Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 FINAL TRACT 17144• Agenda Item 3 - ~~ ~ AGENDA REPORT Reviewed: < ~.~ ~_ Finance Director MEETING DATE: JANUARY 18, 2011 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS VIA: DAVID C. BIGGS, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: FINAL TRACT MAP 17144 SUMMARY: Final Tract Map (FTM) 17144 is a request to subdivide a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purposes only. Future development of the project site will be subject to approval of a Concept Plan and Design Review which will facilitate the development on the proposed lots consistent with the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. On January 4, 2011, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 17144 by adopting Resolution No. 11-01. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 11-03 approving FTM 17144, a subdivision of 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purposes only. FISCAL IMPACT: This is a City initiated application. Fees related to the preparation of FTM 17144 have been appropriated in the current budget. BACKGROUND: On November 13, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended and on December 4, 2007, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 17144, a request by Tustin Legacy Community Partners to subdivide a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for the purpose of development of approximately 1,267,324 square feet of commercial business, open space, public streets, and flood control facilities. Final Tract Map 17144 January 18, 2011 Page 2 The approved TTM 17144 was proposed as a Sector Level B Map which divides a larger parcel into additional parcels (development units) that will facilitate conveyance of the property by a master developer to merchant builders or other parties. Since then, Tustin Legacy Partners has terminated its contract with the City of Tustin as the master developer for the remaining undeveloped land within the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Accordingly, the City is reorganizing and reassessing the implementation strategies for the development within the master developer footprint. On December 14, 2010, and January 4, 2011, the Planning Commission recommended and the City Council respectively approved an amendment to TTM 17144 which was proposed as a conveyance map only (Attachment C). No development is proposed in conjunction with this map. If approved, Tract Map 17144 would provide for conveyance of individual parcels and the establishment of roadways and public infrastructures. DISCUSSION: Site and Surroundings The project site is generally bounded by Barranca Parkway on the south, Red Hill Avenue on the west, Warner Avenue on the north, and Armstrong Avenue on the east within Neighborhood E (Planning areas 9-12) of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Attachment A -Location Map). Final Tract Map 17144 FTM 17144 is a request to subdivide a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purposes only (Attachment B). Future development of the project site will be subject to approval of a Concept Plan and Design Review which will facilitate the development on the proposed lots consistent with the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. FTM 17144 has been analyzed for conformity to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, applicable City of Tustin guidelines and standards, applicable mitigation measures identified in the certified FEIS/EIR, and other agreements with the City of Tustin. In addition, the Public Works Department has reviewed the map and determined that the map is in substantial conformance with the City Council's approval of TTM 17144, MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, City Subdivision Code, and State Subdivision Map Act. Environmental Review On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. An environmental check list was prepared for the proposed project that concluded no additional environmental impacts would occur from approval of the project. In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Final Tract Map 17144 January 18, 2011 Page 3 Act (CEQA), the City Council considered the checklist and found that it is complete and adequate prior to approving the TTM 17144 by adopting Resolution No. 11-01 on January 4, 2011. Approved for Forwarding By: Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director David C. Biggs City Manager Attachments: A. Location Map B. Final Tract Map 17144 C. City Council Resolution No. 11-01 D. City Council Resolution No. 11-03 ATTACHMENT A Location Map ;, ~ , , , s r ~~ _ ~ . _- ~~ ~~~ ( ~ r - '~ F'~Jf ~ ~ _ ~ ~-.. i ~~ ~'. / r td / f l~ s Pr~ r ~ ~. F ~ ~. N ~ ~ ~ ! Z ., ~,,~ ! ,w , i / / ,,i ,~ 1 f \\ n.[T~ el ~ ~ \5 F~. +~, ~ ~ \ r ~t f r /~ \ `~ ~y ~' s ,~ ~.9° Final Tract Map 17144 Planning Areas 9-12 Neighborhood E MCAS Tustin ATTACHMENT B Final Tract Map 17144 SHEET 1 OF 10 SHEETS AGCEPTEDREf~D fJIT of AT THE AREA: 130.949 ACRES GROSS 17144 TRACT N 0 (BEING ALL OF TENTATIVE . TRACr No n14a) IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN onrE NUMBERED LOTS: 12 LETTERED Lors: za , COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA uME ___ ___ FEE ~- _ "FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY' I NSTRUMEN_I ~ _ _ ---- BEING A SUBDIVISION OF ALL OF LOTS 19, 20, 22 AND 23 AND A PORTION OF LOT 24 OF BOOK ___ __ PAGE _____ TRACT N0. 17026 AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF FILED IN BOOK 884, PAGES 1 THROUGH 14, TOM DALY INCLUSIVE OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY CLERK-RECOItUER COUNTY. GREGORY A. HELMER, L.S. 5134 ~ DATE OF SURVEY: MARCH, 2007 BY coHSU nHo DEPUTY OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE: WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING ALL PARTIES HAVING ANY RECORD TITLE INTEREST IN THE LAND COVERED BY THIS MAP, DO HEREBY CONSENT TO THE PREPARATION AND RECORDATION OF SAID MAP, AS SHOWN WITHIN THE DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINE. WE HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE PUBLIC FOR STREET PURPOSES: LOTS "AA", "BB", "CC", "DD", "EE" (WARNER AVENUE), °FF", "GG", "HH", "]I", "NN" (ARMSTRONG AVENUE), "00", "PP" AND "QQ°. WE ALSO HEREBY RELEASE AND RELINQUISH TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN ALL VEHICULAR ACCESS RIGHTS TO BARRANCA PARKWAY, RED HILL AVENUE, WARNER AVENUE (LOT "EE") AND ARMSTRONG AVENUE (LOT "NN"), EXCEPT AT APPROVED ACCESS LOCATIONS AND STREET INTERSECTIONS. CITY OF TUSTIN, A CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (OWNER) BY __ DAVID C. BIGGS CITY MANAGER SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON A FIELD SURVEr' iN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCE AI THE REQUEST OF 1USTIN PUBLIC FINANCIAL AUTHORITY, A JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, IN MARCH, 2007. I HEREBY STATE THAT ALL MONUMENTS ARE OF THE CHARACTER AND OCCUPY THE POSITIONS INDICATED, OR THAT THEY WILL BE SET [N SUCH POSITIONS, AND THAT SAID MONUMENTS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED. I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS FINAL MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP. ~LAND~- ~~~~V A. yF~AfL~9 GREGORY A. HELMER, L.S. 5134 DATE ~ ~ N0 `~' I 5134 VALID THROUGH: JUNE 30, 2011 11\ CXP. O6-30-2011 ~JF CALIFO~~\P ~ COUNTY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT: I HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP AND HAVE FOUNC THAT ALL MAPPING PROVISIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH AND I AM SATISFIED SAID MAP fS TE.CHNICALLY CORRECT. DATED THIS GAY OF 2011. KEYBANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, A NATIONAL BANKING CORPORATION (BENEFICIARY) AS BENEFICIARY UNDER DEED OF TRUST RECORDED DECEMBER 27, 2007, AS INSTRUMENT N0. 2007000753417. OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. BY NAME TITLE BY NAME TITLE NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT: (CITY of TUSTIN) STATE OF ~ SS COUNTY OF ON BEFORE ME, PERSONALLY APPEARED WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY([ES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON(S) OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. WITNESS MY HAND: MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS [S IN COUNTY. NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID STATE MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: (PRINT NAME) RAYMOND L. MATHE, COUNTY SURVEYOR L.S. 6185 EXPIRATION DATE: 03-31-2012 CITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT: I HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP AND HAVE FOUND IT TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY [N CONFORMANCE WITH THE TENTATIVE MAP, IF REQUIRED, AS FILED W[TH, AMENDED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION; THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF THE SUBD VISION MAP ACT AND CITY SUBD[`/ISION REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED W[TH. DATED THIS DAY OF _ 2011. DOUGLAS S. STACK, R.C.E. 54637 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS THE CITY OF TUSTIN EXPIRATION DATE: 12/31/11 CITY CLERK'S CERTIFICATE: STATE OF CALIFORNIA SS COUNTY OF ORANGE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP WAS PRESENTED FOR APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Of TUSTIN AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE __ DAY OF _, 2011, AND THAT THEREUPON SAID COUNCIL DID, BY AN ORDER DULY PASSED AND ENTERED, APPROVE SAID MAP AND DID ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC, SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENTS, THE DEDICATION FOR STREET PURPOSES OP LOTS "AA", '~BB", "CC", "DD", "EE" (WARNER AVENUE), °FF", "GG", °HH", "II", "NN" (ARMSTRONG AVENUE), "DO", "PP" AND °QQ". AND DID ALSO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN: 1) THE VEHICULAR ACCESS RIGHTS TC BARRANCA PARKWAY, RED HILL AVENUE, WARNER AVENUE (LOT °EE") AND ARMSTRONG AVENUE (LOT "NN") AS RELEASED AND RELINQUISHED. I ALSO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE CITY HAS APPROVED SUBJECT MAP PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 66436 (a)(3)(A) OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT. DATED THIS DAY OF 2012. PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT: (KEYBANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION) STATE OF { SS COUNTY OF 5 ON BEFORE ME, PERSONALLY APPEARED WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(IES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON(S) OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. WITNESS MY HAND: MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IS IN COUNTY. NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID STATE (PRINT NAME) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: NOTES: SEE SHEET 2 FOR SIGNATURE OMISSION NOTES, EASEMENT NOTES AND GENERAL NOTES. COUNTY TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR'S CERTIFICATE: STATE OF CALIFORNIA SS COUNTY OF ORANGE [ HEREBY CERTIFY IHA1 ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF MY CFF[CE THERE ARE NO LIENS AGAINST THE LHND COVERED BY THIS MAP OR ANY PART THEREOF FOR UNPAID STATE, COUNTY, MUNICIPAL OR LOCAL TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES, EXCEPT TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES NOT YET PAYABLE. AND DO ALSO CERTIFY TO THE RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT HAVE BEEN COMPLIED W[TH REGARDING DEPOSITS TO SECURE THE PAYMENT OF TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES ON THE LAND COVERED BY THIS MAP. DATED THIS DAY OF 2011 CHRISS W. STREET BY COUNTY TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR DEPUTY TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR 10-107351 SHEET 2 OF 10 SHEETS AREA: 130,949 ACRES GROSS TRACT N 0 17144 (BEING ALL OF TENTATIVE . TRACT No n144) NUMBERED LOTS: 12 IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN, LETTERED Lors: 28 COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 'FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY' BEING A SUBDIVISION OF ALL OF LOTS 19, 2D, 22 AND 23 AND A PORTION OF LOT 24 OF TRACT N0. 