Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 GP AMEND 95-001 01-02-96 NO. 1 !-2-96 Inter-Com _~ATE' J/~qUARY 2, 1996 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJEC~ GENERAL PL/~NAMENDMENT 95-001 (DAHN CORPORATION) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions: I · · Certify the Negative Declaration as adequate for the project by adopting Resolution No. 96-002, as submitted or revised; Approve General Plan Amendment 95-001 by adopting Resolution No. 96-003, as submitted or revised. FISCAL IMPACT There are no fiscal impacts associated with this project as this is an applicant initiated project. BACKGROUND The applicant proposes to change the present General Plan Land Use Designation of "Military" to "Industrial" on a 2.6 acre triangular site located north of Warner Avenue between Jamboree Road and Peters Canyon Wash. The Irvine Company, owner of the site, received City council approval for General'Plan Amendment (GPA) 89- 03, Zone Change (ZC) 89-01 and Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 89-110 on November 13, 1989. No development plans were submitted for review at that time. The purpose of the three applications was to change the site's General Plan Land Use Designation (from "Public Institutional" to "Industrial") Zoning Designation (from "Public Institutional" to "Industrial") and to create a 2.6 acre industrial parcel north of Warner Avenue between Jamboree Road and Peters Canyon Wash. In 1994 the City changed the General Plan designation from "Industrial" to "Military" as part of the overall General Plan Update. This request was brought before the Planning Commission on November 27, 1995. At the November 27th meeting, 'the Planning Commission recommended that the city Council approve General Plan Amendment 95-001. City Council Report GPA 95-001 January 2, 1996 Page 2 The subject property is located north of Warner Avenue between Jamboree Road and Peters Canyon Wash and was created as a result of the Jamboree Road extension from Barranca Parkway through MCAS- Tustin to Edinger. The surrounding uses are a vacant area zoned General Industrial to the south (within the boundaries of the City of Irvine), the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station MCAS-Tustin~to the north past Jamboree Road, and the existing (MCAS-Tustin) multi- family military housing to the east across Peters Canyon Wash. A public hearing notice identifying the time, date and location of the public hearing on this project was published in .the Tustin Weekly. Property owners within 300 feet of the site were notified of the hearing by mail and notices were posted on the site, at City Hall and at the Police Department. The applicant was informed of the availability of a staff report for this item. 'DISCUSSION The applicant has submitted a General Plan Amendment (GPA) request, proposing to change the present General Plan Land Use Designation of "Military" to its previous designation of "Industrial." The GPA in conjunction with the present "Industrial" zoning would allow construction of several industrial land uses as discussed below. The "Industrial" Land Use Designation is designed to accommodate a variety of land uses which can coexist with surrounding land uses which do not create smoke, dust, sound, vibration, soot or glare which might be obnoxious to the City. The permitted land uses/businesses would include but not be limited to: 1. 4. 5. 6. Wholesale Businesses Light Manufacturing and Processing Distribution and Sales Warehousing and Storage Research and Development Light Industrial Business Parks The applicant is currently processing development plans for a proposed self storage facility. The proposed self-storage facility project is proposed as a joint project with the City of Irvine. The middle of the project straddles the boundary line between the City of Irvine and Tustin. The City of Irvine portion of the project will tentatively consist of a caretakers quarters and three storage buildings containing 69,624 square feet. The Tustin portion of the project will tentatively consist of one 25,200 square foot single story storage building and 59 open RV parking spaces. City Council Report GPA 95-001 January 2, 1996 Page 3 The original General Plan Land Use Designation of the site was "Public Institutional" which was changed in 1989 to "Industrial" at the request of the property owner. The General Plan Land Use Designation was subsequently changed again in 1994/95 to "Military" during the City-Wide General Plan update. The General Plan states that the "Military" designation refers exclusively to the Marine Corps Air Station. No other land uses are allowed under this designation. Since the land is under private ownership by the Irvine Company and will ultimately be developed as a non-military civilian use, a General Plan Amendment would be appropriate. Staff discovered the Zoning/GP land use conflict during the project review process and notified the applicant of the inconsistency. Staff is recommending the General Plan Amendment to "Industrial" because: 1) it is the most appropriate land use designation given the existing zoning of "Industrial" which would provide the highest degree of zoning/land use compatibilitY, 2) the property is currently not in federal ownership and 3) the surrounding industrial land uses are compatible. The development uses permitted, and conditionally permitted within the current "Industrial" zoning designation for the site are only allowed within the General Plan "Industrial" land use designation. Additionally~ the proposed "Industrial" land use designation in conjunction With the industrial zoning of the site would not be detrimental to the surrounding land uses since they are either industrial or buffered by extremely large setbacks and existing barriers. The proposed General Plan Amendment to "Industrial" will support numerous goals and policies contained within the General Plan, targeted toward a balanced development of industrial land Uses within the City. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. The attached Initial Study discusses numerous impact categories and appropriate mitigation measures. City Council Report GPA 95-001 January 2, 1996 Page 4 Based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, staff has determined that any potential impact could be mitigated to an acceptable level and that such mitigation measures have been included as Conditions of Approval in Planning Commission Resolution 3405 recommending approval of General Plan 95-001 to the City Council. CONCLUSION Based on the above analysis, the proposed General Plan Land Use Designation is appropriate and will not be detrimental given the surrounding land uses and current zoning. It is recommended that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 95-001 by adopting Resolution No. 96-003, as submitted or revised. Assistan% Planner Christ ineV~h i~g 1 e~ Assistant City Ma/~tger Attachments: Location Map Initial Study/Negative Declaration. Resolution Nos. 96-002, 96-003 RAD: GPA95- 001. cc LO.L;ATION ? / MAP < . / ,? NO SCALE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (714) 573-3]05 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Description: Project Proponent: Lead Agency Contact Person: Telephone: -'/1~ - .$ 7 '~---5 i %/~: The Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study for the above project in accordance with the City of Tustin'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 may be extended if deemed necessary. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS 4:00 P.M. ON '~10¥c':',,~ 13¢," '~ ~/ X(-\c~ _.c) Date NEGDEC. PM5 3704.A Christine A. Shingleton Community Development Director COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 CentenniM Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (714,) 573-3]05 INITIAL STUDY Ae BACKGROUND Project Title: %5-oo q ~ --or-'l, Lead Agency: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92680 Lead Agency Contact Person: Project Location: }x~oeWI,-x ~ Project Sponsor's Name and Address:'~fle_ General Plan Designation: . Zoning Designation: Project Description: _~:~_.[~- SJ~w~o,.... {c).vx~'~'-~-' -1t- ~;9-5 =~,,q-s / ~, ~ ~I5' 44-, Surrounding Uses: South Other public agencies whose approval is required: [21 Orange County ,Fire Authority [~l Orange County Health Care Agency [~l South Coast Air Quality Management District C] Other [] City oflrvine City of Santa Ana C} Orange County EMA ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated bY the checklist ih''~ Section D below. Land Use and Planning [2 Hazards Population and Housing [2 Noise Geological Problems [2 Public Services Water [2 Utilities and Service Systems Air Quality [2 Aesthetics Transportation & Circulation 12 Cultural Resources Biological Resources [2 Recreation Energy and Mineral Resources [2 Mandatory Findings of Significance Ce DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the enx4ronment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheets have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a sigmficant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a ' significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including. revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature Printed Name Date Title ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 123 Earlier analyses used: Available for review at: O~ of Tustin Communi~ Development Department LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the proposal: .. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning7 b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by 'agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land uses in the vicinity7 d) Affect agricultural resources or o.p~, rations? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? 2. POPULATION & HOUSLNG - 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 extension of major, infrastructure)? c)' Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - ~buld the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) b) c) d) e) 0 g) h) i) Fault rupture? Seismic ground shaking? Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? Landslides or mudflows? Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? Subsidence of land? Expansive soils? Unique geologic or physical, features? 4. WATER - Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff?. 'b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as .flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or thc course or direction of water movements? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 0 E] 0 0 0 0 0 0 E3 E3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E3 0 0 0 o E] E3 0 E3 0 0 0 0 E3 E3 0 0 O' 0 E3 o ge f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal: · o a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION - IFould the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bi%'clists? f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative .transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, 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 - Would the proposal: a) -Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact Impact 0 0 0 .0 0 0 . E3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E3 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 E3 0 0 0 E3 0 0 E3 0 0 0 E3 0 0 0 © 0 © © E3 0 9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion Or release of haTardous substances (including, but not 'limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? b) Possible interference with emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard' or potential health hazard? d) ExpoSUre of people to existing sources of potential health .ha7.ards? . , . e) Increased fire h~7~rd 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 severe noise levels? PUBLIC SERVICES - l, Vould the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? e) Other government services? 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 water supplies? 13. AESTHETICS - Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c) Create light or glare? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Un less Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact ....No Impact 0 '0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~a 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 O~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - lVould the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources? 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 potential impact area? 15. RECREATION - [b'ould the proposal: . . a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the qualiLy of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or xvildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history, or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve sho/l-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? .c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively Considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects). d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than SignifiCant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact ,~No Impac, o o o 0 0 0 E. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Please refer to Attachment A for an evaluation of the environmental impacts identified in Section D above. INITSTUD. PM5 3702A JilLJl -i~;"- / ATTACHMENT A DISCUSSION OF ENVIRON-MENTAL EVALUATION General Plan Amendment 95-001 Conditional Use Permit 95-017 Design Review 95-035 (The Dahn Corporation) pRoJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) requesting a change in the General Plan Land Use Designation, on a 2.6 acre parcel, from "Military" to "Industrial", and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), and Design Review (DR) to construct an 89,000 sq. ft. 825 unit two story mini-storage facility with caretakers quarters with approximately 2,519 square feet of floor area. The property is located between Jamboree Road, and the Peters Canyon Wash, north of Warner Avenue (City of Irvine) . The U.S. Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS-Tustin) is located to the west across Jamboree Road (zoned P&I), the City of Irvine to the immediate south (zoned General Industrial), and across Peters Canyon Wash to the east is existing (MCAS-Tustin) multi-family military housing. This is a tiered initial study that is based on and incorporates by reference, the environmental analysis included in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for Tentative Parcel Map 89-110, Zone Change 89-01, and General Plan Amendment 89-03 Certified by the City of Tustin on November 13, 1989. In conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the purpose of this-tiered initial study is to identify and focus the environmental analysis for the project on significant new environmental impacts that were not previously considered in ~the Negative Declaration for Tentative Parcel Map 89-110, Zone Change 89-01, and General Plan Amendment 89-03 The previous Negative Declaration for Tentative Parcel Map 89-110, Zone Change 89-01, and General Plan Amendment 89-03, analyzed the impacts resulting from the proposed change in General Plan Land Use designation from P&I to Industrial, changed in zoning designation from P&I to Industrial and the creation of a 2. 6 acre parcel north of Warner east of Jamboree Road. That Negative Declaration identified several impact categories which were marked "YES" on the initial study check list. An evaluation has been made to ensure that impacts previously identified will not be intensified, and that mitigation measures identified in the previous Negative Declaration that mitigated the impacts that would be applicable to this project have been identified. Staff has reviewed each of these impact categories to ensure that no new project impacts associated with the project would occur that were not identified in the Previous Negative Declaration. For the purposes of this initial study check list, these items have been checked "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" and the mitigation measures identified in the Previous Negative Declaration that would be applicable to this projec% have been identified. Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 2 In conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the purpose of this study is to identify and focus the environmental analysis for the project on significant new environmental impacts. LAND USE PLANNING (A) Less Than Siqnificant: The present zoning of the site is Industrial (M) which allows mini storage facilities and caretakers quarters with the approval of a Conditional Use permit. The current General Plan designation for the site is "Military" This creates a land use inconsistency between the General Plan and the Zoning of the site. The site was the subject of a property owner initiated General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Parcel Map in 1989. The applicant has submitted a GPA 95-001 which proposes to change the present land use designation from "Military" back to "Industrial" With the inclusion of the GPA the Zoning/General Plan inconsistency will be corrected. (B-E) No Impact The proposed project would improve a vacant 2.6 acre parcel with an allowed revenue generating land use. Adjacent land uses include MCAS-Tustin to the west, industrial land uses in the City of Irvine immediately to the south and southwest. The subject property was previously a portion of' MCAS-Tustin until 1991, when it was severed off from the air base by the alignment of Jamboree Road. No agricultural uses exist onsite or on adjacent parcels. The site is the one of the last remaining undeveloped industrial p.arcels in the area. Pursuant to City Code Section 9242(b), a self storage facility with caretakers quarters is allowed in the zoning district subject to an approved Conditional Use Permit. The proposed project will not physically divide or disrupt any established community in the area. The area is predominately industrial with the exception of the multi-family military housing to the east across Peters Canyon Wash. The project will not disrupt this community since the housing will be buffered from the proposed project by setbacks, the separation distance of the Peters Canyon Wash, and onsite screening. sources- City of Tustin Community Development Department. City of Tustin General Plan .Land Use Map. Field Observations. City of Irvine. Mitigation Monitoring- None Required Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 3 · POPULATION AND HOUSING ~ (A-C) No Impact The previous Negative Declaration for this site determined that there would be no direct increase in population in that no new dwelling units would be created. The proposed project substantially confirms this position in that the proposed project would not result in any noticeable direct or indirect increase in population or need for additional dwelling units or displace any existing housing. An- onsite caretaker quarters is proposed for the onsite manager and family and no additonal housing will result on this project. Self storage facilities typically will not attract people to the area by way of new jobs since the use will not require more than 1 offsite employee. The residents of the community typically serve as the labor for mini-warehouses typically doing their own loading and unloading of the storage units. Moreover the proposed use will serve the surplus storage needs of the existing residents in the area. sources: City of Tustin Housing Element of the General Plan. City of Tustin Community Development Department. Mitigation~Monitoring: None Required. · GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS (A,D,E) NO Impact The previous Negative Declaration determined that an industrial land use would not result in any geologic c~anges to the existing conditions, and indicated that soils reports and grading plans will address any onsite conditions encountered. According to the General Plan there are no Aquist - Priolo zones on or near the site. (B-C, F-I) Potentially Siqnificant 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. The site will not be impacted by any landslides, Seiche, Tsunami, volcanic action, erosion, or subsidence since none of these geologic features are present onsite or in the vicinity. The region however 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. Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 4 Mitigation Monitoring: A detailed soils engineering report and grading plans for the site are required as a condition of approval to determine that all grading activities on the site. Ail grading activities will comply with all applicable City of Tustin Codes and Uniform Building Code. WATER (A-B) Potentially Significant The previous Negative Declaration determined the the proposed project would result in the alteration of existing drainage through rough grading/construction but that the proposed changes would be reviewed through drainage studies and review by the Building Division. Any onsite drainage however will be properly channeled to the existing and proposed storm drainage system, including any interim storm drain improvements prior to development of the site. (C-I) Less Than Siqnificant There will be no changes in surface waters, direction of flows, diScharges, or water hazards occurring as a result of the project as there are no water features/hazards present onsite. The site will be reviewed by the Public Works Department and subject to a precise grading plan which will analyze water flows for compliance with the City regulations. Sources: City of Tustin Building Division City of Tustin Public Works Department Mitigation Monitoring: Alterations to drainage would be subject to review and approval by the City's Building Division and Public Works Department. Compliance with applicable requirements would be verified by the Building Division and Public Works Department. Any increased runoff flows associated with~ the proposed development wilt be mitigated by incorporating on- site and off-site drainage improvements, providing erosion control measures and developing appropriate pollution control plans have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. Erosion control measures will be developed and incorporated into final grading plans for the project to minimize potential increases in erosion. Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 5 · AIR QUALITY (A-D) Potentially Siqnificant The previous Negative Declaration determined that there would be no permanent degradation of the existing air quality, and proposed no mitigation. The use proposes no direct or indirect increase in air emissions over existing ambient levels in the community. The proposed use involves no manufacturing or assembly processes, and does not involve any substantial use or need of trucking or rail transport systems. Construction of the site however will temporarily generate natural particulate matter in the form of dust from grading operations. However the Jamboree Road wall and normal grading practices should reduce the particulate matter to a level of insignificance. Sources: AQMD standards for preparing EIR documents. Mitigation Monitoring: Construction ac5ivity dust generation shall be reduced nhrough regular watering as required by the SCAQMD Rule 403. 6. TRAI~SPORTATIONAND CIRCULATION (A-C) Less Then Siqnificant The street system (Warner Ave/Jamboree Road) is within the jurisdiction of the City of Irvine and will be subject to road widening /improvements by the City of Irvine in the near funure. The Public Works Department of the City of Tustin and City of Irvine have reviewed the proposed project and concurred with the previous Negative Declaration in determining that the proposed project would not have a negative impact on the existing or the future circulation system planned for the area. A traffic report prepared.by the applicant, states that the proposed use will not generate any substantial trip volumes in either the a.m. or p.m. peak hour periods. The a.m. peak trip count is 8 (5 in/3 out), and the p.m. peak trip count is 20 (10 in/10 out). At the present time, Warner Avenue is paved two lane road. The anticipated pm peak demand of 20 trips a day will not create an overcapacity situation on Warner Avenue and even less so when Warner is fully improved. However as a result of the improvements proposed for Warner Avenue, and the unknown nature of the development .to the south, the proposed site access is conditional and subject tc modification when the property to the south is developed. Atachment A- GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 6 The City of Irvine has conditionally approved interim access to the site via Warner Avenue and reserves the right to modify the interim access design and/or location, if warranted as specified 'in the conditions listed below and incorporated as mitigation measures. Permanent shared access with the parcel to the south will depend on the ultimate development of the site. Interim access has been evaluated by the City of Irvine, taking into consideration the following issues: the proposed location of the access, the access sight lines (Sight Distance Triangle), interim and long term street improvements, Warner Bridge widening, and the left turn movements/storage requirements. Parking for the proposed use is adequately provided for onsite. The Zoning Code requires 13 parking spaces which are provided in three locations onsite. (D-G) No Impacts The project will not result in any adverse impacts to pedestrians, bicyclists, rail, air, waterborne traffic or conflict with any alternative mode of transportation supported by the City. The subject site is landlocked between Jamboree Road and the Peters Canyon Wash and does not block, interrupt, or require the use or need for pedestrian, bicyclist, rail, air, or waterborne traffic. The nature of the proposed use restricts its transportation needs to passenger vehicles and light trucks already in common use traveling the existing circulation system (Warner/Jamboree). sources: City of Tustin Traffic Engineer. City of Tustin Public Works Department. City of Irvine Standard procedures for design review for the City of Tustin, Community Development Department. Applicant prepared traffic report Mitigation Monitoring: The City of Irvine has conditionally approved interim access to the site via Warner Avenue and reserves the right to modify the interim access design and/or location, if warranted as specified in their letter date October 10, 1995 to the applicant and made apart of this project as conditions of approval. Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 7 e BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (A-E) No Impacts The previous Negative Declaration determined that the site is free from any plant life, animals, fish or wildlife with the exception of common weeds and grasses. Moreover, the site is not in its original condition, but has since been roughgraded when Jamboree Road was constructed in 1991. Therefore develoPment would not result in the loss of any significant plant life, animals, fish or wildlife. sources: MCAS-Tustin EIS/EIR Field Observations: Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. · ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES (A) No Impact The previous Negative Declaration determined that the proposed project will not result is the change in the use of energy since site specific plans were not available. The proposed self storage facility has provided staff with the opportunity to review the project. The proposed project will not conflict with any adopted Energy Conservation Plan since the nature of the proposed project does not lend itself to particiPation in any existing program and will not use energy in a wasteful and inefficient manner with compliance of Title 24, regulations during building plan check. (B-C) Less Than Siqnificant The proposed project would not result in any change in the use of energy. Given the scale and type of proposed development, it is not anticipated that development of the site would result in a substantial usage of energy. The use is a low volume long term storage land use that does not require substantial amounts of energy for any manufacturing, assembly, processes or maintenance needs. Moreover energy conservation measures will be incorporated to reduce the overall energy needs of the project to the maximum extent possible. sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department. Project Description Field Observations Mitigation Monitoring: Ail building construction 'shall comply with the Energy Conservation Standards set forth in Title 24 of the California .Administrative Code, that energy conservation techniques be considered, that insulation of walls, ceiling and floors be required, and that energy efficient lighting be used. · Atachment A· GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 8 These mitigation measures related to energy, as applicable, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. · HAZARDS (A-F) No Impacts The previous Negative Declaration determined that the propose project"s exposure to Hazards was minimum since no specific project was proposed but that when a specific project was proposed compliance with the Building Code and Fire Authority requirements would mitiqate and potential for adverse consequences due any potential hazard. The proposed project has been reviewed by the both the Fire Department and the Building Division and the appropriate comment incorporated or made conditions of approval. Moreover, the proposed project is a low volume passive storage use that limits its activities to the storage non-explosive, non-toxic, and non- hazardous materials. Additionally, the site is surrounded by existing man made and natural barriers such as the Jamboree Road wall and Peters Canyon Wash Channel. Furthermore, the site is not located over any known fault area. The proposed land uses would not expect to result in any significant adverse effects on human health. sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department. Orange County Fire Authority. City of Tustin General Plan. City of Tustin Building Division City of Tustin Public Works Department Mitigation Monitoring: Ail construction shall comply with applicable Uniform Building and Fire Codes and shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Building Division and Public Works Department. Compliance shall be verified by the Building Division prior to certification of rough grading. 10. NOISE .(A) Less Than Siqnificant The previous Negative Declaration determined that development of the proposed project would not result in any significant increase to ambient noise ~evels, except in the short term during construction. Future noise levels be evaluated at the time of future submittals and reviewed for compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance. Atachment A GPA 95-001,. CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 9 The self storage development proposed is by nature a passive land use that typically does not generate excessive amounts of traffic, or require any manufacturing processes. The activities of the proposed uSe are infrequent and innoxious relative to the.other existing industrial uses in the vicinity, (Jamboree Road, Military Base Operations, Irvine Batch Plant, surrounding industrial uses and future roadway improvements). The proposed storage activities expected onsite will be masked by the existing and future aircraft, vehicle, and railroad noise sources in the vicinity. To address the construction noise impacts the previous negative declaration required the imposition of a mitigation measure requiring compliance with the Noise Ordinance dealing with construction noises. (B) Potentially Siqnificant The previous Negative Declaration determined that development is located within an area that exposes the site to military and roadway noise sources. The project site is located within the 70 CNEL noise contours caused by Jamboree Road traffic. The Noise Element of the General Plan does not provide any noise contours for the military air operations. However the previous Negative Declaration contained a mitigation measure requiring the site to record a deed restriction advising landowners to advise tenants that the site is subject to aircraft/helicopter noise. According to the General Plan, the industrial component of the self storage project is compatible with this noise level, however the caretakers quarters would normally be incompatible, unless the interior sound levels are mitigated to a level no higher than 45dba. The project however, will be conditioned to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance, which limits outdoor noise to levels generated by the site to no greater than 60dba. The only project related noise levels expected to exceed 60dba will be as a result of construction activities, which will be temporary in nature and subject to the additional ordinances limiting the times construction activity may occur. Sources: City of Tustin Zoning Code. City of Tustin General Plan Noise Element. MCAS-Tustin. Community Development Department. Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 10 Mitigation Monitoring: Compliance with City Noise Ordinance and Construction Noise Ordinance. Interior .noise impacts determined to be greater than the level permitted by the Noise Ordinance (45dba) will be mitigated by providing improved noise rated windows and soundproofing of the exterior walls to attenuate sound levels down to levels that comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. In addition, the City's Noise Ordinance No. 1143 has specific requirements in regard to construction noise and hours of permitted construction. 11. PUBLIC SERVICE (A-E) No Impacts The previous Negative Declaration determined that all services are existing and are adequate to serve the project. Implementation of this project will not result in an increase in the demand for and utilization of public services, such as fire protection, police protection, infrastructure maintenance and other governmental services, such as schools, parks and recreational facilities. The public services that will serve (i.e Police, Fire, Trash and City Maintenance) the proposed mini-storage development have been reviewed by the affected City agencies, and no concerns have been expressed with respect to the ability to provide the needed services. sources: Orange County Fire Department. City of Tustin Police Department. City of Tustin Community Development Department. City of Tustin Public Works Department. Western Waste Management Mitigation Monitoring: None 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICES (A-G) No Impacts The previous Negative Declaration determined that the site presently has several utility easements traversing the site that serve MCAS-Tustin and are identified to be abandoned when the base is closed. These easement run along the boundaries of the site and do not adversely impact the project. The site will be provided utility service from existing lines within the Jamboree right-of-way. sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department. MCAS-Tustin. Southern California Edison. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 11 13. AESTHETICS (A-C) Less Than Siqnificant The previous Negative Declaration determined that the previous projects (GPA, ZC, TPM) would not change the aesthetics since no specifit project is proposed fOr the site. The proposed self storage project would not result in positive impacts to aesthetics in the area, since this request will improve the site. The propOsed structures onsite will contain masonry accent bands on the visible upper portions of the building elevations breaking up the harsh and plain nature of the proposed long masonry storage buildings. The lower portions of the buildings contain repeating pattern red accent doors. The perimeter of the site will contain several landscape screening elements which will soften the views of the site from Jamboree Road and the MCAS housing'development to the east. Additionally, a majority of the site will be obscured from public view due to the existing Jamboree Road wall and the lower grade elevation of the site. Development of the site will also eliminate the dust currently generated from the site, and reduce the potential for the site to serve as an illegal collection site for debris. The proposed project will not result in any increase in stray light or glare on the property since 'site specific development plans are proposed which will direct light downward away from adjacent Jamboree Road and the adjacent MCAS housing. Additionally the light fixtures proposed are motion sensitive to reduce energy costs and the amount of total onsite light. The project will be conditioned to require ~all lighting fixtures direct their illumination downward and onsite only. Conditons of approval will be made a part of the project requiring that all mechcanical equipment be screened and the entire perimeter be screened by a view obscuring fence or wall. sources: City of Tustin Zoning Code. City of Tustin Security Code. Community Development. Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES (A) Potentially Siqnificant The previous Negative Declaration determined that the proposed project is not expected have any negative effect on archeological resources in that the General Plan does not identify any cultural resources on this property. However significant paleontological resources may be found onsite. Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUP 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 12 /B-D) Less Then Siqnificant The proposed 'project would not result in any increased use of natural resources sources: City of Tustin General Plan. City of Tustin Historic Resources Survey. Mitigation Monitoring: Conditions of approval for the project require that a archeologist/ paleontologist be present during all grading operations. 