Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA 2 3RD AMEND DDA 04-01: PROSPECT VILLAGE 02-03-09Ag~d# Item RDA 2 • Reviewed: ~~~` AGENDA REPORT City Manager Finance Director N/A MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2008 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FROM: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF SUBJECT: THIRD AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 04-01 WITH PROSPECT VILLAGE L.P. SUMMARY: City Council approval is requested for a Third Amendment to the Prospect Village Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) 04-01. In summary, the amendments would allow: commercial service uses and certain ofFce uses, as well as retail uses, in all six (6) of the live/work units facing Prospect Avenue; various food related uses up to a minimum of (50) percent of the ground floor instead of a requirement that a minimum 3,000 square feet of the ground floor of the Main Street Commercial Building consist of a restaurant use; and, allow op#ometrists and opticians. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency: 1. Adopt RDA Resolution No. 09-01 finding that the Third Amendment to DDA 04- 01 is within the scope of the previously approved Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). 2. Approve and authorize the Executive Director, or his designee, to execute the Second Amendment to DDA 04-01 between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village L.P., subject to City Council approval of Zone Change 08- 003 (Amendments to the Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations) and any non-substantive modifications to the Third Amendment as may be determined necessary by the City Attorney. FISCAL IMPACT: No additional fiscal impacts are anticipated beyond those identified in the Original DDA. BACKGROUND: The Redevelopment Agency entered into a DDA 04-01 with Prospect Village L.P. on June 21, 2004 (the "Original DDA"), amended the DDA on February 21, 2007 (the "First Amendment") and amended the DDA on March 18, 2008, collectively, the "DDA". Consistent with Planned Development District zoning regulations for the project, the current DDA contains restrictions that limited the use of the ground floor of three of the units along Prospect Avenue to retail uses with the remaining three units permitted to be in either retail, commercial service or professional office uses. Proposed modifications to the DDA would eliminate the requirement that three of the units along Prospect Avenue must be retail use and will expand the authorized uses permitted in the ground floor of all units facing Prospect Avenue to retail, commercial service and professional office uses and also permit opticians and optometrists. Units facing Prospect Lane would continue to have their ground floors limited to retail, commercial service and professional office uses. The current DDA and Planned Development District zoning regulations for the project also require that a minimum of 3,000 square feet of the ground floor of the commercial building along Main Street be in a high quality restaurant use. The Developer has represented to the Agency that there have been significant issues associated with marketing the Main Street commercial building with this requirement. Given current market conditions particularly in the restaurant industry, providing additional flexibility regarding the type of retail uses that are required in the ground floor of the Main Street building will assist the Developer in marketing use of the Main Street building. It is being proposed that the Agency only require that approximately fifty percent (50%) or a minimum of 2,200 square feet of the ground floor of the Main Street building be required to be in restaurant or other food service use. This would also permit the 2,200 square feet to include other types of cafe uses or food related uses such as bakeries, delicatessens, specialty foods, coffee houses and shops or prepared food stores (i.e. ice cream, yogurt, candy or similar items), wine shop or wine tasting uses. The Agency would retain its authority under the DDA to review all retail food related leases and current financial statements for such tenants with the authority to approve or disapprove such materials, in Agency's sole discretion, provided, that the Agency would not withhold its consent if certain conditions in the proposed Third Amendment to the DDA were met which are summarized as follows: 1. All documents and materials required are provided in the form and substance required under the DDA; 2. The proposed Retail Food Related Lease(s) provide for the improvement and operation of uses consistent with authorized uses in the DDA scope of development, and the Tenant has sufficient financial creditworthiness, restaurant or food related experience as applicable to the proposed use and market strength to operate properly the proposed use and maintain the tenant space and pay its share of common area charges; 3. The Developer or tenant has previously delivered to Agency building improvement plans, with respect to intended interior improvements for the tenant space and evidence of financing for such construction of the improvements. The remaining balance of the ground floor of the Main Street building would still be restricted to other retail uses permitted by the Planned Development regulations for the project. The modifications to the DDA will provide flexibility to the types of uses permitted along Prospect Avenue and Main Street assisting the Developer in marketing the project and the Agency in accomplishing implementation plan goals established for the Tustin Town Center Project Area. The Community Development Department is also concurrently processing Zone Change 08-001 (Amendments to the Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations) which would ensure that proposed amendments to the DDA are reflected in the planned development zoning regulations for the project. Approval of the Third Amendment to DDA 04-01 shall be contingent upon City Council approval of Zone Change 08-001. The City Council previously approved RDA Resolution No. 04-01 certifying the