17026 AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF FILED IN BOOK 884, PAGES 1 THROUGH 14 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, ]N THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY. GREGORY A. HELMER, L.S. 5134 ~ DATE OF SURVEY: MARCH, 2007 GONSULTIN~ SIGNATURE OMISSION NOTES: PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 66436 (a)(3)(A)(C) OF THE SUBDIVISfON MAP ACT THE FOLLOWING SIGNATURES HAVE BEEN OMITTED: 1. IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT, HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR PIPELINES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED SEPTEMBER 1, 1971 (N BOOK 9788, PAGE 771 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 2. COUNTY OF ORANGE, HOLDER OF AN AVIGAT[ON EASEMENT RECORDED MARCH 17, 1564 [N BOOK 6965, PAGE 721 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS (NOT PLOTTABLE). 3. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT AS RESERVED iN DCED RECORDED MAY 14, 2002 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 20020404594 AND RE-RECORDED APRIL 9, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 2003000392129 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS (NOT PLOT TABLE). 4. CITY OF TUSTIN HOLDER OF EASEMENTS RECORDED MAY 14, 2002 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 20020404599 AND AS RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED DECEMBER 18, 2002 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 2002001156609 AND HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT AND CERTAIN 01L, GAS, MINERAL. RIGHTS, WATER AND WATER RIGHTS AS RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 19, 2007 AS INSTRUMENT N0 200700039D804, ALL OF OFFICIAL RECORDS (NOT PLOTTABLE) 5. TUSTIN PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY, HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 4, 2006 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 2006000661919 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS (NOT PLOTTABLE). EASEMENT NOTES: © DENOTES VEHICULAR ACCESS RIGHTS, EXCEPT AT STREET INTERSECTIONS ANG APPROVED ACCESS LOCATIONS, RELEASED AND RELINQUISHED HEREON. INDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR PIPELINES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES IN FAVGR OF IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT PER BOOK 9788, PAGE 777 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES EXCEEDING 5,500 SQUARE FEET (PER AMENDMENT) ANb ALL STRUCTURES EXCEEDING FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE PROTECTED BY AN AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM IN A MANNER MEETING THE APPROVAL OF THE FIRE CHIEF. 2. LOT "I" IS PROPOSED FOR RECREATION PURPOSES. 3. LOTS "JJ", "KK", "LL" AND "MM" ARE NOT SEPARATE BUILDING SITES AND PROPOSED FOR STORM DRAIN AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PURPOSES. SAID LOTS TO BE GRANTED FOR FLOOD CONTROL PURPOSES BY SEPARATE DOCUMENT. 4. LOTS "A", "B", °C" AND "D" ARE PROPOSED FOR OPEN SPACE PURPGSES. 5. LOT "H" IS PROPOSED FOR RECREATION AND DETENTION BASIN PURPOSES. 6. LOTS °E", "F" AND "K" ARE PROPOSED IRWD WELL SITES. ACCESS TO SAID LOTS WILL BE GRANTED OR RESERVED BY SEPARATE DOCUMENT AT THE TIME OF CONVEYANCE OF THE WELL SITE OR AT THE TIME OF CONVEYANCE OF THE ADJOINING LOT, WHICH EVER MAY OCCUR FIRST. ~o-iai3~i SHEET30F10SHEETS TRACT N0.17144 AREA: 130.949 ACRES GROSS (TRACT NOL 07144~TATIVE NUMBERED LOTS: 12 IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN, LETTERED Lars: 2a COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA SCALE: 1 " = 300' 'FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY" GREGORY A. HELMER, L.S. 5134 ~ DATE OF SURVEY: MARCH, 2007 coH.u~n No BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE BEARING BETWEEN O.C.S. HORIZONTAL CONTROL STATION GPS N0. 6576 AND STATION GPS N0. 6527R1 BEING NORTH 11°43'02" WEST PER RECORDS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE ORANGE COUNTY SURVEYOR. GPS POINT LOCATIONS: GPS # 6576 FOUND BOLT AND WASHER, STAMPED "L.S. 5831", FLUSH. STATION N 2197723.170 ]S LOCATED AT CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF HARVARD AVE. AND E 6084556.279 BARRANCA PKWY. PER M.M. 701/1-9, R.S.B. 150/24-35. GPS # 6527R1 FOUND BRASS NAIL AND WASHER STAMPED L.S. 5301" FLUSH IN EPOXY, N 2209806.138 IN LIEU OF PUNCHED SPIKE AND WASHER. MONUMENT WAS RESET PER E 6082050.201 CORNER RECORD #2001-850. STATION IS LOCATED AT CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF RED H]LL AVE. AND ED[NGER AVE. PER P.M.B. 64/39, R.S.B. 150/24-35, CR 2001-0850. DATUM STATEMENT: COORDINATES SHOWN ARE BASED UPON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM (CC583), LONE VI 1983 NAD (1991.35 EPOCH O.C.S. GPS ADJUSTMENT). ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE GROUND, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. TO OBTAIN GRID DISTANCE, MULTIPLY GROUND DISTANCE BY 0.99997770. REFERENCE NOTES: R1 - INDICATES RECORD PER TRACT N0. 17026, M.M. 884 / 1-14 R2 - R.S. 2002-1058, R.S.B. 194/19-27 7 EDINGER GPs #6527R2 AVENUE ,~ ~ ~ z I I \ VALENCIA GPs X6528 AVENUE PORTION ~ a, 6 \ oLOCiC 10 "' IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION ~ M.R.M. 1 /88 h `/. b/ ~. h^ ~ a/1 11 ~~~~ ~ ~ 5 ° GPS {6529\y 8 9 10 N42 ~q . N42°56'09"WrR OJ~F 14 ~Oi 15 I6 Np'L ~P~` 18 (R ) , ~~~~ WARNER ~ 6 393. I8' (Ri) 7 13~ 17 N48°32'S2'W 541.86' RI N48°32'52" _ AVENUE a 5 ~ WARNER AVENUE ~ _ _ - ~ 3 LOT "EE" ea' \ LOT'G" ~~ ~ S LOT "C' ~~ Q ' n ¢ y~`\ LOT 4 \ 1 . }Y I yn~ LOT 2 ~ ~ 1 g a 2 ; LOT'HH" LOT 12 `O~' 1 I' / I 77 ~ ~~~r-- ` I o H ~ z~ i I CARNEGIE n' AVENUE °w N ~ 84 z ~!~ . U'~ I: 184' ~~ ~I I i ~I GPS #6530 a \i E. DYER ROAD MONUMENT NOTES: 1. SET LEAD, TACK AND TAG °L.S_5134" IN CONCRETE OR AN 8" SPIKE W/BRASS WASHER STAMPED "L.S. 5134" [N ASPHALT PAVEMENT OR 2" IRON PIPE TAGGED "L 5. 5134" AT ALL CENTERLINE POINTS OF CONTROL, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2 TIES TO CENTERLINE MONUMENTS WILL BE MADE AND FILED WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY SURVEYOR. • INDICATES FOUND ORANGE COUNTY SURVEYOR'S G.P.S. MONUMENT AS NOTED. Q INDICATES 2" IRON PIPE TAGGED °L.S. 6654" OR LEAD, EACK AND lAG "I..S. 6654" OR NAIL AND TAG °L.S. 6654" OR 8" SPIKE AND WASHER STAMPED "L.5- 6654" TO BE SET WITHIN 90 DAYS AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS PER R1 • INDICATES FOUND MONUMENTS AS NOTED AND REFERENCED HEREON: FD. SPIKE AND WASHER "L.S. 5831" FER R1. O.C.S. GPS 6576 N 2197723.170 E 6084556-279 FD. 2" BRASS CAP STAMPED "LS 3246" DN 1.8' IN WELL MONUMENT PER R1. O.C.S. GPS 6535 N 2202360.638 E 6079110.361 ~3 FD. SPIKE AND WASHER STAMPED "JOHNSON-FRANK" LS NUMBER ILLEGIBLE, ACCEPTED AS CENTERLINE INTERSECTION PER R1. ® FD. 3" O.C.S. BRASS DISC DN 1.0', STAMPED 9~9 PER P.M.B. 48/34. O.C.S. GPS 6530 N 2204089.342 E 6077144.581 0 FD. 3 1/2" BRASS CAP STAMPED "9-10" DN 1.G' iN WELL MONUMENT PER H1. O.C.S. GPS 6529 N 2206093.606 E 6078864.355 © FD. HEX BAR IN WELL MONUMENT PER R1, DN.1.6'. O.C.S. GPS 6528 N 2208097.506 E 6080583.577 FD. BRASS NAIL AND WASHER STAMPED "LS 5301" FLUSH [N EPOXY, IN LIEU OF PUNCHED SPIKE AND WASHER, MONUMtNT WAS RESET PER CORNER RECORD 2001-850. O.C.S. GPS 6527R1 N 2209806.138 E 6082050.201 ® FD. NOTHING, SET NOTHING. ~9 FD. PUNCHED SPIKE & WASHER STAMPED "LS 6168" PER CR 1996-0035. 10 FD. 1 1/2" IRON PIPE [N CONCRETE TAGGED "USN, LTAS 1942, LS 2201" N 49-20-02 W 0.58' FROM CORNER PER R1. 11 FD. 1 1/2" IRON PIPE IN CONCRETE TAGGED "USN, LTAS 1942, LS 2201" N 49-20-02 W 0.65' FROM CORNER PER R1. 13 FD. NOTHING, SET NOTHING. ESTABLISHED BY RECORD DISTANCE 131C.20 FEET FROM BARRANCA PARKWAY PER R2. I I LOT 20 - - 21 I 22 z3 2G~ i / ~ i ~ i ~~ z4 ~ \'~ ) / ~i ~ 0 / ~/ / 5i 1 / t~~/l~P~ c~ V1~ / ~ 25 j7~~P a~p~W~ / it 1 u'14 5i,.\ ~ ` ~~.~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ LOT 3 ~~ ~ r " " ~ ~CF ~ p ® 9 ~ ',~ / LOT HH ~ 0 ~ ~ ~~ LOT "C' ~°' LOT "D' ~e` ~~~ T 6 LOT'AA" ~p ~ LOT'F' LOT 'I" p~ G~ OT "B ~0~," ~' 0~,~ ~~ i° LOT'GG' ® ~ to 9's ~e ~ ~ o. LOT 1 '9y, ~c~`j. .~ ~ l~~ ~ ~`' LOT 8 ~ w N79'18'15"W 1 (RAO) DATA TABLE BRN6/DELTA ) RADIUS IENGTN - N40°36'15"E - 30.00 'RI) N49°22'07"W - 7.00' (R1) N86°02'31''E - 17.70' (R1) N49°20'02°W -- 13.40' (Rt) N40°37'53"E -- 80.00' (R1) N49°20'01"W -- 12.26' (Rt) N40°39'59°E -- 76.78' (Rt) N48'32'S2"W - 94.67' (R1) 10°11'07° 59.00' 10.49' (R1) ] N38°21'45"W -- 88.05' (R1) 1 06°23'18° 59.00' 6.58' (Rt) 2 01'48'54" 24!5.06' 76.50' (R1) } 04°29'36" 2285.06' 179-20' (RI) 9 N40°50 28"E -- 20.64' (R1) 5 N49°09'3TW -- 15.93' (R1) - N40°50'28"E -- 21.07' (R1) 7 00°43'09° 2285.06' 28.68' (R1) 3 N41°27'08"E -- 12.00' (R1) 3 N48'30'07"W -- 50.00' (R1) ~ N48'53'39°W - 169.10' (R1) 1 N38°14'17"E -- 127.01' (R1) 2 NBS°15'26"E -- 37.48' (Rt) 3 N39'70'32"E -- 114.22' (Rt) 4 19°01'42" 1748.03' 447.69' (Rt) 5 N07°09'55"E -- 58.91' (Rt) 02°31'06" 1336.03' 58.72' (R1) 7 N25°41 'OB"E - 58.91' (Ri) R 02°00'27` 1348.03' 47.23' (R1) 9 N02°11'51°E -- 106.67' 0 N49'30'05"E -- 16.90' 1 NO6'10'32"E -- 296.02' 2 N07°57'52"E -- 214.77' 3 O1°GO'49" 1446.04' 25.58' 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~O 34 W°27'52" 4677.54' 37.87' p 31 ~ pab j 35 N35°04'49"E ° ' " - 46.01' (Rt) ' ~ ~ i~~. p0 ~ 36 N39 31 05 E ° ' " -- ' (Rt) 85.89 7' (R1) ~Pp~ ~ ~ O 37 01 09 14 ° ' " 58.00 1.1 ' ~ Ppl ,H ~ ~ 9 ~~ O 38 40 79 E N40 ° ' " ' (Rt ) 102.55 ' i •~ ff" ~~ LDT I~ ~ 39 12 14 09 ° ' " 53.00 13.09 (R1) ' '~ 32 '~~ p ~ 33 ~ 40 N26 31 07 E ° ' " - ' 35.29 (R1) ' ~'i ~p ~ 41 14 09 13 ' " ° 58.00 14.33 (R1) ' l.~ t~~ 42 43 N40 40 19 E 14°09'13" - 58 00' (R1) 60.00 14 33' (R1) 34 ~(~ ~ ~ qq N54°49'32"E . . 35.30' (R1) ~\ 0°p2 2 N O " p5 14°09'13" ° ' " 53.00' 13.09' (R1) ' ~ 7g •~7 ~ / W (R 46 N40 4D 19 E - 41.63 (R1) 76 `W ~ A~~ q_ 47 N49°19'52"W - 20.85' (20.86'R1) r' `a Rqp ~46>7. `m~N9 ~ ~ Rn7g98 O~q. ~=`~ 2 LOT 7 A rZ)~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ sO ~/ ~ LOT 'H" v 7 g • A 4% O il~ 9 - ~ `KPOF o. 6 \ 10 0 0 LOT SEE DETAIL 3s ~'~'L ~' J J 0~ •J• SHEET9 36 '~ LOT'E' ~ 3e 37 ~~o~ LOT 16 LOT "LL' ' ' 0T5 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 11 ~ 39 ao F~ m al LOT FF " " ~? 42 LOT K I n a3 ~ Z LOT'MM" LOT'KK' LOT JJ a4 45 _~~° _ CITY OF 1USTIN _ Ngq~19 41 W~~ __ ___~~fi6.01~- ° _ ~_ -CITY CF IRVINE- - ~ BARRANCA PARKWAY ~ GPS X6535 ~ 2 O j 9 N49°30'56"W 9770.67' (TIE) ~ -- BOUNDARY CONTROL--& INDEX MAP qO INDICATES SHEET NUMBER ~ ~~ a C31 \ r~ GPS X6576 - - ~ _ ~ - Cr BARRANCA ~ ~] PARKWAY i 10-1 C7351 O -1 ~ =~~ ~~ ~~ zl_ °~ `O~ l SgSf~a [ .~' nn ~~/ • O6 / Ong 9p n ~~ ~ ~~ ~o r 0a ~ 09 0 ''a~ \~ - 9 133HS 33S - z~ ~ ~ i~ ~1 ,26}.65 \~ ° n o ~~ ~ ° w p ° '~ z ~ ry. ~ p°. ~ •09~ •~ ho +2/ h° ;, ~ A a ~ ~ 9 0 ~aa ~~~` ~ < ~ g N z O~ / ~ ~' W b 7 °j 0n ~~~ ~~' .s~2 0 ~^ ~O .~~ ~\ 092 ny y° .OS, c ~ ,f0 +F 6~ y ~2 0a - / 62 •~ ~ X22 ~O,\ 69 69\ '~o 0a 0 ~ ~ ~~2 a2 \o N U "~ ~ sQ ~ 2 r `~' Q ~ w Z ~_ Q' y ~ ~ O rZ~N a ~ ~ w O 0 r O = Z ~ Z°`~a J ui "' U U ~ ~ W } 2 9W ~ v z~o ~ O U U ~, Q ~ ~ ~ O O w U ~ w x d i o w ~ ~ x ~z--N~ fA awv~;.i o ~° LL rn°~~'- ~ ~ o~ooo n .a ~<zoo W w Q Z U~~ L. j = K m K~ r Q Q"~Z J N N r- O .,;~, ~o, ~ ~, go ~ ~ I ,_ N02"20'30"W I < t25. 12' LOT 'PP' z 11s ac. N02~20'30"W 281.31' N02'20'30"W 281.31' \ 125.58' 1 N02'20'30"W _Y.~ ~ ~ ~' - - - .OF ~ ,Gf i ~ _ ~ _ _i ~ -~ f~ W N ~ < W ~~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ c~+ Of ,Gf 9 6a P4. ti~ '~ a ° ° ,LS~49t M,.Ot.OL,ZON ~' h E ~' • e ti9~ ~ 88. lOl 5 E ~'a°j ~Q N'I~IRP~I ~ ~3i`^ $ • ,SL~Z9b M..O:.OL.ZON - - R 9 ~ ~ IRNO 8 ~ \q ZSO oo ~ ,~~ ,,~a2 ~ .tlV. lOl -. ~ ~,; ~ ,2 p' -a ,~91Q503 `1 0~ 0 6 ° ,S_~lOh M„OF,OL,Z(iN ~ a ~. n 0 6 .5 9~ 2°P ,~ p ~ i G ~n Sg ~1- ~° P~ / 2 9 ~ah° 6 / p~ Q~ a ~\ 0 o. °S F < ~° ~~ °^ O ~ 0 ~` / ~ l ~ O Q _ .OZ~OOZ M„US, BI ,LON - o ~ ~ o, ' ~h ,~~ ' gn ~~ yi 6 ~ a V. X16 .~ V i O~ / c) hti~ ~°~ Y ~ • ~ Pc_ o •P .h° . o ~h t~,t ~ ~~ ~5 ^h ~p9 ~ ~p/ ~°A' h~ ' , O ti Cx. .h°~ .t P~o~ h~ ~/ ~aA ~ ~O hh ~~ ~O o \~ ~ ZZ ~b~ N O ~ h \ \ \ U ~j~/ g0 `6 ~~`~ • 96 \ 2 ~°h °~ ~; 46 ~ 0~ S > \ en ~ ~ \ ~ ~ ` \~ £S ~ \ nH ~ ~ F \ •86•,10 \ ~ ~ dJ~ ~FFi A ~ ~ \ \ ~ ~£a -t ~ o ~ d 2 \ ~ °- ~~' < ` m• \ ~ ,~ \ n92 \ \\ ~ z W ~ ~ N 8 J W ~!// •; S~£ \\ ~2S .fir • ~Q O 0 £onry Sn , ~J~ \ \onN\ \\ n2 o^^ Q° ~ ~~ ~ ~ c2 ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ S v ~ v ~' `~~ \ ~` \ ~~ p \ ~`f p si ~r~ Nnrv~n ~m~ \ y\ \ •96 0~ m \ ^ i i i ii i i ~i ii ii i g g i \ \ ~-( l~ a 1r o a Z \~rJ \ \ 0 _ ~ N ~ \ ~~ ~1j j c~ w \ hj \ 3 ~.,. w _ ~., 1j'Y~.~ ~ A m~~o \ m m w z ~ n°°'~~ °' \ \ ~ \ .~ ~~~~m~ oa z ~'m \ m I zz~`~~zz~zg~z~MZ \ \ ``\ \ \ \ . ~6~ ~ N =ooz ~ ~ ~ Q O o I~~~Nne~~~~~ ~~~«.- V W V1U2 Z (~/ 1 m ~ ~ NOTES: SHEET 5 OF 10 SHEETS sEE sr+EEr 3 FoR eou rloARr coNrRCL, AREA: 130.949 ACRES GROSS BASIS OF BEARINGS, 17144 TRACT N 0 GPS POINT gq TATIVE ~ ~ ~B . LOCATIONS, REFERENC E NOTES AND 7t TRACT N0 ~ } MoNUMENr NGrES. IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN NurneEREO Logs: tz LErTEREB Lots: 28 o I- LOT 'HH^ , STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE } } SCALE: t" - 80' } a 341 s' ' " , "FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY' I I ~; ~ WARNER w C I 33 LOT GREGORY A. HELMER, L.S. 5134 ~ DATE OF SURVEY: MARCH, 2007 ~ AVENUE " ° ' - ~S• w 130.03 21 ~ ~ N49 22 97.75' 3228'-- oreu ~n HO ,~~d ~ z ~ ~ ~ - L 20' / GPS N65287r y6I ` ' I y ~ 10 / ~ - I t LOT 'AA' LOT 'QQ" ~ p LOT 'PP' S $ LOT "EE" 1 d=46°59'20" ' " ° ' ' ~ `-~ 14 DETAIL 'B" W 311.83 19 50 . R=399.00 ~ ~ N49 L=399.00'~~ ' J ~ NOT TO SCALE f- 240 -73' 1.67 0=46°59'20" 14,00' R=385.00' L=315.74'-~ ~ ~'(. ~ ~~ (16 21.20 / m~ ~~ 37.9) ~ °i I ~%~~"/v. z N49 ° 19' S0"W ' I ~ 1 11 45 a Q~ LO7 94 1.67 LOT "QQ' ~ LOT 'C ~°`PO BI OCiC 10 LOT 2 ' ' n 7 N4a°3z'sz°w N3a. ' 21' " IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION 8 ~ DETAIL "p1' DETAIL C NOT TO SCALE 1 ~94.67 (RI) g5 43' ° 8805'(RiJ 27 p ~ 9 8.89' )UI.R. ) BBB NOT TO SCALE WARNER ~ C . 10.00' ----- - -~, ' - ~~9z3 , ---- ~i°F. ~ II t 5 AVENUE _ _ _ _ ,°n N49 09 06 W 283.02 _ _ _ Y42'S6' ~ ~~S" B~W 374.80' N49-09- 09"W 393.18' R7 28' T ~ 32 U ~42~ ~Rp01 ~ ~ N49°22'21 W 0 . ° ~ O ~ 92.36' R7 o-~q'293ti ~OR ~~ ~ 13 / ~ 130.03 0-70 25'32" 85. ufi ~ 1 -~ N48`32'S~"W 641.ri6' (R1 97.757 ' / 5 SEE DETAIL "C" T ABOVE RIO - ~~~-327.53 / ~p~~ ~~ - '~ER ~ 110 ^ ~ 14 15 e ~ /AVENUE > N38'S6'49.. ~ 3 6 N 9 O 7 2 w _ 261. 20 ° C R-40900 ~, 21' LOT "EE" 6.288 AC. - ) O 1B L=736.30' 23 ° ~ 2 / 45 _ °=11 24 52'a0" 22 ~ I / 46 o_~ ~ R=1860.00 .- ^' 54'26" L=217 _ ' L=373.75' __ / m w - wI -00 ~ w~ - -N~4?'08'45"E ~ fJ38 °56 • ,. I - - ~ ~ 0=04°58'74" , L=156.15' ry~~ °°iI~ ~ q9 W ~ ~, ~a 113.79. ~ (RAD) ~~ ~Ia ° ~ ~ ~ ~_ L=177.16' C r of<° ~ 25 20" e ZB ° vlo R=1872.00' ° e m ~ ~ C t zl¢ I" ~ "' ~ ~ Q~'7 ~ N45 Jl %L ~ ~ 25 ~ 47 27 fRgO) S ea ~ ~RNOI a7 ~ 6 ' 30' 30' <I LOT 4 ~I~ I f ~ ~ ~ U m ~ ~ ~ O "' W 81 6 14 E ~ ` ~ N00°04'05"E ~ ~ - G5 2 ~ < 23.05' ~ 0 N40°4C'10"E z W N40°40'10"E y 40.00' 40.00' ° N00°64'05"E N81°16'14"E _ ~ 23.05' Q ~ 23.U5' \ VV I / O O - /~ 6 ' / ;" f 30' 30' I /~ l z z "' Z / ) LOT 12 N01'31'S0"'W / °v ~ ~ 0.060 AC. N65°4G 10"E ' 20.15' Q N49°19'50"W 10.00 21.21' I i ) LOT 2 65.00' N49°19'50"W 265.16' - SEE CETAIL "A" ABOVE I ) 16.565 AC. LOT "QQ' 2zn ac. J ~ I N40'40'10°E 40.00' 29 N49°19'50"W - ~ 311.83' - gl n 6- 2 I 09'25"W N03 43' ?40.73' 40 00' 9 ~ - 4 -- ° ~ I o iv 37.5Q' . . ro °` 0 ry I ° I N39'40'44"E 19.57' N49°19'54"W 156.73'- N49°19'51"W 00' ~ N85 40'10"E N05°12'20'W 10 fi5 00' N87°22'01"W 44 I . . [21.21' 24 38' ~ 2a.21' ~ N39°40'44"E . ~ ~ N49'19'S0"W (~ ~ I 19 50' ~-- LOT 'HH' N LO 7 3 1 43.00' ~ N83"36'30"E 0.139 AC. < r, ~ ~ 30'6 30' ~ Q I 38.18' ~ N g ~ DA1A TABLE ~ 84' I I SEE DETAIL "E" ® -- BRNG/DELTA- -RADIUS_ - LENCTR- ~ ON SFfET 6 I 1 7.00' (R1) N49'22'07"W ~ ~ 2 - N86°02'31"E 17.70' (R1) 1 - ry 3 ~ N49°20'02"W - 13.40' (R1) z ~ ° 4 N40°37'53"E BD.00' (R1) ~ I ~ 5 N49"20'01"W 12.2fi' (R1) ~ ~ - 6 N40°39'59"E - 76.78' (R1) ~ 7 10°11'07" 59.00' 10.49' (R1) N40°37'53°E 8 O6"23'18" 59.00' 6.58' (R1) ~ 21.02' 9 01°48'54" 2415.06' 76.50' (R1) I I < 10 N40°50'28"E 20.64' (R1) J2 11 ' ' " N49°09'32"W 15.95' (R1) ~ N81 16 14 E 12 N40°50'28"E -- 21.07' (R1) I I 23.05' 13 ~ 00°43'09" 2285.06' 28.68' (R1) q3 ~ 14 N49°22'21"W 20.03' I I ~ 15 ,a 16 15'05'08" 41.00' 10.80' N34'17'13"W -- 36.96' I 42 I N40°40'10"E r ' `O~ = 17 13'06'23" 59.00' 13.50' ' w 39.00 ~ 18 01°58'45" 1728.00' 59.69 ' I ! i° 19 13°06'23" 59.00' 13.50' ' ' ' ° 37 _ I ~ I ~ 20 Noo°oa'DS"w 21 W 36.96 31 14 N58 Is'os'as" 41.40' 14.ao' 30' 77' ° r z 23.05' Q 22 N38°56'49"W -- 57.42' ' ' 1 50' CV7 23 27.58 11'12'24" 141.00 1 . - ~ 41 I ~ 24 O 25 N27°44'25"W 32.31' N00°37'29"W - 34.48' 1 q0 ~ ° 26 N04°19'50"W -- 35.36' I I 27 N85°24'02"E -- 36.58' I I o N ~ `M" 28 03°08'22" 1860.00' 101.92' ' .n 39 i 29 N40°40'10"E 60.00 I I C I 30 ° ~' ° 31 N40°40'10"E 146.00' N85°40'10"E -- 35.36' I I 1 w 39 LOT "HH" 32 ~ I 1 ° 12' 25" 159. GG' 31.10' 50' 1 " ° ' ) N m Of 139 AC. 0 33 ~ •` 34 ~ W . Nag 07 22 N40°37'53°E - 20.00' ' ' w 1 p, / g 35 10.13 14°09'14" 41.00 z ~'~ ° 37 / 36 37 N54'47'O6"E - 36.66' 14°09'13" 59.00' 14.57' ~ 36 38 N40°37'53"E 60.00' ' ' ' " ' I ~ / 35 6Q 39 40 14.57 14 59.00 14 09 66' N26°28'40"E 36 34 Pq5°28'25"W I 41 N49°19'SD"W 537.43' 4.50' 18-00' 30' 30' Lo7 ' D" 42 . 14°09'73" 41.W' 10.13' 11°12'25" 141.00' 2'.58' I 36.06' , 26 LOT "C 1.427 AC. 29 43 N51°50'18"E 32.31' N49°19'50"W 526.92' _ ~ 44 N49°22'07"W 1.00' 60.53' H 45 N86°02'25"E -- 37.25' 31 N49'19'S0"W W 46 17'12'24" 159.00' 31.10' I ~ 676 AC v 30 r = 47 /C~ STREET "A' LOT 'AA" 2 N49° 19' S0"W -- 30.00' - - .7/.00' - 120.03' _ N ~ 609.37' _ ~ W 1 _ _- _~ ~ N49'19'S0"W 806.40' N d a 8 °o ° I O7 'A' LO7 ' B" ~ 1 LOT 1 a + + - SEE SHEET 4 - _ 1r,-,07351 ~~ _~__ `. N ~~ _ _ ; b l c oz - - ;S,,s,, T m ~_~, _ ,~~ ~~~, m o ~~ ~~ w Qee e ~ ~, s °~w _ - _ - _ _ -- -_ _ ~w ~ mow, `o~ ,~~ o?~cn \ ~°°~ _o°o~, a o o ~ ? ~ o 0 00o m oono F ~ ~. ~s o~ ~,~ <\ i~' ''~ ~/ ``<~~ m. ~~~~~~~gz ~~~ '~~~~~5 z~o~~~ °~~z z z z z ~ ~ '~\i. ~~Z~ ~ n w~ . o ~ s '~\ b ~ ~' \ - wl~z ;®I ~~,n<~n ~o~mm =---__----~~v ~v~n~,~~v ~v ~vnnrn 'nnnnn~nnvaa«< ~~~ad °o e. 2\ _ ~ =oow S oZ ~S \~ in cn~~ •6\ O waoo ~~~ Z ~ m ~ ~ _ ~ ~ p29 pG i N 5- ~~0 .NN ~ ~~• Q 6 R\ ~.~j ~~ b g ~ ~.4>l 69 a 3. L1,4l .BfN j 42 40 W~ 5 OZ N6~lRN0~ ~=~4W p,~"I p5 ~y9 ,OD"Z9 ,1059 3„Z£,Ol,6fN o=19`01'42' `~ `,6 ~p~T~pNG ~ s9 ~ ~ ~ D~ R,14h2 04 atl02! `JN02llSW2N ~J ~~ -,oo zi ~~~ ~-5w6eB42 40,w SRN '~~ s ~ ~_~ ~ ,65"99 .00'l6 .IZZ~ 0=1253'11 N ~ ~\ ~ p-DS 55~1~~ ~ ~~,~ nL - Q- D_15D.0~~ :~// ~ ~S~dJ ~ N ti/ 9~ h/ O z ~ ~ al „~~e1 w ~ ~, 6pA v mold Q~ o(~ / o~ [O ~~ m° ~~ ~~a m~a z~ ~ W ~I~ o of oQ Flo ~J J = zz°I _ z ~ zl~ ~~,o ~ W ~(.7Q woJ ~~ -~ ~ p "'b ~ g Or ~ s3tavn zc ~ ~ ~~ ~~~j ~ ap 9 S~F _ '! 6F U ~" °~~ ;I \o 0 g ~ ~o z •~ ~ ~ gar T~ E ~ •~a z A ~ J LL ~ '\ zW l T U ~ a ~ ~6 6 Z W p z v< ~,o, , s ~HW--a ~ Jf •~8 ~ti~ O tL ~ j .F z ~ °F'/ Z ~~ ~ .; ~a l ~ .~-°9 uPw 3 °~z~ U ' z ry f_ ,yo V ~ Z ~ °z M ~n I--- Z O ~ ~ ~ l oe ~O~ QQ / Q ~~~ o~ a z ° ~ -' ° ~ ~o~~ / ° . W ~~ ~ z w I ,~~ S~ ~ti Q ~ a~ O ~ & O ~° m°j ;~/ w •~ ~ tY i a N ~ \ S3[21VA ,09 ~~ ~ ~o~\~ ~ 0 05i~ o o ~~ aN ~~ \ 3„O1 04,04N y ~ ,SO"LOZ 3,A1,04,04N ,9b ~SZl W cn W l ,fS'88 'OV £ll~Z ,6f OS4 .dd. l0l ~ ~ ~\ N / , OZ ~ 46 , £C 446 - ~O ~ ~, os ses 3.ol,ob,o4N .OD. lOl ~ -t L9.S "~ ~. ~/ ~ \~ '% ~ QIr. z//~ ~8 0l~ ~I - / ~ ~~v ~~ o ° ~ ~ ~ ~~ Ja avn ~ n m _-.G -~ ~, ~ a S3f z ~ J N - ~ ~ ~ ~ o a) ~ ~ o ~ 0~,,~~1 ~ o~ ~! ,`O ~o, ~n~ d h <~ Q F- Q - 5 133HS 33S - i - ~S m ~~ M ~ m u'~o _ ti`~~~ a N vl , ~ p"J ti~~ ~ 9!. o w 3.Lf,Ob,6£N r ~> 3„fS, Lf,O4N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ „ 3„64,Ob,6fN ~ ,Sl ~6Zl ~ < ~~ ,8£Z9l ,Zl £L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ,86ZL - = it z,.N ~ ,SS'LS£ C Q ~ ~ ~ N ~-- (l?!) ,00"OSL 3,£S,LC.04N 80"Ll4 -~ ~ ~ ^ ~ Gi ~ " (lb) ,bZ~OLS 3„£S, C£,D4N ~ ~ ° ~ o o _ ~ 3f1N3Atl IIIH ~3i1 ~ ~ °~aJJ ~~ tC rnazoo ~ o ~ ~~ F h ~v- 2 W <Z¢m~ ~ ~~ c~ N 4 `-' ~ J N oonm r~'i 2 ~y~r-i O m ~~ m O zoo? ~ y fTl A A TI / ~/ / ~ f'l Z ~1 / ~ G7 Z ~ W / / / ti Z In ~n '(~ ~~` J~°' / ~ ~l O O ]J / iry- °~4 / / o^ ~ . ~zo / y ~. z Z ~ / / ~,~. ~. o ~ ~ o - °~ ~~; q ~ 9sT / / ,o ~` ~ 6 0 1 F °• a / / ~ .° J / oti 4°~ 'O~ °° ^' r / F'y~ °° ~4 0 ~ rah ° ~7 p° ~ ~ ~ ~ 9~ / ~ ~,0~1' ~~ .~\C`cFl~ / `O~ 6p`4,4C Np°, app a ti p°9°. ~'s / a'~Cl~`, ~` / ti 9 f a~ ,~ 6• / ~ / / `° SB ~ S~~ J6 6. / / ~ O S, r_ sp8 6°j OO ° O X '°•'~~. 0 ~ / ~~ ~ // oa //~ / ~ mq2 / / ~+q~ . v o'° ~ O ~~ ~ 1 ~° ~ m / c~ ~ f ~° / f ' sF~ sy~ ~9 ~ ~"~ , ~~ / ~• ~O ~~amo~ 4 - SEE SHEET 9 - --l L . S~~syF~ ~O ~ ~c-~m~ _ n mn-~n m r~ i~r~~ZJ AA~G7 ~oznc., V r ~~0 0 it O O ~ T ~ A O~ In Vl V "1 cp A r'l (~ (n Cb N~.Z~ D ~ T <A N ~' O O . P ,~~ ~ _ °. ~, ~ ~ (7 C a p ~ [n ~ ~ ~ n O z'~z O ~ `~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z m ~ mn _ m ~ , ~, u 7 m ~7 ~ ~ LOT ' AA' 5 z• ~ O C D ~ O ~ C O to ae2.~s' - ' - ~ m ~ ~ LOT ' SB r Z i O ~ < ~ O ~ Z ~ rti 6 ~ ~ 3~ C7 2 N 8 V a o ~' y m ~'o ~~ y ~_ _ o m ~ ~ ° ~ ~ 'i y~U _ ~~ ~1 1 SEE SHEET 8 - "I \~ 41 N \\ JQ ~b ~\ ZZO 9 F > o~(Ld "~' Ll " \ 9r. . ls 8 O • ZL,.p~ ~O 2 b~1 n ~ i r~\O (OVN) _ ~O M„4S,S£,19N ~ / - ^~4'/ n O~ LO, ~ ~/2Q ~~ I 2~/ \ O 0 O£ ~ ,0£ 09 V (O r ~ °i' W ,,, ~ ~ ti 8 . W ~ fn U ~ \i, ¢ Z > ~ ~ V T- ~ ~ ~ o o,~ T~ Q O zV F c U ~ ~ ~ .dd~O 10'i O ~ ~ ~ u _ Z Z °`~a •~ W U •i U O zd. _ ~ W W ~ } = _~, lL z~o ~ ~ U O U ~n ee Q 0 Q U ~ W g ~ F O = C~ Q r W m ~' ~ ~ ~ a W W y W W 0 (A ~° ti~ ~ ~~i `~P~l , / ~ n9~ ~ ~~P s~,~s f - °~ w ~< w~ ~ ~w~~~ c 4~< _ a LL a,o~~~ ~ J oo u ~ ono J M MQZOO .- W w Q?U~~ W s ~m~ml- Q (p ¢ ~ Z J N b 9 ~~~ o cCi ~ ~ c~ - ~ ~ a Fj, o z o-~n o w r rl~ K O C ~ d Z ~l Z C~ ~ U O - Z mom' ~~ ~ K ~ Z W O L~ w ~ w L7 ¢ ~ ~ Fl,b, ~I °~'~ _ ~~ s~ ~~ -'`Yi~^ ~ z ~ `O ~ ~cj' .( N W ~ i~ LL z~ wo oz vii ~n ~ ~ a ~ ~ Z6 ! o ~ ~ ~~ ~ e~v o ^~-- n ~ n ~i~¢ ~~¢ ~ Z w / c ~ z twn m ~ ~ ~ L ~ P ~ Z z ~ m ~ ' T ' 0 ZI g ~ ~ \ ' q \ \ I I ~ GO ~b ' \ ~O6 bbd, L>y ~ l I ~ s ~ J ~ ~ ""'~ a zl _ ~i z ~ a ~- ~z< J oa .~ I ~ 3„IS, II,ZON -(LN) .CS'Ztl co --- ~ ~ ~ °~~ v, _ ~~ ~ b N ~ 6 9 , 6s Z ~~6F ~ N ~j o ~w o °O o c I -- ~ .~ ~ < " y . b_~ F_o L9 901 < 3„l9,Il.ZON ~- ~ `n a -- Cla).OO~OLf 3.. Z£, Ol 90r ~ ~~~`~ 6 \\ i~~~~b ~ ZS F Og>~ -~L,Q`I~,\ •~- _o , _ ,ZO'96Z 3.,Zf.Ol,90N ~ __- _.~ ~ ~ ~ _ >/_ ' LL - s~\ ~s o L6 BYF,~b ..f0£ h ° 0 S C CZ ~ _ ~ N j 61Z 3, ZS.CS.[ON _-~ ~l L') :O B .oAd ~\ . Z;p ~ ` .[b. F!_ P O n i„ _ L_~ - -- 3_Zf, 01,90N N~9 jg~40 ' (RADA ~ ~ 1 3„Zf, 01 90N -,9£'8L- , Sl £L 3„LS 10 SON '~ , , ,fBLSI W ~~~ ~" ~ ~ 3 N~ o / / ~ ~~~ `° z z~ ~~ < °e m~ ~ n z n ° _ zl `B o =~ zM g CL a 0 0 O`o a N p - o J o S6 ZSZ -- - - - 3,Bf,L9 ~/- - - ,SON ~ _ or+ O N N NI `eR ~ a ~o F o m ---- ~ ~/ W - ~ Ja, O _ °o ~ ~ 60 }0' }0 ~ ~ ~ ~ W I m ~ z 4z'w~ ~ ~' I I la .p6 N~ FRC .g -g na `POl ~ ~~o of ~ ~ Im J o ~~a ^ jo- ~ ~, iD ~ ~ .61 '0l Z'l ZON 'Gb ~Og Z - b ~o 'a' ~ fl6l ,LH o "' ~ , N„O£,O Z,y 'Ob B160 ~~ lOl° ., OS . ' ~ ~ BI~Zb ~ ,S8 L9l _ .OO~OgZ a ~L OG Fe_ ~~ - MwZ£,fS.£ON ~ o ,50 ££Z M, 0£,OZ.ZO ° •Q~Fb'~ ~ ,S9~L91 M,D£.OZ.ZON ~~~OZZ_b S[ ' 8 b i . -Cb Ps S l ~ F o ° :gip s2. J ~ _ S ~~2~\ 2 ~ v ~ ~ a F ~6N ~~~ U ~0 ~ ~< .Odti .~ wl ~~ ~~ 4 133HS 33S .~ O OL 133HS 33S ~~80881~~ o ISl '6\' I -"'~~9~SS~oN- - - - ~~ ff zzzz zz z ~ooo~~e P~~Qr~~nQOa~ oho Igg~g~~~~mzz ~~~~gg~~; GI NMVNCD i~cOrn ~~-~-.--~ ~~ ~N ,0£ ,OF 9 I zti g m O n W 0£ .0£ !A 09 W ~ ~ -g L'/ ~- ,Sf'S4Z ---~ M.D£,OZ,ZON M„Of,OZ,ZON _ M, O£,OZ,ZON 9£'9£Z 0 ~ U ~ O U ao ~~ rn L J z n ~- 0 otl aoc£ ,99. lOl ~ cl -~' .tl. 133ZLLS ~ ,scz94 °' .tlV. lOl Q Otl 9L9 Z a SHEET90F1OSHEETS AREA: 130.949 ACRES GROSS TRACT N0 17144 (BEING ALL OF TENTATIVE rRACr No. n144) . NUMBERED LGTS: 12 IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN LErrEREO Lors: za " ' , COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA SCALE: 1 = 80 "FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY' ( LOT 2A DESIGNATED REMA IIV(JER) GREGORY A. HELMER, L.S. 5134 ~ DATE OF SURVEY: MARCH, 2007 o-o1°a9'1a" R=sa.oa' ~L=1.17' (R1) ` ` 0.121 AC. 4=18°20'58^ coHSU~n HC \ R=137.63' - ' " ° 1 26 30 W N65 . ' (RAD)P.R.C. ~ z s.', ~ 4=16°07'50" R= na . n' DETAIL'F' Ng7. 2 . - . (Rg NOi TO SCALE ~ p ~ O)P ~~. ~,4~ -R.C eej~ ~ "7s. ~~~ ~ ~~ LOT 24 0 0.73 •~W (RRA~~~`7q 20 ~~~o / - ~ (REMAI NPDER) qo q \ n / ~ ~ 0.121 ac. SEE DETAIL "H' NOTES: 6 6~ q R q 7 yq~/ /21 ~ ~ X80°02• I ~ ~ LEFT SEE SHEET 3 FOR BGUNDARY CGNTRGL, o N7g•~i,z1"W (R ~ ~ 0 1a'zo'se" BASS OF BEARINGS, GPS PUINT P y 76~ 40 o R=137-63' ~o`'o gr`~r. w (Rgp~~R Ig45r, yq, A ~~s° ~~ L-aa a N65 ~2E'30"w MONUMEN~SNORESERENCE NOTES AND DETAIL 'H' ~ ~~ c \ F 4=16'al'sD° NOT TO SCALE ~ ='~ R=174.17' - SEE SHEET 8 - mos. ~ ~o ~y r-4a.73' (R 1) o P ~pP' - ~~1'3 '~ ~s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ti b ~ A(Rga~P ~0 "w v. F p~ ~>a'~~~ V ~R.o 9 ~ DATA TABLE ~~ ~ Vt'60 X30 j78"lY (R ----------- ------------ --------- ~ ZO ~ 3,W (RqQ~ R~pgq NO BRNG/DELTA RADIUS LENGTH l ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ) R_qs~ g Oq. _____________________________________ ~ / v. \ 7~ ~_ 1 N49'19'50"W -- 60.00' ~`'~ .3 'o ~ NgO. ~9q 2 os°ae's3^ so2.Da' s9.71' \ IOT 5 oh/ ~ o 3 06°48'53" 550.00' 65.42' ~, A ~ ,c~'/Q ~J,, ~ - ~ N7g°3j 761~~~ ('~qG 4 O6°48'53" 598.00' 71.13' ~ 0^, ~" m/ e W (Rq~ ~ R-46~ 5 03°13'34" 1354.04' 76.24' ~ v° 4W° N ~ ~ ~ R~,q 794' 6 03°05'25" 1354.04' 73.03' ~ ~, S~ 7 9~ 9 g6~0q 7 1}'15'04" 121.81' 28.17' ~~ ~° N ~ n6 8 N53°48'22"E -- 31.65' ~° S"°~ °°° titi~ g' 9 13°08'02" 138.32' 31.71' ~S. g•~ ~~. ~~a OC' ~ 46 10 N49°19'50"W -- 30.00' 6,o A~ g 11 NaD°4D'lD"E -- so.aD' ~ ~ ~ 8 n 12 Nas°1s'so"w -- s2_sa' (n E) ~N 13 INTENTIONALLY OMITTED o ~~ 14 INTENTIONALLY OMITTED A~ ) ~ o 15 O6°18'59" 1354.04' 14927' - o o i6 INTENTIONALLY OMITTED ~ n n 17 INTENTIONALLY OMITTED 3~'Wi~ o'Da `a,, 19 N49EN9I~'A~LY OMI TTED 85.31' N~A PO1Q G~~ sm 1- / 20 Ot°00'49" 1446.04' 25.58' (R1) lR ~~ 21 00'27'52" 4671.94' 37.87' (R1) °o~Y ~. 30' 61 30' ~~ o y o P„ ~, LOT 7 S~ g ~~ N Q 4.735 AC. r \°- i~ N v Lor a w ~ ~I~ ! ~ o ~ ~ ~PgoJ\J~ 2, T •° ~ V °' °. ~ N77°39'a6°E \ N' '% 60' n r 30' 30' 38.77' - ~, 1 N04°19'50"W N59'CB'42"+! Na540' 10"E O ~o ~~ 35.36' IRAD) F- 35.36' 356.32' N59°14'49"W ~ ~ U -~ _ N49°19'50"W N5fi 08 43"W - -(RAD) ~ J/ N49° 19'50°W 216.33' _ BL 47' -_ ~ 2 ET 'A 435.49 - 46.07' ~ ~ }, / ~ STRE N5fi DS' 43~ o"~` O LOT 'BB' ~ 3.7oa Ac ~ ~ -~9,a2 6 271.33' 136_47' ° -- O °' 9 po ~°~'- - N49°79'50"W 407.80' n ~~ / N56~08. 43"W 364.41' o~ - "w 46' ~ N49'19'S0"W 407.79 ~ 292 20' N13 2 15 W / 46' ~~ N54•34~a2'W 175.00' 67.34' 72 21• 36 ~9 p9 1Ai o (RAD) a56 ~aNOI ~ ~~ ~rN}s'o4'49"E ' /~a6 oi' (R1) n ° ~I / 1 ~ - -i LL' LOT 'J' _ SEE DETAIL'F' = ABOVE M 0.723 AC. m/ ~~- W °c ~ ~ o N49'26'42"W _ ~~ o-01°09'14' , (RAD) 7, ~ R=58-00' ~ L=1.17' (RI) LOT 11 a ° N49°19'50"W 175.00' 3.447 AC. 9 46 LOr ~ .- ~ 4=14°09'12" R=53.00' 10 L=13.09' (R1) LoT 1o r ~ N;6.3,~G7"L - 3s. z9' (R1) _ 3.zo5ac. 12 ,I n LOT 'E' f4=14°a9'13" 10 0.034 AC. Q R=58.00' L=14.33' (R1) ~ - - ~ M 118' N40°40'19"E 60.00' (R1) fi0' VAR- 4=14°09'13" ~`, - R=58.00' m ~ ~ z N54°49'32°E ~ v " 35.30' (R1) C _ o=1a°09'13" N49°19'41"W ~ ~ 1397.53' R=53.00' 315.a9' 385.00' 2.49' L=13,09' (R1) 19 ~,_ N40°40'19"E L6l ' K}C 7oa.a9' LOT 'JJ' a.3zz Ac. 700,49' \ 6o`.Da' 41.s3' (R 1)_ N49 19 41 W 2566.01 R1 C C ~ ~ _` _ f N45 ° 19' S2"W 20.85'(20.86'R1) CITY LIMIT LIDS CITY OF TUSTIN (((~~~ BARRANCA PARKWAY CITY LIMIT LIFE CITY OF IRVINE _ - _ ~ _ _ - - - _ _ - - 25.31 _ - --__- 1487.53' (1487.54') R2 _ 2617.61' M & R1 N49°19'41"W 2642.92' M & R1 a 2 10-10 P51 m w ~ ~ ~ - 9 133HS 33S - ~~ ~ ~ ~ - L 1.33HS 33S ~~ cO b ~ ~~ _, _, i _. I °; ~~~~~ ~ M.of,oa,zoN a !s b4f v z~__ ~ P .E9.lOl ~ _ __ - -- m ,f l'f9L ~ M„Of,Gz,ZGN - a, _-_~- ~ o ~ E~ m ~ -Gy 80C L 9f GOt z ~ ~O~ ~ti9~ ~ ~~al ~ ~ ~, scaee °' ° ~ etio6ti8ti '~ :zo5 p3' ov eL9 a .y.133211S ~J ~ .Vtl. lOl `-~ ~ oz.zon o ~ Z o ~ ° ~-~~ oo ~ s~ nor M,.oc. o - z p, 59 ,65. F`2~ w o ? ~ ~n -~ o X59 ~ ¢ W ~ t'J"'J. h~ D,0. n ~ ~p A M m N Z ~~b9 O'} Lil ~~ W 00 L ~L~po In to ¢ ? ~ ~~ o, ~^p~,~p ~ , 9t ~ ' <~~ O W N U Z ~pp ~. In ~] J `~ f C M~ Q ~ N ~ J j N D~ SOON ~~! W~ j6a ~0 ~^ d\O ~~ ~O/ • ~O/ Jb 669 p O Jbt g~tS _ ~s. •J a Sg~ n '9~g9 S ~ _ i i i ~i . i i J6' U ObN ^ 7C \\ v ~ ~ ~~ m~~,z~fzpz~~~ ~~ ~1. ~a, r Z ~ 2" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~o Z a u, rZ~° a ~W ~O N ~ °'~~s< ~ ~, O ~~ ~ ~ °~ J F- W (Wj • i 0O o9 U ~ ~ v r 00. _ ~ ~ °dr zoo ~ .r •p, f U ~ ° ~6' o ~ ~ '°ati O W ' ~y0 ~ /~/- / _ ~ ~,c 0 ~ ~ a ~ ~i. ~J ,pp0 / / o~ / ~r / s ~\ .p8~ ¢ ~ry0 / O ~// \ 6t p 'L ~~ ~ \ \~ ~~ ~ ~ .v~ ~~ ~ ~.~~ ~ o~/ \ \ a / ~ phi / {L°j / \ \ ~ P \\ ~ 1Pb~ \ 6e h , / / / \ ~ Mgr , \ P~ \ / \ ~~S \ ~ ~ i~ 000 ~ y.J_b ~ , 0 ~ ~bs n ~ ~~ \ / GP `7 d ~~s` 006 ~~ U ~r O \ / /~ ~ ~s / ps ~ ~~ ~ sr .~~ y a~ , ~; ~~~ rye 9 ._ ~ "b~"fr~J ~ \ \ ~`•~1 J~~y ,tea` O :9 ~r> rfh ~~ ~ _ ~ ~ cti1 ~ _ / /+ Abe W ~ 'r!J\ ~O~ Q Z \ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~( \ = W ~ P (n ~Z~NN ~. ~'~0 O a~ v ~ w ~a°, O ~~ ~dJ~\ rn ~- r` cri vi m s ~a o ,3. (`~ Sr Op LL ~ o ~ ~ r- ~0,, //i~, O OJ000 II ~ 69 ti~~~AA Q~~/ -<'pb-2' F- ~ ~V w z U ,., ~., ~;; a_<m~- s ~m~~ ~ fq a ~- z ~ ~ ATTACHMENT C City Council Resolution No. 11-01 RESOLUTION NO. 11-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17144 FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY TO SUBDIVIDE A 131-ACRE SITE INTO 12 NUMBERED LOTS AND 28 LETTERED LOTS LOCATED WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 9 THROUGH 12 OF THE MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDED BY BARRANCA PARKWAY ON THE SOUTH, RED HILL AVENUE ON THE WEST, WARNER AVENUE ON THE NORTH, AND ARMSTRONG AVENUE ON THE EAST The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for an amendment to Tentative Tract Map No. 17144 was initiated by the City of Tustin to subdivide a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purposes. The site is bounded by Barranca Parkway on the south, Red Hill Avenue on the west, Warner Avenue on the north and Armstrong Avenue on the east; B. That the proposed amendment to Tentative Tract Map 17144 is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan land use designation of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan which designates the project sites (Planning Areas 9-12) as commercial business which provides for future development of offices, retail and service commercial, public and institutional, and light industrial uses; C. That on November 13, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended and on December 4, 2007, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 17144, a request by Tustin Legacy Community Partners to subdivide a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for the purpose of development of approximately 1,267,324 square feet of commercial business, open space, public streets, and flood control facilities. D. That Tustin Legacy Community Partners terminated its contract with the City of Tustin as the master developer for the project site. E. That to acquire ownerships of parcels that had been conveyed to Tustin Legacy Partners, an amendment to Tentative Tract Map 17144 is proposed as a conveyance map only. F. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said map on December 14, 2010, by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission Resolution 11-01 Page 1 of 3 adopted Resolution No. 4164 recommending that the City Council approve an Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 17144. G. That the map is in conformance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Tustin City Code Section 9323 (Subdivision Code); H. That the Public Works/Engineering Department has reviewed the map and determined that it is technically correct; I. That on January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR and its Addendum is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The FEIS/FEIR and its Addendum considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin; and, J. That the proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development rights are associated with approval of this conveyance map. An Environmental Analysis Checklist has been prepared, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and concluded that the proposed project does not result in any new significant environmental impacts, substantial changes, or a substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified significant impacts in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Moreover, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since certification of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. II. The City Council approves an Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 17144 for the subdivision of an approximately 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purposes only. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Tustin on the 4~h day of January, 2011 ~`_ PAMELA STOKER City Clerk Resolution 11-01 Page 2 of 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 11-01 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 4~' day of January, 2011 by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBERAYES: Amante, Nielsen, Gomez, Murray (4) COUNCILMEMBER NOES: None (0> COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: None (~> COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Gavello (1) ~-r` P ELA STOKE City Clerk Resolution 11-01 Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 11-01 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST For Projects With Previously Certified/Approved Environmental Documents: Environmental Impact StatemendEnvironmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin This checklist and the following evaluation of environmental impacts 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): Tentative Tract Map 17144 (Conveyance) Lead Agency: City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Justina Willkom Phone: (714) 573-3115 Project Location: Neighborhood E of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 General Plan Designation: MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Zoning Designation: MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (SP-1 Specific Plan), Neighborhood E Project Description: Tentative Tract Map 17144, a subdivision of a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purposes only. Surrounding Uses: North: Warner Avenue/vacant lots East: Armstrong Avenue/vacant lots South: Barranca Parkway/Commercial and Business Parks West: Red Hill Avenue/ Business Complexes Previous Environmental Documentation: Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Program FEIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin (State Clearinghouse #94071005) certified by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001 and its Addendum approved by the City Council on Apri13, 2006. 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 "Potentially Significant 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 Date: 11 /23/2010 Ju na Willkom, Principal Planner Date 11/23/2010 Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS See Attachment A attached to this Checklist EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS L AESTIIETICS -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 glaze which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area'? [I. 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 ,Lfore Change From Signifrcant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ a ^ ^ a ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ [V. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modiftcations, 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) lIave 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'? ~ 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 AIVD 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 ,Clore Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts ;Inalysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ a ^ a a ^ ^ a ^ a i) 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. 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 wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water'? 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 reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazazdous 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 cesult in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area'? 14o Substantial New ,'Clore Change From Signi/icant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ a o ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ a ~ O ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ n n ~ No Substantial New More Change From Signiftcant Severe Previous g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an Impact Impacts ,4na1 sis 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? a ^ VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER OUALITY• -Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste dischazge 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? t) 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'? ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ IX. LAND LSE 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? 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? 1) 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 (tor example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere'1 No Substantial New More Change From Signi/leant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analvsis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ n n ~ No Substantial New More Change From .Significant Severe Previous Impact c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the Impacts Anal sis 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? ~ ~ 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 occw or be accelerated'1 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'1 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? h) 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`? 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? ;Vo Substantial .~~ew ,More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17144 FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES NEIGHBORHOOD E OF MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION A Final Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station {MCAS) Tustin and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the EIS/EIR was prepared by the City of Tustin and the Department of the Navy (DoN) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy (NEPA). The FEIS/EIR analyzed the environmental consequences of the Navy disposal and local community reuse of the MCAS Tustin site per the Reuse Plan and the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan. The CEQA analysis also analyzed the environmental impacts of certain "Implementation Actions" that the City of Tustin and City of Irvine must take to implement the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan. The FEIS/EIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. The DoN published its Record of Decision (ROD) on March 3, 2001. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. The MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the FEIS/EIR and Addendum analyzed amulti-year development period for the planned urban reuse project. When individual activities with the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan are proposed, the planning agency is required to examine individual activities to determine if their effects were fully analyzed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. The planning agency can approve the activities as being within the scope of the project covered by the FEIS/EIR and Addendum if the agency finds that pursuant to Sections 15162, 15164, and 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines no new effects would occur, nor would a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects occur, then no supplemental or subsequent environmental document is required. For the proposed amendment to Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 17144 project, the City prepared a comprehensive Environmental Checklist and the analysis is provided below to determine if the project is within the scope of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum and if new effects would occur as a result of the project. PROJECT LOCATION The Property is within the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan also known as Tustin Legacy. TTM 17144 consists of approximately 131 acres of land at Tustin Legacy and is located within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Planning Area 9-12). Tustin Legacy is that portion of the former Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin within the City of Tustin corporate boundaries. Owned and operated by the Navy and Marine Corps for nearly 60 years, approximately 1,585 gross acres of property at MCAS Tustin were determined surplus to federal government needs and was officially closed in July 1999. The majority of the former MCAS Tustin lies within the southern portion of the City of Tustin. "the remaining approximately 73 acres lies within the City of Irvine. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 2 Tustin Legacy is also located in central Orange County and approximately 40 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles. Tustin Legacy is in close proximity to four major freeways: the Costa Mesa (SR-55), Santa Ana (I-5), Laguna (SR-133) and San Diego (I-405). Tustin Legacy is also served by the west leg of the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR 261). The major roadways bordering Tustin Legacy include Red Hill Avenue on the west, Edinger Avenue and Irvine Center Drive on the north, Harvard Avenue on the east, and Barranca Parkway on the south. Jamboree Road transects the Property. John Wayne Airport is located approximately three miles to the south and a Metrolink Commuter Rail Station is located immediately to the north providing daily passenger service to employment centers in Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego counties. PRESENT CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY Historically, the Property was used as a Marine Corps helicopter training facility. Currently, the actual footprint of the Property is largely undeveloped land that was previously used for interim agricultural out-leasing by the Marines and also improved with landing strips and tarmac areas. Demolitions of abandoned buildings, tarmac areas, and landing strips have substantially been completed. Interim earthwork and mass grading have commenced. Rough grading in the area of Red Hill Ave. and Barranca Ave. as well as the installation of storm drain pipelines and retention facilities have also commenced. The City of Irvine is currently widening Barranca Ave. near Red Hill Ave. and providing underground storm drain facilities in this area. AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17144 In 2007, TTM 17144 was proposed by Tustin Legacy Partners (Master Developer) as Sector Level B Map. Sector Level B Map is a subdivision map that divides a larger parcel into additional parcels (development units) that will facilitate conveyance of the property by a master developer to merchant builders or other parties. Since then, Tustin Legacy Partners has terminated its contract with the City of Tustin as the master developer for the remaining undeveloped land within the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Accordingly, the City is reorganizing and reassessing the implementation strategies for the development within the master developer footprint. To acquire ownerships of parcels that had been conveyed to Tustin Legacy Partners, an amendment to TTM 17144 is being proposed as a conveyance map only. No development in conjunction with this map is being proposed. Amendment to TTM 17144 would subdivide a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purpose only. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The following information provides background support for the conclusions identified in the Environmental Analysis Checklist. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 3 I. 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed subdivision is for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development plan is proposed with the subdivision and therefore the project will have no substantial adverse effects on a scenic vista. The proposed project has no potential for substantially damaging scenic resources, degrade the existing visual character, or create a new source of substantial light or glare. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required.• None. Sources: Tentative Tract Map Field Observations FEISBIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-84, 4-109 through 114) and Addendum (Page 5-3 through 5-8) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) "Tustin General Plan II. 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed subdivision is for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is associated with the project. The proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 will not directly cause Agricultural impacts. The Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 4 project site was leased as interim agriculture sites. All agricultural activities on the site and Navy out leases were terminated in phases by the Navy prior to the closure of MCAS Tustin in July, 1999. The physical impact area for the proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 is the same as that identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Although not proposed at this time, implementation of the proposed project would continue to impact areas mapped but not used as Prime Farmland. Additionally, there are no areas subject to a Williamson Act contract, and conservation of farmland in this area was deemed unwarranted by NCRS. The loss of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance would remain a significant and unavoidable impact. The mitigation options previously identified in the FEIS/EIR are still infeasible and would be ineffective to reduce the localized adverse effects associated with the loss of mapped designated farmland. There are no new feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented that would reduce the significant unavoidable impact associated with the conversion of Farmland to urban uses. Mitigation options identified in the FEIS/EIR determined to be infeasible are still infeasible and ineffective to reduce impacts to a level considered less than significant. There would not be a substantial increase in the severity ofproject-specific and cumulative impacts to agricultural resources beyond that identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; however, these impacts would continue to be significant unavoidable impacts of the proposed project. The Tustin City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the FEIS/EIR on January 16, 2001. All implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. MitigationlMonitoring Required.• In certifying the FEIS/EIR, the Tustin City Council adopted Findings of Fact and Statement in Overriding Consideration concluding that impacts to agricultural resources were unavoidable (Resolution No. 00-90). No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEISBIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-84, 4-109 through 114) and Addendum (Page 5-8 through 5-10) Resolution No. 00-90 MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Rcuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 5 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)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The conveyance tentative tract map has no potential to violate air quality standards, or contribute to a cumulatively considerable increase of any criteria pollutant for the project region. The project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentration or create objectionable odor. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. rt~Iitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEISBIR and Addendum for operational and construction activities. However, the FEIS/EIR and Addendum also concluded that the Reuse Plan related operational air quality impacts were significant and could not be fully mitigated. A Statement of Overriding Considerations for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001 (Resolution No. 00-90). No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-143 through153, 4-207 through 4-230, pages 7-41 through 7-42 and Addendum Pages 5-10 through 5-28) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Resolution No. 00-90 Tustin General Plan 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? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 6 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. 11ie proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The FEIS/EIR and Addendum found that implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would not result in impacts to federally listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species; however, the FEIS/EIR and Addendum determined that implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (including the proposed project site) could impact jurisdictional waters/wetlands and the southwestern pond turtle, which is identified as a "species of special concern" by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), or have an impact on jurisdictional waters/wetlands. Mitigation measures were included in the MCAS Tustin FEIS/EIR to require the relocation of the turtles and establishment of an alternative off-site habitat, and to require the applicant to obtain Section 404, Section 1601, and other permits as necessary for areas on the project site affecting jurisdictional waters of the U.S. or vegetated wetlands. Appropriate permits have been obtained and are subject to conditions listed in the respective permits. Future implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Mitigation/Monitoring Required.• Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for future developments. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 7 Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-75 through 3- 82, 4-103 through 4-108, 7-26 through 7-27 and Addendum pages 5-28 through 5-40) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General 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 formal cemeteries? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project has no potential to change the significance of a historical resource, or destroy a unique paleontological resource. Future development activities have been previously considered within the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Numerous archaeological surveys have been conducted at the former MCAS Tustin site. In 1988, the State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) provided written concurrence that all open spaces on MCAS Tustin had been adequately surveyed for archaeological resources. Although one archaeological site (CA-ORA-381) has been recorded within the Reuse Plan area, it is believed to have been destroyed. It is possible that previously unidentified buried archaeological or paleontological resources within the project site could be significantly impacted by grading and construction activities. With the inclusion of mitigation measures identified in the MCAS Tustin FEIS/EIR that require construction monitoring, potential impacts to cultural resources can be reduced to a level of insignificance. "There is no new technology or methods available to reduce the identified significant unavoidable project-specific and cumulative impacts to historical resources associated with the removal of Hangars 28 and 29 to a level considered less than significant. Although these unavoidable project-specific and cumulative impacts would not occur with the proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 (for conveyance only and affects Neighborhood E only), the future development of the Master development footprint could present impacts to these resources. A Statement of Overriding Considerations for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001, to address potential significant unavoidable impacts to historical resources resulting from the removal of both blimp hangars. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 8 All implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. r~Iitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for future developments or as conditions of approval for future developments. No reftnements need to be made to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-68 through 3- 74, 4-93 through 4-102, 7-24 through 7-26, and Addendum Pages 5-40 through 5-45) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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 (2001), 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The FEIS/EIR and Addendum indicate that Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to 'l~l'M 17144 (Conveyance) Page 9 impacts to soils and geology resulting from implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would include non-seismic hazards (such as local settlement, regional subsidence, expansive soils, slope instability, erosion, and mudflows) and seismic hazards (such as surface fault displacement, high-intensity ground shaking, ground failure and lurching, seismically induced settlement, and flooding associated with dam failure. However, the FEISBIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum concluded that compliance with state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, would avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to such hazards. No substantial change is expected for development of the project from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. All implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Mitigation/Monitoring Required.• Compliance with existing rules and regulations would avoid the creation of potential impacts. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Rcuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-88 through 3- 97, 4-115 through 4-123, 7-28 through 7-29 and Addendum Pages 5-46 through 5-49) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 10 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed subdivision is for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The FEIS/EIR and its Addendum include a detailed discussion of the historic and current hazardous material use and hazardous waste generation within the Specific Plan area. The DoN is responsible for planning and executing environmental restoration programs in response to releases of hazardous substances for MCAS Tustin. The FEiS/EIR and Addendum concluded that the implementation of the Specific Plan would not have a significant environmental impact from the hazardous wastes, substances, and materials on the property during construction or operation since the DoN would implement various remedial actions pursuant to the Compliance Programs that would remove, manage, or isolate potentially hazardous substances in soils and groundwater. As identified in the FEIS/EIR and the Addendum, the project site is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) and is subject to height restrictions. "1'he Amendment to TTM 17144 does not propose changes to height limitation included in the Specific Plan, nor do they pose anaircraft-related safety hazard for future residents or workers. The project site is not located in a wildland fire danger area. Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. ,~litigationlMonitoring Required.• Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages (3-106 through 3- 117, 4-130 through 4-138, 7-30 through 7-31, and Addendum Pages 5-49 through 5-55) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) for Southern Parcels 4-8, 10-2, 14, and 42, and Parcels 25, 26, 30-33, 37 and Portion of 40 and 41 l;valuation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 11 Finding of Suitability to Lease (FOSL) for Southern Parcels Care-out Areas 1, 2, 3,and4 Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) Tustin General Plan 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 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? f) 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project site is located within the Barranca Channel Master Drainage Area. A master drainage hydrology study (San Diego Creek Flood Control Master Plan, Barranca Channel Update, dated September 28, 2007) was prepared and approved by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFD). The study identifies a detention basin to be located within Lot H of TTM 17144. The detention basin has been included in TTM 17144. As concluded in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum, preparation of a WQMP in compliance with all applicable regulatory standards would reduce water quality impacts from the Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 12 development activities to a level of insignificance. Implementation of the proposed Amendment to TTM would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts to water quality than what was previously identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations would reduce any potential impacts related to water quality and groundwater to a level of insignificance and no mitigation is required. Measures related to hydrology and drainage were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin and Addendum; these measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program or as conditions of approval for future projects. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Soarrces: Field Observations FEISBIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-98 through 3- 105, 4-124 through 4-129, 7-29 through 7-30 and Addendum Pages 5-56 through 5-92) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts arc anticipated. The proposed subdivision would not alter the land uses proposed for development or the location of the land uses in relation to communities within the Specific Plan area. The project site area is surrounded by existing development and future development on-site would not physically divide an established community. Also, the proposed project will not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17]44 (Conveyance) Page 13 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that there would be no significant unavoidable land use impacts. The Amendment to TTM 17144 for conveyance purposes does not increase the severity of the land use impacts previously identified in the FEISBIR and Addendum; therefore, no refinements needed to be made to the FEIS/EIR mitigation and no new mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-3 to 3-17, 4-3 to 4-13, 7-16 to 7-18 and Addendum Pages 5-92 to 5-95) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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? 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed subdivision is for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The FEISBIR and Addendum indicated that no mineral resources are known to occur anywhere within the Specific Plan area. The proposed project will not result in the loss of mineral resources known to be on the site or identified as being present on the site by any mineral resource plans. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Mitigation/Monitoring Required.• No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-91) and Addendum (Page 5-95) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) 'Tustin General Plan 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? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 14 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no noise impacts are anticipated. The proposed subdivision will not increase the severity of the long-term traffic-related noise impacts more than previously identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. With respect to the short-term noise impacts, future development would be required to comply with adopted mitigation measures and state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, thus avoiding significant short-term construction-related noise impacts. As discussed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum, John Wayne Airport is located southwest of the project site. Based on review of the Airport band Use Plan for John Wayne, the project site is not located within the 60 CNEL contour for airport operations. The proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 is for conveyance purposes only and would not expose people to excessive noise related to aircraft operations. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that with implementation of identified mitigation measures, there would be no impacts related to noise. The Amendment to TTM 17144 does not increase the severity of the noise impacts previously identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; therefore, no refinements need to be made to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no new mitigation measures for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-154 through 3- 162) and Addendum (Page 5-96 through 5-99) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 15 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts to population and housing are anticipated. No new housing, removal of existing housing, or displacement of any people to necessitate construction of additional housing are proposed with the Amendment to TTM 17144. The proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 would not have an adverse effect on population and housing. Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 does not change the conclusions of the FEISBIR and Addendum, no refinements need to be made to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no new mitigation measures for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: Field Observations FEISBIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-18 to 3-34, 4- 14 to 4-29, and 7-18 to 7-19) and Addendum Pages (5-lOlthrough 5-112) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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: "1'he proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts public services are anticipated. The FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin requires developers of the site to contribute to the creation of public services such as fire and police protection services, schools, Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (conveyance) Page 16 libraries, recreation facilities, and biking/hiking trails. New facilities will be provided within the Master Developer footprint upon development of the site. Fire Protection. Future development will be required to meet Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) regulations regarding construction materials and methods, emergency access, water mains, fire flow, fire hydrants, sprinkler systems, building setbacks, and other relevant regulations. Adherence to these regulations would reduce the risk of uncontrollable fire and increase the ability to efficiently provide fire protection services to the site. The number of existing fire stations in the areas surrounding the site and a future fire station proposed at Edinger Avenue and the West Connector Road will meet the demands created by the proposed project. Police Protection. The need for police protection services is assessed on the basis of resident population estimates, square footage of non-residential uses, etc. Future implementation of the project site in compliance with the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would not increase the need for police protection services in addition to what was anticipated in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. As a condition of approval, future development projects would be required to work with the Tustin Police Department to ensure that adequate security precautions are implemented in the project at plan check. Schools. The impacts to schools resulting from future implementation of the proposed Tentative Tract Map would be similar to that identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Consistent with SB 50, the City of Tustin has adopted implementation measures that require future developer to pay applicable school fees to the SAUSD to mitigate indirect and direct student generation impacts prior to the issuance of building permits (Neighborhood E is located within the SAUSD boundary). The payment of school mitigation impact fees authorized by SB 50 is deemed to provide "full and complete mitigation of impacts" from the development of real property on school facilities (Government Code 65995). SB 50 provides that a state or local agency may not deny or refuse to approve the planning, use, or development of real property on the basis of a developer's refusal to provide mitigation in amounts in excess of that established by SB 50. Other Public Facilities (Libraries). Since certification of the FEIS/BIR, the Orange County Library {OCPL) entered into an agreement with the City of Tustin for the expansion of the Tustin Branch library. The expansion of the library is a capital improvement of a public facility that will directly benefit development activities within the Specific Plan area. Developers within the Specific Plan area are required to make a fair share contribution to a portion of the development costs of the library expansion. To support development in the reuse plan area, the Reuse Plan/Specific Plan requires public services and facilities to be provided concurrent with demand. The FEISBIR and Addendum concluded that public facilities would be provided according to a phasing plan to meet projected needs as development of the site proceeded. The proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 is for conveyance only and would not increase the demand of public services Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 17 more than what was already analyzed in the previously approved FEIS/EIR and Addendum; therefore, no substantial change is expected. MitigationlMonitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that there would be no significant unavoidable impacts related to public services. The proposed Amendment to "I'TM 17144 would not result in a substantial increase in the severity of impacts to public services beyond that identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Therefore, no refinements or new mitigation measures are required for a subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-47 to 3-57, 4- 56 to 4-80 and 7-21 to 7-22) and Addendum (Pages 5-112 through 5-122) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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? Impacts associated with recreation facilities were analyzed and addressed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. The proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 is for conveyance purposes only and no development is proposed. Therefore, the proposed Tentative Tract Map would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts related to recreation services compared to conclusions of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEISBIR and Addendum concluded that there would be no significant unavoidable impacts related to recreation facilities. Additionally, the proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 for conveyance purposes would not result in a substantial increase in the severity of impacts to recreation facilities beyond that identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Therefore, no new mitigation measures are required. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages 3-47 to 3-57, 4-56 to 4-80, 7-21 to 7-22 and Addendum Pages 5-122 through 5-127 MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 18 Tustin City Code Section 9331d (1) (b) Tustin General Plan 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 project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that traffic impacts could occur as a result of build out of the Specific Plan. The FEIS/EIR concluded that there could be significant impacts at 18 arterial intersections (see Table 4.12-6 of the FEIS/EIR for a complete list) and the levels of service (LOS) at two intersections would improve compared to the no-project condition. The trip generation resulting from implementation of the original Specific Plan and Addendum would create an overall Average Daily Trip (ADT) generation of 216,440 trips. "l,he original Specific Plan also established a trip budget tracking system for each neighborhood to analyze and control the amount and intensity of non-residential development by neighborhood. The tracking system ensures that sufficient ADT capacity exists to serve future development. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No new impacts or substantially more severe impacts would result from amendment to TTM 17144 than were originally considered by the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Therefore, no new or revised mitigation measures are required. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 3-118 through 3- 142, 4-139 through 4-206 and 7-32 through 7-42) and Addendum (pages 5- 127 through 5-147) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 19 Tustin General Plan Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis, March 2007, Austin Foust Associates, Inc. (Exhibit 1) 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? fj 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? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The FEIS/EIR and Addendum analyzed new off-site and on-site backbone utility systems required for development of the site as necessary to support the proposed development, including water, sewer, drainage, electricity, natural gas, telephone, cable television, and solid waste management. In accordance with the FEIS/EIR and Addendum, future development of the site is required to pay a fair share towards off-site infrastructure and installation of on-site facilities. In addition, development of the site is required to meet federal, state, and local standards for design of waste water treatment, drainage system for on-site and off-site, and water availability. As concluded in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum, no unavoidable significant impacts would result. The proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 for conveyance only would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts than what was evaluated in the FEISBIR and Addendum. Mitigation/Monitoring Required.• No new impacts or substantially more severe impacts would result from the proposed Amendment to 'fTM 17144; therefore, no new or revised mitigation measures are required. Sources: Field Observations Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 20 FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 3-35 through 3- 46, 4-32 through 4-55 and 7-20 through 7-21) and Addendum (pages 5-147 through 5-165) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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? The FEIS/EIR and Addendum previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the proposed Amendment to TTM 17144. With the enforcement of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum mitigation and implementation measures approved by the Tustin City Council in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project or as conditions of approval, the proposed project would not cause unmitigated environmental effects that will cause substantial effects on human beings either directly or indirectly nor degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitats or wildlife populations to decrease or threaten, eliminate, or reduce animal ranges, etc. To address cumulative impacts, a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the FEISBIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001 (Resolution No. 00-90) for issues relating to aesthetics, cultural and paleontological resources, agricultural resources, and traffic/circulation. The proposed Amendment to TTM 17144 for conveyance only does not create any impacts that have not been previously addressed by the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 5-4 through 5-I 1) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3- 70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137) and Addendum Resolution No. 00-90 Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Amendment to TTM 17144 (Conveyance) Page 21 CONCLUSION The proposed project's effects were previously examined in the FEISIEIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. No new effects will occur, no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects will occur, no new mitigation measures will be required, no applicable mitigation measures previously not found to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and no new mitigation measures or alternatives applicable to the project that have not been considered are needed to substantially reduce effects of the project. Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. ATTACHMENT D City Council Resolution No. 11-03 RESOLUTION NO. 11-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING FINAL TRACT MAP 17144 FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY TO SUBDIVIDE A 131- ACRE SITE INTO 12 NUMBERED LOTS AND 28 LETTERED LOTS LOCATED WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 9 THROUGH 12 OF THE MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDED BY BARRANCA PARKWAY ON THE SOUTH, RED HILL AVENUE ON THE WEST, WARNER AVENUE ON THE NORTH, AND ARMSTRONG AVENUE ON THE EAST. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Final Tract Map No. 17144 was initiated by the City of Tustin to subdivide a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purposes. The site is bounded by Barranca Parkway on the south, Red Hill Avenue on the west, Warner Avenue on the north and Armstrong Avenue on the east; B. That the Final Tract Map 17144 is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan land use designation of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan which designates the project sites (Planning Areas 9- 12) as commercial business which provides for future development of offices, retail and service commercial, public and institutional, and light industrial uses; C. That on November 13, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended and on December 4, 2007, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 17144, a request by Tustin Legacy Community Partners to subdivide a 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for the purpose of development of approximately 1,267,324 square feet of commercial business, open space, public streets, and flood control facilities. D. That Tustin Legacy Community Partners terminated its contract with the City of Tustin as the master developer for the project site. E. That an amendment to Tentative Tract Map was proposed as conveyance map to allow for conveyance of individual parcels and the establishment of roadways and public infrastructures. F. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for an amendment to Tentative Tract Map on December 14, 2010, by the Planning Resolution No. 11-03 FTM 17144 Page 2 Commission. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4164 recommending that the City Council approve an Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 17144. G. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for an Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 17144 on January 4, 2011, by the City Council. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-01 approving the Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 17144. H. That the Public Works/Engineering Department has reviewed the map and determined that it is technically correct and is in substantial conformance with the City Council's approval of the Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 17144, MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, City Subdivision Code, and State Subdivision Map Act; That on January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR and its Addendum is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The FEIS/FEIR and its Addendum considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin; and, J. That the proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development rights are associated with approval of this conveyance map. An Environmental Analysis Checklist had been prepared and concluded that the proposed project does not result in any new significant environmental impacts, substantial changes, or a substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified significant impacts in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Moreover, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since certification of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. The City Council has adopted Resolution No. 11-01 finding that Amendment to Tract Map 17144 for conveyance purposes will have no environmental impacts and that the FEIS/EIR for the MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan and Specific Plan adequately addressed all potential impacts related to the project; II. The City Council hereby approves Final Tract Map 17144 for the subdivision of an approximately 131-acre site into 12 numbered lots and 28 lettered lots for conveyance purposes subject to final approval of the City Engineer. Resolution No. 11-03 FTM 17144 Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 18t" day of January, 2011. JERRY AMANTE MAYOR PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 11-03 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 18t" day of January, 2011 by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK