Community Development that the off-site roadway improvements needed to mitigate Tustin Departments the effects of the Specific Pian are constructed pursuant to improvement programs established by the respective jurisdiction. EIS/E-E1R, fi)r the Disl)osal and Reuse qf A4C: t,S Tustin 32 Mlligalion Uoniloring and Deporting f rogranl Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility IA -6 In order to properly coordinate the timing and funding of Within one (1) year of approval City of Tustin Public Works and (coat.) fair share obligation of Specific Plan improvements in the of reuse and disposal of MCAS Community Development adjacent jurisdictions, the City of Tustin shall hold a Tustin Departments (Tustin, Irvine, scoping -like meeting with the respective jurisdictions. and Santa Ana), and Caltrans Tile purpose of said scoping -like meeting shall be to identify the concerns of the respective jurisdictions prior to the initiation of the fair share study. The purpose of the study would be to fully identify, with each jurisdiction, the scope and costs of obligations of the Specific Plan as required to mitigate transportation impacts in feasible improvements (as determined by the respective jurisdiction). Tile improvements would be acceptable to each jurisdiction toward fulfilling the timing and cost: of the transportation improvement each jurisdiction, as listed above. Tile funding for the improvements to be incorporated into the agreement would be utilized by the respective agency to improve the capacity of the impacted intersections/I inks or be used for substituted improvements, as determined by mutual agreement. Prior to execution of the agreement, each jurisdiction would be allowed ten working days to review the technical report prior to being provided with a copy of the proposed agreement. Each jurisdiction would then have ten working days to review and comment as to its concurrence with the improvement programs contained in the agreement. The comments of each jurisdiction would be considered to ensure that the City of Tustin's responsibility for fair share funding of the improvements in each jurisdiction as stated above is fully addressed. EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of WAS Titstin 33 Mlligal on Monitoring and Reporting Prograin Measure Timing and Implementation IA -7 Each Specific Plan project would contain, to the Prior to issuance of grading satisfaction of the City of Tustin and/or City of Irvine, as permits applicable,.a pedestrian circulation component showing pedestrian access to regional Biking trails, parks, schools, shopping areas, bus stops, and/or other public facilities. AQ- I Mitigation Measures for Air Quality If determined feasible and appropriate on a project -by -project basis, the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, shall require individual development projects to implement one or more of the following control measures, if not already required by the SCAQMD under Rule 403: -- Apply water twice daily, or chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' . specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging areas or unpaved road surfaces at all actively disturbed sites. Develop a construction traffic management plan that includes, but is not limited to, rerouting construction trucks off congested streets, consolidating truck deliveries, and providing dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment onsite and offsite. Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel or gasoline powered generators. Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 mph or less. Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Project developer Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility Community Development Department (Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable) Prior to issuance of grading or Project developer Community Development building permits. Department (Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable) EIS/EIR.ffor• the Disposal and Reuse of'MCAS Tustin 34 Mitigation A4oniloring and Reporting Program Measure Timing and implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility AQ- I — Pave construction roads that have a traffic Prior to issuance of grading or Project developer Community Development (cont.) volume of more than 50 daily trips by building permits. Department ('Tustin and/or construction equipment or 150 total daily trips Irvine, as applicable) for all vehicles. -- Apply approved chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for four days or more). — Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. -- Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply approved soil binders according to manufacturers' specifications, to exposed piles of gravel, sand, or dirt. — Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, and maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., minirnurn vertical distance between top of the .load and top of the trailer). — Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent roads (use water sweepers with reclaimed water when feasible), — Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. EI5/E1R for• the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tirstin 35 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Measure AQ -2 Unless determined by the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, to be infeasible on a project -by -project basis due to unique project characteristics, each city shall require individual development projects to use low VOC architectural coatings for all interior and exterior painting operations. AQ -3 Prior to the issuance of development permits for new non- residential projects with 100 or more employees, and expanded projects where additional square footage would result in a total of 1.00 or more employees, the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as applicable, shall impose a mix of TDM measures which, upon estimation, would result in an average vehicle ridership of at least 1.5, for each development with characteristics that would be reasonably conducive to successful implementation of such TDM measures. These TDM measures may include one or more of the following, as determined appropriate and feasible by each city on a case-by-case basis: Timing and Implementation Prior to issuance of grading or building permits. Prior to issuance of development permits for new non-residential projects with 100 or more employees and expanded projects where additional square footage would result in a total of 100 or more employees Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Project developer Project developer Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility Community Development Department (Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable) Community Development Department (Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable) ELVEIR.for the Disposal and Reuse of WAS Tustin 36 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility AQ -3 — Establish preferential parking for carpool vehicles. Prior to issuance of development Project developer Community Development (cont.) — Provide bicycle parking facilities. permits for new non-resident hil Department ('Tustin and/or — Provide shower and locker facilities. projects with 100 or more Irvine, as applicable) — Provide carpool and vanpool loading areas. employees and expanded projects — Incorporate bus stop improvements into facility where additional square footage design. would result in a total of 100 or — Implement shuttles to shopping, eating, recreation, more employees and/or parking and transit facilities. — Construct remote parking facilities. — Provide pedestrian circulation linkages. — Construct pedestrian grade separations. — Establish carpool and vanpool programs. — Provide cash allowances, passes, and other public transit and purchase incentives. — Establish parking fees for single occupancy vehicles. — Provide parking subsidies for rideshare vehicles. — Institute a computerized commuter rideshare matching systern. — Provide a guaranteed ride -home program for ridesharing. — Establish alternative work week, flex -time, and compressed work week schedules. — Establish telecommuting or work -at-home programs. — Provide additional vacation and compensatory leave incentives. — Provide on-site lunch rooms/cafeterias and commercial service such as banks, restaurants, and small retail. -- Provide on-site day care facilities. — Establish an employee transportation coordinator(s). EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of XICAS Tustin 37 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prograin .Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility AQ -4 If not required under each individual development's TDM Ongoing Project developer Community Development plan, the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine, as Department (Tustin and/or applicable, shall implement the following measures, as Irvine, as applicable) determined appropriate or feasible by each city on a case-by-case basis: — Reschedule truck deliveries and pickups for off-peak 11oui•s. — Implement lunch shuttle service from a worksite(s) to food establishments. — Implement compressed work week schedules where weekly work hours are compressed into fewer than five days, such as 9/80, 4140, or 3/36. — Provide on-site child care and after-school facilities or contribute to off-site developments within walking distance. — Provide on-site employee services such as cafeterias, banks, etc. -- Implement a pricing structure for single -occupancy employee parking, and/or provide discounts to ridesharers. — Construct off-site pedestrian facility improvements such as overpasses and wider sidewalks. — Include retail services within or ad j scent to residential subdivisions. — Provide shuttles to major rail transit centers or multi -modal stations. -- Contribute to regional transit systems (e.g., right-of-way, capital improvements, etc.). — Synchronize traffic lights on streets impacted by development. EINE1R for the Disposal and Reuse of WAS Tustin 38 A4itigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Measure Timing and Implementation Mitigation Compliance Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibility Enforcement Responsibility AQ -4 — Construct, contribute, or- dedicate land for the Ongoing Project developer Community Development (cont.) provision of off-site bicycle trails linking the facility Department (Tustin and/or to designated bicycle commuting routes. Irvine, as applicable) — Include residential units within a commercial development. -- Provide off-site bicycle facility improvements, such as bicycle trails linking the facility to designated bicycle commuting routes, or on-site improvements, such as bicycle paths. — Include bicycle parking facilities such as bicycle lockers. — Include showers for bicycling and pedestrian employees' use. — Construct on-site pedestrian facility improvements, such as building access which is physically separated from street and parking lot traffic, and walk paths. Mitigation Measures for Noise N-1 Prior to reuse of any existing residential units within the Prior to reuse of any existing Project developer Community Development reuse area for civilian use, the City of Tustin or the City residential units. Department (Tustin and/or .of Irvine, as applicable, and where necessary and feasible, Irvine, as applicable) shall require the installation of noise attenuation barriers, . insulation, or similar devices to ensure that interior and exterior noise levels at these residential units do not exceed applicable noise standards. ELVEIR.1or the Disposal and Reuse of AICAS Tustin 39 Miligation Moniloring and Reporting Program Measure N-2 During design of the grade -separated intersection of Tustin Ranch Road at Edinger Avenue, the City of Tustin shall evaluate potential noise impacts oil surrounding properties to the northeast of Edinger Avenue and shall incorporate into the design of this intersection noise attenuation measures determined appropriate and feasible by the City of Tustin, in order to ensure that these surrounding properties do not experience noise levels that exceed City of Tustin noise standards. N-3 ! For new development within the reuse area, the City of Tustin and City