15. RECREATION (A-B) No Impacts The previous Negative Declaration determined that the proPosed project would not result in any increased need for recreational opportunities. Industrial uses typically do not demand recreational amenities from the community as do residential land uses. Moreover, the proposed use will serve to promote existing recreational amenities of the area by serving as a storage area for recreational equipment. sources: City of Tustin General Plan Land Use Element. City of Tustin Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposed GPA and CUP for the mini-storage project will not have any adverse environmental impacts since the surrounding land uses are conducive to the proposed land use. Moreover, the most sensitive land use near the proposed project is military multi-family housing development on the east side of the project which is approximately 225 feet away from the site screened by a solid fence and separated by a 176 foot wash. The zoning of the site is industrial which permits the proposed land use subject to a CUP. The General Plan Amendment will make the General Plan land use designation consistent with the project, and consistent with the long term planning goals of the city for the area. Atachment A GPA 95-001, CUp 95-017 DR 95-035 Page 13 Review of site development plans by various agencies, services and the~ Community Development Department will ensure compliance with all applicable development regulations and mitigation measures. sources: As previously noted. Mitigation Monitoring: None 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 96-002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-001 INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: Ao The request to approve General Plan Amendment 95- 001 is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act. m o A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review. C o Whereby, the City Council of the City of Tustin has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Director and other interested parties with respect to the subject Negative Declaration. m o The City Council has evaluated the proposed final Negative Declaration and determined it to be adequate and complete. II. A Final Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The City Council, having final authority over General Plan Amendment 95-001 has received and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration prior to approving the proposed project, and found that it adequately discussed the environmental effects of the proposed project. 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 ¸24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-002 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 2nd day of January, 1996. JIM POTTS Mayor PAMELA STOKER City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 96-002 PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the~whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is 5; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 96-002 was duly and regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held of the 2nd day of January, 1996. COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER City Clerk 10 11 12 13 1¸4 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 96-003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-001, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "MILITARY" TO "INDUSTRIAL" ON A 2.6 ACRE PARCEL ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF WARNER AVENUE BETWEEN JAMBOREE ROAD AND THE PETERS CANYON WASH. The City Council Of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: Ao That a proper application for General Plan Amendment 95-001 was submitted to the City Council by The Dahn Corporation, for consideration. m o That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held on said application by the Planning Commission on November 27,~ 1995 and by the City Council on January 2, 1996. C o That the project will not have a significant effect on the environment as conditioned, and a Negative Declaration has been prepared and certified pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . m o That the proposed General Plan Amendment change from Military to Industrial is consistent with the Tustin Zoning Code which designates this property Industrial, which would accommodate a broad range of industrial/commercial uses including a self- storage facility. E o That the proposed General Plan Amendment to Industrial is in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the surrounding area in that the proposed designation of Industrial is compatible with industrial, commercial, and military uses surrounding the property. II. ~The City Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment 95-001 changing the Land Use Designation of the property located north of Warner Avenue between Jamboree Road and Peters Canyon Wash from "Military" to "Industrial" as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto. 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-003 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting held on the 2nd day of January, 1996. JIM POTTS Mayor PAMELA STOKER City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 96-003 PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the ' City of Tustin is 5; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 96-003 was duly and regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held of the 2nd day of January, 1996. COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER City Clerk .: tJARINE CORPS AIR STATION CiTY Or TUSTIN CITY 0£ IBVlh'£ SUBJECT EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: "MILITARY" PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: "INDUSTRIAL" SUBJECT SITE AP NUMBER: 434-061-14 EXHIBIT NO SCAL~