Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 GP AMEND 96-002 05-06-96NO. 2 5-6-96 DATE: MAY 6, 1996 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJEOT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-002 AND AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14022 (BRANDYWINE DEVELOPMENT) RECOMMENDATION That the City Council: . Approve the environmental determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 96-47; and , Approve General Plan Amendment 96-002.by adopting Resolution No. 96-48; and , Approve Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 14022 by adopting Resolution No. 96-49, as. submitted or revised. FISCAL IMPACT The subject project is an applicant initiated project. The applicant has paid application fees to recover the cost of processing this application. City Council Report GPA 96-002 & Amend TT 14022 May 6, 1996 Page 2 DISCUSSION Backqround and Project Description In January of 1990, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 14022 which authorized the subdivision of a .675 acre site to accommodate nine (9) condominiums (Attachment A). The Final Map was recorded in December of 1994. However, construction of the project never commenced and the Design Review and Variance approvals expired in January of 1995. The applicant is requesting approval for nine (9) detached condominiums to be constructed on the site (Attachment B). The original approved plans for the subject development included nine (9) 1,400 square foot two-story condominiums with a motor court type street system. The applicant is intending to construct nine (9) 1,478 square foot two-story detached condominiums. .The proposed plans utilize the same site plan and street system previously approved, with the exception of detached dwellings located in the motor courts. As part of the Design Review approval, the Planning Commission approved a Variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 9.5 feet for the two units in the southwest portion of the site and to increase the height of the .perimeter fence within the front yard setback from 3 feet to 6 feet 8 inches. Access to the development is proposed by a 25 foot wide entry drive from Wass Street. The entry drive reduces to 24 feet in width and extends to the rear of the property to provide secondary emergency access to the existing apartment complex to the southeast. Two 24- foot wide motor courts are provided for access to the dwellings along the northwesterly perimeter of the site. A two-car garage is provided for each unit. Three (3) guest spaces are provided as required by the R-4 District development .standards of one guest space for each four units. ~ Condition 2.2 of Resolution 2728 approving Tentative Tract Map 14022,. required reciprocal vehicle, pedestrian and parking access between the subject property and the adjacent apartment complex to the southeast. The proposal to include an emergency access gate at the southeasterly corner of the site would require that this condition, and the recorded easement, be modified to provide only emergency access between the two properties. The proposed gate location is acceptable to the Orange.County Fire Authority and standard conditions of approval have been included.to ensure proper gate access. City Council Report GPA 96-002 & Amend TT 14022 May 6, 1996 Page 3 General Plan Amendment The properties located at 1062 and 1082 are zoned Suburban Residential (R-4) which allows for multiple-family dwellings up to 15 dwelling units'per acre. However, the "Low Density Residential" General Plan Land Use Designation for these properties only allows residential development up to seven (7) dwelling units per acre. The previous General Plan Land Use Designations for these properties were "Multiple-Family" which accommodated development up to 25 dwelling units per acre. The land use designation ~was inadvertently changed in 1994 as part of the General Plan Update. The proposed General Plan Amendment would change the land use designation to "Medium Density Residential" which would accommodate residential development up to 15 dwelling units per acre and would be consistent with the existing zoning and proposed development. The proposed amendment will support a number of goals and policies contained within the General Plan targeted to provide a variety of housing types and encourage home ownership opportunities. Environmental Analysis A Negative Declaration has been previously prepared and certified for the project and is attached to this report. Based on review of this project, and the Certified Negative Declaration, it has been determined that environmental issues relating to this project have been addressed. Mitigation measures identified in the Negative Declaration are included as.conditions of approval for the project; therefore,, staff recommends that the City Council find that the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met and that no further environmental review is required. Daniel Fo~, 'AICP Senior Planner Community Development Director Attachments: Location Map A - Previously Approved Plans B - Proposed Plans Initial Study/Negative Declaration Resolution Nos. 96-47, 96-48 and 96-49 EAB :DF:br :TT14022 .DF LOCAT! O N MAP NO SCALE ATTACHMENT A ORIGINAL APPROVED PLANS ~ ' ATTACHMENT B PROPOSED PLANS i Jl rO r~ o .I · - , ." 0 ' ' . ~ i ~ ~ · ~'1 /' ~ -~--~ l .Z. ~, ~1, ' ' ~1~,.