Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH 3 T.T. MAP 14782 07-19-93AGENDA - PUBLIC. HEARING NO. 3 7-19-93 Inter-Com 'L....,s,¥.'' DATE: JULY 19, 1993 TO' WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ' SUBJECT: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14782 (CALIFORNL~ PACIFIC HOMES/ WILLIAM L. MOORHOUS) FISCAL IMPACT There are no fiscal impacts associated with this project as this is an applicant initiated project. No City financial assistance is requested. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions: me ApprOve the environmental determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 93-75; and · Approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782 by adopting Resolution No. 93-76, as submitted or revised. BACKGROUND The applicant proposes to subdivide an approximate 10.00-acre site into twenty five numbered lots and 40 lettered lots for the purposes of developing 94 patio home dwelling units. Patio homes are defined by the ETSP as "any residential zoning district or residential development wherein the number of permitted detached units on one building site is two (2) or more and where the dwelling units are under condominium ownership." Consequently, fences may be constructed to define spaces (rear yards) of which the apparent user does not have exclusive right of ownership, but instead a condominium interest. Located in Sector 11 of the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP), the site is bordered by Laurel Glen Neighborhood Park on the north, Myford Road to the east, the E1 Modena/Irvine Channel and Bryan Avenue to the south and Tract 13106 consisting of 110 medium density single family attached dwelling units to the west. Prior to development, the City Council must approve the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map. At their regular meeting on June 28, 1993, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3151 recommending that the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782. In conjunction with this action, the Planning City Council Report VTTM 14782 July 19, 1993 Page 2 Commission also adopted Resolution No. 3149 approving Design Review 93-008, and adopted Resolution No. 3150 approving Conditional Use Permit 93-009 authorizing use of patio home standards for this project, pursuant to Section '3.6.3.C 6f the East Tustin Specific Plan. A public hearing notice identifying the time, date and location of the public hearing on this project was published in the Tustin News. Property owners within 300 feet of the site were notified of the hearing by mail and notices were posted on the site, at City Hall and at the Tustin Police Department. The applicant was informed of the availability of a staff report on this project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/SITE PLAN The ETSP designates the project site as Medium Density Residential, which would permit the development of conventional single family .detached housing, attached single family dwellings, condominium projects or apartments up to a density of 18 dwelling units per acre. However, the maximum allowable density for patio homes within this land use designation is 15 dwelling units per acre as approved by the recent amendments to the East Tustin Specific Plan in May 1993. The proposed density is 9.4 dwelling units per acre, approximately 37 percent less than the allowable density under patio home development standards. The proposed site is 10.0 acres and is relatively flat. The site has been rough graded as part of the grading for Tract 12763, the sector level map. The conceptual grading plans indicate a grade change of approximately seven (7) feet across the tract from the northwest boundary to the lowest point adjacent to the E1 Modena/Irvine Flood ~Channel On the south. Minor grading is proposed to create building pads. Streets As the City Council is aware, the new patio home development standards include a street hierarchy system consisting of private streets, private drives, and the newly approved private courts. According to the private street standards, private streets with no parallel parking within the travel way shall have a minimum width of 28 feet. Private streets where on-street parallel parking will be limited to one side only shall have a minimum paved width of 32 feet. Private drives with perpendicular parking outside of the travel way shall have a minimum paved width of 24 feet. A "private court" is defined as a combination c~ private streets and/or private drives which take access from a main backbone street system within a detached residential developmen~ and which serves no more than 12 dwelling units. Street widths are measured from curb face City Council Report VTTM 14782 July 19, 1993 Page 3 to curb face, or flow line to flow line in the event of rolled curbs. Ingress and egress to the site is proposed from one 40 feet wide private street (A Street) onto Myford Road approximately 460 feet north of' Bryan Avenue and