The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03 ZONE CHANGE 96-001 11-18-96DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 1996 Inter-Oom NO. 3 11-18-96 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ZONE CHANGE 96-001 (BELDEN) SUMMARY:' Zone Change 96'001 is a request to change' the Land use Designation of the~ Newport Warren: Planned Community and modify., the setback standards to permit conStrU~'.tiOn of.:a:. 3,330: square foOt dental/medical office projeCt and related site improvements on: the property, located at 12581 Newport Avenue. On October 28, 1996, the' Planning Commission recommended' that the City Council approve:Zone Change 96-O01(Attachment A)and .apProved the site and architectural plans for' the:project. Applicant:. Signe Belden, MD, Owner: Cortese Properties, Inc. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 96-120 approvinG the Environmental Determination for the project; and, 2. Have first reading by title only and introduce Ordinance No. 1172 approvinG Zone ChanGe 96-001. FISCAL IMPACT The applicant ~has paid application fees to recover the cost of processing this application. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The applicant is proposinG to amend the Newport Warren Planned Community District (NW-PC) regulations to change the Land Use DesiGnation for 12581 Newport Avenue from "Residential SinGle Family - Garden Office" (RSF-GO) to "Garden Office" (GO) to accommodate medical/dental office uses and to amend the side and rear yard setback standards of the NW-PC. On October 28, 1996 the PlanninG Commission recommended that the City Council approve Zone City Council Report Zone Change 96-001 November 18, 1996 Page 2 Change 96-001. The Commission also approved Design Review 96-019 and Administrative Adjustment 96-001 to: I o Permit the construction of a 3,330 square foot dental/medical office and site improvements; and, . Reduce the required on-site parking by 10 percent, from 20 spaces to 18 spaces. The proposed site plan and elevations are included in Attachment C. If this request is not approved, the Design Review and Administrative Adjustment will not be valid and the project may not be constructed. The project site, an approximately 0.33 acre parcel, is located on the west side of Newport Avenue, approximately 300 feet northeast of the intersection of Newport Avenue and Warren Avenue. The site was developed with a single family residence while under Orange County's jurisdiction which was vacated and removed. The site was annexed to the City of Tustin in 1990 as part of an eight acre annexation known as the Newport-Warren annexation. The site is one of four parcels at the north end of the annexed area which are all under single ownership and vacant. The Newport Warren Planned- Community regulations do not allow medical/dental offices within the RSF-GO District. The proposed Zone Change would modify the land use designation for the subject site from Residential Single Family-Garden Office (RSF-GO) to Garden Office (GO), which would allow the establishment and operation of medical/dental offices~. Uses surrounding the site include multi-family residential to the east across Newport Avenue, vacant parcels to the north, single family residences to the west, and a real estate office to the south. Land Use-Desicrnation In determining whether to approve the proposed zone change, ~the City Council should determine whether the proposed zone change: is consistent with surrounding zoning; is consistent with all elements of the Tustin Area General Plan; and whether or not rezoning the property will be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the use; or, whether the proposed zone change will City Council Report Zone Change 96-001 November 18, 1996 Page 3 be injurious or detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. The Newport Warren Planned Community regulations include two land use classifications. Uses allowed by right and uses allowed with the approval of a conditional use permit identified in each of the Zoning Districts vary according to the characteristics of the proposed use. The Residential Single Family - Garden Office district permits the least intense uses, primarily residential, but also includes general office uses subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The Garden Office district permits more intensive uses and allows general office and dental/medical office uses as outright permitted uses. These districts are the same as those previously established under county jurisdiction, prior to the area being annexed to the City. The subject site and the three parcels to the north are vacant and adjacent to single family residences to the west. The RSF-GO was initially viewed as the most compatible zoning designation for the property. The NW-PC regulations include development standards and design guidelines to ensure compatibility between proposed projects and the existing community. In some instances, the current development standards encourage developments that may be less compatible with the adjacent residential uses. For example, the current NW-PC regulations require office developments to be a minimum of 15 feet at the side from residential uses with the second story required to be 25 feet, which might encourage a property owner to construct a two story project since there is less usable land. Two story developments are less compatible even with a 25 foot setback because they may permit clear line of sight into the adjoining yard. Surrounding Zoning Districts include Residential Single Family - Garden Office o'n the north; Garden Office on the south; Single- Family Residential adjacent to the west under county jurisdiction; and Multiple-Family and Single-Family Residential to the east across Newport Avenue under County jurisdiction. In light of the Garden Office designation of the adjacent parcel to the south of the project site and based on the type of developments on the west side of Newport Avenue, the zone change would be compatible' with the area and provide a larger, more logical and cohesive GO zoning designation with the adjacent parcel. The proposed Zone Change would be consistent with the Land Use Plan of the General Plan which designates the project site as Planned Community Commercial Business. City Council Report Zone Change 96-001 November 18, 1996 Page 4 Side and Rear Yard Setback Standards Section 3.2, Garden Office (GO), of the Newport Warren Planned Community Regulations includes Subsection D.5 entitled Site Development Standards - Minimum Building Yard Setbacks. The proposed text changes, with the additions in shaded print and deletions in strike-out, include the following: b.3 "Side Yard Setback - ~-~ i~i feet from any residential single family district or the Res~'dential Single Family-Garden Office land use designation developed with residential uses. Any main building, ~i~i~ or portion thereof in excess of 18 feet in height sha~:~ ............ ~:~ ............ ~etback a minimum of 25 feet from an abutting residential single family district or the Residential Single .Family-Garden Office land use designation developed with residential uses." C o The proposed changes are less restrictive for one-story developments to encourage low profile structures of a residential character and to permit greater use of the lot area for single story developments. The setbacks for two-story developments remain the same as the existing requirements. Public Concerns The applicant has stated that the residential property owner directly adjacent to and west of the proposed project is supportive of the land use and design of the development. Prior to the Planning Commission meeting, staff received several inquiries in response to the public hearing notice indicating some concern regarding the proposed land uSe changes and the modification to required setbacks. Several neighboring residents and concerned citizens provided testimony at the Commission hearing and identified the following issues and concerns. Minutes from the Planning Commission meeting are included as Attachment B. Some ,of the concerns were addressed with conditions imposed by the Planning Commission included in Resolution No. 3492. City Council Report Zone Change 96-001 November 18, 1996 Page 5 CONCERN: The integrity of the Newport Warren Planned Community regulations is being compromised. RESPONSE: The Newport Warren Planned Community was patterned after the North Tustin .Specific Plan which has since been amended to permit medical office uses in the Garden Office district. The proposed Zone Change is consistent with recent amendments approved by the County of Orange. CONCERN: There will be impacts to adjacent residents from parking lot lighting. RESPONSE: Condition No. 3.5 was included as part of the Planning Commission Resolution ensuring that the parking lot lighting shall not exceed 10 feet in height and shall be designed to confine all direct light rays to the property. CONCERN: The security of adjacent residents from potential intruders. RESPONSE: Condition 4.5 was included as part of the Planning Commission Resolu%ion requiring construction of a 6'-8" masonry wall between the proposed use and all adjoining residential uses. CONCERN: There may be safety hazards due to of medical wastes generated by the use. RESPONSE: The applicant has indicated that a special medical waste trash disposal company will be collecting the medical wastes on a regular basis. CONCERN: As proposed, there will be a lack of provisions for on- site trash enclosure. RESPONSE: Condition 3.9 was included in the planning Commission Resolution requiring the applicant to design an on-site trash enclosure to ensure there are no future problems with adequacy of trash disposal. City Council Report Zone Change 96-001 November 18, 1996 Page 6 CONCERN: The existing grade of the property creates drainage impacts to adjacent parcels. RESPONSE: The on-site grading is required to be designed to ensure that all water drains to Newport Avenue, away from adjacent residences. CONCERN: Proposed setba.cks will negatively impact residential uses. RESPONSE: The setbacks proposed will encourage single-story developments to be more compatible with surrounding residences. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. A Negative Declaration/Initial Study was prepared for the project, a copy of which is attached to this report. Based upon review of Zone Change 96-001, Design Review 96-019 and Administrative Adjustment 96-001, it has been determined that the environmental impacts relating to this project will be reduced to an acceptable .level with the inclusion and implementation of the identified mitigation measures. These mitigation measures have been included as conditions of approval in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3492. Staff recommends the City Council certify the Negative D~claration as adequate pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. ~ J. Pa~alides Associate Planner Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director EAB:SJP:ZC96001.SJP Attachments Location Map A - Commission Resolution Nos. 3491 and 3492 B - October 28, 1996 Commission Minutes C -'Site Plan/Elevations Existing Zoning Negative Declaration/Initial Study Resolution No. 96-120 LO CATI 0 N. MAP ? / .01 WARREN J72 12421 EUNICE PL 12711 12721 12741 c~ NO SCALE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 3491 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 96-001 TO AMEND THE NEWPORT WARREN PLANNED COMMUNITY TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12581 NEWPORT AVENUE FROM "RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY - GARDEN OFFICE" TO "GARDEN OFFICE" AND TEXT AMENDMENTS TO MODIFY THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACK STANDARDS. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I · The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A· That a proper application, ZC 96-001, has been filed on behalf of Signe Belden, MD to amend the Newport Warren Planned Co.mmunity to change the Land Use Designation for property located at 12581 Newport Avenue from "Residential Single Family - Garden Office" to "Garden Office" and text amendments to modify the side and rear yard setback standards. Be That a public hearing was duly notice, called and held on said application on October 28, 1996 by the Planning Commission. Ce That the proposed project will not have a significhnt effect on the environment as conditioned, and a Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). De Proposed Zone Change 96-001 would provide a land use designation for the subject property which is consistent with the Land Use Designation of the adjoining 5 acres of developed property to the south, fronting onto Newport Avenue. The proposed modifications to development standards will encourage new construction to be physically integrated and compatible with the adjoining residential area. E· The land'use intensity of development on the subject site or within the entire Newport Warren Planned Community would ~not be increased over the current land use designation when considered as a whole. ATTACHMENT A 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolutic._ No.. 3491 Page 2 Fe Proposed Zone Change 96-001 would be consistent with the policies of the General Plan Land Use Element which identifies the Newport Warren Planned Community area as Planned Community Commercial/Business which encourages mixed uses of professional office and commercial uses. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Zone Change 96-001, amending the Newport Warren Planned Community to change the Land Use Designation for property located at 12581 Newport Avenue from "Residential Single Family - Garden Office" to "Garden Office" and text amendments to modify the side and rear yard setback standards, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A and amendments as shown in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting he~d on the 28th day of October, 1996. ~ ~/~ Recording Secretary LOU BONE Chairman 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. 3491 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of October, 1996. Recording Secretary EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 3491 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ZONE CHANGE 96-001 (BELDEN) GENERAL (1) 1.1 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the issuance of any Building Permits for improvements at 12581 Newport Avenue, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.2 The applicant shall sign and return an Agreement to Conditions Imposed form prior to the issuance of any building permits. (1) 1.3 The applicant shall hold and defend the City of Tustin harmless for all claims and liabilities out of City's approval of the entitlement process for this project. PLAN SUBMITTAL *** 2.1 Within 30 days of approval, the applicant shall submit 15 bound copies and one reproducible copy of the Newport Warren Planned Community regulations with all revisions as shown in Exhibit B attached hereto. FEES (2) 3.1 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $38.00 (thirty-eight dollars) pursuant to AB 3185, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990, enabling the City to .file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITIONS (2) PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY (3) MUNICIPAL CODE (4) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT Exhibit A Resolution No. 3491 Page 2 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. EXHIBIT B RESOLUTION NO. 3491 NEWPORT WARREN PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENTS ZC96-001 (BELDEN) le · Section 2.0 entitled Statistical Summary/ Designations shall be amended as follows: Land Us_e ae Exhibitl entitled Planned Community Development shall be revised to reflect the change on Parcel 4 from "Residential Single Family - Garden Office" to "Garden Office" as shown in Attachment 1 to this Exhibit attached hereto and incorporated herein. Be That portion of Table 1 entitled Statistical Summary that identifies Land Use Categories shall be revised to move AP no. 401-181-22 from RSF-GO to'GO. Section 3.2, Garden Office (GO), of the Newport Warren planned Community Regulations shall be amended as follows: A· Subsection D.5 entitled Site Development Standards - Minimum Building Yard Setbacks shall be modified to read as follows: · "b.3 Side Yard Setback- ~ i~ feet from any residential single family d~trict or the Residential Single Family-Garden Office land use designation developed with residential uses. Any main building, ~~ or portion thereof in excess of 18 feet in H~~:':'~"~hall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from an abutting a residential single family district or the Residential Single Family- Garden Office-land use designation developed with residential uses." · !.'...C.- Rear Yard Setback PLANNED COMM ~NITY DEVELOPMEN'~ 4 EXqIIBIT 1 Page 2~ Parcel Index Lot No. Assessor's l'nrdi:! N(). 1 401-191-30 2 401-191-31 3 401-191~29 4 401-181-22 5 401-181-51 6 401-181-52 7 401-211-35 8 401-211-36 9 401-211459 10 401-211-67 11 401-211-65 12 401-211-57 13 401-211-64 14 401-211-59 15 401-211-53 16 401-211-21 17 401-211-15 LEGEND Residential Single Family-Garden Office Garden Office _~_ GO 35 GO 45 NOT TO SC/~E BASE DISTRICF GO 45 MA2<iMUM I{FIGIqT LhMII'I' 1 RESOLUTION NO. 3492 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT 96- 001 AND DESIGN REVIEW 96-019 AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,330 SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING DENTAL/OFFICE BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12581 NEWPORT AVENUE. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: ae That proper applications, Design Review 96-019 and Administrative Adjustment 96-001, were filed on behalf of Signe Belden, MD, requesting approval of a 3,330 square foot freestanding dental/medical office building on the property located at 12581 Newport Avenue. Be That this item Was considered -by the Planning Commission on October 28, 1996. Ce 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 aso a whole. In making such findings, the Commission has considered at least the following items: - 1. Height, bulk and area of buildings. 2. Setbacks and site planning. 3. Exterior materials and colors. 4. Type and pitch of roofs. · 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. · Location, height and standards of exterior' illumination. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution .... 3492 Page 2 e 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 feature structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares. 12. Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council. De Pursuant to Section 4.7A7 of the Newport Warren Planned Community regulations, the Commission finds that, as conditioned, the intent of the parking regulations is preserved; the parking provided will be sufficient to serve proposed and potential uses; the decrease will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare or materially injurious to properties located in the general vicinity. In addition, there are practical difficulties or benefits of improved design which justify the deviation, and the adjustment is not in conflict with the objectives or the general intent of the specific plan. Ee The proposed project has been reviewed for conformity with the provisions of the Orange County Congestion Management Program and the approval body has determined that the additional traffic generated by the proposed project onto the CMP Highway System does not cause the system to exceed established Level of Service standards. Fe The project has been determined to be exempt from the provisions of Measure "M" in that the additional traffic generated by the proposed project onto the Arterial Highway System does not cause the roadway system to exceed established level of service standards. Ge That the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub-Element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent or has been conditioned to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub-Element. II. The planning Commission hereby conditionally approves Design Review 96-019 authorizing the construction of a 3,330 square foot dental/medical office' building and 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ~25 26 Resolution ,4o. 3492 Page 3 Administrative Adjustment 96-001 to permit a reduction of required parking from 20 spaces to 18 on the property located at 12581 Newport Avenue, 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 October, 1996. Lou BONE Chairman 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. 3492 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning· Commission, held on the 28th day of October, 1996. Recording Secretary 28 EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 3492 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DESIGN REVIEW 96-019 ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT 96-001 GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped October 28, 1996 on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development Department 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 Tustin City Code or other applicable regulations. (1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in ' this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.3 The subject project' approval shall not become valid · unless and until the City Council approval of Zone Change 96-001 is finalized and shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued within eighteen (18) months of the date of this Exhibit and substantial construction is underway. Time extensions may be granted if_a written ~equest is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. (1) 1.4 Approval of Design Review 96-019 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) 1.5 The applicant shall hold and defend the City of Tustin harmless for all claims and liabilities arising out of 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 Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 2 PLAN SUBMITTAL ._ (3) 2.1 At building plan .check, the following items shall be submitted: (3) A. 