HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 GEN'L PLAN AMEND 07-03-00~0. 1
07-03-00
DATE:
JULY 3,2000
Inter-Com
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC HEARING FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99-003
SUMMARY: General Plan Amendment (GPA) 99-003 is a request to amend the General Plan Land
Use Designation from "Professional Office" to "Community Commercial" for the purpose of
developing a service station and convenience store on a 22,651 square foot vacant lot located at 17241
Irvine Boulevard A Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated for this project in conformance
with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Ack On June 12, 2000, the Planning
Commission recommended that the City Council approve this projeca
Applicant: Parviz Shamtoub
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council take the following actions:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 00-47 approving the environmental determination for the project; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 00-48 approving General Plan Amendment 99-003.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
On June 12, 2000 the Planning Commission recommended approval of General Plan Amendment
99-003 and approved Conditional Use Permit 99-026 and Design Review 99-033 authorizing the
development of a service station, including fuel dispensing, air and water service, a car wash and
convenience store with alcoholic beverage sales (Attachment A). The project site is a vacant lot on
the north side Irvine Boulevard adjacent to the SR-55 freeway (Attachment B). A Mobil service
station previously existed at this site and was demolished in 1993.
The project site and the adjacent office complex are zoned Planned Community (PC). The Planned
Community Regulations specify that service stations and retail uses are permitted on the subject
parcel. The General Plan Land Use designation for the project site is "Professional Office", which
provides for development of office uses. The development of a service station and retail uses is
inconsistent with the General Plan designation. To allow for the development and to create
consistency between the Planned Community Regulations and the General Plan designation, an
amendment is necessary. The appropriate land use designation for the project would be
"Community Commercial" which provides for commercial development. In addition, the General
Plan Amendment is consistent with and implements the following General Plan policies:
City Council Report
GPA 99-003
July 3, 2000
Page 2
1 ) Policy 1.3
Facilitate the development of vacant and underutilized
freeway parcels with commercial uses where appropriate
and compatible with surrounding uses to capitalize on their
freeway access and visibility.
2) Policy 1.6
Encourage compatible and complementarY infill of previously
by-passed parcels in areas already predominantly
developed.
3) Policy 2.2
Maintain consistency between the Land Use Element,
Zoning Ordinances, and other City ordinances, regulations
and standards.
ENVIRONMENTAL
An Initial Study/Negative Declaration has been prepared and circulated for public review in
accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the
proposed development (see Exhibit A of Resolution No. 99-47 - Attachment C).
LSd'A. Eudi (.// v -
Associate Planner
beth A. Binsack
Community Development Director
s:ccreportJgpa99-003.doc
Attachments:
A- Planning Commission Minutes 6-12-00/Submitted Plans
B - Location Map
C - Resolution No. 00-47
D - Resolution No. 00-48
ATTACHMENT A
Planning Commission Minutes 6-12-00
Submitted Plans
Planning Commission Minutes
June 12, 2000
Page 6
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3737 recommending
that the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 2000-135 to combine
two parcels into one (1) 7.3 acre parcel.
The Public Hearing opened at 7:35 p.m.
Minoo Ashabi, Associate Planner, presented the subject report.
Public Hearing closed at 7:36 p.m.
Commissioner Davert moved, Comissioner Kawashima seconded, approval of
Tentative Parcel Map 2000-135 to combine two parcels into one (1) 7-3 acre parcel.
Motion carried 5-0.
=
Conditional Use Permit 99-026 a request to construct a 2,390 square foot service
station with a car wash and convenience store which would provide beer and wine
for sale for off-site consumption.
APPLICANT:
PARVIZ SHAMTOUB
OWNERS:
ZORRO INVESTMENT COMPANY
LOCATION:
17241 IRVINE BOULEVARD
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission adopt:
Resolution No. 3732 approving the Final Negative Declaration for the
project;
Resolution No. 3733 recommending that the City Council approve
General Plan Amendment 99-003; and
Resolution No. 3734 approving Conditional Use Permit 99-026 and Design
Review 99-033.
The Public Hearing opened at 7:37 p.m.
Lori Ludi, Associate Planner presented the subject report, including revised language for
Condition 6.25 regarding the sale of alcoholic beverages.
The Director commented regarding Condition 6.17 it should read: "All truck deliveries
shall occur prior to 6:00 a.m. and after 8:00 p.m." Since this is a Mitigation Measure, it
Planning Commission Minutes
June 12, 2000
Page 7
should also be modified in the Negative Declaration to insure that the trucks do not enter
during the peak driving hours.
Commissioner Davert asked what was required on the canopy roof for the last gas station
approved because the Planning Commission should be consistent.
Staff indicated the design is a pitched roof designed to match the roof on the store.
Chairman Kozak indicated the conditions address most of his concerns in terms of
ingress/egress but suggested that 7.5 on page 14 should also include pavement
markings at the westedy driveway, as an additional safeguard;, stated that trucks
offloading should enter on Irvine and exit on Irvine to minimize the cross circulation of fuel
trucks with customer vehicles; referred to Conditions 5.4 and 5.5 regarding additional
trees and berming, suggesting landscaping treatment be added along the 45-foot
westerly wall; and, questioned staff regarding the fact that proposed signs were not
included for consideration but are indicated on the plans, such as a pole sign, and asked,
if the recommended actions are approved, will this lock in sign locations.
Staff responded that the applicant would have to come back with a sign program. Any
pole sign would require a conditional use permit to be brought before the Planning
Commission.