opposite the entrance to Tract 13096 to the east across Myford Road. Lot A provides access to a private looped street (Streets B, C, D and E) within the subdivision which would have a paved width of 32 feet from curb to curb and would accommodate parking on one side. Four foot wide sidewalks would be provided within the private street right-of-way on both sides of the street. The private court standards would permit two (2) private court (streets) and 16 private court (drives) which would have access in regular intervals along the private loop street. The private court (street) 'accessed from "B" Street and locate in the southeast corner of the project would be 32 feet wide (flow line to flow line) with parking on one side and a four foot wide sidewalk outside the private street right-of-way consistent with the newly adopted private court standards. Two 24 feet wide (flow line to flow line) private court (drives) would have access from this private court (street) as permitted by the private court standards and would have a minimum width of 24 feet (flow line to flow line) with no parallel parking within the travelway as permitted by the private court standards. The private court (street) accessed from "C" Street and located in the southwest corner of the project would be 28 feet wide (flow line to flow line) with no parallel parking and a four foot wide sidewalk outside the private street right-of-way consistent with the newly adopted private court standards. One private court (drive) would have access from this private court street and would have a minimum width of 24 feet (flow line to flow line) with no parallel parking. The Community Development Department and Planning Commission has identified a circulation and safety concern with the confluence of the private court (street) serving units 24- 26 and the priVate court (drive) which provides access to units 35- 38, and included Condition of Approval 1.15 in Resolution No. 3151 requiring that the confluence of these private courts be eliminated, so that each private court has a separate and distinct entrance to "C" and "D" Street. The remaining 16 court drives which would take direct access from the private loop street would be a minimum of 24 feet wide (flow line to flow line) with no parallel parking and no sidewalks, and would be a maximum of 150 feet in length, serving no more than six dwellings, consistent with the newly adopted development standards. City Council Report VTTM 14782 July 19, 1993 Page 4 Parkinq The newly adopted patio home development standards require a two car enclosed garage for 'each dwelling with one to three bedrooms. Dwellings with four bedrooms would be required to provide 2.5 parking spaces, two of which would be an enclosed garage. In addition, open guest parking at a rate of .5'spaces per unit shall be provided and located within 200 feet of the unit which it is intended to serve. Resident parking is provided by 94 two-car attached garages for a total of 188 garage spaces, as required by the patio home development standards. No four bedroom units are proposed for this development. The site plan identifies 51 guest parking spaces being provided where 47 would be required, resulting in an average of approximately .54 guest parking spaces per dwelling unit. Each space has been determined to be located within 200 feet of the unit which it is intended to serve. As no parking would be permitted on travelways'less than 32 feet in width from curb face to curb face (or flow line to flow line in the event of a rolled curb) or in driveways less than 19 feet in length, a condition of approval has been. included regarding the enforcement of parking regulations to be included in the project's recorded CC&R's to mitigate any potential illegal parking problems. Setbacks As the Council is aware, the newly adopted patio home setback standards were designed to provide flexibility yet maintain a desirable streetscape. On private streets, the minimum building setback is ten (10) feet. A garage may be setback a minimum of five (5) feet. Living area above a garage with less than a ten (10) foot setback would be limited to 75% of the units on that street. On private courts, the patio home development standards permit a minimum building setback of seven (7) feet. A garage could be setback a minimum of three (3) feet provided that no more than 50% of the length of the building frontage over the length of the court is less than seven (7) feet. The minimum distance betWeen buildings is ten (10) feet pursuant to the patio home development standards. The distance between buildings may be reduced to a minimum of six (6) feet for a limited distance of no more than 25 feet provided that there are no windows on at least one of the elevations. The proposed project conforms with these development standards. City Council Report VTTM 14782 July 19, 1993 Page 5 Open Space The patio home standards requires a minimum open space of 400 square feet per dwelling unit, excluding