of Irvine, as applicable, shall ensure that interior and exterior noise levels do not exceed those prescribed by state requirements and local city ordinances and general plans. Plans demonstrating noise regulation conformity shall be submitted for review and approval prior to building permits being issued to accommodate reuse. N-4 I Prior to the connection of Warner Avenue to the North Loop Road or the South Loop Road, the City of Tustin shalt conduct an acoustical study to assess reuse traffic noise impacts to existing sensitive receptors adjacent to Warner Avenue, between Harvard Avenue and Culver Drive. If mitigation of reuse traffic noise impacts is required, the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine shall enter into an agreement that defines required mitigation and which allocates the cost of mitigation between the City of Tustin and the City of Irvine oil a fair share basis. Timing and Implementation Prior to approval of final design plans. Mitigation Compliance Responsibility Project developer Mitigation Monitoring and Enforcement Responsibility Tustin Public Works Department Prior to issuance of building Project developer Community Development permits. Department (Tustin and/or Irvine, as applicable) Prior to approval of final design City of Tustin and City of plans. Irvine Tustin Community Development and Public Works Departments E1S/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of A4CAS Tustin 40 Relitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table l Utilities Phasing Requirements Facilitv General Scone General Triggering Mechanisms Domestic Waiter 1) Existing Housing water distribution Biles I) Upon determination by IRWI.) regarding acceptability of water lines 2) New backbone water mains 2) When backbone arterial highways are constructed 3) ' AbanDepartment of the Navyed/relocated wells 3) Upon determination by IRWD Reclaimed (Non -Potable) 1) New backbone water fines; I ) When backbone arterial highways are constructed; Water 2) Existing and new well sites. 2) Upon completion of negotiations by IRWD and developer(s) regarding exchange of well sites. Sanitary Sewer 1) Existing housing sewer conveyance liners 1) Upon determination by IRWD and UCSD regarding acceptability ol'the 2) New backbone sewer mains lines 2) When backbone arterial highways are constructed Storm Drain 3) Backbone storm drain channels 1,2) Armstrong storm drain 4) Regional flood control channel improvements 1,2) Generally in conjunction with arterial highway construction 5) Retention basins 3) Upon determination of acceptability as part of development plans b) Flood plain mitigation 4) Filing of flood zone map with FEMA prior to any Phase 11 construction Electricity Backbone electric distribution lines When backbone arterial highways are constructed Natural Gas Backbone gas distribution lines When backbone arterial highways are constructed Telephone Backbone telephone lines When backbone arterial highways are constructed Cable Television Backbone: cable television distribution lines, fiber optic cables When backbone arterial Highways are constructed Source: City of'1'ustin 1996b and 1998 F.I.S/E1R ff)r the Di.sposcrl and Rettse (?f WAS Tit.stin 41 Mitigation Monitoring and Deporting Prngranz Table 2 2005 Mitigation for Impacted Arterial intersections EIS/E fbi- the Disposal and Reuse oj'AICAS Tustin 42 Mitigation Monitoring and Repo! -ling Program Soutlibouncl Westbound Eastbo�rnc! impact Result L T R L T R L T R L T AM P11'I AM PM EIS/E fbi- the Disposal and Reuse oj'AICAS Tustin 42 Mitigation Monitoring and Repo! -ling Program Soutlibouncl Westbound Northbound Implementation Threshold Project Share LocationLRCumulative ADT Percent Tustin/1 rvine 86. Von Karman B1 -Ise — — — 2 3 — 2 -- i — 3 d & Barranc:a(')ca' Mit. — — — 2 3 -- 2 — 2 — 3 d p — ma 102,000 100 103. Jamboree & Base 2 4 f 2 3 f 2 4 f' 2.5 2.5 1 (6) Barranca"- 2.3) 2. 