Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
01 TT MAP 14410 06-17-96
NO. 1 6-17-96 DATE: JUNE 17, 1996 Inter-Com TO' WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM" COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14410 (LEWIS HOMES) SUMMARY: "Amendrnent ..to .'.VeSting Tentative..Tract . 14410: is' a request .to' :add three new residential product:types to a prevtously approved 171:lot subdivision on,Lots 7, 8, "N", '0" and ".U" of Tract 13627. On May 28, 1996, the Planning Commission recommended that.the :City Council approve Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract 14410, and approved Amendments to: Hillside Review 95-001, Design Review 95-008 and ConditiOnal Use Permit 91-008 for. the stte :.specific: development plans. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council: I o Approve the environmental determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 96-64; and 2. Approve Amendment to Tentative Tract Map 14410 by adopting Resolution No. 96-65, 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 Amend TT 14410 June 17, 1996 Page 2 BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Project Description In October of 1995, the City Council approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410, which authorized the subdivision of an approximate 38-acre site to accommodate 171 single-family detached residential dwellings in accordance with the Cluster Development Standards of the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) and the City's Hillside Review standards. To date, the final map has been approved and construction of the models for the originally approved product line has commenced. The applicant is now requesting approval for three new residential product types to be constructed on 64 of the 171 lots (Attachment B). The original approved plans for the subject development included' three (3) different floor plans, all two-story, ranging in size from approximately 2,376 square feet to 2,987 square feet (Attachment B). The project was proposed to be constructed in eleven phases, including the model complex. The applicant is proposing to construct the three new product types on Lots 21 through 84 of the 171-lot subdivision, which would comprise approximately 37 percent of the project buildout. The floor plans range in size from 1,837 to 2,300 square feet of livable area. A second, six-unit model complex is proposed on Lots 48 through 53. Both products will be marketed and constructed simultaneously. No modifications to the previously approved street system or lot configuration of the development is proposed as part of this project. The architectural design of the originally approved project is a contemporary interpretation of the Early California style. The proposed elevations include similar architectural features, and utilize the same material and color palettes as the previously- approved designs. Massing elements on the front elevations, are provided at the same scale as the originally approved plans, so that there is little evidence of size differentiation between the original and new product types at street level. The overall quality of design is consistent among all six product types. The new product types are proposed to be consolidated on the southwesterly portion of the subdivision, separated from the remainder of the project site. The transition points between the original and new product types will be buffered, by two landscaped lots, Lot Q to the south and Lot T to the north. City Council Report Amend TT 14410 June 17, 1996 Page 3 The proposed modifications meet or exceed all other development standards required by the ETSP. Please refer to the attached statistical summary for.more detailed information. CC&Rs and Put~lic Disclosure Both product lines will be governed under the same Homeowners Association and CC&Rs. Unlike the Standard Pacific (Tract 14188) and Bramalea (Tract 13908) projects, where similar dual-product line proposals were opposed by residents of those subdivisions, none of the subject project units have been constructed or sold .Therefore, public concern of a similar nature is not expected to b~ generated. Nonetheless, the applicant has agreed to provide a disclosure of the two product lines as an addendum to all initial purchase and sale agreements. A condition requiring that this disclosure be made to all initial home buyers, and that the Community Development Department be provided with a copy of the disclosure statement prior to the issuance of building permits, has been included in the Tentative Tract Resolution. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS An Initial Study has been prepared for this project and is attached to this report. Based upon review of the proposed project and Environmental Impact Report ~(EIR) 85-2, as amended, it has been determined that environmental issues relating to this project have previously been addressed. Mitigation measures identified in EIR 85-2, as amended, are included as conditions of approval; therefore, staff recommends that the Council find that requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met and no further environmental review is required. Associate Planner Attachments: Location Map Community Development Director gg: TT14410. gg Statistical Summary A - Previously Approved Plans B - Proposed Plans C - Planning. Commission Resolution Nos. 3447 3448, 3449 and 3450 ' Initial Study Resolution Nos. 96-64 and 96-65 LOu, ATIO N. MAP / / / PROJECT SITE /! ! · · · ee t · NO SCALE Statistical Summary Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410, Hillside Review 95-001, Design Review 95-008 and Conditional Use Permit 91-008 Gross Site Area Building Area Open Space Street Area Total Units Density Lot Coverage Building Setbacks Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Maximum Height Resident Parking Cluster Development Requirement N/A N/A 0.2 acres N/A N/A 5 du/ac (gross) 7O% 15 feet minimum 5 feet minimum 10 feet minimum 35 feet 342 spaces (2-car garage per unit) Proposed 38 acres 23 acres 8 acres 7 acres 171 units 4.5 du/ac (gross) 46% 15 feet minimum 5 feet minimum 10 feet minimum 29 feet (two story) 20 feet (single story) 513 spaces (3-car garage per unit) Guest Parking 342 spaces 377 spaces PLAN SQ. FT. (Previously Approved) 393 2,376 389 2,659 250 2,987 (Proposed) 398 1,837 520 2,090 399 2,300 DESCRIPTION 4 BD/Bonus, 3 BA 4 BD/Bonus, 3 BA 4 BD/Bonus, 3 BA 3 BD, 2 BA 4 BD, 2 BA 5 BD, 3 BA QUANTITY 32 18.7 35 20.5 40 23.4 17 9.9 19 11.1 28 16.4 TOTALS 171 100% ATTACHMENT A: Previously Approved Plans ~ © 2a- JUL-1995 i:\ foom,ogn ,] ' ~ f ~,l'ltt'~' ~, .~- Ii.l '"~ "' "' i ................. ..... iii '~ ILL i,l,,,,,. ,. i ;. ~,t iiii .". ':',-' , II. , ,- : l:, :,,, ! i,,,.i, li,j si, ' -- [l:Jl:j'l,':'"[i!:,:'ll':ll':l..:::~[[[[,[ J i ,,, ,, l, il ,: ,,j ..... ,, ,:, l J , ih ' :,i ,11,~ ~ - ~,J "~i ~jj?' ......... '~!:,',J,,llJ,~,i'll,l,li, .......... .... I!!1 l~j j ~ , ,.:I:: l,: :,,: . ,:~i i~ ,t',:, ii', :' ,i ': I '::: :::l II: : i I: ~: [~[~l' Iii:iii J:lljjijj j ::j' Il [l:jl ' 'ljj j ll!'jJ j I[ J .1 iJJ i: lJJ Jl:'"' "'" llill '[ ....... 'ill 'ill J::ll :~ j[ ,.I.,i.,: ..... I'll"" ! "'ill :ti . ,:llilI,' t ~[jlllJl[~ ,I , h h h t, ! ,il ~ ~ I:, : ,,!Jlr. l;' [[ ;~ , .. I !,::,,:[~, illt~l~lll~ ~]~ ~ J:ll :"jljjll," , , I I ! ! I I . . I:~ ! i · i iii pE~TER$ --MATTHEW~-~ DIIIVE HISKE¥ ,~ PIONEER · . · .~ · ~ LANE ,. [[[[ [ [ i . i n[ · -- · il i cur r ~t ~s$~fllI~Jt hffi~me · __ Pl..AN 393 "' ,-.--- " TUSTIN RANCH - ~'''" ----~-- ~ "EL DORADO" LEanS HOMES OF ~._U_F_?RN,^ CURRENTD&T£ ! m I I J~ oo · ~ ~o 4020 XO SILL · 6'-r 8060 5NAP£ 20~0 F.C. 2030 F.C. ND. m 15'-~ ND. · ?'-0' HD. ~ ?'-0' 5050 ~06 ND. · '- · · o 805,0 XOX t~.e 7'-6' ! 5050 XO i CUR~£NTD&?£ ~ i mm i I I ~ P~ 389 I , , ~lS H~ES OF ~ , , CURR£NTDAT£ ~ PLAN 389 ............. TUSTIN RANCH .............. EL DORADO~ - CURRENTO/' TE -- J PLAN 389 LE~VlS HOMES Of: CALIFORNIA TUSTIN RANCH "EL DORADO" CAB. ?050 HD. · 7'-6' L t I I I I 80SO XOX l~'.e 7'-&' ] H g ", (~ 140. e .- · Ho.e 7,.-~* III : I I CUI~£NTDIkTE C:'""' r' erwt Oe ahlJ~:'f I m b~ 't s'~°n°`rl°'ne-- I II I I e~ ~50 I -- I J ............. : "EL DORADO" I CU~R~NTD J. TE HOMES OF CALIFORNIA ,i ATTACHMENT B: Proposed Site Plan, Floor Plans & Elevations 0 . © -I- i I I ! I ! ! ! ! I ! © © r~ © , ATTACHMENT C: Planning Commission Resolutions 10' 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 3447 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDED HILLSIDE REVIEW 95-001 FOR AMENDED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14410 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: ao Lewis Homes of California has submitted an application for Hillside Review pursuant to Section 8914.A of the Tustin City Code for those areas which are located within the Hillside District as identified in the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) in conjunction with Vesting Tentative Tract 14410. B . That the Planning Commission discussed said application at a-public hearing in conjunction with Amended Vesting Tentative Tract 14410 on May 28, 1996. C. That in conjunction with said Hillside Review application, the applicant submitted the following information: o A conceptual landscaping plan for the planting of temporary and permanent slopes. o o A conceptual.grading plan that included areas of proposed cut and fill, location of pads and slope analysis of hillside areas including pertinent cross section profiles. . A preliminary geological investigation and soils report. n . That pursuant to Section 8914(c) (8) of the Tustin City Code, the Planning Commission has reviewed the subject application for Hillside Review using the guidelines for hillside grading contained in the Grading Manual to ensure the attainment of the following objectives: . Compliance with the Grading Manual and Hillside Guidelines contained in the manual. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3447 Page 2 o o ~ o . o o Compliance with guidelines established in the September, 1976 Fire Protection Planning Task Force Report, adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors and entitled "Fire Hazard Background Report and Recommendations for the Reduction of Fire Hazard at the Natural Open Space/Urban Development Interface Orange County, California." Provision of fire-resistant roofing materials, Class A minimum. Visual, drainage and slope erosion impacts from any proposed parcelization resulting from slope conditions are within either the property owner's management and control or the Homeowners' Association, whichever is applicable. Sites are planned in such a way so as to preserve or enhance important vistas and maintain the overall landform character of the land use area, particularly those seen from public places. Preservation of the open space values of the central Peters Canyon ridge as identified in the ETSP by excluding buildings and overhead utility lines from being developed on the top of the ridgeline and by careful siting of structures and landscaping adjacent to the ridgeline. Where feasible, grading and siting reflects the natural topography of the land, drainage patterns and minimizes creation of excessively large leveled areas by grading. Grading on hillside areas will soften hard edges left by cut and fill operations. Where an adverse visual impact may occur, rounded finished contours have been required. Grading slopes (cut of fill), including roadsides, will undergo permanent re- vegetation in a timely manner' to minimize change of erosion and siltation. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3447 Page 3 10. prOvision for drainage and erosion, control made to avoid any damage to existing landforms. 11. Provision and approval of an independent engineering study concerning the potential impacts of slope instability, liquefaction, landslide and seismic potential for proposed development within a Geologic Hazard Special Study Zone. 12. The natural profile and landform character of the knoll identified in the ETSP is maintained. 13. Roadway alignment and grading impacts in~ hillside areas are minimized and hillside roadways are designed consistent with guidelines contained in the Grading Manual. 14. Slope gradients will vary when adjacent to -roadways to create open areas to be planted, thus softening the appearance of man-made slopes. 15. Preparation and recordation of a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions providing for the development and maintenance of slopes and drainage devices will be a condition of approval on Vesting Tentative Tract 14410. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Am~nded Hillside Review 95-001 for Amended Vesting~ Tentative Tract Map 14410, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 ~27 28 Resolution No. 3447 Page 4 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting held on the 28th day of May, 1996. Recording Secretary ChairwOman STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN. ) I, BARBARA REYES the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3447 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of May, 1996. Recording Secretary EXHIBIT A AMENDED HILLSIDE REVIEW 95-001 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 3447 GENERAL *** 1.1 Ail conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3391 remain in full force and effect, except as follows: A. Condition 1.3 is hereby deleted. B. Condition 3.3 is hereby revised to read as follows: "Landscaping and Irrigation plans shall Comply with all requirements of Conditions 4.1 through '4.14. of Exhibit A of Planning Commission .Resolution No. 3448, approving Amended Design Review 95-008." (1) 1.2 The subject amended Hillside Review 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. (1) 1.3 Approval of Amended Hillside Review 95-001 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) 1.4 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. 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 10 11 12 RESOLUTION NO. 3448 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING AMENDED' DESIGN REVIEW 95-008 TO ADD THREE ADDITIONAL PRODUCT TYPES ON LOTS 21-84 OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED'DEVELOPMENT ON VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 14410. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I . The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: no That a proper application to amend Design Review' 95-008 was submitted by Lewis Homes of California requesting approval to add three additional product types on Lots 21-84 of the previously approved 'development of Vesting Tentative Tract 14410; and o That the said application was considered by the Planning Commission on May 28, 1996; and Co That an Environmental Impact Report EIR 85-2, as amended, for the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) has been certified in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the subject project; and D . Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Municipal Code, the Commission finds that the location, size, architectural features and general appearance of the proposed development will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole. In making suc~ findings, the Commission has considered at least the following items: . Height, bulk and area of buildings.. 2. Setbacks and site planning. 3. Exterior materials and colors. 4. Type and pitch of roofs. o Size and~spacing of windows, doors and other openings. . Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television antennae. . Landscaping, parking area design and traffic circulation. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2.0 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3448 Page 2 . Location, height and standards of exterior illumination. . Location and apPearance of equipment located outside of an enclosed structure. 10. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood. 11. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structure to. existing structures and possible fut'ure structures in. the neighborhood and public thoroughfares. 12. Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Amended Design Review 95-008 authorizing the addition of three new product types on Lots 21-84 of Vesting Tentative Tract 14410, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A,' attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 28th day of May, 1996. Recording Secretary Chairwoman STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, BARBARA REYES, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution~ No. 3448 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of May, 1996. Recording Secretary GENERAL EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 3448 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AMENDED DESIGN REVIEW 95-008 (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans date stamped May 28, 1996, on file with the Community Development Department as herein modified or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve subsequent minor' modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are to be consistent with provisions of the ETSP.. (1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the,conditions contained in the Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department~ ' , ' (1) 1.3 Design Review approval shall become null and void unless building permits .are issued within twenty four (24) months of the date of this Exhibit. (1) 1.4 The applicant shall sign and return an "Agreement to Conditions Imposed', form prior to issuance of building permits. (1) 1.5 The applicant and property owner shall hold harmless and defend the City of Tustin from all claims and liabilities arising out of the City's approval of the entitlement process for this project. 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) DES IGN REVIEW * * * EXCEPTION Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-008 Resolution No. 3448 Page 2 PLAN SUBMITTAL 2.1 At building plan check, the following items shall be submitted: (3) A. (2) B. (3) (2) C. (3) (1) D. (3) (4) E. Construction plans, structural calculations, and Title 24 energy calculations. Requirements of the Uniform Building Codes, State Handicap and Energy Requirements shall be complied with as approved by the Building Official. Preliminary technical details and plans for all utility installations including cable TV, telephone, gas, water and electricity. Additionally, a note on plans shall be included stating that no field changes shall be made without corrections submitted to and approved by the Building Official. Rough and/or Precise grading plans and specifications consistent with the site plan and landscaping plans and prepared by a registered civil engineer for approval by the Community Development Department. A precise soils engineering report provided by a soils engineer written in the previous twelve (12) months from the date of plan check submittal. A model complex plan identifying all temporary fencing, landscaping,~ elevation alterations, parking facilities and other temporary, model complex facilities subject to approval of Community Development Department. .