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. All buildings shall comply with 1.991 edition of UBC, UMC, UPC and 1990 edition of NEC. (2) B. (3) Technical detail 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. (2) C. (3) Precise grading plans and specifications consistent 'with the site plan and landscaping, plans- and prepared by a registered civil engineer based on Orange County Surveyor's Bench Mark Datum for approval by the Community Development Department. Subject grading submittal shall comply with all requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance and Manual and th~ following: me A detailed soil engineering, report shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Official conforming to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Requirements, and all other applicable State and local laws, regulations and requirements. · Preparation of a sedimentation and erosion control plan for all construction work related to the subject'project including a method of control to prevent dust and windblown earth problems. (3) 2.2 Complete hazardous material questionnaire and the air quality questionnaire and submit to Building Division and the proper agencies. And if the answer to any of the questions is "yes", please provide a note on plans that: "Clearances from Hazardous Material Disclosure Office and from Air Quality Management District shall be submitted to the Building Division prior to final inspection.', Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 3 (3) 2.3 Ail walls within 20 feet of the property line shall _be one-hour fire-rated construction and openings within 10 feet of the property line shall be fire rated. No opening shall be allowed less than 5 feet to property line. (3) 2.4 Ail areas of tenant space and site shall be accessible to persons with disabilities including private sanitary facility, lockers and medical gas/lab areas. The. accessible parking space shall be a van accessible with 8 feet wide access aisle. SITE AND BUILDING CONDITIONS (5) 3.1 A separate 24" x 36" street improvement plan, as prepared by a California Registered Engineer, will be required for all construction within thee public right-of-way. Construction and/or replacement of any missing or damaged public improvement adjacent to this parcel will be required to include, but not limited to the following: ae Curb and gutter Sidewalk Drive apron Underground utility connections. (1) 3.2 Note On final plans that a six-foot-high chain linked fence shall be ihstalled around the site prior to building construction stages. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the site for construction vehicles. (1) 3.3 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. ElectriCal transformers shall be located toward the interior of the project maintaining a sufficient distance to minimize visual .impacts from Newport Avenue. (1) 3.4 Exterior elevations of the buildings shall indicate any fixtures or equipment to be located 'on the roof of the building, equipment heights and type of screening. All roof mounted equipment, roof penetrations, and vents shall be located a minimum of 6" below the top of parapet. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 4 (1) 3.5 Indicate lighting scheme for project, note locations of (4) all exterior lights and types of fixtures on the elevations. Lights to be installed on buildings and in the parking lot shall be a decorative design. No lights shall be permitted which may create any glare or have a negative impact on adjoining properties. Parking lot light fixtures shall not exceed 10 feet in height. The locations and types of light fixtures shall cOmply With the City's Security Ordinance and shall be located as far as practical from the rear property line, subject to the approval of the Community Development Department during plan check. (1) 3.6 The property owner of the subject property shalI remove all graffiti on the subject property site, building or improvements within 72 hours of a complaint being transmitted by the City to the property owner. Failure . to maintain said structures and adjacent facilities will be grounds for City enforcement of its Property Maintenance Ordinance, including nuisance abatement procedures. (1) 3.7 Ail signs require separate permit and shall comply with the provisions of_the Tustin Sign Code and the design guidelines of the Newport Warren Planned Community regulations. (5) 3.8 This parcel will require annexation to the Tustin Landscape 'and Lighting District. The Public Works Department/Engineering Division will require a letter from the property owner stating this annexation will not be protested. (5) 3.9 The applicant shall provide a trash enclosure on the subject property. Details of the trash enclosure shall be architecturally consistent with the main structure and subject to approval by the Community Development Department during plan check. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 5 (2) 3'10 If, at any time in the future, the City is made aware and concurs that a parking problem exists at the subject site as a result of insufficient on-site parking availability, then the Community Development and Public Works Departments may require the property owner to submit a parking demand analysis, at no expense to the City, within the time schedule stipulated by the City. If said study indicates that there is inadequate parking or a traffic problem, the property owner Shall be required to provide additional mitigation measures to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Said mitigation may include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Establish alternate hours of operation. b. Reduce the demand for parking. C . Provide additional parking as needed, up to minimum number required for the uses consistent with the Zoning Code standards, by purchase and/or lease of property within 500 feet of the property or provision of the needed parking on site. The securing of off-site parking would require approval by the Community Development Director. Failure to adequatDly respond to such a request and to~ implement mitigation measures within the time schedules established, shall be grounds for initiation of revocation procedures for Administrative Adjustment 96- 001. 3.11 Prior to the establishment of any use within the future expansion area, the applicant shall obtain all applicable City approvals and building permits for the related improvements. LANDSCAPING, GROUNDS AND tIARDSCAPE ELEMENTS Il) 4.1 Submit at plan check complete detailed landscaping and (7) irrigation plans for all landscaping areas, consistent with adopted City of Tustin Landscaping and Irrigation Guidelines. Landscaping plans.shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of any building permits. Provide summary table identifying plant materials. Landscaping plans must be approved prior to issuance of any building permits. The plant table shall list botanical and common names, sizes, Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 6 spacing, location and quantity of the plant materials proposed. Show planting and berming details, soil preparation, staking, etc. The irrigation plan shall show location and control of backflow prevention devices, pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing and coverage. Details for all equipment must be provided. Show all property lines on the landscaping and irrigation plan, public right-of-way areas, sidewalk 'widths, parkway areas, and wall locations. The Department of Community Development may request minor substitutions of plant materials or request additional sizing or quantity materials during plan check. Note on landscaping plan that coveraqe of landscaping and irrigation materials is subject to ~ield inspection at project completion by the Department of Community Development. (7) 4.2 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. · C· Provide a minimum of one 15-gallon size tree and five 5-gallon size shrubs for every 30 feet of property line on the perimeter of the project. Shrubs shall be spaced a minimum of 5 feet on center. D. Ground cover shall be planted between 8 to 12 inches on center. E · F o Fences, walls and equipment areas, shall be screened with shrubs and/or vines and trees. 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. G· 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. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 7 H o Major points of entry to the project, courtyamds and pedestrian internal circulation routes shall receive specimen trees to create an identification theme. (1) 4.3 Two additional 15-gallon trees shall be provided along the south perimeter of the property, continuing the design, and species proposed on other portions of the site, subject to review and approval of the Community Development Director. (1) 4.4 The landscape buffer loCated along the rear property line shall be increased to a minimum of 8 feet in width and shall include a minimum of 2 additional 15-gallon trees, spaced 20 feet on center. The trees shall be of a specie that will create and opaque screen above the wall within 24 months of initial planting, as required'by the Newport Warren Planned Community. (1) 4.5 Ail new and existing masonry walls located along the site boundaries shall be a minimum of 6 feet, 8 inches in height, subject to review and approval of the Community Development Director. FIRE AUTHORITY (5) 5.1 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Fire Chief evidence of the on site fire hydrant system, indicating public or private. If the system is private, the system shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Chief and provision shall be made for the repair and maintenance of the system. (5) 5.2 Prior' to the issuance of any building permits, contact the Orange' County Fire Authority Hazardous Materials Disclosure Office at (714) 744-0463 to obtain a "Hazardous Materials Business Information and Chemical Inventory Packet" This shall be completed and submitted to the Fire Chief before the issuance of any building permits. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 8 (5) 5.3 Prior to the issuance of any grading~ permits, the applicant shall submit to the Fire Chief a list of the quantities of all hazardous, flammable and combustible materials, liquids or gases. These liquids and materials are to be classified according to the "Orange County'Fire AUthority Chemical Classification Handout,,. Provide a summary sheet listing each hazard class, the total quantity of chemicals stored per class and the total quantity of chemicals used in that class. All forms of materials are to be converted to units of measure in pounds, gallons and cubic feet. (5) 5.4 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit a detailed letter of intended use for each building. (5) 5.5 Prior to approval of a site development permit, or the issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit plans for the review and approval of the Fire Chief. The applicant shall include information on the plans required by the Fire Chief. The applicant shall include information on the plans required by the Fire Chief. Contact the Orange County Fire Authority Plans Review Section at (714) 744-0403 for the Fire Safety Site/Architectural Notes to be placed on the plans. 'NOISE (1) 6.1 Ail construction operations, inclUding engine warm up and deliveries of materials and equipment, shall be subject to the provisions of the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance as amended, and may 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 the Building Official determines that said activity will be in substantial conformance with the Noise Ordinance and'the public health and safety will not be impaired, subject to application being made at the time the permit for the work is awarded or during progress of the work. No Sunday or holiday construction shall be permitted. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 9 FEES (1) 7.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall (5) be made of all applicable fees, including but not limited t© the following. Payment shall be required based upon those rates in effect at t'he time of payment and are subject to change. no Building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department based on the most current schedule. B . New development fees in the amount of $.10 per square foot of floor area to the Community Development Department. C . School facilities fee to the Tustin Unified School DistriCt subject to any agreement reached and executed between the District and the applicant. D. Orange County Sanitation District No. 7 sewer connection fees to the Tustin Public Works Department. The current fee is calculated as follows: $470 x S.F. of Buildinq Area or $2,350.0 minimum 1000 Plus front footage of parcel x $6.00 or $400 minimum E . Payment of the major thoroughfare and bridge fees will be required at the time a building permit is issued. The current fee is $2.84 per sq. ft. of building area. F o Payment of the East Orange County Water District fee will be required prior to installing the water service. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3492 Page 10 (1) 7.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject (5) project,' the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $38.00 (thirty-eight dollars) to enable the City to file the ~appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 1996 Page 2 · Minutes of the October 14, 1996 Planninq Commission Meeting. Commissioner Pontlous moved, Vandaveer seconded to approve the consent calendar. Motion carried 5-0. ' PUBLIC HEARINGS: Zone Chanqe 96-.001, Design Review 96-019 and Administrat Adjustment 96-001 APPLICANT: SIGNE BELDEN, MD 1076 EAST FIRST STREET TUSTIN, CA 92680 AGENT: HAL WOODS'ARCHITECT 3500 W LAKE CENTER DRIVE,'SUITE B SANTA ANA, CA 92704 LAND OWNER: CORTESE PROPERTIES INC. % BETTENCOURT AND ASSOCIATES 110 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 150 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTN: PHILIP BETTENCOURT LOCATION: 12581 NEWPORT AVENUE ZONING: PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC); NEWPORT WARREN PLANNED COMMUNITY - RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY' - GARDEN OFFICE (RSF-GO) LAND USE DESIGNATION ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: 1. . . A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. APPROVAL OF AN-AMENDMENT TO THE NEWPORT WARREN PLANNED COMMUNITY REG~TIONS TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12581 NEWPORT AVENUE FROM "RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY- GARDEN OFFICE" TO "GARDEN OFFICE" TO ACCOMMODATE MEDICAL/DENTAL OFFICE USES AND TO AMEND SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACK STANDARDS; APPROVAL OF THE pROPOSED ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE DESIGN FOR A 3,330 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL/DENTAL OFFICE; AND APPROVAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED PARKING FROM 20 SPACES TO 18 SPACES. Recommendation - That the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3490 certifying the Negative Declaration prepared for the project; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 3491 recommending that the City Council approve Zone Change 96-001; and, ATTACHMENT B Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 1996 Page 3 o Adopt Resolution No. 3492 approving Design Review 96-019 and Administrative Adjustment 96-001. - Presentation: Sara Pashalides, Associate Planner Staff suggested adding a new Condition 3.11 to Resolution No. 3492 to ensure that the tenant improvements made will comply with the City's development standards. The Public Hearing opened at 7:15 p.m. Commissioner Bone stated that for the record he had met with representatives of the architects office at their request on September 4, 1996 to review the site plans. Commissioner Kozak inquired if it were possible to achieve 20 addi- tional parking sp~ces through restriping. He would like to ensure that lighting is not installed along the property line to avoid impacting adjacent residential uses. He asked how the trash bin could be shared since the plan calls for landscaping along the wall where the bin is to be placed. Staff stated that the guidelines suggest no more than 20 percent of parking to be compact. The applicant has indicated that to share the trash container the wall would be terminated at the trash enclosure' The bulk of the waste is medical and a special hauling service would be used. Commissioner Vandaveer expressed concern that lighting comply with the security ordinance. Commissioner Pontious expressed concern on assigning a prohibition on the applicant for lighting since there are lighting fixtures on the market which would achieve a non glare condition. Commissioner Bone inquired if the property owners at the rear and side had agreed to the project as long as it was one story. He would like to see the trash enclosure moved onto the property. Staff stated that a letter had been received from the owner at the north but perhaps the applicant could answer the question concerning the property owners agreement to the proposed plan. Hal Woods, Architect, representing the applicant, stated that ~elden h~d been a dentist in the area for 16 years and the project was an endeavor to stay in the City. He asked for a reduction of two parking spaces since the property is an 'irregular lot and Dr. Belden's practice was such that there are never more than three patients at one time. Concerning the property owner to the rear, Dr. Belden met with her early in the project, she was in Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 1996 Page 4 concurrence with a one story building but has not been available · for further discussion on the ~pproval. The property owner to the north is present in the audience and is in favor of the project. The parking lot lighting will be analyzed and the applicant will work with staff to achieve the best results. Niles Koines, 18022 Weston Place, President of the Foothil~ Community Association, stated they have concerns about amending a zone to accommodate one project; that it was interpreted as spot zoning and would be setting a precedent. They could not support this project even though it has some positive aspects. He stated that the North Tustin Specific Plan requires driveways on Newport Avenue to be consolidated and that the proposed zone does not have this requirement. He stated that amending the zone would affect other properties and does not understand why this project is not being processed through a use permit. Nancy Hamilton, 18681 Eunice Place, stated that her home is north of the project and she has lived there for ten years. She stated that there has been dust, noise and a total lack of privacy from road and construction crews using the vacant land as a staging area and feels she has done her part to be civic minded in putting up with this% She is concerned with access to and from the property and potential additional traffic. She asked that the City enforce what has already been' committed to in the Newport Warren regulations which does not include a dental office. Philip Bettencourt, property owner of 12581 Newport Avenue, is anxious to see Dr. Belden succeed. He stated that they have been in an economic, straight jacket because of the development standards applied to this property and feels this land.use would be the best use for the property. He regrets any inconvenience experienced by the previous speaker through allowing staging area use for county and city improvements. Harry Kay, 18672 Eunice Place, stated his property is directly behind this future development. He would like to be a good neighbor but is concerned with security, future construction projects in the area, medical waste, water damage due to runoff because the grade has been raised and damage to his block wall which has been knocked down several times already. Dave Dunn,. 1782 Terry Lynn Lane,. Santa Ana, believes that this use is very benign and has the amenities of a single family residence. Mr. Dunn stated that this is an economically unfeasible project and the neighborhood is fortunate that Dr. Belden wants to build the building as proposed. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 1996 Page 5 Dennis HamiltOn, 18681 Eunice Place, stated his concerns related to the ongoing integrity of the word of the citY. He stated that the previous property owner knew the zoning of the North Tustin SpeCific Plan when he purchased the property and that following the owners purchase the cause was championed for annexation. Following annexationl even though the City assured him that the North Tustin Specific. Zoning would be maintained it was changed soon thereafter. ' Commissioner Bone read a letter for the record received from David A. Dunn in favor the project. Doctor Belden, the applicant, stated that the traffic impacts'would be minimal. She stated she would work with the neighbors and understood their concerns. She stated- dental offices do not generate large units of waste. Hal Woods, stated that the lot would drain toward the street and would actually serve to improve the situation. Commissioner Kozak asked for an explanation of the annexation as mentioned previously. Daniel Fox, stated that the City annexed this property and the property was included in the Newport Warren Specific Plan. A set of zoning regulations was adopted as close as possible to the North Tustin Specific Plan with minor changes. Medical use was an issue part~icularly related to this garden office district. Medical uses are identified in the specific plan and allowed under a. different land use designation; therefore, a medical use would not be considered in the unlisted use provision. A zone change is the most efficient, way to accommodate this specific-.development proposal by extending the line that would allow for medical office one property to the north' It is immediately adjacent to a property which is developed with a two story office building and Could accommodate medical offices. Also by changing the designation for the property and not adding medical uses to the garden uses, the properties to the north will still have medical offices excluded. The' original specific plan did not have a two tiered setback. The new rear and sideyard setback requirements will encourage single story development. This request is not spot zoning. The zoning is still Planned Community and nothing is being changed, only moved within the zoning designation. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 1996 Page 6 Doug Anderson stated that if the site elevation has been raised andi there are impacts to the adjacent properties, this needs to be remedied. The planned capacity for Newport Avenue is approximately 37,500 vehicles a day and currently there are 21,400 vehicles, all well within the acceptable levels of service. As compared to general office uses, this is more intense only by a fraction over a general office use, with 9 anticipated trips, in the A.M. peak and 13 in the P.M. peak. The left turn ability will not be impacted. The applicant has agreed to use the existing driveway to the property site. The possibility of red curbing to eliminate parking adjacent to the property would be looked at when the plans are Presented for review. Commissioner Pontious was concerned that if the trash unit was brought onto the property, landscaping would be lost. The Public Hearing closed at 8:15 p.m. Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Pontious seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3490 certifying the Negative Declaration prepared for the project. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Pontious seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3491 recommending that the City Council~approve Zone Change 96-001 as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. Commissioner Vandaveer moved, Pontious seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3492 approving Design Review 96-019 and Administrative Adjustment 96-001 revised as follows: Condition 1.3, first sentence shall read, "The subject project approval shall not become valid unless and until the City Council approval of Zone Change 96-001 is finalized and shall become null and void unless permits for- the proposed project are issued within eighteen (18) months of the date of this Exhibit and substantial construction is underway." Condition 3.5 last sentence should read, "The locations and types of light fixtures shall comply with the City's Security Ordinance and shall be located as far as practical from the rear property line, subject to the approval of the Community Development Department during plan check." Condition 3.9 replaced to read, "The applicant shall provide a trash enclosure on the subject property. Details of the trash enclosure shall be architecturally consistent with the main structure, and subject to approval by the Community Development Department during plan 'check." Add Condition '.3.11 to read, "Prior to the establishment of any use within the future expansion area, the applicant shall obtain all applicable City approvals and building permits for the related improvements." il [~M__ot_ion__carried .5-0. ATTACHMENT C iiii l'l'|p ~[ liJ:il[!S' DR. SIGNE BELDEN 12.~1 N£WI~ORT AVF...NUE o . . · o DR. SIGNE BELDEN 17~1 N~RT AV~NIJ£ TIJ~'TIN, CALIFOR."~IA PLANNED COMM oNITY DEVELOPMEN'I EXHIBIT 1 Page 20, Parcel Lot No. Index Assessor's Pnrccl 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 401-191-30 401-191-31 401-191-29 401-181-22 401-181-51 401-181-52 401-211-35 401-211-36 401-211-69 401-211-67 401-211'65 401-211-57 401-211-64 401-211-59 401-211-53 401-211-21 401-211-15 ,f LEGENrD _ Family-Garden Office Garden Office ~~ GO ~ GO 35 45 BAS~ DISTRICT GO 45 MPO~IMUM I-IEIGIIT LIMIIT NOTTO SCALE NEGATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial }gay, Tustin, CA 92780 (7]49 5 7_~-.~ [o5 DECLARATION Project Title: ~_OO/ ~ c/6__.O/ff x' A j6 ~ Project Location: / /V r A-t, . Project Description: ' Project Proponent: ~ - LeadAgency Contact Person: C~qa. rg_ ~4a/q~/,~e,r Telephone: 5" ?y -_~ l-P_2 ' The Commtmity Development Department has conducted an Initial Study for the above project in accordance ~4th the City of Tustin's procedures rezarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, and on the basis of tha~ study hereby finds: That there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the' envirbnment. Therefore, the'preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not required. The Initial Study which provides the basis for this determination is attached and is on file at the Community Development Department, City of Tustin. The public is invited to comment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the review period, which begins with the public notice'ofNegative Declaration and extends for twenty (20) calendar days. Upon review by the Community Development Director, this review period may-be extended if deemed necessary. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS 4:00 P.M. ON '~ /q/off. /t~, Date ~ ~ lc)q.~ _ '%_.~t.~'¢'. "~)~~. Elizabetl'?A. Binsack Community Development Director That potential si~m'fificant effects were identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and a~eed to by the applicant that would avoid 0r mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Said Mitigaiion Measures are included in Attachment A of the Initial Study which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. NEGDEC.PM5 - 3704.A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 .. INITIAL STUDY Ae BACKGRO~ ..Project Tide: 'ZONE CHANGE 96-001 & DESIGN REVIEW 96-019 Lead Agency: City of Tustin 3.00 Centennial Way TtLq/n, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Project Location: 12581 CITY OF TUSTIN/SARA PASHALIDES NEWPORT AVENUE Phone:(714) 573-3122 Project Sponsor's Name and Address: DR. SIGNE BELDEN 1076 E. FIRST ST. #F TUSTIN~ CA. 92780 General Plan Designation: ZoningDesignation: NEWPORT WARREN PLANNED COMMUNITY. (NW-PC) Project Description: PROPOSED TO AMEND NW-PC TO GARDEN OFFICE TO ALLOW CQNSTRIICTION OF 3.300 SOUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Surrounding Uses: North VACANT East RESIDENTIAL South_ fiFFTC. F \Vest RESIDENTIAL Other public agencies whose approval is required: [] Orange Co.unty Fire Authority [] Orange County Health Care Agency ~ South Coast Air Quality Management District [--1 Other City of Irvine [] City of Santa Ana Orange County EMA ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below.' ' [~I' Land Use and Planning [] Population and Housing [] Geological Problems ~ Water E3 Air Quality [~l Transportation & Circulation I~] Biological Resources ~ Energy and ~fineral Resources I~] Hazards · ~ Noise [] Public Services O Utilities and-Service Systems ~. AesthetiCs O ' Cultural Resources [] Recreation I~ Manda/ory Findings of Significance C~ DETERM~ATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ' . · [~ I find that the proDosed project COULD NOT have ~ siomaific~t effect on the' environment, and a NrEGATIVE DECLARATION rdll be prepm-.ecL - . [~ I fi_nd that although the proposed project could have'a significant effect on ~e environmght, there w/H not b~ a · sigrtifim.nt eff~i in this case beca~ the mitigation measures demfibed on ~n attached sheets have been added to the project. A. NEGAT4VE DECLARATION will be prepare~ . . . . [~ I fiaad that the proposed project MAY 'have a sigaificam effect on the enViromnent, and an ENv[RO~NTAL 12VfPACT REPORT is required.- _ . I fi. nd tl~.t the proposed project MAY'have a signifimm effect(s) on the environment, but at leaxt one effect I) has been adequately ana137_.ed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measur, es based on the earlier analysis as described on attached shee~s, if the effect is a "Potentially Signifier Impact" or "Potentially Sigrdficant Urdess Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC~ REPORT is requ/red, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. . . . 'I find that although the proposed project could have a s~gnificant effect on the env/ronment, there WILL NOT be a sign/fiR:ant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects I) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EI1R, including rex~isions 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 si~mfi.ficant effects 1) have been anal32e21 adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to tha~ earlier NrEGATi\rE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation n~easures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature ~ Printed Name ~ 'J' ~'~ Date Title D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS- ¸3. [] Earlier analyses used: Available for review at: City of Tuslin Corn%unify Development Dcparlmen! 1. LAND USE & PLANNING- Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning7 b) Conflict with applicable envirortmental 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 dix'ide the physical arrangement of aa established commu_,fity (indu.ding a Iow-income or minoritT community)? 2. POPUL&TION & HOUSING - WouM the proposal: a) Cumulat/veb' exceed official regional or local population projection? b) Induce substantial ~o~th in an area either directly or ' ind. irectly ( .=., ttu-ouah proje~ns in aa uadeveloped area or ex-tension of major infra.q.mcture)? c) · Displace existing housin~ especially affordable housing? GEO LO GIC PRO B LEMS - 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 l~:mrd? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion. changes in topography or unstable s~il conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of Iand? h) Expansive soils? i) 'Unique geologi'c or physical features? · 4. '~VATER - Would the proposal result, in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the tale and amount of surface runoff?. b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface waters or other aher:~tion of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount ofsuffacc water in any water body? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction ofx~mer movcmcnts7 Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Lexs than Significant Impact No Impact 0 0 E] E] E] E] 0 0 0 E] E] E] E] E] 0 0 0 E] E] E] E] E] 0 E] 0 E] 0 E] E] 0 E] E] E] 0 E] E] © E] 0 0 0 E] 0 0 0 0 b) c) d) 0 Change in the quantity ofground waters, cithcr through direct additions or withdrav,~ls, or through interception ofan aquifer by cuts or exca',m/ons or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capabiliva,? .g) Altered direction or rate of flow ofgroundwatcr? h) Impacts to groundwater quality? i) Substantial reduction in the amount ofgrotmdwater otherwise available for public water supplies? · AIR Q UAl,Fry - .Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contn'bme to an existing or projected air quality violation? Expose sensitive receptors to pollutan'ts? Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? Create objectionable odors? TRANSPO RTATIO N & CERCULATION _ Would the proposal result in: Potentially Significant Impact l~olentiallv Unless ' A4itigation Incorporated l_.css than Significant Impact No Impact [3 [2] [3 0 [3 [3 E3 a) Increased veh/cle trips or traffic congestion? b) I-h.zards to sat'et), from desig-n features (e.g., sharp curves or .dangerous intersections) or incorapau'ble uses (e.g., farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insttfficient parking capacity onsite or off_s:ite7 e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicvclists?- f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? B IO LO GICAL PESO URCES _ Would the proposal re..rult in impacts to: CI [3 [3. CI [3 [3 a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants fish, insects, animals, and birds? ' · b) la>callv designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? · d) Wetland habitat ( -~-, marsh riparian, and vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors7 ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES _ ltbuldthe proposal: ' [3 [3 E] .[3 a) Conflict with adoptcd energy consen'ation plans? b) Use nonrenewable resources in a w~steful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability ora known mineral resource that would be of fulure v-slue to the region.'? CI 9. tLaEE~RDS - Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemic:als, or radiation)? b) Possible interference with emergency re~n~ plan or . emerge, ney evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potentiaI health ~?~"d? d) Expose of people to exL~ng sourc~ of' potential health e) Increased fixe hazard in areas with'flammable brush. grass, or trees? 10. NOISE - Would the proposal result in: 11. 12. a) I. ncr~ in ~g noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe fioise lex, els? PUB LIC SERVICES - I~rOuM the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need f~>r new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire prot~--~--don? b) Poi/ce protection? c) Schools? d) Maintenan~ of public facilities, including roads7 e) Other government services7 - UYELITI~S & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the proposal res'Mt in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the.following utilities: a) b) c) d) g) Power or natu~ gas? Communications s'3.'sterns? Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Sewer or septic tanks? S~orm water drainage? Solid waste disposal7 Local or regional water supplies? 13. AESTHETICS - Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic .,'ism or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aestheti~ effect7 c) Create light or glare7 Potentially Significant. Impact .tcntially Unless A~itigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact E] [] 0 E] E] [] [] 0 0 0 E] E] 0 E] E] E] E] E] E] [] 0 [] 0 0 0 0 0 [] 0 E] E] E] E] 0 [] E] 0 0 E] 0 E] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. CULTURAL RESOURCES _ Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological.r~? b) Disturb archaeological resources? c) -Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect un/que ethnic culturaI values? d) Re.strict existing religious or ~acred uses within the potential impact area? 15. RECREATION _ Would the proposal-. a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional 1~'~ or other recreational facilities? b) Affect exSsting recreatiOnal oppommities? 16. 1VLA. h~ATORY F[hq)INGS OF SIGNIlri~CE a) Does the project h2ve the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or x~41dlife species, muse a fish or wildlife population to drop ~low self-susm/ning levels, threaten to elim/nate a plant or animal communit3; reduce the number or reszri~ the range of a rare or endangered' plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Calif'o~ histdry or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, em'ironmentat goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are ind/vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection aqth the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects). [~] d) Does th~.project have environmental effects wh/ch will cause substantial adverse effec~ on human beings, either directly or indirectly? l'olcntiollv Signific,v~t Potentially Unlexs Lexs than Significant A¥iligation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact' E3 0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Please'refer to Attachment A for an evaluation of the environmental impacts identified in Section D above. INI.TSTUD. PM5 3702A ATTACk[MENTA EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ZONE CHANGE 96-001 & DESIGN REVIEW 96-019 12581 /FEWPORT AVENITE BACKGROUND The applicant, Signe Belden, M.D., is requesting a Zone Change and Design Review approval to establish a 3,330 square foot dental/medical office bUilding with site improvements. The property is located at 12581 Newport Avenue, north of Warren Avenue. The subject property is currently vacant and approximately 14,500 square feet in size. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project site is located within a fully urbanized area in the northwesterly portion of the City of Tustin and is characterized by well-established commercial and professional uses along the Newport Avenue corridor. A commercial office building is located to the south. There are single family residences located to the west and residential uses to the east across Newport Avenue. This site and the three adjacent parcels to the north are vacant. ' . The site is not located within any known"~ensitive biological, geological or other environmentally critical overlays. Environmental concerns specific to the project are primarily focused on transportation 9nd circulation impacts and land use issues related to the proposed medical Office use. A detailed analysis of these and other environmental issues is addressed in the following discussion, which is progided to substantiate the responses to the checklist questions presented in Section D of this Initial Study. LAND USE & PLANNING Items b, d and e - "No impact,- The subject property is designated by. the General Plan Land Use Map as Planned Community Commercial/Business. The subject property is zoned Planned Community and subject to the standards established by' the Newport Warren Planned Community regulations (NW-PC). The subject property is designated Residential Single Family - Garden Office (RSF-GO) which would allow single-family dwelling as a. permitted use and general office uses as conditionally permitted. The parcels south of the subject site are designated for Garden Office (GO) uses which would allow general office and dental/medical office uses as permitted. The applicant is'requesting.a zone change from RSF- GO to GO district to develop the proposed 3,330 square foot dental/medical office. The subject property is presently Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental impacts zOne Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 2 vacant and was previously developed with a single family residence. There is an 'existing curb cut for the driveway serving the previous use. The proposed zone change and design review will not conflict with any applicable environmental plans, affect agricultural resources, or disrupt the physical arrangement of an existing community. Items a and c - "Potentiall Si nificant U__nless ~ IncorDo______rated,,: The proposed medical office use is not consistent ~h the existing RSF-GO designation which does not permit medical offices. Other professional office uses such as architects, attorneys, accountants, insurance and real estate agents and travel agencies are conditionallY permitted uses within the RSF-GO district. The applicant is requesting a zone change to GO which permits all types of professional offices. Ail of the fifteen parcels sou'th of the subject site within the AW-PC are designated GO and developed with a variety of office and other nses. The applicant is proposing a zone change so that the use will be consistent with the zoning. Text changes are proposed to the development standards of the GO district to ensure that office development is compatible with the existing residential land uses to the. west. The specific development standards relate to the side and rear yard setbacks from properties zoned for. and developed with residential uses. The proposal will reduce the required side yard setback for single story developments from 15 feet to 5 feet and increase the side yard setback for two-story elements from 25 feet to 40 feet. The rear yard setbacks for sinqle- story developments is also proposed to be changed'from 20 ~eet to 10 feet, and increase the 'rear yard 'setback for second story elements from 20 feet to 40 feet. These proposed changes will encourage single-storydevelopments which wi more compatible and less intrusive to ~ .... ~-~- .~ 1.1 b~ communmty to the west of the. NW-PC. Sources: Project Description Submitted Plans 'City of Tustin General Plan City of Tustin Zoning'Code Newport Warren Planned Community Mitiqation/Monitorinq Recruired' Adherence to and compliance with the guidelines and provisions of the NW- PC regulations, which address building height, building setbacks, parking requirements, and other site Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 3 development standards, would ensure that the development of the proposed medical office facility is compatible with surrounding area. o POPULATION & HOUSING Items a and c - "No Impact": The proposal will-not affect existing'housing or create a demand for additional housing, as no dwelling units are proposed and minimal-new square footage is proposed. The proposed project is intended to serve the existing local and sub-regional ~opulation. Sources: Project description Tustin Community Development Department Mitication/Monitorinq Recuired: None Required. . GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS Items a throuch e, g, h, and i - "No Imoact"- No unstable conditions, significant changes in topography or exposure to geological hazards will result from the subject project. Item f - "Potentially Siqnificant Unless Mitiqation Incoroorated": The proposed project will require minimal grading and movement of soil, associated with the construction' of a 3,330 square foot dental/medical office on an existing vacant site. The physical improvements required to accommodate the proposed use involve constructing an access drive, parking area, landscaping and office structure. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design or will be included as conditions of approval. Sources: Submitted Plans Mitication/Monitori~g Requiredr A detailed soils engineering report and grading plans for the site are required as a condition of approval to ensure that all grading activities on the site minimize grading impacts. In addition, the structure will be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 4 4. WATER -- It'e_____~ms b throuah i - "No Impact"- ~ submitted for the ~ro~ -' ~ - ....... ~ aeve±oDmen~ ecu do not propose any construction that would alter existing drainage patterns, or in any other manner affect existing surface and ground water conditions' Water service to the site is presently adequate to support the proposed 'use. Water use associated with the proposed medical/dental office will not significantly diminish the availability of water resources for public or other uses. Item a - "Potentiall Si nificant Unless Incorporated,,: The development plans submitted for the project propose the construction of parking area, sidewalks, and a 3,330 square foot office building which will create impermeable surfaces. The. new impermeable surfaces will not change the existing absorption rate or amount and rate of surface runoff, due to the relatively small scale of the project. Sources: 'Project Description ~t~a~ion ~onitorin Recruited. Miti~atio assOciat~d~ia~~tTM ~ucomm~gEe increased runoff flows ~ une 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 ~sSeesd. iment' transport during, the short-term construction o SIR QUALITy -- · · - . ~em ~ a "Potentiall Si~ni~ ....... ' · . ±n~°rD~rated"£ Medical dent ~ ~%~~ un~l~es~ ~ potential to-nrodu~= /~___ a~o%zzue u~es ~o nave a slight · . . = ~ ~uzs, Dun woulm no · s~gnmfzcant, or neces~-~N ..... . . , t be conszdered °~z~Y oo]ect~onab±e . potential.exists for adverse o=-- · - Therefore, no ~r mmpacts from this project. Constructmon generated dust will be redu waterzng, as conditioned ced by regular Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 5 Items b throuqh d - "No Siqnificant Imoact"- The South Coast Air Quality Management DistriCt's (SCAQMD) CEOA Air Quality Handbook contains a list of daily thresholds of potential significance for air quality. For small medical/dental offices, the threshold is 96,221 square feet of floor area, as shown'onTable 6-2 of the Handbook. Based on a proposed floor area of '3,330 square feet for the proposed medical/dental office, the level of emissions resulting from the number of vehicle trips generated from the propOsed project falls well below AQMD thresholds for significance. The project is located in an existing developed urban area and will not have a significant impact on the 'climate,.or result in alterations in the movement of moisture in or temperature of the~air. Sources~: Submitted Plans South Coast Air Quality Management District. 1993. CEOA Air Quality Handbook. ' Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: Construction activity dust generation shall be reduced through regular watering as required by the SCAQMD Rule 403. o TRANSPORTATION & CIRCULATION Items b, c, e, f & a - "No Impact"- The proposal consists of new construction on an existing vacant-lot which abuts an arterial highway. There' are no improvements proposed to Newport Avenue or the adjacent sidewalks and curbs as a result of this project, with the exception of relocating and widening the driveway curb-cut access. No alterations to existing circulation patterns are proposed. The project will have no effect on existing access or circulation routes, emergency or pedestrian access, or other modes of transportation. Items a and d - "Less than Sicnnificant Impact"- According to traffic count data received from the Public Works Department, average daily traffic (ADT) volumes along Newport~Avenue in the vicinity of the subject Property are '21,400 ve~icles per day. The present capacity of Newport Avenue is 37,500 vehicles per day, resulting in an existing level of service (LOS) of "A". Based on statistics generated by the Institute of Traffic Engineers, a .3,330 square foot dental/medical office use is expected to generate approximately 113 vehicle trips per day, o Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 6 · with 9 trips in the am peak hour and 13 in the pm peak hour. A general office use bf the same size would generate approximately 106 vehicle trips per day, with 13 trips in the am peak hour and 15 in the pm peak hour. The proposed dental/medical office use can be considered to be minimal net increase in ADT. Based upon the relatively small increase in ADT for the proposed use vs. the permitted general office use., the increased vehicle trips will not have a significant impact on the arterial circulation system in this area. The proposed project requires 20 parking spaces. The applican~ is proposing a total of 18 on-site: 13 regular size spaces,' 4 compact spaces and 1 handicapped parking space. The is requesting an Administrative Adjustment to reduce the required parking by 10% as provided for in the NW-PC regulations. Based upon.the proposed floor plan, a total of 5 dental chairs are proposed, with a future expansion area for other medical or dental use which is estimated could accommodate 5 additional patient space. This leaves an additional 8 parking spages for employees and patient overlap, assuming all patient chairs are occuPied. In addition, the proposed parking would be adequate to serve potential future use of the site for other dental/medical office or for general office which requires only 1 parking space Der.250 square feet of floor area. -- Sources: Project Description Submitted Plans City of Tustin General Plan City of Tustin Public Works Department City of Tustin Zoning Code Institute of Traffic Engineers. 1987. Trip Generation. · ~itiqation/Monitorinq Reauired: None required. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Items a throuqh e - "No ImDact,,- The site and surrounding area has been completely eradicated of all naturally occurring plant and animal species, and habitat, as a result of several decades of urbanization. There is no evidence of unique, rare or endangered floral or faunal resources on the project site, nor are there any known endangered or rare species of animals known to use the project site as a migration corridor. The project site is currently vacant and will be developed with ornamental landscaping and artificial irrigation as part of Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 7 this project. The proposed use will not will have a further effect on plant or animal resources. Sources: submitted Plans Field Observations City of Tustin General Plan Mitiaation/Monitorinq Required: None Required o ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES Items. a throuqh - "No Impact"- Due to the small scale and nature of the proposal, the project will not result in a significant increase in the use. of energy or mineral resources. The'project will not affect access to presently available subsurface mineral resources. Sources: Submitted Plans Project Description Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: None Required. HAZARDS Items a, b, d, and e - "No Impact"'- There is no risk of explosion, interference with emergency response plans, creation or exposuue of people to health hazards, or increased fire hazard associated with this project. Item c - "Potentially Siqnificant Unless Mitiqation Incorporated": Proposed building improvements shall be in compliance with Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code standards, and compliance will be verified through the standard inspection practices., particularly related to occupancy classifications and exiting requirements. Sources: Project Description City of Tustin Building Division Orange County Fire Authority Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures related to human health, such as adherence to the Uniform Building Codes and Fire Codes and all other applicable city, county, state and federal codes as applicable have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review-96_019 Page 8 10. NOISE Item a - "Potentiall Si nificant Un___~less ~ Inco orated,,: There may be some short term noise impacts associated with the project during construction, and the project will be required to comply with cohstruction noise standards of the City. Item b - "No Imoa~,,A The project site is located in a commercial area, wi~n residential uses in the vicinity of the. project site. According to the General Plan Noise Element, existing'and future ambient noise levels along Newport Avenue are at 70 dBA, which are considered acceptable for commercial uses such as medical offices.. The proposed medical office operations will occur within a completely enclosed structure, and these operations alone will not generate excessive noise levels. . ~ources: Project Description Field Observations City of Tustin General Plan Tustin City Code Article 4, Chapter 6 Mltl atlon Monitorin Recruited: Mitigation measures related to compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance have been incorporated into the project as submitted or would be incorporated as conditions of approval. !1. PUBLIC SERVICES -- Items a throu h e - "No Imoact,,: The area in which the subject property is located is presently provided with adequate public services listed on the Environmental Impact checklist. The proposed development is small in scale (3,300 square feet in size) on an existing infill lot (t4,500 square feet) which is surrounded by urbanized area. Although the project involves new construction of office use, which might be considered an increase in intensity with respect to trip generation, as previously discussed in Section 6, the project will not have an impact on any public services due to its small overall scale. Sources: Various City Departments Project description Miti ation Monitorin Re ired: None Required. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 9 12. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Items a-q - "No Impact"- The project site is located in an area with all utility services currently available .to the site. Due to the small scale of the project, it will not overburden the service capacities of existin~ public utilities, and thus, will not require the expansion of these · facilities or require the construction of new facilities, such as natural gas, electric, water, sewer, storm drainage, solid waste disposal or communications. Sources: Project Description Submitted Plans Mitiaation/Monitorinq Required: None required. 13. AESTHETICS Items a - "No Impact"- The project will not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway, since Newport Avenue is not a designated scenic highway and there are no vistas in the area. Items.b and c - "Potentially Sic~nificant Unless Mitiqation Incorporated": Since the site is currently vacant and the applicant is proposing commercial development of office space, parking and exterior lighting, there may be some visual impact on the ~urrpunding area. The project prOponents intend to construct a low profile office building, small in scale, with residential design elements incorporated into the architectural-style of the building. A majority of the building will be 15.5' feet in height, with a 25.5 foot high tower defining the-entry at the south side of the building. There is no floor area in the t0wer element. The design and location of the building is regulated by the RrW-PC restrictions which include provisions to ensure new office developments are compatible with existing and planned residential uses. Although the zone change to permit medical office use on this site might have a negative aesthetic impact, as previously discussed in Section .1 above, the project will.not have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect due to the overall small scale of the project and design restrictions incorporated into Section 1 above. Parking lot and site lighting is planned to be low profile' to minimize intrusion into the surrounding residential neighborhoods. In addition, the site lay-out has been designed to orient the Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 10 parking~and lighting toward the adjacent office development, with the proposed building acting as a buffer and shielding the adjacent residence from the new lighting. Sources: Project Description Submitted Plans · Mitiaati°n/M°nitorinq Required: Lights installed on the building and in the parking lot shall'be a decorative design. No lights shall be permitted which may create any glare or have a negative impact on adjoining properties. Parking lot light fixtures shall not exceed' 10 feet in height. The locations and types of light. fixtures shall be subject to the approval of the Community Development Department during plan check. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES Items a thr_~h d - "No ' Impact',: The project site v~as previously developed ~n~ ~s not located in an area known to be archaeologically sensitive. There is no evidence that any cultural resources exist on the property. Sources: City of Tustin Historic Resources Survey City of Tustin General Plan Technical Memorandum Field Verification. Mitigation/Monitorinq Require~: None Required. 15. RECREATION Items a and b - "NO Impact,'- The proposed project is not on or adjacent to any recreation faCility. The proposed office use will not have an effect.on existing or future recreational needs. Sources: Project description .City of Tustin General Plan Land Use Map Mitiqation/Monitorinq Require~: None Required. Attachment A - Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Zone Change 96-001 & Design Review 96-019 Page 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Items a throuqh d - "No Impact": Based upon the information contained in this Initial.Study, the project in and of itself will not cause negative impacts to wildlife habitat nor achieve any Short-term environmental goals, nor have impacts which are potentially individually limited but are cumulatively Gonsiderable and could potentially have an indirect adverse impact on human beings. The project's scope does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals in that the project is a proposal to construct a small medical office that does not 'exceed- the design capacity established by 'the NW-PC and the site .is surrounded by existing urbanized area. Sources: As stated above Mitiaation/Monitorina Reauired: As stated above. sjp:ZC96001 .EI~V 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96-120 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR ZONE CHANGE 96-001 INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. m o The request to approve Zone Change 96-001 is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review. II. A Final Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA and state guidelines. The City Council, having final approval authority over Zone Change 96-001 has received and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration, prior to approving the proposed project, and found that it adequately discussed the environmental effects of the proposed project. On the basis of the initial study and comments received during the public review process, the City Council has found that although the proposed projects could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect on it in this case because mitigation measures identified in the Negative Declaration have been incorporated into the project which mitigate any potential significant environmental effects to a point where clearly no significant effect would occur and are identified in Exhibit A to the attached Negative Declaration and Initial Study and are adopted as findings and conditions of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3492. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on the 18th day of November, 1996. TRACY WILLS WORLEY Mayor Pamela Stoker City Clerk 1 ORDINA/~CE NO. 1172 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 96-001 TO AMEND THE NEWPORT WARREN PLANNED - COMMUNITY 'TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12581 NEWPORT AVENUE FROM "RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY - GARDEN OFFICE" TO "GARDEN OFFICE" AND TEXT AMENDMENTS TO MODIFY THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACK STANDARDS. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: a. That a proper application, ZC 96-001, has been filed on behalf of Signe Belden, MD to amend the Newport Warren Planned Community to change the Land Use Designation for proPerty located at 12581 Newport Avenue from "Residential Single Family - Garden Office" to "Garden Office" and text amendments to modify the side and rear yard setback standards. B . That a public hearing was duly notice, .called and held on said application on October 28, 1996 by the Planning Commission and on November 18, 1996 by the City Council. C . That the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment as conditioned, and a Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). D. Proposed Zone Change 96-001 would provide a land use designation for the subject property which is consistent with the Land Use Designation of the adjoining 5 acres of developed property to the south, fronting onto Newport Avenue. The proposed modifications to development standards will encourage new construction to be physically integrated and compatible with the adjoining residential area. E . The land use intensity of development on the subject site or within the entire Newport Warren Planned Community would not be increased over the current land use designation when considered as a whole. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ordinance No. 1172 Page 2 F o Proposed Zone Change 96-001 would be consistent with the policies of the General Plan Land Use Element which identifies the Newport Warren Planned Community area -as Planned Community ~Commercial/Business which encourages mixed uses of professional office and commercial uses. II~ The City Council hereby approves Zone Change 96- 001, amending the Newport Warren Planned Community to change the Land Use Designation for property located at 12581 Newport Avenue from "Residential Single Family - Garden Office" to "Garden Office" and text amendments to modify the side and rear yard setback standards, as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting held on the 18th day of November, 1996. Pamela Stoker City Clerk TRACY WILLS WORLEY Mayor STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE - ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1172 PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is 5; that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 1172 was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 18th day of. November, 1996. COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER:ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER City Clerk' EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO. 1172 NEWPORT WARREN PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENTS ZC96-001 (BELDEN) 2 Section 2.0 'entitled Statistical Summary/ Land Use Designations shall be amended as follows: a. Exhibit 1 entitled Planned Community Development shall be revised to reflect the change on Parcel 4 from "Residential Single Family - Garden Office" to "Garden Office" as shown in Attachment 1 to this Exhibit attached hereto and incorporated herein. o That portion of Table 1 entitled Statistical Summary. that identifies Land Use Categories shall be revised to move AP no. 401-181-22' from RSF-GO to GO. Section 3.2, Garden Office (GO), of the Newport Warren Planned Community Regulations shall be amended as follows: A, Subsection D.5 entitled Site Development Standards - Minimum Building Yard Setbacks shall be modified to read as follows: i . "b.3 Side Yard Setback - 15 i~i feet from any residential single family~:~:~istrict or the Residential Single Family-Garden Office land use designation developed with residential uses. Any main building, ~i~~ or portion thereof in excess of ........ ~'~§ .............. ~:~%t in height shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from an abutting a residential single family district or the Residential Single Family-Garden Office land use designation developed with residential uses." . PLA3NNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 4 EX'HIB IT 1 Pa 9e 2o, Parcel Index Lot No. Assess~ r s _._ Parcel 1 401-191-30 2 401-191,31 3 401-191-29 4 401-181-22 5 401-181-51 6 401-181:52 7 401-211-35 8 401-211-36 9 401-211-69 10 401-211-67 11 401-211-65 12 401-211-57 13 401-211-64 14 401-211-59 15 401-211-53 16 401-211-21 17 401-211-15 LEGEND Family-Garden Office Garden Office mmM GO ~ GO _ 35 45 NOT TO SCALE BASE DISTRICT GO 45 MA.X. IMU.M ItEIGI4'I' LI,x~,llT