4 i' 2 3 f 2 4 f 2.5 2.5 1 — ma. 929000 (6) Sant: Ana 47. Main & Warner Base 2 3 — 1 2 — 2 3 — 1 2 1 Mit. 2 3 -- l 3 — 2 3 — 1 2 1 -- c -- rnp 78,000 15 48. Main & Dyer Base 1 3 — l 2 — 1 2 1 ] 2 1 Mit. 2 3 — 2 2 — 1 2 1 1 2 1 — c -- m0 781000 17 r G1. Grand & Base 1 3 — 1 3 — 1 3 — 1 3 — Eclinger(2) Mit. 1 3 — 1 3 — 2 3 _ 1— 3 _ — p — ma 32,000 100 72. Ritchey & Edinger Base 1 2 — 1 3 — 1 I — 1 3 — Mit. l 2 — 1 3 — 1 2 — 1 3 -- — p -- ma 70,0()() 100 l3ase - Intersection lanes without mitigation; Mit. - Intersection lane's \vith mitigation d - de facto right -turn; I'- free right -turn L, T; R - Jell, through, right Bolc! - notation indicates lane change from base scenario (without mitigation) A 0.5 or 1.5 lane designation represents lane sharing between different movements p - Project causes deficiency; c - Project contributes to deficiency. ma - N/litigated to an adequate level of' service; nip - Project portion of' impact mitigated, LOS remains less thail ade(ILlate i') IBC intersection (2) TSTA intersection Additional access from Warner Avenue west of Jamboree Road (a' interim improvement only, not necessary for 2020 ... ' . �5? Fair share contribution by City ofTustin for project responsibility. TSiA funds would not be used f'or this portion of the funding. Many ofthe measures specified for mitigation of'traffic/circulation impacts require financial contributions on a fair share basis. Fair share contributions shall be no greater than required for capacity improvements consistent with and assumed in this EIS/EIR, as mutually agreed to by the Cities of'I'ustin, Irvine, and Santa Ana, as applicable. (6) Currently -unidentified future improvements will.be made to this intersection to maintain an acceptable level ofservice to be agreed to by the cities of Tustin and Irvine for baseline conditions pursuant to the TCA, Tustin and Irvine 1998 MOA. Only when, these improvements are included in 111e ICU calculations can the impact of* reuse be identified. Therefore, impacts from reuse may be overstated, cliffcult to quantify at this time and could be less al this location because of unknow!! improvenlents. EIS/E fbi- the Disposal and Reuse oj'AICAS Tustin 42 Mitigation Monitoring and Repo! -ling Program Table 3 2005 Mitigation for Impacted Freeway Ramp Intersection Base: - Intersection lanes without mitigation; Mit. - Intersection lades with mitigation d - de facto right -turn; f - free right -turn L, T, R - left, through, right Bold - notation indicates lane change from base scenario (without mitigation) A 0.5 or 1.5 lane designation represents lane sharing between different movements p - Project causes deficiency; c - project contributes to deficiency. nia - Mitigated to an adequate level of service; nip - Project portion of impact mitigated, LOS remains less than adequate CMP monitored intersection t2' TSIA intersection Fair share contribution by City of Tustin for project responsibility. TSTA funds would not be used for this portion of the funding. Many of the measures specified for mitigation of traffic/circulation impacts require financial contributions on a fair share basis. Fair share contributions shall be no greater than required for capacity improvements consistent with and assumed in this EIS/EIR, as mutually agreed to by the Cities of Tustin, Irvine, and Santa Ana, as applicable. EIS/EIR.foi• the Dislwsal and Rett.se (?f MICAS Tustin 43 Mitigation Monitoring and Repnrling Program Implementation Southbound Westbound Northbound Ensthotind Impact Result Threshold Cumulative Project Share (3) Location L T R L 'T R L T R L T R AM I PM AM I PM ADT Percent Santa Ana 75. SR -55 SB Raiiips & Edinger (')(2) Base Mit. I I 1 l — — 1 1 2 2 — — 1.5 1.5 .5 .5 f f 1 1 2 3 i' f C. — mp 379000 28 Base: - Intersection lanes without mitigation; Mit. - Intersection lades with mitigation d - de facto right -turn; f - free right -turn L, T, R - left, through, right Bold - notation indicates lane change from base scenario (without mitigation) A 0.5 or 1.5 lane designation represents lane sharing between different movements p - Project causes deficiency; c - project contributes to deficiency. nia - Mitigated to an adequate level of service; nip - Project portion of impact mitigated, LOS remains less than adequate CMP monitored intersection t2' TSIA intersection Fair share