Prospect Village Project Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and adopted Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Consideration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project. The Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study and it has been determined that the proposed Third Amendment to DDA 04-01 is within the scope of the Prospect Village Project FEIR and no additional analysis, action or document is required under CEQA. A copy of the Initial Study is attached to the City Council agenda item for the similar zoning action being recommended on the Prospect Village project. Christine A. Shinglet Assistant City Manag r S:\RDA\CC report\Agenda Report 2-3-09-3rdAmendmentProspectVillageDDA.doc Attachments 1. Resolution No. 09-01 2. Third Amendment to DDA 04-01 THIRD AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This THIRD AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "Amendment") is entered into as of 2008 (the "Effective Date") by and between the TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (as more fully defined in Section 1'.4.1 of the Original DDA (as defined below), ("Agency") and PROSPECT VILLAGE L.P., a California limited partnership (as defined in Section 1.4.2 of the Original DDA, (~~Developer"). The City and the Developer are sometimes referred to herein individually as a ~~Party" and collectively as the "Parties." RECITALS A. Agency and the Developer entered into that certain Disposition and Development Agreement dated as of June 21, 2004 (the "Original DDA"), pursuant to which among other things, the City agreed to sell and the Developer agreed to purchase a Developer Parcel. Subject to Entitlements, Developer also agreed to develop and construct a Project and the Parties agreed to a scope of development for the Project. B. City and Agency entered into the First Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement dated as of February 21, 2007 (the "First Amendment"), and entered into the Second Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement dated as of March 18, 2008 (the "Second Amendment"). The Original DDA, First Amendment and Second Amendment is referred collectively as the "DDA". .Initially capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the respective meanings assigned to such terms in the Original DDA, as amended. B. Pursuant to the Zoning Planned Development Document for the project, the DDA contains restrictions on the total square footage of the ground floor of the commercial building on Main Street that must be in restaurant use and also limits the use of ground floors of a certain number of units along Prospect Avenue to retail uses. Modifications of .the DDA will provide additional flexibility to the types of food related uses permitted in the ground floor of the Main Street Building and the uses along Prospect Avenue. These modifications will assist the Developer in marketing the project and the Agency in accomplishing implementation plan goals established for the Tustin Town Center Project Area. C. Agency and the Developer each desire to amend the Original DDA as set forth below. The Original DDA as amended by this Amendment is referred to herein as the `Agreement." AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals, which are hereby incorporated in the operative provisions of this Amendment by this reference and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties further agree as follows: 1. DDA Modifications 1.1 Section 2.5.2 of the DDA is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: "2.5.2 To the Main Street Commercial Building and the Space Within. Recognizing that the Developer Parcel may be subdivided in furtherance of the intent to lease individual parcels, or retail office space to tenants, and provided that CC&R's for the for the Main Street Commercial Building property are approved by the Agency and have been recorded, the general prohibition against Ownership Transfer as described in Section 2.2.2 shall not be applicable to (a) leasing of office or retail space to tenants in the Main Street Commercial Building, provided that the Agency approves all restaurants, cafes and food service leases set forth in the Scope of Development, Attachment 7., (b) the sale of the Main Street Commercial Building provided that no occupancy shall be permitted until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued by the City, and (c) the grant or dedication in fee of portions of, or easements in the Developer Parcel to Governmental Authorities or utilities, as reasonably required in connection with the Development of the Project by Developer." 1.2 Section 13 of the DDA is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: "13. Use Restrictions for Live-Work Units. The Deeds for individual Live-Work Units shall contain restrictions that: (a) limit the use of the ground floor of units along Prospect Avenue to retail, commercial service, or professional office uses only as permitted by the Prospect Village Planned Development Community District Regulations with deeds for these specific units reflecting this restriction; and (b) limit the use of the ground floor of units along Prospect Lane to retail, commercial service or professional office uses only as permitted by Prospect Village Planned Development Community District Regulations; and (c) permit the Owner of at least two of the units along Prospect Avenue as shall be identified by the Developer to Agency before the close of escrow for any Live-Work-Unit to lease the ground floor portion of the Live- Work Units without requirements for additional parking ("Unrestricted Units"). Any deed restrictions on ground floor uses in the Live-Work-Units shall be binding on the Purchaser and all subsequent Ownership Transferees, for the benefit of the Agency, its successors or assigns. Prior to Close of Escrow on alive-Work-Unit, the Agency shall approve the Deed for each Live-Work Unit prior to Close of Escrow for each unit. For the benefit of the other ten (10) Live-Work Units (the "Restricted Units"), the City and Agency will consider granting Parking Licenses to the Developer