all structures, private street, private drives, private courts, above ground patios, and parking lots. A minimum of 150 square feet of area designated for private use may be included in the open space calculation, provided such area is located on a ground level and is open on three sides. The proposed project complies with this minimum open space requirement by incorporating several large open areas in the design of the tract including the open area at the southwest corner of "B" and "E" Street and the pedestrian paseos in the center of the .development and continuing to the neighborhood park. Open areas in the front yard setbacks also contribute to the open space calculation. The open space at the southwest corner of "B" and "E" Streets has no other function in the proposed development. Architecture, Landscape and Hardscape The architectural style of'the proposed project is a contemporary interpretation of the Monterey style. The structure would have "S" or flat concrete tile roofs, stucco walls and wood trim. Some of the architectural details include multi-pane windows, and various architectural recesses and pop-outs to provide a break in the building mass of the elevations. The conceptual landscape plan meets the requirements of the ETSP and is generally consistent with the City's landscape guidelines. The proposed landscaping consists of a variety of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, vines and ground covers intended to enhance the project and minimize visual impacts. The conceptual hardscape plan identifies masonry slumpblock walls with a sac finish interspersed with vertical wrought iron fencing along Myford Road for the community wall, which meets the criteria of the ETSP and are consistent with approvals of Sector Map 12763. The conceptual hardscape plan also identifies wood frame fences with stucco finish for the fencing adjacent to the.looped street, and vertical board on board with wood cap fencing for all other rear yard fencing which was acceptable to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission approved a condition of approval requiring that final mailbox location and orientation be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director. In determining the final location, the Director would consider the following: mailboxes shall be located as close as possible to a designated parking space; mailboxes shall not be located within ~en (10) feet of a street/court intersection or ten (10) feet from the City Council Report VTTM 14782 July 19, 1993 Page 6 back of curb return; and the location of mailboxes should encourage people to walk to their mailboxes. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Based upon review of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782, Design Review 93-008 and Conditional Use Permit 93-009, as well as Environmental Impact Report 85-2 (as supplemented) it has been determined that the environmental issues relating to this project have previously been addressed. Also, appropriate mitigating measures identified in EIR 85-2 are included as conditions of approval for the project. With this information in mind, it is recommended that the Commission make the finding that requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met and that no further environmental review is required. CONCLUSION Given the analysis conducted by the Community Development Department and in consideration of comments from other agencies and the public, it is concluded that the proposed project meets the requirements of the East Tustin Specific Plan, the Subdivision Map Act, as adopted, and the California Environmental Quality Act. With the inclusion of conditions of approval listed in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3151, it is recommended that the City Council approve the environmental determination for the project and approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782. Becky C. Stone Assistant Planner CAS: BS: bt/vt t 1/,782 Christine A. Assistant City Manager Attachments: Attachment A - Statistical Summary Attachment B - Location map Attachment C - Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782 and Conceptual Plans Attachment D - Planning Commission .Minutes of June 28, 1993 Planning Commission Resolution No. 3151 City Council Resolution Nos. 93-75 and 93-76 ~TTACHMENT A Statistical summary Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782 Patio Home Development Requirement Gross Site Area Building Area Street Area Perimeter Landscape Remaining Open Space N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total Units Density N/A 15 du/ac (gross) Lot Coverage Building Setbacks Tract Boundary Tract Boundary adjacent to a park Private Street Garage - Private street Private Courts/Drives Garage - Private Courts/ Drives 100% (minus setbacks) 10 feet minimum 5 feet minimum 10 feet minimum 5 feet minimum 7 feet minimum 3 feet minimum PropOsed 10.0 acres 2.59 acres 3.10 acres .13 acres 4.18 acres 94 units 9.40 du/ac (gross) 26% 10 feet minimum 5 feet minimum 10 feet minimum 5 feet minimum 7 feet minimum 3 feet minimum Height Resident Parking Guest Parking Driveway Lengths PLANS NO.OF UNITS 1 22 2 18 3 30 4 24 BS:br 35 feet maximum 188 spaces ( 2 garage per unit) 47 (.5 spaces per unit) NO. UNDER 9 FEET 89 PERCENTAGE 23 19 32 26 25 feet maximum 188 spaces 94 (attached 2 car garages) 51 spaces NO. OVER 19 FEET SQUARE FEET DESCRIPTION 919 2 BD,2.0 BA 1,079 2 BD,2.0 BA 1,187 3 BD,2.5 BA 1,265 3'BD,3.0 BA LOCATION MAP¢/~' Z site *ZpZl ~ EL CAMINO REAL NO SCALE TENTATIVE TRACT 14782, Attachment B Attachment C ="; I t ' ~;.