contribution by City of Tustin for project responsibility. TSTA funds would not be used for this portion of the funding. Many of the measures specified for mitigation of traffic/circulation impacts require financial contributions on a fair share basis. Fair share contributions shall be no greater than required for capacity improvements consistent with and assumed in this EIS/EIR, as mutually agreed to by the Cities of Tustin, Irvine, and Santa Ana, as applicable. EIS/EIR.foi• the Dislwsal and Rett.se (?f MICAS Tustin 43 Mitigation Monitoring and Repnrling Program Table 4 2020 Mitigation for Impacted Arterial Intersections ElS/EIR f r the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin 44 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progrann Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Impact Result lmt�lcmentatinn Threshold Project Share (6) Location 11 T T it L 7 R IJ rI' It L IF It ANI Pm AM PNI Cumulative AD'i' Percent Tustin 15. Newport & Ldinger"-') Base 2 2.5 1.5 1 3 f' 2 3 d 2 3 I (�) Mit. 2 2.5 1.5 1 3 f 2 3 d 2 3 1 — n — ma 100 30. Red Hill & Edinger Base 2 3 1 2 3 1 2- 3 1 2 3 1 Mit. 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 — p — ma 174,000 l00 42. Tustin Ranch & Walnut` Base 2 3 d 1 2 1 2 3 d 1 2 1 Mit. 2 3 d 2 2 1 2 3 ci 2 2 1 p p nmnm 122,000 100 ' "Dustin/Santa :Ana 77. Iced Hill & Warner(' Base 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 3 I .- Mit. 2 4 1 2 3 2 2 4 1 2 3 1 — P — ma 206,000 100 Tustin/Irvine 103. Jamboree & Barranea('' a) Base 2 .4 f' 2 3 f 2 4. 1` 2.5 2.5 l (8) M it. 2 4 f 2 3 _f 2 4 f 2.5 2.5 1 — c — nm 141,000 Santa Ana 53. Hutton Centre & 13 ase 2 I 2 2 3 1 1 .5 1.5 2 3 l �'� MacArtlll[r Mit. 2 1 2 2 4 — 1 .5 1.5 2 3 I c — ma 2U b 1. Grand & Edinger(3) Base 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Mit. 2 3 1 2 4 — 2 4 — 2 3 1 C c ma 172,000 100 63. Grand & Warner (3) base 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 i Mit. 2 3 l 2 3 1 2 4 — 2 3 1 — n — ma 195,()00 l0() 66. Grand & Dyer(3) Base 2 — 1 — 3 1 — — — 2 3 — M it. 1.5 -- 1.5 -- 3 1 — — — 2 3 — — c — ma 131,000 29 70. Lyon & Edinger(3) Base I I 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 Mit. 1.5 .5 I 1 3 1 1 I 2 I 3 — — C — nip 152,000 l3 - . - 202. Standard & Edinger Base I 2 — 1 3 — 1 2 — 1 3 Mit. 1 2 — 1 3 1 1 2 — 1 3 — c _ ma 181,000 9 ElS/EIR f r the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin 44 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progrann Table 4 Continued Base - Intersection lanes without mitigation; Mit. - Intersection lanes with mitigation ATMS - Advanced Transportation Management System d - de facto right -turn; f - free right -turn 1,, T, R - lel}, through, right Boles - notation indicates lane changes froth base scenario (without mitigation) A .5 or 1.5 lane; designation represents lane sharing between dillbrent movements p - Project causes deficiency; c - project contributes to deficiency 111111- Mitigated to all adequate level of service; nip - Project portion of impact mitigated, LOS renlains less than adequate; nm - Project impact not mitigated c - Project contributes to deficiency No lane changes; ATMS measures tune changes and ATMS measures TSIA intersection '4' 1130 intersection No identifiable mitigation pleasures '`'' Fair share contribution by City of Tustin for project responsibility. TSIA fiends would not be used for this portion of the funding. Many of the measures specified for mitigation of traffic/circulation impacts require financial contributions on a fair share basis. Fair share contributions shall be llo greater than required for capacity improvements consistent with and assumed ill this EIS/(::IR, as mutually agreed to by the cities of—Tustin, Irvine, and Santa Ana, as applicable. ''' bull buildout of Reuse Alternative 1 Currently unidentified future improvements will be made to this intersection to maintain an acceptable level of service to be agreed to by the cities of Tustin and Irvine for baseline conditions pursuant to file 1998 MOA between the 'I'CA and cities of Irvine and Tustin. Therefore, [lie impacts of reuse allay be overstated, difficult to quantity at this time, and could be less at this location because; of unknown improvements. EISIElRJ()i' the Dhvposal and ReiiSe of MCAS T1ivt111 45 Mitigation Monitoring ai7d Repoi"liilg Program Soil thboll lid Wes t1)ound Northbound Easthound Imp.-fict Result Implementation� t-hreshold i reject Share(<') Location i, "I' It L "1' It 1, "I' It L "1' it AM I'M AM I'i1°i Cumulative ADT Percent Ii -vine 81. Red Ilill & Maiilt4' Base 1 3 ci 2 3 d 2 3 f 1 3 cl p — ma 157,0()0 1(}U Mit. 1 3 f 2 3 ci 2 3 f 1 3 c1 89. Von Karman & Base 1 2 d 1 2 f 1 2 1. 1 2 cl c _ Ina 141,000 22 Mic:helsoilt'' Mit. 1 2 d 1 2 f 1 2 1 2 2 d 106. Jamboree &A I ton(') Base 2 4 d 2 3 c1 2 4 1 2 3 cl ('' IOU Mit. 2 4 d 2 3 d 2 5 1 2 3 d -- p — ina 118. Harvard & Alton Base 1 2 1 2 3 d 1 2 d 2 3 1 — ma -- 181,0(}0 100 Mit. 1 2 1 2 3 c1 2 2 d 2 3 i P 128. Culver & Warner Base 1 3 d 1 2 d 1 3 1 1 2 d — p — Ina 174,000 100 Mit. 1 3 d 1 2 d 1 3 l 2 2 cl Base - Intersection lanes without mitigation; Mit. - Intersection lanes with mitigation ATMS - Advanced Transportation Management System d - de facto right -turn; f - free right -turn 1,, T, R - lel}, through, right Boles - notation indicates lane changes froth base scenario (without mitigation) A .5 or 1.5 lane; designation represents lane sharing between dillbrent movements p - Project causes deficiency; c - project contributes to deficiency 111111- Mitigated to all adequate level of service; nip - Project portion of impact mitigated, LOS renlains less than adequate; nm - Project impact not mitigated c - Project contributes to deficiency No lane changes; ATMS measures tune changes and ATMS measures TSIA intersection '4' 1130 intersection No identifiable mitigation pleasures '`'' Fair share contribution by City of Tustin for project responsibility. TSIA fiends would not be used for this portion of the funding. Many of the measures specified for mitigation of traffic/circulation impacts require financial contributions on a fair share basis. Fair share contributions shall be llo greater than required for capacity improvements consistent with and assumed ill this EIS/(::IR, as mutually agreed to by the cities of—Tustin, Irvine, and Santa Ana, as applicable. ''' bull buildout of Reuse Alternative 1 Currently unidentified future improvements will be made to this intersection to maintain an acceptable level of service to be agreed to by the cities of Tustin and Irvine for baseline conditions pursuant to file 1998 MOA between the 'I'CA and cities of Irvine and Tustin. Therefore, [lie impacts of reuse allay be overstated, difficult to quantity at this time, and could be less at this location because; of unknown improvements. EISIElRJ()i' the Dhvposal and ReiiSe of MCAS T1ivt111 45 Mitigation Monitoring ai7d Repoi"liilg Program Table 5 On-site ADT Development Thresholds ADT (Cclmiflative) Roads Added Avenue 271000 (27 000) Landsdowne Road North Loop Road — Red Flill Avenue to West Connector Road (Build 3 lanes only) West Connector Road East Connector Road Marble Mountain Road Moffett Drive North Loop Road — Red Hill Avenue to West Connector Road (Final Buildout) 82,800 t 109,800) North Loo Road — East Connector Road to Moffett Drive (Build 3 lanes only) Loop y Red Hill Avenue/Carnegie Avenue Intersection (East Leg) Red Hill Avenue/Warner Avenue Intersection (East Leg) Severyns Road Armstrong Avenue — North Loop Road to Barranca Parkway North Loop Road — West Connector Road to East Connector Road North Loop Road — East Connector to Moffett Drive (Final Buildout) North Loop Road — Moffett Drive to Warner Avenue 26,900 (1361,700) South Loop Road — Warner Avenue to Tustin Ranch Road Tustin Ranch Road — Edinger Avenue to North Loop Road (6 lanes) Tustin Ranch Road — Warner Avenue to Barranca Parkway (Build 4 lanes only) Warner Avenue — Red !-till Avenue to Jamboree Road (Build 4 lanes only) 392500 (176 200) South Loop Road — Armstrong Avenue to Tustin Ranch Road Tustin Ranch Road —North Loop Road to South Loop Road (Build 4 lanes only) 40,200 (216 400) Widen Tustin Ranch Road to 6 lanes (Final Buildout) . Widen Warner Avenue to 6 lanes ( Final Buildout) EfSIEf fibs- the D sl)osal and Rerrse of WAS Ttrsth? 46 U llgalloi7 Mol7llorh7g a17d Reporting Progl'ain Table le C Planning Area Trip Budget Planning Area No. Assumed Land Use Residential/Parks Non Residential Amount ADTs Amount ADI's�2� Neighborhood A I General Commercial 27,120 sr 3,033 learning Village 1,385,531 sf' 8,479 13A 1 Trip Budget Subtotal 119512 2 Community Park 24.1 ac 121 3 Transitional Housing 192 du 941 Neighborhood A Square Footage Total 194129651 sf Neighborhood A Trip Budget Total 11,512 Neighborhood B 4 LDR (1-7 du/ac) 304 du 2,909 5 MDR (8-15 du/ac) 621 du 41,968 7 General Commercial 315,592 sf 14,273 PA 7 Trip Budget Subtotal 14,273 Neighborhood B Square Footage Total 315,592 sf Neigh borh ood B Trip Budget Total 149273 Neigliborliood C 6 Regional Park 84.5 ac 423 Non -Residential General Commercial 57,500 sr 31920 Neighborhood C Square Footage Total 57,5411 sf Neighborhood C Trip Budget Total 3,920 Neighborhood D 8 MHDR (16-25 du/ac) 891 du 53907 Office Park 1,815,380. sf 14,872 Industrial Park 1,633,830 st' 13,384 Shopping Center 181,540 sf' 12,376 PA 8 Trip Budget Subtotal 40,632 EIS/E,EI R. f yr the Disposal and Reuse of AICAS Tustin 47 Mitigation Monif oi-ing and Re.-pot'1 inn Program Planning Area No. Iles idential/1'arlcs Assumed Land Use Amount ADTs Neighborhood D Square Footage Total Non Residential Amount .3,630, 7.30 sf ADTs(Z) Neighborhood D Trip Budget Total 40, 632 Neighborhood C 9 General Commercial H 0,990 sf 77566 Light Industrial 47,570 sf 386 13A 9 Trip Budget Subtotal 79952 10 Office Park 174,570 sf 2,317 Light Industrial 157,110 sf 11274 General Commercial 17,460 sf 1,952 PA 10 'Trip Budget Subtotal 5,543 11 12 General Commercial 68,390 sf 4,662 Office Park 615,505 sf 51042 Industrial Park 683,890 sf 51602 PA I I Trip Budget Subtotal General Commercial 12,810 sf 15,306 1,432 General Office 115,280 sf 11530 PA 12 Trip Budget Subtotal 29962 13 General Commercial 34,240 sf 31829 General Oflice 136,950 sf 11817 Light Industrial 513,575 sf 41663 PA 13 Trip Budget Subtotal 105309 14 General Commercial 42,340 sf' 4,734 General Office 338,720 sf 39387 Light Industrial 465,750 sf 4,326 PA 14 Trip Budget Subtotal 129447 Neighborhood E Square Footage Total 3,535,130 sf Neighborhood E Trip Budget Total 549519 Neighborhood F 16 Generali Commercial 72,930 sf 41972 EISID..R.fol' the Di.yposal wid Reuse ()fA4CAS Tusth? .48 Alfifi jallo!? HoWforing and Reporlitig Program Planning Area No. Assumed Lan(I Use Residential/Parks Anoint AD'I's Non Resitlentiai Arnount Awrsm General 011ice 07,250 sr 1,291 Light Industrial 315,950 s1' 39211 PA 16 Trip Budget Subtotal 92474 17 Light Industrial 284,0 I o sr 27959 PA 17 "Trip Budget Subtotal 2,959 18 Military 40,850 s1' 542 PA 18 "Trip Budget Subtotal 542 19 Shopping Center 672,570 sr 23,217 PA 19 Trip Budget Subtotal 23,217 Neighborhood F Stptare Footage Total 11 48.19560 sf Neighborhood F Trip Bttdget Total 36,192 Neighborhoocl G 15 LDR (1-7 du/ac) 272 du 21603 MDR (8-15 du/ac) 662 du 51,296 General Commercial 62,730 sr 4,276 Hotel 500 rm 43115 Golf Course 159.3 ac 19274 PA 15 Trip Budget Subtotal 9,665 20 MHDR (16-25 du/ac) 588 du 3,898 General Commercial (by CUP) 23,000 sl' 27572 PA 20. Trip Budget Subtotal 2,572 21 LDR ( 1 -7 du/ac) - Tustin 711 6,804 LDR (1-7 du/ae) - Irvine 150 1,436 PA 21 "Trip Budget Subtotal Neighborhood G Sgttare Footage Total 851730 sf Neighborhood G Trip Bttdget Total 129237 Neighborhood H 22 MDR (8-15 (folic) 402 3,216 Neighborhood 11 aml 1`114 22 1 rip 13wt wet Total 0 EIS%EIR filr the Disposal and Reuse of AlICAS Titstin 49 Mlllgalion Monitot-ing and Repot -ting Pt'ogram Planning Area No. Assumed land Use ttesi(lentin!/E'arks Non Residential Arnot���t A17Ts Amount AnTs(2) rm - hotel rooms Source,: AD"1's for land use types derived from iifCfiS Tustin Specific 1lnt/Rerse flnjTrcrSific t))(Austin-TOust Associates, Inc. 1999) in Appendix r, bound separately. I_:1env\700S\73 I \MIT -TA }3. VO'I'D EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of AlICAS Tustin 50 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program