which will be transferable to subsequent Owners/Occupiers of Live Work Units permitting the Owners to lease the ground floor portion of their Live-Work Unit for retail, commercial service or professional office uses as permitted subject to the use restrictions contained in subsection (a) and (b) above. The Parking License Agreements will be assigned to each specific Restricted Live-Work Unit and identify the availability and location of Agency licensed parking to the Owner based on the size of the ground floor use, the permitted use of the ground floor (i.e. retail, commercial service, or office use), as applicable, and the additional parking which would be required for such uses if the Unit is not Owner/Occupied on the ground floor. None of the restrictions contained about are designed to reduce the flexibility available to an Owner of a Live-Work Unit from being an Owner Occupier of the ground floor space of a Live- Work Unit, subject to the ground floor use restrictions identified herein." 1.3 Section 2.1.1(a) in Attachment 7 -Scope of Development of the DDA is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: "2.1.1 (a) An approximate 8,589 square foot (leasable area) two story commercial building fronting along Main Street between Prospect Avenue on the east and a public alley on the west having a minimum of approximately fifty percent (50%) or a minimum of 2,200 square feet of the ground floor in restaurant or cafe uses (family or specialty), or other food related uses including bakeries, delicatessens, specialty foods, coffee houses and shops, or prepared food stores (ice cream, yogurt, candy and similar items), wine shop or wine tasting and the balance of the ground floor square footage in retail, commercial service or other restaurant or food related uses and approximately 4,816 square feet of second floor professional and general office uses all of which shall be either permitted uses or conditionally permitted uses pursuant to the Prospect Village Planned Development Community Regulations." 1.4 Section 3.2. in Attachment 7 -Scope of Development of the DDA is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: " 3.2 Approval of Retail Food Related Leases 3.2.1 The Retail Lease for a specific Retail Restaurant, cafe or other food related Tenant (Retail Food Related Tenant") in the ground floor of the Main Street Commercial Building shall require the prior written approval of the Agency. The Developer shall submit to the Agency all documentation, as well as all other materials necessary for the Agency's review of such proposed Retail Food Related Tenant Lease(s) (such materials to include the Retail Food Related Tenant Lease agreement(s) and all ancillary documents thereto, including any guarantees, work letters, subleases, option agreements and the like, as well as current financial statements and similar information for the proposed Tenant(s). The Agency shall have a period of ten (10) working days from the date of its receipt from Developer of all the foregoing materials in which to approve or disapprove, in the Agency's sole discretion, such Retail Food Related Tenant Lease(s), provided however, that the Agency shall not unreasonably withhold its consent if the following conditions have been met: (a) All of the documents and materials required by this Section 3.2.1 are provided in form and substance required by Section 3.2.1; (b) The proposed Retail Food Related Lease(s) provide for the improvement and operation of uses consistent with authorized uses identified in the Scope of Development, and the Tenant(s) has sufficient financial creditworthiness, restaurant or food related experience as applicable to the proposed use and market strength to operate properly the proposed use and maintain is Retail Food Related Tenant space(s) and pay for its share of common area maintenance costs; (c) The Developer or Retail Food Related Tenant has previously delivered to the Agency preliminary building improvement plans, with respect to the intended interior improvements for the Retail Food Related Tenant(s) space and evidence of financing for such construction of the improvement in accordance with the terms of the DDA. 3.2.2 If the .Agency has not approved or disapproved a Retail Food Related Tenant Lease(s), meeting the requirements of the foregoing clauses (a.) through (c.) within the ten (10) working day period, Developer shall send notice to the Agency requesting the Agency's action, and if the Agency has not approved or disapproved such Retail Food Related Tenant Lease(s), within five (5) working days of its receipt of the Developer's notice, the Retail Food Related Tenant Lease(s) shall be deemed to be approved by the Agency. The foregoing deemed approval provisions do not apply to any Retail Food Related Tenant Lease(s), which does not meet each of the requirements set forth in clauses (a.) through (c.):" 2. Miscellaneous 2.1 Revised CC& R's. Prior to Agency's issuance of Certificate of Compliance for the Project and the finalization of any sale or leasing of buildings or ground floor space impacted by the above DDA modifications, Developer shall be required to submit revised amended CC&R' documents for City and Agency review, at Developer's sole expense. Upon City and Agency approval, the amended CC& R documents shall be recorded and a recorded set of documents shall be provided to the City. 2.2 Agreement Ratified. Except as specifically amended or modified herein, each and every term, covenant and condition of the DDA, as amended is hereby ratified and shall remain in full force and effect. 2.3 Binding Agreement. This Amendment shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their legal representatives, successors and permitted assigns. 2.3 Governing Law. This instrument shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Agency and the Developer have executed this Amendment as of the date first set forth above. "AGENCY" Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency Dated: By: William Huston, Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART By: Doug Holland, Agency Counsel < Additional Signature Page Follows> "DEVELOPER" Prospect Village, L.P., a California Limited Partnership Pelican-Tustin, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, General and Managing Partner Dated: By: John Tillotson, Jr., Member By: Daniel Howse, Member RESOLUTION NO. 09-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FINDING THAT THE .THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND PROSPECT VILLAGE LP IS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROSPECT VILLAGE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ("FEIR"). The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency does hereby resolve as follows: A. That the Third Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village LP is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act; B. That on May 17, 2004, the Tustin City Council and Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency certified the Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). The FEIR is a project EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The FEIR considered the potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Prospect Village Project; C. That an Environmental Analysis checklist, attached as Exhibit A hereto, was prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with Zone Change 08-003 and the Third Amendment to the DDA and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village LP. The Environmental Analysis checklist demonstrates that all potential impacts of the project were addressed by the certified FEIR and no additional impacts have been identified; D. That on January 13, 2009, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4109, recommending that the City Council adopt findings that Zone Change 08-003 is within the scope of the previously approved Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report; E. That the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency has considered the Environmental Checklist along with the FEIR prior to making a decision on the Third Amendment to the and approves the Environmental Checklist, attached hereto as Exhibit A. II. The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency finds that the project is within the scope of the previously approved FEIR and that pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15162 and 15168(c), no new effects could occur and no new mitigation measures would be required. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. Resolution No. 09-01 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency held on the 3rd day of February, 2009. DOUG DAVERT CHAIRMAN PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 09-01 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 3rd day of February, 2009 by the following vote: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD MEMBER AYES: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD MEMBER NOES: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD MEMBER ABSTAINED: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD MEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 09-O1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST For Projects With Previously Certified/Approved Environmental Documents: Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) This checklist and the following evaluation of environmental impacts (Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01) takes into consideration the preparation of an environmental document prepared at an earlier stage of the proposed project. The checklist and evaluation evaluate the adequacy of the earlier document pursuant to Section 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. A. BACKGROUND Project Title(s): Zone Change 08-003 and Third Amendment to DDA (Prospect Village) Lead Agency: City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Scott Reekstin Phone: (714) 573-3016 Project Location: The site is located at 191 E. Main Street and 270-292 Prospect Avenue. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 General Plan Designation: City of Tustin -Old Town Commercial Zoning Designation: City of Tustin -Planned Community Project Description: Approval of Zone Change 08-003 and Third Amendment to the DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village LP to: 1) allow commercial service uses and certain office uses, as well as retail uses, in all six (6) of the live/work units facing Prospect Avenue; 2) allow various food related uses to satisfy a requirement that a minimum of fifty (50) percent of the ground floor of the Main Street Commercial Building consist of food related uses; and 3) allow optometrists and opticians. Other very minor amendments are also proposed. Surrounding Uses: North: Vacant site used for a weekly farmers market East: Main Street Water Facility and public parking lot South: Commercial West: Commercial Previous Environmental Documentation: Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (State Clearinghouse #2003041144) certified by the Tustin City Council on May 17, 2004. B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "New Significant Impact" or "More Severe Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. ^Land Use and Planning ^Population and Housing ^Geology and Soils ^Hydrology and Water Quality ^Air Quality ^Transportation & Circulation ^Biological Resources ^Mineral Resources ^Agricultural Resources ^Hazards and Hazardous Materials ^Noise ^Public Services ^Utilities and Service Systems ^Aesthetics ^Cultural Resources ^Recreation ^Mandatory Findings of Significance C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ^ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ^ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. ^ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Preparers ~'J~?o~,~"~ D~~~.z,~'~ Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner Eliza eth A. Binsack, Community Development Director D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Date: ~ ~ ~ ~ Date ~ ~ ~ ! See Attached EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS No Substantial New Change Significant More Severe From I. AESTHETICS -Would the project: Impact Impact Previous Analysis a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ^ ^ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? ^ ^ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ^ ^ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ^ ^ IL AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? ^ ^ b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ^ ^ c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? ^ ^ III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? ^ ^ b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? ^ ^ c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? ^ ^ d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ^ ^ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ^ ^ No Substantial New Change Significant More Severe From IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: Impact Impact Previous Analysis a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ^ ^ b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ^ ^ c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ^ ^ d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? ^ ^ e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ^ ^ f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? ^ ^ V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? ^ ^ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? ^ ^ c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ^ ^ d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ^ ^ VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: -Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: No Substantial New Change Significant More Severe From i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the Impact Impact Previous most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map Analysis issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ^ ^ ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ^ ^ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ^ ^ iv) Landslides? ^ ^ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ^ ^ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? ^ ^ d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? ^ ^ e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? ^ ^ VIL HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ^ ^ b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? ^ ^ c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? ^ ^ d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? ^ ^ e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ^ ^ f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ^ ^ g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: -Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities? No Substantial New Change Significant More Severe From Impact Impact Previous Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 1) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from post- construction activities? m) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? n) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING -Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES -Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No Substantial New Change Significant More Severe From Impact Impact Previous Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excess noise levels? XII.POPULATION AND HOUSING -Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? No Substantial New Change Significant More Severe From Impact Impact Previous Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Substantial New Change Significant More Severe From Impact Impact Previous Analvsis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ No d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and odors)? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Substantial New Change Significant More Severe From Impact Impact Previous Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ATTACHMENT 1 TO EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 09-01 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ZONE CHANGE 08-003 AND THIRD AMENDMENT TO DDA (PROSPECT VILLAGE) BACKGROUND On May 17, 2004, the Tustin City Council and Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") conducted a joint public hearing and considered the Prospect Village Project (the "Project"), which included the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of a 9,300 square foot two-story commercial building and twelve (12) live/work units at the northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue. The approximately one-acre project site is bordered by Third Street on the north, Prospect Avenue on the east, East Main Street on the south and a public alley on the east. After conducting the hearing, the Tustin City Council approved a General Plan Conformity Finding for the disposition of the site; approved an ordinance approving a zone change from Central Commercial and Parking Overlay (C2-P) to Planned Community (PC) and to establish Planned Community District Regulations; approved a tentative tract map, design review, and conditional use permit; and approved the sale of Agency-owned property. Following the Council's actions, the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency approved Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) 04-01 between the Agency and Prospect Village, LP. On May 17, 2004, the Tustin City Council also certified the Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) as complete and adequate pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and adopted Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project. The proposed project is a zone change that consists of minor amendments to the Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations to 1) allow commercial service uses and certain office uses, as well as retail uses, in all six (6) of the live/work units facing Prospect Avenue; 2) allow various food related uses to satisfy a requirement that a minimum of fifty (50) percent of the ground floor of the Main Street Commercial Building consist of food related uses; and 3) allow optometrists and opticians. Other very minor amendments are also proposed. The proposed project to be evaluated also includes the Third Amendment to the DDA, to: 1) provide more flexibility to the types of uses allowed along Prospect Avenue so that all six (6) of the live/work units facing Prospect Avenue may contain commercial services and certain professional office uses, as well as retail uses; 2) allow various food related uses to satisfy a requirement that a minimum of fifty (50) percent of the ground floor of the Main Street Commercial Building consist of food related uses; and 3) allow optometrists and opticians throughout the Prospect Village Planned Community. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 2 The following information provides background support for the conclusions identified in the Environmental Analysis Checklist. AESTHETICS -Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The Prospect Village Project is not located on a scenic highway, and the proposed zone change and DDA amendment will not affect a scenic vista. Development of the site was considered within the FEIR and was determined to have no negative aesthetic effect on the site or its surroundings. The FEIR identified no significant impacts related to aesthetics. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (pages 3.1-1 to 3.1-16) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP ~~. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 3 b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non- agricultural use? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Managing and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency to non-agricultural use. Also, the property is not zoned or used for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract, nor does the allowed use involve other changes in the existing environment that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. The FEIR identified no impacts related to agricultural resources. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page 1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 4 d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No intensified uses or changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts to air quality. Development of the site was considered within the FEIR, and the FEIR identified no significant impacts related to air quality. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (pages 3.2-1 to 3.2-11) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 5 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not result in impacts to federally listed, threatened, or endangered plant or animal species The FEIR identified no impacts related to biological resources. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page 1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The FEIR determined that the Prospect Village Project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in the FEIR to minimize these impacts. However, in approving the Prospect Village Project, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 17, 2004 for cultural resources impacts that could not be mitigated. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 6 No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIR. However, the FEIR also concluded that impacts to cultural resources were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 17, 2004. No additional mitigation measures are required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (pages 3.3-1 to 3.3-11) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: -Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: • Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. • Strong seismic ground shaking? • Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? • Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 7 The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts related to geology or soils. The FEIR identified no significant impacts related to geology or soils. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: -Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 8 The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts related to hazards or hazardous materials. Development of the site was considered within the FEIR, and the FEIR identified significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials, but these impacts were reduced to a level of insignificance after mitigation. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIR. No additional mitigation measures are required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (pages 3.4-1 to 3.4-7) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: -Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 9 f1 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities? I) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from post-construction activities? m) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? n) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts related to hydrology and water quality. The FEIR identified no significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page 1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 10 IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited, to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. Furthermore, the proposed changes do not conflict with the City's General Plan or Zoning Ordinance. The FEIR determined that the Prospect Village Project would be inconsistent with General Plan policies that promote preservation and rehabilitation of historic resources. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in the FEIR to minimize these impacts. However, in approving the Prospect Village Project, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 17, 2004 for land use and planning impacts that could not be mitigated. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIR. However, the FEIR also concluded that impacts to land use and planning were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 17, 2004. No additional mitigation measures are required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (pages 3.5-1 to 3.5-15) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 11 b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not result in impacts to mineral resources. The FEIR identified no impacts related to mineral resources. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP XI. NOISE: Would the project: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. Furthermore, the proposed changes would Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 12 allow uses that are no more noise-sensitive or noise-generating than uses currently allowed. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts related to noise. Development of the site was considered within the FEIR, and the FEIR identified no significant impacts related to noise. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (pages 3.6-1 to 3.6-9) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP XII. POPULATION & HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The FEIR determined that the Prospect Village Project, which includes the construction of twelve (12) live-work units, would not substantially increase the population of the area. The FEIR identified no significant impacts related to population and housing. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts related to population and housing. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 13 XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The FEIR determined that the Prospect Village Project would result in a minor increase in the demand for and utilization of public services. With compliance with all agency requirements, any potential impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance. The FEIR identified no significant impacts related to public services. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts related to public services. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The FEIR determined that the Prospect Village Project would result in a minor increase in the demand for recreational services and facilities. Compliance with the City's parkland dedication requirements reduces any potential impacts to a Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 14 level of insignificance. The FEIR identified no significant impacts related to recreation. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts related to recreation. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Tustin City Code Section 9331(d) Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any additional impacts related to transportation or traffic. Development of the site was considered within the FEIR, and the FEIR identified significant impacts related to short term construction traffic and increased parking demand, but these impacts were reduced to a level of insignificance after mitigation. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 15 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIR. No additional mitigation measures are required for the proposed project. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (pages 3.7-1 to 3.7-13) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations Tustin General Plan DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and odors)? The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would make minor changes to the allowed uses in the Prospect Village Project. No changes to the physical development of the site are proposed. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 16 The FEIR determined that the Prospect Village Project would result in a minor increase in the demand for utilities. Compliance with all agency requirements ensures that any potential impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance. The FEIR identified no significant impacts related to utilities and service systems. The proposed zone change and DDA amendment would not have any impacts related to utilities and service systems. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR (page 1-1) Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Based upon the foregoing, the proposed zone change and DDA Amendment would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitats or wildlife populations, or threaten, eliminate, or reduce animal ranges, etc. With the enforcement of FEIR mitigation and implementation measures approved by the Tustin City Council, the proposed zone change and DDA Amendment would not cause unmitigated environmental effects that will cause substantial effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The FEIR previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Prospect Village Project. The proposed zone change and DDA Amendment will result in no substantial changes to environmental issues previously considered with adoption of the FEIR. Mitigation measures were identified in the FEIR to reduce impacts, but not to a level of insignificance in all Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 09-01 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ZC 08-003, Third Amendment to DDA Page 17 cases. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 17, 2004. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEIR previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Prospect Village Project. Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR and no additional mitigation is necessary. Sources: Field Observations Prospect Village FEIR Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations DDA by and between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP CONCLUSION The summary concludes that all of the proposed project's effects were previously examined in the FEIR, that no new effects would occur, that no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects would occur, that no new mitigation measures would be required, that no applicable mitigation measures previously not found to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and that there are no new mitigation measures or alternatives applicable to the project that would substantially reduce effects of the project that have not been considered and adopted. A Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program and Findings of Overriding Considerations were adopted for the FEIR on May 17, 2004, and shall apply to the proposed project, as applicable. S:\Cdd\SCOTT\Environmental\ZC 08-003 Prospect Village Amendments #2 Initial Study Evaluation.doc