~ . oc i I I ,~' 1~' ~:, - ~-~ HALES- LANGSTON - STEICHEN ::* : i ! i ! r-m Oc Or · I11 ITl 'fl 1.1 HALES - LANGSTON - STEICHEN A R C H I T E C T U R E , I N C . z O. Z Ili 0 .... ' ! :~i'!1 [~i l O~ m m~ ~ · - ~5l HALES- LANGSTON - STEICHEN . --- A R C H I T E C T U R E I N C . HALES - LANGSTON - STEICHEN A R C H ! T E C T U R E , I N C . NEGATIVE CiTY OF TUSTIN 300 DECLARATION CENTENNIAL WAY, TUSTIN, CA. 92680 Project Title: TTM 14022, Design Review 88-70, Variance 89-19 Project Location: 1062& 1082 Wass Street Fi le No. Project Description-Realign lotline separating two parcels;'construct nine condominium dwelling units and' one apartment unit (total of 12 apartments onzS~te)-;.~a~M.~_9~ing code t~ allow rear setback encroachments. Project Proponent: Richard C. Webber Contact Person: Paula Rankin Telephone: 544-8890 Ext. 257 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 find' That there, is no substantial evidence that" the project may have a significant effect on the environment. That potential significant affects were identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and agreed to by the applicant that would avoid or mitigate~ the affects to a Point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Said revisions are attached to and hereby made a part of this Negative Declaration. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not required. The initial study which provides the basis for this determination is on file at the Community Development Department, City of Tustin. The public is invited to comment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the review period, which begins with the public notice of a · Negative Declaration and extends for seven calendar days. Upon review by the Community Development Director, this review period may be extended if deemed necessary. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS 4:30 p.~. on January 8, 1990 C6mmu~i ~y- De~lopment Di. rector .. le !!. e ( CITY OF TUSTIN Community Development Department ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY FORM Address and Phone Number of Proponent cA' ! · Dale' Oi Checklist Submitted ~ Name of Proposal, if applicable · Envireament~l lrnpect~ (Explanations of all '~es" and "maybe" answers are required on attach;ecl sheets.) Will the proi~osal result im Yes Ma'/'be . No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes. in geologic substructures?'. · b. Disruptions, displacements, comp.action or overcovering of the soil? C~ de ee fe Change in topography or ground surface relief features? The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? . . Any increase in wind or Water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? Changes in deposit[on or erosion of beach sands'~ or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? e ge Air. Exposure of people or property to geolo- gic i~zards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? Will the proposal result in: ae Substantial air emissions or deterioration of arrbient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? Ce ' Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climcrte~ 'either locally or .r~jio~ily? Will the proposal result in: ae Changes in currents~ or the course of di- rection of water movement~, in either marine or fresh waters? Chef, es. in absorption rates, drainage' pat- terns, ar .the rate and amount of surface runoff? c. Alterations to the course ar fl~w 'of flood waters? d. Chonge in the amount of surface water in . ony water body? e. D is~horge into surfoce waters~ or in on), t alteration of surface woter qu~lity, in- cluding but not limited to temperoture~ dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? ge he Chonge in the quontity of ground waters, either through direct odditions or with- drawals, or through interception-of on oquifer by cuts or ex.covations? Substantiai.reductian in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supp lies? Exposure of people or property to water re- lated hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 5~ ® Be Plt~t Life. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or. number of any-species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aqUatic. plants)? . b. Reduction of the numbers of (ny Unique, rare or endangered species of plants? Ce Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a borrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of ony agricultural crop? Animal Life. Will the proposa__l result in: ae Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of. any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare br endangered species of animals? Ce Introducti°n of new species of a~imals into c~ area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of a~imais? ct. Deterioration to existing fish or wiidlif~ habitat? -- Noise~ Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Light ~ Glare. Will the proposal prc~clUCe new light or glare? Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub- stantia[ alteration of the pres~:~t or planned land use of an area? Nal~ral Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of. any natural resources? Y~ 10. I!. 12. 13. 14. b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or rodkrtiort) in the event of an accident or upset cor~litions? be Poss~le interference with an emergency resporu~ plan or an emergency evooJation plan? Populcrtiom Will the proposal alter the location, distr~utian, density~ or growth rate of the human population of on area? Housing. Will the proposal affect existing hous- ing, or create a demand for additional housing? Transportcrtion/CirCUicrtio~. Will the proposal result in: a. Ceneration of substantial additional veh icular, movement? be Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? Substantial impact upon existing t.ranspor- tation systems? d~ ee Alteratians to present patterns of 'circula- tion or movement of people and/qr goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians.? Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a nm. ad for new or altered governmental services in .any of the ' following oreos: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection?' c. Schools? Yes 15. o. d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. N~intenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? . EnergY. Will the proposal result' in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? be Substantial increase in demand upon exist-. lng sources of energy~ or require the development of new sources of energy? Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: c~ Power or natural gas? - b. Communications systems? c. Water? cl. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 1'7. Human Health. Will the proposal ~sult in: ! 8. · 19. 20. a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? Aesthetics. Will the proposal.result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Recrec~tion. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the dest~iaa of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? Y~ x X b. Will the'proposal re~lt in adver~ physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic l~iiding, structure, or object? Does the proposal have the potential to caus~ a physical ~ ~d'~ic~ would affect ur~ique etl~ic cultural values? . . cl. Will the propo~zI restrict existing relkjious or sac~ed uses within the potential impact czrea? 21. de be Ce Mandat~ Findings of Signif'mance. . a. Does the project have the potential to degrade' the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habit, crt of a fish or wildlife species, cc~se a fish or wild- life population to drop below self SUs-. taining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the 'rcrge of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate irr~ortant examples of the major'periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project] have the pdtential to achieve short-term~ to the disadvantage of Iong-term~ 'environmental goals? (A short- term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief~ definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure- well into' the' futgre.) ' · Does 'the Project have impacts which are individually limited~ but cumulatively con- siderable? (A project may in'pact on two or-more separate resources where the impact on'each resource is. relatively small~ but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) Does the project have environmental effects which Will cause substantial adverse effects on human bei.ngs, either directly or indirectly? · 111. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation A 1¥. C~terminotioq (To be, completed by the Lead A~ency} On the b~sis of this( .nil,,,I evaluation: · ! find that the proposed project COOLD NOT have 'a significant effect . on the enviror~ment, and o NEGATIVE DECLARATION"Will be prepared. J J ,, · i find that although tl~ proposed project could have. a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigatic~ measures clescr~ed an an attached ?fl~eet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY hcr,~ a significant effect on the. environ- merit, and an ENVIF~ONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. J J DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION TENTATIVE TRACT MAP' 14022, DESIGN REVIEW 88-70 VARIANCE 89-19 The applicant proposes to demolish an existing single-family dwelling and accessory structures; adjust the boundary between two. properties; construct nine condominium dwellingunits; and convert an ex~sting apartment into two dwelling units. The 78,450-square foot (SF) (1.69 acres) site is located north of the old Irvine Triangle at 1062 and-1082 Wass Street. It is situated within an urban area and zoned Suburban Residential District (R-4). The site is comprised of two parcels. For identification purposes, they are designated .as Lot 1 and Lot 2. Lot 1 comprised, of 22 050 SF, is developed , with a single-family residence and two garage structures; Lot 2 is developed with an ll-unit apartment complex. After the removal of the structures from Lot 1, the lotline separating'the two parcels will..obe adjusted to increase the area of Lot 1 by 25 percent to 29,505 SF. That will provide adequate land area to construct nine condominium units. While the area,of Lot 2 will be correspondingly decreased, adequate land area will be retained to allow one of the existing units to be remodeled into two apartments for a new total of 12 apartment units. The condominiums will have attached two-car garages, An existing three-car garage will be relocated and a two-car garage will be constructed on the apartment site, Lot 2 to provide adequate parking for the apartments. ' EARTH - The site is, flat, with no unique geological Or topographic features. The property is presently developed and the current proposal will require minor grading and compaction to create building pads and facilitate site drainage. Appropriate soils reports and grading plans are required as part of the City's design review, building plan check and permit processes. All applicable code requirements and provisions will be incorporated into the plans to ensure that no adverse imPacts, such as dust or soil erosion during the construction phase, will be created. Southern California is designated, as seismic zone 4, an area of potentially severe earthquakes, depending on loca~ geological~conditions. Sources: City of Tustin Building Division City of Tustin Public Works Department Mitiqation Measures/Monitorinc: Appropriate measures will be taken during constructio~ to insure adequate dust control during the grading operation. Those measures shall include, but not be limited to, watering the site. If grading takes place between October and March, an erosion control plan will be reviewed, approved and Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Tentative Tract Map 14022, Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 January 8, 1990 Page 2 · · · implemented for the project. Appropriate grading and construction techniques will be followed to minimize geological hazards. These will be monitored by the Building Division. AIR - The proposal will not result in any degradation to the existing air quality based on review of AQMD standards for preparing EIR documents. Sources: AQMD standards for preparing EIR documents Mitiqation Measures/Monitoring: None Required. WATER - The project will not result in any change to existing surface bodies of water or flow of streams, as none exist near the site.' However, the proposal will add impervious surface area to the property which could effect drainage and absorption rates. Appropriate drainage plans are required as part of the City's building permit process and will be designed in accordance with acceptable City Standards. All drainage will be collected on site and transmitted to a public storm~drain system. Sources: Field Observation City of Tustin Building Division City of Tustin Public Works Department ~itigation Measures/Monitoring: Alterations to drainage will be subject to review and approval by'the City's Building Division and Public Works Department. Compliance with applicable requirements will be verified by the Building Division and Public Works Department prior to certification of rough grading. PLANT LIFE - Existing on-site vegetation includes a few large specimen trees along the east property line and a stand of orange trees at the rear of the parcel. 'Those plant materials will be removed to construct the new dwelling units. However, new specimen trees and other landscaping will be installed as part of the development plans, in accordance with the City's landscaping requirements. Sources: Field Observations. City of Tustin Community Development Department Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Tentative Tract Map 14022, Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 January 8, 1990 Page 3 · · · ~itiqation Measures/Monitoring: None~Required. ANIMAL LIFE - The project is an infill residential development in an urban area. It is free from any significant population of animals, fish, or wild life. ' 'Sources: Field Observations. Mitiqation Measures/Monitoring: None Required. NOISE - A single-family dwelling and an ll-unit apartment complex are presently located on the site. The development of nine condominium units and one apartment may generate some additional noise in the area. However, the site is flanked by existing commercial and residential areas. Increased residential uses will have few long term adverse noise impacts on the vicinity. Local residents may experience short term impacts related to construction activity. Sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department Field Observations Mitiqation Measures/Monitorinq: Ail conStruction activity will be limited to Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., pursuant to the City's~ Noise Ordinance, and monitored by the Building Division and/or Police Department. LIGHT AND GLARR - The proposed project will increase lighting on the property and in the area. However, through the design review process, lighting has been specifically reviewed to ensure that: 1) The minimum amount of lighting is provided in accordance with the City's Security Code;'and 2) Lighting does not produce direct light rays or glare on adjacent properties. Conditions to this effect have been included in the project ,approval. Proper installation will be verified prior to final inspections. Sources: City of Tustin Community Dewelopment Department Tustin City Code Mitiqation MeasureS/Monitoring: None required. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Tentative Tract Map 14022, · Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 January 8, 1990 Page 4 · LAND USE - The site is located within the Suburban Residential (R-4) District. The General Plan Land Use Designation 'for the property is Multi-Family Residential (MF). One- and two- family dwellings are in conformance with the General Plan Land Use Designation and permitted within the R-4 zoning district. The maximum allowable number of dwelling units, as permitted by the 'R-4 zoning district, is consistent with the proposed number of units (nine condominiums, 12 apartments). · Sources: Tustin General Plan Land Use Map Tustin'Zoning Map and Code Mitiqation Measures/Monitoring: None Required. · NATURAL RESOURCES ' While the~e will be some use of non- renewable natural resources such as wood, stone and other' building materials, as well as energy, the quantities of building materials and energy used in the construction of nine dwelling units will not significantly deplete resoUrces. Therefore, the proposal will not result in any significant long term use of natural resources· Sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department Mitiqation Measures/Monitorinq: M e t h o d s o f construction and materials for the condominiums will comply with all applicable code requirements relating to energy efficiency and conservation. 10. RISK OF UPSET - The Proposed project will not result in any increased risk of upset to the property or adjacent properties. Development of the property for residential uses requires compliance with applicable building codes and Fire Department regulations, including the requirement that the units are to be sprinklered which significantly reduces the risk of fire. The~ site is not located within any sensitive seismic areas. Sources: Orange County Fire Department ' C£ty of Tustin Community Development Department City of Tustin Building Division Tustin General Plan Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Tentative Tract Map 14022, Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 January 8, 1990 Page 5 Miti ation Measures Monitorin : None required. 11. POPULATION - The proposed project will result in an area Populatio~ increase of approximately 22 residents, based on 2.2.persons per dwelling unit. The increase will most 1-ikely result from relocations within the community. Any actual population increase to the City as a result of this project will be negligible. Sources: City of Tustin community Development Department Miti ation Measures Monitorin : None Required 12. HOUSING - The constructionof 10 residential units (9 condos, 1 apartment) in an existing urban area'will not create a demand for additional housing in the immediate Vicinity as this is an infill project and all immediately adjacent property is presently developed. ' Source: City of Tustin Community Development Department Miti ation Measures Monitorin :~ None Required. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION - The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the existing vehicular circulation, street system, .parking facilities, or movement of goods and services. The project density is approximately 13.28 Units per acre.. Based on that, ~the guideline for determining vehicular trip generation is 8.6 trips per dwelling per day. Therefore, the proposed ten units will generate approximately 86 trips. Wass Street is an existing two-lane residential street with a right-of-way which varies from 40 to 60 feet. Estimated capacity of a commuter street of that size is approximately 5,000 trips per day. The Tustin Department of Public Works has not identified any traffic problems in the vicinity. The existing street system is adequate to accommodate this additional housing, and all required parking will be provided on the site. The project will require street improvements (curbs, gutters, driveways) to upgrade a substandard street section along the project frontage. To meet current City standards and to align the new improvements with the existing, a ten-foOt-wide strip of land across the front' of Lot 1 will be dedicated to the 13. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Tentative Tract Map 14022, Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 January 8, 1990 Page 6 City for additional street right-of-way~ Street improvements will be constructed by the applicant at the time of project implementation. ~ Sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department City of Tustin Traffic Engineer Tustin Zoning Code Mitigation Measures/Monitorinq: None Required. 14. .pUBLIC SERVICES - The proposed project will not result in any substantial change to existing public services, or create a need for new public services. The cumulative impacts of the proposal will have minor impacts on police and fire services. However, existing police and fire services are adequate for the project. The development will also increase demands on public schools and park facilities. Sources: ~ity of Tustin Community Development Department urange County Fire Department ' City of Tustin Police Department City of Tustin Public Works Department ~itigation Measures~Monitoring: The applicant will be assessed school' impact fees, as'determined by the Tustin Unified School District, and parkland dedication fees in accordance with City ordinances and state law. 15. ~NERGY - The proposal will result in minor changes in energy use. However, the increase of ten units will not have any significant impacts. The State has energy conservation regulations for electrical and mechanical equipment, plumbing and the building envelope. These are contained in the Uniform. Building Code, as adopted by the City of Tustin. Sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department Miti ation Measures Monitorin : All regulations for energy conservation will be complied with. . 16. UTILITIES - The proposed project will not result in any need , for altered utility systems. The site is in an urban area with all utilities available to the site from Wass Street. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Tentative Tract Map 14022, Design Review 88-70 and Variance 89-19 January 8, 1990 Page 7 with all utilities available to the. site from Wass Street. They are adequate to accommodate the proposed residential development. Source: City of Tustin Public Works.Department ~itigationMeasures/Monitoring: None Required. 17. H UMANHEALTH - The residential project will not create adverse conditions or result in negative effects to hUman health. The proposed residential use is compatible with surrounding land uses. Further' the site is located outside the 500-year flood plain. Sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department Flood Insurance Rate Map City of Tustin Police Department Mitigation Measures/Monitoring: None Required. 18. AESTHETICS - The proposed project will not have a significant negative visual impact on the area. As part of the Design Review process, special care has been taken to ensure architectural compatibility with adjacent commercial and residential uses. Appropriate architectural detailing will be incorporated into all building elevations, minimizing the "back of building,, appearance. Sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department Mitigation Measures/MOnitoring: None Required. 19. RECREATION - The proposed project will result in an increased need for additional recreational opportunities. Residential projects typically create a larger need. for recreational amenities than commercial 'and industrial projects. However, no recreational amenities are proposed as part of this project. Sources: City of ~ustin Community Development Department Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Tentative Tract Map 14022, Design Review 88-70- and Variance 89~19 January 8, 1990 Page 8 Miti ation Measures Monitorin : As previously stated, the applicant will be required to pay parkland dedication fees based upon the number of units and product type prior to the issuance of building permits, in accordance with the Tustin City Code and State law., 20. _CULTURAL RESOURCES - The proposed project will not have any effect on the cultural resources. The General Plan and the Historic Resources Survey do not identify any culturally significant resources on this property. Sources: City of Tustin Historic Resources Survey Tustin General Plan · Miti ati0n Measures Monitorin : None Required. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE - Potential impacts related to erosion and dust control during construction, noise, lighting, vehicular traffic, u~e of public services, and recreation facilities have been identified as a result of this project. The proposal, as currently designed, conditioned, and mitigated, has reduced these potential impacts to a level of. insignificance and will not ,result in any adverse environmental impacts. Sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department M'iti ation Measures Monitorin : As Previously Noted. PR: kbc , 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96-47 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 '18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, RE-CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-002 AND AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACT 14022 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: ae The request to approve General Plan Amendment 96- 002 and Amendment to Tentative Tract 14022 are considered "projects" pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Be A Negative Declaration was previously prepared and certified on January 8, 1990 for this project and was distributed for public review. Ce 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. De The City Council has evaluated and determined the final Negative Declaration to be adequate and complete. II. A Final Negative Declaration has been previously prepared and certified on January 8, 1990 in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The City Council, having approval authority over General Plan Amendment 96-002 and Amendment to Tentative Tract 14022, has received and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration, prior to approving the proposed project, and found that the Negative Declaration adequately discussed the environmental effects of-the proposed project. On the basis of the initial study and comments received during the public review process, the City Council has found that although the proposed projects could have impacts, there will not be a significant effect because mitigation measures identified in the Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the project which mitigate any potential significant environmental effects to a point where clearly no significant effect would occur. The mitigation measures are identified in Exhibit A of the Negative Declaration and Initial Study and are , % adopted as findings and conditions of Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3437 and 3438. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-47 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 6th day of May, 1996. PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK TRACY WILLS WORLEY MAYOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 96-47 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 6th day of May, 1996, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96-48 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-002, TO · CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO "MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" ON THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1062 AND 1082 WASS STREET. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: ao The a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held on said application by the Planning Commission on April 22, 1996 and by the City Council on May 6, 1996; and Be A Negative Declaration has been previously prepared for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and Ce That the General Plan Land Use Designations on these properties were inadvertently changed from "Multiple Family" to "Low Density Residential" in 1994 as part of the General Plan Update; and Do Ee That the proposed General Plan Amendment change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential is consistent with the Tustin Zoning Code which designates these properties as Suburban Residential. (R-4) which would accommodate residential development up to 15 dwelling units per acre; and That the proposed General Plan Amendment to Medium Density residential is in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the surrounding area in that the proposed designation is compatible with the surrounding residential uses. II. The City Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment 96-002 changing the Land Use Designation of the properties located at 1062 and 1082 Wass Street from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-48 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 6th day of May, 1996. PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK TRACY WILLS WORLEY MAYOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF TUSTIN SS I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members, of the City. Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 96-48 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 6th day of May, 1996, by the'following vote: . COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 96-48 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-002 ~- WASS - IRVINE 3-39 LOT l' . LOT 2 ,4C. I.~07 AC. 14 022 B£K. Q . 2.27 AC. POR. LOT 331 .® OLD IRVtNE BOULEVARD P. kL 96-29 PAR. I pi4 9~-29 PAR. 2 · Existing Land Use Designation: Proposed Land Use Designation: A.P. Nos: 501-081-25 501-081-26 Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 96-49 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACTMAP 14022. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: ae That the Planning Commission and City Council previously approved Tentative Tract 14022 for nine (9) condominiums in January and February of 1990 respectively; and Be That Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 14022 was submitted to the City Council by Brandywine Development Corporation for consideration; and Ce That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said Amendment by the Planning Commission on April 22, 1995, and by the City Council on May 6, 1996; and De A Negative Declaration has been previously prepared' and certified for this project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and Ee That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan, as amended by GPA 96- 002, and Subdivision Map Act; and Fo The parkland dedication requirements will be satisfied by payment of park in lieu fees; and Ge That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and He That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; and I · That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat; and J· 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; and 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-49 Page 2 Ke That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems. II. The City Council hereby approves Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 14022 to construct ' nine (9) detached condominiums, subject to the Conditions contained in Exhibit A, attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 6th day of May, 1996. PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK TRACY WILLS WORLEY MAYOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 96-49 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 6th day of May, 1996, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACT 14022 RESOLUTION NO. 96-49 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL *** 1.1 Condition 10.5 of Planning'Commission Resolution No. 2728 is hereby revised to read as follows: "Prior to the release of building permits, all conditions of appr. oval of Design Review 96-002 and Variance 96-001 for the subject project shall be complied with as shown in Exhibit A attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 3438." *** 1.2 Condition 2.2 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2728 is hereby revised to read as follows: "Reciprocal emergency access easements shall be provided between Lots 1 and 2 of Tentative Tract 14022. Said Easement documents 'shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department and City Attorney. The final City approved easement documents shall be recorded prior to issuance of any permits for the construction of the project. *** 1.3 Ail conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2728, except as modified by this Resolution, shall remain' in full force and effect.'' (1) 1.4 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) 1.5 The Subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued within twenty four (24) months of the date of this Exhibit and substantial construction is underway. Time extensions may be granted if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. 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 *** EXCEPTION Exhibit A Amendment to Tentative Tract 14022 Resolution No. 96-49 Page 2 (1) 1.6 Approval of Amendment to Tentative Tract 14022 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form as established by the Director of Community Development. (1) 1.7 The applicant shall hold and defend the City of Tustin harmless for all claims and liabilities arising out of the City's approval of the entitlement process for this project.