Commmissioner Davert expressed his concern that landscaping along Irvine Boulevard
not be so aggressive as to interfere with sightlines.
Chairman Kozak supported this comment.
Commissioner Davert asked about the trucks exiting onto Yorba rather than onto Irvine
Boulevard since traffic moves quite rapidly on Irvine; suggested trucks should not be
restricted from using Yorba; indicated he spoke with the applicant's representative
regarding the traffic, point of access, circulation, and architectural issues; and, stressed
the importance of being consistent with regard to requirements for Chevron on 17th Street.
Scott Peotter, representing the applicant, expressed no disagreement with the age
limitation under 6.25; referred to 4.5 requiring obscuring of the glass in the car wash;
pointed out the site has been vacant seven years; noted his desire to achieve a modem,
custom look similar to the Made Callendar's at First Street; expressed concern regarding
obscuring the glass because the plan is to show off the car wash equipment; noted most
of the deliveries will occur after 10:00 p.m.; and, noted vines along the westedy wall to
abate graffiti can easily be implemented. .
Commissioner Davert expressed concem regarding tinting the windows to obscure the
view into the car wash, which seems inconsistent with security concerns, especially at
night when the facility is not being used.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 12, 2000
Page 8
The Director responded there should not be anyone in there when the car wash is closed
and' the doors secured. This is similar to the requirement applied to the E-Z Lube being
constructed on Newport Avenue.
In response to an inquiry from Commissioner Davert, Mr. Peotter indicated that the facility
will be secured at both ends when not in use. When it is open, the stainless steel and
porcelain machinery will be illuminated.
Commissioner Davert requested clarification of the tint.
The Director responded it should be opaque so the interior is not readily visible. This is a
requirement for all mechanical equipment throughout the City.
Mr. Peotter stressed the applicant's desire to advertise the equipment. It will always be a
nice bright white interior with stainless steel hoops, which is good advertising for the
product.
Chairman Kozak asked if there were any more questions or comments. There being
none, the matter was returned to the Commission for discussion.
Commissioner Pontious supported staff on 4.5 due to issues of consistency with other
actions taken regarding tinting windows to obscure machinery. On 4.1 the Commissioner
asked for clarification.
Commissioner Davert asked staff to confirm his recollection that the car wash equipment
for the car wash at Main and Newport was required to be obscured.
The Director replied affirmatively.
Commissioner Davert stressed that this will be a big improvement to the parcel but
allowed that the Commission should be consistent with other projects. On 4.1 he stated
his support of staff and the guidelines the Commission helped to establish. On 4.5, if it
was required of others, the Commission should be consistent.
The Director proposed language t° add to Condition 5.5 and 6.17.
Commissioner Davert asked there not be restrictions going in and out on Irvine.
Chairman Kozak noted that the language on 6.17 should remain as the intent is to avoid
being overly restrictive.
Mr. Peotter then stated that Mobil likes to have a 12-hour window for deliveri'es and would
like the condition language to read 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
The Commission maintained the condition as written.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 12, 2000
Page 9
Commissioner Davert asked about the language in 3.12, "Cash register shall be located
closer to the front door ..." and asked that this be reviewed at the staff level.
The Director indicated that staff and the Police Department will review this condition
during plan Check.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:10 p.m.
Commissioner Davert reiterated his support of the project.
Chairman Kozak asked, regarding the tinted windows, whether there is a material that
would obscure the direct sight, meeting requirements placed on other applicants, and still
allow some visibility of the equipment. Chairman Kozak suggested the applicant could
bring materials for the approval of the Community Development Director.
The Director indicated that the condition is flexible
mechanical equipment from a public right-of-way.
but intended to obscure the
Commissioner Davert moved, Commissioner Pontious seconded, to adopt
Resolution 3732 approving the Final Negative Declaration for the project, with the.
following modification on page 13 of Attachment A:
Mitigation Measure 7.5, sentence 3, shall .read: "A 'No Exit' sign and pavement
markings shall be installed adjacent to the westerly driveway."
Adopt Resolution No. 3733 recommending that the City Council approve General
Plan Amendment 99-003, and Resolution No. 3734 approving Conditional Use
Permit 99-026 and Design Review 99-033 with the following modifications:
Condition 5.5 shall include the following sentence: "Landscape screening shall be
provided along the westerly building elevation subject to review and approval by
the Community Development Department."
Condition 6.17 shall read as follows: "All truck deliveries shall occur prior to 6:00
a.m. and after 8:00 p.m."
Condition 6.25 shall read as follows: "All persons selling alcoholic beverages shall
be 18 years of age or older. Employees selling alcoholic beverages who are
between the ages of 18 and 21 shall be supervised by an employee who is 21 years
of age or older. The supervisor shall be present in the same area as the point of
sale."
Condition 7.5, sentence 3, shall read: "A 'No Exit' sign and pavement markings
shall be installed adjacent to the westerly driveway."
Motion carried 5.0.
Planning Commission ,,~inutes
June 12, 2000
Page 10
Chairman Kozak asked the Director for comments.
The Director stated there is a 7-day appeal period during which the applicant may appeal
any of the conditions or actual approval.
Chairman Kozak indicated to applicant the City welcomes this project.
5.
Conditional Use Permit 99-031 a request to construct a 6,684 square foot auto
transmission facility with eight work bays, a storage area and an indoor waiting
area and office.
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNER:
MICHAEL LUNA, ARCHITECT
(TUSTIN TRANSMISSION)
HENRY AND JUDY KUMAGAI
LOCATION:
14122 NEWPORT AVENUE
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3730 approving the
Final Negative Declaration for the project and Resolution No. 3731
approving Conditional Use Permit 99-031 and Design Review 99-039.
The Public Hearing opened at 8:13 p.m.
Lori Ludi, Associate Planner, presented the report.
The Director added .that this project will block parking to the adjacent site. Staff has
reviewed this with the City Attorney's office and worked with the applicant concerning this
issue holding up his project. The Director suggested including a condition of aPproval
that provides flexibility under 1.1 allowing the parties to come to an agreement which
could be handled administratively and would not require Planning Commission approval.
Commissioner Davert questioned whether the current application provides for any parking
across property lines, whether or not the City would normally require this, or is it even
something the Planning Commission should consider.
The Director responded that that is correct. If the parties agree on an arrangement, staff
could review the implementing documentation. However, staff does not feel as a result of
this development that staff can require the dedication or the granting of reciprocity.
Chairman Kozak agreed that this is an important technical and legal point and asked for
other questions.
, ,,
~ .~'.'~'"~ .... :"' ':i'I/ "
· ...~..,.. ¢...: ~ - ,
. , .,,,, ~ ~
_. -L I ..' ,' /
l~ ~ ./ ~ I
- ~ < ~ ~ -
J-- } ~ B~ ~ 172411rvineBIvd.,Tustin, CA ~2~60 ~_~'~-'~ ......... ~ =
, t
I -
~0
vZ
Proposed Gasoline Retail Facility, Market & Car Wash
17241 irvine Blvd., Tustin, CA '1 ~. '~ ~ 0 '
I
Proposed Gasoline Retail Facility, Market & Car WaSh
17241 Irvine Blvd., Tusfin, CA o~?..~ l ~ ..
I
ATTACHMENT B
Location Map
LOBATION
MAP
2
/
!
I'
BERG[N CIRCL~
',
F- ROSELEAr AV[NU[
V'.N[WOO0 AV~NU£
HELEN
175 168
173 lEO!
148
151
·
145 1~
.
IRVINE BOULEVARD
TRA~.T $311
175
17.1
TRA~.T
NO SCALE.
·
ATTACHMENT C
City Council Resolution No. 00-47
RESOLUTION NO. 00-47
]0
]2
]4
]6
]?
20
22
23
24
26
2?
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 99-003 AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
I. The citY Council finds and determines as follows:
Ao
That General Plan Amendment 99-003 and the related applications
for Conditional Use Permit 99-026 and Design Review 99-033 are
considered "projects" pursuant to the terms of the California
Environmental Quality Act; and
Bo
A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has
been distributed for public review.
Co
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin has considered
evidence presented by the Community Development Director and
other interested parties with respect to the subject Negative
Declaration, and on .June 12, 2000 recommended that the City
Council certify the Negative Declaration.
Do
The City Council of the City of Tustin has reviewed and considered
the Final Negative Declaration and has determined that the Final
Negative Declaration is adequate and complete.
II.
A Final Negative Declaration, attached hereto as Exhibit A, has been
completed in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The City Council
has received and considered the information contained in the Negative
Declaration prior to approval of the proposed project, and found that it
adequately discusses the environmental effects of the proposed project.
On the basis of the initial study and comments received during 'the public
hearing process, the Council finds that although the proposed project could
have impacts, there will not be a significant effect because mitigation
measures identified in the Final Negative Declaration have been
incorporated into the project which mitigate any potential significant effects
to a point where clearly no significant effect would occur. The mitigation
measures are identified in Exhibit A and are conditions of approval in
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3734 for Conditional Use Permit 99-
026 and Design Review 99-033.
In addition, the City Council finds that the project involves no potential for
any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources
as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
]2
]4
20
2!
22
24
25
26
2?
28
Resolution 00-47
Page 2 of 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning
Commission, held on the 3'" day of July, 2000.
JEFFERY M. THOMAS
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. 00-47 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City
Council, held on the 3'd day of July, 2000, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
Exhibit A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
300 Centennial Iqay~ Tustin, CA 92780
(714) 573-3100
INITIAL STUDY
A. BACKGROUND
Project Title: Conditional Use Permit 99-026, Design Review 99-033 and GPA 99-003
Lead Agency'
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, Califomia 92780
Lead Agency Contact Person:
Lori Ludi
Phone: (714) 573-3127
Project Location: 17241 Irvine Boulevard
·
Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Parviz Shamtoub
10535 Wilshire Boulevard, #404
Los Angeles, CA 90039
General Plan Designation: Professional Office
Zoning Designation: Planned Community Commercial (PC-COMM)
Project Description: Construction of a service station with a 1,400 square foot convenience store and
990 square foOt car wash.
Surrounding Uses:
North: Commercial
South: Commercial
East: Commercial
West: SR55 Freeway ROW
Other public agencies whose approval is required:
[~] Orange County Fire Authority [-]
[--] Orange County Health Care Agency [--]
[---] South Coast Air Quality Managemem [--]
District
Other
City of Irvine
City of Santa Ana
Orange County
EMA
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
[--]Geological Problems
[-]Water
[--]Air Quality
[-]Transportation & Circulation
[--]Biological Resources
[--]Energy and Mineral Resources
[--]Hazards
[~Xloise
[-'-]Public Services
[--IUtilities 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 enviroranent, 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 imposedupon the proposed project.
Preparer:
Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Directoix,
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Directions
A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects
like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"answer should be
explained where it is based on project-specific factors and general standards (e.g., the project will not expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
All answers must take into account the whole action involved, including off-site, on-site, cumulative project level,
indirect, direct, construction, and operational impacts.
Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
"PotentiallY Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If
there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, and EIR is
required.
"Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant
Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect
to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier.Analyses," may be cross-
referenced).
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIK, or other CEQA process, an effect has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3)(D). In this case, a brief
discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis'Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b)
Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of
and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether
such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c)
Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,
where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies
normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in
whatever format is selected.
The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and,
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the iml~ct to less than significance.
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMEp~ FAL IMPACTS
1. 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?
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
Pro.am of the California Resources Agency, to non-
a_ericultural 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-a~iculmral 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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
E]
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 offish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department offish 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, region, al, or state habitat conservation
plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact .
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
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?
[3
[23
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:
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 unstab, le as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
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 hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project
area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing
or working in the project area?
Potentially.
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With ·
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
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 wild!ands?
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: - Would
the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would
be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoffwater which would exceed the
capacity of ex~sting or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?.
f') Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood HaTard 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 slamctures 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 USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
'.
d o o
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 a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Xl. 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 groundbome noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excess noise levels?
XII.POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Potentially.
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
E]
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
XIV. RECREATION-
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse .physical effect on the environment?
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation
to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system
(i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or
congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for desiguated 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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
0
0
0
0
0
0
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS-
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
ATTACHMENT A -
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-026,
DESIGN REVIEW 99-033 & GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99-003
BACKGROUND
The project site, an approximate .52 acre vacant parcel, is located at 17241 Irvine Boulevard, on
the north side of Irvine east of the northbound SR-55 Freeway on-ramp. The area in which the
project site is located is surrounded by developed commercial uses to the north, south and east.
The SR-55 Freeway fight-of-way is located to the west. The project site is located in the Planned
Community- Commercial (PC-COMM) zoning district.
The proposed service station includes the construction of the following:
1.)
Construction of three pump islands with a total of six pumps under a 3,440 square
foot canopy.
2.)
Construction of a 1,400 square foot convenience store that would sell alcoholic
beverages for off-site consumption.
3.) Construction of a 990 square foot self-serve car wash.
4.)
Construction of landscape planters, trash enclosure and paved surface for
circulation and parking.
Design Review 99-033 is required to authorize site design, architecture and landscaping;
Conditional Use Permit 99-026 is required to authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-
site consumption. The following mitigation measures are numbered to correspond with the
Conditions of Approval.in the recommended resolution of approval.
1. AESTHETICS
Items a & b -No Impact:
it affect a scenic vista.
The project site is .not located on a scenic highway nor does
Items c & d- Less Than Simaificant with Mitigation Incorporation: The proposed project
will establish a new building at a prominent i.ntersection within the community. The building
has been desired to be compatible with the architectural styles of existing buildings within
the surrounding area. Over 16% of the site is'proPosed to be landscaping. Landscaping is
required to be provided around the perimeter of the site and within the parking areas.
Landscaping adjacent to the public fight-of-ways is required to screen the view of the pump
islands, consistent with the Auto Service Guidelines. The landscape planter area adjacent to
Irvine Boulevard is 10-15 feet wide. Lighting on the site will be required to be directed on-
site to avoid glare on adjacent arterials and properties~
,..
¢
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
3.11
Details of all proposed lighting fixtures and a photometric study showing the
location and anticipated distribution pattern of light of all proposed fixtures shall be
provided. All new light fixtures shall be consistent with the architecture of the
building. All exterior lighting shall be designed and arranged as not to direct light or
glare onto adjacent properties, including th6 adjacent streets. Wall mounted fixtures
shall be directed at a 90 degree angle directly toward the ground. All lighting shall
be developed to provide a minimum of one (1) footcandle of light coverage, in
accordance with the City's Security Code, but not exceed thirty (30) footcandles.
5.1
The site shall be landscaped consistent with the City's Landscaping and Irrigation
Guidelines. Landscaping shall consist of a combination of berming and sufficient
numbers of shrubs and trees to provide adequate screening, subject to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
5.3
A minimum of 15 percent landscaping shall be provided on the project site including
a landscape buffer around the perimeter of the site in accordance with the Auto
Service Design Guidelines and the Parking Lot Design Guidelines.
5.4
Prox4de additional trees within the perimeter landscaping to increase the visual
buffer of the pump islands from public view.
With the implementation of these mitigation measures and the conditions of approval,
impacts related to aeSthetics will be reduced to a level of insignificance.
Sources: Project Application
Tustin Security Code
2. AGRICULTUR.~ RESOURCES
Items a.b & c- No Impact: The proposed project will be located Within an area that is
vacant and was previously developed with a service station. No impacts will occur to any
agricultural uses or farmland.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required
Sources: Tustin General Plan
,, Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Revie{4, 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Study - Attachment A
Page 2 of l 4
-
3. AIR OUALITY
Items a & b - Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation: With respect to long-
term air quality impacts, the proposed project involves the construction of a facility that is
substantially similar to the service station that was previously located at the site. As su6h, no
substantial increase in long-term emissions associated with stationary or mobile sources
beyond the condition of the previous service station is anticipated. Minor short-term
emissions of paniculate matter may occur during grading.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
2.11
The applicant shall comply with all City policies including the City's Grading Plan
regarding short term construction emissions, including periodic watering of the site
and prob_ibiting grading during second stage smog alerts and when wind velocities
exceed 15 miles per hour.
Items c.d & e- No Impact:
The relatively small magnitude of the project does not have the capacity to create a net
increase of any criteria pollutant, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrates, or create objectionable odors.
With implementation of the above mitigation measures and conditions of approval that
requires the applicant to. conduct grading activities in compliance with the City of Tustin
Grading Manual and obtain all necessary approvals and permits from the SCAQMD and the
City of Tustin, any potential impacts related to air quality will be reduced to a level of
insignificance.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None ReqUired
Sources[
South Coast Ak Quality Management District Rules & Regulations
City of Tustin Grading Manual
Project Application
Field Inspection
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Items a. b. c. d. e & f-No Impact: The proposed project will be located within an area
that is vacant and was previously developed with a services station. No impacts will occur to
endangered, threatened or rare species or'habitats, locally designated species or natural
communities, or wildlife dispersal or mi~ation corridors.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required
Mobil Service Station
(Conditional [.:'se Permit 99-026. Design Review 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Stud), - Attachment A
Page 3 of 14
Sources: Field Inspection
Tustin General Plan
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Items a, b, c & d-No Impact: The proposed project involves construction of a service
station with a convenience store and car wash on a site that is currently vacant, but was
previously developed with a service station. No impacts to paleontological, archaeological,
historical, religious resources, or disturbing of any human remains, will occur.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
None Required
Sources: Tustin General Plan
6. GEOLOGY & SOILS
Items a-i, a-ii. a-iii & b - Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation: A review of
the State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Map indicates that the project site is located in
an area of potential liquefaction hazard. The topography of the site is relatively fiat and
would require minor precise grading activity to prepare the site for new construction.
Compliance with current codes will ensure that the design and construction of the proposed
project reduces any potential impacts related to fault ruptures, ground shaking, ground
failure, liquefaction or unstable soils to a level of insignificance.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
2.1
When submitting plans for a building permit, submit four (4) sets of plans, two (2)
sets of specifications of, soils report, structural and energy calculations. Electrical,
mechanical and plumbing plans shall be included. Grading plans, landscape plans,
underground tank removal/installation plans and signage plans may be submitted
separately, but no building permits will be issued until all plans have been approved.
2.2
Indicate on the title sheet the applicable codes, City, State and Federal laWs and
regulations to include:
1997 Uniform Building Code with Califomia Amendments
1997 Uniform Mechanical Code with California Amendments
1997 Uniform Plumbing Code with California Amendments
1996 National Electrical Code with California Amendments
City of Tustin Grading Ordinance
City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines
City of Tustin Private Improvement Standards
City of Tustin Security Ordinance
Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Revie~v 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Study - Attachment A
Page 4 of 14
2.11
The applicant shall comply with all City policies regarding short term construction
emissions, including periodic watering of the site and prohibiting grading during
second stage smog alerts and when wind velocities exceed 15 miles per hour.
2.13 . All grading, drainage, vegetation and circulation shall comply with the City of
Tustin Grading Manual. All street sections, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, lighting and
storm drain shall comply with on-site improvement standards. Any deviations
shall be brought to the attention of the Building Official and request for approval
shall be submitted in writing prior to any approval.
Items a-iv, c, d & e- No Impact: The project site is not located within an area that is
subject to seiche, tsunami, volcanic hazards, landslides, or mudflows, erosion, subsidence, or
expansive soils. No unique geological or physical features are present within the area.
With implementation of the above mitigation measures and conditions of approval that
requires the applicant to obtain all necessary approvals from the Community Development
Department, the project design and construction will reduce potential impacts to a level of'
insignificance.
Sources:
Tustin General Plan
City of Tustin Grading Manual
Uniform Building Code
Project Application
Field Evaluation
7. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Items a & b- Less Than Significant with Mitieation Incorporation: Operation of the
service station, convenience store and/or car wash may expose customers and employees to
petroleum products, motor oil and other automotive substances which are highly flammable
and known to be carcinogen. These uses may risk potential contamination and exposing
employees and the general public to hazardous substances.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
2.3
Complete the hazardous material questionnaire and the air quality questionnaire and
submit to the Building Division and the proper agencies. On these forms, if the
answer to any of the questions is "yes", clearances form Hazardous Material
Disclosure Office and from Air Quality Management District shall be submitted to
the Building Division prior to approval.
2.4
The applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals form the Community
Development Department, Orange County Fire Authority Hazardous Materials
Disclosure Office, Orange County Health Care Agency and Occupational Safety
Hazard Association (OSHA).
Mobil Service Station
Revte~v 99-033 & GeneraiPlan Amendment 99-003)
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design ' ~
Initial Study - Attachment A
Page 5 of l 4
6.18
7.12
The aPplicant shall be responsible for taking appropriate corrective action to address
any surface contamination as required for any accidental spills, as required to the
satisfaction of the Health Care Agency.
This development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City of Tustin
Water Quality Ordinance and all federal, state and Regional Water Quality Control
Board and Orange. County Sanitation District rules and regulations as they relate to
service station facilities. The plan shall be designed in accordance with, but not
limited to, the following:
· Fueling area shall be designed to prevent mn-on of storm water and the
mn-off of spills;
· Paving of fueling area with Portland cement concrete; Provide an
overhead cover over the fueling area;
· Use a perimeter drain or slope pavement inward with drainage to sump;
· If a dead-end sump is not used to collect spills, an oil/water separator is
to be installed.
8.6
8.8
Spills can be contained within the fueling area either by using a perimeter drain or
by sloping the pavement inward with drainage to a sump. In both cases the drain
can be connected to the storm drain with a valve that is only closed during fueling
operations and left open at all other times.
Prior to the issuance of any grading permits or building permits the applicant shall
submit to the Fire Chief a list of the quantities of all hazardous, flammable and
combustible materials, liquids or gases. These liquids and materials are to be
classified according to the "Orange County Fire Authority Chemical Classification
Handout". The submittal shall provide a summary sheet listing each hazard class,
the total quantity of chemicals stored per class and the total quantity of chemicals
used in that class. All forms of materials are to be converted to units of measure in
pounds, gallons and cubic feet_
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall contact the Orange
County Fire Authority Hazardous Materials Disclosure Office at (714) 744-0463 to
obtain a "Hazardous Materials Business Information and Chemical Inventory
Packet". This shall be completed and submitted to the Fire Chief before the issuance
of any building permits.
,, Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Revie)w 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Stud), - Attachment A
Page 6 of 14
Item d - Less Than Significant Impact: The previous development on the vacant site was a
service station that was demolished in 1993'. After the demolition of the service station, the
site was inspected by the County Health Care .Agency for soil contamination. Contamination
was found and the property owner was required to clean-up the site and remove and/or treat
any contaminated areas on the site before any development on the site is permitted. In April
1996 the County Health Care Agency re-inspected the site and found that the contaminated
areas had been cleaned up and the site no longer has any contaminated soil.
Mitigation Measure/Monitoring Required: None
Items c, e, f, g & h- No Impact: The project sit~ is not located within a airport land
use plan or within two miles of a public or private airport. The closest school is located
further than a quarter of a mile from the project' site. The proposed project does not interfere
with any evacuation plans or emergency response plans. The project site is not within a
wildland area, and would not expose individuals or structures to the hazards of wildland fires.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required.
Sources:
Tustin General Plan
Orange County Fire Authority
Orange County Health Care Agency
8. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY
Item a - Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation: The imPervious surface of the
project will drain into the existing storm drain system. Since the proposed use will be an
automotive use on the subject property, petroleum products, motor oil and other automotive
substances may accidentally spill onto the impervious surfaces of the facility and drain into
the system. However, a Water Quality Management Plan administered by the City of Tustin
Public Works Department and the Regional Water Quality Control Board would be required
to mitigate and minimize runoff into the storm drain system. Any water deposited into the
sanitary, sewer system for treatment shall be in complianc, e with the Orange County
Sanitation District requirements. ' "
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
2.6
The applicant 'shall comply with the following conditions pertaining to the
requirement for a Water Quality Management Plan:
me
Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit for approval
by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on site to control
predictable pollutant nm-off.
Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Revic4v 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Study - Attachment A
Page 7 of 14
\
Bo
This WQMP shall identify the: structural and non-structural measures
specified detailing implementation of BMPs whenever they are applicable to
the project; the assignment of long-term maintenance responsibilities
(specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessee,
etc.); and~ reference to the location(s)of structural BMPs.
Prior to issuance of grading or demolition permits, the applicant shall obtain
coverage under the NPDES Statewide Industrial Stormwater Permit for
General Construction Activities from the State' Water Resources Control
Board. Evidence that this has been obtained shall be submitted to the
Building Official of the City of Tustin.
Co
Prior to issuance of certificates of use and occupancy, building permits.for
individual tenant improvements or construction permits for a tank or
pipeline, uses shall be identified and, for specified uses, the applicant shall
propose plans and measures for hazardous materials management (including,
but not limited to, storage, emergency response, 'employee training, spill
contingencies and disposal) to the satisfaction of the CiD' of Tustin.
Hazardous Materials Management Plans shall be approved by the City of
Tustin and other specified agencies such as the Orange County Fire
Authority, the Health Care Agency, and sewering agencies to ensure
implementation of each agency's respective requirements. Further, a copy of
the approved "Hazardous Materials Management Plans (HMMP)" shall be
furnished to the Building Official of the City of Tustin, prior to the issuance
of any certificate of use and occupancy. Certificates or permits may be
ministerially withheld if features needed to properly manage hazardous
materials cannot be incorporated into a previously completed building,
center, or complex. -
2.11
The applicant shall comply with all City policies including the City's Grading Plan
regarding short term construction emissions, including periodic watering of the site
and prohibiting grading during second stage smog alerts and when wind velocities
exceed 15 miles per hour.
2.12 Drainage, vegetation, circulation, street sections, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and storm
drains shall comply with the on-site Private Improvement Standards.
3.7
All site drainage shall be handled on-site and shall not be permitted to drain onto
adjacent properties.
Compliance with the above mitigation measures and conditions of approval will ensure that
the design and construction reduces any potential impacts related to absorption rates,
drainage patterns of surface runoff, or effect on the amount or quality of surface or
g-roundwaters to a level of insignificance. The project does not have the capacity to affect the
direction of currents in surface waters or amount or quality of groundwaters.
,, Mobil Sera,ice Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Review 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial StuaS.,- Attachment A
Page 8 of 14
-
Items b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i & i - No Impact: The project would not expose people or
property to water related hazards sucti as flooding, change the course or direction of waters
movements, or affect the quantity of groundwaters.
Sources:
Tustin General Plan
City of Tustin Grading Manual'
Public Works Department
Orange County Health Care Agency
Project Application
9. LAND USE PLANNING
Items a, b & c-No Impact: The proposed project consists of constructing a service
station with three pump islands, a 1,400 square foot convenience store and a 990 square foot
car wash. The site is zoned Planned Community Commercial (PC-COMM). Auto service
stations are a permitted use under this zoning district. The site is designated as Professional
Office by the General Plan Land Use Map, which is not consistent with the Zoning of the
site. Therefore, the applicant shall obtain approval from the Planning'Commission and City
Council to amend the General Plan designation from Professional Office to Community
Commercial.
As proposed, the location and design of the facility is consistent with the development
standards of the PC-COMM zoning district. The proposed project has been designed to
provide a landscape buffer that screens the view of the service bays, as recommended by the
City's Auto Service Guidelines.
The proposed project is similar to and compatible with other commercial uses in the vicinity.
The proposed project is not anticipated to impact land use or planning.
Mitigation Measures:
1.8
Prior to obtaining Building Permits, the applicant shall obtain approval by the
'Planning Commission and City Council to amend the General Plan designation
from Professional Office to Community Commercial. The approval of
Conditional Use Permit 99-026 and Design Review 99-033 shall become null and
void if the General Plan Amendment is not obtained.
7.1
The title report and Parcel Map No. 27-45 identify a ten (10) foot wide Caltrans
easement for water line purposes along the westerly property line which is in conflict
with the proposed building location shown on the site plan. Prior to issuance of
building permits, this easement shall be eliminated. If the easement is not eliminated,
a ten (10) foot setback from the westerly property line shall be required and
modifications to the site plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the
Planning Commission.
Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Revieh, 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003).
Initial Study - A ttachment.d
Page9ofl4
7.2
The site plan shall be revised to correctly reflect the dimensions of the existing
parcel (159.72' by 145') as shown on the Assessors Parcel Map and Parcel Map No.
27-45 and the area proposed to be combined through a lot line adjustment (159.72'
by 12') along the northerly property line. A lot line adjustment shall be required to
combine the additional area to the north prior to the issuance of building permits, the
applicant shall submit a lot line adjustmeni application for review and discretionary
action by the City of Tustin. If the lot line adjustment is not approved, the depth of
the site shall be reduced twelve (12) feet and the site design shall be modified and
subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission.
Sources:
Tustin General Plan
Tustin Zoning Code
Project Application
Field Evaluation
10. MINERAL RESOURCES
Items a & b- No Impact: The construction and operation of the facility will not use
nonrenewable resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner. There are no known mineral
resources located on the project site.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required
Sources: Tustin General Plan
11. NOISE
Item a, b, c & d- Less Than Significant with Miti~,ation Incorporation: With respect
to short-term noise impacts associated with construction, all construction will be required to
conform to the Noise Ordinance and work may only be performed during permitted hours of
construction. As such, short term noise impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance.
No significant increase in long term noise impacts associated with generation of vehicular
traffic is anticipated. Operations of the facility will be required to conform to the Noise
Ordinance. Long-term operational noise will be reduced to a level of insignificance through
compliance with the Noise Ordinance. A requirement .that all service activities shall be
conducted' within the 'structure of the car wash bay will also reduce noiSe to a level of
insignificance.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
6.19 All requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance shall be met at all times.
Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Revic4v 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Study - Attachment A
Page 10 of 14
-
6.33
All construction operations, including engine warm-up and deliveries of materials
and equipment, shall b~ subject to the provisions of the Iustin Noise Ordinance and
shall take place only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, and between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, unless otherwise
determined by the Community Development Director and/or Building Official.
6.34 Construction hours shall be clearly posted on the project site to the satisfaction of the
Building Official.
With implementation of the above mitigation measures and conditions of approval, potential
noise impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance.
Items e & f-No Impact: The project site is not located within an airport land use
plan or within two miles of a public or private airport.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required.
Sources:
Tustin General Plan
Noise Ordinance
Project Application
12. POPULATION & HOUSING
Items a. b & c-No Impact: The proposed project is located on a vacant site that
previously was developed with a service station and surrounded by existing commercial and
freeway right-of-way uses. 'The proposed project would not result in any direct increase in
population nor induce substantial growth in the area. No impacts related to population or
housing are anticipated.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required
Sources:
Tustin General Plan
Project Application
Field Evaluation
13. PUBLIC SERVICES
Item a - Less Than Sienificant with Mitieation Incorporation: The project site and
surrounding commercial properties are currently subject.to fire and police protection. The
proposed project to cOnstruct an auto fueling facility is similar to the auto service station
facility that was demolished in 1993. Additional resources may be required to maintain these
existing service levels and address potential criminal activity associated with a convenience
store. Convenience stores have a higher probability to have levels of criminal activity.
Therefore, the proposed project may have an impact for additional Police services related to
crime reduction.
Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design RevieW, 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Stua5, - Attachment A
Page 11 of 14
.-
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
3.12 TO provide the clerk good visibility of the gas pumps and the grounds, the cash
register shall be relocated so that it is closer to the front door and so that the clerk
can be seen from the street.
6.11
6.12
6.13
Sources:
A drop safe shall be installed for the clerk to make deposits, limiting the amount of
money at the register.
Video cameras, mirrors and height markers shall be installed for security purposes.
If determined by the Chief of Police and the Community Development Director,.
based upon the number of calls for service, the owner and/or operator will be
required to implement procedures to reduce the likelihood of criminal activity.
Tustin Police Department
Orange County Fire Authority
Tustin Public Works Department
14. RECREATION
Items a & b -No Impact: The proposed reconstruction of an existing service station
would not affect existing facilities nor create a demand for recreational facilities.
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Project Application
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Item a. d & g - Less Than Significant Impact: The City's Traffic Engineer has reviewed.
the proposed project and found that the project, as compared to the vacant site, will result in
an increase in traffic. However, the proposed project will not generate more traffic than the
previous service station that was demolished on the site in 1993. A typical service station,
similar to the'previous development, generates approximately 1000 daily trips. The traffic
generated from the'previous service station development did not negatively affect the level of
service for the adjacent arterials and intersections. Therefore, even with the increase of trips
as compared to the vacant site, the proposed project is not anticipated to impact the planned
level of service for the adjacent arterials and intersections. No safety hazards or barriers for
Pedestrians, bicyclists or vehicles or' conflicts with bus turnouts are proposed. Adequate
access is provided from two driveways off of Irvine Boulevard and the adjacent alley.
Automobiles accessing the site could creme a hazard to vehicular and pedestrian traffic if
stac 'king occurs within the public right-of-way. .
' Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Review 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Study - Attachment A
Page 12 of 14
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required:
6.4
Vehicle stacking across a public side walk shall be prohibited and any violation shall
be subject to citation. The operator of the facility is responsible for ensuring
compliance and preventing stacking across a public sidewalk.
7.5
Install traffic signs and provide pavement markings at the easterly .access driveway
(private alley) onto Irvine Boulevard indicating "Right Turn Only" for egresS traffic
from the site. Vehicles exiting the site shall only be allowed to turn right. A "No
Exit" and pavement markings shall be installed adjacent to the westerly driveway.
The applicant/property owner is responsible for maintaining configuration of
westerly point of ingress to prevent exiting. The signing and striping markings shall
be consistent with Caltrans specifications. If, in the future, it is determined that
motorists are proceeding with left mm movements onto Irvine Boulevard from the-
driveway in violation of the signed prohibition, then the applicant shall be required
to fully improve the center median to prevent left mm movements.
Items b, c, e, & f-No Imt)act: A total of ten (10) parking spaces are being'provided
consistent with the off-street parking standards within the Tustin City Code. Six standard size
parking spaces are located adjacent to the south property line and are accessible from Irvine
Boulevard and the adjacent alley. One handicap parking space and three (3) standard size
spaces are located adjacent to the north side of the building and accessible from a two-way
drive aisle. No rail, waterborne, or air transportation is affected by the proposed project.
Sources:
Tustin General Plan
Project Application
Tustin Public Works/Traffic Engineer
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required
16. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS
Items a. b, c, d, e, f & g - No Impact: The proposed facility will be connected to existing
utilities and service systems in the area. No substantial alterations to any utilities will be
required.
Sources: . Tustin Public Works Department
Field Inspection
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required
Mobil Service Station
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design Review 99-033 & General Plan Amendment 99-003)
Initial Stud), - Attachment A
Pagel3of]4
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Items a, b & c-No Impact: The proposed project is the construction of a service
station, car wash and convenience store on a lot that is currently vacant. The previous
development on the site was a gas station which was demolished in 1993. The project
design, construction and operation will comply with the regulations of the Community
Development Department, Air Quality Managemeht District, and Orange County Fire
Authority which reduces any potential impacts related to geological problems, water quality,
air quality, hazards and noise to a level of insignificance. As such, the project does not have
the potential to degrade the quality of the environment nor achieve short-term environmental
goals to the disadvantage of the long-term. It does not have impacts that are individually
limited but cumulatively considerable or that would cause substantial adverse impacts on
human beings.
Sources: Project Application
City and Agency Requirements
Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required
Mobil Service Station
Revtew 99-033 & General Plan .4mendment 99-003)
(Conditional Use Permit 99-026. Design ' ~
Initial Study - .4ttachment .4
Page 14 of 14
ATTACHMENT D
City Council Resolution No. 00-48
]0
20
24
25
2?
RESOLUTION NO. 00-48
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99-003,
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE TO COMMUNITY
COMMERCIAL ON A ,52 ACRE VACANT LOT LOCATED AT
17241 IRVINE BOULEVARD.
The City Council does hereby resolve as follows:
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
Ao
That a proper application was filed for General Plan Amendment
99-003 to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation of .52
acre vacant parcel located at 17241 Irvine Boulevard adjacent to
the SR-55 freeway.
Bo
That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held on said
application by the Planning Commission on June 12, 2000 and by
the City Council on July 3, 2000.
Co
That on June 12, 2000 the Planning Commission recommended
that the City Council approve the project.
Do
A Negative Declaration has been certified as adequate for this
project in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
E°
That General Plan Amendment 99-003 is consistent with and
implements the following policies of the General Plan:
1) Policy 1.3
Facilitate the development of vacant and
underutilized freeway parcels with commercial
uses where appropriate and compatible with
surrounding uses to capitalize on their freeway
access and visibility.
2) Policy 1.6
Encourage compatible and complementary infill
of previously by-passed parcels in areas
already predominantly developed.
3) Policy 2.2
Maintain consistency between the Land Use
Element, Zoning Ordinances, and other City
ordinances, regulations and standards.
F.
That the proposed amendments are in the best interest of the public
and ensure consistency between the General Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance.
l0
14
20
24
"5
27
25
Resolution No. 00-48
Page 2
II.
The City Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment 99-003,
amending the General Plan Land Use Designation of the subject property
from "Professional Office" to "Community Commercial", as identified in
Exhibit A attached hereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a
regular meeting on the 3"~ day of July, 2000.
JEFFERY M. THOMAS
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. 00-48 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City
Council, held on the 3~ day of July, 2000, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
[-.-
C
0 C) c-