~:ii I~ti'~';i~,~ :~']~l~,I 1~ ,It I i ~ I1 .... 1',I! ,.'.,... : i.t, lilWilIlJJ~ ~" ~ !,~ J J i]J,i~,J,,~ tq ,J, Jl I ~JlJJ' "! ~i~ ~ ~- J, < < ,! ~o Z ~ Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 8 · ,il Commissioner Butler moved, Well seconded to approve Conditional Use Permit 93-001 to amend Conditional Use Permit 91-17 for a cluster development by adopting Resolution No. 3146, as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Butler moved, Weil seconded to recommend approval to the City Council of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782 by adopting Resolution No. 3151, as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Vestinq Tentative Tract Map 14782, Desiqn Review 93-008 and Conditional Use Permit 93-009 APPLICANT/ LANDOWNER: LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: CALIFORNIA PACIFIC HOMES 5 CIVIC PLAZA, SUITE 100 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 LOT 10 OF TRACT 12763 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN THIS PROJECT IS COVERED BY A PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED EIR (85-2) FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN. NO ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED. REQUEST: 1. AUTHORIZATION TO CREATE TWENTY FIVE (25) NUMBERED LOTS AND FORTY (40) LETTERED LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING 95 PATIO HOME DWELLINGS; 2. APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT; AND 3. AUTHORIZATION OF A CO~DITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PATIO HOMES. Recommendation - It is recommended that the Planning commission take the following actions' 1. Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3148; 2. Approve Design Review 93-008 by adopting Resolution No. 3149, as submitted or revised; 3. Approve Conditional Use Permit 93-009 by adopting Resolution l~o. 3150, as submitted or revised; 4. Recommend approval to the City Council of Vestin~ Tentative Tract ~-:ap 14752 by adopting Resolution No. 315i, as submitted or revised. Presentation- Bec}:':' Stone, Assistan= Planner Commissic. rer Wei! a£ked v:hy fire sprinklers are being required. Att achment D Planning Commission Minutes June 25, 1993 Page 9 Staff responded that the Orange County Fire Department has recommended it. The Director noted that although the fire code does not outright require the installation of automatic sprinkler systems there is an operating standard of the code that allows the Fire Marshal to determine that automatic sprinkler systems on individual units would be required if the unit is not within a certain radius provided by hose service from an existing hydrant. Commissioner Weil asked if any of the fire hydrants are on any of the drives? The Director responded it would really depend on how the applicant works out the situation with the Fire Department. Based on the initial submittal information the template has indicated that they cannot comply on those units that have been identified for sprinklers. However, there could be some field conditions that could be modified in working with the Fire Marshal or alternate fire safety provided that would give the Fire Department greater assurance that those units would be more adequately protected. Commissioner Stracker asked what the future parking area of the . model home area would become. Staff replied that would be an open site which would be landscaped. Commissioner Stracker asked if the garage doors were roll up or tilt type. Staff replied that they are typically tilt type controlled with an electric door opener. Commissioner Kasatek asked if the Ficus trees being put in are the type that will cause damage from roots later on. The Director responded that depending on the species 'of the type F±cus recommended, the City's landscape architect, BSI, would require the installation of a root barrier system. The ?ublic Hearing was opened at 8'16 p.m. Bill Moorhous, Director of Project Management for California Pacific Homes, the Irvine Division, brought an e>:hibit of the actual fence for Commission review. He noted that the}' had submitted this project only three months and i2 days ago and commended staff since tkis was a real record for processing. He Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 10 stated that they were in concurrence with all the conditions with one exception which