Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA 90-10 ! 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 1(; 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. RDA 90-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW 88-20 AS ADEQUATE FOR A REVISION TO SAID DESIGN REVIEW, INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Redevelopment Agency finds and determines as follows: ae Design Review 88-20 is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act. Be A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review. Ce Whereby, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Director and other interested parties with respect to the subject Negative Declaration. De The Redevelopment Agency has evaluated the proposed final Negative Declaration and determined it to be adequate and complete. II. A Final Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The Redevelopment Agency, having final approval authority over Design Review 88-20, has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration prior to approving the proposed project and found it adequately discussed the environmental effects of the proposed project. On the basis of the initial study and comments received during the public review process, the Redevelopment Agency has found that there is no substantial evidence that there will be any significant adverse environmental effects as a result of the approval of the project because mitigation measures identified in the Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the project which mitigate any potential significant environmental effects to a point where clearly no significant effects will occur. The mitigation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 191 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. RDA 90-10 Page 2 measures are identified in Exhibit A to the attached Negative Declaration and initial study and are adopted as conditions of approval of the subject project pursuant to Conditions 2.1, 3.1, 4.1 and 5.1 of Exhibit A of City Council Resolution No. 90-73A, incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency held on the 16th day of July, 1990. RICHARD B. EDGAR Redevelopment Chair~n MARY WYNN,'~ Re co r d;~flg Secretary,3 v NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF TUSTIN 300 ,CENTENNIAL WAY, TUSTIN, CA,'92680 Project Tttle: Conditional Use Permit 90-08 Ftle No. CUP 90-08 Project Location: 15642 Pasadena Avenue, Tustin Project Description: An 11 unit apartment project with seven (7) units having a maximum height of 2½ stories (29.5') & four (4) units having a Project Proponent: Feridoun Rezai maximum height of I story (20'). Contact Person: Steve Rubin Telephone: 544-8890 Ext. 252 The Community Development Department has conducted an lntttal study for the above project in accordance with the City of Tustln's procedures regarding implementation of the California EnvlFonmental Quality Act, and on the basis of that study hereby find: That therq is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. That potential significant affects were identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and agreed to by the applicant that would avoid or mitigate the affects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Said revisions are attached to and hereby made a part of this Negative Declaration. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not required. The initial study which provides the basis for this determination is on file at the Community Development Department, City of Tustin. The public is invited to comment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the review period, which begins with the public notice of a Negative Declaration and extends for seven calendar days. Upon review by the Community Development Director, this review period may be extended if deemed necessary. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS 4:30 p.m.'on DATED: l~y 24m 1990 June 13~ 1990. Community Development Director/ CITY OF TUSTIN Community Development Department ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY FORM II. i. Na~e of Proponent yERIDOUN REZAI 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent 203 TROJAN STREET ANAHEIM~ CA 92804 (7l&) 220-2893 Oate of Checklist Submitted j MARCH 12. 1990 Agency Requiring Checklist CITY Of' TUSTIN Name of Proposal, if applicable I~ONDITIONAL USF. ?ERMIT 90-08 Environmental Impacts (Explanations of oll "yes" and "maybe" answers ore required on attached sheets.) I. Em'th. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displocemonts, compaction or ovcrcovcring of the soil? X X c. Change in topography ~x- ground surface relief features? de fe The dcs~uctlon, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? Any incrz-~.~e in wir~ or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? Chc'~ges in deposition or erosion o1' beach · sands, or chorx'jes in si/tot/on, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any boy, inlet or lake? X X X ge Exposure of people or property to geolo- gic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides~ ground foilure~ or similar hazards? Air. Will the proposal result in-' Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? The creation of objectionable odors? Alteration of air movement~ moisture, or temperature, or any change in climote~ either locally or regionally? Water. Will the proposal result in: Oe Ce Changes in currents, or the course of rection of water moveme~ts~ in either marine or fresh waters? Changes in absorption rates, drainage pot- terns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Alterations to the course or fl~w of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in · any water body? ee Discharge into surfece waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, cludincj .