(2) (3) A detailed acoustical noise study prepared by a qualified acoustical expert, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department, to insure that interior noise levels do not exceed a maximum of 45 dB CNEL and exterior noise levels shall not exceed a maximum of 65 dB CNEL. Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-008 Resolution No. 3448 Page 3 (1) G. (3) H. Detailed plans for pool and spa areas must be approved by the Orange County Health Department. Ail pool and spa areas must be enclosed by a five (5) foot high fence with self-closing and latching gates with access by key only and with vertical openings as established by the City's Uniform Swimming Pool and Spa Code. Comply with Sec. 1710 of UBC for projections, e.g.; 1) combustible projections located where openings are not permitted or where protection of openings is required, shall be of I-HR fire- resistive or heavy timber construction conforming to Sec. 2106 of UBC, and; 2) projections shall not extend more than i2 inches into the area where openings are prohibited. (1) 2.2 Consideration shall be given to include rough plumbing for future .solar heating options for recreation buildings. Copper shall be installed from hot water closet and the hot water closet shall be adequate to accommodate a solar water heater and the addition of a ll0V electrical outlet. (1) 2.3 Applicant shall be permitted to obtain grading permits and building permits for model unit'construction prior to approval of Final Map 14410 provided all Building Code, Public Works, Fire Department and Community Development Department requirements have been met and approvals granted. (1) 2.4 Architectural plans shall not be submitted for plan check unless accompanied by a letter approving proposed design by The Irvine Company. SITE AND BUILDING CONDITIONS *** 3.1 The subject amended Design Review shall only apply to Lots 21 through 84. Design Review 95-008 (Resolution No. 3392) and the specific plotting of units on Lots 1-20 and 85-171 with Plans 250, 389 and 393 shall remain in full force and effect. Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-008 Resolution No. 3448 Page 4 (1) 3.2 Provide exact details for exterior doors and window types (4) and treatments (i.e., framing color, glass tint). (1) 3.3 Indicate location of exterior utility meters and°include screening details. Screening adequacy, appearance and compatibility shall be subject to ~ approval of the Community Development Department. (1) 3.4 Ail exterior coIors to be used shall be consistent with (4) the previously approved residences and shall be subject' to review and approval of the Director of the Community Development Department. All exterior treatments shall be coordinated with regard to color, materials and detailing and noted on submitted constrUction plans and elevations. The color glacier white shall be eliminated from the exterior color palette. (1) 3.5 Note on final plans that a six-foot-high chain linked fence shall be installed around the site prior to building construction stages. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the site for construction vehicles. (1) r 3.6 Ail mechanical and electrical fixtures and equipment (4) shall be adequately and decoratively screened. The screen shall be considered as an element of the overall design of the project and shall blend with the architectural design of buildings. All telephone and electrical boxes shall be indicated on the building plans and shall be cOmpletely screened. Electrical transformers shall be located toward the interior of the project maintaining a sufficient distance to minimize visual impacts on entry points along Pioneer Road. If visible from the backbone road or auto court, air conditioning units shall, be screened from view by architectural features. (1) 3.7 Exterior elevations of the buildings shall indicate any (4) fixtures or equipment to be located on the roof of the building, equipment heights and type of screening. (3) (4) (1) 3.8 Perimeter walls constructed by the subdivider shall be consistent with wall concepts approved for Tract 13627. Patio or courtyard block walls which do not also serve as perimeter walls for the project shall be consistent with main building treatments or community theme wall as reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department during plan check. Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-008 Resolution No. 3448 Page 5 (1) 3.9 Final mailbox architectural details indicating color and (4) exterior treatment shall be included in the working drawings, and subject to review and 'approval of the Community Development Department during plan check. LANDSCAPING, 'GROUNDS AND ~ARDSCAPE ELEMENTS (6) 4.1 The applicant shall submit detailed landscaping and irrigation plans for all new landscaping areas and the model complex on'the site consistent with adopted City of Tustin Landscaping and Irrigation Guidelines. The plans shall include the following information: k. A summary table applying indexing identification to plant materials in their actual location. The plan and table must list botanical and common names, sizes, spacing, actual location and quantity of the plant materials proposed. m o Planting and berming details, soil preparation staking, etc. ' C. ~ The irrigation plan shall show location and control of backflow prevention devices, pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing and coverage. Details for all equipment must be provided. D o Ail property lines on the landscaping and irrigation plan, public right-of-way area, sidewalk widths, parkway areas, and wall locations. E. Note on landscaping plan that coverage of landscaping irrigation materials is subject to field inspection at. project completion by the Community Development Department. (6) 4.2 The Community Development Department may request minor substitutions of plant materials or request additional sizing or quantity materials during plan check. (7) 4.3 The submitted landscaping plans at plan check shall reflect the following requirements: no Turf 'is unacceptable for grades over 25%. A combination of planting materials must be used, ground cover on large areas along is not acceptable. / Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-008 Resolution No. 3448 Page 6 B . Shrubs shall be spaced a minimum of 5 feet on center. C o Ground cover shall be planted between 8 to 12 inches on center. D o Fences, walls and equipment areas, shall be screened with shrubs and/or vines and trees. E . Ail plant materials shall be installed in a healthy vigorous condition typical to the species and must be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. Maintenance includes but is not limited to trimming, mowing, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing, regular'watering, and replacement of diseased or dead plants. F o Buffer driveway and parking areas with landscaping berms when possible. G o Earth mounding is essential and must be provided to applicable heights whenever it' is possible in conjunction with the submitted landscaping plan. Earth mounding should be particularly provided at project entries and along the backbone road. H o Major points of entry to the project, courtyards and pedestrian internal circulation routes shall receive specimen trees to create an identification theme.- I . Landscape adjacent to the right-of-way shall be coordinated with parkway landscaping. Perimeter walls shall be treated with vines, in order to relieve large expanses of walls. Vines shall be informally grouped with training devices installed. (1) 4.4 Screening adjacent to roadways, whenever possible, shall (7) compliment the architecture, color and construction (4) material of primary buildings on.the site. (1) 4.5 Ail walls, fences, or landscaping adjacent to streets (7) should be designed to provide adequate sight distance for (4) vehicles exiting the tract via the private streets. Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-008 Resolution No. 3448 Page 7 (1) 4.6 Provide details, colors, and materials for all exterior (4) walkways, stairs and walls. Design interior walkways to (7) create a reinforced pedestrian corridor with accessory landscaping treatment. (1) 4.7 Entryways to the project site should be focal points. (4) In addition to larger tree treatments, these areas should (7) be provided with a variety of color and treatment of landscaping as well as an incorporation of special decorative signage or pavement treatment (i.e. walls gates, lighting, etc.). ' ' (1) 4.8 A complete, detailed project sign program including (4) design, location, sizes, colors, and materials shall be approved by The Irvine Company then submitted for review . and approval by the Department of Community Development. The sign program shall include temporary and permanent project identification, addressing and street signs. Address signs shall be automatically illuminated. (1) 4.9 Indicate lighting scheme~for project, note locations of (4) all exterior lights and types of fixtures on the elevations'. Ail street lighting shall'be in accordance with City standards. Lights to be installed on buildings shall be a decorative design. No lights shall be permitted which may create any glare or have a negative impact on adjoining properties. The location and types of lighting shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. (6) 4.10 Ail landscape structures, such as trellises, gazebos, decks, barbecue areas, pools, etc., within the recreation complex shall require building permits. (4) 4.11 The motor court shall include the use of decorative hardscape pavement treatments and subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department during plan check. (4) 4.12 Prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for Phase 1, the developer shall install all landscaping on perimeter Lots "M", "N" and "O" and a chain-link screen fencing, maximum 6 feet in height, shall be installed on Lots "K", "L" and "V" Prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for Phase 3, the developer shall install all landscaping on perimeter Lots "K", "L" and Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-008 Resolution No. 3448 Page 8 "V". Prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for Phase A, the developer shall install all landscaping on perimeter Lots "R" and "S" The phasing plan shall be revised to include these improvements. (4) 4.13 Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy for dwellings within Phase 2, all site improvements and landscaping shall be installed on recreation lots A, W and' AJ. The phasing plan shall be revised to include these improvements. (4) 4.14 The visibility sight lines need to be shown on the landscape plan-per OCEMA Standard Plan No. 1117 at the intersection of Pioneer Road/Carlson Court and Peters Canyon Road/Orchard Drive. NOISE (~) 5.1 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, a final (2) acoustical analysis report describing the acoustical (3) design features of the structures required to'satisfy the exterior and interior noise standards shall be submitted to the Tustin Community Development Department -for approval along with satisfactory evidence which indicates that the sound attenuation measures specified in the approved acoustical report(s) have been incorporated into the design of the project. The acoustical analysis shall be prepared by an expert or authority in the field of acoustics. Ail residential lots and dwellings shall be. sound attenuated against present and projected noises, which shall be the sum of all noise impacting the project, so as .not to exceed an exterior standard 65 dBa CNEL in outdoor areas and an interior standard of 45 dBa CNEL in, all habitable rooms is required. Evidence prepared under the supervision of an acoustical consultant that these standards will be satisfied in a manner consistent with applicable zoning regulations shal% be provided. (1) 5.2 Prior to issuance of any Certificates of Use or (3) Occupancy, field testing in accordance with the Title 25 regulations may be required by the Building Official to verify compliance with STC and IIC design standards. Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-008 Resolution No. 3448 Page 9 (1)- 5.3 Ail construction operations, including engine warm-up, deliveries of materials and equipment, shall be subject to the provisions of the'City of Tustin Noise Ordinance shall take place only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday unless otherwise determined by the Building Official. (1) 5.4 Construction hours shall be clearly posted on the project site to the satisfaction of the Building Official. FEES (1) 6.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall (3) be made of all required fees as may be in effect at the (6) time of permit issuance, including but not limited to: A. Major thoroughfare and bridge fees in the amount of $2,501 per unit to the Tustin Public Works Department, or as may be amended prior to permit issuance. m o Water and sewer connection fees to the Irvine Ranch Water District. Ce m. Street improvement, grading and landscaping plan checks and permit fees to the Community Development Department based on the most current schedule, as may be amended prior to permit issuance. Ail apPlicable Building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department based on the most current schedule, as may be amended prior to permit issuance. m o New development fees in the'amount of $350 per unit to the Community Development Department, or as may be amended prior to permit issuance. F o School facilities fee to the Tustin Unified School District subject to any agreement reached and executed between the District and the Irvine Company. Exhibit A Amended Design Review 95-00'8 Resolution No. 3448 Page 10 G. Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver t© the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $38.00 (thirty eight dollars) pursuant to AB 3185, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination requir%d under Public Resources Code Section 21151 and 14 California Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above- noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. In addition, should the Department of Fish and Game reject the Certificate of Fee Exemption filed with the Notice of Determination and require payment of fees, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, within forty-eight (48) hours of notification, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $850 (eight hundred fifty dollars) pursuant to AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990. If this fee is imposed, the subject project shall not be operative, vested or final unless and until the fee is paid. gg: br :pcreso:3448 10 11 12 13 RESOLUTION NO. 3449 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91 - 0'08 AUTHOR I ZING THE USE OF THE CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AS STATED IN THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF TRACT 14410 The Planning'Commission does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: no I o m o That a proper application for a second amendment to Conditional Use Permit 91-008, has been filed on behalf of Lewis Homes Management Corp. to request authorization to use the Cluster Development standards as stated in the East Tustin Specific Plan for development Of Tract 14410. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said application on May 28, 1996 by the Planning Commission. Co That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use applied for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, nor detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, nor to the general welfare of the C~ty of Tustin as evidenced by the following: o o The use of the. Cluster Development standards allows for the development of a common recreation facility and passive open space areas for the enjoyment and benefit of each of the homeowners of the tract and their guests. The project proposes 2.5 acres of useable common open space where 0.2 acres are required. . The project proposes a cohesive pedestrian open space system throughout the project with direct access to the recreation facilities and Peters Canyon Road. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3449 Page 2 II. The Planning Commission hereby approves this second amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 91-008 authorizing the use of the Cluster Development standards as stated in the East Tustin Specific Plan for the development of Tract 14410 subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A of Planning Commission ResolutiOn Nos. 3448 and 3450 incorporated herein by reference. PASSED ANDADOPTED at a regular'meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of May, 1996. Chairwo~an ' Recording Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN. ') I, BARBARA REYES, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the. City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3349 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th, day of May, 1996. Recording Secretary 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 RESOLUTION NO. 3450 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING. THAT THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AMENDMENT TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP %4410 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I o The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: no That Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410 was submitted to the Planning Commission by Lewis Homes. of California for consideration;'and o That a public hearing was duly called,, noticed'and held for said Amendment by the Planning Commissio~ on May 28, 1996; and C o That an Environmental Impact Report EIR 85-2, as amended, for the East Tustin Specific Plan has been certified in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act for the subject project; and n o That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan, adopted East Tustin Specific Plan, Development Agreement and Subdivision Map Act; and E o F . The 1.5198 acres of parkland required for this development was previously dedicated with recordation of Tract 13627; and That the City has reViewed the status of the School Facilities Agreements between the Irvine Company and the Tustin Unified School DiStrict for the impact of Amendment. to Vesting Tentative Tract 14410 on School District facilities, and changes in State law. Impacts associated with this approval on School District facilities are adequately addressed; and g. H o That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; and 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 3450 Page 2 I o 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 Jo 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 That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410 to add three additional product types on Lots 21-84' of the previously approved development, subject to 'the Conditions contained in Exhibit A, attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 28th day of May, 1996. Recording Secretary Chairwoman STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, BARBARA REYES, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Recording Secretary of-the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3450 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of May, 1996. Recording Secretary EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 14410 RESOLUTION NO. 3450 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL *** 1.1 Condition 1.2 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3394 is hereby revised to read as follows: "Prior to release of building permits, all conditions of approval of Design Review 95-008, and the subsequent amendment thereto, for the subject project shall be complied with as shown on Exhibit A attached to Resolution Nos. 3392 and 3448 respectively.,, Ail other 'conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3394 remain in full force and effect. *** 1.2 The developer shall disclose, t0 all initial purchasers of Lots 1 through 171 of the subject tract, that the development of said lots is composed of two distinct product lines The disclosure shall be provided as .an addendum to afl initial purchase and sale agreements. A copy of the disclosure statement shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of all building permits for all residential units, excluding those comprising the model complexes. (1) 1.3 Unless otherwise specified, the condition's 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) 1.4 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 Amended Tentative Tract 14410 Resolution No. 3450 Page 2 (1) 1.5 Approval of Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract 14410 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) 1.6 The applicant shall hold and defend the City of Tustin harmless from all claims and liabilities arising out of City's approval of the entitlement process for this project. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (7 4) 5z3-3 o5 INITIAL STUDY A. BACKGROUND Project Title: txd~slDq¢_tdT To Lead Agency: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92680 Lead Agency Contact Person: Phone' ~q,4~ ~7~-- ~ lZ7 Project Location: Project Sponsor's Name and Address: General Plan Designation: Project Description: To .msr,/to~ T4-er .F-c-~t~o~_.~-rt~t...Re--cr:a~., q- T'-¢t-qZr cO t.~-6 ii W~-oO~[ ~~t~t~ I~l ~~ ~tM~-~t~ ~~~, ' Surrounding Uses: North FUTO g.~ South ~,.tt:> ~'0'l"d~ ,~l(¢t.~.- ~.~ I'-1' Other public agencies whose approval is required: ~ Orange County Fire Authority ~ Orange County Health Care Agency ~ South Coast Air Quality Management District [-I Other East West City of Irvine City of Santa Aha Orange County EMA Be ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. [] Land Use and Planning IZI Hazards [~ Population and Housing [] Noise [2] Geological Problems 12] Public Services [] Water [] Utilities and Service Systems [] Air Quality 12] Aesthetics ~ Transportation & Circulation 12 Cultural Resources ~ Biological Resources [] Recreation 12 Energy and Mineral Resources I2 Mandatory Findings of Significance Co DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION ,a411 be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there ~411 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. 12 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by' mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ~ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EI~ 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 Do· ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: [] .E._arlier analyses used: Available for review at: City of Tustin Community Development Department 1. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 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 viCinity? d) Affect agricultural resources or operations? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? 2. POPULATION & HOUSING - Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS - Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? 4. WATER - Would the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoffT. 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 the course or direction of water movements? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less &an Significant !tnpact No Impact t) 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' othenvise available for public water supplies? 5. AIR QUALITY - Would the proposal: . a) V~olate an3' 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 an), change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION - Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safer), 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 bicyclists? 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 ?otentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9. HAZARDS - Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiatibn)? 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 hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas ~4th flammable brush, grass, or trees? 10. NOISE - Would the proposal result 11. 12. a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the proposal hm,e 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 res~dt 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 regi6nal 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 Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No bnpact Potentially Significant Impact otentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would 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 - Would 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 quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal communit); 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 short-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? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2[ 0 0 0 ii]' t~ EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Please refer to Attachment A for an evaluation of the environmental impacts identified in Section D above. INITSTUD. PM5 3702A 6 ATTACHMENT A TIERED INITIAL STUDY RESPONSES AMENDMENT TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 14410, AMENDMENT TO DESIGN REVIEW 95-008 AND AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-008 BACKGROUND In October of 1995,. the City Council approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410 which authorized the subdivision of an approximate 38-acre site to accommodate the construction of 171 single-family detached residential 'units in accordance with the cluster development standards of the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP). To date, the final map has been approved and rough grading has commenced. The applicant is requesting approval to add three new residential product types to the project. The total number of dwelling units for this project will not be increased. The improvement of this property is governed by the regulations adopted by the ETSP and the City's Grading Ordinance. The subject site is located in Sectors 2 and 3 of the ETSP and is bordered by Pioneer Road on the east, Peters Canyon Road on the south and west, and Lot 9 (part of TT 14397) to the north. Anticipated development in the vicinity include single-family detached dwellings to the north and West with single-family detached and attached products to the east across Pioneer Road. This. is a tiered initial study that is baSed on and incorporates, by reference, the environmental analysis included in EIR 85-2 for the ETSP (certified on March 17, 1986) and subsequently .amended with supplements and addenda, as it relates to the subject property. In conformance with CEQA, 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 Program EIR, as amended. EIR 85-2, as amended, identified several impact categories where a Statement of Overriding Consideration was adopted by the City for the entire ETSP area. For the purpose of this initial study check list, these items have been checked "Potentially Significant Impact" ahd an evaluation has been made to ensure that impacts previously identified have not been intensified. Mitigation measures identified in the EIR to minimize the impacts that would be applicable to this project have been identified. EIR 85-2, as amended, also identified several impact categories where impacts could be lessened to a level of insignificance with the imposition of mitigation measures. Staff has reviewed each of these impact, categories to be sure no new project' impacts associated with the project would occur that were not identified in the Program EIR, as amended. For the purposes of this initial study check list, these items have been checked "Potentially Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 2 Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" and the mitigation measures identified in the Program EIR, as amended, that would be applicable to this project that are included as part of the project have been identified. Impact categories not identified to have a potential impact in EIR 85-2, as amended, have'been reviewed and identified in the initial study check list accordingly to ensure that the project'Would not create any~additional significant impacts which were not considered by EIR~85-2, as amended, and cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. · LAND USE & PLANNING Items a, b and e - "No Impact": The subject property is designated by the General Plan Land Use Map as Planned Community - Residential. The subjeCt property is zoned Planned Community Residential and is identified within the Low Density Residential Land Use Designation of the ETSP Land Use Plan. The proposed uses on the property are consistent with those land use designations. The proposed project would not alter existing or future land uses. Item c - "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated": EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects of residential land uses to ensure compatibility with existing land uses. Mitigation measures identified in EIR 85-2, as amended, have been incorporated into the project or would be required as conditions of approval which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Program EIR, as amended. The project will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Item d - "Potentially Significant Impact": EIR 85-2, as amended, identified that the development of the p~oject site would result in the gradual conversion of existing open space and agricultural uses into urban use. The City Council considered the benefits of the Specific Plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the Specific Plan. Since the subject property has been identified for residential development, the project will not create Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 3 additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Sources: Submitted Plans -Certified EiR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: Adherence to and compliance with the guidelines and provisions of the ETSP, which address building height, building setbacks, parking requirements, and other site development~ standards and would ensure that the proposed development complies with the mitigation measures specified in the certified EIR 85-2, as amended. · POPULATION & HOUSING Items a and b - "Potentially Siqnificant Impact": The proposed project would provide 171 single-family dwelling units on the site. The Low Density designation would permit up to 190 units pursuant to the ETSP, which allows a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre on the subject site. The proposed project would have 4.5 dwelling units per acre. The project will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended. The project site is within the Specific Plan area for which the certified EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to population. The City.Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to population into either the submitted plans or would be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Item c - "No Impact": Since the p~oject site is currently vacant, no housing units or population would be displaced. The project would provide new dwellings for the planned population. Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 4 Sources: Submitted Plans Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Adherence to and compliance with the guidelines and provisions of the ETSP, which address bUilding height, building setbacks, parking requirements, and other site development, standards and would ensure that the proposed development complies with mitigation measures specified in the certified EIR 85-2, as amended. · GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS Items b, h and i - "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated": EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the necessary grading activity that would occur in order to accommodate the various types of development and the resultant change to existing landform and topography of the area. The site has been mass graded as part of Tract 13627 and subsequently graded to accommodate development of the property consistent with the approved plans. Minor precise grading will be required to accommodate the development. However, since a portion of this site is within the Hillside District, the grading plan has been designed to be sensitive to the existing landforms and preserve the existing prominent hillside on the site. The project has been reviewed and will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified to the site and topography in the Program EIR, as amended. 'Item f - "Potentially Significant Impact": EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the necessary grading activity that would occur in order to accommodate the various types of development and the resultant change to existing landform and topography of the area. The City Council considered the benefits of the Specific Plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effect. A Statement of Overriding Consideration was prepared to address necessary compromises for the overall benefit of the Specific Plan area and region. The project has been reviewed and will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified to the site and topography in the Program EIR, as amended. Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 5 Items a, c-e, q and i - "No Impact": The proposed development will not expose people to potential fault ruptures, liquefaction, volcanic hazards or mudflows. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: A detailed soils engineering report and grading plan for the site are required as a condition of approval to ensure that all grading activities on the site minimize grading impacts. · WATER Items a, b and q - "Potentially Significant Impact": The subject project site is within the ETSP area for which the certified EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to surface runoff, drainage flows, water quality and water percolation. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the~project,s unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. The project has been reviewed and will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended. This proposal has' incorporated those measures related to surface runoff, drainage flows, water quality and water percolation into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable. Items c-f, h and i - "No ImpaCt,,: The proposed development is within~ the Specific Plan area. The certified EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to water quality. The project has been reviewed and will not worsen or create additional impacts other than those previously identified on water quality in the Program EIR, as amended. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended, related to changes to water course direction, amount of surface water, discharge into surface waters, ground waters, reduction of amount of water, and exposure to water hazards would also be implemented at the time subsequent specific development plans are considered. Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95~0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 6 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, as amended, including plans to ~accommodate increased runoff flows associated with the proposed development 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 and sediment transport during the short-term construction phases. · AIR OUALITY Item a - "Potentially Siqnificant Impact": The subject site is within the project area for which the certified EIR 85-2, as amended, determined that the ETSP will result in an incremental degradation of air quality in conjunction with other past, present' and reasOnably foreseeable future projects. The City Council considered the benefits.of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared to address necessary compromises for the overall benefit of the Specific Plan area and region. The project has been reviewed and will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified impacts on Air Quality in the Program EIR, as amended. Conditions of approval will be requkred for the project to meet applicable mitigation measures, as required by the certified EIR 85-2, as amended. Mitigation measures identified in EIR 85-2, as amended, related to air quality impacts, such as encouraging the use of alternate transportation modes, and the encouraging of ridesharing will be incorporated as mitigation measures. Items b, c and d - "No Impacts": The development will not alter air movement, moisture, temperature or cause any changes in climate, or create objectional odors. Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 7 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Construction activity dust generation shall be reduced through regular watering as required by the SCAQMD Rule 403. Additionally, mitigation measures encouraging use of alternative transportation methods have been made available to the project as part of Tract 12870, the'Sector level map. These measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, as amended, have been incorporated into the project as sUbmitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. · TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION Item a - "Potentially Siqnificant Impact": The subject single-family residential project is within the density range permitted by the ETSP. The impacts from the project were previously addressed in certified EIR 85-2, as amended. The program EIR as amended, identified that ETSP will generate increased traffic in the .vicinity. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects and chose to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Applicable mitigation measures were incorporated into the ETSP, including a circulation plan intended to provide an adequate circulation system for specific plan traffic, and mitigate impacts on the existing circulation system. The project will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified on the transportation and circulation in the Program EIR, as amended. This proposal has incorporated· applicable measures related to transportation/circulation into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable for the subject project. ' Items b-q - "No Impact": EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects on traffic safety,~emergency access, demand for new parking pedestrian circulation, and alternative modes of transportation. As all required parking would be provided on site, there would be no demand for additional parking. As the surrounding roads have been designed to accommodate peak Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 8 traffic demands the proposed project would not have a substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, as discussed above, nor would it impact the present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods. As the site plan is designed to the specifications of the ETSP, and the Tustin city Code, traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians would be mitigated. No additional impacts would occur beyond those identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Mitigation measures were identified in EIR, 85-2, as amended. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to transportation and circulation into either the submitted plans or would be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Conditions of approval require that the private street system and residential development on the site shall meet the requirements of the ETSP, and the Tustin City Code. AlsO, a condition of approval requires that a street improvement plan be provided for all construction within the public right-of-way. Adherence to and compliance with the guidelines and provisions of the ETSP will ensure that the proposed development complies with mitigation measures specified in the certified EIR 85-2, as amended. · BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Items a-e - "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated": The project site has been rough graded. The site is within the ETSP area for which certified EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to plant and animal life. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to plant and animal life into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. No additional impacts would be created beyond those identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 9 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Mitiqation measures require rev~getation on graded and cut-and-fili areas where structures or improvements are not constructed, with consideration given to the use of drought-tolerant plant materials, such as the eucalyptus, pinus canariensis, schinus molle, bougainvillea, and pittosporum. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as submitted, or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. · ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCE8 Items a and c - "No Impact": The proposed development will not create additional impacts than those previously identified on energy conservation or mineral resources with respect to adopted energy conservation plans or loss of available known mineral resources. Item b - "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated,,: Implementation of this project as well as the ETSP as a whole, will increase the demand for and consumption of energy. The project site is within the Specific Plan area for which certified EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to energy. However, the project will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to energy into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996. Page 10 Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: Mitigation measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, as amended, require that 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. 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 Items a, b,d and e - "No Impact": EIR 85-2, as amended, identified no impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects from hazards. Item c - "Potentially Significant Unless Mitiqated": EIR 85- 2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to. human health. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified'in EIR 85-2, as amended. This development has previously incorporated those measures related to human health into the project. No additional impacts would be created beyond those identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Sources: Submitted Plans Uniform Building and Fire Codes Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None required. 10. NOISE Item a - "Potentially Siqnificant Impacts": Development of the site would result in short-term construction noise impacts, and a long-term increase in the ambient noise levels in and around the project site. These impacts were originally considered as part of certified EIR 85-2, as amended. The City Council considered the benefits of the ETSP original program EIR as amended, and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. The project Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 11 has been reviewed and will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Mitigation measures addressing the acoustic environment were identified in the program EIR, as amended, and are included in the submitted project, or would be conditions of approval. Item b - "No Impact": The proposed development will not expose persons to severe noise levels. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitoring .Required: Mitigation measures identified by the program EIR, as amended, include-measures to mitigate exterior noise levels with the use of berms, walls or a combination of both. Landscaping materials and setbacks from the roadway are also included in the site design as mitigation measures. Interior noise impacts where determined to be greater than the level permitted by the Noise Ordinance will be mitigated by providing improved noise rated windows. In addition, ~the City's Noise Ordinance No. 828 has specific requirements in regard to construction noise. Those measures identified in certified-~EIR 85-2, as amended, and the City of Tustin Ordinance No. 828, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or would be incorporated as conditions of approval. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES Items a - e - "Potentially Significant Impact": Implementation of this project will 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, schools, parks and recreational facilities. Impacts to public services were originally considered as Part of EIR 85-2, as amended. The project will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended, as the impacts anticipated that the site would be designated as Low Density Residential by .the land use plan, allowing up to 5 dwelling units per acre, resulting in a maximum of 190 units. Attachment A - Initial Study ReSponses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 12 The proposed .project would provide 171 single-family residences with a density of 4.5 units per acre. The subject site is within the Specific Plan area for which the certified EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to public services. The City Council considered the benefits of the Specific Plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the Specific Plan. Additionally, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to public services into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval., where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as .amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: Measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, as amended, such as; stating the project sponsor shall work closely with the Police Department, the Orange County Fire Department and other governmental services to ensure adequate security, safety and services for the project; a street improvement plan required for all construction in the public right-of-way; and a parkland dedication for this project have been incorporated into the project. These measures identified in the certified EIR 85-2, as amended, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Items a-g - "Potentially Siqnificant Impact": The ETSP will increase the demand for utilities. The project will not create additional impacts other ~than those identified in the Program EIR, as amended. The City Council considered the benefits of the Specific Plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects' on the use of utilities. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted~for the Specific Plan. Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 13 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None required. 13. AESTHETICS Items a and b "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated": The three additional product types proposed to be added to the project include similar architectural features, detailing, colors and materials consistent with the previously approved units for the development. The project is within the Specific Plan area and the certified EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to aesthetics. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified through Design Review in conjunction with EIR 85-2, as amended. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to aesthetics into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. No additional impacts would be created beyond those identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Item c - "Potentially Significant Impact": The proposed development will create additional light at the presently undeveloped site. Lighting from pedestrian and street lights, decorative wall lights and outdoor private area lights will have a significant impact. The project site is within the Specific Plan area in which the program EIR addresses the impact of development and the resultant negative effects from light and glare, and the City Council considered the benefits of the Specific Plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan and mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to light and glare into the submitted plans. The mitigation measures would also be included in t~e conditions of approval for the project. The project has been reviewed and will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Attachment A - Initial Study Responses Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 14 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: Conditions of approval for the project require that a lighting plan be submitted for the project, and that no lights that create any glare or have a negative impact on adjoining properties shall be permitted. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES Item a, c and d - "No Impact": The subject site is within the Specific Plan area and the 'certified EIR 85-2, as amended identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and 'the resultant negative effects to cultural resources. This project is not within an area identified as an archaeological site. Item b - "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated": EIR 85- 2, as amended, identified impacts related to archaeological resources related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to cultural resources. The project has also been reviewed and will not create additional impacts other than those previously identified in the Program EIR, as amended, as this project is not within an area identified as an archaeological site. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan. Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: None Required. Attachment A - Initial Study ResponSes Amendment to VTT 14410, DR 95-0008 & CUP 91-008 May 6, 1996 Page 15 15. RECREATION Items a and b - "Potentially Significant~ Unless Mitiqated": The subject site is within the Specific Plan area and the certified EIR 85-2, as amended, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to recreation. Parkland dedication of 1.7442 acres was previously dedicated as part of Tract 13627 to satisfy the parkland required by the ETSP. Furthermore, all parks identified by the ETSP have been reserved for the purpose of providing recreation in the ETSP. No additional impacts would occur beyond those identified in the Program EIR, as amended. Sources: Submitted Plans Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan. Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: None Required. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCR Items a-d - "No Impact": The project in and of itself will not cause negative impacts to wildlife habitat, nor limit the achievement of any long-term environmental goals, nor have impacts which are potentially individually limited but are cumulatively considerable and could potentially have an indirect adverse impact on human beings. The program EIR 85- 2, as amended, addressed all of these concerns and this project is fully within the scope of that discussion. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2, as amended East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: None required. GG:br:TT14410.ENV 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 96-64 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN FINDING THAT THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) PREPARED FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN (FINAL EIR 85-2, AS MODIFIED BY SUBSEQUENTLY ADOPTED SUPPLEMENTS AND ADDENDA) IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROGRAM EIR FOR 'AMENDMENT TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14410 AND APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I . The City Council finds and determines as follows: Ao That Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410 and respective development plans are considered "projects" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act; and m o That the projects are covered by a previously certified Final Environmental Impact Report 85-2, as amended, for the East Tustin Specific Plan which serves as a Program EIR for the proposed project. II. The East Tustin Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (85-2), previously certified on March 17, 1986, as modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda, was considered prior to approval of this project. The City Council hereby finds: this project is within the scope of the East Tustin Specific Plan previously approved; the effects of this project, relating to grading, drainage, circulation, public services and utilities, were' examined in the Program EIR. The' applicable mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the Program EIR are incorporated into this project. The Final EIR, is therefore determined to be adequate to serve as a Program EIR for this project and satisfies the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Further, the City Council finds the project involves no potential for any.adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources; and therefore, makes a De Minimus Impact Finding related to AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 96-64 Page 2 Applicable mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR have been incorporated into this project which mitigate potential significant environmental effects thereof. The mitigation measures are identified as Conditions on Exhibit A of Planning commission Resolution No. 3450 recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410, Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3447 approving Amendment to Hillside Review 95-001 and Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3448 approving Amendment to Design Review 95-008. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 17th day of June, 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. 96-64 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 17th day of June, 1996, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96-65 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING AMENDMENT TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14410. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: a. That Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410 Was submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council by Lewis Homes of California for consideration to add three additional product types on Lots 21-84 of the previously approved development; and o That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said Amendment by the Planning Commission on May 28, 1996, whereby the Planning Commission recommended approval of said Amendment to the City Council; and C o That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said Amendment on June 17, 1996 by the City Council; and D o That an Environmental Impact Report EIR 85-2, as amended, for the East Tustin Specific Plan has been certified in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act for the subject project; and E , That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan, adopted East Tustin Specific Plan, Development Agreement and Subdivision Map Act; and F o The 1.5198 acres of parkland required for this development was previously dedicated with recordation of Tract 13627; and G . That the City has reviewed the status of the School Facilities Agreements between the Irvine Company and the Tustin Unified School District for the impact of Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract 14410 on School District facilities, and changes in State law. Impacts associated with this approval on School District facilities are adequately addressed; and H. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and 10 11 13 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Resolution No 96-65 Page 2 I o That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; and Jo 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 Ko 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 h ° That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems. M . The project has been determined to be exempt from the provisions of Measure "M" because entitlements specified in the East Tustin Development Agreement entered into in 1985, and the estimated project generated traffic does not cause the roadway system to exceed established levels of service standards. II. The City Council hereby approves Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14410 to add three additional product types on Lots 21-84 of the previously approved development, subject to the Conditions contained in Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3450, incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 17th day of June, 1996. PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK TRACY WILLS WORLEY MAYOR 28