is, Condition 3.7 on page 4 of Resolution 3149 of the design review resolution, which is the. condition which requires that all fences and walls be slumpstone or masonry rather than the combination of wood and masonry. He feels that this condition is unnecessary since with the addition of the metal post that these fences will hold up to all maintenance responsibilities and that this project does have a homeowner's association with a budget for maintenance. Commissioner Weil asked if this type of stucco on wood fence were the same type construction as is applied to a house. Mr. Moorhous responded yes. Commissioner Stracker asked if'there was an amount reserved for maintenance of the slumpstone walls. Mr. Moorhous responded yes, a dime a lineal foot on the slumpstone which is the same as the stucco and 9 cents a square foot on the painting. Commissioner Kasalek asked how far apart the steel posts would be. Mr. Moorhous responded eight foot on center. Commissioner Wei! asked what the price of these homes would be. Mr. Moorhous responded under 200 thousand to low/mi6 200 thousand. Commissioner Stracker asked what type of s~reet lighting would be on the project. · . Mr. Moorhous responded that on the loop street there would be cobra heads and additionally there would be carriage lantern type lights on the individual sho~t motor courts on each garage, and pos% lamps on each of the three entrances to the park. Commissioner-ctracker asked %'ha'- the d:=~"~"~*~=*=,,~ in cost would be for concrete in privaze courts as opposed to asphalt. !.tr. !,ioorhous responded than iz %:ould be double. ~oncrete is $3.00 Der scuare foo~ while aspha!~ is 51.5(" Der square foot. Jane Anderson, Board President of Seviila Homeowners Association, 247~ Via Corella, Tustin, stated that !,Ir. Moorhous went to. their Board of Director's meetinc to talk ~o them about the problem~ they Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 11 were concerned about. The association had two main problems, field mice when the grading started and buffer as far' as trees between the two developments. She was satisfied that California Pacific would work with them to resolve these problems. Ms. Anderson stated that she felt that cluster mailboxes were a plus as far as security. Theft out of individual mailboxes is prevalent and there has been damage to individual mailboxes from having cherry bombs placed in them which blow out-the backs. Mr. Moorhous ncted that relative to the landscaping buffer between the two products, California Pacific needs to construct a portion of a wall along the Sevilla property and also relocate a storm drain, so he is sure that the developer will be able to satisfy them from the landscaping standpoint or will not be able to get their approval. Commissioner Weil asked if some of the Eucalyptus trees have died. Jane Anderson replied that there has been a problem with the Eucalyptus trees in their development. They' have lost about 26 trees in the development from an unknown disease. Rene Redfield Shaw, 13453 Verona, Tustin, spoke in opposition to the project, mainly stating that it detracts from the Arcada which is across from the project, and lowers the value of their property and also that' they had wanted a park for Arcada, not more homes. She stated the homes were sold with the assumption that there would be an elementary school site. She realizes that this is a statement after the fact but just wants to be on record for opposition. Commissioner ~eil'asked if Ms. Shaw was aware that these were patio homes. Ms. Shaw respcnded yes. The Director stated %hat the Tustin School District has released this land and %hat l{arket Place Annex commercial/retail approval went through %ne normal public hearing process. The City Council felt that ~he Costco project was in the best interest of the community. The Public Hearing was closed at 8:51 p.m. Commissioner 5ut!er stated that he feels the developer shculd be a!iQwed =o have %he fences as =hey have explained them and he would be in favor of remo\,inc Condition ~ 7 as discussed He feei~ that Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 12 in case of an earthquake, the slumDstone would be ultimately more expensive to replace. Commissioner Stracke~ disagrees an~ feels the slumpstone will work better and would be'easier to maintain. Commissioner Weil agrees with Com~.issioner Butler. She feels that the wood gives a little more and would help the homes to be more affordable. She feels that the original of 18 units to an acre has been cut in half and she feels this is commendable. Commissioner Kasalek stated she was pleased with the whole project. She initially was opposed to the wood fences but after the presentation and the explanation of the steel post and paint she feels they would be alright. Commissioner Well moved, Butler seconded to approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 3148 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Well moved, Butler seconded to approve Design Review 93-008 by adopting Resolution 3149 as revised to'delete Conditions Of Approval 3.8 and '3.9, as the applicant and Police Department have determined that enhanced security need only occur at recessed entries that would not have Surveillance from the looped street. A new Condition, 3.8 was added to read: "The front door of floor plan 2 units 6, 10, 15, 21, 25, 37, 48, 57, 61, 71, 75 and 91, shall be improved with & metal frame to enhance security in the recessed doorway." Condition of Approval 4.10, related to the l&ndscape buffer adjacent to Laurel Glen Park should be revised to read: "The private side and rear yards of units 1,2,3,6,7,10,i1,14 and 15 adjacent to the north boundary of the development shall be buffered from visual and noise impacts of the adjacent neighborhood park. The applicant shall'provide one 24 inch box tree per each 30 lineal feet of the northern tract boundary, excluding those .common areas indicated on the conceptual landscape plans which shall receive the accent/interest area trees as prescribed by the conceptual landscape plans subjec~ to the final review and approval of the Conununity Development Department. Said 'tree shall be of a specimen type that will provide adequate visual and noise buffering, (i.e. Italian cypress, Brisbane Box or Cajeput tree). As an alternate,, or in combinaticn with some additional planting, the applicant shall apply fcr an administrative adjustment for additional wall height of uu tc 20 percent. &bore the maximum permitted height of 7 feet-six inches alone the northerly property lin~, non to exceed 9 feet." Motion carried 3-1. Com~..i£sioner Stracker was opposed. Planning Co~ission Minutes June 28, 1993 Page 13 Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded, to approve Conditional Use Permit 93-009 by adopting Resolution No. 3150 as submitted. Motion carried 4-0. Commissioner Weil moved, Butler seconded, to recommend approval to the City Council of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 14782 by adopting Resolution No. 3151 as revised to modify Condition of Approval 1.6 to read, "Streets, storm drain, water and sewer improvement plans shall comply with the "City of Tustin Minimum Design Improvements except as modified by the Building Official." Condition of Approval 1.12 should be modified to read, "Provisions for landscape maintenance and ownership of landscaped lots CC, DD, EE,FF and GG and all other lettered lots of Tract No..14782, excluding lot __~U6__, shall be the responsibility of the adjacent property owners and/or 'Homeowners Association." Condition 4.1.B.9 is deleted. Condition 5.4 revised to read, "Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all underground piping for .automatic fire extinguishing systems, shall be approved. Plans for an automatic fire extinguishing system shall be approved by the Fire Chief prior to the installation. Such system shall be operational prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy. The residences on the following lots shall have automatic fire sprinkler systems installed in the structures: 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 20, 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36, 37, 40, 41, 44, 45, 48, 49, 50, 56, 57, 60, 61, 64, 65, 68, 69, 71, 74, 75, 78, 79, 86, 87, 90, 91, and 94 or as otherwise approved by the Orange County Fire Department." Typographical errors in the following Conditions of Resolution No. 3151 shall be corrected: 4.2F "beams" should be "berms" Typographical errors in the following Conditions of Resolution No. 3151 shall be corrected: 1.5B "an" should be "and"; "constructin" should be "constructed"; "rems" should be "terms"; 5.5, "Paking" should be "Parking" and 1.12 "Rod" should be "Road". Motion carried 4-0. OLD BUSINES£- 5. Status Reports Commissioner Weii moved, Butler seconded to receive and file this report. Moticn carried 4-0. ! 6 ? 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 '17 18 19 22 26 RESOLUTION NO. 93-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, FINDING THAT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN (FINAL EIR 85-2, AS MODIFIED BY SUBSEQUENTLY ADOPTED SUPPLEMENTS AND ADDENDA) IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS. THE PROGRAM EIR FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT' MAP 14782- AND ALL FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: ae That Vesting Tentative Tract Map 1~782 and respective development plans are considered "projects" pursuant to the.Germs of the California Environmental Quality Act; and B. That the projects are covered by a previously certified Final Environmental Impact Report for th~ East Tustin Specific Plan which serves as a Progra~ EIR for the proposed projects. II. The East Tustin Specific Plan Final EnvirQnmental Impac* Report (85-2), previously certified on March 17, 1986 as, modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda' was considered prior to approval of this project. ThE City Council hereby finds: this project is within the scope of the East Tustin Specific Plan previousl, approved; the effects of this project, relating t~ grading, drainage, circulation, pub~c services an( utilities, were examined in the Prograh EIR. Ali feasible, mitigation measures and alternatives develope~ in the program EIR are incorporated into this projectl The Fi~a~-EIR, is therefore determined to be adequate t¢ serve as a Program EIR for this project and satisfied ali requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Further, the City Council finds the project involves nc potential for any adverse effect, either individually o! cumulatively, on wildlife resources; and, therefore makes a De Minimis Impact Finding related to AB 3158 Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990. 1 3 4 5 6 7 $ 9 10 11 12 15 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 25 26 27 Resolution No. 93-75 Page 2 Applicable mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR have been incorporated into this project which mitigates any potential significant environmental effects thereof. The mitigation measures are identified as Conditions on Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3151 recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 14782 and Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution No.. 3149, and 3150 approving Design Review 93-008, and Conditional Use Permit 93-009 respectively. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting held on the 19th day of July, 1993. JIM POTTS MAYOR M~ry E. Wynn, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) C. ITY OF TUSTIN ) SS CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO~ 93-75 MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Cit5 Council of the City of Tustin, California, d0~s h%reby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council oX the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution N6...~3-75 was duly and regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held o~ the 19th day of July, 1993, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk 4 6 7 10 11 12 14 ,LIS .J '17 19 2O 21 25 26 RESOLUTION NO. 93-76 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14782. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: Ie The City Council finds and determines as follows: · A. That Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 14782 was submitted to the City Council by California Pacific -Homes for consideration; and B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said map on June 28, 1993 by the Planning Commission and on July 19 1993 by ~he City Council. ' , Ce De E. 'F. Ge He That an Environmental Impact Report (EIR 85-2 for the East Tustin Specific Plan) has been certified in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act . for the subject projeCt area. That the proposed subdivision is 'in conformanc~ with the Tustin Area General Plan,. adopted Easl Tustin Specific Plan, Development Agreement anl Subdivision Map. Act as it pertains to development of single family detached dwell (patio homes). The .7896 acres of parkland required for thi development was previously dedicated wit recordation of Tract 12763. '" ' - That the City has reviewed the status of the Schoo Fa~i-Iities Agreements between the Irvine Compan and the Tustin Unified School District. The Eas' Tustin Specific Plan, EIR 85-2 with subseq adopted supplements and addenda, the impact o vesting Tentative Tract 14782 on School Distric~ facilities, and reviewed changes in State law, finds and determines that the impacts on School District facilities by approval of this map are adequately addressed. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. That the site is physically suitable for th~ proposed density of development. 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 24 26 27 1 3 4 Resolution No. 93-76 Page 2 I ® J, That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements proposed will not conflict with easement acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. K, That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvement proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems. II. The City Council approves Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 14782, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3151, incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City 'of Tustir at a regular meeting held on the 19th day of July, 1993. JIM POTTS MAYOR Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 93-76 .. MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Cit5 Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certif5 that the whole number of the members of the City Council the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoin~ Resolution No. 93-76 was duly and regularly introduced, passe¢ and adopted at a regular meeting of 'the City Council held the 19th day of July, 1993, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk