Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 TP 97-117 CUP97-005 12-01-97DATE: DECEMBER 1, 1997 NO. 3 12-1 - 9:7 inter-Com / TO: FROM: SUBJECT: WILL~M A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 97-117 AND APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-005 AND DESIGN REVIEW 97-009 RECOMMENDATION That the City Council take action as deemed appropriate. FISCAL IMPACT Application fees for the project were waived. BACKGROUND On August 11, 1997, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for CUP 97-005, DR 97- 009 and TPM 97-117 to consider the proposed self-serve gasoline station, full-service carwash, convenience store and retail building. The Commission identified several concerns related to architecture, screening and noise and continued the matter to their September 22, 1997 meeting to provide time for the applicant to evaluate the Commission's concems and modifiy the plans accordingly. On September 22, 1997, the Commission reviewed the applicant's resubmittal and provided additional direction regarding the outstanding issues. On November 10, 1997, the Planning Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review and recommended City Council approval of the Tentative Parcel Map (Resolution Nos. 3534 and 3535 respectively - Attachment C). The minutes City Council Report TPM 97-117 & Appeal of CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 December 1, 1997 Page 2 from the August 11, 1997, September 22, 1997 and November 10, 1997 Planning Commission meetings are included (Attachment D). Aooroval Criteria Several discretionary actions are requested in consideration of the project and include the following: Conditional Use Permit 97-005 to authorize the establishment of the gasoline station, carwash, and convenience store (TCC Sections 9233c(c), 9233c(r) and 9233c(aa)); . Tentative Parcel Map 97-117 to subdivide the site into two parcels and locate the service station/convenience store/carwash on one parcel adjacent to Newport Avenue and the 5,500 square-foot retail building adjacent to Main Street on a separate parcel (TCC Section 9323); and, o Design Review 97-009 to authorize site design, architecture, landscaping and other site amenities of the project (TCC Section 9272). The project has also been reviewed for conformance with the City Council's adopted design standards for: 1. Service Station Development Guidelines (Attachment E); 2. Parking Area Design Guidelines; and, 3. Landscaping and Irrigation Guidelines. Proiect Description The following provides a description of the improvements proposed. City Council Report TPM 97-117 & Appeal of CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 December 1, 1997 Page 3 RETAIL BUILDING *A 5,500 square-feet Spanish style retail building is proposed to be located at the northeast comer of Main Street and Centennial Way. -An outside 3,100 square foot pedestrian courtyard is proposed 'on the east side of the building facing Main Street. The courtyard will include benches, a fountain and other decorative amenities and is intended as a public space. · Parking is provided on the north side of the building, with access to the parking lot from Centennial Way on the west and from Newport Avenue through the gas station parking area. · Potential tenants of this building could include any of the permitted and conditionally permitted uses identified in the C-2 (Central Commercial) District. GASOLINE STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE · Eight (8) under canopy gasoline pumps are proposed to be located approximately 60 feet from Newport Avenue. · A 750 square foot convenience store, which includes the cashier for the service station, is proposed to be located at the rear of the site in the carwash building. The convenience store is proposed to be open 24 hours per day. CARWASH · The main building is proposed to be five (5) feet from the rear property line, with a three (3) car detail building in the comer at the property line. · The carwash drying area is located in the center of the site, defined by decorative paving and a screen wall on the east side. · The vacuums and six (6) additional gasoline pumps for the carwash customers are proposed along the north property linel under a second canopy. City Council Report TPM 97-117 & Appeal of CLIP 97-005 & DR 97-009 December 1, 1997 Page 4 · The carwash is designed to accommodate a total of 31 cars at one time, as follows: 9 cars at the service entry, 3 cars in the wash tunnel, 16 cars in the drying area and 3 cars in the detail garage. · The carwash is proposed to operate from 7:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. · The applicant does not propose alcoholic beverage sales, check cashing or money transfer services in conjunction with 'the convenience store. If alcoholic beverage sales or check cashing services are requested in the future, a Conditional Use Permit would be required. Site and Surrounding Propertie~ The project site, an approximately 1.6-acre parcel, is located on the northwest comer of Newport Avenue and Main Street. The existing full service carwash was authorized in t 965 by Conditional Use Permit 65-194. At that time, the Commission determined that a carwash would be compatible with other uses permitted in the C-2 District. All existing site improvements are proposed to be removed. Surrounding uses to the site include the Civic Center to the west across Centennial Way, office and retail uses to the north and east (across Newport Avenue), and commercial uses across Main Street to the south. Larwin Square is to the north of the site and Tustin Plaza is to the south, across Main Street. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS Site Plant Architecture and Circulation The site is located at a prominent intersection within the Town Center Redevelopment Area and is a major gateway to the Old Town area of the City. With such a prominent location, the site plan, architectural design, building massing, design details, architectural form and site amenities are important to the image and appearance of the community. Proposed development plans indicate a modified Spanish style architectural theme with stucco walls, multi-color S-tile roof, stone window and door surrounds, wood trellis and tile building accents. A patio area is proposed on the south side of the carwash building and a courtyard with a fountain proposed at the comer of Newport Avenue and Main Street. City Council Report TPM 97-117 & Appeal of CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 December 1, 1997 Page 5 Access to the site is currently provided by two driveways located on Centennial Way. Implementation of this plan will permanently close the most southerly access drive on Centennial Way, leaving one drive open on Centennial Way. Two driveways are proposed from Newport Avenue. The most northerly access fi-om Newport Avenue is an existing driveway which currently provides access for Larwin Square service vehicles. Landscaping precludes access to the existing carwash. The applicant is proposing to widen this drive and modify the design, consistent with city standards to provide joim access to Larwin Square and the project. A second driveway is proposed along the Newport Avenue frontage, approximately 150 feet north of the Main Street intersection. On-site circulation is designed to permit two-way traffic around the gasoline canopy to permit access to the pumps and carwash fi-om any of the three entrances. The applicant has indicated that vehicles exiting the drying area will use Newport Avenue. Parking is provided north of the retail building and along the east property line facing Newport Avenue. The parking is distributed throughout the site to ensure that each use will have adequate parking. The Zoning Code requires 49 parking spaces for all of the proposed uses and the applicant has provided a total of 53 parking spaces. As part of the City review of this project, a traffic analysis was prepared by CAM Engineering to evaluate the adequacy of on-site circulation, parking and potential impacts to the bicycle trail and surrounding streets. The City Transportation Engineer has reviewed and accepted the study with respect to the content, methodology and analysis used, 'and findings and conclusions. The study identified several mitigation measures to ensure the project has no impacts on surrounding streets, which were included in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3534. The traffic study is identified as Appendix B to the Negative Declaraton/Inifial Study (Attachmem G). Consistency with Service Station Guidelines The Service Station Devdopment Guidelines (Attachment E) are discretionary. Tustin City Code Section 9272c(15) requires consideration of all adopted City CoUncil Guidelines during Design Review. Should the CoUncil wish to approve this development without the reverse service station design, it will be necessary to make specific findings to support a departure from the adopted Service Station Development Guidelines. Specifically, not withstanding all other required findings, the CoUncil must find that it is infeasible to design this site so as to preclude open bays facing a public street; and it is infeasible to design this site so the location of the service pumps is oriented on the rear portion of the site. The applicant has stated that a departure from the guidelines is warranted due to the angle of Newport Avenue. The applicant provided empirical data which the Commission considered in their approval of City Council Report TPM 97-117 & Appeal of CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 December 1, 1997 Page 6 this project (Attachment F) and are included within Resolution No. 3534 (Attachment C). In summary, the findings the Commission used to depart from the guidelines include the following: · The open bays of the detail garage will have limited visibility fi.om the street. The property is irregular in shape and not a comer condition as identified in the development criteria, making it infeasible to design the pumps at the rear of the site. The lack of vehicular access to Main Street, the established access easement and the irregular property angle at the intersection preclude implementation of a reverse functioning gasoline station. The applicant believes that the additional retail component proposed on Main Street eliminates the necessity for constructing a reverse functioning gasoline station. Landscaping and Screenine The conceptual landscaping plan provides a 23-foot wide landscaped planter adjacent to Newport Avenue fi'ontage in fi.ont of the pumps and a 15-foot wide landscaped berm in fi.om of the carwash drying area. A 15-foot landscaped area is proposed along Main Street and Centennial Way. The Newport Avenue landscaping includes berms, a screen wall and landscaping to screen the canopy and drying area. The perimeter streetscape treatment includes the use of California Pepper trees along Centennial Way, Main Street and the southern edge of the Newport Avenue frontages. The Newport Avenue street frontage adjacent to the gasoline canopy will have California Fan Palm trees. The interior perimeter of the site is proposed to include Raphiolepis shrubs and Crape Myrtle trees. Crape Myrtle trees are proposed along the north elevation of the retail building and potted plants are proposed surrounding the carwash/convenience store building. Noise At the August 11, 1997 meeting the Commission and members of the public identified a concern that the carwash equipment may negatively affect surrounding properties and requested that a preliminary noise analysis be provided to determine compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance. City Council Report TPM 97-117 & Appeal of CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 December 1, 1997 Page 7 The applicant prepared an Acoustical Analysis dated October 9, 1997 which has been reviewed by the City's noise consultant and accepted as complete. The analysis is included as Appendix C of the Initial Study (Attachment G). In statutory, the project is estimated to generate a maximum of 8 dBA of noise above the limit established by the City's Noise Ordinance. To ensure compliance with the standards of the Noise Ordinance, several mitigation measures were identified in the Noise Study and incorporated into the project design. These include a 6'- 8" high perimeter wall, 10' high screen walls at the carwash 'tunnel and .removal of the roof of the carwash tunnel. Compliance with Water Quality Management Plan The applicant was originally requesting to install gasoline pumps at the carwash area without an overhead canopy. The Drainage Area Master Plan (DAMP) requires all gasoline pumps to have an overhead canopy to minimize contamination of storm drain waters. The applicant has modified the plans to include a second canopy over the carwash gasoline pumps of the same design as the front canopy. The requirements of the DAMP are mandatory and cannot be waived without jeopardizing the City's municipal storm water permit. To minimize the intensity of development at the northwest comer of the site, staff recommended that the rear canopy be lowered in height, since the maximum height of vehicles using these pumps are limited to only vehicles using the carwash. In addition, the Planning Commission included conditions to modify the canopy to include a pitched roof design to ensure compatibility with the design of the adjacent detail garage and convenience store. Tentative Parcel Map TPM 97-117 is a request to subdivide the site into two lots for financing purposes (Attachment B, Sheet 9). Parcel 1 is proposed to be approximately one (1) acre in size and fronts onto .Newport Avenue. The service station/convenience store/carwash and drying areas are located on Parcel 1. Parcel 2 will be approximately. 5 acres and is located on the western portion of the site fronting onto Centennial Way and Main Street. The 5,500 square foot retail building is located on Parcel 2. Both parcels meet the minimum size and width requirements of the Zoning Code. The applicant has stated that the site will be subdivided if a buyer is interested in developing the retail project. Staff has included provisions for CC&Rs to ensure that common area landscaping and parking areas are maintained asone project and that access drives are available to both parcels. In addition, a condition has been added to both Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Map approvals requiring the retail building to be built either concurrently with or prior to the gas station/carwash uses. City Council Report TPM 97-117 & Appeal of CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 December 1, 1997 Page 8 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Staff has prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project based upon the revised plans and Acoustical Analysis. The attached Initial Study (Attachment G) discusses numerous impact categories and appropriate mitigation measures. Based upon this review, the potential impacts can be mitigated to acceptable levels. Applicable mitigation measures have been included as conditions of approval in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3534 approving CUP 97-005 and DR 97-009, and Resolution No. 3535 recommending approval of TPM 97-117. CITY COUNCIL ALTERNATE ACTIONS The City Council has the discretion to take one of the following actions: Uphold the Planning Commission's decision, approve Tentative Parcel Map 97-117, and direct staffto prepare appropriate Resolutions for consideration at the next meeting; Direct staff to prepare Resolutions modifying the project design; or, · Direct staff to prepare a Resolution denying the request. Associate Planner Attachments A- B- C- D- E- F- G- H- Elizabeth A. B insack Community Development Director Location Map Site Plans and Elevations Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3534 and 3535 August 11, September 22, and November 10, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes Service Station Development Guidelines Applicant's Empirical Data for Findings Negative Declaration/Initial Study Letters of Support ATTACHMENT A LOCATION MAP / /11 I i/ li!,t , , ,l, t"i : ' I ] I ' ' 1-1 \ \ \ /' / / I ~ /? /'x / / \ / / \ / / //%~ // / / I I 'BENNETT n~.c.~'rEc'rs TUSTIN AUTO CENTER ~r.h~l~m ~llh~m~I ~nI .......... 535 EAST ~ S~ET, ~ST~, CALIFO~ , TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 1L__ TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST IVIAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA J · \\ 0 0 TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA I BENNETT ARCHITECTS TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA lBENNETT ]ARCHITECTS TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 'x "xx · [BENNETT 17' k"c~ 'i"t"~ ~-t"~ I Arohil~ F. nlin~etinl Plmmmll · TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA ,/ TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA :lilll v'l x x, TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA ./ ,/ TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 535 EAST MAIN STREET, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA '1 L : ATTACHMENT C PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NOS. 3534 AND 3535 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 3534 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-005 AND DESIGN REVIEW 97-009, AUTHORIZING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A 24-HOUR SELF-SERVE GASOLINE STATION, A FULL-SERVICE CARWASH, A 750 SQUARE FOOT 24-HOURCONVENIENCE STORE, AND A 5,500 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING AT 535 EAST MAIN STREET. The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A, That a proper application for Tentative Parcel Map 97-117, Conditional Use Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009 was filed by Greg Bennett Architects on behalf of the property owners to request authorization for the establishment of a 24-hour self-serve gasoline station, a full- service carwash, a 750 square foot 24-hoUr convenience store, and a 5,500 square foot retail building at 535 East Main Street, more specifically described as Assessor's Parcel No. 401-612-03. B . That the proposed use is allowed within the C2-P Central Commercial - Parking Overlay District, with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. C . The subject property is located within the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area. Pursuant to City Code Section 9299b, the Zoning Administrator has forwarded action on Design Review 97-009 to the Planning Commission for consideration. D · As conditioned, the subject project has been found consistent with the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area Plan. E · That apublic hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application on August 11, 1997 and continued to September 22, 1997 and subsequently renoticed for hearing on November 10, 1997 by the Planning Commission. 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3534 Page 2 F . That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the uses applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, nor be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, as evidenced by the following findings: 1) As conditioned, the proposed use can be accommodated on the subject property, providing for parking, landscaping, on- site circulation and queue length. 2) As conditioned, the use will not negatively affect surrounding properties in that the site design includes screen walls, berms, landscaping and architec- tural enhancements that minimize the visual and aesthetic impacts of the pump island and vehicles stopped for refueling. ... 3) As conditioned, the use will be compatible with the surrounding uses, in that the Newport Avenue frontage includes landscaping, berms and a screen wall and the structures on-site include architec- tural details that strengthen the Newport Avenue theme and improve the gateway to the Old Town area of Tustin. Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Municipal Code, the Commission finds that the location, size, architectural features and general appearance of Design Review 97-009, as conditioned, will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole. In making such findings, the Commission has considered at least the following items: . , Height, bulk and area of buildings. Setbacks and site planning. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No 3534 Page 3 3. Exterior materials and colors. 4. Type and pitch of roofs. · Size and spacing of 'windows, doors and other openings. · Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radiOand television antennae. · LandscaPing, parking area design and traffic circulation. . Location, height and exterior illumination. standards of · Location and appearance of equipment located outside of an enclosed structure. 10. Location and method of refuse storage. 11. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood. 12. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares.. 13. Proposed signage. 14. Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council. That the strict adherence to all design criteria of the adopted Service Station Development Guidelines cannot be satisfied due to the irregular shape and angles of this site. Although the site does not include the "reverse design" (pumps at the rear, 'buildings, at the front) the screen walls, berms, landscaping and architectural details provide amenities'to ensure that the project is visually acceptable from the public right- of-way. In addition, although the service bays partially face onto the street, screening is provided. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3534 Page 4 I . A Negative Declaration has been prepared and certified for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). J. ~That the project has been reviewed 'for consistency with the Air Quality Sub-element of the City of 'Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub-element. Ke That the project has been reviewed for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and it has been determined that dedications of right-of-way at the corner and all radius type driveways are necessary for compliance with the requirements of ADA. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit. 97-005 'and Design Review 97-009 to authorize the establishment of a 24-hour self-serve gasoline station, a full-service carwash, a 750 square foot, 24-hour convenience store, and a 5,500 square foot retail 'building at 535 East Main Street, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A, attached hereto. .~ PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 10th day of November, 1997. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK· Planning Commission Secretary Chairman Pro Tem !0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3534 Page 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I' am the Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3534 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 10th day of November, 1997. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary GENERAL EXHIBIT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9'7-005 AND DESIGN REVIEW 97-009 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 3534 (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped November 10, 1997 on file with the Community Development Department, as herein 'modified, or unless otherwise indicated, as modified by the Community Development Director in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director may also approve subsequent minor modifications to plans, during plan check if such modifications are consistent with provisions of the Tustin City Code or other applicable regulations. (1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.3 The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is.underway within twenty four (24) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. (1) 1.4 Approval of CUP 97-005 and DR 97-009 is contingent upon the applicant and property owners signing and returning an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form as established by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.5 The appliCant shall hold harmless and defend the City of Tustin from all claims and liabilities arising out of a challenge of the City's approva!' of this project. *** 1.6 The 5,500 square foot retail building shall be constructed in the first phase of development. Building permits and construction of said retail building shall occur prior to or concurrently with permits for the gasoline station/carwash use. Certificate of Occupancy for the retail building shall be issued prior to or concurrently with the Certificate of Occupancy for the carwash or gasoline station. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (2) CEQA MITIGATION (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (4) DESIGN REVIEW *** EXCEPTIONS (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENTS (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (7) PC/CC POLICY Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 2 PLAN SUBMITTAL (1) 2.1 At building plan check, submit four (4) sets of plans, two sets of soils reports, structural and energy calculations, specifications and acoustical report. Electrical, mechanical and plumbing plans shall be included. Each building ~requires a separate building permit. Grading ,plans, underground tank removal/installation plans and signage plans shall be submitted separately. (1) 2.2 Ail grading, drainage, vegetation and circulation shall comply with the City of Tustin Grading Manual. All street sections, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, lighting and storm drains 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. (1) 2.3 The building shall comply in all respects with the Building Code, other related codes, City Ordinances, and state and federal laws and regulations. (3) 2.4 Mechanical ventilation shall be provided based on .the number of occupants. (3) 2.5 Provide complete details for accessible paths of travel. throughout the site, including pedestrian circulation from public right-of-way to the buildings and throughout the new structures. The tenant space, parking spaces, entrances to the building, path of travel from the parking area to the building, and sanitary facilities shall be accessible to persons with disabilities. (2) 2.6 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 run-off. This WQMP sha~l 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. The BMPs shall include the following: Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 3 A) Wash racks to be constructed in accordance with the Orange County Sanitation District Guidelines and subject to final review and approval of the District. B) Ail areas used for fuel dispensing to be paved with concrete. All motor fuel dispensing areas to have a canopy structure for weather protection extending over the concrete pad. c) The fuel dispensing area to be graded and constructed so as to prevent drainage flow either through or from the area. The area shall drain to an underground clarifier/sump/tank equipped with a shut-off valve that can stop the further draining of storm water' or spilled materials from'the fuel dispensing area into the street or storm drain system. D) A Spill Contingency Plan shall be prepared which requires immediate clean-up of any fuel spills and provides for notification of responsible agencies, disposal of cleanup materials and documentation. (4) 2.7 The site' will be designed so that all parking area surface run-off is directed to and picked up by the storm drain system. (4) 2.8 The use of water conserving plumbing fixtures throughout the buildings should be considered by the applicant. (5) 2.9 The applicant shall submit Tank Removal Plans to the Orange County Health Care Agency and shall satisfy all Tank Removal Guidelines. If corrective action to address any subsurface contamination is required by the Health Care Agency which requires modification to approved plans, then revised plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. (5) 2.10 Prior to submittal to Building Plancheck, the plans sh'all be'designed to provide that all drive approaches meet current federal ADA requirements. (5) 2.11 Complete the hazardous material questionnaire and the air quality questionnaire and submit to Building Division and the proper agencies. If the answer to any of the questions is "yes", clearances from the Hazardous Material Disclosure Office and from the Air Quality Management District shall be submitted to the Building Division prior to approval. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 4 (5) 2.12 Underground tank removal or installation will require Health Department, Fire Authority, Air Quality/Water Quality Agency and CAL OSHA clearances prior to issuance of a building permit. (5) 2.13 Trash enclosures shall comply with Great Western Reclamation and City of Tustin standards. ~Separate trash enclosures are required of each parcel, or provide covenants for shared use. (2) 2.14 Drainage .from new areas shall be collected and drained to the existing storm drain system. New plumbing fixtures and carwash drains shall be connected to existing sewer systems. Capacity of existing utility systems shall be Calculated and identified on the plans. (5) 2.15 The existing reciprocal access easement between the subject property and the adjacent property to the north (Larwin Square) shall be identified on the site plan and shall be revised as appropriate, consistent with the proposed driveway improvements, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Any changes to the existing easement will require the property owner to execute and record a new reciprocal easement with the property owner of Larwin Square in order to provide for joint access. The form and content of the easement shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Department and the City Attorney. Said easement shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the Final Map approval or issuance of any building permits, whichever occurs first. (5) 2.16 Prior to issuance of any building or grading permits, the applicant shall submit two (2) copies of the Notice of Intent for the NPDES industrial/commercial general permit, as submitted to the State of California Water Resources Control Board (one copy to Community Development Department/Building Division and one to the Public Works Department/Engineering Division). SIGNS (4) 3.1 Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a Master Sign Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Community Development.Department. Complete sign plans shall be submitted which address all proposed wall, directional, and address signs. The sign plans shall include dimensions, materials, colors, and method of illumination. The design, size, location, installation · .and maintenance of said signs shall be in compliance with the Tustin Sign Code. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 5 SITE AND BUILDING CONDITIONS (4) 4.1 Provide exact details for exterior doors and window types on construction plans. (4) 4.2 Ail mechanical and electrical fixtures and equipment shall be adequately and decoratively screened. The screen shall be considered as an element of the overall design of the project and shall either blend with the architectural design of the building or be integrated into the landscape design. A dense type of landscaping could be utilized for screening. (1) 4.3 Ail final colors and materials to be used shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. All exterior treatments shall be coordinated with regard to color, materials and detailing and clearly noted on submitted construction plans and elevations. (4) 4.4 Provide plans and details of all proposed lighting fixtures and a photometric study showing the location and anticipated distribution pattern of light of all proposed fixtures. The fixtures proposed shall be modified to be more decorative in design and consistent with the architecture of the building. 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. (4) 4.5 Ail exposed metal flashing or trim shall be painted to match the building. (1) 4.6 Note on final plans that a six-foot-high chain link fence shall be 'installed around the site prior to building construction stages. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the site for construction vehicles. (1) 4.7 Exterior elevations of the building shall indicate any (4) fixtures or equipment to be located on the roof of the building and equipment heights. The building parapet shall be an integral part of the building design, and shall screen all .roof mounted equipment. All roof- mounted equipment and vents shall be a minimum of six inches below the top of the parapet. (4) 4.8 Ail roof access shall be provided from the inside of the building. Exhibit'A Resolution No. 3534 Page 6 (4) 4.9 No exterior downspouts shall be permitted; all roof drainage shall utilize interior piping, but may have exterior outlets at base of building. (4) 4.10 Six (6) inch continuous concrete curbing shall be used through the parking lot, landscaped areas and adjacent to sidewalks, except where required to satisfy handicap access requirements. (4) 4.11 Roof scuppers shall be installed with a special lip device so that overflow drainage will not stain the walls. (4) 4.12 Indicate the location of all exterior mechanical equipment. Gas and electric meters shall either be enclosed within the building or boxed behind a screen wall designed to be consistent with the main building. (4) 4.13 Outdoor storage and automotive repair is prohibited. A note prohibiting such activities shall be added to the final plans. (4) 4.14 Construction or replacement of all missing or damaged public improvements adjacent to this development will be required. A separate 24" x 36" street improvement plan, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer, will be required. Said plan shall show all existing public improvements along with all new construction to include but not be limited to the following: a) b) c) d) e) f) Curb and gutter Sidewalk/curb ramps Drive aprons (meeting current Federal ADA requirements) Underground utility connections Signing and striping Signing and striping of Class I Bikeway on Newport Avenue In addition, a 24" x 36" reproducible construction area traffic control plan, as prepared by a California Registered Traffic Engineer or Civil Engineer experienced in this type of plan preparation'will be required. (4) 4.15 A grading plan will be required based on the Orange County Surveyor's bench mark datum. (4) 4.16 Additional street right-of-way is required at the corner of Main Street and Centennial Way in the form of a corner cut-off. This shall be adequate for the construction of a new handicap ramp per City Standard No. 124. Additional street right-of-way is also required at the radius type drive aprons per City Standard No. 108E. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 7 A legal description and sketch of the dedication area, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor shall be-provided, along with a copy of the vesting on the property. (4) 4.17 The Newport Avenue driveways shall be restricted to right turn in/out access. Written approval from the adjacent property owner (Larwin Square) is required for' the reconstruction of the common drive apron on newport Avenue. (4) 4.18 Sight distances at each access driveway shall be reviewed for compliance with Orange County EMAStandard Plan 1117, .when landscaping and improvement plans are prepared. (4) 4.19 On-street parking shall continue to be prohibited adjacent to the project site on Newport Avenue, Centennial Way and Main Street. (4) 4.20 The applicant shall submit a Courtyard Plan identifying the location and size of all tables, chairs, benches and other amenities for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of any permits. (4) 4.21 The decorative doors proposed on the detail garage and carwash tunnel entrance and exit shall be a sectional roll-up type with a decorative design, consistent with the architecture of the project, subject to the approval of the Community Development Department. (4) 4.22 A note shall be added to the plans that the inside of the carwash tunnel and the support beams shall be painted to match the exterior walls. (4) 4.23 A decorative cap on the top of the wing walls proposed at the car wash tunnel shall be of a decorative design, consistent with the architecture of the project, subject to the approval of the Community Development Department. (4) 4.24 The decorative Cornice at the building roof eaves shall have a minimum of 12-inches vertical height and 12-inches horizontal width, and are subject to the approval'of the Community Development Department. (1) 4.25 The site plan shall be modified to show the dimension of the driveway on Centennial Way, to be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. (4) 4.26 The design and location of air hoses in the drying area shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Department. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 8 (4) 4.27 The canopy over the carwash gas pumps shall be reduced in height and redesigned to have a pitched roof, consistent with the design of the detail· garage and convenience store, subject to the approval of the 'Community Development Department. The precise location and design of the vacumes and other carwash equipment proposed under the canopy shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Department. LANDSCAPING, GROUNDS AND HARDSCAPE ELEMENTs (1) 5.1' The applicant shall submit for plan check complete detailed landscaping and irrigation plans for all landscaping areas consistent with adopted City of Tustin Landscaping and Irrigation Submittal Requirements and consistent with the landscaping concept plan. Said plans shall be consistent with the existing landscape palette for the center. The applicant shall provide a summary table applying indexing identification to plant materials in their actual location. The plant table shall list botanical and common names, sizes, spacing, actual location and quantity of the plant materials proposed. Show planting and berming details, soil preparation,.staking, etc..The · irrigation plan shall show location and control of backflow prevention devices (screened from view from right-of-way and on-site by shrubs), pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing and coverage. Details for all equipment shall be provided. The plans shall show all property lines on the landscaping and irrigation plan, public right-of-way areas, sidewalk widths, parkway areas, existing landscaping and walls and proposed new wall locations. The Department of Community Development may request minor substitutions of plant materials or request additional sizing or quantity. Note on plans that adequacy of coverage of landscaping and irrigation materials is subject to field inspection at project completion by the Department of Community Development. (7) 5.2 The submitted landscaping, plans at plan check shall reflect the following requirements: A. Shrubs shall be a minimum of 5 gallon size .and shall be spaced a minimum of 8 feet on center when intended as screen planting. B . Ground cover shall be planted between 8 .to 12 inches on center. C , When 1 gallon plant sizes are used, the spacing may vary according to materials used. Exhibit A ResolUtion ~No. 3534 Page 9 D . Ail plant materials shall be installed in a healthy, vigorous condition typical t'o the species. and landscaping must be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. This will include but not be limited to trimming, mowing, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing, regular watering, or replacement of~ diseased or dead plants. (4) 5.3 Ail vehicle headlight glare from all parking areas, gasoline pumps and drying areas shall be adequately screened from view. Plans and sections shall be provided to demonstrate adequate screening, subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department during building plan check. (4) 5.4 Hibiscus shrubs shall'be provided in front of the carwash drying area screen wall, between the trees, and shall be maintained to the height of the wall. (2) 5.5 Vertical growing shrubs shall be planted on the east side of the screen wall in front of the gasoline canopy in naturalized groupings, and shall be allowed to grow. to the height of the wall. *** 5.6 The shrubs along Newport Avenue ~shall be maintained to a height of 6-feet above the Newport Avenue top of curb,-as indicated on the plans. *** 5.7 The landscaped.area in front of the sound walls at the tunnel shall be a minimum 5-feet in width and planted with tall shrubs, vines or small trees. NOISE (5) 6.1 Ail construction operations, including engine warm-up and deliveries of materials and equipment, shall be subject to the provisions of the Tustin 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 Building Official. (5) 6.2 Ail uses and operations on the site shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. Outside public address speakers, telephone bells, car horns, buzzers and similar devices which are audible on adjoining properties are prohibited. Non-compliance with this restriction may be grounds for City initiation of revocation of the use permit. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 10 (5) 6.3 Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Building Official may require that field testing be performed to demonstrate compliance with noise attenuation standards. (5) 6.4 Construction hours shall be clearly posted on the project site to the satisfaction of the Building Official. (2) 6.5 The dryer blower motors and fans shall be remotely located in the equipment room. This reduces the typical dryer noise levels by about 10 dBA. (2) 6.6 The vacuum equipment shall be housed in the equipment room. (2) 6.7 The equipment room must be acoustically insulated, including access door assemblies rated at least STC 35. Equipment room venting should open onto the interior of the wash tunnel, and must use Model "R" Noishield acoustical louvers available from Industrial Acoustics Company or equivalent, as required by the October 9, 1997 Acoustical Analysis. (2) 6.8 Specify the quietest possible air nozzles for the hand drying area. .. (2) 6.9 Any air tools used in the detail garage shall be rated to produce levels no higher than 89 dBA at one meter three feet (3') under full load. (2) 6.10 Ail exterior mechanical equipment, including air conditioners, ice makers, exhaust fans, refrigeration, condensers, etc. shall have a Sound Rating of 8.5 Bels or less, .or a level of 50 dBA at 50 feet or less. (2) 6.11 Compressors, blowers, pumps and other mechanical equipment that does not require exterior locations for heat exchange purposes shall be located in enclosed windowless rooms with acoustically sealed doors. (2) 6.12 Maintenance, changing of fluids, installation of parts, removal of parts, testing, tuning, and similar operations on any vehicle is prohibited. (2) 6.13 The site shall be posted at a speed limit not to exceed 10 mph. Exhibit A ReSolution No. 3534 Page 11 FIRE AUTHORITY (5) 7.1 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Fire Chief evidence of the on-site fire hydrant system and indicate whether public or private. If the system is private, the system shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Chief prior to issuance of building permits. Provisions shall be made by the applicant for-the repair and maintenance of the system in a manner meeting the approval .of the Fire Chief. (5) 7.2 Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map, the applicant shall obtain approval of the Fire Chief of all fire protection access easements and shall dedicate them to the City. The CC&R's shall contain provisions which prohibit obstructions within the fire protection access easement. The approval of the Fire Chief is required~for any modifications such as speed bumps, control gates or other changes within said easement. (5) 7.3 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of preliminary plans for all streets and courts, public or private, from the Fire Chief in consultation with the Manager, Traffic Engineering. The plans shall include the plan view, sectional view, and indicate the width of the street or court, measured flow line to flow line. Ail proposed fire apparatus turnarounds shall be clearly marked when a dead-end street exceeds 150 feet or when other conditions require it. (5) 7.4 Prior tO the issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval from the Fire Chief for improvement plans with fire lanes shown. The plans shall indicate the locations of red curbing and signage. A drawing of the proposed signage with the height, stoke and color of lettering and the contrasting background color shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Chief. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Use and Occupancy, the approved fire lane marking plan shall be installed. The CC&R's shall contain a fire lane map and provisions which prohibit parking in the fire lanes. A method of enforcement shall be included. (5) 7.5 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, 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 Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 12 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 material are to be converted to units of measure in pounds, gallons and cubic feet. (5) 7.6 Prior to the issuance of any building permits for combustible construction, the developer shall submit and obtain the Fire Chief's approval of a letter and plan stating that water for fire fighting purposes and an all weather fire access road shall be in place and operational as required by the Uniform Fire Code before any combustible materials are placed on the site. (5) 7.7 Prior to the issuance of any building permits an Orange County Fire Authority Water Availability form shall be submitted to and approved by the Plan Review Section for the Orange County Fire Authority. If sufficient Water to meet fire flow requirements is not available, an automatic fire extinguishing system shall be installed in each structure in a manner meeting the approval of the Fire Chief. (5) 7.8 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. (5) 7.9 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit plans for review and approval of the Fire Chief. The applicant shall include information on the plans required by the Fire Chief. Contact the Orange County Fire Authority Plans Review Section at (714) 744-00403 for the Fire Safety Architectural Notes to be placed on the plans. '(5) 7.10 Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, all fire hydrants .shall have a "Blue Reflective Pavement Marker" indicating its location on the street or drive per the Orange County Fire Authority Standard and approved by the Fire Chief. On private property, these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the property owner. (5) 7.11 Prior to the installation of any above ground/underground tanks and/or dispensing equipment, plans shall be submitted to the Fire Chief for review and approval. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 13 USE RESTRICTIONS · (1) 8.1 The owners shall be responsible for the daily maintenance and up-keep of the facility,'including but not limited to trash removal, painting, graffiti removal and maintenance of improvements to ensure that the facilities are maintained in a neat and attractive manner. Ail graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours of a complaint being transmitted by the City to the property owner. Failure to maintain said structures and adjacent facilities will be grounds for City enforcement of its Property Maintenance Ordinance, including nuisance abatement procedures. (5) 8.2 The carwash is limited to operate between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. When closed for operation, the. doors to the carwash tunnel shall be shut and the doors to the detail garage closed. (3) 8.3 Ail building locking devices added to the premises shall meet those requirements as set forth in the Building Security Code. (2). 8.4 The drying and detailing of vehicles'shall be confined to the areas designated on the plan. No vehicles shall be detailed outside of the detail building and no vehicles shall be dried outside the designated drying area. (4) 8.5 Storage of any vehicles on-site is prohibited. (4) 8.6 Au[omotive repair is prohibited. FEEs (1)· 9.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits,' payment shall (5) be made of all applicable fees, including but not limited to the following. Payment shall be required based upon those rates in effect at the time of payment and are subject to change. A. Building plancheck and permit fees to the Community Development Department .based on the most current schedule. B , C . Orange County .Fire Authority plan check and inspection fees to the. Community Development Department based upon the most current schedule. New development fees in the amount of $ 0.10 per square foot of floor area to the Community Development Department. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3534 Page 14 D . Transportation System Improvement Program (TSIP), Benefit Area "A" fees in the amount of .$5.53 per square foot of new square floor area of construction or improvements to the'Community Development Department. E , Major thoroughfare and bridge fees in the amount of $2.96 per square foot. of building area to the Tustin Public Works Department. F . Payment of any applicable East orange county water District fees will be required. G . Payment of the Orange County Sanitation District No. 7 sewer connection fees will be required. (1) 9.2 within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject (5) project, the applicant shall, deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $38.00 (thirty-eight dollars) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 3535 A RESOLUTION OF THE PI2INNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 97- 117, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.6-ACRE COMMERCIAL PARCEL INTO TWO NUMBERED PARCELS ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 535 EAST MAIN STREET· The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: a. That Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 97-117 was submitted to the Planning Commission by Greg Bennett Architects on behalf of the property owners for consideration; B · That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held on said application by the Planning Commission on August 11 and September 22, 1997, and renoticed for .a hearing on November 10, 1997 by the Planning Commission; C · That a Negative Declaration has been prepared and certified for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); D · That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan, Subdivision Map Act and Tustin City Codes as it pertains to development of commercial development; E · That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; F . That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; Ge That the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and un-avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat; 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No 3535 Page 2 H . That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements proposed will not conflict- with easement acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision; I . That the design of the.subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems; J. 'The proposed project has been reviewed for conformity with the provisions of the Orange County Congestion Management Program, and it has been determined that the additional traffic generated by~ the proposed project onto the CMP Highway System does not cause the system to exceed the established level of service standards; and, K. n. The proposed, p~oject has been reviewed for conformity with the provisions of the Measure M/Growth Management Program, and it has been determined that the proposed project is exempt from the provisions of Measure "M" in that the estimated project generated traffic does not cause the roadway system to exceed the established level of service standards. That the project has been reviewed for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and it has been determined that dedications of right-of-way at the corner and all. radius type driveways are necessary for compliance with the requirements of ADA. II. The ~Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 97-117, to subdivide a 1.6-acre commercial site into two numbered parcels on the property located at 535 East Main Street, subject to conditions contained in Exhibit A, attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting held on the 10th da~ of November, ~gLIE PONT~OUS ~~~~ Chairman Pro Tam -ELIZABETH A.~ BI~SACK Planning Commission Secretary 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3535 Page 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, California; ~that Resolution No. 3535 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning. Commission, held on the 10th day of November, 1997. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK' Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 97-117 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 3535 GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped November 10, 1997 on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified, or as modified by the Community Development Director in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director may also approve subsequent minor modifications to plans during plan check if suCh modifications are consistent with provisions of the Tustin City Code or other applicable regulations. (1) 1.2 The subject project approval shall become null and void unless a Final Parcel Map is recorded within twenty four (24) months of the date of this Exhibit, unless time extensions are granted. Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. (1) 1.3 Approval of VTPM 97-117 is contingent upon the applicant and property owners signing'and returning an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form as established by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.4 The applicant shall hold harmless and defend the City of Tustin from all claims and liabilities arising out of a challenge of the City's approval of this project. (1) t.5 Prior to sale of the individual parcels, the Subdivider shall record a final map in conformance with the approved tentative map. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (5) 2.1 Preparation and recordation of a Final Parcel Map will be required. (5) 2.2 Prior to City Council approval and recordation of the Final Map, the Subdivider shall execute Subdivision/ Monumentation agreements and furnish Improvement/ Monumentation bonds as required by the City Engineer. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (2) CEQA MITIGATION (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES. (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (7) PC/CC POLICY (4) DESIGN REVIEW (8) MUNICIPAL CODE **** EXCEPTION Exhibit A Resolution No. 3535 Conditions of Approval Page 2 (5) 2.3 In addition to the normal full size plan submittal process, all final development plans including, but not limited to: tract maps, parcel maps, right-of-way maps, record of survey, public works improvements, private infrastructure improvements, final grading plans, and site plans are also required to be submitted to the Public Works Department/Engineering Division in computer aided design and drafting (CADD)'format. The acceptable formats shall be Intergraph DGN or Auto Cadd DWG file format, but in no case less than DXF file format. The City of Tustin CADD conventions shall be followed in preparing plans in CADD, and these guidelines are available from the Engineering Division. The CADD files shall be submitted to the City at the time the plans are approved, and updated CADD files reflecting "as built" conditions shall be submitted once all construction has been completed. The subdivision bonds will not be released until the "as built" CADD files have been submitted to and accepted by the Engineering Division. (5) 2.4 Prior to final map approval: A. Subdivider shall submit a current title report..- B . C . Subdivider shall submit a duplicate mylar of the Final Map, or 8~ inch by 11 inch transparency of each map sheet prior to final map approval and "as built" grading, landscape and improvement plans prior to certificate of acceptance. Subdivider shall conform to all applicable requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. (5) 2.5 Prior to Final Map approval, the Subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of the Notice of Intent for the NPDES industrial/commercial general permit, as submitted to the State of California Water Resources Control Board (one copy to Community Development Department/Building Division and one to the Public Works Department/Engineering Division). (5) 2.6 Ail drive approaches shall meet current federal ADA requirements. 2.7 The Final Map shall provide accurate 'size and name of each parcel. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3535 Conditions of Approval Page 3 DEDICATIONS/RESERVATIONS/EASEMENTS (1) 3.1 The subdivider shall satisfy dedication and/or (2) reservation requirements as applicable, including but not (5) limited to dedication of all required street right-of-way easements, vehicular access rights, sewer easements and water easements defined and approved as to specific location by the City Engineer and other agencies. (5) 3.2 A covenant of easement between Parcels 1 and 2 shall be~ recorded for vehicular and pedestrian access between Parcels 1 and 2, subject to final review and approval by the Community Development Department and the City Attorney. (4) 3.3 The existing reciprocal access easement between the Subject property and the adjacent property to the north (Larwin Square) shall be identified on the Final Map and shall be revised as appropriate, consistent with the proposed driveway improvements, subject to review and approval of the City Engineer.. Any changes to the existing easement will require the property owner to execute and record a new reciprocal easement with the property owner of Larwin Square in order to provide.for joint access. The form and content of the easement shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Department and the City Attorney. Said easement shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the Final Map approval or issuance of any building permits, whichever occurs first. 'CC&R'S (1) 4.1 Prior to approval of the final map, all organizational (3) documents for the project including ~any deed restrictions, covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Department'and City Attorney's Office. Costs for such review shall be borne by the subdivider. A copy of the final documents shall be submitted to the Community Development Department after recordation. CC&R's shall include but not be limited to the following provisions: A, The city shall be included as a party to the CC&R's for enforcement purposes of those CC&R provisions in which the city has interest, as reflected in the following provisions. However, the city shall not be obligated to enforce the CC&R's. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3535 Conditions of Approval Page 4 B . The requirement that association bylaws be established. Co Provisions for effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and facilities including landscaped areas, walls and fences, driveways, sidewalks and courtyards. Do Membership in any Owner's Association shall be inseparable from ownership in individual lots. E · Architectural controls shall be provided and may include but not be limited to provisions regulating exterior finishes, roof materials, walls, signs, awnings, exterior mechanical equipment, television and radio antenna. F . Maintenance standards shall be provided for applicable items listed in Section C above in CC&R's. Examples of maintenance standards are shown below: Ail common area landscaping visible from any public way shall be properly maintained such that they are evenly cut, evenly edged, free of bare or brown spots, debris and weeds. All trees and shrubs shall be trimmed so they do not impede pedestrian traffic along the walkways. Trees shall be pruned so they do not intrude into neighboring properties and shall be maintained so 'they do not have droppings or create other nuisances to neighboring properties. All trees shall also be root pruned to eliminate exposed surface roots and damage to sidewalks, driveways and structures. · Ail driveways, sidewalks and courtyards shall be maintained so that they are safe for users. Significant pavement cracks, pavement ~distress, excessive slab settlement, abrupt vertical variations and debris on travel-ways should be removed or repaired promptly. 3~ Common areas shall be maintained in such a manner as to avoid the reasonable determination of a duly authorized official of the city that a public nuisance has been created by the absence of adequate maintenance such as to be detrimental to public health, Safety, or general welfare. ExhibitA Resolution No. 3535 Conditions of Approval Page 5 Owner's. Association approval of exterior improvements requiring a building permit shall be obtained prior to requesting a building permit from the City of Tustin Community Development Department. All plans for exterior improvements shall conform to requirements set forth by the City and the CC&R's. No amendment to alter, modify, terminate or change the Owner's Association's obligation to maintain the common areas or other CC&R provisions .in which the city has an interest, as noted above, or to alter, modify, terminate or change the city's right to enforce maintenance of the common areas shall be permitted without the prior written approval of the City of Tustin Community Development Department. FEES (1) 5.1 The applicant shall be required to pay all fees identified in Condition No. 9.1 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3534. (1) 5.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the County Clerk, in the amount of $38.00 (thirty-eight dollars) to enable the City to file with the County Clerk, the appropriate environmental documentation pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. If within such forty-eight' (48) hour period, the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the' environmental determination under the provision of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. ATTACHMENT D AUGUST 11, 1997 SEPTEMBER 22, 1997 AND NOVEMBER 10, 1997 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Planning Commission Minutes August !!, 1997 Page 6 Vestina Tentative Parcel MaD 97-117, Conditional Use Permit 97-005 and Desian-Review 97-009. -Location: 535 East Main Street Chairman Mitzman - disclosed that he is'involved with a property on Edinger in the south part of Tustin~ that will have a' similar application as Item ~3. He noted that he is hot the applicant and has.not reviewed the plans. He further stated that he does'not have a conflict and participated in the deliberations.'. Sara J. Pasha!ides, Associate P!aD_ner presented the sta~f 'report~ . The Director - indicated that if the Planning Commission chooses to depart, from the guidelines that were established by the City Council, a varianc=' would not be re_c/ui~ed. She directed the Commission to the last half of Attachment D noting the examples of car washes with visible drying areas. The Public Hearing opened at'8:18 p.m. Linda Jenninas - 350 S. 'B' Street, member of ~he Cultural Resources Advisory Committee, stated her opposition to the design of the si~e at Main Street and Newport Avenue. She re.cfuested that the architecture be redesigned with a more appropriate gateway.for historic Old Town. Ramesh Baiaria, property owner stated'his commitment'to a quality product and that he is pleased with the design. Howard Ferrand, owner stated they had worked on' the project for quite some time and apologized that the site does not a!lowthem to design the project the way the City would like. Stated his belief that the site has been greatly improved since they became owners. Ray Pate!, manager, Tustin Auto Wash stated that customers are happy with the service and ask' when a better facility will be built. Gre~ Bennett, architect, addressed the Commission minutes and thanked staff for their expeditious processing of the project and the City for waiving fees on the project. He summarized the site plan and materials being used for the project. He distributed. information to the Commission and indicated that the car wash would be an economic benefit for the City. He distributed copies of signatures obtained from car wash patrons indicating their support for the. project. He indicated that the ~ruide!ines are 18-22 years old and' that most of the document is no longer applicable. He stated 'that staff's photos are all car washes with gas stations, · _~nt s unlike this project He stated his wish to satisfy his c!~= ' business goals and to create a facility that is economically viable for the future. Planning COmmissiOn Minutes August !1, 1997 Page 7 · ~ Lois Bobak - asked for copies of the documents Mr. Bennett~ · distributed to the Planning Commission for the public record ' Gre~ Bennett - stated that staff has all the documents he ' distributed. He recommended that Condition No. 2.10, A, B, C and D of Resolution 3534'be deleted. He indicated that if the project is ~pproved, with Conditions A, B, C or D, the project will not be built. He displayed a new illustration showing additional landscaping. The Director - indicated that all documents submitted'tonight will 'remain With the City as part of the public record and staff has not had the Opportunity to review what has been ~hbmitted. John DeWitt, president J.E. 'DeWitt, stated that he wil~ not finance the project with the building blocking access.to the gasoline dispensers. · Gre~ Bennett - presented staff, with a complete copy of exhibits presented. Jerry-Miaashi, property.:owner, 335 Centennial 'Way, stated .his concerns with noise since the car wash would be closer to his property. He inquired about the need for the 30 foot. tower on the car wash building. Richard S~. Rockwell, property owner'3!5 Centennial Way, stated his concerns with noise and would like to see mitigation, such as walls or barriers. He indicated that the current plan calls' for the car wash to.be against his back-hedge. Kathy Wei!,' 1702 Summervil!e, stated .that she works across, the 'street from the ca~ wash and the owners have done a beautiful job of l'andscaPing at Newpor~ Avenue-and she would like to See them' continue in that~tr~dition. She stated that the'new proposal that Mr. Bennett displayed addresses her concerns better than the original ~ropoSa~ ~She agreed with Linde Jennings about the proper handling f this ~a.ueway to Old Town and noted that the massiveness of the retail design is ~naDDropriate and is opposed to the configuration, of Dumps'and bay~ She encouraged the Commission to approve the project ~ith City standards because she sees no need for any Variances. She asked if the driveway would be wide enough for people to avoid a right angle turn into'project which would impaSt traffic flow on Newport' Avenue ' Dou~ D~derson, indicated that new commercial curb cuts are proposed that allow for access at higher speeds. The Director -. noted that the Commission has'a memorandum from David Gottlieb, Senior Redeve!oDment_ Project Manager with the City's Redevelopment Agency, ~=spondin~ to a letter that was Planning Commission Minutes August 11, !99~ Page 8 addressed to the Planning Commission related to the economic' benefits of this project. The memorandum identifies that the RDA staff has not done an in-depth fiscal.analysis of the project and · will in' the future if appropriate to do so. The Public Hearing closed at 8:57 p.m.. The Director-- summarized the issues.that the Commission raised. Commissioner-Pontious .- commended the property owners for the upgrades that they have done over the years but stated her concern about the. development due to over intensification of the site. She stated her agreement with staff that the retail building is not in keeping with the area. She stated her concern about driveway access on Newport Avenue'. Commissioner Kozak ~ thanked the property owner and architect for the work they have done on this proposal, and suggested that some changes in the architecture and landscaping might make the project more viable. He suggested extension of the landscaping treatment further down Newport Avenue toward the intersection. He also suggested landscaping or other materials to mitigate the noise concerns of adjacent property owners. Commissioner Davert - commended the property owner for taking the time 'tO present this proposal. He stated that reinvestment in the City is important. He noted that Mr. Bennett mentioned that the existing guidelines do not refer to car'washes. He'stated that car washes are specifically mentioned in the definitions section of the guidelines. He stated his concern with setting a precedence by' departing from t~e guidelines without any real exigent circumstances. He stated his ~elief that the applicant's inflexibility on the design, is due to the desire to continue operations of the current car wash while the new car wash is being built. He stated his concern with approving a design to prese_~-ve the current operation du~ing the period of construction. The Public Hearing opened at 9:08'p.m. · Commissioner Browne - asked if the individuals who signed the document were looking at a model. Gre~ Bennett - stated that they were looking at a rendering. Commissioner Browne - noted that only half of the signatures are residents of Tustin and the rest are from other communities. Gre~ B~nnett - stated that a count was done and .70 percent of the signatures are from Tustin, 20 percent are from the County and the balance were from other cities. Planning~CommiSsion Minutes August 11, 1997 Page 9' Commissioner Browne asked i= - ~ anyone-was committed for the retail space. Grea Bennett - responded that no one is committed to~ the space but they are working, with a bank who has expressed interest in investing and/or purchasing' the site. Commissioner Browne - asked durinH peak period how many cars would simultaneously be in the.odrying area. Grea Bennett - responded at least 18 at any one time but that once that figure is reached, they slow down the queuing. .. · Commissioner Browne-- asked if the reason for this alignment is because Chevron will not help fund the development unless i~ meets these qualifications. John DeWitt - stated that he was associated with Texaco. Gre~ Bennett -"stated that it is physically not possible to alter the plan Hiven the constraints of the site. The' Public HearinH closed at' 9:14 p.m. Chairman Mitzman - stated that' the site is in dire need of redevelopment and does not believe there is' a perfect soluti6n because of the odd shape of the site. .Stated his concern with how the project would appear f~om Newport Avenue. He suggested a computer generated visual impact report be done. He stated his concern.with noise im_maCts and that he would not feel comfortable voting either way on. the project at this'point. Comm'issioner Davert - stated'that he.could not vote on the project due to a lack of information.. .. Commissioner Pontious - concurred with the other .C°mmissioners. She stated that a .car wash is a very noisy operation she has concerns about the office buildings. She stated'that-she would like to deny the project or at the.very least continue the project for more investigation. Commissioner Mitzman - stated that he does not want.to deny the project but that he would like to continue the he,ring. The Director.- summarized the Commission's concerns. She identified that· staff does.not have the capability to generate a photographic simulation of what the on-site operations would inc!ud~. She stated that staff can create schematics consistent with guidelines for 'the applicant and Planning Commission's cohsideratio~. She recommended a 30 day continuance to allow the applicant and staff to work together on those issues. She stated Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1997 Page 10 that the Commission needs concurrence-on the recgrd from the apPlicant.for'the'continuance. Commissioner Browne - stated his concern about'lack of direction to the applicant and that a major disagreement still' exists ~etween staff and the applicant about whether the project should be reversed. Chairman Mitzman - stated that'he is not opposed to the current configuration, but he has hot decided'about the elimination of one tower. Commissioner Pontious - stated that reversing the site would alleviate her concerns with noise and that she would'like to look' at other options. Commissioner Browne - clarified that if the applicant is asked to reverse the configuration, there'wil! be no development.' ~ommissioner Pontious - noted that the Commission cannot, aPprove a project based solely on its economic 9iabi!ity, nor can the Commission grant variatibns based on economics. .- . Commissioner Davert - stated that he feels that there is an artificial barrier with the configuration to be able to continue ooerations during construction. He stated that he believes the s~te would be more flexible without, the existing car wash. . Commissioner Kozak - indicated' that he would !i~e to see comparisons of revenues generated to the City by this project versus another typ. e of use on the'site. 'Chairman Mitzman - asked, the 'City Attorney to clarify what the Commission can and can not do regarding reviewing projects on a financial basis. Lois Bobak - reolied that the Commission .cannot take financial 'matter.s into consideration in determining whether'a variance should be granted. sioner K°zak - noted'that if the site' . . i a moot point and the ed, then the flipping of the site s ! ~Commission should know that. ~~~ - noted that not every use is appr°priate f°r e · ect°rsite She encouraged the Commission to look at the sites identified in the photographic attachment. She noted that some of those Kites, including Texaco and Chevron stations, have the ~!ipped design. She indicated that staff can _nves~igate those sites if that would be of benefit to the'Commission. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 1997 Page 1! Chairman -Mitzman - asked the applicant' if he agrees to the continuance. Grea Bennett - indicated that he has a problem with the direCtion as described by staff He stated that the use has to Stay within the constraints and he will agree with continuance if given better direction. He stated that the guidelines are discretiQnary, and .findings are not necessary to waive a guideline. ~. The Director ~ state, d that it would be appropriate to discuss the issue among the Commissioners and they s~ul~ deve!oD a consensus and direct staff as 'appropriate. - Commissioner Davert - stated that he feels the Commission has a take it or leave it proposal'on the.table and that his primary concern is the view of 'that corner. ' Commissioner Pontious -stated. sh~ .would need a strong reason to grant an exception to the guidelines. Commissioner'Browne' - asked if the applicant stated that car Wash operations would continue while the new car wash is being built. -._ The Public Hearing opened at 9:35 p.m. Grea Bennett - stated that the ~ont'inued operation of the car wash is not a requirement of this development. The Public Hearing closed at 9:42 p.m. . Chairman Mitzman - asked the aop!icant if he had e~ough staff direction to 'agree to the continuation. The D__irect_____o~ - stated that if th~ aoolicant does not ~gree to a continuance, it would be appropriate~r the Commission to request that staff bring back a resolution of denial. The Commission decided to conduct & str~w vote. Four Of the five Commissioners stated that they would be comfortable with the building configuration with modifications. The.Pla~i~q COmmission D'rovided direction on site modifications~' ,,' and contin~ ued the hea~inc to the SeDt~her 22, 1997j_ P I~~~ isslon Meeting. ' The'me~ihg resumed at 9:49 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1997 Page 5 · Conditional Use Permit 97-005, Desian Review 97-009 'Tentative Parcel Map 97-117 (535 East Main Street) (Continued from Planning Commission Meeting of August 11, 1997) On the ad~ice of the City.Attorney, due to his involvement with an application for a gas station on Edinger Avenue, Commissioner Mitzman abstained from this a'ction. Recommendation - That the Planning Commission: 1. Table this item and provide direction to the applicant and staff regarding the outstanding concerns for the project; and 2. Request that the project be re-noticed when all - discretionary applications 'and materials are submitted, outstanding issues resolved, and the final project analyzed. AssOciate Planner, Sara.Pashalides presented the staff report. The Director indicated that a resolution of °approval had been prepared incorporating staff's concerns in the staff report. The noise study which was submitted on September 16, 1997 was not .able to.be reviewed by the City's consultant. The noise.study'created some inconsistencies in the plan that was submitted for the · Commission's consideration and the recommendations 6f the study. There were some modifications now proposed that members of the public did not have the benefit .of considering, particularly the · fact that the roof is proposed to. be removed from the tunnel of the car wash building. 'There are inconsistencies between the noise study and the plan about the size of the sound wall. The sound .wall may require a variance and therefore would need to be noticed so that members of the public will have the ability to review and comment on revised plans. .Commissioner Browne inquired about the time needed by staff to review the noise study and if staff needs additional input from the applicant. · The Director indicated that once the applicant, submits a noise study.that is consistent with the plan, a couple of weeks would be required for review. · The Public Hearing opened at 7:39 p.m. John Kelly, 330 E1 Camino Real stated he has been following this issue in the newspapers and feels that staff is being Wayward and nitpicky. Planning Commissic, iinutes September 22, 1997 Page 6 Travis McWilliams, 328 W. 3rd St. stated that the project is outstanding and would like to see it move alo. ng. Greq Bennett, applicant, stated his appreciation for the concerns of staff and that he is close to a'solution that can.'be supported by staff. He stated that his acoustic engineer was not familiar with Tustin and did not realize the difference between a 6'8" wall and a 7' wall. He has since modified the report to a 6'8" wall so as to not require a variance. He stated that with the elimination of the roof on the car wash, the noise goes straight up thereby not affecting the neighbors. Due to the height of the ~arapet, .the roof cannot be viewed from anywhere On the site or viewed from the second ~evel-of the other two office buildings adjacent to the property. He passed out a copy of his August 14th letter to the Planning Commission. He .stated' that the property cannot be consolidated any further economically and that with the screening, no pumps are visible from the street. Commissioner Davert stated his~ concern with the Commission making an exception to the guidelines and asked the applicant if the the screening hides the pumps from the street. If so, the design could be flipped to comply with the guidelines. Greq Bennett stated that the reverse function will not mathematically fit and physically Can not be done. The Public Hearing closed at 8:03 p.m. Commissioner K0zak stated that' he would like to move project forward tonight. Commissioner Davert stated 'that 'he researched the city. code and findings need to be made. one way or another'and does not feel the Commission has the authority to dismiss the guidelines. Commissioner Pontious stated that in dealing with these issues over the years, she tries to be fair and it is critical that· every applicant be treated equally and. she does not find anything unique about this si[e to allow her to give an exemption to the guidelines. Commissioner Browne stated th'at the site is unique and asked if the project has taken on a personal nature preventing staff and the applicant from coming to an agreement. The Director stated that within three days of the August 11, 1997 PlanDing Commission meeting, staff presented a letter to Mr. Bennett with suggestions. Staff took pictures to try to provide as much direction as possible. Staff asked the aPplicant to submit documents to staff by September 10th. Staff did receive some Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1997 Page 7 documents, but did not receive the noise study. Although Mr. Bennett said that'the noise ~tudy had been Submitted on the 10th, it was not actually received until September.15th which is-the day before-staff reports are .copied for the 'Planning Commission packets. With the late notice, staff was not able to take forward a resolution of approval because the public needed to be notified that a variance was being considered. She stated that .she had identified to Mr. Bennett that staff would bring a status .report back to the Commission; however, Mr. Bennett stated that was not his desire. She also noted that the project is not personal and that staff has not received information to justify a variation from the guidelines and that it would be appropriate for the Commission to make findings to do so. ~re~ Bennett stated that the design guidelines are to be followed whenever feasible and that he wouldrather have the Commission deny the project tonight and move on. Lois Bobak, Deputy City Attorney, stated that many things can constitute evidence of the infeasibility-of meeting the design guidelines and the applicant should present evidence to support those findings. She further stated that 'although Mr. Bennett has stated his opinion that it is financially infeasible, there is no evidence to support that opinion. .- Commissioner Davert stated his concern with departing from the guidelines and that the City Council has authority to change or ignore the guidelines. Commissioner Pontious stated that the Commission needs specifics from the applicant demonstrating the infeasibility. ..Greq Bennett stated that he can generate findings that' are empirical so that the commission would be Compelled to approve the project. Commissioner Pontious stated that there is nothing that requires the applicant to have.three functions on the site and findings need to'be made that no special privilege is being granted in deviating from the guidelines.. .The Director stated that staff can bring a resolution forward for the CommisSion, s consideration but the Commission needs to indicate what they wish included in the resolution. Lois' Bobak? indicatgd that Staff can write findings that it is infeasible but the Commission has to be comfortable that there is evidence in the record to support the findings that staff writes. Plannin~ Commission Minutes · September 22, 1997 Page 8 commissioner Davert stated that he has' no justification to future applicants for mak.ing an exception on. this project. Commissioner Kozak'stated that he does not want to involve the'City Council and' that the Commission needs to give· staff direction to write the findings. · . commissioner Pontious indicated that she is still not comfortable with vehicular 'and pedestrian traffic flow on the site. Commissioner Kozak suggested a condition that requires automobiles exiting the car Wash to exit onto Newport Avenue. Commissioner Pontious stated that it is a great project but not for this site. .Greq Bennett asked Commissioner Davert if findings were Created would he support the project. Commissioner Davert stated he-still has minor issues with design and asked the applicant if it would be better to deny the project tonight. · · Gre~ Bennett stated that he feels that he has Council support but would rather have the' Commission approve the project. · The Director noted that the Commission can continue the item to a date certain or table the item and that staff would'need two weeks to review all sUbmittals from the applicant.. She also stated that since the architecture has changed it may be appropriate to renotice the hearing. Lois Bobak st·ated that Commissioner Davert should indicat'e his concerns with the design tonight so~ that staff may work with the applicant to address them prior to the next meeting. Commissioner ~Davert 'stated his concern with the citY's water quality management plan requirement for the second canopy and asked how that can be ignored.' He also-stated there would be more horn honking than the four times per day indicated. He.noted that the noise.study did nog address the issue of a 24 hour operation. · The Director requeSted'that Mr.· Bennett submit the empirical data he has to support findings. The Commission asked the applicant if tabling the project 'would be alright with him. Gre~ Bennett indicated that tabling for up to 60 days would be fine wi th him. Planning Commission Minutes September 2-2, 1997 Page 9 seconded, to table~% Commissioner Browne ,.,moved, Commissioner Davert the item fo~ four meetings. Mo_ti_on carried 3-1. Vice Chair~ ~  tious was Opposed. _ REGULAR BUSINESS: 5. Status Reoorts Recommendation - Receive and file. Senior Planner, Dan Fox presented the subject report. · Commissioner Davert moved, Commissioner Pontious seconded, to receive and file. Motion carried 5-0. STAFF CONCERNS: · Reoort on Actions taken at the Seotember 15, 1997 City Council Meetinq. The Director reported on the~ subject agenda. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Commissioner Davert Indicated that he found the Second Annual Planning Officials forum informative and thanked staff for the opportunity to attend. Asked staff to check if banners and flags at 17291 Irvine Boulevard are permitted. Commissioner Kozak Thanked staff for the opportunity to attend the Planning Officials ~Forum. Noted that there.was graffiti on a bus bench at E1 Camino Real and First Street. - Noted-that he hoped three dead palm trees at the rear of the property at 333 and 339 E1 Camino Real would be removed during the remodel of that property.. Commissioner pontio~s ' Noted that ivy by the freeway on Nisson Road between Red Hill Avenue and Newport Avenue was'dying. Planning Commissi November 10, 1997 Page.2 Minutes PUBLIC HEARINGS: LVestinq Tentative Parcel MaD 97-117, 97-005 and Desiqn Review 97-009 ICANT: OWNERS: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: Conditional UsePermit~ GREG BENNETT, BENNETT ARCHITECTS HOWARD FERRAND, RAMESHAND REKHA BAJARIA 535 EAST MAIN STREET CENTRAL COMMERCIAL - PARKING OVERLAY (C2-P); TOWN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A ~NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). AUTHORIZATION TO SUBDIVIDE THE SITE INTO TWO LOTS TO CONSTRUCT A SELF-SERVE GASOLINE STATION, FULL SERVICE CARWASH, 750 SQUARE FOOT CONVENIENCE STORE AND A 5,500 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING. Recommendation - That the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3533 approving .the Environmental Determination for the project; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 3534'approving Conditional Use Permit 97- 005 and Design Review 97-009; and, 3. Adopt Resolution No. 3535 recommending that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 97-117. Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Chairman Mitzman abstained from this itenn due to a confiict of interest. Pro Tem Pontious assumed the Chair. The Public.Hearing opened at 7:04 p.m. Greq Bennett, applicant, requested that the hours of operation be changed to read 7:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., eliminating the words "or dusk" from the conditions of approval. He urged the C~mmission for a vote on the project this evening. Howard Ferrand, owner, stated he appreciated Commission approval and thanked them for their support. Linda Jenninqs, 350 South "B" Street, cited a 1991 City sponsored study to develop a revitalization for Old Town Tustin (RUDAT) which identifies the intersection of Main and Newport as an entry enhancement' to Old Town. She does not believe the project corresponds to the RUDAT recommendations and urged the Commission to request a more suitable design. The Public Hearing closed at 7:12 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes November 10, 1997 Page 3~ Commissioner Kozak believes that the project will be a revitalization and renewal of the Newport Avenue corridor and the entrance to Old Town. Commissioner Davert expressed support of the project. Commissioner Pontious believes that the project has made some definite improvements but is not what she would like to see in that · location because of the density. Commissioner Browne moved, Kozak seconded, to approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3533. Motion carried 3-1. Commissioner Pontious opposed. Chairman Mitzman abstained. Commissioner Browne moved, Kozak seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 97-005 and Design Review 97-009 by adopting Resolution No. 3534 modified as follows: First sentence of Condition 8.2, Exhibit A, page 13, shall read, "The carwash is limited to operate between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m." Motion carried 3-1-. Commissioner Pontious opposed. Chairman Mitzman abstained. Commissioner Browne moved, Kozak seconded, to reconm~end that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 97-117 adopting Resolution No. 3535. Motion carried 3-1. Commissioner Pontious opposed. Chairman Mitzman abstained. irman Mitzman resumed the chair. · APPeal of Conditional Use Permit 97-014 and Design Review 97-023 APPELLANT: APPLICANT/ OWNER: LOCAT I ON: ZONING: ENV I RONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: MARY L. RIVAS CINDY DALRYMPLE 340 WEST 2ND STREET SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-I), CULTURAL RESOURCES OVERLAY THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (SECTION 15301, CLASS 1) PURSUANT TO .THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. APPEAL THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S APPROVAL OF THE CONVERSION OF ANEXISTINGTWO-STORY DETACHED GARAGE INTO A GUEST HOUSE AND TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY GARAGE ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE. ATTACHMENT E SERVICE STATION DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES XiI. SERVICE STATION D-_~LOPF. ER~T GUIDELIh~ES ' .· A. Pol icy · The City Co~nci! of the city of Tustin recognizes the vehicle service · station as an e'ssential service to the .public. The location and desi~ · · 'of service stations shall be such as to provide un aesthetic amenity, free from hazards and urban~ blight, in addition to being a service to the .. public. A use De-~mit shall, therefore, be required .for any service station, self-serve station, drive-through convenience outlet, or related 'facilities ~nd operations, to assure compatability with the surrounding area. · B. Definition · !. Service Station shall mean an attended occupancy which primarily pro- vides for the sale of motor fuels; but also supplies the servicing and operations incidental to motor vehicles rated at one ~n~ one-half (1 1/2) tons or less. These i=ncidenta! services include the retail sale of petroleum products ~n~ automotive accessories; automobile washLng (by h~nd); w~xLng ~nd ?olishing of automobile~; the sa!e·-and '- -repair of tires (excluding recapp.'.~ng)~ battery service; cleaning and flushing of radiators (exc!ud/-ng steam c!e~ning and repair): ~nd-the installation of accessory co~onents. 'Also, the following operations are permitted if conducted within a b~i!ding: lubrication of motor . -vehicles (! 1/2 to~s or les's): br~ka sea-vice limited to servicing and _~_~iacement of brake cylinders 'a~d brake shoes7 wheel balanci'ng; and the testing', adjustment, and replac'ement of carburetors, coils, condensers, distributor caps, fan belts, ~filters, generators, points, rotors, spark plugs, voitage regulators, water hoses, and wiring. The perfor-' mance of mLnor emergency repairs is allowed for vehicles of one and one-half (! 1/2) tons or less. · .: 2. .. Self-Ser~e Station sha!i mean an occu?ancy. ~ich primarily-provides · · for the self-dispensing of motor fuels, and may 'also include automatic · . car washing, but excludes the servicing and.repair or maintenance of vehicles. · 3. Drive-throuch Convenience Outlet shall mea.n an occupancy which pri- marily provides for the sale of food items with the incidental sale of motor fuels. C. Operational Conditions . .. 1'. The operation and display of' merchandise shall be within an approved structure, except those direct-ly required for the dispensing Of gasoline, oil, and water ~nd air. 2. The storage of pe_~nanently disabled, junk, or wrecked automobiles shall not be oermitted. Further, no used Or discarded automotive 'parts-or equ!p~.-~-nt may 'be located outside of the build~_ng except within the designated trash storac, e area. · 3. Storage or parking of buses and t_~ucks or similar vehicles is pro- hibited, except tow trucks, pick-up trucks, ~nd small' vans incide._ntal to. the service station uke. The storage of rental trailers is per- o o mitted, provided said trailers .are adequately screened from view and said storage or rental trailers is specifically co~ered in the use .. · Detroit. 4. Parking and advertising of vehicles for sale or lease is prohibit.ed. D._ Development Criteria 1. New deve!op~-m_nts and substantially modified existing sites shall be . .designed so as to provide interior traffic circulation and non-interference · '- ' =~ . ic suggested design is ill ustra, ted with-through ~raf~_c on a Dub! str. eet, a - by E>~ibit Xii-A. · 2. Parkin9 acco~.-~odations shall be orovided as follows: a'. Service Station - 6 spaces' · - Self-se:r~e S~ation - (gasoline and. oil. only) ' 3 spaces c. Self-se?~-ice Station - (automatic car wash) - 6 spaces plus 2 s6aces d. Drive-through Convenience Outlet - 3 sp. --s plus 1 space for each · · 200 square feet of building area on the site. 3. Accessory buildings- for t~he storage of ac'cessory, goods to be sold at retail on the site, such as tires, tubes, waxes, lubricants, etc., shall be architecturally harmonious with the design of the main' structure and shall require specific use permit approval. · . . . 4. Trash storage areas, shall be an encldsed ~asonry structure, minimum , six (6)'feet by eight (8) feet. · 5. Lights for illu~natJ~ng the site or to advertise the facility shall be located in such a manner so as to contain all direct rays ~oon the subject property. Fixtu_~s and intensity shall re_c/aire the app. roval of t-he Community Dev. elopment Director. 6. signing ~ha!l be in accordance with the City of Tustin Sign Code (~rdinance No. 684) . 7. ¥~fmum Allowable Height - thi~y-five (35). feet. 8.. ~Mininnnn'B~i!di'ng Site - ten thousand (10,000) square fe. et. ._ . 9. Maximum Lot Coverage - (build~_ngs and stz-uctures) fifty (50) percent · . 10. Minimum 'Lot Width. at Prope~y Line: Co~rner Ldt: One h%undred (100). feet ' · Luterior Lot: One hundred (100) feet 11. Yards and Setbacks: Front Side Rear Frontage on major highway (120' ROW) (measured from cente~!ine) 75' 75' 75' Frontage on primary highway (100' ROW)~ (measured from center!Lne) . . 65' '''65"- 65' Front. age on secon.d, ary highway (80' ROW) (measured from centerlLne) 55' 55' 55' Ali' o~er sites and yards n6t abutting a primar~ or secondary highway: Front .yard: Fifteen (15) feet', unless otherwise indicated on zoning map. '. · Side yard: Twelve (12) feet, ~mless '6therwise indicated on zoning map. P~ar. yard: Twelve (12) feet ... E. De$i .Ch St ~-n dards -. 1. Buildings and plOt plans shall be designed ~nd of such materials as to assure compatLbility with existing or anticipated development in the neighborhood ~-.nd. the t'otal community. 2. Whenever feasible', service Stations shall be designed so as to pre-' clude open bays facing a public street. 3. Whenever' feasible, service stations ~nd self-serve stations shall be o designed for the loCation of se_~vic.e pumps on the rear portion of the . site with drive entrances and exits located at the ~ntrem--~ties of the lot 1Lnes. (See Exhibit-X!I-A). 4. In all inst. ances, traffic flow and stacking ~oom shall be provided to _oreclude interference w~'th Janterna! parking and on a_nd o:~-s~_~e=-' '~ ._ =~-==~-=_=,-=_~ circulation. 5. Perimeter mason.ry walls, 6'8" in height, shall be provided on all interior lot lines abutting~residential land uses. 6. Perimeter and interior, landscaping shall be provided Ln accordance o o · · . with the st~_ndards contained i~u Se~ion XI of these guidelines. · · F. Process and Procedures for Deve!ooment Permit The process ~-.nd procedures for the development, modification, or operation. of a service station, self-serve station, or drive/through convenience o outlet shall be as re_cui~ed for a ,use permit, as. contaLned-Ln Section III of these guidel/_nes. 'r" DR I VE APRON i i SET3)C~: Li N~ SERVICE 3AYS PERIHETER '7' .." :;..' 6" CONCRETE ~CUR.~ STREET TREES PER HAgTER PLAN o. ARTERIAL .--.i.. H I GItWAY CITY ATTACHMENT F APPLICANT'S EMPIRICAL FOR FINDINGS DATA TUSTIN AUTO WASH GUIDELINE JUSTIFICATIONS Fact the City of Tustin has stated that gas stations are an essential service needed within the community have stated this in the guidelines themselves, see City Guidelines. Fact the City of Tustin does not have enough gas stations to serve its driving public based upon national standards of the ratio of drivers vs. gas stations within the city limits. The affect of this under service is dri-cing business to other cities, and costing the city a great deal in sales tax per year, besides making it difficult to shop for gas in the City of Tustin. The existing property is irregular in shape and is not a comer condition property as described in the Service Station Development Guidelines. (Exhibit 11.) The property does not have access on Main Street and therefore does not fit the development criteria for strict adherence to the development guidelines. (See Development Guidelines page 33 through 36 and Exhibit 11 .) The development guidelines do not address retail centers; therefore, they are not applicable when referencing the comer property. o_ The access points along Newport Avenue are restricted by the City Engineer and by the site's physical limitations. (See attached Traffic Report.) The property in question has an easement on the north boundary commonly shared with the Larwin Square and Vons property and does not allow for additional depth of common access required by a reverse functioning gas station facility. As you move away from the north terminus of the north east property line, the easement is not covered beyond the current propoSed plan. The commercial neighbors have been complementary of the proposed development and have signed a letter of support and are not supporting a reverse functioning gas station because they do not wish to have it developed in such a manner. They feel that the buildings themselves screen the gas station, from their point of view. RECEIVED CO~",~'JUNITY DEVELO?~",'IENT BY The proposed screening mitigates the visual and sound impact of the gas station and car wash. (See attached rendering and see sound study) The development guidelines do not include full service car washes. They only consider self-service gas stations with automatic car washes that are not operated by employees. Therefore the guidelines do not apply to the car wash itself. (Per City section XII B 2 Service Station Guidelines, Exhibit 1.) Fact the development guidelines are merely guidelines, and are not meant to be required for an approval. ' Fact within the City Zoning Ordinance 9272 v z (7) ( c ), (Exhibit 5), there is no obligation that the Planning Commission adhere to the guidelines, they are only to be considered. (See Section 9272 c 14, 15), and Exhibit V.) The property in its current blighted condition regularly makes a profit for the property owner and will continue to do so for years to come with no changes. The Orange County Register recently voted this location the second best car wash in Orange County, not because of its attractive facilities but because of the quality service and good business practices of its owner. The Tustin Car Wash has built up a good reputation and its customers are anticipating an attractive replacement. Strict adherence to a reverse functioning gas station will deny the public Of a new facility. The proposed development includes three functions. This site is large (1.75 AC) enough to allow for three functions to occur as evidenced by the lack of a variance or exceptions to any code as proposed. Fact. This property is too large for a gas station project, it thereby reduces the applicability of the design guidelines in this instance. The design guidelines have specific limits. All of the specific limits and guidelines have been met in this project. The specific one in question, Design Standard E 3 states, "whenever feasible, service stations and self service stations shall be designed for the location of the service pumps on the rear portion of the site with the drive entrances and exits located at the extremities of the lot lines." (See Exhibit XII - A.) "Whenever feasible", in this instance it is not feasible because of many factors, including, physical limitation (The large area of the site), site limitations, traffic limitation, public health and safety limitation (crossing bike lane and sidewalk in such a manner to complY with the City Traffic Engineer's requirements), easement limitation, access to Main Street limitation (no driveway on Main Street, size and shape limitation, economic limitation, financial limitation associated with site development retail, and tenant limitation (The bank as a tenant will not commit to the site, and the gas companies will not commit to the site.) The design standards are substantially imposed to mitigate the affect of pumps facing the street. The illustration in the Service Station Guidelines of a reverse functioning gas station is used to show one method of screening the pumps from view from the street, but clearly from some standpoints, the view of the pumps and the view into the car wash is exacerbated. Our project complies with the spirit of the guideline and screens the facility with berms and landscaping, thereby avoiding the inherent shortcomings of the reverse functioning service station. Clearly, our project mitigates these concerns by screening the pumps from both the intersection of Main Street and the Newport Avenue side. Our pumps are at a greater distance from the intersection of Main and Newport than a reverse functioning station at that location would be. The pumps are 67 feet from Newport and 212 feet from the intersection of Main and Newport. The amount of landscaping and screening will entirely mitigate this concern. Only two people from the general public have voiced their concern, 2,800 people have voiced their support. These are the strong compelling facts in this case. All of the neighbors have reviewed the visual impacts of the property and have voiced no concern about the look or the location. In fact they have voiced their support, the Vons and Larwin property owners letter of support is on file with the City Staff. The two property owners to the west are concerned about sound, as we are. Accordingly, the sound report has been prepared and the sound requirements can be met in compliance with the sound ordinance of the.City. Fact. The existing gas station at the southeast corner of Nisson Road and Redhill is not as physically desirable in comparison to the proposed courtyard at the corner of Newport and Main. (See proposed Plans 1 through 12). Also, please visit the location above to compare the sites and architecture and see what visual impact our site would have. Fact. To not support this project will adversely affect the neighbors' property values. This project will infuse approximately, $3.9 million dollars that will help strengthen the property values of the neighbors. The neighbors' properties would be adversely affected if the project is not approved because they will be forced to look at the existing car wash with a lack of quality features and an old facility' The current location of the car wash does not help the community and is a negative asset for the public. · The proposed project strengthens and creates a gateway to Old Town Tustin without any hardship to the community. Fact this project sends a message to the property owners in the Olde Town Project area that the Planning Commission is trying make an effort to mitigate negative properties by helping them redevelop. For the Planning Commission not to follow the staffs recommendation of approval would be devastating to the owners of other properties in Tustin and would send the wrong message to the public that has little or no concern for the need for reverse functioning service stations, as expressed by 2,800 signatures in support. The public is clearly more interested in a better visual environment, this project meets their needs. Fact the courtyard with its amenities as proposed at the corner of Main Street and Newport is more attractive than any reverse functioning service station in Tustin. Please see the locations at the southeast corner of Redhill and Nission a new facility and the station at the southeast corner of Yorba and 17th Street) These two stations do not compare in any way to the proposed project architecture and features, or by screening the pumps for public view. The courtyard and fountain itself and'the amount of public space being devoted towards a quality overall appearance are sufficient grounds and are justifications alone to merit this C. U. P. without any other consideration. Denying the project will adversely affect the general welfare of the community as stated in 9271 v z (7) ( c ), item a (1). See the attached City code sections. Fact. The service station guidelines state under XII A Policy, first sentence, "The City Council of the City of Tustin recognized the vehicle service station as a essential service to the public." Fact. "Essential" is the preemptive statement and the essential services are necessary for the public. This is that facility. Fact. California Government Code Section 65906 and the city of Tustin code requires the City to make two positive findings to approve a variance. (Exhibit VI.) Fact. The City does not require the Planning Commission or City Council'to make finding of fact to grant excePtion to a design guideline. There are no ordinances or stipulations obligating the Planning Commission to adhere to any or all guidelines. All you must do is consider them, which you have done. This project is not a variance project therefore no findings of fact are required at all. No precedent will be set because there are justifications for this project at this location without any variances. Routinely, Staff has not considered the guidelines over the past 22 years, on many gas stations in the City. (See Staff reports of the following locations, wherein in many instances there were no discussions about the guidelines or little discussion if any. Please ask the Staff to provide you with copies of the following reports: Project at the northeast corner of Newport and Irvine- Chevron, Project at northeast corner of E1 Camino and Redhill- Shell, and Project at Card Lock Fuel Station behind Petco on the east side of Newport Avenue. We have reviewed these reports in microfilm and found that a lack of adherence to the guidelines runs deep within Staff's consistency with respect to these issues. Please also drive north bound from the 5 Freeway to Irvine Blvd. on Jamboree and look at the gas pumps clearly visible from the north and south bound lanes of Jamboree, which is a quality facility and has a reverse functioning layout, but does not screen the pumps from the street as well as our proposed facility would. Clearly, the Jamboree project was vacant prior to construction, but does not screen from view the pumps along the right-a-way. We are not concerned about the lack of consistency with the City guidelines, we are merely pointing out the Planning Commission's ability to make their decision without adhering to these guidelines in all instances as supported by the history on these issues. See Exhibit E of a facility that has a reverse functioning plan that physically does not work because of the spatial and site requirement of a tunnel along Newport Avenue. Also see the Staff's 8 1/2 x 11 in. sketch that similarly does not function. (See Exhibit Attachment F, prepared by Staff.) and see the 24'x36" plan provided by the architects office. The existing Tustin Car Wash, because it was built thirty-five years ago, currently meets only one out of sixteen design guidelines, the parking requirements. The propOsed new Tustin Car Wash meets fifteen out of the sixteen design guidelines. The current facility also does not operate under a conditional use permit that requires it to mitigate concerns such as noise. By approving this project the facility will be required to operate in conformance with Tustin's regulations. The majority of new commercial projects include just 10% landscaping, ours has 30 %, 82 trees, enough to classify this property as an arboretum. Current property tax is approximately $14,000 per year. Future property taxes will be approximately $62,000 per year, which is a tax increment of $48,000 per year and $480,000 for the first ten years, directed to RDA and more than $1,000,000 after twenty years. This is a large number for a small project. In addition, significant combined sales taxes from the Centers revenue generated from the combined uses including retail, gasoline, etc. would be approximately $78,000 per year direct sales tax benefit to the City. The combination of taxes directed to the City would be $126,000 per year and every year there after. Fact the pumps at the present location are 18 feet from Main Street and 30 feet from Newport compared to 255 feet from Main Street with proper screening. Not hard to see why the public asked the question time after time why is this project a problem. The choice is clear 25 'more years of the present location and use, or the proposed project that will benefit all without exception. The property is not deep enough going from Newport to the west to allow for two functions t° occur. See staff solution. There are some 6,600 gas stations in our state, and few if any would chose to set a station removed from the street and the traffic. The gas companies all agree that the project would fail in a reverse style setup and will not agree to any help or financing. In these times, if you can not get financing, you do not build. Within the mission statement of the Redevelopment Agency of Tustin one goal is clearly to bring about change to properties that have blight and or do not fit within the community standards. This property in its present condition ' is blighted and needs to be improved. XiI. SERVICE STATION DE-VELOP.~._Eh~ GUIDELI!~S' ' A. Policy The City Council of the city of Tustin recognizes the vehicle service · station as an essential service to the public. The location and 'desicn · . 'of service stations shall be such as to provide an aesthetic ~menity, free from hazards and urban blight, in add/tion to being a ser~'ice to the public. A use pe_~mit shall, therefore, be re?uired for ~.ny service station, self-serve station, drive-t2urough convenience outlet, or related facilities ~nd operations, to assure compatabi!ity with the surrounding area. Definition '. !. Service Station shall mean an attended occupancy ~;nich pri=ari!y pro- rides for '~he sale of motor fuels; but also supplies the servicing and operations incid~_nta! to motor vehicles rated at one ~.n~ .one-half (1 1/2) tons or less. These Lncidenta! se_~-~ices include tn=' .-=~=~!' sale of petroleum products a_n~- automotive accessories; auton~bi!e ._ washLn9 (by h~nd); w~xLng and polishing of automobiles; the sale -repair of tires (excluding recapp.'.~ng)~ batte_~y service; c!e~nLng ~nd flushing of radiators (exc!udLng s'tea_~ c!e~uing ~nd repair); ~.nd-':~ -,: installation of accessory components. 'Also, the fo!!owJ_ng operations . are permitted if conducted within a buildLng: lubrication of motor -vehicles (! 1/2 to~s or les's); br~ke service limited to ser~icLng --~_~iacem~nt of brake cylLnders 'a~nd br~ke shoes% wheel balancing; ~.nd tlne testing, adjustment, and replacement of carburetors, coils, condensers, d/stributor caps, fan belts, filters, generators, poLnts, rotors, spark plugs, voltage regulators, water hoses, ~nd wirLng. The parlor- · mance of mLnor emergency repairs is allowed for vehicles of one a_nd one-half (! 1/2) tons Or less. · 2. ...Self-Serve Station she!/ mean an occupa,ncy. ',~ich DrL,~ilv provides · · for the se!f-dispensLng of motor fuels, and may also ~nc!ude automatic · . . % car 'washLng, b~t excludes the sez-vickng and.repair or maLnten~nce of · vehicles. 3. Drive-throuch Convenience Outlet shall mean ~-n occupancy which pti- mari!y provides for the sale of food items with the incidental sale of motor fuels· C. Operational Conditions · . !. The operation and display of' merchandise, shall be within an approved structure, except those direct-ly required for the dispensing of gasoline, oil, and water ~.nd air. 2. The storage.of pe_~nanent!y ~isabled, j~.k, or wrecked automobiles shall not be permitted. ~arther, no used or discarded automotive · · part~ 'or ecuio,.-~_nt may be located outside of the 'building exce=t -- within the designated trash storage area. 3. Storage or _parking of buses a_nd t~ucks or similar vehicles is pro- . hLbited, except tow trucks, pi~k-up trucks, ~nd small' vans L~.cidenta! . to. the ser%-ice station u~e. The ~torage of rental trailers is Der' -- · . mitted, provided said tr~i!ers are adeqluately screened from view and said storage, or rental trailers is specifically co~ered Lut~in_= use oermit. 4. Parking and adve~isL~.g of vehicles for sale or lease is prohibited. D. Deve!ooment Criteria -- !. New deve!op,-~_nts a,ud substa~tia~_ly modified .existing sites shall be .. designed s° as to provide interior traffic circulation ~nd non-Lnterference with.through traffic on a public "-",- ~=, .. s.-_.e.= a su=g~sted design is illustrated · by EY2,nibit Xii-A. 2. Park/_n9 acco~.-unodations shall be orovided as follows'.- , a:. Ser~-ice Station - 6 spac~_s · · . .. . b. Self-serve Station - (gasoline and-oil only) ' 3 spaces c. Self-service ~ ~' ' _ _ S~a~_on - (auto=~-tic car wash) 6 spaces plus 2 s~aces d. Drive-throuch, Convenience Outlet. - 3 spaces_ plus 1 space ~.or: each 200 scuare feet of ~',':'~'~',',~ area on the site 3. AcceSsory bui!dings for tine store,ce of ac'cessory goods to be sold at retail on the site, su~n as tires, tubes, waxes, lubricants, etc., shall be architecturally harmonious with the design of the main structure : and shall require specific use permit approval. · 4. Trash storage areas, shall be un enc!~sed ~asonry structure, six (6) 'feet by eight (8) feet. · 5. Lights for i!!uminatLn9 ~ne site or to advertise the facility shall be located Lu such a m~--~_ner so as to contain all direct rays ~pon the - .. subje~ property. F~xt ~'u_.-,-~s and 'Lntensity shall re_m.~ire the approval of. the Co~anunity Dev.elo_oment Director· ' .- 6. . Si~m'~ing ~ha!l be -L.-~ accord~,nce with the City of Tustin Si~m'~ Code (~rdLnance No. 684). ' · .- · .' 7. ¥~munn A!!o~-able Height - thi~y-five (35) feet. ' :' .; 8. ~_inimnmm'Bu~!di'ng Site - ten ti~ousa=nd (!0,000) s_=uare re.et. .. 9. Maximum Lot Coverage- (buildLngs ~nd structures) fifty (50) percent' !0. _uJ_nimum ~ot Width at Prope~y LLne: Corner Ldt: One h:~.~.dred (100) feet Interior Lot: One h%mdred (100) feet !!. Yards and Setbacks: Front Side Rear Frontage on major highway (!20' ROW) (maas~ed from cente~!ine) Frontage on primary highway (!00' _ROW) (measured from center!ine) 75' 75' 75' 65' 65' 65' -:. Front.age on second, ary highway (80' POW). (meas ~u~ed from center!~_ne) 55' .55' 55' other sites and yards n6t abutting a primaz-y or secondary highway: Front .yard: Fifteen (15) feet, ~nless otherwise Lndicated on zon".ng map. ' · Side yard: Twe!~'e (12) feet, iun!ess 6the_~ise Lndicated on zoning ma~. -. P~a_r. yard: ~e!'~-e (12) f~t 'E. Desicn Standards · 1. Buildings and plot _O!~nS shall be designed ~nd of such materials as to assure compatibility witch existing or anticipated development in the neighborhood ~nd the total conumunity. 2. W~enever feasible', service stations shall be designed so as to pre- clude open bays facing a public street. 3. W~enever' feasible, service stations and self-serve stations shall be deslgn~d for t~.e location of se_~vic~ pumps on the rear portioh of tl.~e · sire'witch drive entrances and exits located at ~he ~ntremities of ~he lot lines. (See Exh/bit-XII-A). 4. in all instanceS, traffic flow ~nd stacking _~oom shall be provided to _preclude Lnterfere_nce with J-nterna! parkLng ~nd on and o=~.-s~_=e== '~ traffic cir~_,!ation. 5. PerLmeter r.~son.ry walls, 6'8" Ln height, shall be provided on all · interior lot !Lnes abutting' residential land uses. 6. Perimeter and Lnterior !andscaDing shall be provided Ln accordance o . . with the st~.ndards contained ;_~n Se~ion XI of these guidelines. · · .... oc_ss ~nd Procedures -/or Deve!oDment Pe-.~t The process and procedures for tlge development, modification, or i=~ ~ - _ oD__ a ~--0~ of a se_~vice station, self-serve station, or drive-td, nrough convenience outlet shall be as re_cui~ed for a use permit, as contaLned Ln Section iii · of these guide!J_~.as. o . DR I VE APRON · .; ... _; .¢: .,,. : ¢-;- .~ ."~Y:.~: "-;-",-.:,.'~ ;:-" '-C::' .:':'-' "-:. :~'.;.:.:;-:: PAVE~-iEHT~ TRASH ENCLO$ ·f.~.~ ?:..~ ,.; =,~- -~ "';;"~;. ..- '- ~:;' PER I METER 6" CONCRETE CURB STREET TREES PER CITY MASTER PLAN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY EXHIBIT II ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS (PLEASE REFER TO APPENDIX C OF ATTACHMENT G) t i }I ~[ £N~[ D 0.1. fl V ,/ . / K z TuSTIN CITY CODE ZONING 9271vz(7)(c) (c) No signs or other advertising de.vices are permitted beyond those painted on or atTLxed to the pushcart, portable vending device or its canopy. Such signs shall be considered "vehicle signs", and shall be allowed in accordance with Tustin City Codes. Electrified or internally illuminated signs shall be prohibited. (d) Pushcart canopies, awnings or roofs constructed of fabric or other light- transmitting material shall not be backli~ (e) All merchandise shall be maintained on the pushcart or portable vending device. (Ord. No. 1123, Sec. 1, 6-6-94) 9272 DESIGN REVIEW Review ReqUired (1) The City Council finds that poor quality, in the exterior design, development and maintenance of structures, landscaping and general appearance affects the desir- ability of the neighborhood and the community as a whole, and impairs the benefits of both p~tential and existing occupancy of other properties to the detriment of the public health, safety, comfort and ~eneral welfare. (2) The City Council further finds that quality evaluations are necessary to fully accom- plish the purpose of regulations designed to control such matters, since such regula- tions cannot both allow reasonable.latitude for diversity and originality of design and still be speci~c enough' to control all the aspects of the different uses that can ad- versely affect the community. (3) The Community Development Department is hereby established to accomplish the above objectives and shall have the following responsibilities: (a) To provide for the review of building design, site planning and site development in order to protect the increasing value, standards and importance of land and development in the City due to the urbanization of Orange County. Co) To retain and strengthen the unity and order of the visual community. (c) To ensure that new uses and structures enhance their sites and are harmonious with the highest standards of improvements in the surrounding area and total community. (4). In carrying out the functions of design review, consultant services may be utilized as budgeted by the City Council. (Ord. No. 587, Sec. 2) b Scope of Jurisdiction Prior to the issuance of any building permit, including new structures or major exterior alteration or enlargement of ex~sting structures, building to be relocated, and signs to be constructed or modified, the Community Development Director shall approve the site plan, elevations and landscaping for such development. (Ord. No. 587, Sec. 2) c Conditions of Approval The Community Development Director shall approve the submitted plans ff he finds that the location, size, architectural features and general appearance of the proposed development REV: 7-94 LU-2-66.2 · TUSTIN CITY CODE ZONING 927~.c will not impair the orderly and harmonious development .of the area, the present or future development therein, the occupancy thereof, or the community az a whole. In making such findings, the Director shall consider the following items: (1) Height, bulk and area of buildings. (2) Setbacks and site planning. (3) Exterior materials and colors. (4) Type and pitch of roofs. (5) Size and. spacing of windows, doors and other openings. (6). Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television antennas. REV: 7-94 'LU-2-66.3 TUSTIN CITY CODE ZONING 9272c'(7) (7) Landscaping, pa~king area design and traffic circulauion. (8) Location, height and standards of exterior illumunation. ~'J ~) Location and appearance of equipment located outside of an enclosed structure. ~1~%~.~'1) Location and method of refuse storage. · (~%%.(~k'2~ Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures an the neighborhood. ~] ~%~) Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares. ~%~ ~%~D. Proposed signing. (~q~(~J Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council. d Procedures' and Time Limits (1) The Community D~velopment Department shall review all applications for use permit, variance and other proceedings'subject to public hearing before the Planning Commission, and shall render to the Planning Commission a report of its review, observations and recommendation prior to the date of such public hearing. (2) Pertinent information shall be furnished to the. Community Development Department to enable review and evaluation of proposed developments. (3) The decision of the Co~nunity DeveloPment Director in matters of original jurisdiction and those referred to him by the Planning Commission or City Council shall be final, unless appealed in writing as herein provided. (4) Development shall commence within-a period of eighteen months, other- wise, a new evaluation and review shall be required prior to any development~ e Guiding Principles · Implementation of the development preview process relative to external design -shall be guided by the following principles: (1) Individual initiative sha~l be encouraged. Control shall be reduced to the minimum extent possible, while insuring that the goals stated in this Chapter are achieved to the fullest possible extent. (2) Good architectural character is based upon the suitability of a structure for its purposes, upon the appropriate use of sound materials ~nd upon the principles of harmony and proportion in the elements of thestructure. (3) Good architectural character is not, in itself, more costly than poor architectural character and is not dependent upon the particulDr s~yle of o architecture selected. (4) When considering signs, particular attention shall be given to incorporating the design, including colors, of %he sign into the over-all design of the ~ntire development, so as to achieve homogeneous development. (5) Building to be relocated must be previewed as to their compatibility with neighboring structures and with existing or prOPosed structures on the same site. (Ord. No. 587, Sec. 2) TUSTIN CITY CODE ZONING · 9272f f Appeals Appeal of any decision of the Community Development Director may be made by any . person to the Planning Commission pursuant to the following procedures: (1) Within seven(7) days of any decision an appeal may be filed in writing with the Com~uity Development Department stating the reason for said appeal, accompanied by a fee of $30.00, provided, however, that any appeal filed pursuant to this Section by the City Council or~ any member thereof shall not be subject to the requirement of payment of any fee. (2) The Planning Commission shall schedule a hearing of said appeal at a meeting to be held' within thirty (30) days of the filing of such appeal or at Such other time as may be determined by t_he Planning Commission from time to time. (3) The decision of the Planning Commission shall be final unless an appeal is filed with the City Council within1 fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the action taken by the Planning Commission. Appeals to the City Council shall be filed under the same procedures as .other appeals on the Zoning Ordin- ance. (Ord. No. 656, Sec. 2) g Appointment of Development Preview Board of Appeals (1) Number of Members · The Development Preview Board of Appeals shall consist of five (5) members appointed by the City Council. .. -. (2) Terms & Compensation o Board members shall be appointed for two (2) year terms. Compensation for attendance at Board meetings shall be as set by the City Council. (3) Quali fi cations Members, insofar as available, shall be salected from at least three (3) of the following groups: (a) Licensed, Architects (b) Registered Landscape Architects (c) Registe.red Civil Engineer ' (d) Persons associated with the Real Estate or Building Industries having had demonstrated eXPerience in the visual arts. (e) Any other group, the selectee from which the City Council at its discretion determines could significantly contribute to accomplishing the ' stated goals of the Development Preview Appeals Board. ( 4 ) Quo rum Three members shall constitute a quorum for Uhe conduct of business. (5) Officers · A ~hairraa~ shall be selected by the memborship upon call of a Board of Appeals Meeting. P~EV: 1-79 C, OMMUNI []EVELOPMENT _.* ~oliEornia ~overnmen~ ~ode '~e~on ~0~ and ~he Tureen ~i~ ~ode requirem ~'e ~i~ to make ~o pomi¢ive ~ndingm ¢o approve o variance or minor adjumtment. Please answer the followin~ que~¢ion~ to provide evidence in ~uppo~' of the necemmary ~ndingm. Are there special circumstances applicable to the properly/, including size, shape. topography, location or surroundings, l~cr~ t~e sl~-ic~r applicalion o¢ l~e zoning ordinance deprives such properly7 o¢ privileges enjoyed by oCher pro~er"t'ies in the vicinil~/ under identical zoning classi~cation? 2. SPECIAL PP-IVILEGES How would the variance or minor odjustmen% i¢ granted, assure that the adjustment thereby authorized would not constitute a grant o¢ special privileges inconsistent with the limitcndons upon other properties in the viciniIw and zone in which such property is · I hereby acknowledge that all o~ 'the information contained in 'chis sUpplemental applicc~l'ion is, 'to the best cE my knowledge and belie¢, true and correctly represented. I hereby grant the Ci~/ the authority to place a public hearing notice on the property for which the variance or minor adjustment i¢ requested, if required. Land Owner's Signature [])ate Aplblicant's Signature (if different) _~OO Centennial Way, Tustin, California ¢2780 (714) _57_~-_~1z~O FAX (714) ATTACHMENT G NEGATIVE DECLARATION/INITIAL STUDY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (7]4) 573-3]o5 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Title: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 97-117, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-005 AND' DESIGN REVIEW 97-009 Project Location: 535 EAST MAIN STREET Project Description: Project Proponent: 'SUBDIVISION INTO TWO PARCELS, CONSTRUCTION OF SELF-SERVE GASOLIN[ STATION, FULL-SERVE CARWASH, CONVENIENCE STORE, 5,500 SQ.FT. RETAIL BENNETT ARCHITECTS Lead Agency Contact Person: SARA J. PASHALIDES Telephone: (714) 573-2122 The .Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study for the above project in accordance with the City ofTustin's procedures regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, and on the basis of that study hereby finds: That there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. ._ That potential significant effects were identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and agreed to by the applicant that would avoid or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Said Mitigation Measures are included in Attachment A of the Initial Study which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not required. The Initial Study which provides the basis for this determination is attached and is on file at the Community Development Department, City of Tustin. The public is invited to comment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the review period, which begins with the public notice of Negative Declaration and extends for twenty (20) calendar days. Upon review by the Community Development Director, this review period max, be extended if deemed necessary. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS 4:00 P.M. ON Date NOVEMBER 5, 1997 NEGDEC.PM5 3704.A NOVEMBER 25, 1997 Elizabeth A. Binsack Community DevelOpment Director COMMUNITY 'DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way..Tusth:. CA 92780 (714).573-3105 INITIAL STUDY A. BACKGROUND TUSTIN CAR WASH -.RETAIL CENTER Project Title: Lead Agency: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, C_Mifornia 92780' LeadAgency Contact Person: SARA PASHALIDES Phone: (714) 573-3122 Project Location: NORTHWEST CORNER MAIN STREET AND NEWPORT AVENUE Project Sponsor's Name and Address: G&neral Plan Dasignation: Zoning Designation: BENNETT ARCHITECTS 175811RVINE BLVD. #116 TUSTIN, CA 92780 · . COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL CENTRAL COMMERCIAL - PARKING OVERLAY Project Description: TPM 97-117, cUP 97-005 AND DR 97-009; PROPOSED TO SUBDIVIDE INTO TWO LOTS TO CONSTRUCT GAS STATION, CAR WASH, CONVENIENCE MARK~_I'ANU 5,500 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING.. Surrounding Uses: North South RETAIL COMMERCIAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL Other public agencies xvhose approval is required: [] Orange County Fire Authority [] II Orange County Health Care Agency O O South Coast Air Quality Management O District - [] Other East RETAIL COMMERCIAL West CIVIC CENTER ANff' OFFICk City oflrvine City of Santa Ana Orange County EMA ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY The environmental factors i::hecked below would be potentially afl'ected by this project, i~v~51ving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist ~n Section D below. a Land Use and Planning [3 E] Population and Housing ~ [3 Geological Problems [3 []] Water [3 Q Air Quality Q' [3 Transportation & Circulation [3 [3 Biological Resources [3 [3 Energy and Mineral Resources [3 Hazards Noise Public Services Utilities and Service Systems ' Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance Ce DETERMINATION: Oh 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 ,,x-ill be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a signifimnt effect on the environment, there will not be. a ( significant effect in this case because the mitigation mca.rares descn'lxa:l on an attached sheets have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. El E] O. · I find that the 15roposed pi'oject MAY have a si~cant effect on the ~nvironment, and an ENVIRO~NTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effe'ct 1) has been adequately anaI3~ed in an earlier' document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation rheasure's based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potent/ally Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRO~NTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed: · I find that although the proposed project could Imve a significant effect on the' environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects I) 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 cftc. ct in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to app!icable 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. . Print Name ~ FO. J. ~D~...~hta/,'de..~ Title D. I£NVI RONM ENTAI.~ ~MPACTS: · [3 Earlier analyses used: Available for review at: City of Tustin Community Development Department 1. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) , b) c) d) e) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning7 Conflict xdth applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project7 Be .incompatible with existing land uses in the vicinity? Affect agricultural resources or operations? Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established commtmity (including a low-income or minority community)7 2. POPULATION & HOUSING - Would the proposal: . a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or ex'tension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential itnpacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ' b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ~ound failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? 4. ~,VATER - IVould the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runofI?. b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surfa'ce water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen · or turbidity)? d) Cha,~ges in the amount of surface x~ater in any water .body? c) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water' movements? l'otentially ,¥ignificant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact [3 [3 0 0 0 0 '0 E] E] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E] E3 [3 0 Cl. El ~x Chan§c hi thc quantity or ground walcr, s, chhcr through dircct addhiohs or. whhdrawals, or through inlcrccption of an aqui£cr by cuts or cxcavations or through substantial loss of groundwatcr rcchargc capability? g) ^][crcd dircction or ratc ol'llow ol'groundwatcr? h) lmpacL~ to ~roundwatcr qua]it:y? i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater othenvise available for public water supplies? 5. AiR QUALITY - Would the proposal: l'otentinllj~ ImpaCt i Ni.c.~ctmt Mitigmion lncorporc~ted Impact /go Imp("" o 0 El 0 0 0 0 E] a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation?. b) Ex-pose sensitive receptors to pollutan~? c) Alter air movement, moimure, or temperature., or muse any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? TR-&NSPORTATION & CIRCULATION - Wouldthe proposal result in: [3 El O V1 [3 a) Increas~ vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safen- from design features (e.g., sharp curt,es or dangerous intersections) or incompafibl6 uses (e.g., farm equipment)? . c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity ousite or o~ite? e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? f) . Conflicts ~5th adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - WouM the proposal result in impacts to: ai Endangered, threatened or rare spe~es or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, in.sects, animals., and birds? b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? , c) LocalLy designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES - Wouldthe proposal: [3 . [3 E] 0 E] [3 0 El 0 E] 0 0 E] E] E] E] O. 0 0 0 0 0 E~ E] a)- Conflict with adopted cncrgy consen,ation plans? b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inelIicient manner7 c) REsult itl thc loss of availability ora known mincnfi resource that would be of fi~ture value to thc region? 0 0 0 0 0 El . 9. IIAZARDS - Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)7 b) Possible interference with emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health ~z~rd or potential health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,' grass, or trees? 10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in: 11. 12. a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to sc~,ere noise levels? PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government sen,ices in an.v of the following areas: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other government services7 UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? b) Communications systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm water drainage? f) Solid waste disposal? g) Local or regional x~mer supplies? 13. AESTHETICS - I["ouM the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c) Create light or glare? l'olentially ,¥ignificant Impact l'otentially Nign~/Zcant [h~lc.vx Mitigation Incorporated l. ex.~' than Significant Impacl No Impact' 0 0 [2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [2 xu El 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [2] [21 [21 [2] [2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14. CU LTU RA L RESO U RCES - Would the proposal'. a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological re. sources? c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potent/al impact area? 15. RECREATION - Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect e.,dsfing recreational opportunities? 16. MANDATORY FINDI:NGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a). D~s the project have the potential to degrade the qualiLy of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or xxSldlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or artimal commuaity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or artirnal or eliminat6 important exaknples of the major periods of Califorrfla history or prehistory? b) Does the project ha(,e the potential to achieve shori-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, 'environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable7 CCumulatively 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). d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? I~otentiall), .~ignijTcant Impact l~otentinlly .¥i.~ni. ficant Unle.vx 3.litigation Incorporated Lc.rs than Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .o ge EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Please refer to Attachment A for an evaluation of the environmental impacts identified' in section D above. INITSTUD. PM5 · 3702A _ ATTACHMENT A EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 97-117¥ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-005 & DESIGN REVIEW 97-009 TUSTIN CAR WASH BACKGROUND The project site, an approximately 1.6 acre parcel, is located on the northwest corner of Newport Avenue and Main Street. The site is currently developed with a full-service carwash with gasoline sales. All site improvements are proposed, to be removed. Surrounding uses to the site include the Civic Center to the west across Centennial Way, office and retail uses to the north and east across Newport Avenue, and commercial uses across Main Street to the south. The proposed project includes: an 8 pump self-serve gasoline station, a full-service carwash with 6 gasoline pumps, a 750 square foot 24-hour convenience store, and a 5,500 square foot retail building. A Conditional use permit is required to authorize the establishment of the self-service gasoline station, full-service carwash and convenience store, pursuant to Tustin City Code Sections 9233c(c), 9233c(r) and 9233c(aa). A Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the site into two parcels is proposed to locate the 5,500 square foot retail building on Parcel 1 adjacent to Main Street and the service station/convenience store/carwash on Parcel 2 adjacent to Newport Avenue. A Design'Review is proposed to authorize site design, architecture and landscaping for the above noted uses. ._ 1. LAND USE & PLANNING Items a, b, d and e - "No Impact": The subject .property is designated by the General Plan Land Use Map as Community Commercial. The subject property is zoned Central Commercial - Parking Overlay (C2-P) and located within the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area. .The proposed retail use is permitted. The full service carwash, convenience store and self service gas station are allowed within the C-2 Zoning District, with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed project would not result in alterations of present land uses in the vicinity, nor- does it conflict with the General Plan or applicable environmental policies. Item c - "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated..: The site is currently developed with a full. service.carwash which was authorized in 1965 by Conditional Use Permit 65-194. All ~existing site improvements are proposed to. be removed. The existing palm' trees will be relocated and incorporated into the proposed perimeter landscaping. The project includes the Construction of a new full service carwash in a different configuration than currently existing. In addition, an 8-pump self service Attachment A - Evaluation o'f Environmental.Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 2 . gasoline station, a 750 square, foot convenience store and a 5,500 square foot retail building is proposed to be added to the site. The site is located at a prominent intersection within the Town Center Redevelopment Area and is considered a. major gateway to the 01d Town area of the City. A gasoline station. and convenience market may not be the most desirable uses for such.an important site. The City's service station guidelines encourage locating the building, adjacent to the street with the gasoline pumps to the rear of the site, to screen the view of the pump island and'vehicular activity which is typically not very attractive. Screen walls, berms and landscaping have been incorporated intO the site design to screen the view of the gas pumps and vehicle drying area. The architectural design of the carwash building and the retail building includes tower elements, trellis and columns and design details reflective of an Early California theme. The design of the project and proposed amenities include sufficient details to ensure that-the development will not have a negative impact on planned land uses in the vicinity. Sources: Submitted Plans '- · City of Tustin General Plan and Zoning Code Town Center Redevelopment Plan Tustin Community Development Department Service Station Development Guidelines Field observations Mitiqati°n/Monitorinq Required: None required.· P_0PULATION & HOUSIN~ Items a throuqh c - "No Impact": The proposed project is on a site currently developed with-a carwash and is surrounded~by commercial and office development. The proposed development would not result in any direct increase in population in that no additional dwelling units would be Created. This project is proposed to meet the needs of the existing residents and businesses of the community. The project would have no impact on the location, growth, distribution or density of the population in the surrounding area. Attachment. A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts. TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 3 Sources: Submitted Plans City of Tustin General Plan and Zoning Code Field observations Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: None Required. . GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS Items a, d, e and i - "No ImDact": The site is relatively flat in its topographical features. The proposed modifications to the site would involve minor gradin~ activity to prepare the site for the proposed new construction. The site will not be impacted by any landslides, seiche, tsunami, volcanic action, erosion, or subsidence since none of these geologic features are present on-site or in the vicinity. Items b, c, f.throuqh h - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": According to the City of Tustin General Plan there are no Aquist-Priolo zones on or near the site. However, the site is subject to seismic shaking as a result of the site's proximity to regional fault lines such as the Newport-Inglewood fault, as is all of Southern California. Tustin is subject to expansive soils and liquefaction due to the high ground water table in the area. However, common construction practices such as removal and recompaction of the site soil.and remedial grading will mitigate any potential impacts from any existing expansive soils encountered. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: The following mitigation measures would be required to be satisfied prior to issuance of any building permits for the project: a. The applicant would be required to submit a soils report to the Building Division prepared within twelve (12) months prior to Building Permit Plan Check. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 4 · · The applicant would be required to submit grading plans identifying the scope of work at Building Permit Plan Check. In addition, all structures will be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. All work shall be done in conformance with the Uniform Building Code, Grading Code and Grading Manual as required by the Building Official. WATER Items b throuqh i - "No Impact": The subject site is developed as a carwash, and is not located near any standing or moving bodies of water. As a result, the amount of surface water and direction of water movement will not change. Item a - "Potentially Siqnificant Unless Mitiqation Incorporated',: As proposed, the surface areas of the project will drain into the existing storm drain system. It is not .anticipated that this project will Substantially contribute to the drainage flow. However, a Water Quality Management Plan administered by the City of Tustin and the Regional W~ter 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 compliance with the Orange County Sanitation District requirements. The site currently has underground storage tanks that provided gasoline for the existing car wash facility. The applicant proposes to remove the tanks and install new gasoline tanks in a different location on-site. The tank removal process shall be in compliance with the Orange County Health Care Agency requirements. Source: Field Observations Tustin Community Development Department Tustin Public Works Department 'Orange County Sanitation District Orange County Health Care Agency Mitiqation/Monitorinq: The following mitigation measures would be required to be satisfied prior to issuance of any building permits for the project: Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental ImPacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 5 a. B . The applicant shall submit Tank Removal Plans to the Community Development Department and the Orange County Health Care Agency and shall.satisfy all Tank Removal Guidelines. If corrective action to address any subsurface contamination is required by the Health Care Agency which reqUires modification to approved plans, then revised plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 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 run-off. 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. The BMPs .will include the following: .- 1) Wash racks shall be constructed in accordance with the Orange County Sanitation District Guidelines and subject to final review and approval of the District. 2) Ail areas used for fuel dispensing shall be paved with concrete. Ail motor fuel dispensing areas shall have a canopy structure for weather protection extending over the concrete pad. 3) The fuel dispensing area shall be graded and constructed so as to prevent drainage flow either .thrOugh or from the area. The area shall drain to an underground clarifier to prevent spilled materials from entering the storm drain system. 4) A Spill Contingency Plan shall be prepared which requires immediate clean-up of any fuel spills and provides for notification of responsible agencies, disposal of cleanup materials and documentation. ' Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 6 . The site will be designed so that all parking area surface run-off is directed to and picked up by the storm drain system. D . Ail grading and drainage plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City of Tustin's Building Division and the Public Works Department to confirm compliance with Drainage Area Management Plan and Construction Standards for Private Streets, Storm Drains and On-Site Private Improvements prior to construction. E . Ail landscaping irrigation shall be designed to consistent with the City's Landscaping and' Irrigation Guidelines which includes the use of landscaping timing devices to ensure watering efficiency. F . The use of water conserving plumbing fixtures throughout the buildings should be considered by the applicant. AIR QUALITY ._ Items a, c and d - "No Impacts": The proposed project would not result ~in substantial air emission or deterioration of ambient air quality, nor would it alter air movement, moisture, ~temperature or.cause any changes in climate, or create objectional odors. Item b - "Potentially Significant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": The construction of the new structures may result in short term pollutants such as dust particles which will be emitted into the air. Conditions of approval will be required for the project to minimize construction activity dust generated as part of this project. Sources: Submitted Plans Field Observations Tustin Community Development Department Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: The site will be required to comply with grading plan approvals with regard to dust control, which requires the applicant to apply water to the Site as specified in the Grading Code and Grading Manual. This will be monitored by the Building Division when construction commences. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts · TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 '& DR 97-009 Page 7 TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION Items c, d, f and q - "No Impact": The p~oposed project includes construction of a 5,500 square foot retail building, an 8-pump self-serve gasoline service station, a 750 square- foot convenience market and a full-service carwash. Based on the Tustin City Code, a total of 50 parking spaces are required for the entire site, A total of 67 parking spaces are provided. The parking is distributed throughout the site to ensure that each use will be adequately parked in accordance with the City Code. Based on review of plans and additional technical studies, the project will not impact traffic safety, emergency access,, demand for new' parking, pedestrian circulation, or alternative modes of transportation. Items a, b and e - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": The development plans submitted to the City by the applicant for the proposed project reflect the ultimate right-of-way configuration of Newport Avenue and Main Street. The site plan review and traffic analysis performed for this project were also based upon the ultimate configuration of the site. As the site is currently developed with a full-service carwash use, the proposed project will add 1,526 new trip~s per day to the City's circulation system in this area. The City's roadway system, as identiffed in the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) and the City's General Plan Circulation Element, is designed to accommodate traffic associated with the ultimate build-out of the City. Newport Avenue is classified as a Primary(Augmented) arterial in the City's General Plan and in the Orange County MPA}{. At its current configuration of four lanes, Newport Avenue, in the vicinity of this project, .currently carries 24,750 vehicles per day of which 13,680 are in the southbound direction adjacent to this project site. Main Street is classified as a Primary arterial west of Newport Avenue in the · City's General Plan Circulation Element. Main Street currently carries 10,700 vehicles per day. Both Newport Avenue and Main Street have a capacity of 37,500 vehicles per day. Main Street· operates at a' Level of Service "A" and Newport Avenue is at LOS. "B". Centennial Way is a local street currently carrying 6,400 vehicles per day, which operates at LOS "A". Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 8 The site is currently developed With a full-service carwash. Access to the site is provided by two driveways, located on Centennial Way. Implementation of the project will permanently close the most southerly access drive on Centennial Way. Two driveways are proposed from Newport Avenue. The most northerly access from Newport Avenue is an existing joint driveway, however it currently only provides access to the Larwin'Square service vehicles. Landscaping precludes access to the existing car wash. The plan proposes to widen this drive and modify the design, consistent with City standards. A second driveway is proposed along the Newport Avenue frontage, approximately 150 feet north of the Main Street intersection. On-site circulation is designed to permit two-way traffic around the gasoline canopy to permit easy acCess to the pumps and carwash from any of the three entrances. The applicant has indicated that cars exiting the drying area will use Newport Avenue. Landscaped buffer areas have been included in the project design which improve the efficiency of on-site circulation. The applicant has prepared a Traffic Impact Report for the project which was reviewed and accepted by the City of T~stin Engineering Division which is included as Appendix B to this Initial Study. In summary, the project is estimated to generate approximately 1,526 additional vehicle trips per day, of which 65 trips will be generated in the P.M. peak-hour. The anticipated project related traffic volumes can be accommodated within the planned arterial highways and local street systems. It will not significantly affect the Level of Service for Newport Avenue, Main Street or Centennial Way. Analysis indicates that the adjacent streets and intersection will continue to operate at the same Level of Service with project traffic. The subject property is. located within the Transportation Systems Improvement Program (TSIP) Benefit Area A which was established to fund and provide for various circulation improvements to benefit properties within the benefitted area as a result of new development. Based upon the TSIP Program, the applicant would be required to pay applicable fees to mitigate cumulative impacts. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 page 9 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin Community Development Department Tustin Public Works Department Traffic Impact RepOrt, dated 7-25-97, prepared by CAM Engineering Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The following mitigation measures would be required to be satisfied prior to issuance of any building permits for the project: A, The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Engineering Division a separate 24" by 36" street improvement plan, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer, for all construction within the public right-of-way. In addition, a separate 24" by 36" reproducible construction traffic control plan, as prepared by a California Registered Traffic Engineer or Civil Engineer experienced in this type of plan preparation would be required. B ~ The applicant shall be required to pay applieable Transportation System Improvement.Program, Benefit Area A Fees, based upon the current fee schedule in effect at the time building permits are issued. C , Close the existing southern most driveway on Centennial Way due to its close proximity to the intersection. D. ' The Newport Avenue driveways shall be restricted to right turn in/out access. E . F , Sight distanCes at each access driveway shall be reviewed for compliance with Orange County EMA' Standard Plan -1117, When landscaping and improvement pans are prepared. On-street parking shall continue to be restricted adjacent to the project site on Newport Avenue, Main Street and Centennial Way. G. Signage shall be provided where the bicycle lane crosses the proposed driveways, as recommended in the Traffic Study. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 10 . BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Items a-e - "No Impact": The subject site is located within an drban area and is developed with a carwash. The site is free from any unique, rare or endangered species of plant or animal life. There are several mature palm trees which will be preserved and relocated on site. The proposed project would introduce landscape and specimen trees on to the site in conformance with the requirements of the City of Tustin's Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines. All landscaping will be designed, installed, and maintained in accordance with the City's Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines. Source: Field Observations Proposed Developmen~ Plans Mitiqation/Monitorinq: None Required. . ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES Items a and c - "No Impact": The proposed project will not conflict with any adopted conservation plans nor wiI1 it result in the loss of availability of known mineral resource. Item b - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": The proposed project would result in the construction use of materials that are non-renewable. However, the usage will be minimal given the scale of the .project. The proposed project would not result in any "significant" change in the current use of energy given the scale of new development but will require the renewal of services since the site is vacant. The applicant should consult with the various utility companies which would provide service to the development to incorporate energy conserving systems and design features into the project. Sources: Field VerifiCation· Submitted Plans Tustin Community Development'Department Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: Compliance with all provisions of Title 24 shall be required with regard to energy.conservation prior to building permit issuance. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmentat Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005.& DR 97-009 Page 11 9. HAZARDS Items a, b, c and'e - "No Impact": The proposed use would not create conditions that negatively affect human health. The proposed project would not result in significant hazards (i.e. explosion, hazardous materials spill, interference with emergency response plans, etc.) or expose people to existing sources of potential hazards. Item d - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitiqation Incorporated": The site currently contains underground gasoline storage tanks. The applicant will be required to obtain clearance from the Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division prior to issuance of building or grading permits. All mechanical and electrical equipment associated with the facility would comply with Uniform Building and Fire Codes. Sources: Submitted Plans Uniform Building and Fire Codes Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: Ail construction shall be in accordance with applicable Uniform Building and Fire Codes. Such compliance shall be verified durin~ the plan check process prior to the issuance of any building permits. All hazardous materials shall be handled and disposed of in accordance with all Orange County Health Care Agency - Environmental Health Division, and Orange County Fire Authority requirements. 10. NOISE Item b - "No Impact": The proposed project would not expose persons to severe noise levels. The amount of traffic generated by. the project is minimal and will not add significantly to the existing ambient noise. The operation of a car wash will not generate severe noise levels. Item a - "Potentially Siqnificant UnleSs Mitiqation Incorporated": The proposed project would add new. noise sources into the area since the westerly portion of the site is currently vacant. The car wash and necessary equipment will be located within the building proposed adjacent to the westerly property line, in the vicinity of existing offices. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 12 The applicant has prepared an Acoustical Analysis (Appendix C) of the proposed project which was reviewed and accepted by the City's noise consultant. In summary, the project is.estimated to generate a maximum of 8 dBA of noise above the limits established by the City's Noise Ordinance. To ensure compliance with the standards of the Noise Ordinance, several mitigation measures are required. These are identified in the mitigation section below. The development of the project will result in short term construction noise impacts and a long-term increase in the ambient noise levels in and around the project site. Given the existing noise levels in the area generated by vehicles on the surrounding st'reet system the proposed project is not expected to impact the ambient noise levels in the area. All noise sources will be required to conform to the City's Noise Ordinance, which applies to commercial zones at a standard level of 60 dBA, 24 hours per day. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Acoustical Analysis, dated 10-9-97, prepared by Gordon Bricken and Associates .- Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: The following mitigation measures would be required to be satisfied prior to issuance of any building permits for the project: A, Ail noise generated by the proposed development (including mechanical equipment) shall be in accordance with the City of Tustin. Noise Ordinance which, in part, limits noise generation to a maximum of 60 dBA and restricts construction hours, which would be enforced by the Community Development Department and Police Department. B. The car wash "tunnel" will not have a roof. C . The car wash tunnel shall incorporate wing walls at the west side of the tunnel entrance and exit as shown on Exhibit 5 of the Acoustical Analysis. these wing walls shall be equal in height to the height of the tunnel openings and shall' extend beyond the ends of the tunnel far enough to break any line of sight from the tunnel openings to the west property line. .. Attachment A - EvalUation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 13 D. E , F · G· H. I · Je K~ The dryer blower motors and fans shall be. remotely located in the equipment room.. This reduces the' typical dryer noise levels by about 10 dBA. The vacuum equipment shall be housed in the equipment room. The equipment room must be acoustically insulated, including access door assemblies rated at least STC 35. Equipment room venting should open onto the interior of the wash tunnel,and must use Model "R" Noishield acoustical louvers available from Industrial Acoustics Company or equivalent. These measures result in an interior to exterior noise reduction of 23 dBA as shown in Appendix 4, plus an additional 7 dBA of reduction for the. building setback. The total 30 dBA of noise reduction would allow interior noise levels as high as 90 dBA and still provide compliance with the 60 dBA property line noise limit. Erect sound walls six feet, eight inches high (6'- 8") along the north and west property lines of Parcel 2 as shown on Exhibit 5. The remainder of .the common property lines may use .walls six feet (6') high. Specify the quietest possible air nozzles for the hand drying area. Any air tools used in the detail garage shall be rated to produce levels'no higher than 89 dBA at one meter three feet (3') under full load. Ail exterior mechanical equipment, including air conditioners, ice makers, exhaust fans refrigeration .condensers, etc. shall have a Sound Rating of 8.5 Bels or. less, or a level of 50 dBA at 50 feet or less. Compressors, blowers, pumps and other mechanical equipment that does not require exterior locations for heat exchange purposes shall be located in enclosed windowless rooms with acoustically sealed doors. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 14 .~ n . Me Any form of amplified sound exterior to a building or inside an open bay of a building is prohibited. Maintenance, Changing of fluids, installation of parts, removal of parts, testing, tuning, and similar operations on any vehicle, exterior to a building is prohibited. N. The site shall be posted at a speed limit not to exceed 10 mph. O , Each individual tenant shall comply with the noise limits stated in the City's Noise Ordinance. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES Items a throuqh e - "No Impact": It is not expected that the project would create significant demands for additional service on schools, parks, maintenance of public facilities or other governmental service. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: None Required. 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Items a throuqh q - "No Impact": The project site is located within an existing commercial area with all utilities available to the site. Sanitary sewer, storm drain and water capacities required for the project are existing and have been designed to accommodate commercial projects on this parcel, such as the previous service station facility, are therefore adequate to serve the proposed project. The proposed project would not require the need for additional utilities to serve the site. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: None required. Attachment A = Evaluation of Environmental Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 15 ' 13. AESTHETICS Item a "No Impact": The proposed project is not located on a scenic highway nor will it affect a scenic vista. Items b and c - "Potentially Siqnificant unless Mitigation Incorporated":. The proposed project site is located in a highly visible location within the Newport Commercial Corridor, the Town Center Redevelopment. Area and is a gateway to the Old Town area of the City. With such a prominent location, the architectural design, building massing, design details, architectural form and site amenities of the project are very important to the image and appearance of the community. Proposed development plans indicate a modified SpaniSh style architectural theme with stucco walls, multi color S-tile roof, stucco columns and stone building accents. A patio area is proposed on the south side of the carwash building with a courtyard and fountain proposed at the corner of Newport Avenue and Main Street. The architectural style, building massing and roof line are reflective of an Early California theme which is appropr-iate for such a prominent site. The building massing is consistent with the size and scale of the building footprint and site. Architectural details, are included on the buildings to soften the appearance of flat walls through the use of decorative columns, trellis structures, arched wall details, cornice moldings and decorative window and door surrounds. The proposed project will be required to provide adequate lighting which would add new lighting into the area to serve its operations during business hours. All new exterior lighting would comply with the City of Tustin Security Ordinance. Sources: Field VerificatiOn Submitted PlanS Tustin City Code Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The applicant shall provide details of all proposed lighting fixtures and a photometric study showing the location and anticipated distribution pattern of light of all proposed fixtures. All new light fixtures shall be consistent with the architecture of the building. Wall mounted fixtures Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental 'Impacts TPM 97-117, CUP 97-005 & DR 97-009 Page 16 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. 4. CULTURAL RESOURCES Item a throuqh d - "No Impact": The proposed project site is not located within the City's Cultural Resources Overlay District, nor are there any identified cultural, historic or archaeological resources identified on or around the site. The project will have no impacts on cultural resources. Source: City of Tustin Historical Resources Survey Tustin Community Development Department Field Verification Submitted Plans Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: None Required. 15. RECREATION Items a and b - "No Impact": Since this project is a commercial development to provide support for residential neighborhoods, there are no impacts on recreation. The project is not located in proximity to recreational facilities and will have no impact on quality of recreation opportunities in the community. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: None Required. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Items a-d - "No Impact": The project will not cause negative impacts to wildlife habitat, nor achieve any short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, nor have impacts which are potentially individually limited but are cumulatively considerable, nor will the project cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. Source: As stated above Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: As stat'ed above. APPENDIX B l ustin Auto 'Cen'[er I raffic Study CAM Engineering Co. 1,3905 Salada Road La Mirada, CA 906,38 0AM ENG EEBING Civil Engineers and Surveyors 13903 Salada Road l_a Mirada. CA 90638 (714) 521-97'79 · Fax (213) 944-2300 CO. Carl A. Mastro July .25, 1997 Gregory D. Bennett Bennett Architects 17581 Irvine Boulevard, suite 116. Tustin, CA 92780 Dear Mr. Bennett: The purpose of this'traffic analysis is to discuss traffic access to the proposed Tustin Auto center, as well as future traffic conditions at the intersection of Newport Avenue and Main Street. Conclusions 1." The pr6posed project has virtually no impact on .t~ traffi© operation of the intersection of Newport Avenue and Main Street. The intersection currently operates at Level of Service A and will continue to do so after the project 'is built in both the morning and evening, peak hours. Specificall'y, the proposed project adds 1.4 percent to the Intersection Capacity Utilization. 2. The project proposes two driveways on Newport Avenue. There is a bike trail on Newport Avenue across these, two proposed driveways. However, very few bikes currently use the' off street bike trail. On a daily basis, only 5 bike riders used the off street bike trail in front of the project based on a 67.5 hour survey over six days. This is approximately 0.5 bikes per hour that use the bike trail, or one bike e'very two hours, or 6 bikes in. 12 hours. 3. Because of the low 'bike ridership on the trail, there will be very little bicycle/vehicle conflicts at the two proposed driveways on Newport Avenue. 4. The proposed access on Newport significantly imProves site access and convenience in that patrons southbound on Newport Avenue will not have to turn right through the intersection of Newport Avenue and Main Street and then turn right onto the Centennial Way. 5. The two driveways on NewPort Avenue clearly have beneficial economic impacts 'to the project. Economic vitality of a site is normally agreed to be a function of location, visibility and accessibility. This site has very poor access without two driveways on Newport Avenue. The economic benefits of the driveways accrue to the city of Tustin accordingly. This is a highly visible corner in the City, and the current use is very dated. 6. The existing environment in Tustin and generally in California, because of it's strict environmental rules and regulations, allows fOr very few appropriately priced properties to support a safely functioning, gas station. It is our belief, that this property is, both from an on site and an off site circulation point of view, superior in its design to a design with only one driveway on Newport Avenue, and is safe from a traffic operations standpoint. 7.~ If there is only one shared driveway on Newport Avenue at the north end of the project, there is a possibility of queueing out of the single driveway back onto Newport Avenue and therefore a second driveway is recommended.' The shared driveway intersects Newport Avenue at ~n acute angle and may occasionally be blocked by large delivery and service truCks. going to the back of Vons. 8. With two driveways on Newport Avenue, on site traffic flow is greatly improved. If there is only one driveway on Newport Avenue, traffic entering the site to go to the gas station or car wash and wishing to exit on Newport. Avenue to go southbound on Newport Avenue will have to double back. See Figures 1 and 7. 9. The two driveways on Newport Avenue are beneficial for .gas tanker trucks as they'deliver gas. Without both NeWport Avenue driveways making a gas delivery will require the tanker truck'to use Centennial Way. 10. Toda~ there are two driveways serving the property on Centennial Way and the driveways are quite close.to each -other. The driveway closest to Main Street is very close to the intersection of Centennial Way and Main Street. The project proposes to consolidate the two driveways by closing the driveway closest to Main Street. Proposed Proi ect The proposed project will be'located on the northwest corner-of Newport Avenue and Main Street. The existing car wash will be replaced with a car wash, gas station with mini-mart, and retail commercial. A site plan for the project is Contained in Figure 1 at the end of this report. The gas station with mini-mart will have 14 fueling positions, 8 used by persons who do not have their car washed, and 6 used by .car wash patrons. The. retail commercial will have 5,500 square feet of floor space. Proiect Traffic Generation Based on the.Institute of Transportation Engineers'Trio Generation manual, 5th Edition (1991) and 5th Edition Supplement (1995), the project will generate an estimated 2,366 trips per day as can be seen in Table 1. The traffic generation rates for the gas station are for a gas station with a mini-mart. Although there are 14 fueling positions, 6 strictly serve' the car wash patrons and their traffic generation is accounted for in the car wash traffic, generation. Table 1 also shows the traffic generation by the existing land uses on the site, and the difference between the existing and future proposed land uses. On.a peak hour basis the proposed project will add an additional 69 inbound, and 65 outbound trips. On a daily basis, the proposed project will add 1,526 trips. Many Of these trips are already on the street and driving by the site anyway because of the nature of the land uses.. : Car wash and gas station 'land uses have a high percentage of what are called pass-by trips. What this means is that a high percentage of the traffic generated by the land use is already on the street and driving.by the facility anyway. Typically a driver buys gas and/or gets a car wash as they are going somewhere, and they choose the gas station or car wash that is along their path they would be traveling any way. It is estimated that at least 20 t° 30 percent of the project traffic will be pass-by trips' No reduction was taken for the pass-by trips in the report. The .report presents a worst case scenario. The Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation manual, 5th Edition, 1991 contains data on pass-by trips. The data are for shopping centers'and is based on floor area. For shopping centers with less than 50,000 square feet of floor area,' the data show' an average weekday evening'peak hour pass-by rate of 55 percent. There is no specific data for a gas station or car wash pass-by trips in the Trip Generation manual . Traffic Distribution The expected traffic distribution for both the existing land uses and the future land uses are shown in Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5. Figures 2 and 3 are the estimated inbound and outbound traffic distributions for the existing land uses. Figures '4 and '5 are the projected ~traffic distributions for the proposed project'. As can be seen in Figures 4 and 5, it is 'estimated that 60 percent of the project's traffic will use Newport Avenue and 40 percent, of the project's traffic will continue to use the Centennial way driveway. This is because the Newport Avenue drivewaYs only serve right turn in and right turn out traffic. Left turns in or out are not possible. The .estimated traffic distribution 'used in~ this traffic analysis is based on a' recent survey of current patrons of the existing car wash. Over 1,000 patrons.were .surveyed and their home addresses indicate the majority live north of the site. Improvements to Traffic Conditions on Cehtennial The project will improve traffic operations on Centennial Way at the project access point. On Centennial Way just north of Main Street the project currently has two driveways side by side. Photograph 1 shows the two driveways. The southern driveway of the two driveways will be eliminated with the proposed project. 4 photograph 1. Two adjacent driveways on Centennial way at project' site. so'uth driveway will be removed as part of project. .. ProDosed Driveway on Newport Avenue A driveway is p~oposed 'on Newport Avenue 225 feet north of Main Street. The 225 feet is measured centerline to centerline. If measured inside of curb to inside of curb it is 190 feet. The spacing of the driveway from the corner meets some agency standard spacing, requirements. Many governmental jurisdictions including CalTrans require 150 feet'measured centerline to ~enterline. However, it does not meet the County of Orange driveway spacing guidelines of 300 feet which are to be obtained when practical. In this case there is not even 300 feet of project frontage on Main Street nor Centennial Way. For the proposed new driveway on Newport Avenue it is approximately centered on the Newport Avenue.project frontage and' is approximately equal distance from Main -Street'and the 'shared Vons driveway. It is not possible to .obtain 300 foot spacing and have a second aCcess point on Newport Avenue. · This driveway will serve only right turns in and right turns out. Left turns are impossible because of the raised median. Space for Deceleration Lane on Newport Avenue Figure 7 shows 'the geometrics in the area where the Newport Avenue driveways are proposed. The number two southbound through lane on Newport Avenue is 12 feet wide and outside of the through lane in what might be termed 'the emergency parking lane there is 11 additional feet. Photograph 2 illustrates the space for a deceleration lane. A deceleration lane can be installed if the City of Tustin wishes to do' ~o. One is not recommended at this time. Photograph 2. Looking southbound on Newport A%enue .adjacent project site. There is room for a deceleration lane if 'it is determined to be needed. ReCommended Siqnaqe for Bike Lane at Pr~ect Driveway · Where the bicycle trail crosses the proposed driveway, signage on the bicycle trail can be similar to.the signage currently on the bike trail at other driveways for consistenCy.. Photograph 3 shows how the driveway into the back of Von's is signed. Photographs 4, 5, and 6 show other possible treatments. Any of these treatments result in a direct and positive assignment of right of way. We recommend the treatment shown in Figure 6. Photograph 4 shows the driveway that crosses the bike trail for the Home Savings of America Bank near Irvine Boulevard. The other project is Tustin Plaza (Spoons, etc.) . Pho~ograph 5 shows the driveway that crosses the bike trail there. Photograph 3. current signage and. striping on Bike Lane (on right) and sidewalk (on left) near site. Photograph 4. Current signage and striping on Bike Lane (on left) and sidewalk (on right) at Home Savings of America building. Photograph 5. · Current signage and' striping on Bike Lane (on right) and sidewalk (on left) at the Tustin Plaza adjacent Spoons Restaurant. Other Driveways That CroSs Same Bike Trail The subject bicycle trail crosses several streets and driveways. Two of the driveways have heavy volumes and are noteworthy. Those two driveways serve Larwin Square. Photograph 6 is of the main entry, to Larwin Square opposite Bryan Avenue.. Photograph 7 is .of the driveway between Bank of America and Burger King. Photograph 6. Current signage and striping on Bike Lane (on left) and sidewalk (on right) at Larwin Square entry-opposite Bryan Avenue. 10 Photograph 7: Current signage and striping on Bike Lane '(on left) and sidewalk (on right) at Larwl-n Square entry' near Bank of America /' Burger King. Bicycle Survez A bicycle and pedestrian survey was made of persons using the off-stre.et bike trail and the sidewalk on the .west side of. Newport Avenue in front of the existing car wash. The results of this' survey are at the end of this report. What that survey showed is that there is very little bicycle activity on the off-street bicycle trail. In 67.5 hours of observation there were a total of 11 northbound bicycles and 22 southbound bicycles, for a total of 33 bicycles on. the bike trail. That 'is 0.5 bicycles per hour. The bicycle survey was conducted ih 'the winter and summer and On both weekdays and weekend days.. The survey showed similar volumes on all daYs surveyed. 11 Probability of.a Vehicle /'Bicycle Encounter Using the 0.5 bikes'per, hour, and' assuming a 12 hour day for the number of hours when bikes use the bike-trail, only 6 bikes per day are expected to use the off-street. bike trail on the west side of Newport Avenue. With Only 6 bikes per day on the bike trail, the probability of a ~ . . bicycle/automobile conflict in the two Newport Avenue driveways is very low. Two Driveways Needed on Newport Avenue With two driveways on Newport Avenue, on site traffic flow is greatly improved as can be seen by'examining Figures 1 and 7.. If there is only one driveway on Newport Avenue, traffic going to the gas station or car wash will have to double back to exit the same driveway they entered if they desire. Two driveways on Newport Avenue allow for greater on site safety'with respect to the lack of mixing created by only one driveway. The two driveways reduCe on-site circulation and significantly expand business potential allowing for the benefit of retail, gas station, and car wash lend'uses. The shared common access point with'the Vons condition along Newport. Avenue is not suitable for. the level of traffic use anticipated at this site. The shared access is at an acute angle, and it leads to a reverse.gas station if another Newport Avenue access is not provided. A reverse gaS station is one'that has the back Of the building adjacent the street rather than opposite the street. Also it sh6uld be noted that occasionally Vons de~ivery and service trucks will preclude ~xiting and entering in the shared common north driveway.. Two driveways on Newport Avenue will reduce the potential effect of vehicles queuing into Newport Avenue. The queueing would occur if those drivers exiting the site block the inbound drivers. Two driveways are beneficial because if there is only one'driveway, then exiting customers would have to re-enter Newport Avenue at an acute angle. Two driveways that are a 'suitable and 'safe distance between each other and between the intersection have a positive environmental benefit. They create a better use while at the same time do not adversely affect the intersection of Main and Newport. 12 Two driveways are beneficial by increasing sight line visibility of the project and allowing for deceleration 'along southbound Newport Avenue once the project is visually identified, allowing for entrance into.the 'second driveway along Newport. Two driveways on Newport Avenue benefit the retailers on Main Street and Centennial Way by reducing the mixing effect of traffic circulating internally.. Approximately 60 percent of the'trips to this site will enter the two driv. eways on Newport - see Figure 5. Since such a large element of the business is a gas station component, the two driveways along Newport will allow for easy and safe access without interference of the general traffic patterns. This is the only southbound gas station along Newport Avenue between Chapman Avenue and E1 Camino Real, a large service area with very few options for the motoring public. Gas Tanker Delivery of Gas Figure 7 illustrates the path a gas tanker truck would use via elongated arrows. It will be noticed that without both Newport Avenue driveways, making a gas delivery will require the tanker to use Centennial Way. The two driveways on Newport Avenue are extremely beneficial for gas. delivery trucks. Eliminating one 6~f the two Newport Avenue driveways creates the need to .circulate on site and exit onto Centennial Way. If gasoline tanker trucks are forced to make a· left-onto Centennial Way the distance between the centennial Way exit and the Main Street and Centennial Way intersection STOP sign is barely sufficient to allow the tanker to clear the northbound Centennial Way lane before stopping for the STOP sign. Further,. the left turn: from Centennial Way to Main Street is not signalized, nor the left turn from Main Street to Centennial Way. Car Wash Drying Space Figure 7 illustrates where 18 cars can be dried without encroaching on any of the internal t~avel paths. Two or three more cars can be accommodated without materially impacting the internal travel paths. 13 Traffic ImDact on NewDort Avenue/Main Street Intersection To assess the traffic impact on the Newport Avenue and Main Street intersection, a morning and evening peak hour traffic count was made and an Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) calculated for existing conditions as well as with the proposed project. The existing counts are contained at the end of this report and the counts are also included in the ICU calculations which are discussed below. To determine the project'added peak hour traffic movement volumes, Tables 2 and 3 were created. These two tables parallel one another. Table 2 is for the proposed project with access to Newport Avenue. Table 3 is for no access to Newport Avenue. Both tables account for the existing and proposed land use traffic generation from Table 1, and utilizes'the traffic distributions contained in Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5. The. tables shows the calculation, of the difference in intersection traffic volumes between the existing project and proposed project. The project added traffic in Tables 2 and 3 is for the evening peak hour. Tables 4 and 5 show the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) calculations for existing traffic, conditions and with the project'traffic added, and this is done for the two cases of the project does and does not have access to Newport Avenue. In Tables 4 and 5 the evening peak hour project generated traffic-has been used for both the morning peak hour and evening peak hour. Although the morning peak hour project traffic is smaller than the evening peak hour, the evening peak hour project volumes will be added to both the morning and evening peak hour intersection traffic' volumes as a worst case analysis. Examination of Tables 4 and 5 shows that the intersection is operating at level of service A today and will continue to do oso after the proposed project is added. .The project adds 1.4 percent to the ICU. 'However, it should be noted that the project has less impact on the intersection if there are two driveways on Newport Avenue. It has been a pleasure to prepare this information for you and the city of Tusti.n. If there are any questions, Or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Respectfully submitted, CAM Engineering Co. Carl Mastro, P.E. RCE 27156 '#2228 15 Taint e 1 Daily T~affic Generation Descriptor Units Quantity Daily Traffic Generated per Unit Daily Traffic Generated Evening Peak Hour Inbound Traffic Generated per Unit Evening Peak'Hour Inbound Traffic Generated Evening PeaE Hour Outbound Traffic Generated per Unit Evening Peak Hour Outbound Traffic Generated ITE Trip Generat i on Code Proposecl Larx~ Uses Existing Land Use Specialty Retait 1,000 Square Feet' 5.5 40.67 224 Service Station with Mini Mart Fueling Positions. 8 162.78 2.81 15 2.12 12 814 6.69 54 6.69 54 845 Car · ~ash Cars Uashed 4OO 2.1 84O 0.1575 63 0.1575 63 [See Note] Total Change (Proposed Minus Existing) 1,526 69 65 NOTE: The InstitUte of Transportation Engineers Traffic Generation manual, Fifth Edition, 1991 and supplemented in February, 1995 suggested the above.traffic generation rates for the [and uses. However, no rate was available for a car wash. The estimate of 2.1 trips per car washed is reasonable since there is one entry and one exit for each car washed plus there are trips for employees and administration. It was assun~cl that 15 percent would bo in the evening peak hour and that half were inbound. l~bte 2 ~ A,,en.e a'd Existirg Lad Use Futwe Prgzsed Lad Use Diff~-~,.= in Vott.~ (Ftro. re Rifts Hain Street ' Ex'istirg Lad Use) lntersecticn Tu'nirg Hov,~,-, ~t · . (~i~ Iz~t tril:S) (~ toter trips) (1~ tvt~t l~il~) (I?R l:oCa[ tril:$) Irt:o.~ ~ Irt::Lrd (Fro~ l;b~e 1) (Fron Tal~e 1) CFr~ Tat~e 1) ' (Fr~n Iai:Re 1) Diff=~ ~e Dif'fere-ce Phs ' Per'c~ ~ture Fer'o~ Votute Perc~ Vol. ure Per'c~ Volt.ne 0 0 0 ~,-ttt=~ 'ama.,.~-t~h~d .~d~t o o o ia~..~ iZ~- ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ o ~o 15 19 0 19 19 saxti:::trd Ri~tSmttt:=~ lhro~ (:0 ~ ~ ~5 -~ 45 7 ~ lhrctah 10 6 0 -6 -6 ~ ~8 ~0 -iR 0 1 1 ~ ~ 10 6 10 1S ? 0 . 1,~sttztrd R~oht 0 0 0 ~~- 0 0 0 · Total ' -21 E2 41 ~ A,,en.e a-d Ex'isz'irg Lad Use Futwe Prq:z:s~ Lad Use Diff,~-~-c.e in Votute (~ Hims Main ~-eer. Existirg Lad Use) Int:ersectim ~ Id:o. rd PH Clab:srd PH Irtzu'd m ~ 1~ I~ · m (~ ~ l~'ii~) (~5 lz~at ~ri~) (I~ ~t ~ri~) ¢~ ~c~:at triI:s) I~ O,r~u-d Irtzu~ (FrmT;tRe 1) (Fr~Tabte 1) (Fr~Tabte 1) (Fr~Tabte 1) Di;f=u~e Diffo-uu~ Pks Dill=e,.= ~a.r~ ~ 0 0 O ~:rttta4nd m;d~t 0 0 0 Ncrtfbcu-dJ~l~' 15 9 15 20 10 0 10 Scufftxzrd lhrc~ 0 0 0 _~h:~-d ekht (:0 ~8 EO 7~ Z.1 o 41 o o o la~a,u, rd 'ihrcu~ 10 6 · 10 13 ., 7, 0 ? ~ 0 0 0 Tetat 5~ 55 114 Table 4 Intestate-tim C4~city Utitizaticn Fa- Existirg a-d Existirg PI. ts project Traffic Ca~ticrs UlT~ ~ A~'~ Dri~.mys fa- Proj~-t Tcstin Ava-La a-d [xistirg Traffic Cm:fiticrs Proj~-t Traffic Existing Ptu; Proj~-t Traffic tct:~ Frm Tabte Ccrditi~'s Main Str~t 2 CPm lrb:x..rd lnters~icn Ptcs ~ Tu"ning ~ ~ c~:it~ votu~e ' v=t~ity Diffa'm:e) Voture Votary · ,. ~ lhro4~ 7 34120 ' 335 lCliG 0.~0¢ 0.238 * 0 0 2~ lC~3 0.109 ~ ~t 0 0 37' 135 0.CD3 0.CrD 0 0 T/' 1~5 0.CI20 0.CrD ~ 1 17120 221 1~ 0.13) * 0.C~ 10 '10 231 187. 0.135 * 0.C~;5 Sazt-tm. rd lhro.~ 2 3~0 ~ ~1 0.272 ' 0.247 19 19 ~5 E:O 0.2iS * 0.~ SoJtt-t=x.rd ~t I 17C0 91 72 0.C1% 0.C~ 7 7 ~ 79 0.C58 0.0~ So..dimrd 1 17120 ~ ~ 0.C21 0.C!57' ' 13 13 ~ 78 0.11~ 0.0~5 * · ~ ~ 2 3iii) 71 241 fi.eR1 0.071 * -6 -6 65 Z~i 0.019 0.C~9 * Easdmrd 1 1703 18 lC0 0.011 * -0JEO 1 1 19 101 0.011 * · ~ ll-ra.gh 2 3~0 179 218 0.e53 * 0.C~ 7 7 185 2;5 0.C55 * 0.055 ?. o o z ~-dm. rd 1 17C0 55 ~1 0.CEG 0.~ * 0 0 55 91 0.CI2G 0.CT:~ x~i~ r,~t7 .uriup. t.~, c~ ~.~t.~,t, o.t~ o.4m o.t~ o.~ Vo[um to C,=~IW Ratlcs wnlcn are ~uu~.~ -, u, · Lee[ of Se~rice A A A A TabEe 5 Inter.erich Cavity Ut.ilimtim For Existirg a"d Exist?g Pt~ Proj~c Traffic C~Sticrs t/lll-13.ff I~crrt gv~n.e Dri~s tcr Project Ttstin Av~qJ) a-d Existirg Traffic Ccrfliticrs Proj~-t T~fic h:t:)Ed FnJ~ Table Main Str~-t Z CPm Irt~ I~im Pt~ O JUra.rd Tuning I~,~, ~ Volum Vol~ity Diffena-~) Existing Pt~s Projm't Traffic Ccr~ticrs Votu~ vot~ity EasdJard Right Easdmrd reft lntecs~im C,X~_ i~ .UtitiRtjm (s.~. of .c. rit.?,t, Votum to Cq:~ity Rat~cs m~m a~e ctrot~ ~nm ~ Leer of SerYice le.ll.i iii [llliillllllill!lll!lilI I~!,.' ~ ~! '!, I · l"i i.'1' /- · i .:1~ .2[ ! : · · / ./ ¢ % . / / / I! I . ' , .I: I: I,.,,iI!. ' I i ill IARCHIT£C'~S · · TUSTIN AUTO CENTER .o Figure 2 Existing Traffic Distribution Inbound 60Z Site 100% 957, 107. 5% 107. Figure 3 EXisting Traffic DistributiOn Outbound ' Site 60% 100% 95%. I0% 57, .-- Figure. 4 Project Traffic Distribution Proposed Driveways - Inbound 25Z Site 357. 407. IOZ 107. I Figure 5 Project Traffic Distribution Proposed Driveways- Outbound 15;{ Site 60Z 35Z 35~. 5Z 30~. 157, i i · . Figure 6 Proposed DrivewaY on Newport Avenue · STOP (s¥) · · .' RIGHT TURN ONLY · (s¥) STOP (Sig.) 20 Feel I I Scale: linch = 20 Feet CAM Engineering Co. 0 ii ~:~.LN:~O ' O.L~V N I.L S EI.L .. ; ..' o ! ..N~ !.2' t: .'~ ... .! · .. . '~. .~. , ....' ~' ,....~- i-. · o - ,,'.. ,,.- ~ ~.".?' "...~ ,..~." '...,...~. · · · · · · , FRL SRD JAN. (~) TUES. 7TH JAN.(2) SCHOOL DAY SUN. 8TH FEB. (3). SAT. 16TH FEB.(4) TUES. 15TH JULY(5) WED. 18 I' H JULY (6) TOTAL HRS. TEST (1) 10.5 HRS. TEST (2) 10.5 HRS, TEST (3) 10 HRS. rEST (4) 10.5 HRS. TEST (5) 13 HRS. TEST (6) 13 HRS. 1997 1997 1997 1997 1997 1997 REVISED 7/17/97 BIKE LANE STUDY NEWPORT & MAIN STREET WEST SIDE OF NEWPORT 535 EAST MAIN STREET TUSTIN CARWASH 7:00 AM - 5:30 PM 7:00 AM - 5:30 PM 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM 7:00 AM - 5:30 PM 7:00 AM - 8:00 PM 7:00 AM - 8:00 PM TEST DATA WEATHER CLEAR CLEAR CLEAR CLEAR SUNNY/HOT SUNNY/HOT BIKES BIKES PED. PED. NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH 4 2 (6) 24 18 (42) · 2 6 (8) 18 23 (41) 0 4 (4) 11 14. (25) I 3 (4) 16 19 (35) 2 2 (4) 21 16 (37) 2 4. (6) 14 19 (33} .oo · AVG. AGE OF BIKERS --BEST GUESS, BASED UPON VISUAL INSPECTION OVER 6 DAYS AND 67,5.. HRS. IS 18'TO 25 YEARS. NOT MANY CHILDREN RIDING DURING TEST PERIOD. INTERSECTION PEAK PERIO0 AND PEAK HOUR TURNXNG MOVEMENT VOLUMES Intersection Name: ~ Avenue (NS) arid Main Street Date Count Taken: 70197 Day of Ueek: Tuesday AM PEAK NT NR NL ST SR SL ET ER EL UT UR UL TOTAL 7:00-7:15 AM 97 0 7 49 7 13 18 42 0 16 0 4 253 7:15-7:30 AM 238 5 50 105 14 26. 21 31 2 79 3 12 586 7:30-7:45 AM 52 8 87 40 45 9 26 0 2 0 0 15 284 7:45-8:00 AM 39 11 62 415 28 0 2 36 7 3 0 12 615 8:00-8:15 AM 6 ' 13 22 366 4 0 22 1~ 7 97 0 17 57'5 8:15-8:30 AM 168 24 30 '0 11 39 18 0 2 0 3 2 297 8:30-8:45 AM 58 0 79 0 0 31 · 26 44 2 53 0 2 295 8:45-9:D0 AM 213 0 2 210 9 0 24 31 1 13 3 10 516 2 HOUR TOTAL 871 61 339 1185 118 118 157 203 23 261 9 74 HourLy TotaLs for Four Consecutive 15 Minute Counts 7:00-8:00 AM 426 24 206 609 94 48 67 109 11 98 3 43 1738 7:15-8:15 AM 335 37 221 926 91 35 71 86 18 179 3 56 2058 7:30-8:30 AM 265 56 201 821 88 48 68 .55 18 100 3 4~ 1769 7:45-8:45 AM 271 4& 193 781 43 70 68 99 18 153 3 33 1780 8:00-9:00 AM . 445 37 133 576 24 70 90 94 12 163 6 31 1681 AM PEAK HOUR 335 37 221 926 91 35 71 86 18 179 3 56 2058 PM PEAK NT NR NL ST. SR SL ET ER EL UT UR UL TOTAL 4:00-4:15 PM 106 69 35 0 1 5 30 24 7 31 1 18 327 4:15-4:30 PM 259 107 41 144 0 15 62 3 6 20 0 . 15 672 4:30-4:45 PM 35 76 53 47 18 3 50 50 2 36 0 18 388 4:45-5:00 PM 0 19 39 191 0 5 64 47 20 0 1 30 416 '5:00-5:15 PM 284 26 0 158 1 23 46 15 25 40 ' 0 37 655 5:15-5:30 PM 408 6 62 82 26 12 97 6 26 42 3 18 788 5:30-5:45 PM 106 44 90 345 30 20 87 74 25 82 3 27 933 5:45-6:00 PM 225 50 0 256 15 8 11 65 24 54 1 9 718 2 HOUR TOTAL 1423 397 320 1225 91 91 447 284 135 305 '9 172 ~our[y TotaLs for Four Consecutive 15 Minute Counts 4:00-5:00 PM. 400 271 168 382 19 28 206 124 35 87 2 81 1803 ' 4:15-5:15 PM 578 228 133 540 19 46 222 115 53 96 1 100 2131 4:30-5:30 PM 727 127 154 478 45 43 257 118 73 118 4 103 2247 4:45-5:45 PM 798 95 191 776 57 60 294 142 96 164 7 112 2792 5:00-6:00 PM 102.3 126 152 841 72 6~ 241 160 100 218 7 91 3094 PM PEAK HOUR 1023 126 152 '841 72 63 241 160 100. 218 ? 91 3094 PEAK HOUR LEG VOLUMES- North Leg 'South Leg East Leg Uest Leg Time Period In Out Tot In Out Tot In Out Tot In Out Tot AM Peak Hour 1052 356 1408 593 1068 1661 238 143 381 175 491 666 PM Peak Hour 976 1130 2106 1301 1092 2393 316 430 746 501 442 943 AM+PM Pk Hr 3514 4054 1127 1609 CAM ENGINEERING CO. Civ~"Engineers and S~v'~yors ' 13903 Salada Road La Mirada, CA 90638 (714) 521-9779 · Fax (213) 944-2300 Carl A. Mastro TO; CITY OF TUSTIN TRAFFIC ENGINEER 300 CENTENNIAL WAY TUSTIN CA. 92680 REF; TUSTIN AUTO CENTER 9-5-97 DEAR; BOB REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE PROPOSED TUSTIN AUTO CENTER AT 535 EAST MAIN STREET. MR. GREG BENNETT ARCHITECT HAS MADE MINOR REVISIONS TO THE AUTO CENTER PLAN PER THE REQUEST OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, I HAVE REVIEWED THIS REVISED TUSTIN AUTO CENTER PLAN DATED 9-5-97. IT APPEARS THAT THE MINOR REVISIONS HAVE INSIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION OR SAFETY OF SAID PLAN. CARL A MASTRO P E CAM ENGINEERING CO. RECEIVED COMMUNITY DEVELOPi,AENT BY APPENDIX C 97/551 GORDON BRICKEN'& ASSOCIATES ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS October 9, 1997 MR. GREG BENNETT BENNETT ARCHITECTS 17581 Irvine Blvd., Suite 116 Tustin, California 92780 SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO ACOUSTICAL'REVIEW 97-009 TUSTIN AUTO CENTER -- CITY OF TUSTIN Dear Mr. Bennett: The appropriate responses to the Design Review 97-009 Acoustical Comments are as follows: ._ 1. This comment noted an'air conditioner unit installed on the equipment room which was not addressed in the original report. The revised report now addresses this unit and recommends it be relocated to a position over the retail/office area of the car wash building. 2. This comment requested~clarification of the vacuum hose noise source. As noted in the revised acoustical study, the Table 4, 5, and 6 noise level values represent the cumulative noise level for all vacuum operations. . This comment is similar to item #1. Revised report corrects this matter. This comment notes an error in Table 7. This is corrected in the revised report. 5. This comment questions the Table 7 noise level for "other operations". This value is indeed a composite level for- "other operations" (please note the plural form). 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Santa Ana, California 92705-8518 Phone (714) 835-0249 FAX (714) 835-1957 6. This comment questions the distance from the property line used for fuel deliveries. The fuel deliveries are made to the underground tanks, not the fuel pumps. The underground tanks access area is located approximately 90 feet from the nearest property line. . Similar comment,to items #1 and #3. Revised report addresses this issue. 8. This item requests noise level assessment at the vacant parcel to the west of the site. Revised report addresses this issue. 9. Similar comment to item # 5. Ail noise levels used in the analysis are cumulative composite values for a worst case assessment. 10. This item requested an analysis of the equipment room. A brief analysis and specific mitigation have been added to the revised report. 11. This item is concerned that the Appendix 2 sound barrier calculations do not consider cumulative sources. The Appendix 2 calculations examine Only the wash tunnel noise sources · (the dryer is the dominant noise source in the wash tunnel). The Appendix 3 calculations examine only the remaining composite noise sources. The resulting cumulative levels of the two sets of calculations determine the property line noise levels. .- I hope this response, along with the revised report, answers all of the reviewers questions. Thank you, and if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Prepared by: /~ Christouner Jean Staff Engineer /mmb 97/552 GORDON BRI'CKEN & ASSOCIATES ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS October 9, 1997 R E V.I S E D ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS T U S T I N AUTO CENTER 5 3 5 E A S T M A I.N STREET C I T.Y OF TUS T I N Prepared by: Gordon Bricken President /mmb Prepared for: MR. GREG BENNETT BENNETT ARCHITECTS 17581 Irvine Boulevard, Ste. 116 Tustin, California 92780 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Santa Ana, California 92705-8518 Phone (714) 835-0249 FAX (714) 835-1957 -. 97/552 GORDON BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS SUMMARY The project was examined on the basis of all the existing design information. The analysis considered individual sources of noise that can occur on the project site. A. FINDINGS The analysis found that certain features of the project will produce significant noise reduction to the adjacent land uses. However, some. noise impacts could still occur at the existing land uses directly to the north and west of Parcel A. Distance and ambient masking will allow compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance in all other directions. MITIGATION The following mitigation measures (which may already be a part of the project design) are required to assure .compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance: The car wash "tunnel" will not have a roof. 2. The car wash tunnel shall incorporate wing walls at the west side of the tunnel entrance and exit as shown on Exhibit 5. .These wing walls shall'be equal in height to the height of the tunnel openings and shall extend beyond the ends of the tunnel far enough to break any line of sight from the tunnel openings to the west property line.~ 3. The dryer blower motors and fans shall be remotely located in the equiPment room. This reduces the typical dryer noise levels by about 10 dBA. 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Phone (714) 835-0249 Santa Ana, California 92705-8518 FAX (714) 835-1957 97/552 o The vacuum equipment shall 'be housed in the'equipment room. 5. The equipment room must be acoustically insulated, including access door assemblies rated at least STC 35. Equipment room venting should open onto the interior of the wash tunnel and must use Model "R" Noishield acoustical louvers available from Industrial Acoustics Company or equivalent. These measures result in an interior to exterior noise reduction of 23 dBA as shown in Appendix 4, plus an additional 7 dBA of reduction for the building setback. The total 30 dBA of noise reduction would allow interior noise levels as high as 90 dBA and still provide compliance with the 60 dBA property line noise limit. 6. Erect sound walls six feet, eight inches high (6'8") along the north' and west property lines of Parcel A as 'shown on Exhibit 5. The remainder of the common property lines may use walls six feet (6') high. . Specify the quietist possible air nozzles for the hand drying area. 8. Any air tools used in the detail garage shall be rated tO produce levels no higher than 89 dBA at one meter (three feet) under full load. 9. Ail exterior mechanical equipment, including air 'conditioners, ice makers, exhaust fans refrigeration condensors, etc., shall have a Sound Rating of 8.5 Bels or less, or a level of 50 dBA at 50 feet or less. 10. Compressors, blowers, pumps, and other mechanical equipment that does not require exterior locations for heat exchange purposes shall be located in enclosed windowless rooms with acoustically sealed doors. 11. Any form of amplified sound exterior to a building or inside an open bay of a building is prohibited. 12. Maintenance, changing of fluids, installation of parts, removal of parts, testing, tuning, and similar operations on any vehicle exterior to a building is prohibited. 13. The site shall be posted at a speed limit not to exceed 10 mph. 14. Each individual tenant shall comply with the noise limits stated~ in the City's Noise Ordinance. 97/552 GORDON BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES ACOUSTICAL and ENERGy ENGINEER'S 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a noise impact and design study of the proposed TUSTIN AUTO CENTER located at 535 East Main Street in the City of Tustin. This report includes a discussion of the expected exterior community noise environment and the recommendations for noise control to insure' compliance of the guidelines of the City of Tustin. A vicinity map showing the location of the auto center is presented on Exhibit 1 -- Site Location Map. The surrounding land uses are as follows: North...A retail center is directly adjacent to the north half of the project' site. Two'story office buildings are directly adjacent to the south half of the project site. East .... Newport AvenUe is directly adjacent to the project site across which is commercial and retail development. South...Main Street is directly adjacent to the project site across which is commercial and retail development. West .... Two story office buildings are directly adjacent to the north half of the project site. Centennial Way is directly adjacent to the south 'half of the project site across which is a vacant parcel. Site....The site currently hosts an automated car wash operation. 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Phone (714) 835-0249 Santa Ana, California 92705-8518 FAX (714) 835-1957 . · ' 4 97/552 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT The project is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Main Street and Newport Avenue. The site plan is shown on Exhibit 2. The overall proposal is a'car wash and retail buildinG. The combined-center contains the following uses: 1. Car Wash The car wash, as proposed, is a hand car wash with 16 fuelinG stalls, eight vacuum stalls, a detailing GaraGe and a retail area. The assumption is that the car wash will be open from 7:00 A.M. to dusk. o Retail Stores The buildinG to the south of the project is for retail store locations. Tenants have not been identified. The retail buildinG can house several smaller retail businesses. The assumption is that the stores will be open from 8:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. The Car WaSh site is well defined at this time. Site plans, operations information, and building designs are fairly complete. The retail uses represent tenants which the developer is still pursuinG. Each of these uses will be discussed in Greater detail later in this report. 3.0 APPLICABLE NOISE CRITERIA The potential impacts of the project would primarily be to the adjacent retail and office uses to the north and west of the project site. The City of Tustin requires all commercial projects to conform to the requirements of the Noise Ordinance listed in Table 1 on the following page. 97/552 (1)- TABLE 1 APPLICABLE NOISE CRITERIA (1) DURATION SYMBOL ALLOWED LEVEL 30 Minutes L50 60 15 Minutes L25 65 5 minutes L8 70 1 minute L2 75 Anytime Lmax 80 If the existing ambient noise levels exceed the allowed levels of the ordinance, then the existing ambient noise levels become the allowed levels. See Appendix 1 for a more thorough explanation of acoustical terminology. 4.0 EXISTING NOISE LEVELS L Short-term measurements were performed on the site. The locations of the measurements are shown on Exhibit 2 and the records are shown on Exhibits 3 and 4. Measurements are conducted using a Bruel and Kjaer (B & K) Model 2218 Type 1 Sound Level Meter and a B & K Model 2317 Portable Level Recorder.--The average noise level reported from the measurement taken at the north side of Parcel B was 64 dBA Leq. The average noise level reported from the measurement taken at the northwest corner of Parcel A was 58 dBA Leq. The measured existing ambient noise levels are compared to the Noise Ordinance in Table 2. TABLE 2 POSITION #1 POSITION #2 ALLOWED. SYMBOL MEASURED LEVEL MEASURED LEVEL LEVEL L50 62 57 58 60 61 72 L25 64 L8 66 L2 67 Lmax 75 POS. #1/#2 DIFFERENCE ~0 + 2/-3 ~s - 1/-7 70 - ,~/-10 75 - s/-14 so - 5/-s 97/552 Table 2 shows that the existing ambient is generally below the allowed levels of the City's Noise Ordinance. Thus, no ambient corrections will be made. In this type of project, the critical design levels will be the maximum and L50 allowed levels. 5.0 REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS 5.1 CAR WASH The proposed car wash consists of the following features: a. A single building houSing the hand wash and mechanical drying areas in a roofless "tunnel", equipment rooms, storage rooms, a retail area, offices, 16 fueling stations (eight for gas only plus another eight with vacuums at the car wash entrance). b. A vacuum area at the gas Pumps ahead of the entrance to the wash tunnel with four (4) vacuum.stations containing two vacuums each. c. The vacuum mechanical equipment is to be housed in the equipment room of the car wash building. d. An exterior blow-off and hand drying area where residual water is removed using compressed air hoses and towels. This area is located immediately southeast of the car wash building. e · The tunnel roof is open. f · opening· The dryer is a self-contained unit located about 15 feet from the exit g· room. The dryer motors and fans are to be remotely located in the equipment h. The plans show a detail garage at the northweSt corner of Parcel A. The garage bays will open towards the east. The operation of the facility would normally allow the drivers to leave.the cars upon arrival at the 97/552 vacuum/fueling area. When there is a queue, cars would normally be moved by attendants. Since vacuuming takes about two minutes, it is possible for a car to be started every two minutes for each of the four lines. The random nature of the operation means that cars would rarely be moved simultaneously. After vacuuming, a car would be driven to the tunnel entrance where it is attached to a chain. The chain moves the car through the tunnel. It is presumed that the car first moves through a water arch (equipment tunnel) which sprays the car. This is followed by hand washing. Upon leaving the wash area, the car passes another spray arch which rinses off the soap. The car then passes through the dryer arch. Upon leaving the dryer, an attendant starts the car and drives it to the hand drying area outside where any excess water would be blown off with an air hose and finally towel dried. When the car is ready, the attendant signals the car driver. This can be a hand signal or blowing the horn. The driver enters the car, starts it, and drives off. The typical through-put of such a system is about 30 cars in a hour. The maximum through-put is about 50 cars an hour. ~ The car wash has a variety of sound sources. These sources are listed in Table 3 on the following page. 97/552 TABLE 3 POTENTIAL INDIVIDUAL SOuRcEs AT THE PROPOSED CAR WASH SITE SOuRCE Start car Door slam Idle Run ups Radio Vacuum: Hose Motor Air: Hose Motors Speaker Pumps A/C Units Alarms Verbal Horns Dryer Buffers COMMENT Each car will be started at least 3 times. Duration one second per event. Each car could have as many as 4 door slams. Duration one second per event. Likely to occur pnly in the arrival area about 30 seconds per car. Occurs upon leaving after, start. Maximum five seconds per car. Will be shut off by attendant or driver in the vacuum area. Instructions will be posted. Duration would be 120 seconds per car at the most. Two per car. Operated about two minutes per car. Runs continuously at maximum through-put. Multiple air hose outlets in hand drying area. Compressors enclosed Speaker assumed to be present playing music. Probably three enclosed in equipment room. Runs continuously at maximum through-put. Roof mounted and run continuously. Car alarms infrequent. Probably once a day. Whistling, and other verbal signals by attendants Horn blowing by attendants or patrons about 4 times a day. Runs continuously at maximum through-put. Used in the detail area. The individual sound sources have been measured during visits to various car washes. A Worldwide Drying Systems unit measured at the Fountain.Valley Car Wash was used as the basis for this project's estimates. The typical car wash noise levels are given in Table 4 on the following page for a fixed reference distance of ten feet. 97/552 (i) (i) TABLE 4 MEASURED VALUES OF CAR WASH SOUND LEVEL REFERENCED TO TEN FEET FROM SOURCE sOURCE Lmax L5'0 Start Car Door slam Idle Run-up Horn Vacuum:(1) Hose Motor Air: Hose Motor Buffer: Finish Orbital Dryer: Exit Enter Speaker Alarm Pumps (2) 71 NA 66 NA 63 63 71 NA 84 NA 76 76 63 63 79 NA 63 63 72 72 62 62 77 77 73 73 85 NA 94 NA 63 63 The vacuum hose noise value is. based on an actual measurement taken at a point ten feet to one side of a typical four station vacuum operation with all stations occupied. The dryer measured was for a closed tunnel situation with remote motors and fans. The car wash building will have two rOof mounted air conditioning units. One is to be located over the. equipment room and one over the office/retail area. Both units will be assumed to have a Sound Power Rating of 8.5 Bels. The car'wash has only the gas pumps as service equipment. However., underground tank filling operations will occur about 22 times a month, or roughly once a day. The gas operation information is taken from file data and is listed in Table 5 on the following page. 10 ' 97/552 TABLE 5 REFERENCE MEASURED LEVELS OF GAS SERVICE OPERATIONS AT 10 FEET FROM SOURCE SOURCE Lmax L50' ( 1 ) Truck brakes 100 NA Truck start up 95 NA Fill pumps 70 70 Door slams 66 NA Short duration noise levels will not affect the L50 level. L50 values listed represent the worst case situations if the sources truly were continuous. 5.2 RETAIL STORES The retail store tenants are not yet identified. The main source of noise from the small retail stores will be air conditioning units. Certain types of tenants, such as cleaners and restaurants, may install additional mechanical equipment. Multiple tenants are feasible. For this analysis, the assumption will be that one (1) air conditioning unit will occur for each of the smaller retail spaces. These units will be assumed to have a Sound Power Rating of SR = 8.5 bels. '- Delivery trucks will service the retail stores. Reference noise levels were determined from actual measurements taken at various markets and retails stores. The expected levels are referenced to ten feet in Table 6. TABLE 6 DELIVERY TRUCK REFERENCE LEVELS AT 10 FEET SOURCE Lmax L50 Air Brakes Engine Start-up Engine Idling Gear Selection 98 N/A 81 N/A 76 76 74 N/A 11 5~3 SUMMARY OF LEVELS Ail of the various noise source levels are summarized in Table 7. TABLE 7 REFERENCE SOUND LEVELS SOURCE DISTANCE Lmax L50 Car Wash Dryer 10' 77 77 Fuel Deliveries 10' 100 70 Other Operations 10' 94 77 A/C Unit 1'. 85 85 Retail Building 5 A/C Units 1' 92 92 Delivery 10' 98 76 6.0 OFF-SITE LEVELS The off-site levels will vary.with the off-site use since each use is in proximity to different elements of the project. Certain conditions are assigned to the calculations, which are as follows: .- 1. Building shielding was assumed. See Appendix 2 for wash tunnel west wall 'and wing wall reduction calculations. . Noise sources are considered to be point sources. . The car wash is expected to operate from 7:00 A.M. to dusk. For this purpose, dusk will be taken to be 8:00 P.M. The retail, stores are assumed to operate from 8:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. The off-site project sound levels at the nearest common property lines are given in Table 8 on the following page. 12 97/552 TABLE 8 SOUND LEVELS AT NEAREST PROPERTY LINES WEST PL NORTH PL SOURCE DIST. Lmax L50 DIST.. Lmax L50 CARWASH Dryer 20' 60 60 105' 56 56 Fuel Deliveries 90' 78 50 90' 81 53 Other Operations 35' 81 64 25' 82 67 A/C Units 10' 65 65 70' 51 51 TOTAL 83 68 85. 68 RETAIL BUILDING A/C Units 95' 52 52 100' 52 52 Delivery 95' 78 56 50' 84 62 TOTAL 78 57 84 62 The Table 8 "Totals" represent the cumulative noise levels for the various noise sources including simultaneous maximums noise levels. 7.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT The summary of noise impact events is identified in each of the preceding tables~ It is useful to annotate these summaries as to the major contributor to the level. This is done in Table 9. TABLE 9 TOTAL PROPERTY LINE SOUND LEVELS COMPARED TO NOISE ORDINANCE WEST PL. NORTH PL SOURCE Lmax L50 Lmax L50 Car Wash + 3 + 8 + 5 + 8 Retail Building 2 2 - 3 +4 +2 Table 9 indicates that the project will exceed the City's Noise Ordinance. 13 97/552 8.0 MITIGATION EVALUATION The predicted project noise levels will require a total of 8 dBA of noise reduction at the north property line of Parcel A, 8 dBA of noise reduction at the west property line of Parcel A and 4 dBA of noise reduction at the north property line of Parcel B. This will require sound walls plus moving the air conditioning unit over the car wash equipment room to a position over the retail/office space. Relocating the air conditioning unit will reduce the noise reduction requirement to 6 dBA at the west property line of Parcel A. Appendix 3 contains the various sound wall calculations for the various sources. The calculations show that the planned six foot walls along the property lines must be raised to at least six feet, eight inChes (6'8") in fhe areas shown on Exhibit 5. The following mitigation measures (which may already be a· part of the project design) are required to assure compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance: · The car wash '"tunnel" will not have a roof· 2. The car wash tunnel shall incorporate wing ~ walls at the west side of the tunnel entrance and exit as shown on Exhibit 5. These wing walls shall be equal in height to the height of the tunnel openings- and shall extend beyond the ends of the tunn'el far enough to break any line of sight from the tunnel openings to the west property line. '- 3. The dryer blower motors and fans shall.be remotely located in the equipment room. This reduces the typical dryer noise levels by about 10 dBA. The vacuum equipment shall be housed in the equipment room. 5. The equipment room must be acoustically insulated, including access door assemblies rated at least STC 35. Equipment room venting should open onto the interior of the wash tunnel and must use Model "R" Noishield acoustical louvers available from Industrial Acoustics Company or equivalent. These measures result in an interior to exterior noise reduction of 23 dBA as shown in Appendix 4, plus an additional 7 dBA of reduction for the building setback. The total 30 dBA of noise reduction would allow interior noise levels as high as 90 dBA and still provide compliance with the 60 dBA property line noise limit. · Erect sound walls six feet, eight inches high (6'8") along the north and west.property lines 14 97/552 of Parcel A as shown on Exhibit 5. The remainder of the common property lines may use walls six feet (6') high. · Specify the quietist possible air nozzles for the hand drying area. 8. Any air tools used in the detail garage Shall be rated to produce levels no higher than 89 dBA at one meter (3 feet) under full load. 9. Ail exterior mechanical equipment., including air conditioners, ice makers, exhaust fans refrigeration condensors, etc.,, shall have a Sound Rating of 8.5 Bels or less, or a level of 50 dBA at 50 feet or less. 10. Compressors, blowers, pumps, and other mechanical equipment that does not require exterior locations for heat exchange purposes shall be located in enclosed windowless rooms with acoustically Dealed doors. 11. Any form of amplified sound exterior to a ~ building or inside an open bay of a building is prohibited. 12. Maintenance, changing of fluids, installation Of parts, removal of parts, testing, tuning, and similar operations on any vehicle exterior to '~ building is prohibited. 13. The site shall be posted at a speed limit not to exceed 10 mph. 14. Ordinance. Each individual tenant, shall comply with the noise limits stated in the City's Noise 15 EXHIBIT 1 SITE LOCATION MAP ~RZNRD OJ.,fl¥ NI£Sft£ S.I. 3 3.LI H 3~{ ~{ \ // \ / V I'.t / \\ \ EXHIBIT 2. z 0o ¢,1 E o UJ rtl n Z 03. 0 Itl !-- <I: < 0 ,¢: 'r' 0 0 EXHIBIT 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I. i I ! I I I I I I (:3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o o~ E 0 IAI O. Z ~0 0 -r 0 0 ,sJ o o o o o (21 ~ t~ ~ Io ,~. I I ! I I I i i. I i ! I 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXHIBIT 4 o O. 0 0 0 o I I I I I I 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~t-q.LN:a30.t. Fl¥ NI£$fI.L / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ / \\ \ \ \ \ : :c [ :? ] i , l . i , i_ { i,: L~ .ll,d GORD'ON BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS APPENDIX 1 NOISE RATING METHODS 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite'K Phone (714) 835-0249 Santa Aha, California 92705-8518 FAX (714) 835-1957 Page 1 of 3 GORDONN( 'BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES CONSULTI ACOUSTICAL and ENERGy ENGINEERS NOISE RATING METHODS The A-weighted decibel of "A" scale on the sound level meter is often used in the measurement of noise because the weighting characteristics of this scale approximate the subjeCtive response of the human ear to a broad frequency band noise source by discriminating against the very low and the very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. Since community noise is seldom constant, varying from moment to moment and.throughout the day, the "A" weighted noise level needs to be further described to provide meaningful data. The Environmental P~otection Agency, Federal Department of .Transportation, foreign countries and private consultants are now using three time-exceeded percentile figures to describe noise, which are: (1) L90 is the noise .level which is exceeded 90% of any sample time period (such as 24 hours) and is used to describe the background or ambient noise level. (2) L50 is the noise level which is exceeded 50% of the time.. It is the median level. is the noise level which is exceeded (3) Al0 10% of the time and is a good descriptor of fluctuating noise sources, such as vehicular traffic. It indicates the near-maximum levels which, occur, from grouped single events. Being related to the subjective annoyance to community noise, it is a good design tool 621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K SantaAna, California92701 · Phone(714) 835-0249 Page 2 of 3 in the planning of acoustical barriers. More recent noise assessment methods are based on the equivalent energy concept where Leq(x) represents the average energy content of a fluctuating noise source over a sample period. The subscript (x) represents the period in which the energy is computed and measured. Current practice references the quantity to either one (1) hour, eight (8) hours, or twenty- four (24) hours. When referenced to one (1) ~hour, L is also eq sometimes called HNL (Hourly Noise Level). Since Leq is the summation of the functional products of noise level and duration, many combinations of noise level, duration time and time history can make up the same L value. eq Thus, an Leq(24) equals 50 means only that the average noise level is 50 dB. During the 24-hour period there can be times when the noise level is higher than 50 dB, and times when it is lower. ~ If the period of the measurement is only a single event, the energy content is not averaged. The energy expression for a single event is simply the sum of the functional product of '- the noise level and duration time of the event. This term is called L · or SENEL (Single Event Noise Exposure Level) The e - · summation of L values averaged over one hour is L e eq(1) ' Leq(8)' and Leq(24), etc. Leq is further refined into Ldn (Level Day-Night) and CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level), where noises that occur during certain hours of the daY are weighted (or penalized) because they are considered subjectively more annoying during these time periods: (1) Ldn is the sound level in dBA which corresponds to. the average energy content of the noise being measured over a 24-hour period including a 10 dBA weighting penalty for sound levels which occur during the nighttime hours of 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. This. is a rating method recommended by the Environmental Page 3 of 3 Protection Agency because it takes into .account those subjectively more annoying noise events which occur during the sleeping hours. (2) CNEL is the sound level in dBA which corres- ponds to the average energy'content of the noise being measured over a 24-hour period including a five (5) dBA penalty for noise which occurs during the evening hours of 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., and a ten (10) dBA weighting penalty for noise that occurs during the night- time hours of 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. For typical high- way vehicular traffic situations, computer analysis has shown that CNEL and Ldn correlate within 0.5 dBA. The percentile figures L10, L50, and L90.can be directly scaled from a graphical recording of the measured noise over a particular time period. They are also convenient to implement in automatic measurement equipment. Energy parameters Le, Leq, Ldn, .and. CNEL require expensive and complicated equip- ment. As a result, engineers have devised ways of estimating L eq (and hence, Ldn) using standard instrumentation and methods. .- GORDON BRICKENNE & ASSOCIATES ACOUSTICAL and E RGY ENGINEERS APPENDIX 2 CAR WASH TUNNEL 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Phone (714) 835-0249 Santa Ana, California 92705-8518 FAX (714) 835-1957 BARRIER NOISE REDUCTION ANALYSIS,WALL HEIGHT VARIABLE REFERENCE SOURCE LEVEL AT 50 FEET SOURCE..i .... = 63 PROJECT ...... CAR WASH DESCRIPTION..WEST WALL OF WASH TUNNEL SOURCE HEIGHT .......... 21 SOURCE ELEVATION ....... 0 RECEIVER ELEVATION ..... 0 BARRIER ELEVATION ...... 0 RECEIVER HEIGHT ........ 5 DISTANCE TO SOURCE ..... 18.5 DISTANCE TO RECEIVER... 15 NOISE LEVEL ............ 66.5 WALL HEIGHT TNL 21.00 50.58 FN 3.3052 50.58 TIL 15.90 BARRIER NOISE R~DUCTION REFERENCE SOURCE LEVEL ANALYSIS,WALL HE'z~HT VARIABLE AT 50. FEET SOURCE ....... = 65 PROJECT ...... CAR WASH DESCRIPTION..TUNNEL EXIT WING WALL SOURCE HEIGHT .......... 8 'SOURCE ELEVATION ....... 0 RECEIVER ELEVATION ..... O BARRIER ELEVATION ...... 0 RECEIVER HEIGHT ........ 5 DISTANCE TO SOURCE ..... 10 DISTANCE TO RECEIVER 15 NOISE LEVEL ............ 71.0 WALL HEIGHT TNL TIL 6.00 71.02 FN 0..0000 7.00 65.96 FN 0.0032 8.00 64.29 FN O.1174 9.00 62.23 FN 0.'3942 10.00 60.05 FN 0.8294 11.00 58.21 FN 1.4155 12.00 56.71 FN 2.1428. 13.00 55.48 FN 2.9997 14.00 54.44 FN 3.9740 15.00 53.56 FN 5.0534 16.00 52.78 FN 6.2263 71.02 65.96 64.29 62.23 60.05 58.21 56.71 55.48 54.44 53.56 52.78 0.00 5.06 6.73 8.79 10.97 12.81 14.31 15.54 16.58 17.47 18.24 · GORDON BRIC E & ASSOCIATES ACousTICAL a E RGY ENGINEERS APPENDIX 3 SOUND WALL CALCULATIONS 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Phone (714) 835-0249 Santa Ana, California 92705-8518 FAX (714) 835-1957 BARRIER NOISE REbUCTION ANALYSIS,WALL HEiG~T VARIABLE REFERENCE SOURCE LEVEL 'AT 50 FEET SOURCE ....... = 58 PROJECT ...... CAR WASH - WASH TUNNEL ENTRANCE DESCRIPTION..WEST PROPERTY LINE WALL SOURCE HEIGHT .......... 8 SOURCE ELEVATION ....... 0 RECEIVER ELEVATION ..... 0 BARRIER.ELEVATION ...... 0 RECEIVER HEIGHT ........ 5 DISTANCE TO SOURCE ..... 25 DISTANCE TO RECEIVER... 15 NOISE LEVEL .... ~ ........ 59.9 WALL HEIGHT TNL TIL 5.00 59.94 FN 0.0000 6.00 59.94 FN 0.0000 7.00 54.25 FN 0.0402 8.00 52.67 FN O. 1 843 9.00 50.91 FN 0.4312 10.00 49.17 FN 0~7780 59.94 59.94 54.25 52.67 50.91 49.17 0.00 0.00 5.69 7.27 9.03 10.77 BARRIER NOISE RE~-~CTION ANALYSIS,WALL HEIGh'£ VARIABLE REFERENCE SOURCE LEVEL AT 50 FEET SOURCE ....... = 63 PROJECT ...... CAR WASH - VACUUM NOISE DESCRIPTION..WEST PROPERTY LINE WALL SOURCE HEIGHT .......... 4 SOURCE ELEVATION ....... 0 RECEIVER ELEVATION ..... 0 BARRIER ELEVATION ...... 0 RECEIVER HEIGHT ........ 5 DISTANCE TO SOURCE ..... 80 DISTANCE TO RECEIVER... 15 NOISE LEVEL ............ 57.4 WALL HEIGHT 5.00 FN 6.00 FN 7 .OO FN 8.00 FN 9.00 FN 10.00 FN 52.41 0.0009 51.53 0.0528 50.16 0.1832 48 .65 0.~910 47.11 0.6741 45.73 1.0296 TNL 52.41 51.53 50.16 48.65 47.11 45.73 TIL 5.02 5.89 7.26 8.77 · . 10.31 11.70 BARRIER NOISE R~DucTION ANALYSIS,WALL HElC~GHT VARIABLE REFERENCE SOURCE LEVEL AT 50 FEET SOURCE ....... = 58 PROJECT ...... CAR WASH - WASH TUNNEL DESCRIPTION..NORTH PROPERTY LINE SOUND WALL SOURCE HEIGHT .......... 8 SOURCE ELEVATION ....... 0 RECEIVER ELEVATION ..... 0 BARRIER ELEVATION ...... 0 RECEIVER HEIGHT ........ 5 DISTANCE TO SOURCE ..... '55 DISTANCE TO RECEIVER... 5 NOISE LEVEL ............ 56.4 WALL HEIGHT 4.00 56.42 FN. O.0000 5.00 56.42 FN 0.0000 6.00 50.41 FN 0.0602 7.00 48.13 8.00 45.74 FN 0.7554 9.00 43.81 FN 1.3365 10.00 42.30 FN 2.0315 TNL 56.42 56.42 50.41 48.13 45.74 43.81 42.30 TIL 0.00 0.00 6.01 8.29 10.67 12.61 14. ;[1 BARRIER NOISE RED~TION ANALYSIS,WALL HEIGH'I"VARIABLE REFERENCE SOURCE LEVEL AT 50 FEET SOURCE ....... = 63 PROJECT ...... CAR WASH - VACUUM NOISE DESCRIPTION..NORTH PROPERTY LINE SOUND WALL SOURCE HEIGHT .......... 4 SOURCE ELEVATION ....... 0 RECEIVER ELEVATION ..... 0 BARRIER ELEVATION ...... 0 RECEIVER HEIGHT ........ 5 DISTANCE TO SOURCE ..... 25 DISTANCE TO RECEIVER... 5 NOISE LEVEL ............ 67.4 WALL HEIGHT 4.00 67.44 FN 0.0000 5.00 62.38 FN .0.0033 6.00 60.35 FN 0.1620 7.00 57.75 FN 0.~474 8.00 55.41 FN 1.1316 9.00 53.60 FN 1.8807 10.00 52.20 FN 2.7633 TNL 67.44 62.38 60.'35 57.75 55.41 53.60 52.20 TIL 0.00 5.06 7.09 9.69 12.02 13.83 15._V4 HZI q'd', ,T,.. 5 O0 7° 03 F'; 0 O0° I 5 nO 75 FN O. 1767 7 O0 73 '': · · :.~ 0 45 O0 71 ~N 1 I07~ 9.00 69.4~ FN I .8081 I0 O0 6~ 1o F" "6 7S 0° 75 06 ·., 7'~ t ~. 5 . -+ ,., :5.15 9.71 11 .9._5 13.59 15.0.'_7- 97/552 ~o.~o. ~..c~~,.~ ~ ~,ssoc.^~s ACOUSTICAL a E RGY ENGINEERS APPENDIX 4 EQUIPMENT ROOM NOISE REDUCTION CALCULATIONS 1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Phone (714) 835-0249 Santa Aha, California 92705-8518 FAX (714) 835-1957 WORK SHEET FOR CALCULATING ROOM NOISE REDUCTION VALUE ROOM NAME EQUIPMENT ROOM FLOOR AREA 600 SURFACES TL @ AREA T*S EXT.WALL 1 40 540 EXT.WALL 2 43 84 EXT.WALL 3 56 508 INT.WALL 0 WINDOW 1 0 .05 0 WINDOW 2 0 .05 0 W~In~-B~--3~u~% 35 .05 32 SGD 0 .05 0 DOORS ~ 31 .04 96 ROOF 40 .04 600 .054 4.209972E-03 1.276039E-03 0 0 1.011929E-02 O. 7.625549E-02 .06 FLOOR 9.999999E-02 600 ET*S -10LOG(ET*S) 10LOGA NR = .2058608 6.864264 20.43126 21 woRK SHEET FOR CALCULATING ROOM NOISE REDUCTION VALUE ROOM NAME EQUIPMENT ROOM - STC. 35 DOORS FLOOR'AREA 600 SURFACES TL @ AREA T~S EXT.WALL 1 40 540 EXT.WALL 2 43 84 EXT.WALL 3 56 508 INT.WALL 0 WINDOW 1 0 .05 0 WINDOW 2 0 .05 0 %~-N-B~L~~ 35 .05 32 SGD 0 .05 0 DOORS 36 .04 96 ROOF 40 .04 600 FLOOR 9.999999E-02 600 ET*S -10LOG(ET*S) 10LOGA NR = .054 4.209972E-03 1.276039E-03 0 0 1.0~1929E-02 0 2.411411E-02 .06 .1537194 8.132713 20.43126 23 ATTACHMENT H LETTERS OF SUPPORT & HERTER ,.~ Accountancy Corp. 335 Centennial Way · Tustin, CA 92780-9794 (714) 505-9000 · Fax; (714) 505-9200 November 6, 1997 Robert Sterman * Gerald Y. Higashi Gerald Herter Maril.vn Mlllare Steven Williams Jeffrey Hipshman · An Accountanc.v Corporation Ms. Elizabeth Binzack Community Development 300 Centennial Way City of Tustin, CA 92680 Re: Tustin Auto Wash, 535 East Main Street Dear Ms. Binzack: We are the C.P.A.'s and owners of the property across the street from City Hall, adjacent to the Tustin Auto Wash Project. We have reviewed the concept plans and support the project and the owner's effort in working with the adjacent ownership groups. We were initially concerned about the sound issue but since the project now has fully integrated the sound requirements we feel that our concerns have been resolved. We would like to thank the City Staff and the property Owner for adding these features into the project. The project appears visually attractive and will be an asset to the City of Tustin and our property as well. The new concept will be a nice gateway into Old Town and will clean up a deteriorating site. ._ Thanks for supporting this project and encouraging positive growth in Tustin. It has been really needed at this site. Their architect has created a nice addition to the cityscape of Tustin. We can see there will be a large investment needed to build this project that will clearly help the City's property taxes and sales tax revenue which never hurts the community or adjacent property owners. Sincerely, igashi, C.P.. STERMAN, HIGASHI & HERTER ACCOUNTANCY CORP. Member. American Institute of Certified Pub#c Accountants Private Company Practice Section t/tl tN TUSTIN, .SQII E LLC October 3 l, 1997 Elizabeth Binsack Director of Community Development City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 RE: Tustin Auto Wash Remodeling Dear Elizabeth: We have reviewed the elevations and renderings for the proposed remodeling of Tustin Auto Wash next to Larwin Square and see no reason why the redevelopment of this property should not be a benefit to the neighborhood and to the public. Please feel free to convey our support for this project to the Planning Commission. What the owners of Tustin Auto Wash propose will certainly be a noticeable improvement to that property over what currently exists there. 'l'he local management of VONS agrees that the improvements submitted should have no negative impact on the area. Revitalizing Old Town Tustin and the Newport Corridor can create many benefits for the residents of Tustin, and we would Iike to see this project started. Yours truly, Dick Kaye, Manager MANAGEMENT OFFICE: 275 CentenniaJ Way · Suits 209 · Tustin, CA 92780 * (714) 544-3300 Fax (714) 669-8141 0C~-27-97 02:21P COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OEP (714) 573-3113 P.01 LR, t-~W :r. N IT WOULD'HELP THE OVERALL ~ENTER. II W~LL CLEAN UP THE ~KEND VERY MUCH. I THINK IT WOULD AL~O IMPROVE THE VIEW FROM THE STREET, I'HANK YOU, MANAGER VON8 # 146 D eWitt Inc. Petroleum Marketing and Environmental Services August 8, 1997 Mr. Ramesh Bajaria TUSTIN AUTO CARWASH 535 Main Street Tustin, CA 92680 Dear Mr. Ramesh Bajaria: As you are aware J.E. DeWitt, Inc. has been a gasoline distributor for over fity (50) years. We service over thirty (30) Texaco Service Stations (three of which we own), ten (10) independent service stations, seven (7) cardlocks and many commercial accounts. Just as the people in the real estate field, we always look for three main features for a successful investment location- location, location, location. We feel that your location at 535 Main Street if developed correctly, can meet the requirements to be a successful business. However, if you are required to develop this area as a reverse functioning area, where the public does not have easy access or cannot see your business, we are sorry to say that we do not have any interest in your location at this time. Should this change, please give us a call and we would be most happy to discuss our interest in the development of this location. Regards, Tom Sisneros Retail Sales Manager 1903 North Durfee Avenue · P.O. Box 3867 ° South E1 Monte, California 91733 818-444-2691 ° 213-283-8123 ° FAX: 818-350-8042