~t not I/m/ted to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of t.L~_ direction or rate of How of ground waters? he Chon.ge in the quantity of ground wotcrs~ either through direct odditlons or with- drowols, or throurjh interception of on aquifer by cuts or excavations? Substohtial reduction in the amount of water other'w/se available for public water supplies? Exposure of people or property to water re- lated hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X X X X X X X _X X X X Picot Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of a'r/ species of plants (including trees, shrubs~ grass, crops, ortd aquatic plants)? b.- Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new soecies of plants into an oreo, or in o barrier to the normal replenishment of' existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic orgcrHsms or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unlque, rare or endangered species of c~imals? Ce Introduction of new species of cnimals into an area, or result in a borrler to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people fo severe noi~ levels? L/.qht c~ncl Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub- .~fontiol alteration of the prese.,t or planned land use of an area? Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of ony natural resources? Yes ,X. X X= X X X X X X X X b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve II. 12. 13. .aa A risk of an ~q~losion or the relea~ of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of cm occident or upset, condlt ions? be Pc~sible interference with an ernergenc-y res~:~3nse pla=3 or on emergency evacuatio~ plan? Population. Will the prooosol alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of on area? Housing. Will the proposal affect existing hous- ing, or create a demand for additional housing? Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular, movement? b. I--ffects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? de Substantial impact upon existing tronsporo ration systems? Alteraticns fo present potferr'.s of' circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic h~ards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Public Servic-e_~. Will the proposal have an effect upan, or result in a need for new or '.ltered governmental services in any of the following areas: o. Fire protect ion? b. Police protection? Schools? X X X X X X X X X X x d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f~' Other governmental services? 15. Energy. W~II the proposal result in: a. Use of' substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial incre~ in demand u~on ex/st- ing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utiliti~. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: · -. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water dralnoge? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Hurn~ Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health .hazard or potenlicl health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health I'~zards? 18. Aesthetic. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public~ or will the proposal result in the creation of on aesthetically offensive site open to public view? I?. Recre~rtion. Will the proposal result in on impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a pre,~istoric or historic archaeological site? Y~ ,X, X X X X X X X X X X X X X be Will the proposal re~lt in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? ~ the prol~s~l have the potential to cause a physical clx~ge ~ich would affect unique etl'mic cultural values? Will the proposal re~trlct ex/sting religious or sacred uses within the potential impact 21. Mandator~ ~indings of Significance. ae Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, codse a fish or wild- life population to drop below self sus- taining levels, tl,reaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endanqered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? be Ooes the project' hove the potential to ach/eve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short- term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) Ce Does the project have in'pacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively con- siderable? (A prciect may Jrr!~act on two or more separate resources ,.,.,here the ~mpact on each resource is rel~tlvely smcll, but where the effect of the total of those irroacts on the environment is significant.) de Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III. Discussion of Environmental Evaluotio~ IV. C)eterminot ion (To be completed by the Lead Agency) Yes X X X X X X On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find fhat the proposed project COULD NOT have a slgnificont effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARAT10N will be prepared, I I I find that although the prooased project could have a s~nlficant effect I'~'J on the environment, fhere will not be a significant effect in thls case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet hove been added to the project. A NEGATIVE[ DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED, I find the proposed proiecf MAY hav~ a significant effect on the environ- merit, and an E~IVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. J ~"MARCH 16, 1990 ,/ ObOe. ~ Signoture ASSOCIATE PLANNER City of Tustin REDEVELO~,ENT A~ENCY RESOLUTION CER~FIC&TION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) RESOLUTION NO. RDA 90-10 MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk and Recording Secretary of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. RDA 90-10 was duly and regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency held on the 16th day of July, 1990, by the following vote: AGENCY MEMBER AYES: Edgar, Puckett, Pontious AGENCY MEMBER NOES: Potts AGENCY MEMBER ABSTAINED: None AGENCY MEMBER ABSENT: Prescott Mary E. Clerk/ Recording Secretak~: