HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 G.P. AMEND 94-001 11-20-95DATE:
NO. 3
1]-20-95
·
Inter-Com
NOVEMBER 20, 1995
TO:
FROM:
WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-001, ZONE CHANGE 94-004, SECOND
AMENDMENT TO THE EAST TUSTIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (IRVINE
SUBJECT: COMPANY)
RECOMMENDATION
Pleasure of the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts associated with this project, as this
is an applicant initiated project. The applicant has paid
application fees to recover the cost of processing this
application.
BACKGROUND
The Irvine Company originally proposed to make several amendments
to the Land Use Plan and text of .the East Tustin Spec~fic~ Plan
(ETSP) primarily related to three separate vacant parcels within
the ETSP area. The City Council provided direction to the
applicant that the original proposed increase in the percentage of
apartments from 25% to 28.4% would not be suppOrted. The applicant
submitted a revised project proposal which was referred back to the
Planning Commission to review and make a recommendation on the
revised project proposal pursuant to Government Code Section 65857.
On October 9, 1995, the Planning Commission recommended to the City
Council by Minute Motion (Attachment A) approval of an alternate
project proposal. The Planning Commission's Minute Motion contains
a description of all the various elements of their recommendation
to the City Council.
On October 16, 1995, the City Council provided direction to staff
to revise the environmental documentation and notice the public
hearing for this project to consider both The Irvine Company's
revised proposal, as well as, the Planning Commission's
recommendation which has been done. In addition, the attached
Ordinances have been.prepared to highlight options available
related to the various outstanding issues to help facilitate any
direction that the City Council's may wish to provide on this
project.
City Council Report
GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, Development Agreement Amendment
November 20, 1995
Page 2
No specific development plans have been proposed with the
amendments at this time. Pursuant to the provisions of the ETSP,
the Planning Commission and City Council would have the opportunity~
to review and approve the specific development plans through the
City's tentative map process.
A 1/8 page'display ad public hearing notice identifying the time,
date, and location of the public hearing for the project was
published in the Tustin News. In addition and pursuant to Section
3.14 of the ETSP, all property owners within Sectors 6, 8 and 11,
as well as, within 300 feet of Sectors 6, 8, and 11, were notified
of the hearing by mail and notices were posted on the sites, Tustin
City Hall and the Police Department. The applicant was informed of
the availability of a staff report for this item.
DISCUSSION
A summary of The Irvine Company's "original" proposal, the
"revised" proposal dated August 21, 1995, the "modified" proposal
dated October 9, 1995 and the Planning Commission's recommendation
has been included in Attachment B..
As the City Council is aware, much of the'discussion related to the'
project has focused on the 40 acre former High School site (Parcel
2 of Parcel Map 88-315). The Irvine Company's modified proposal,
as suggested in Alternative 4, as it relates to the former High
School site would:
Create one "Medium Density For-Sale" site for an attached or
detached product at the corner of Tustin Ranch Road and Irvine
Blvd.; one "Medium Density Apartment" site for apartments away
from Tustin Ranch Road; one "Medium-Low Density" site for a
detached product along Heritage Way; and a "Neighborhood Park"
site at the corner of Tusti~ Ranch Road and Heritage Way.
Permit up to a total of 533 dwelling units on the former High
School site at an average density of 13.3 dwelling units per
acre 'instead of 12..8 units per acre as originally proposed.
~Permit. up to 400 apartment units on the proposed "Medium
Density Apartment" site, all of which would be two stories in
height, instead of up to 4J9 apartment as indicated in the
August 21, 1995 revised proposal and the 350 apartments on a
"Medium-High" Density Site recommended by the Planning
Commission to the City Council on June 5, 1995.
City Council Report
GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, Development Agreement Amendment
November 20, 1995
Page 3
Require a 2-story townhome or single-family detached product
on the "Medium Density For-Sale" site at no more than 16
dwelling units per acre.
Provide a 3.6 acre park site instead of the 5 acre proposed to
the City Council on June 5, 1995. The Irvine Company has not
proposed to increase the size of the park, nor did they make
any firm commitment to the Planning Commission to develop or
financially contribute to the improvement of the park. They
did state to the Planning Commission that they were prepared
to discuss this issue with. the City Council and perhaps
discuss a possible donation toward improvement costs.
The 3.6 acres would be dedicated on the High School site. The
Company proposal would require the City to be responsible for
the design and construction of the 3.6 acre site.
On November 14, 1995, The Irvine Company provided in writing
revisions to the Development Agreement that they would agree
to commit to the provision of a contribution toward the
development of the park site as follows:
"The Developer will contribute Two Hundred Thousand
Dollars ($200,000.00) toward improvement of the New Park,
which sum shall be payable to the City on the later to
occur of (i) issuance of the first building permit for an
apartment unit on the Medium Density Site, and (ii)
City's publication of a request for proposals for a
public contract to be let by City for the improvement of
the New Park."
These revisions have not been incorporated into the draft
Development Agreement language at this time. Staff would be
prepared to respond to any direction the Council may wish to
provide related to this issue at the conclusion of the public
hearing. Staff in any event would have concerns related to
the timing of payment which will need to be further
negotiated.
The proposed land use designations would be arranged as generally
depicted in Alternative 4 prepared by The Irvine Company. The
Company proposes to have actual acreage devoted to each designation
more precisely determined at the time a Sector Level subdivision
map is proposed. The original development proposal included a
Sector Level subdivision map (Tentative Tract Map 15055). However,
given the nature of the proposed modifications, that Sector Level
Map would require significant technical revisions. It is the
City Council Report
GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, Development Agreement Amendment
November 20, 1995
Page 4
desire of The Irvine Company to complete the processing of the
General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Amendment to the
Development Agreement at this time. A revised Sector Level
subdivision map would be subsequently processed concurrently with
the first builder level development plan for the former high school
site.
The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council, as
suggested in Alternate 3, as it relates to the former High School
site and the differences with Alternate 4 bolded and can be
summarized as follows:
Create one "Medium-Low Density" site for a single-family
detached product at the corner of Tustin Ranch Road and Irvine
Blvd.; one "Medium Density Apartment" site for apartments away
from Tustin Ranch Road; one "Medium-Low Density" site for a
single-family detached product along Heritage Way; and a
"Neighborhood Park" site at the corner of Tustin Ranch Road
and Heritage Way.
Permit up to a total of 533 dwelling units on the former High
School site at an average density of 13.3 dwelling units per
acre.
Permit up to 400 apartment units on the proposed "Medium
Density Apartment" site, all of which would be two stories in
height.
Require a 3.6 acre park site to be both dedicated and improved
by The Irvine Company.
Include revisions to the required parking rates of the ETSP in
the Estate District, and guest rates in the Medium-Low,
Medium, Medium-High, and Patio Home land use designations as
originally recommended to the City Council on June 5, 1995.
The Company continues at this time to not support, any
amendments to the parking standards in the Specific Plan to
provide additional parking spaces in multi-family.and patio
home projects, as recommended by the Planning Commission some
months ago. Their position is that amendments to the Specific
Plan can not be adopted without their agreement pursuant to
the East Tustin Development Agreement.
Although the Planning Commission's recommendation would authorize
up to the same maximum number of units at 533 on the former High
School site as proposed by The Irvine Company, the recommended
Medium-Low land use designation adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road would
City Council Report
GPA '94-001, ZC 94-004, Development Agreement Amendment
November 20, 1995
Page 5
require a single-family detached product at a maximum of 10
dwelling units per acre. The ML land use designation was intended
by the Planning Commission to provide a greater transition in
density and product type between the existing Low Density~ single-
family detached developments across Tustin Ranch Road to the west
and the proposed Medium Density apartment site on the eastern
portion of the High School site adjacent to Irvine Boulevard. The
ML designation would provide a lower density on this portion of the
site compared to The Irvine Company's proposal for a "Medium
Density For-Sale" site at a maximum of 16 dwelling units per acre.
In summary, the Irvine Company's modified proposal and the Planning
Commission's recommendation differ with respect to the following
elements:
Land Use Designation on HS site
Adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road
Park Site
Parking Standards
Irvine Planning
Company Commission
Medium Density
"For-Sale" Product
@ 16 units/acre max.
Dedicate a 3.6 acre
park site
No changes proposed
Medium-Low Density
Single Family Detached
@ 10 units/acre max.
Dedicate and Improve a
3.6 acre park site
Increase Estate~parking,
and guest rates in ML, M, MH and
Patio Home developments
Other significant provisions of the modified development proposal
remain unchanged, from the August 21, 1995 revised proposal and are
also consistent with the Planning Commission's recommendation which
are highlighted below as follows:
The Irvine Company would agree to a cap on residential
development of 8,058 units in Tustin Ranch. This represents
a 12% reduction from the current maximum entitlement of 9,178
units. The Development Agreement would be amended to provide
that the maximum number of residential units in Tustin Ranch
can not exceed 8,'058.
As part of any Development Agreement Amendments, The Irvine
Company proposes to:
Reduce the setback area along Tustin Ranch Road from the
50 feet originally proposed to 35 feet of.which 10 feet
will be for right-of-way, leaving an actual landscape
setback of 25 feet.
City Council Report
GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, Development Agreement Amendment
November 20, 1995
Page 6
The proposal provides that any further conversion of
apartments to condominiums could not result in a
reduction of units used to compute the 25 percent cap on
apartments. In other words, the apartments proposed for
the High School site would be the last apartment project.
The revised proposal would not change the originally proposed
Medium-Low land use designation for Lot 6. However, the
Company has proposed to cap the number of units authorized for
development on this site to 71 units or a density of 7.1
dwelling units per acre instead'of the 100 units originally
proposed.
The revised proposal would not change the proposed Medium-High
density designation requested for'the General Commercial site
(Lot 27). The development would be an ownership product and up
to 350 attached units would be authorized instead of the
original 399 apartment units proposed to the City Council on
June 5, 1995.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Based upon review of both The Irvine Company's modified proposal,
as well as, the Planning Commission's recommendation in conjunction
with EIR 85-2, as modified by subsequently adopted supplements and
addenda, Addendum #5 has been prepared to make the EIR adequate and
has been included as Attachment C. Pursuant to Section 15146 of
the California Environmental Quality Act, an addendum is required
for this project in that:
a ·
Onlyminor technical changes to the trip generation tables of
EIR 85-2, as modified by subsequently adopted supplements and
addenda, are required to make the EIR adequate; and
b.
Minor text and map changes to the East Tustin Specific Plan
and changes to the Development Agreement do not raise new
issues about significant effects on the environment which have
previously been discussed and mitigated in EIR 85-2, as
modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda.
The traffic analysis conducted as part of Addendum #5 indicates
that both the Planning Commission's recommended prOject and The
Irvine Company's modified project would generate the same.amount of
traffic. This is a result of the Medium Density and the Medium-Low
Density Land Use Designations generating the same amount of vehicle
City Council Report
GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, Development Agreement Amendment
November 20, 1995
Page 7
trips/day/unit as defined by EIR 85-2. Both alternatives establish
a maximum cap of 533 units on the former High School site at worst
case.
In addition, the proposed land use changes on the former High
School site also represent an approximate 11% reduction in traffic
generation from that which could have been anticipated if the site
was developed with a high school.
CONCLUSION
Should the City Council wish to approve the project,, an appropriate
environmental certification resolution and other necessary
resolutions and ordinances have been prepared with alternatives
between the Planning Commission's recommendation and The Irvine
Company's proposal highlighted to help facilitate any necessary
revisions. In the event that the Council wishes to provide any
alternate direction, staff will be prepared to provide Ordinances
and Resolutions as requested.
~.~i~CDanlel Fox ---P
Senior Planner
CA'S: D F: br: GPA94001. C08
Attachments:
A - Planning Commission Minute Order
B - Development Proposal Comparison.
C - Addendum #5 to EIR 85-1
Resolution Nos. 95-44 and 95-114
Ordinance Nos. 1148 and 1150
ATTACHMENT A
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTE ORDER
Planning Cornmission Minutes
Minute Order
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin,
California was held on October 9, 1995.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kasalek, Bone, Lunn, Mitzmah and vandaveer
SUBJECT: GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EAST
TUSTIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
·
The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed changes to
General Plan Amendment 94-001, Zone Change 94-004 and the Second
Amendment to the East Tustin Development Agreement pursuant to
Government Code Section 65857 and recommends to the'City Council
approval of the following:
·
General Plan Amendment 94-001 - A request to change the Land
Use Designations of the City's General Plan Land Use Map on
the following properties:
Be
Lot 27 of Tract 13627 - To change the Land Use
Designation on a 19 acre portion of the 31 acre property
from PC Commercial Business to PC Residential; and
Lot 6 of Tract 12870 - To change the Land Use Designation
on a 10 acre property from Public & Institutional to PC
Residential.
·
Zone Change 94-004 - A request to change the' Zoning
Designations of the City's Zoning Map on the following
properties:
A·
Be
Lot 27 of Tract 13627 - To change the Zoning Designation
on a 19 acre portion of the. 31 acre property from PC
Commercial to PC Residential; and
Parcel 2 of Parcel 'Map 88-315 - To change the Zoning
Designation on a 40 acre property from PC Community
Facility to PC Residential.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Commission Minute Order
GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, Second Amendment to ET Development Agreement
October 9, 1995
Page 2
·
Amendments to the East Tustin Specific Plan· - A request to
change the ETSP as follows:
A·
Lot 27 of Tract 13627 - To change the ETSP Land Use
Designation on a 19 acre portion of the 31 acre property
from General Commercial to Medium-High Density
Residential;
Be
Lot ~ of Tract 12870 - To redesignate a 10 acre property
which is currently designated for an Elementary School to
include an underlying Medium-Low Density Residential Land
Use Designation;
Ce
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315 - To change the ETSP Land
Use Designation on a 40 acre parcel from High School
identified as Alternative' 3 shown in Exhibit A attached
hereto and generally described as follows: approximately
22.6 acres to be changed to Medium Density Residential;
and approximately 17.4.acres to be changed to Medium-Low
Density Residential with a 3.6 net acre Neighborhood Park
site to be identified at the northeast corner of Tustin
Ranch Road and Heritage Way with the final site
configuration of the park to be subject to final approved
by the Parks and Recreation Commission and City'Council;
and
De
A variety of amendments to the ETSP text and statistical
summaries to reflect the above noted changes to provide
consistency between the Land Use Map and the text of the
Specific Plan document and specifically include:
E ·
1) A maximum of 350 attached units on Lot 27 of Tract
13627;
2) A maximum of 71 single-family detached units on Lot
6 of Tract 12870; and
3) A maximum of 400 apartment units with a maximum
total of 533 units on Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-
315.
,
Amendment to the ETSP text shall include changes to
Section 3.10.1.C as originally recommended to the City
Council related to the amount of required parking in the
Estate District, and guest parking rates Within the
Medium-Low, Medium, Medium-High and Patio Home
designations as shown in Exhibit B attached hereto.
Planning commission Minute Order
GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, Second Amendment to ET Development Agreement
October 9, 1995
Page 3
·
Second Amendment to the East Tustin Development Aqreement - A
request to amend the East Tustin Development Agreement related
to the following:
A·
Lots 16/17 of Tract 13627 - To require the Developer to
dedicate approximately .18 acres of land area on Lot 17
to accommodate a parking lot for the future neighborhood
park on Lot 16;
Be
Lot 27 of Tract 13627 - Eliminate the requirement for a
250 ~room hotel including a non-competitive clause between
the City limits, Portola Parkway, Culver Drive and Myford
Road; and modify the phasing Schedule to reflect the
elimination of the hotel;
Ce
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315 - Provide a two-story
product type within the Medium Density Land Use
Designation; provide a 35 foot landscaped setback along
Tustin Ranch Road; and improve and dedicate to the City
a 3.6 acre neighborhood park with the actual park
location and design of site 'improvements subject to
approval of the Parks and Recreation Commission and City
Council. In providing direction in the requirement for
The Irvine Company to both dedicate and improve the park
site, the Commission qualified the requirement for park
improvement as a negotiated condition for the City's
rezoning of the property and also in recognition of
certain equalizing issues being examined in conjunction
with the refinance of Assessment District bonds for
District 85-1 (as opposed to a Quimby Act obligation);
and
De
General Provisions - Provide condo conversion language
related to the 25% apartment limitation; reduce the total
allowed number of units within the East Tustin Specific
Plan area and Tract 12345 from 9,178 units to 8,058
units. The 8,058 unit cap~ would not be used in
calculating the 25%~ apartment limitation.
Planning Commission Minute Order
GPA 94-001, ZC 94-004, Second Amendment to ET Development Agreement
October 9, 1995
Page 4
Commissioner Bone moved, Vandaveer seconded, to-recommend to the
City Council approval of the proposed revisions to General Plan
Amendment 94-001, Zone Change 94-004 and the Second Amendment to
the East Tustin Development Agreement pursuant to Government Code
Section 65857, as stated above. Motion carried 3-0, Lunn and
Mitzman Abstained.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Barbara Reyes, Recording Secretary of the Tustin Planning
Commission do hereby certify the foregoing to be the official
action taken by the Planning Commission at the above meeting.
Recording Secretary
--i
ITl
Z
IT!
---t
m
Z
MYFORD ROAD
ITl --
-- -- --
z
r- ~. :z::
Z T '"" ~
m
G") m ..< m
T Z Z
o ~
0
0
i'-'
EXHIBIT A
Ce
District
,(ETSP Paqe 3-47)
Residential Off-Street Parking
Spaces Covered
R equ i red Ass i gned
Spaces/Uni t
Estate ~i 2 3. ;2 Car Garage
Low
1. Sector 80 9, 10 2 2 Car Garage
2. Sector 2 2 2 Car Garage
Medium Low 2 2 Car G, arage
Medium & Medium Hioh
Crcd': t for
Guest/
Unass i gned
2 per unit
per unit
per unit
~-~ per unit
~-Strcc~
1. Detached 2 2 Car Garage
1 ~-5 per unit
2. Attached
Studio 1.0 1 Carport (1)
1 Bedroom 1.5 1 Carport~ (1)
2 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
3 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
4 Bedroom 2.5 2 Carports (1)
tipte Famity (apartments)
Studio 1.0 1 Carport (1)
1Bedrocx~ 1.5 I Carport (1)
2 Bedrocxn 2.0 2 4 Carport (1)
3 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
4 Bedroom 2.5 2 Carports (1)
3. Mu[
Patio Homes(2)
1-3 Bedrc~ms 2.0 2 Car Garage ~!75 .-5 per unit
Bedrooms 2.5 2 Car Garage ~:':'~-5 per unit
(1)
Attached singte ramify and muttipte family devetopments shat[ provide a minimum of ~!5 ~.2-5 per
unit open unassigned parkin9 spaces for 4 or more dwelling units. If a two ca~""e~ctosed
private garage is provided, a guest parking standard of ~i75.-~ open unassigned spaces per unit
sha[t appty. '
(2)
Required guest parkirKj for Patio Home products must I:e tocated within a 200 foot radius
measured from the nearest building frontage facing a street, drive or court of the designated
unit which the parking space is inter~Jed to serve.
(3)::+.i..i i it:ii ii&ueS tyunass i gned.:parking maybe -Provi tied on 'pub'[ :ii ~ !!Or!Pr ira t ei:.:s
.............. UaY iex ist s ~ ! :ex,apt.ti::i i~':i'{'fie C~se'Of ia t t ached a'~ :mU [!~'~ 'p [';:~: ~ i
~i t t. · n°t ' be penni t ted::°n"l:"~bt i c streets.'
EXHIBIT B
ATTACHMENT B
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
COMPARISONS
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL COMPARISONS
ATTACHMENT B
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-001
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
REVISED PROPOSAL
(AUGUST 21, 1995)
MODIFIED PROPOSAL
(OCTOBER 9, 1995)
19 acres from Commercial to Residential I
Lot 27, Tract 13627
Lot 6, Tract 1 2870
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
(OCTOBER 9, 1995)
Sallie
Public & Institutional to Residential [ Same Same I Same
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
19 acres from Commercial to Residential
Community Facility to Residential
ZONE CHANGE 94-004
REVISED PROPOSAL
(AUGUST 21, 1995)
MODIFIED PROPOSAL
(OCTOBER 9, 1995)
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
(OCTOBER 9, 1995)
Lot 27, Tract 13627
SazIl¢
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315
Sam~
Same
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS
REVISED PROPOSAL
(AUGUST 21, 1995)
MODIFIED PROPOSAL
(OCTOBER 9, 1995)
Lot 27, Tract 13627
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
(OCTOBER 9, 1995)
Eliminate 250 room hotel
Provide non-competitive hotel clause
Modify phasing schedule to reflect
elimination of hotel
S~me
Salne
Same
Same
San'le
Same
Same
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-'315
Dedicate & construct 5 acre park Dedicate 3.6 acre park Dedicate and Improve 3.6 acre park
50' landscape setback on Tustin Ranch Rd
Two-story appearanc~ on Tustin Ranch Rd
& 50% on Irvine Blvd
Dedicate 3.6 acre park
35' landscape setback on Tustin Ranch
Increase perimeter landscaping Removed
Lots 17/18 of Tract 13627
35' landscape setback on Tnstin Ranch
2 ~tory product/Medium Density Sites
For-Sale product adjacent t6 Tnstin
Ranch Road
Removed
35' landscape setback on Tustin Ranch
2 story product/Medium Density Site
Single-Family Detached adjacent to
Tnstin Ranch Road
Removed
I
Release 2.7 acre reserved park site I
Dedicate. 18 acres for park parking lot
I
I
General Provisions
Same
Same
Increase % apartments to 28.4%
9,178 units total entitled for Tustin Ranch
No request; would agree to condo
conversion language
8,0~8 ~mit~ Total at buildout
No request; would agree to condo
conversion language
-8,058 units Total at build0ut
No request; would agree to condo
conversion language
8,058 units Total at buildout
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
SPECIFIC PLAN
REVISED PROPOSAL'
(AUGUST 21, 1995)
AMENDMENTS
MODIF[ED PROPOSAL
(OCTOBER 9, 1995)
Lot 27, Tract 13627
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
(OCTOBER 9, 1995)
19 acres to Medium-High Density
25 da/ac
Not to exceed 399 apartments
Same
Same
Max. of 350 attached units ~ 25 du/ac
Same
Same
Max. of 350 attached units ~ 25 da/ac
Same
Same
Max.of 350 attached units (~ 25 da/ac
Lot 6, Tract 12870
Medium-Low Density underlying
10 da/ac
Not to exceed jO0 units
Same
Same
Max. of 71 units (~ 7.1 du/ac
Same
Same
Max. of 71 units ~ 7.1 da/ac
Same
Same
Max. of 71 units ~ 7.1 da/ac
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315
16.7 acres to Medium-High Density
25 du/ac
not to exceed 350 apartments
16.3 acres to Medium-Low Density
10 da/ac
Not to exceed 163 units
5 acre park
Total of 513 units proposed ~ average
density for 40 acres = 12.8 da/ac
Increased parking rates
24.38 acre~ to Medium Density
18 du/ac
Max. of 439 apartments (~ 18 du/ac
12.02 acres of Medium-Low Density
Same
Max. of 94 units (~ 7.1 da/ac
3.6 acre park
Total of 533 units proposed (~ average
density for 40 acre ~ite = 13.3 du/ac
Removed
Medium Density Apartment Site - Max.
of 400 apartments ~ 18 du/ac
Medium Density For-Sale Site - Min. of
39 units ~ 16 du/ac
Medium-Low Density; Max. of 94 units
~ 7.1 da/ac
3.6 acre park site
Total of 533 units proposed ~ average
density for 40 acre site + 13.3 da/ac
Removed
22.6 acre Medium Density Apartment
Site - Max. of 400 apartment units ~
18 du/ac
17.4 Medium-Low Density (~ 10 da/ac
3.6 acre park dedicated and improved
Total of 533 units proposed ~ average
density for 40 acre site = 13.3 da/ac
Increased parking rates
ATTACHMENT C
ADDENDUM NO.
TO
EIR 85-'1
5
INITIAL STUD Y
AND
ADDENDUM EIR #5
FOR:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA) 94-001
ZONE CHANGE (ZC) 94-004, AND
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
TO THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
Prepared fo r:
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA. 92680
Prepared By:
The Keith Companies
2955 Red Hill Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA. 92626
November 1995
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
SECTION I .......................................................................... 1-1
1.1 PURPOSE .......................................................................... 1-1
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION ........................................................... 1-1
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................... 1-2
SECTION II ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ................ 2-1
SECTION III DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION3-1
APPENDIX A East Tustin Specific Plan Text Modifications
APPENDIX B
Traffic Impact Evaluation, Tustin Unified School District
CorreSpondence
APPENDIX C
Proposed Second Amendment to East Tustin Development
Agreement
9995-S F J- 12557.001- ETS P
11/9/95
-i-
LIST OF FIGURES
DESCRIPTION
PAGE
Figure 1-1
Existing Land Use Plan ............................................................................. 1-4
Figure 1-2
Proposed Land Use Plan & Location Map ....................................................... 1-5
Figure 1-3
GPA 94-001, Exhibit A ............................................................................. 1-6
Figure 1-4
GPA 94-001, Exhibit B ............................................................................. 1-7
Figure 1-5
ZC 94-004, Exhibit A ............................................................................... 1-8
Figure 1-6
ZC 94-004, Exhibit B ............................................................................... 1-9
9995-SFJ-12557.001-ETSP
11/9/95
-ii-
LIST OF TABLES
DESCRIPTION
PAGE
Table 1-i
Entitlement Modifications ........................................................................... 1-3
Table A-2
East Tustin Phase II Land Use ..................................................................... 3-20
9995-SFJ- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9195
ooo
-111-
SECTION I
1.1 PURPOSE
According to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15164 (a), the
Lead Agency shall prepare an addendum to an EIR if none of the conditions described in
Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred; only minor
technical changes or additions are necessary to make the EIR under consideration adequate
under CEQA and the changes to the EIR made by the addendum do not raise important new
issues about significant effects on the environment.
This addendum evaluates land use revisions that were originally considered in the East Tustin
Specific Plan Final EIR 85-2, prepared by Michael Brandman Associates in 1985 .and as
modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda. FEIR 85-2, as modified by
subsequently adopted supplements and addenda, is currently available at the City of Tustin
Community Development Department. Given that the proposed changes do not raise new
issues about significant impacts on the environment, this environmental assessment has been
prepared as an addendum to Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 85-2.
An addendum to the previous EIR need not be circulated for public review but can be included
in or attached to the final EIR. The City Council should consider the addendum with the
previous final EIR prior to making a decision on the project.
Together, Final EIR 85-2, as modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda, and
this addendum are intended to serve as documents that will generally inform decision makers
and the general public of any significant environmental effects of proposed project changes and
subsequent mitigation measures. Final EIR 85-2, as modified by subsequently adopted
supplements and addenda, is hereby incorporated by reference into this addendum.
Listed below is a discussion of the project location and description of the proposed changes to
the East Tustin Specific Plan, East Tustin Development Agreement, City's Zoning Map, and
Land Use Map of the City's General Plan. Section II includes the environmental checklist
outlining potential impacts that may or may not contribute to significant environmental effects.
Section III provides discussion of the environmental checklist and identifies any differences
between land use modifications and that discussed in Final EIR 85-2, as modified by'
subsequently adopted supplements and addenda.
9995-SFJ- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
1-1
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located in Sectors 2,6,8, and 11 of the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP)
area of the City of Tustin (see Figure 1-1). Sector 2 is located at northernmost portion of the
specific plan area and is bounded by Peters Canyon Regional Park on the west and Jamboree
Road to the east. Sector 6 is bounded by Tustin Ranch Road on the north and west, Portola
Parkway to the south and Jamboree Road to the east. Sector 8 is bounded by the City Limits
to the west and north, Tustin Ranch Road to the east and La Colina Drive to the south. Sector
11 is bounded by Bryan Avenue to the south, Jamboree Road to the east, Irvine Boulevard to
the north and Tustin Ranch Road to the west.
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 94o001), Zone Change (ZC
94-004) and the second Amendment to the East Tustin Specific Plan Development Agreement
for a variety of land use modifications throughout the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) area.
These proposed Specific Plan Text changes are specified in detail in Appendix A. The
proposed second amendment to the East Tustin Development Agreement is included as
Appendix C. The proposed land use modifications are depicted on Figure 1-2. Proposed
entitlement modifications are outlined in Table I-1 and are depicted in Figures 1-3, 1-4, 1-5,
and 1-6. These entitlements will result in a transfer of dwelling units from one sector to
another and therefore, will not increase the overall number of dwelling units permitted by the
East Tustin Specific Plan (7,950 total units) and the Phase I Residential Area (1,228 total
units), for a maximum entitlement of 9,178 units in Tustin Ranch. In effect, three sites which
currently permit the construction of a high school, one elementary school and 72,000 square
feet of general commercial use are proposed to be designated for residential use. As part of
the proposed Development Agreement Amendments, the applicant has agreed to a maximum
buildout cap of 8,058 units in Tustin Ranch which represents a twelve percent (12%) reduction
from the current maximum entitlement of 9,178 units.
9995-SFJ- 12557.001-ETSP
11/9/95
1-2
r~ ~m
- E
_' =
..
Irvine Ave.
I
i
Barranca Rd.
LEGEND
_~] I~.AN ~ECTOR$
CHANGED AREAS
EAST
TUSTIN SPECIFIC
PLAN
EXISTING
LAND USE PLAN
Figure 1-1
E
LEGEND
REFER TO
FIGURE 1-4 & 1-6
REFER TO
FIGURE 1-3
INSTTTUTIONA .L/RECflEATIONAL
[--~-'~ blXEO USE
[-~-'] Q.P.A. · Z:ONINQ LANO LLSE AREA
REFER TO
FIGURE 1-5
ALTERNATE LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS
CONSIDERED
EAST
TUSTIN SPECIFIC
PLAN
PROPOSED
LAND USE PLAN
& LOCATION MAP
Figure 1- 2
TOWNSHIP DRIVE
RAWLINGS
~ SITE
'- EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION: PC PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL
PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATION: PC RESIDENTIAL
.OT 6 OF TRACT 12870 A.P.#: 501-093-16
SOURCE: CITY OF TUSTIN
EAST
TUSTIN
SPECIFIC
PLAN
GPA 94-001
EXHIBIT A'
Figure 1-3
EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION: PC COMMERCIAL/BUSINESS
PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATION: PC RESIDENTIAL.,/
PC COMMERCIAL/BUSINESS
LOT 27 OF TRACT 13627 A.P.#: 502-452-01
--
SOURCE:CITY OF TUSTIN
ii
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PL.AN
GPA 94-001
EXHIBIT B
Figure 1-4
IRVINE
SITE
EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION: PC COMMUNITY FACILITY
PROPOSED DESIGNATION: PC RESIDENTIAL
PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 88-315 A.P.~: 500-221-02 A.P.#: 500-221.-03
SOURCE: CITY OF TUSTIN
EAST
TUSTIN SPECIFIC
PLAN
ZC 94-004
EXHIBIT A
Figure 1-5
LU
EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION: PC COMMERCIAL
PROPOSED DESIGNATION: PC RESIDENTIAL.,tPC COMMERCIAL
Lot 27 of Tract 13627 A.P. 502-452-01
SOURCE: CITY OF TUSTIN
EAST
TUSTIN
SPECIFIC
PLAN
ZC 94-004
EXHIBIT B
Figure 1-6
SECTION II
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
2.1 Background
The proposed General Plan Amendments, Zone Change, East Tustin Specific Plan
Amendments and East Tustin Development Agreement. Amendment are a reconfiguration of
previously approved land uses for the project site. Proposed residential dwelling units will not
exceed residential unit totals discussed and analyzed in Final EIR 85-2 as modified by
subsequently adopted supplements and addenda. In fact the modifications requested will
establish a buildout dwelling unit cap of 8,058 units which represents a twelve percent (12%)
reduction in the maximum entitlement for Tustin Ranch. The proposed elimination of some
public institutional and commercial type uses are not expected to result in any new significant
environmental impacts to the site that were not considered in EIR 85-2 as subsequently
modified by adopted supplements and addenda. Following is an analysis which will document
the additions and the magnitude of additions to determine impacts of the project proposal.
2.2 Environmental Checklist Form
Differences in environmental impacts between the p~oposed land use revisions and the land
uses that were proposed in Final EIR 85-2 as subsequently modified by adopted supplements
and addenda have been summarized in Section III of this Addendum EIR.
Determining whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment and the
subsequent checking of a "yes", "no", or "maybe" on the checklist form is critical to the
CEQA process. Section 15064 (b) of the CEQA Guidelines specifically states that "the
determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for
careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on
scientific and factual data. An ironclad definition of significant effect is not possible because
the significance of an activiw may vary with the setting."
In the case of the proposed project a considerable amount of technical data was available (Final
EIR 85-2 as subsequently modified by adopted supplements and addenda) to determine
potential environmental impacts. In those cases where considerable technical and factual data
was available to determine that the project will not create an adverse impact to the environment
a "no" determination was given. In those cases, such as land use, when there was no question
the projects intent was to modify land uses, a "yes" determination was given. In those cases
where additional study or research was necessary (such as transportation/circulation) the item
was checked "maybe". A conservative approach was taken in the preparation of the checklist
insofar as if there was any question of a "no" or "maybe" determination.the preparers of the
study determined that there may be a possibility of an impact and selected "maybe"
9995-S F J- 12557.001 -ETSP
I 1/9/95
2-1
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR3/I
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
Tustin Oranqe
City County
East Tustin Specific Plan Area
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The project proposes to amend existing general plan
and zone designations for a variety of properties throughout the East Tustin
Specific Plan Area, including text and map amendments to the East Tustin
Specific Plan and modifications to the East Tustin Development Agreement. This
project will not increase the number of dwelling units permitted to be built
by the specific plan, but will provide more land area for those units by
modifying other land uses and densities.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Y~' Maybe No
I. EARTH
a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures?
b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the
soil?
c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? _
d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique
geologic or physical features? _
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off
the site?
f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beachsands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel
of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any ban, inlet or
lake?
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as
earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
X
X
X
X
II.
AIR
a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? _
b) The creation of objectionable odors? __
c) Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally or regionally? _
X
9999-VMV-911-IS CHECKLIST
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (CON'T)
III. WATER
Yes
Maybe No
Vo
a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water
movements, in either marine or freshwaters?
b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff?.
c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body?
e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer
by cuts or excavations?
h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available
for Public water supplies?
i) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as
flooding or tidal waves?
PLANT LIFE
a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of
plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic
plants)?
b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered
species of plants?
c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a
barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species?
d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
ANEMAL LIFE
a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of
animals (birds; land animals, including reptiles; fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)?
b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered
sPecies or animals?
c) Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in
a barrier to the migration or movement of animals?
d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
VI. NOISE
a) Increases in existing noise levels?
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
LIGHT AND GLARE
a) Produce new light or glare?
X
X
x
X
X
x
X
9999-VMV-911-IS CHECKLIST
ENVIRON."MENTAL IMPACTS (CON'T)
VIII. LAND USE
Yes
Maybe No
a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an
area'?
IX. NATURAL RESOURCES
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
X. RISK OF UPSET
a)
A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an
emergency evacuation plan?
XI. POPULATION
a) Alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the
human population of an area?
XII. HOUSENG
a) Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional
housing?
XIII. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?
b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new
parking?
c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems?
d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of
people and/or goods?
e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or
pedestrians?
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks or other recreational facilities?
e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
0 Other governmental services?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
9999-VMV-911-IS CHECKLIST
ENVIRON~IENTAL IMPACTS (CON'T)
XV. ENERGY
a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new sources of energy?
XVI. UTILI~S AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
a) Power or natural gas?
b) Communications systems?
c) Water?
d) Sewer or septic tanks?
e) Storm water drainage?
f) SOlid waste and disposal?
XVII. HUMAN HEALTH
a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard
(excluding mental health)?
b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
X~II.,MESTH~TICS
a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public?
b) The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public
view?
XIx. RECREATION
a) Impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities?
XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site?
b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or
historic building, structure, or object?
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
impact area?
Yes
Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
9999-VMV-911-IS CHECKLIST
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (CON'T)
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a)
Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b)
Short-term: Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which
occurs in a relatively, brief, definitive period of time. Long-
term impacts will endure well into the future.?
c)
Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project
may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the
total of those impacts on the environment is significant.)
Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Y~s
Maybe No
X
X
X
X
9999-VMV-911-IS CHECKLIST
SECTION III
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Explanation of all Answers
I. Earth
Items A-D - "No": The majority of the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) area is relatively flat
(over 70% of the site is at 0 to 5 percent slope). Slopes in the northeastern area 'of the site
consists of moderate hills and a small valley bottom. All properties identified in the subject
modifications have previously been rough graded as part of the rough grading operations
associated with the sector level maps. No significant geologic substructures are known to exist
on the subject sites. No unique geologic or physical features are located in the project site
modification areas.
Item E- "No": Proposed land uses would add impervious surfaces to the project area but the
amOunt of impervious surfaces would not be significantly different than what would be created
by land uses proposed in EIR 85-2. Given that the amount of impervious surfaces would
generally remain the same, it is expected that water runoff quantities would remain the same as
well.
Item F- "No": Project implementation will not modify or impact beachsands or river or
stream channels or lake beds.
Item G. "No": Exposure of people and/or property to earthquakes is inherent with living in
Southern California. This project does not subject people or property to geologic hazards in
any additional manner than previously addressed.
Statement of Findings and Fact
The proposed land use modifications will not introduce the project site to earth related hazards
not previously addressed in Final EIR 85-2. Each significant impact can be reduced to a level
of insignificance by implementation of mitigation measures as outlined in the Final EIR. A
statement of overriding considerations for landform alteration and geology was adopted
concurrent with certification of Final EIR 85-2. The proposed project will not worsen the
environmental impacts, of landform alterations or geologic considerations (seismic) therefore,
no additional statements of overriding considerations are required.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
3-1
9995-S F J- 12557.00 I-ETSP
I 1/9/95
II. Air
Item A- "No"' Short-term temporary impacts would result from construction activities.
Long-term impacts would result from automobile emissions. Both long and short-term impacts
would be similar to impacts created by the uses proposed for the site in Final EIR 85-2.
Construction activities would remain similar and the .proposed project would not create
additional vehicular usage not previously addressed in Final EIR 85-2.
Item B- "No"' The construction of residential uses will not create Objectionable odors.
Residential uses are not associated with objectionable odors.
Item C- "No"' The construction of the proposed project will not significantly alter air
movement, or result in any change in temperature or climate either locally regionally.
Statement of Findings and Fact
The proposed land use modifications will not introduce new air quality impacts to the site nOt
previously addressed in Final EIR 85-2. Impacts to air conditions can be reduced by
implementation of mitigation measures as outlines in the final EIR. A statement of overriding
considerations for the generation of mobile and stationary air pollutants was adopted
concurrent with certification of Final EIR 85-2. The proposed .project will not worsen the
environmental impacts of airborne pollutants, therefore no additional statements of overriding
considerations are required.
Sources'
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
III. Water
Items A,C and D- "No": The project sites are not located in either a marine or freshwater
environment and no water bodies exist on any of the sites. Portions of the ETSP area are
located in both the 100 year and 500 year flood zones.. Specifically,. the 500 year flood zone
area are areas of 500 year floods; areas of 100 year floods with average depths of less than 1
foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile: and areas protected by levees from 100
year floods. Standard mitigation measures required by the City of Tustin ensure that all
structures meet all construction standards established by the National Flood Insurance
Program.
Items B and E- "No"' Urban land uses will affect runoff pollutants. Storm runoff from the
site will result in runoff such as pesticides and herbicides (commonly the result of landscaping
activities) and oil, grease and debris commonly associated with auto- related pollutants.
3-2
9995-S F J- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
Item F- "No":
modifications.
Direction or rate of water flow would not be affected by the proposed land use
Item G- "No": EIR 85-2 noted that increases in impervious surfaces and the provision of
storm drain improvements will result in less runoff percolating into the groundwater basin. In
addition to reducing the volume of water recharge, project implementation will alter the
character of water percolating through the soils. Ultimately the change in landscaping
irrigation return water is anticipated to result in an improvement in the water quality of the
groundwater basin. The proposed land use revisions will not change the quantity of
groundwater nor will they impact through additions or withdrawals, °r through the interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavation change the quantity of groundwater.
Item H- "No": The proposed project will use water supplies for domestic and irrigation uses,
similar to those discussed in Final EIR 85-2.
Item I- "No": The project site is not located in close proximity to any large body of water that
could subject the site to water-related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves.
Statement of Findings and Facts
The proposed project will be similar in impact and scope to that of approved land uses for the
site. The proposed project will not introduce and water related hazards or issues not
previously addressed in Final EIR 85-2. Water related impacts associated with development of
the site can be reduced by implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the final EIR.
A statement of overriding considerations for decreasing recharge to groundwater basins and the
increase of surface runoff to on site and downstream drainage facilities was adopted concurrent
with certification of Final EIR 85-2. The proposed project will not worsen the environmental
impacts of decreased recharge to groundwater basins or' increase surface water runoff,
therefore no additional statements of overriding considerations are required.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
IV. Plant Life
.I.t. ems A,B and D- "No": All areas under project consideration have been previously rough
graded. Consequently, there is no sensitive vegetation on any of the subject sites, including
coastal sage scrub. Additionally, no'agricultural crops remain on any of the sites.
9995-SFJ- 12557.00 I-ETSP
11/9/95
3-3
Item C- "No": New on site plant species will be introduced to the project site, however, these
species would be similar to those discussed in Final EIR 85-2.
Statement of Findings and Facts
All land use areas under consideration with the proposed project have been previously rough
graded. Therefore, all native vegetation and habitat has been removed. The proposed project
will not impose new impacts to existing on site vegetation. A statement of overriding
considerations for the elimination of all on site agricultural vegetation and removal' of various
vegetation associations was adopted concurrent with certification of Final EIR 85-2. The
proposed project will not worsen environmental impacts of elimination of agricultural
vegetation and removal of various vegetative associations, as all of the project areas have been
previously rough graded and are consequently no longer on site. Therefore, no additional
statements of overriding considerations are required.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
V. Animal Life
Items A,B and D- "No": EIR 85-2 did not identify significant animal life residing on the
project site. Modifications to land uses proposed would generate similar impacts as those land
uses proposed for the site in Final EIR 85-2.
Item C- "No": Because land use modifications are residential in nature, it can be anticipated
that domestic species of animals such as dogs and cats, will be introduced to the area.
However, given existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project, domesticated animals are
already present in the immediate vicinity.
Statement of Finding.s and Facts
There is no known fish or wildlife habitat existing on the project site. Habitat for the site has
been previously rough graded and would not support significant wildlife except for
domesticated animals associated with residential units. Environmental impacts can be reduced
to a level of insignificance by implementation of mitigation measures as outlined in Final EIR
85-2.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
9995-SFJ-12557.001-ETSP
3-4
VI. Noise
Item A- "No": Construction activities will temporarily increase existing noise levels in the
immediate vicinity of the project area. Construction activities are however, considered short-
term in nature. These increase would be similar to short-term noise impacts as discussed in
Final EIR 85-2.
Item B- "No": Long-term noise impacts will be decreased based upon a reduction in traffic
levels originally considered with Final EIR 85-2. High school facilities generally have playing
fields which can generate a significant amount of player and spectator noise from such sports
as baseball, track meets, soccer, and softball. Football activities also generate loud speaker
noises at events that can be annoying and obtrusive. The traffic study indicates that the
proposed modification to land uses substantially reduces daily traffic anticipated to be
generated by the East Tustin Specific Plan and said modifications are not considered severe.
Statement of Findings and Facts
Proposed land uses are less intensive than original land uses analyzed in FEIR 85-2. Noise
associated with sporting activities at the school will be eliminated thereby eliminating loud
speaker and spectator noise which can be very obtrusive given that many of these activities are
played in the evening hours. Traffic levels are consequently less and subsequently noise
impacts are reduced. Environmental impacts can be reduced by implementation of mitigation
measures as outlined in Final EIR 85-2. A statement of overriding considerations for
incremental increases in ambient noise levels was adopted concurrent with certification of
Final EIR 85-2. The proposed project will not worsen the environmental impacts of an
increase in ambient noise levels, therefore no additional statements of overriding
considerations are required.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
VII. Light and Glare
Item A- "No": Similar to existing land uses and those approved for the sites, light and glare
would be generate from proposed land uses. In some instances, such as the removal of
schools, light and glare impacts may be less due to the removal of associated high intensity
lighting necessary for nighttime athletics such as football and baseball.
9995-S F J- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
3-5
Statement of Findings and Facts
Light and glare impacts will not introduce the project site to impacts not previously addressed
in Final EIR 85-2. Each significant impact can be reduced to a level of insignificance by
implementation of mitigation measures as outlined in the Final EIR..A statement of overriding
considerations for aesthetics was adopted concurrent with the certification of Final EIR 85-2.
The proposed project will not worsen the environmental impacts of light and glare therefore,
no additional statements of overriding considerations are required.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
VIII. Land Use
Item A- "Yes": The proposed land use modifications will alter the present land uses approved
as part of the ETSP. These modifications are described in Section I, Table 1-1 of this
Addendum to the EIR. The intent of the proposed land uses is not to increase the number of
dwelling units permitted to be built in East Tustin, but to modify land uses and transfer units
from one sector to another. The results will be an overall lower residential density for the
community than is currently planned. Provisions of the Development Agreement Amendment
will reduce the overall allowable dwelling unit count of 7,950 units to 7,236 units within the
East Tustin Specific Plan and from 1,288 units to 822 units in the Phase I Residential Area.
This represents a twelve percent (12%) reduction in the maximum entitlement of 9,178 units to
8,058 units in Tustin Ranch.
The potential for land use conflict may arise within the ETSP between Sectors 10 and 11.
Sector 10 consists of occupied low density dwelling units. The current ETSP designates a
High School (HS) and Medium Density Residential (M) within the central and western portion
of Sector 11, adjacent to Sector 10 and the occupied dwelling units (see Figure 1-1). The
proposed land use modifications will delete the HS designation and chan~e the Land Use Plan
to Medium Density Residential (M) adjacent to Irvin~e Boulevard .and'-Tustin Ranch Road,
Medium-Low Density Residential (ML) adjacent to Heritage Way and Tustin Ranch Road with
a Neighborhood Park site (NP) to be identified at the northeast corner of Heritage Way and
Tustin Ranch Road (see Figure 1-2). An alternate land use designation is also being
considered for this site which includes Medium Density Residential (M) adjacent to Irvine
Boulevard away from Tustin Ranch Road, Medium-Low Density Residential (ML) adjacent to
Heritage Way and adjacent to the entire frontage along Tustin Ranch Road with a
Neighborhood Park site (NP) identified at the northeast comer of Heritage Way and Tustin
Ranch Road (see Figure 1-2). The Medium designation would allow up to 18 dwelling units
per acre and the Medium-Low designation would allow up to 10 dwelling units per acre. In
9995-S FJ- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
3-6
either the proposed land use modifications or the alternate land use designation, the traffic
generated would be similar because :both M. and!~ML land use deSignations carry the same
average daily trip rate (ADT). Approval of either scenario, from an environmental stand
point, would still generate less traffic and reduce circulation impacts with the removal of the
high school. The apartment uses and neighborhood park site may appear to be a significant
departure for the elimination of the high school site. However, the ETSP and Development
Agreement have acknowledged that school sites would be developed upon need, with flexible
siting locations, and that the underlying land use to schools would be residential.
Provisions in the Development Agreement amendments would require the applicant to provide
an expanded 35 foot landscaped buffer adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road within Sector 11. A
Medium Density "For-Sale" site to accommodate an attached residential product at a maximum
of 16 dwelling units per acre or Single-Family Detached dwellings at a maximum of 10
dwelling units per acre would be provided adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road. The Medium
Density "Apartment" site would be located along Irvine Boulevard away from Tustin Ranch
Road to provide additional land use buffers between the existing single-family detached
dwellings and the apartment site. Additional provisions require that the buildings within the M
land use designation of Sector 11 be limited to two-stories in height.
The Medium Density "Apartment" site would allow development up to 18 dwelling units per
acre and would consist of a maximum of 400 apartments. Apartments are allowed within the
ETSP subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, apartment projects are
also typically processed with Condominium maps, therefore, future conversion into condos for
home ownership is not precluded. As part of the Development Agreement Amendments, the
applicant has agreed to provide language that any future conversion of apartments to
condominiums would not be used to create additional apartments under the twenty-five percent
(25%) limit described in the development agreement. Please see Section 12-Housing for
additional discussion on this issue.
Additionally, circulation impacts and light and glare impacts would be reduced to these areas
with the removal of the high school site. Please see Sections 13-Traffic and Circulation and 7-
Light and Glare for further discussion of these issues.
The proposed project also requests to remove the obligation in the Development Agreement of
the applicant to construct a minimum 250 room hotel in Sector 6. The removal of this use
from commercial uses will allow the construction of up to 350 condominium units as identified
in the statistical summary for Sector 6. Condominium units at this location will be a
continuation of residential uses in nearby sectors and generate less traffic and circulation
impacts than a hotel and retail uses. See Section 13-Traffic and Circulation for additional
discussion of impacts.
9995-$ F J- 12557.00 t- ETSP
11/9/95
3-7
A statistical analysis demonstrating changes from the presently approved ETSP to the proposed
project modifications are included in Table 2.4 of the proposed ETSP Text Amendments
contained in Appendix A. The proposed Second Amendment to the East Tustin Development
Agreement is included in Appendix C.
A review of the table reveals total allowable unit changes to Sectors 1,4,5,7 and 8. The total
unit number changes to these sectors are reduced from the existing plan and will therefore
require a specific plan text change only. The overall changes to these sector areas reflect
existing densities and do not change the overall ETSP land use densities.
The proposed project increases the number of residential units in SeCtors 2,6,9,10 and 11. In
summary, the high school site, one elementary school site, and 60% of the general commercial
site are proposed to be converted to residential use. Although these sector areas propose an
increase in the number of residential units, the overall total buildout for the ETSP area and
Phase I Residential Area will be reduced by twelve percent (12%) or 1,120 units. The ETSP
specifically allows that if a school and/or park currently designated for a sector is not built in
this sector, that the acreage goes into residential use. Additionally, Section 3.4.3 of ETSP
provides that if a sector is developed with less than the maximum number of units permitted
within the sector, then a transfer of units will be permitted from sector to sector within the
Specific Plan area provided that:
o
The basic character and intensity of development in both the losing and gaining sector
is not significantly altered;
,
The maximum number of dwelling units in each land use area, as determined by the
density factor times gross acres, shall not be exceeded; and
,
The resulting development pattern is compatible with land use areas adjacent to both
the losing and gaining sectors.
With removal of the HS site in Sector 11 and the reasons cited above, no significant land use
conflicts within Sectors 2, 6, 9 and 11 will occur.
Statement of Finding and Facts
Land use, impacts will remain similar to those outlined in the Final EIR 85-2. A statement of
overriding considerations for conversion of open space to urban uses was adopted concurrent
with certification of Final EIR 85-2. The proposed project will not worsen the environmental
impact of conversion of open space to urban uses, therefore no additional statements of
overriding considerations are required.
9995-$FJ- 12557.001-ETSP
11/9/95
3-8
Sources
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
City of TuStin Planning Staff
IX. Natural Resources
Item A- "No": EIR 85-2 analyzed natural gas consumption and noted that although there was
an increase in usage, there would be no significant impacts associated with providing the site
with natural gas. Although the proposed project is requesting residential uses at sites
designated as public institutional (schools) and commercial, the number of residential units is
below that of the original project.
Statement of Findings and Facts
A reduced number of residential units located over the entire specific plan area will result in
less natural gas consumption. Project impacts can be reduced to a level below significance
through the implementation of mitigation measures as set forth in Final EIR 85-2.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
X. Risk of Upset
Items A and B- "No": Proposed residential land uses would not result in hazardous activities
that would pose a risk of upset. Residential activities typically do not involve the use of
significant amounts of hazardous materials such'as oils, pesticides, chemicals or radiation.
Additionally, proposed land use siting locations would not impede or interfere with established
emergency response or evacuation plans.
Statement of Findings and Facts
Proposed residential uses would have similar impacts to those analyzed in Final EIR 85-2.
Project impacts can be reduced to a level below significance through implementation of
mitigation measures as discussed in FEIR 85-2.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
3-9
XI. Population
Item A- "Maybe": The proposed project would result in a reconfiguration of land uses.
Although the project proposes residential units on previously designated public and institutional
and commercial sites, the total number of units planned in the ETSP areas is less than the tOtal
number analyzed in Final EIR 85-2. Therefore, the total estimated population at buildout is
not expected to exceed levels estimated in Final EIR 85-2.
Statement of Findings and Facts'
The proposed project will not exceed the previously estimated population at buildout for the
ETSP, because total residential units requested are below the total unit figure of the original
ETSP project. The proposed project will result in reduced ETSP population as compared to
the ETSP project analyzed in Final EIR 85-2.
Sources'
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
XII. Housing
Item A' "Maybe"' The proposed land use modifications will affect existing housing within the
ETSP area. 'The ETSP currently allows a maximum of 7,950 dwelling units and the Phase I
Residential Area currently allows a maximum of 1,228 dwelling units for a maximum
entitlement of 9,178 units within Tustin Ranch. Based upon existing built conditions, as well
as anticipated development of remaining properties, the applicant has estimated the buildout
number of dwelling units in Tustin Ranch as 8,058. This buildout number represents a twelve
percent (12%) reduction from the maximum entitlement of 9,178 units. The applicant has
agreed to include language in the Development Agreement Amendments to establish a
maximum buildout total of 8,058 units in Tustin Ranch.
The current ETSP Development Agreement specifies that twenty-five percent (25 %) of the
total dwelling units within the ETSP and Phase I residential area (9,178 total units) to be
apartments, which would allow a maximum of 2,294 apartments to be constructed. No change
to the twenty-five percent (25 %) limitation is proposed. As part of the Development
Agreement Amendments, the applicant has agreed to provide language that any futux:e
conversion of apartments to condominiums would not be used to exceed the maximum number
of apartments under the twenty-five percent (25%) limit. For purposes of calculating the
twenty-five percent (25 %) limitation, the original maximum entitlement of 9,178 units for the
ETSP and Phase I Residential Area shall be used.
9995-S F J- 12557.001-ET5 p
11/9/95
3-10
Apartment projects are typically processed' with Condominium maps, therefore, future
conversion into condos for home ownership is not precluded. This practice would be
consistent with recently adopted goals within the City's Housing Element. Goal 3 of the
H°using Element is to "[I]ncrease the percentage of ownership housing to ensure a reasonable
balance of rental and owner-occupied housing within the City." Apartment unit conversions to
condominiums typically provide for more affordable opportunities for housing ownership.
For the previously outlined reasons, no additional significant impacts to housing will occur.
Statement of Finding and Facts
The increase in apa'rtments will not result in an increase in the total number of residential units
located within the ETSP site. However, impacts will remain similar to those outlined in the
Final EIR 85-2.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
City of Tustin planning staff
XIII.
Transportation/Circulation
Items A,B and C- "Maybe": A traffic study for the proposed alterations to the land uses was
prepared by Pirzadeh and Associates, titled "East Tustin Specific Plan Amendment-Traffic
Generation Analysis. October 24, 1994. An independent review of this study Was performed
by Austin-Foust Associates on October 25, 1995 with comparison of the requirements for a
Level One Traffic Impact Evaluation. Refer to AppendiX B for reports. A Level One Traffic
Impact Evaluation seeks to determine how the proposed land use revisions impact the original
traffic analysis identified in EIR 85-2. The Pirzadeh study indicates that the proposed
amendment will result in significantly less average daily trips (38,611 ADT) as compared to
49,501 ADT discussed in EIR 85-2. This reduction in trips is due mainly to the reduction in
General Commercial (GC) acreage, and to a lesser degree, to the buildout conditions
throughout the majority of the ETSP area. Four Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) were studied
under the Level One Traffic Impact Evaluation. Within two of the four zones studied, (TAZ's
37 and 40), the number of residential units increases by 646. Within the the other two zones,
(TAZ's 38 and 46), the number or residential units decreases by 848, leaving a net decrease of
200 units within the four zones. These reductions and increase are a result of the transferring
of units from other areas of the specific plan. For this reason, the analyzed traffic zones may
slightly increase or decrease without increasing the overall number of previously approved
units at 7,950 d.u.
9995-SFJ- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
3-11
The effect of the proposed land use modifications, or the alternate land use designations
discussed in Section VIII, Land Use page 3-6, substantially reduces daily traffic anticipated to
be generated by the ETSP and thereby negates the need for a more detailed Level Two traffic
analysis. The number of trips generated by the four affected traffic zones is reduced, and the
overall daily trip generation for the zones is reduced by 19,880 ADT. Should the alternate
land use designations be approved as part of this proposal, the reduction in ADT would remain
the same.
Overlapping impacts are of a concern and were initially anticipated to occur on Jamboree Road
south of Tustin Ranch Road to Barranca Parkway, Bryan Avenue between Jamboree Road and
Newport Avenue, and most severely on Irvine Boulevard between Jamboree Road and the SR-
55 Freeway. However, analysis of the proposed ETSP amendment traffic study indicates that
the modified land uses reduce average daily trips generated within the four aforementioned
TAZ's from 49,501 vehicles per day (vpd) to 38,611 vpd; a reduction of 11,890 vpd or
twenty-two percent (22 %). Within TAZ 40, which directly impacts Irvine Boulevard, traffic
will be reduced from the previously approved 10,432 vpd to 9,275 vpd. These reductions
would result in improved traffic flow on affected Tustin 'roadways and therefore, either the
proposed amendment, or the alternate, would not adversely impact the City's planned
circulation system.
The City's Transportation Engineer has also reviewed the subject proposed amendment with
consideration of the proposed Lower Peter Canyon Specific Plan EIR (LPCSP) circulation
plan, dated November 18, 1994. While the LPCSP project substantially impacts various
roadways within the City of Tustin, a mitigation program has been prepared by the County of
Orange to address and mitigate the project traffic impacts generated by the. LPCSP Project.
The LPCSP project is identified as adding 11,000 vehicles per day on Irvine Boulevard at
project buildout in the area of TAZ 40. The additional traffic generated by the LPCSP project
onto Irvine Boulevard, does not offset the traffic reduction from the ETSP amendment~
However, the LPCSP project has been conditioned by the County of Orange to mitigate their
project traffic impacts on all roadways to a level of acceptable conditions. These conditions
were imposed prior to consideration of the reduction in traffic associated with the ETSP
amendment, since neither proposal has been approved as of this date.
As part of the ETSP text amendments, consideration is being given to increase the amount of
guest parking spaces required by Section 3.10.1.C of the ETSP, for multiple family projects.
The amendments would increase guest parking from 0.25 spaces per unit to 0.5 spaces per
unit. In the event that a two-car garage is included, the guest rates would be increased from
0.5 spaces per unit to 0.75 spaces per unit. Additional guest rate increases are also proposed
for patio home projects and developments within the "Medium-Low" land use designations of
the ETSP. Proposed changes to the parking requirements are included in Appendix ~.
9995-SFJ- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
3-12
Item D- "Maybe": Alterations to present patterns of circulation and movement may be
modified due to development of sites. However, changes to movement patterns will not be
considered significant, as traffic generated will be significantly less than that analyzed in EIR
85-2.
Item E- ."No": The proposed project will not alter waterborne, rail or air traffic.
Item F- "Maybe": Development inherently brings increased hazards and' risks to motor
vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians. Given the reduction in traffic volumes these impacts are
considered less than those analyzed in EIR 85-2.
Statement of Findings and Fact
Land use modifications will redistribute traffic volumes within the ETSP. In addition, said
volUmes will be reduced in the location of land use modifications, because of the decrease in
GC and existing buildout conditions throughout the majority of the ETSP area. Please refer to
the complete traffic study found in Final EIR 85-2 and the traffic impact evaluation study
prepared for this project found in Appendix B. A statement of overriding considerations for
increased traffic generation and distribution to local roadways was adopted concurrent with
certification of Final EIR 85-2. The proposed project will not worsen the environmental
impact of traffic generation and diStribution, therefore no additional statements of overriding
considerations are required.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans ~'
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
East Tustin Specific Plan Amendment Traffic Generation Analysis, Pirzadeh &
Associates, October 24, 1994.
East Tustin Specific Plan Amendment Level One Traffic Impact Evaluation,
Austin-Foust Associates, October 25, 1995.
Lower Peters Canyon Specific Plan EIR Circulation'Plan, November 18, 1994.
XIV. Public Services
Item A- "No": The Orange County Fire Authority currently provides service to the ETSP
area. The land use modifications proposed would result in slightly less impacts to the fire
department due to the decrease in overall dwelling units within the planning area and the
corresponding decrease in emergency calls.
9995-SFJ-12557.001-ETSP
11/9/95
3-13
Item B- "No"' The Tustin Police Department currently provides police protection to the ETSP
area. Similar to fire protection serVices, police protection 'services would decrease when
compared to impacts outlined in Final EIR 85-2.
Item C- "Maybe": The Tustin Unified School District (TUSD) has indicated that the proposed
land use modifications will not significantly change impacts as outlined in Final EIR 85-2, nor
will the modifications affect existing school requirements previously negotiated between the
project proponent and the TUSD. Please refer to Appendix B for the most recent school
district correspondence.
Item D- "Maybe": Proposed land use modifications would alter the location of planned public
parks within the ETSP area. As a part of the proposed project, the Development Agreement
Amendments 'would require the applicant to dedicate a 3.6-acre neighborhood park site at the
time of recording any subdivision map in Sector 11. Consideration may also be given for the
applicant to improve the park site ~or financially contribute to the improvements of the park site
as part of the provisions of the Development Agreement Amendments. All other parkland
dedications have occurred consistent with the Specific Plan at the time of recording of the
sector level maps. No significant impacts would result with implementation of the mitigation
measure outlined in Final EIR 85-2.
Item E- "No"' Project implementation will not modify or impact the maintenance of public
facilities, including roads.
Item F- "No"' The proposed project will not impacts other governmental services .not
previously addressed in Final EIR 85-2.
Statement of Findings and Fact
The proposed land use modifications will not significantly change the impacts outlined in Final
EIR 85-2. School impact have been mitigated to level of insignificance by implementation of.
mitigation measures as outlined in the final EIR. A statement of overriding considerations for
increased demand of public services and facilities was adopted concurrent with certification of
Final EIR 85-2. The proposed project will not worsen the environmental impact of providing
public services and facilities, therefore no additional statements of overriding considerations
are required.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
9995-S F J- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
3-14
XV. Energy
Items A and B- "No": EIR 85-2 analyzed energy requirements and noted that although there
was a cumulative increase in usage, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the project to
reduce demands on energy resources. The land use modifications proposed would not
significantly alter the impacts outlined in Final EIR 85-2.
Statement of Findings and Facts
Impacts to energy requirements would remain as outlined in Final EIR 85-2.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
XVI. Utilities and Services Systems
Items A,B,C,D,£ and F- "No": The proposed land use modifications will not alter the
impacts to the usage of natural gas, the local telephone system or solid waste disposal. The
City of Tustin Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed land use modification for
possible changes to the approved water, sewer and drainage systems. Impacts as a result of
the proposed project will remain as outlined in Final EIR 85-2.
Statement of Findings and Fact
The redistribution and overall decrease in dwelling units will not significantly alter the utilities
and services approved in Final EIR 85-2.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
XVII. Human Health
Items A and B- "No": The proposed land use modifications would not create a health hazard
or potential hazards, or exposure of people to potential health hazards.
Statement of Findings and Fact
Similar to the land uses proposed in Final EIR 85-2, the land use modifications would not
create significant human health hazards.
3-15
9995-SFJ-12557.001-ETSP
I I IOlflgl
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its. supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
XVIII. Aesthetics
Items A and B- "No": The aesthetic impacts associated with the original project were found to
be unavoidable and adverse. As the proposed land use modifications and Development'
Agreemej~t Amendments will decrease overall dwelling units within the specific plan, impacts
would not significantly be altered. The proposed project includes the dedication of a 3.6-acre
neighborhood park sit, e, in the western portion of Sector 11 adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road.
Consideration may also be given to require the applicant to improve the park site or financially
contribute toward the improvements of the site as part of the provisions of the Development
Agreement Amendments. Additional provisions have been included within the proposed
Development Agreement Amendment to: a) provide a 35-foot landscape setback along Tustin
Ranch Road, and b) require that the future buildings within Sector 11 within the Medium
Density Land Use Designation be limited to two stories in height.
Statement of Findings and Fact
A statement of overriding considerations for altering a previously open space/undeveloped 'area
was adopted concurrent with certification of Final EIR 85-2. The proposed project will not
worsen the environmental impact of introducing land uses into an open space area, therefore
no additional statements of overriding considerations are required.
Sources-
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
XIX. Recreation
The original recreational needs outlined in Final EIR 85-2 anticipated approximately 66 acres
of new neighborhood and community parks would be needed to support increased recreation
needs. The proposed land use modifications would reconfigure the park sites within the
specific plan but would not impact the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities. By establishing a maximum buildout cap of 8,058 units as part of the
Development Agreement Amendments, the maximum number of acres required for parks
within Tustin Ranch can be calculated. Based upon the proposed 8,058 unit buildout cap and
acreage dedicated to date for parks, the City would be entitled to 3.6 acres of additional
parkland to satisfy Quimby Act requirements. The Development Agreement Amendment will
9995-SFJ- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
3-16
provide for the Developer to dedicate a 3.6-acre neighborhood park site within Section 11 of
the ESTP, generally located at the northeast comer of Tustin Ranch Road and Heritage Way.
Consideration may also be given for the applicant to improve the park site or financially
contribute toward the improvement of the park site as part of the Development Agreement
Amendments as a negotiated condition for the City's rezoning of the property (as opposed to a
Quimby Act requirement). All other parkland dedications have occurred consistent with the
Specific Plan at the time of recording of sector level maps. With the dedication of the 3.6-
acre neighborhood park site, a total of 61.6-acres of public and private parkland will ultimately
be provided within the ETSP area.
Statement of Findings and Fact
Land use modifications to recreational facilities will have insignificant impacts as outlined in
Final EIR 85-2.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
XX. Cultural Resources
Item A- "No": The proposed land use modifications would not result in the alteration of or
the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site.
Item B- "No": No adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object would occur with implementation of the proposed land use modifications.
Items C and D- "No": Implementation of the proposed changes would not cause a physical
change which would affect unique cultural values, nor would it restrict existing religious or
sacred uses within the potential impact area.
Statements of Findings and Fact
The proposed land use modifications would not have a significant impact on cultural resources.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Land Use Plans
Tustin City Code
Certified Final EIR 85-2, its supplements and addendum
East Tustin Specific Plan
9995-SFJ- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
3-17
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance
The proposed location of the land use modifications have recently been graded. Therefore, the
land uses proposed will not substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining level, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory.
The proposed land use modifications will not result in any new long-term impacts not already
outlined in Final EIR 85-2.
The proposed land use modifications will not result in any new cumulative impacts not already
considered in Final EIR 85-2.
Final EIR-85-2 outlines all environmental effects which may cause substantiaI adverse effects
on human being, either directly or indirectly. The proposed land use modifications do not
alter these conclusions.
9995-SFJ- 12557.001 -ETSP
11/9/95
3-18
'Based upon the above discussion, it can be concluded that none of the situations identified in
Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act requiring the preparation of a
Subsec uent EIR exist in that:
he
Bo
The proposed changes would not require important revisions of EIR 85-2, as modified
by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda, as no new significant environmental
impacts have been identified which have not been previously covered in EIR 85-2, as
modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda;
There are no substantial changes that would occur with respect to the circumstances
under which the project will be undertaken; and
Co
No new information of substantial importance has become available that could not have
been known at the time EIR 85-2, as modified' by subsequently adopted supplements
and addenda, was certified related to this project.
Therefore, Addendum//5 to EIR 85-2, as modified by subsequently adopted supplements and
addenda, has been prepared pursuant to Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality
Act in that:
Ao
Only minor technical changes to the trip generation tables of EIR 85-2, as modified by
subsequently adopted supplements and addenda are required to make the EIR adequate
and shall be revised to read as follows'
o
The Trip Generation Table A-l, as identified in Appendix B of the Supplement to
EIR related to the East Tustin Development Agreement, for Traffic Zones 37, 38,
40 and 46 shall be revised as shown on the following pages.
Bo
Minor text and map changes to the East. Tustin Specific Plan and changes to the
development agreement do not raise new issues about significant effects on the
environment which have previously been discussed and mitigated in EIR 85-2, as
modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda.
Prepared By:
9995-SFJ- 12557.001-ETSP
11/9/95
Saundra F. Cicileo-Jacobs
Senior Environmental Planner
Title
The Keith Companies
Firm
3-19
Date: November 9, 1995
TABLE A- 1
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION
~n¢ T~nd U~
BUILDOtYr
Uni! Amount ADT
Rea - E. gam
Res - Low
Res - Med-High
Sub-total (Res)
~ Commercill
Sub-to~ (Other)
DU
DU
DU ~
Du
Res - Med-Lo~
Res - Medium
Res - Med-High
Su~ou~
DU
DU
DU
DU
DU
Sub-total (Others)
ACRE
STU
ACRE
150.00
690.00
:~.:.:.:.:<.:.:.:
TOTAL (Zone 38)
Res - Med-Lmv
Res - Medium
Rea - Med-High
Su~al (Rea)
Parka
Sub-total (Others)
TOTAL (Zone 40)
Rea - Lo~
Res - Med-Lo~
Rea - Medium
Sub-total (Rea)
Sub-total
RESIDENTIAL TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
DU
DU
DU
DU
ACRE
DU
DU
DU
DU
DU
ACRE
DU
,;.;.:,:,;,:.;.;.>;.:.:
650.00
.×.;.:.:.:.:<.>
d"LK ~
900
518
...i~
.........
East Ttmtin Specific Plan
Tcchnk:al Notes
Austin-Foust As.sedates. Inc.
159007.tn
APPENDIX A
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
TEXT MODIFICATIONS
ZONE CHANGE 94-004
EXHIBIT C
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN TEXT REVISIONS
2.1 Land Use
(ETSP Paqes 2-1 throuqh 2-4)
The Land Use Plan, illustrated in Exhibit C, incorporates the
planning goals and objectives in designating a variety of
residential and non-residential land uses circumscribed and linked
by an appropriate arterial circulation system. Each of the parcels
within the plan having a specific land use designation is referred
to as a "land use area". These areas have been aggregated into 12
easily identifiable zones called "Sectors". The sector boundaries
are defined by major roadways and toPographical features; each
sector contains one or more land use area. Table 2.1 summarizes
the land use statistics. More detailed statistics for each sector
are provided in t-he Section 2.14.
Gross acres have been used for computing acreages and residential
densities on the following tables. Gross acres include all land
within a sector or land use area exclusive of arterial street
rights-of-way.
Table 2.1
Statistical Summary
Land Use Designation
Acreaqe
Residential
Estate (up to 2 du/ac)
Low (up to 5 du/ac)
Medium Low (up to 10 du/ac)
Medium (up to 18 du/ac)
Medium-High (up to 25 du/ac)
410:9
~ 2:.5'4:
~ oo 212
Open Space
·
Community Parks 4-~ 46
Golf Course .~v~=n 158
·
Commercial/Business
Neighborhood Commercial
General Commercial
Mixed Use
10 113
31 t2
121
Institutional
Elementary Schools~
Intermediate Schools
Other Uses
Roads (arterial and major only ~ .... *~) ~v~ i24
...:,: :.c:. ~:. :..
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 2
** ~....... Acreage for ail roads other than arterial and major roads, has
been included in the acreage for the surrounding land uses.
Residential Land Use: The Land ~Use Plan des ignates five
residential categories, each of wh='{ch has maximum density.
Residential densities are controlled in all of the following: land
use areas, sectors and the Specific Plan Area...
Mixed Use Designation: The Land Use Plan designates 121 acres in
the southeast corner of the site, in Sector 12 between Bryan Avenue
and the I-5 Freeway, as a mixed use area. A 70-acre commercial
center and hotcl/motcl will be developed in this area. Additional
commercial uses or office and research and development uses may
also be developed within this area. The Mixed Use designation
permits flexibility for location and configuration of these uses.
It also creates the opportunity for development to respond to
future changes in economic and market forces. The Development
Standards for the Mixed Use Area are defined in Section 3.0.
Non-Residential Land Uses: The Land Use Plan (LUP) includes a
number of non-residential uses such as: (1) Schools, (2) Parks, (3)
Open Space and Recreation Facilities, and (4) Commercial Land Use
Designations. These are summarized in the following table:
Table 2.2
Land Uses Inteqral to the LUP
Institut'ional Us~
Quantity
Intermediate School
High School
Community Park
Golf Course
Commercial/Business Us~
Approximate
Total Acreaqe
150 15.8
General Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 3
Table 2.3
Land Uses Anticipated in LUP
Institutional Use
Quantity
Approximate
Total Acreage
Elementary School
Public Neighborhood Parks
Private Neighborhood Parks
The exact number, location and size of private neighborhood
parks will be established with subdivision maps.
~;~'i~! elementarY school sites a'~e ..... to'". b'~'" diSt ribUted' "th~'6'~gh"d'd't
c area,
neighborhood parks are generally located in various seCt0'r'~ of the
Plan.
Three (3) community parks are more specifically loCated; they
include an cight ai!?!iln~:ne acre site near the junior high sChool, a
20-acre site, and~'~'"i3'""~i-acre site incorporating a knoll situated
south of Portola Parkway.
Elementary and Intermediate schools and public neighborhood parks
are symbolically illustrated on the Land Use Plan. The specific
sizes, locations and numbers of these facilities will be determined
in accordance with the provisions of Subsection 2.8.
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 4
2.10 Schools
.(ETSP Paqes 2-13 and 2-14)
The Specific Plan area is within the boundaries of the Tustin
Unified School District. The school district expects that the
completion of the development in the East Tustin Specific Plan Area
will require new facilities as well as the use of some of the
existing facilities.
The Specific Plan symbolically .identifies a maximum number of
school sites to serve the largest estimated population growth.
These schools have all been generally located in areas that are
central to estimated student population growth. One intermediate
school site has been identified for the Specific Plan area.
h,llsldc arc&. ~^ h=gh school sit^ has ~ ........... ~ for
~ust ....
The ultimate requirement for the precise number of schools is based
on the number of students that are to be generated from the
residential areas within the Specific Plan area. The demand for
schools may vary depending on the actual type and number of units
built in each land use category. The size of school sites may vary
depending on specific school district needs and joint school/park
programs. Also phasing and precise locations of sites are
dependent on timing of development and more precise planning within
sectors. The number, location, and size of schools illustrated
symbolically on the Spccifi~ ~an~ 'usc ~&&~~"~t Lan:d~.Use!plan should
be considered as a general guide, subject to further:':~evaluation.
As development plans are prepared for each sector the land owner
and school district will make specific provision for school
facilities. These provisions should be accomplished prior to final
development. The actual size and number of sites may cause an
adjustment to acreage within the land use areas. If any school
that is shown on the Land Use Plan is not needed or if the site
acreage is less than estimated then the acreage that has been
allocated to the school site will be reallocated to the underlying
residential use. However, the maximum number of units permitted
within the sector where the acreage adjustment is made will not be
changed except as provided in Section 3.0.
Zone change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 5
Acreage
ETSP Paqes 2-25 and 2-25
Table 2.4 Statistical Analysis
Maximum
Land Use Density
Total
Allowable
Units
SECTOR 1
125
Estate Density Residential
2 du/ac
Subtotal 125
SECTOR 2
74 Estate Density Residential
~ 5~ Low Density Residential
~ 50 ~18 ~."i'i~i'i'' Medium Low Density Residential
37.35 i~ii~ Medium Density Residential
15 2:~D ** Junior High School
~'" ~i"* * .......... c'ommunity' park
2 du/ac
5 du/ac
10 du/ac
18 du/ac****
Subtotal 271 ~i~
SECTOR 3
i~12' Low Density Residential
1110 ** Elementary School
: :.:..,
* * ~ ~ ~rhood
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
5 du/ac
Subtotal 17 2:2
SECTOR 4
ii~ 112
Estate Density Residential
2 du/ac
68 _+
Subtotal~ ~° 112
SECTOR 5
98
18
Estate Density Residential
Low Density Residential
2 du/ac
5 du/ac
Subtotal 116
SECTOR 6
Subtotal
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 6
SECTOR 7
97 Medium Density Residential
~ i~i~!!~ Medium High Density Residential
o 10 '~'"~' ........
Elementary School
150 i~158! Golf Course
::::::::::::::::::::::
18 du/ac
25 du/ac
Subtotal
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
SECTOR 8
77
26
O 10 **
LOW Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Elementary School
4 du/ac ~4~
18 du/ac ~
Subtotal 117 i~ii~i
SECTOR 9
39
Subtotal 39
Low Density Residential
5 du/ac
SECTOR 10
46
~: 215
.%./
O i0 *+
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
5 du/ac
18 du/ac
Subtotal 71
55 ~ .32:i~. +
SECTOR 11
'~'-~ ::':'!::':'ii:::' ' ::¥:i':'::°:':':':':':''': : :' '"
~ 6:6:~i:~ Medium Density Residential 18 du/ac
5~ ~.9 Medium High Density Residential 25 du/ac
~ 6'~.6 ** NeighborhoOd Park
::: ;.:: -.;
,10 ~1:3 Neighborhood Commercial
....
Subtotal 177
SECTOR 12
121 Mixed Use
Subtotal 121
7,236***
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 7
Total allowable number of permitted units within a given
sector may be increased if a sector unit transfer occurs as
described in Subsection 2.1. ~
** The precise acreage and locations of private and public
neighborhood parks, elementary school and intermediate school
will be determined as part of the review of .the Sector
Subdivision Maps as identified under Review Procedure
Subsection 1.5 and consistent with policies established in
Subsections 2.9 and 2.10 of the Specific .Plan.
*** If the maximum allowable units in Tentative Tract Map No.
12345 are not constructed, the unconstructed units may be
transferred to the Specific Plan area.
**** Maximum density on Lot 11 of Tract 13627 shall be ten (10)
dwelling units per acre.
o This acreage figure is an estimated allocation for this land
use. If it changes, other land uses acreage al'locations in
this sector may change. However, the total allowable units
for the sector will remain the same.
Total Allowable Units assumes that if a school and/or park
currently designated for this sector is not built in this
sector and that the acreage goes into residential use. If
these facilities are constructed, the land use area density
limitation precludes construction of the total allowable
sector units and such unbuilt units would be transferred to
another sector.
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 8
Sector 2
(ETSP Paqes 2-'28 and 2-29)
This sector consists of approximately 271 2~16~6 acres and extends
from the northernmost tip of the site south ~'~"the proposed future
road. The sector is bounded on the west by the crest of the
north/south Peters Canyon ridge, Peters Canyon Wash, and Lower Lake
Drive; on the north and east by the City boundary; and on the south
by the Future Road. The land beyond the eastern edge of the Sector
is in the County's jurisdiction and is currently planted with
orchards. The Sector encompasses a broad valley which contains the
west tributary of Peters Canyon Wash. Much of the valley is
relatively flat.
This sector is planned to include a variety of land uses. The
residential uses will range from the estate density to medium h~h
density. Estate density residential is located in the western and
northern hillsides; low density is located in the upper valley and
on a low knoll extending south from the north/south ridge; medium
low and medium density occur in the central and upper portions of
the valley; and' medium h~gh !1'0~ ~ensity is located at the southerly
end of the valley adjacent .......... to the Future Road. These various
residential densities have been organized relative to the
topography access and visibility from existing development to the
west
~ .... ~ ~ ..... ~- ly tly 1
........... ~,. ~t ~ rcn ~I o
.............................. :~ An intermediate school has been
sited along Peters Canyon Wash. The precise location and size of
~--~ ~--~litic~ thiS/!~ ity
.......... ~ faciI shall be determined as described in
Subsection 2.10 of this Specific Plan ~ ~~ A nine_acre
community park is planned just south of the ~nt~-m~-~..~iata''elementary
school site ini~sedt0r~3, along the wash. A regional riding/hikin~
trail and Cl~'~S~t~'~Bikeway are planned in proximity to Peters Canyon
Wash reflecting Orange County General Plan.
The following policies apply to Sector 2-...
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 9
Sector 6:
(ETSP Pages 2-36)
This triangular configured sector contains 31 acres of flatland and
has the potential to be circumscribed by.arterial roadways. It is
situated along the eastern edge of the site, bounded by the
proposed Future Road extension on the west, Portola Parkway on the
south and the Specific Plan boundary on the east ~ ~ ~_-A~
~!~iii!ii!ili~!~! in the S~6'~!~h~i~'~!iiiiiiiii~'~'~ti!~i~iiiiiii!iii~f!iiiiiii!ii~h'~ sector are to be
~'~:~:::~:~:~:~r a variet~':'::'~:~'~':'::~:'h'~:~'~:':::~~:~:~'i'~:~:':':'"~:~es. ~¢ rcsi~cntial
~ .... ~ ....- ~ ~" ~ .... ~ f th "~-~-- Medium high de ity
residential development is planned for the remainder of this sector
i~%:i:i:!:i:::i;i:i:i:i$i:~:i::.:.::!:!:F................:i:::.:.:::.:.:.:::::.:::::;::::.:.:.::::~:: '::~':
The following policies apply to Sector 6'
In addition to the specific submittal requirements for the
Subdivision Map of this Sector, refer to Section 1.5, a
conceptual landscape plan for arterial roadways within this
sector shall also be submitted with the Subdivision Map for
approval by the Director of Community Development, refer to
Section 2.12, Implementation for specific requirements.
~ C. Concurrent with a Subdivision Map submittal for any portion of
this Sector, a Conceptual Site Plan shall also be submitted
for the entire sector as identified in Section 2.14.1.
Concurrent with the submission of the Sector Subdivision Map
as required under Section 1.5, the precise location of the E1
Modena Fault will be determined by a detailed geological
investigation conducted by the landowner and appropriate
building setbacks should be established in conformance with
current State Standards.'
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 10
Sector 8
...CETSP Pages 2-39 and 2-40)
This sector consists of 117 !~i~~3 acres and is virtually flat. It is
situated adjacent to the eXisting community on the west, and is
bounded by the La Colina extension on the south, the Future Road
extension on the east and the Racquet Hill Drive extension on the
north·
Most of the sector has been designated for low density residential
development along the western boundary so as to be compatible with
the adjacent residential development. Approximately 26 acres along
Future Road have been allocated for Medium Density Residential.
Also planned for this area is an elementary school, the precise
location and size will be determined as identified in 'Subsection
The following polices apply to Sector 8'...
E ·
The distance between the edge of the western right-of-way of
the "Future Road" and the closest point of the foundation of
the closest residence of Pavillion/Saltair shall be a minimum
of 1,000 feet plus or minus 100 feet measured on a horizontal
plane. The noise impacts of the Future Road on the existing
residences to the west of the Specific Plan area shall be
further mitigated by a continuous noise barrier consisting of
a combination of berm, soundwall, and residences adjacent to
the Future Road. This requirement for a continuous noise
barrier applies along the western side of Future Road adjacent
to the medium density residential development in Sector 8 and'
the low density development in between. The noise barrier
line-of-sight from the residences along Saltair and Pavillion
to vehicles traveling along the Future Road behind such noise
barrier. In addition, in designing and orienting the
residences in the two medium-density residential areas in
Sector 8 and the low-density development in between, the
developer shall, to the maximum extent feasible and consistent
with other sound planning practices, construct multi-story
structures which further mitigate the noise impacts of the
Future Road on the existing residences to the west of the
Specific Plan. A design goal impact of 55 or less CNEL for
the existing residences at the foundation is hereby
established. At such time that further noise analysis is done
in this area (at the Tentative Tract stage), this analysis
will model the projected CNEL level at these existing
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 11
Fo
residences to confirm that the noise of level of 55 CNEL will
be met.
It is the explicit intent of the East Tustin ~i~i!iif!~i Plan
that La Colina Road in the Specific Plan area C~~'"'~"~o the
existing La colina Road and to the major arterial known as
"Future Road.~'' this road shall consist of a four lane
residential street, and should be incrementally improved,
beginning With a two lane road. The roadway should not exceed
a total right-of-way of 80 feet, and the first two lanes
should be.built at the edge of the right-of-way, with a raised
landscape median making up the rest of the potential right-of-
way.
The precise alignment of La Colina Road will be determined at
the Tentative Tract stage. The City and County will prepare
a joint study, examining the impacts and mitigation measures
of the connection, and recommending specific measures to deter
through traffic.
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 12
Sector 11
..(ETSP Paqes 2-43)
This sector consists of approximately 183 acres. It is bounded by
the Future Road alignment on the west, Irvine Boulevard on the
north, Myford Road on the east, and Bryan Avenue on the south.
Several land uses are proposed within this sector. The residential
uses include m~di!~!i!iii!iii~!o~ and medium density 'which ~s ~i~ to be
located' in the"'~~;~~ quadrant we~i~'i~?ip'0ri~i~ of~the'~"~ector.
Medium high residential development is to be situated along the
eastern boundary of the site encompassing the entire area between
Bryan Avenue and Irvine Boulevard. A ~0-acrc sitc has
...... just s~uth ~ I
............... ~ ....... O .... -~ ........... C ~uturc ~ ....
~-"~-~-~-.~... At the northeast corner of the sector, a.~" iI3-acre
neighborhood commercial site has been Planned at the intersection
of Irvine Boulevard and Myford Road, an important entry point into
the City from the east An -icmcn~ .....
..... = ~c..ocl has_~..~-- gcn-rall}
io-~ C '~
d~s~.~bcd ~ Subscct~ ·
...... ~ ..... .c Plan~ A Two
neighborhood parks has ha~e been generally located in the area'"::6f
the ~'~:d'iumiil:owi~!iil. and mediUm density residential development. The
preci:~''~ ........ I°~ti'ons of this these parks ~s are to be determined as
described in SubSection 2.8 '~':f'::this SPecific Plan.
The following polices apply to Sector 11:...
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 13
Acreage
ETSP Pages 3-13 and 3-14
EAST TUSTIN STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Maximum
Land Use Density
Total
Allowable
Units
SECTOR I
125
Estate Density Residential
2 du/ac
Subtotal 125
SECTOR
74 Estate Density Residential
~ ~51!! Low Density Residential
50 !68 ............... Medium Low Density Residential
37.35 !~?~ Medium Density Residential
e ~ ~ Elcmcntary
15 ~0i ** Junior High School
G '9' ** community. Park~
2 du/ac
5 du/ac
10 du/ac
18 du/ac****
Subtotal 271 ~26i6
SECTOR 3
6 i~12! Low Density Residential
o G !~ii0 ** .Elementary School
5 du/ac
Subtotal 17 2:2
SECTOR 4
Estate Density Residential
2 du/ac
68+
Subtotal lis ~II2
SECTOR 5
98
18
Estate Density Residential
Low Density Residential
2 du/ac
5 du/ac
Subtotal 116
SECTOR 6
ilg?~:iiil ::,: ..:./i.::.:!.i:Medium High. Density Re~ide.ntial /:25 .:du/ac
31 112 Genera 1' 'commerCial
<:::: .:::.
Subtotal 31 3150_+
::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 14
SECTOR 7
97 Medium Density Residential
~ i~!~ii~ Medium High Density Residential
o 10 ** Elementary School
~ =~ i~!58 Golf Course
:.:.>;.;+~.: :<.;.
18 du/ac
25 du/ac
Subtotal
3, ,,,.,5 ~i~i~ii18108 _+
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
SECTOR 8
77
26
O 10 **
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Elementary School
· ~ .......... Park
4 du/ac ~4~
18 du/ac ~ ~ °
Subtotal ~ ~ = ~t t!13
· x.: :.:..:.: :+:
~8~ !436_+
SECTOR 9
39
Subtotal 39
Low Density Residential
5 du/ac
SECTOR 10
46
0 I0 *+
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
5 du/ac
18 du/ac
Subtotal 71
SECTOR
· ~-7 66:,i!4 Medium DenSity Residential
~6 ~9 ....... Medium High Density Residential
~ ~ii~6 ** Neighborhood Park
I0 i~i.~ .... Neighborhood Commercial
it2i:ii!ili!i !~i ~: !~ ii:'ii: ~:: Med!ium L0w..'DenSitY.~ Residential ~ ~'~iii!I0 :'du/aC
18 dU/ac
25 du/ac
Subtotal 177
~ i1,1875 +
SECTOR 12
121
Subtotal 121
Mixed Use
7,236***
Zone Change 94-004
Exhibit C
Page 15
Total allowable number of permitted units within a given
sector may be increased if a sector unit transfer occurs as
described in Subsection 2.1.
** The precise acreage and locations of private and public
neighborhood parks, elementary school and intermediate school
will be determined as part of the review of the Sector
Subdivision Maps as identified under Review Procedure
Subsection 1.5 and consistent with policies established in
Subsections 2.9 and 2.10 of the Specific Plan.
*** If the maximum allowable units in Tentative Tract Map No.
12345 are not constructed, the unconstructed units may be
transferred to the Specific Plan area.
**** Maximum density on Lot 11 of Tract 13627 shall be ten (10)
dwelling units per acre.
0 This acreage figure is an estimated allocation for this land
use. If it changes, other land uses acreage allocations in
this sector may change. However, the total allowable units
for the sector will remain the same.
Total Allowable Units assumes that if a school and/or park
currently designated for this sector is not built in this
sector and that the acreage goes into residential use. If
these facilities are constructed, the land use area density
limitation precludes construction of the total allowable
sector units and such unbuilt units would be transferred to
another sector.
Zone Change
Exhibit C
Page 16
94-004
Ce
District
_Estate
Lo._.~w
~ETSP Paqe 3-47)
Residential Off-Street Parking
Spaces Covered Crcd': t for
Requi red Ass i gned Guest/
Spaces/Un i t Unass i gned
;.: . ..;.. <.:.;.......;.:...,.......
~ 2 ,~ 2 Car G~rage 2 per unit
0~..- ?. t rcct
P-~rk !ng
1. Sector 8, 9, 10 2 2 Car Garage 2 per unit
2. Sector 2 2 2 Car Garage 2 per unit
Medium Low 2 2 Car Garage 11 ,-5 per unit
·
Medium & Medium High
1. Detached 2
2 Car Garage ~! ,-S per unit
2. Attached
Studio 1.0 1 Carport (1)
1 Bedroom 1.5 1 ·Carport (1)
2 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
3 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
4 Bedroom 2.5 2 Carports (1)
3. Multiple Family (apartments)
Studio 1.0 1 Carport (1)
1 Bedroom 1.5 1 Carport (1)
2 Bedroom 2.0 2 ~ Carport (1)
3 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
4 Bedroom 2.5 2 Carports (1)
4. Patio Homes(2)
1-3 Bedrooms 2.0 2 Car Garage ~75 ,-5 per unit
4 Bedrooms 2.5 2 Car Garage ~',-S per unit
(1)
(2)
Attached single family and multiple family deve[ot~nents shall provide a minimum of ~5 J per
unit open unassigned parking spaces for 4 or more dwelling units. If a two car"enclosed
private garage is provided, a guest parking standard of .75 ,-~ open unassigned spaces per unit
shall apply.
Required guest parking for patio Home products must be [ocated within a 200 foot radius
measured from the nearest building frontage facing a street, drive or court of the designated
unit which the parking space is intended to serve.
i~'~!ii~ii!:i!i.i...i.i!~t:/:Unass i gned:iperk{,g ii~¥: be :PrOvided: on:pub[ i c: 0
way. exists, .except:.in. the:Case of:attachedand mu[ t ip[e, fami[y deve.[opments Where guesl~ patak:in~
~i::[.[ii,i:noi~: b~permi tted', oni~[i Cs treets,
· .,.,...., ,.;.... ....,....... ;....:....: .. :.,...., ...
ETSPAMEND.4
APPENDIX B
TRAFFIC IMPACT EVALUATION
TUSTIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
CORRESPONDENCE
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
Traffic Generation Analysis
Prepared for:
Irvine Community Builders
550 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Prepared by:
Pirzadeh & Associates
17801 Cartwright Road, Suite D
~lrvine, CA 92714
October 24, 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .................................... Page 1
I1. METHODOLOGY · - Page 1
III.
IV.
ANALYSIS '. ....................................... Page 2
CONCLUSION ' Page 6
I. INTRODUCTION
Irvine Community Builders has proposed an amendment to the land use plan for the
East Tustin Specific Plan. The proposed changes occur in three different zones of the
Specific Plan area. This report will analyze the impacts of these proposed changes
by comparing the trip generation of the new land uses to the previous assumptions
of the Tustin Specific Plan.
II. METHODOLOGY
The East Tustin Specific Plan Development Agreement between The Irvine Company
and the City of Tustin was analyzed by a Supplemental EIR to the East Tustin Specific
Plan EIR. A traffic study was conducted as part of the EIR process which assessed
the impacts of the development and identified related mitigation measures.
The analysis presented in this report will follow the same procedure as contained in
the Development Agreement traffic study. Specifically, the traffic generation of the
proposed land uses will be compared to the project trip generation data contained in
the Development Agreement. If the trip generation for the proposed land uses in each
zone is less than or equal to the previous level of traffic generation, then the previous
mitigation measures will be sufficient. Should the new trip generation exceed the
previous levels, then additional analysis and measures may be necessary to mitigate
the potential impacts of the new land uses.
III. ANALYSIS
The East Tustin Specific Plan Development Agreement traffic study projected land use
trip generation by project zones. The Development Agreement Zone Map is shown
on Figure 1. The corresponding land use assumptions for each zone is shown in Table
1.
The proposed land use changes occur in zone numbers 46, 37, and 40. These
changes consist of changing the land use for some of the previously reserved school
sites to residential uses in Zones 46 and 40. Also, the land use assumptions in Zone
·
37 have been modified to allow the implementation of an Intermediat~ school and a
different residential/commercial development plan. Additionally, the residential land
uses for each zone. h.a. ve been modified, where appropriate, to reflect the actual level
of development consistent with the current zoning for each parcel.
Table 2 reflects the Development Agreemen.t and the proposed land use asSumptions
and trip generation for each zone. As shown in this table, the trip generation for the
new land use plan is lower in all three zones.
Page 2
FIGURE 1
Zone Map
·
TABLE 1
_Land Use Data
ZONE LANO
32 Res -
E] mflClr7 ~OQi
TOt41 ~slaentlli
Res -
Part
ToLAI ~s~OenClil
Toga ]
Total
Res -
~s - N~-~lqn
[lm~car~ ~1
Per~s
Totai
~mn~r~ ~ooi
hr~s
Totii ~sl~enClil
Totl!
Nt~h
Parts
TotAl RestaentlaZ
Toca I
Res -
To~ll ~s 1Gent14 i
ToCl I
Retail ~clll
ReCall ~tai
~ ~nter
btm11 ~clal
~te I
ToC~ i
Res - Es~ce
~car7
ZnCl~ lice ~001
Parts
Total ResidentiAl
ToLl i
EAST TUSTIH P,A$E II L~#O U$£ kaO TRIP &EJ4£RATION
---6UILO-QUT---
UNIT AJeOU# f
OtJ 725. O0 2250 225.00
DtJ 180.00 IS48 180.00
5TU 690. O0 SI8 690.
OU 405. O0 3798 405.
4316
OU 760. O0 2.236 260. OO
OU 268.00 2219 ZS8.~Q
OU S3Z. OQ 3777 S3Z.
~.R£ 4.00 20 4.00
OU .~OSG.OQ 1232 1050.00
8252
OU 147.00 16&8 100.00
OU 72°00 720 0°00
TSF 3OZ. O0 ZI],4O 0.00
OU 219. OG 2308 100- O0
OU 349. OO 3490 40 .
OU S&O. 00 4988 0 o
DU ISOS. O0 10686 0. iX)
J~R£ 150.00 gO0 tSO.O0
STU 690.00 SX8 0.00
JI~R£ 17.00 86 13.00
OU 2434. O0 19X64 40.00
20667
DU 156.00 1560 ti0. OO
OU 803.00 6906 730.0(3
OU 950. OO 67 45 6~&. 00
· TU 690.00 S18 0.00
A~qE 4.00 20 4.00
DU 1909. OG 15211 X536.00
IS749
DU 684. ~ 58&2 684
bTU Z4OO.OO 4440 2400.00
ACRE ZZ.00 110 22.00
OU 684. OO S882 684.
10432
OU 856.00 6078 856.DQ
TSF 145.00 10150' 145.00
bTU 690. OO S18' 690.00
OU 856. GO 6078 856.00
1674&
TSF 272. O0 1373~ Q. 00
T~F 4SO. 00 72775 460.00'
AC~.E 37. DO 7263 '37. IX)
ItO0~ Z$O. O0 3000 Z$O. 00
Z.ZSg4
OU 476.0O $141 0.00
OU 473.00 4730 O.OQ
OU 338. O0 2~0 7 O. 00
OU 1SG.0O 1347 O.O0
STU 1250.00 938 O. 00
STU 650. O0 468 0. O0
ACRE Z!. O0 105 O. O0
OU 1443.00 14170
1665!
,PHASE II----- ......
~qOUXT PF.R~EMT AOT PERC~JiT
1002 2ZSO
XOOZ 1546
ZOOZ 518
100~ 3798
4316
/.00~[ 2236
100~ 2219
I002 3777
100~ 20
1002 .SZ3Z
I252
1002
100~
OZ
1080
0
0
1080
52
OZ
1002
OZ
762
400
O
0
0
· 66
400
X365
77
772
912
727
OZ
1002
1002
1007,
XOOZ
1200
~278
4671
0
20
12349
12.369
4440
110
Sa,82
10432
71)Z
1002
1002
IOOZ
1002
64378
10150
Sin
6078
1674~
IOQZ
1002
1002
0
22725
7263
1002
IOOZ
I00~
1002
19S94
JO00
27.594
1001
OZ
02
OZ
OZ
02
02
TABLE 2
TRIP GENERATION
ZONE DEV AGMT LAND USE UNITS DEV AGMT ADT NEW LAND USE UNITS NEW ADT
46
Res-Estate 476 DU 5.141 Res-Estate 117 DU 1.264
Res-Low 473 DU 4.730 Res-Low 259 DU 2,590
Res-Med Low 388 DU 2,907 Res-Med Low 817. DU 7,026
Res-Med 156 DU 1,342 Res-Med 208 DU 1,789
Elementary School 1250 Stu 938 Elementary School 650 Stu 520
Intermediate School 650 Stu' 488 Intermediate School 0
Parks 21 Acres 105 Parks 13 Acre 65
37 Res-Estate 147 DU 1,588 Res-Estate 147 DU 1,588
Res-Low 72 DU 720 Res-Low 72 DU 720
Gen Corem 302 TSF 21,140 Res.-Med High 399 DU 2,833
GenComm 130TSF 9,100
Intermediate School 650 Stu 488
........~.....~;...;.:.....;.;...:.:.:...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.;.:.;.:.:.?:.:.? ?:.:.:-;.:.?:.;.:.:.:.;.:.;.:.:.~.?:.;?;.:.:.:.:.~;:~;; :~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.' .............. .:....:........ :.;.;.;.;,,. ?..;~:.:.:.:.;.:.: ;. ?:.;~ ?:.:.:.:.:-:.;.:.:. ? ? ?:.:.:+:.:.;.:.:.:.:.:.:.:+:.: ?:,:.?:.:+:.? ?:+: .:+:.:.;.:+:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.; .+:,:...:.:.? :,....;....; o., :.. ?;¥... +;.:.:.:.:.;.? ?;.??; ..;.;.;....¥ ....;+:.?;.;.:.:+:.:.:.;.;.:
40
Res-Med 684 DU 5,882 Res-Med Low 163 DU 1,402
High School 2400 Stu 4,440 Res-Med High 588 DU 4.175
Parks 22 Acre 110 Parks 5 Acre 25
IVo CONCLUSION
Based on the data presented in Table 2, the new land use plan results in a lower level
of trip generation when compared to the East Tustin Specific' Plan Development
Agreement . The infrastructure improvements assumed in the Development
Agreement are not proposed to be reduced or modified. Therefore, the new land use
plan can be developed and can be accommodated by the previously planned
circulation system capacity.
Page 6
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
Technical Notes
Prepared for:
The Keith Companies
Prepared by:,
Austin-Foust Associates, Inc.
2020 North Tustin Avenue
Santa Aha, California 92705
(714) 667-0496
October 25, 1995
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
TECHNICAL NOTES
INTRODUCTION
The Irvine Company has applied for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to the
East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) and Development Agreement to modify land use in the specific
plan area. In effect, three sites which currently permit the construction of a high school, an
elementary school and 72,000 square feet of general commercial use are converted to residential use
but without any corresponding increase in the total dwelling units allowed by the ETSP. The total
number of dwelling units planned for the specific plan area is actually less than that allowed by the
ETSP.
ANALYSIS
A Level One traffic impact evaluation was performed for the proposed changes to the ETSP.
A Level One impact analysis seeks to determine how thc project's overall trip generation compares
with the original EIR analysis. Consistent with the Original EIR traffic study, thc proposed land use
has been subdivided into several traffic analysis zones (TAZs). The attached Table 1 shows thc land
usc and thc corresponding trip generation for the four zones that have changes. The overall trip
generation for thc East Tustin area decreases by approximately 20,000 ADT duc to thc changes listed
above.
At a zonal level, the change in land use decreases the 'corresponding zonal trip generation for
each of the four zones.
CONCLUSION
The effect of this project substantially reduces daily traffic anticipated to be generated by the
ETSP and thereby negates the need for a more detailed Level Two traffic analysis. The number of
trips generated by the four affected traffic zones is reduced and the overall daily trip generation for
thc zones is reduced by about 20,000 trips.
Ea~ Tuatin Specific Plan 1
Technical Notes
Austin-Foust Associates. Inc.
159007.tn
Table
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION
Zone
Land Use
BUILDOUT --
Unit Amount
37
Rea - Estate
Res - Low
Rea - Med-High
Sub-total (Rea)
Genernl Commercial
Sub-total (Others)
DU
TOTAL (Zo.e ~7)
Res - Low
Res - Med-Low
Res - Medium
Res - Med-High
Sub-total (Res)
Golf Course ACRE 1SO.O0
Elementary School STU 690.00
Sub-total (Others)
TOTAL (Zone 38)
Res - Med-Low
Res - Medium
Res - Med-High
Sub-total (Res)
High School STU
Parks ACRE
Sub-total (Others)
TOTAL (Zone 40)
Res - Estate
Res - Low
Res - Med-Low
Res - Medium
Sub-total (Res)
ElcmcntaFy School STU ~
Intermediate School STU 650.00
Sub-total (Othe~)
TOTAL (Zone 46)
RF_~IDENTIAL TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
DU
ADT
1.;.:,:.:.;.:.;.;.;.:
.:.:.;.:.:.;.:.:,
·. :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:
...........,....:.;.:
900
518
.... · :.:.:.:
.:,:.;.;.;.;.;.:.:.:.
.:.:.:.:.~.:.:.:.
.:.::.:,:.:,:.:.
.:.:.:.:.:..:.:.
..:.:.:.;...:
.:.:..:.:.:+:.:.-.
5!4:
14120
....
East Tustin Specific Plan
Technical Notes
Austin-Foust Associates. Inc.
159007.tn
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
TECHNICAL NOTES
INTRODUCTION
The Irvine Company has applied for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to the
East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) and Development Agreement to modify land usc in the specific
plan area. In effect, three sites which currently permit the construction of a high school, an
elementary school and 72,000 square feet of general commercial use are converted to residential use
but without any corresponding increase in the total dwelling units allowed by thc ETSP. The total
number of dwelling units planned for thc specific plan area is actually less than that allowed by thc
ETSP.
ANALYSIS
A Level One traffic impact evaluation was performed for the proposed changes to the ETSP.
A Level One impact analysis seeks to determine how the project's overall trip generation compares
with the original EIR analysis. Consistent with the original EIR traffic study, the proposed land use
has been subdivided into several traffic analysis zones (TAZs). The attached TableA-/shows the land
use and the corresponding trip generation for the four zones that have changes. The overall trip
generation for the' East Tustin area decreases by approXimately 20,000 ADT due to the changes listed
above.
At a zonal level, the change in land use decreases the corresponding zonal trip generation for
each of the four zones.
CONCLUSION
The effect of this project substantially reduces daily traffic anticipated to be generated by the
ETSP and thereby negates the need for a more detailed Level Two traffic analysis. The number of
trips generated by the four affected traffic zones is reduced and the overall daily trip generation for
the zones is reduced by about 20,000 trips.
East Tustin Specific Plan
Technicni Notes
Austin-Foust Associatea. Inc.
159007.tn
Zone
TABLE A- 1
F..AST TUSTrN SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION
BUILDOUT --
Land Uae Unit Amount ADT
37 Re~ - Entree DU ~ '??_99 ~.3 ~
Rem - Low DU .................. ~ ............. ~
R~ - M~-Hi~h DU ~ ~
Su~to~l (Oth~) )t~ ~
.;,:.;.;.;,;.;.;.
~T~ (~.~ ~ ~ ~
s..-,o~, (~) Du ~9 ~ ~ ~
Goff ~u~ ACRE 15~.~ ~
El~en~ ~h~l S~ 6~.~ 518
Pa~ ACRE ~ !U.~ ~ ~
:.:.:-:-:.:,:-:.:.: .:.:.:.:
Su~,o~ (O,h~.) ~!~ ~
~ R= - M~-~ DU ~ ~
R~- M~-High DU ~ ~:~
su~,o-, (R=) Du ~ ~ ~ ~
High Sch~i S~' O' ~ ~ ~O
Pa~ ACRE ~:~ ~ ~ ~
:.:.:.:....,:.:
Su~to~i (Othc~) ........
....v.
TOT~ (~nc ~) ~ ~
....
:...:.:.:..,:.:...:.:.:
R~ - ~ DU ~ d7~.~ ~ ~
R=- -~.~ DU ~ ~ ~ ~
;~';'-';';';';':'>;';':+ - ...... ..-;....; ;-.v.v - ....
Intimate ~h~i ~ ~0.~ ~
Pa~ ACRE ~ ~ ~ ~
s.~, (O~h~) ~ ~
~E~ TOT~ DU ~ ~7~9 ~ ~,~
v...v..;< v;.;-
East Tmtin Specific Plan 2 Amtin-Fou~t ~tea. Inc.
Technical Notes 159007.tn
THE KEITH COMPANIES
December 13, 1994
FILE COPY
Ms. Donna Burr
Tustin Unified School District
300 South C Street
Tustin, California 92680
Subject:
East Tustin Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment 94-001 and Zone
Change 94-004
Dear Ms. Burt:
The Keith Companies (TKC) is currently under contract with the City of Tustin to prepare
the environmental documentation necessary for the City to process the subject General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change.
Based on our discussion this afternoon, The Keith Companies would like to confirm our
understanding of the Tustin Unified School District (TUSD) issues within the East Tustin
Specific Plan area.
· The City originally approved the following school sites_within the East Tustin Specific Plan:
Reservation of five (5) elementary, school sites.
Reservation of one (1) middle school site, and
Reservation of one (I) high school site.
Since the original Specific Plan approval, the TUSD has agreed to the following number of
school sites within the Specific Plan area:
TUSD has purchased two (2) elementary school sites,
Reservation of one (1) elementary school site,
Reservation of one (1) middle school site, and
Release of one (1) high school site.
If the TUSD concurs with our understanding, please do so in writing as soon as possible.
~qnmng
Eng~neenng
Enwronmenial
Serwces
LanO Surveying
PuOhc Works
Water Resources
Cullural Resour..,e';
9998-SFJ-12557-L
(714) 540-0800
P.O. Box 25127. Santa Ana. CA 92799
2955 Red Hill Avenue. Costa Mesa. CA 92526
Ms. Donna Burt
December 13, 1994
Page 2 of 2
Should you have any other questions on this matter, please don't hesitate to contacts me at
(714) 668-7113. Let me thank you in advance for your timely response in this matter.
Sincerely,
~ KEITH COMPANIES
Saurktra F. Jacobs, REA
Sr. Environmental Planner
SFJ/sg
9998-SFJ-12557.L
,.
Llni ieb School Dist ic
December 19, 1994
The Keith Companies
Post Office Box 25127
Santa Aha, California 92799
Attention:
Saundra F. Jacobs, R.E.A.
Senior Environmental Planner
Re:
East Tustin Specific Plan
General Plan Amendment 94-001 and
Zone Change 94-004
Dear Ms. Jacobs:
In response to your letter of December 13, ~ 1994, this
will confirm that the status of the Tustin Unified School
District school sites within the East Tustin Specific Plan is
correctly set forth in your letter. Specifically, the
Specific Plan originally provided for reservation of five
elementary school sites, one middle schOol site and one high
school site. Currently, the status of the school sites is
that the District has purchased two elementary school sites,
has reservations of one additional elementary school site and
one middle school site, and has released the reservation of
the high school site.
The District currently believes that the remaining school
sites which it has either purchased or reserved, together with
available capacity in existing schools of the District outside
the Specific Plan area, will be sufficient to provide school
facilities for the anticipated maximum number of dwelling
units at buildout in the Specific Plan area. However, if the
impact of General Plan Amendment 94-001, Zone Change 94-004,
or any other related City approvals is to significantly
increase the maximum number of dwelling, units allowed in the
Specific Plan area, then the District will need to re-evaluate
whether the remaining purchased and reserved sites, together
with capacity in existing schools, will still be sufficient to
provide capacity for all the students to be generated from the
Specific Plan area.
500 so tb C st ee o ¢ s im, ca[ifo nia DR6 O o 71z -750-7501
..
Saundra F. Jacobs, R.E.A.
December 19, 1994
Page 2
Accordingly, the District hereby reserves all rights to
comment on General Plan'Amendment 94-001, Zone Change 94-004,
and any related environmental impact report or negative
declaration, once those documents are completed in draft form
and circulated for review and comment.
Very truly yours,
Donna Burt, Facilitator
Administrative Services
DB/pg
cc: The Irvine Company
APPENDIX C
PROPOSED 2ND AMENDMENT
TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
EAST TUSTIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT (the "SECOND AMENDMENT") to the East
Tustin Development Agreement (the ."ETDA") is made effective
, 1995, by and between The Irvine Company, a
Michigan corporation ("Developer"), and the City of Tustin, a
California municipal corporation ("City"), with respect to the
following:
RECITALS
ao
This SECOND AMENDMENT amends the ETDA entered into by and
between City and Developer effective December 3, 1986, and
approved by City by Ordinance No. 978. The ETDA concerns all
of that real property (the "Property") described in Exhibit
"A" to the ETDA 'and delineated on Exhibit "B" thereto, which
description and delineation are incorporated herein by this
reference. At the time of its entry into the ETDA, Developer
was the fee owner of the Property, and is the fee owner of the
areas of the Property specifically involved in this SECOND
AMENDMENT. The ETDA has been amended once previously;
effective March 16, 1992, and approved by City by Ordinance
No. 1082 ("First Amendment"). The term "ETDA" is used herein
to refer to the ETDA as amended by the First Amendment.
Be
The ETDA provides for the development of the Property in
accordance with the East Tustin Specific Plan adopted by City
on March 17, 1986 (the "Specific Plan").
Ce
The Specific Plan and ETDA provided for the reservation of
school and park sites anticipated to be needed to serve the
future residents and occupants of the Property. As the
Property has been developed, however, certain sites reserved
for school or park purposes are no longer needed for those
purposes, and should be redesignated for residential
development subject to the dedication of a new neighborhood
park, and parking for a future neighborhood park. City and
Developer have also considered the feasibility of development
of hotel uses on the Property, and have determined that hotel
construction is unlikely within the next ten years, and the
ETDA should be amended accordingly.
De
Amendments to the Specific Plan, approved by the City Council
on , 1995, provide for changes in the Land Use
Designations of the East Tustin Land Use Plan relating to the
release of certain school and park sites.
Ee
In light of the foregoing, City and Developer desire to
further amend the ETDA to accomplish the foregoing purposes
and to provide for the development of the Property in
accordance with the Specific Plan, as amended.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and of
the mutual covenants hereafter contained, and for the purposes
stated above, City and Developer hereby agree as follows:
1. Incorporation of Amendments to Specific Plan. Exhibit
"C" to the ETDA, as amended, which is the Specific Plan, is hereby
amended as set forth in the attached Exhibit "C". Among other
minor changes, the amendments to the Specific Plan accomplish the
following:
ae
The Land Use DeSignation of the East Tustin Land Use Plan
for Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315 is changed from HS
(High School) to designate approximately. 16 acres at ML
(Medium-Low) Density Residential with a Neighborhood Park
Site located at the northeast corner of Tustin Ranch Road
and Heritage Way, and approximately 24 acres at M
(Medium) Density Residential as generally depicted in
Exhibit C-1.
-OR-
A. (ALT.) The Land Use Designation of the East Tustin
Land Use Plan for Parcel 2 of Parcel Map
88-315 is changed from HS (High School) to
designate approximately 17 acres at ML
(Medium-Low) Density Residential with a
Neighborhood Park Site located at the
northeast corner of Tustin Ranch Road and
Heritage Way, and approximately 23 acres at M
(Medium) Density Residential as generally
depicted in Exhibit C-2.
Be
The Land Use Designation of the East Tustin Land Use Plan
for Lot 27 of Tract 13627 is changed from GC (General
Commercial) to designate approximately 19 acres at MH
(Medium-High) Density and approximately 12 acres at GC
(General Commercial).
·
A·
Site Access, Landscapinq Setback and Building Heiqht, and
Special Development Restrictions.
Vehicular access to the Medium Density Site from Irvine
Boulevard shall be at its signalized intersection with
Robinson Road. Vehicular Access from Tustin Ranch Road
shall be at, or southerly of, the intersection'of Palermo
and Tustin Ranch Road.
Be
De
E ·
An expanded thirty five (35) foot setback along Tustin
Ranch Road from the edge of the curb to the residential
improvements shall be provided, consisting of nine (9)
feet of landscaped right-of-way and an additional twenty
six (26) feet of landscaped area, all thirty five (35)
feet of which is to be annexed for maintenance purposes
to the Tustin Ranch Landscape and Lighting District (the
"Lighting District"). The Lighting District shall be
responsible for maintenance of the landscaping in all
landscape setback areas around the Medium Density Site
and in dedicated right-of-way.
The building height of any future development provided on
the Medium .Density sites shall be limited to two (2)
stories.
No more than 400 apartment units may be considered on the
Medium Density site located adjacent to Irvine Boulevard,
away from Tustin Ranch Road.
A "For-Sale" townhome or single-family detached
residential product shall be provided at a maximum of 16
dwelling units per acre on the Medium Density site
located at the southeast corner of Irvine Boulevard and
Tustin Ranch Road.
E. (ALT.) (If Land Use Alternative C-2 for Medium-Low
Density adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road is
selected, this Paragraph E may be eliminated.)
·
ae
Neiqhborhood Park.
Developer shall dedicate by separate instrument at the
time of recordation of a final map on Parcel 2 of Parcel
Map 88-315, a minimum net acre neighborhood park
to be located on the northeast corner of Tustin Ranch
Road and Heritage Way. The Developer shall receive land
credit in the East Tustin Parkland Dedication Summary
maintained by the City's Community Services Department
for the amount of land area dedicated to the City for the
neighborhood park.
(OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO ADD TO THIS
PARAGRAPH A)
In addition, Developer shall contribute $
toward the improvement of the neighborhood park.
The Developer shall receive an additional land
credit in the East Tustin Parkland Dedication
Summary maintained by the City's Community Services
Department based upon the above amount of
contribution. Said contribution shall be made
prior to issuance of the first building permit for
residential development on Parcel 2 of Parcel Map
88-315. The amount of land credit that will be
given for the contribution shall be calculated by
dividing the contribution amount by the value of
one (1) buildable acre of residential land with
typical urban infrastructure services to
accommodate development at the densities shown on
the approved Land Use Plan for Parcel 2 of Parcel
Map 88-315, as determined by an appraiser selected
by the City, with appraisal costs borne by the
Developer (i.e.: If the value of the contribution
equals $400,000 and the value of one (1) acre of
land is appraised at $800,000, the land credit
would equal $400,000 divided by $800,000 or .5
acres).
-OR-
A (ALT.) Developer shall design, construct and dedicate
to City, prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the first 'residential unit
developed on Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315, a
minimum net acre neighborhood park to
be located on the northeast corner of Tustin
Ranch Road and Heritage Way. The design of
the neighborhood park shall be subject to
input from the Parks and Recreation Commission
and final City Council approval. City agrees
that the approval of the park design shall be
expedited to the greatest extent possible so
that there will be no delay in Developer
obtaining Certificates of Occupancy for
residential units on Parcel 2 of Parcel Map
88-315. The Developer shall receive land
credit in the East Tustin Parkland Dedication
Summary maintained by the City,s Community
Services Department for the amount of land
area dedicated to the City for the
neighborhood park. The Developer shall
receive an additional land credit in the East
Tustin Parkland Dedication Summary based upon
the value of the improvements provided in the
neighborhood park by the Developer. The value
of the improvements shall be based upon actual
construction costs, as verified by the City,
and Developer agrees to provide true and
correct supporting documentation. The amcunt
of land credit that will be given for the
improvements shall be calculated by dividing
the actual construction costs by the value of
one (1) buildable acre of residential land
with typical urban.infrastructure services to
.accommodate development at the densities shown
on the approved Land Use Plan for Parcel 2 of
Parcel Map 88-315, as determined by an
appraiser selected by the City, with appraisal
costs borne by the Developer (i.e.: If the
value of the improvements equals $400,000 and
the value of one (1) acre of land is appraised
at $800,000, the land credit would equal
$400,000 divided by $800,000 or .5 acres).
4. Release of Reserved Park Site. In order to satisfy
Condition 5.1.B of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2603
approving Tentative Tract Map 13627, City has determined in the
Specific Plan, as amended, to release Lot 17 of Tract 13627 for
residential development provided that the Developer dedicates to
the City an approximate .18 acre portion of Lot 17 of Tract 13627,
as generally depicted in Exhibit H, to provide parking for the
future neighborhood park site located on Lot 16 of Tract 13627.
Said dedication shall occur as part of any future subdivision or
development of Lot 17 of Tract 13627.
·
Apartment Development.
A·
The second sentence in Section 2.1, Permitted Uses,
of the ETDA shall be revised to read as follows:
"As a standard governing the exercise of the
City's discretion to issue conditional use
permits for the construction of apartment
projects under the Specific Plan, the City
agrees that the Developer will be allowed to
construct apartment projects in the medium
high and medium density areas of the Property
totalling 25% of the maximum number of
dwelling units permitted by the Specific Plan
and Tract No. 12345 as of the date of the ETDA
(December 1986) which maximum was 9,178
dwelling units."
B·
New sentenCes shall be inserted after the second
sentence in Section 2.1, Permitted Uses, of the
ETDA and are added to read as follows:
"For purposes of calculating the percentage of
apartments allowed pursuant to this Agreement,
the 1,854 City approved apartment units, as of
the date of Amendment No. 2, and any apartment
units approved by City and built by Developer
(or any successor) after the date of Amendment
No. 2, shall always be used in calculating the
25% apartment unit limitation as stated above.
To the extent that Developer or its successors
in interest, after the date of Amendment No. 2
convert apartment units to condominium units,
the resultant reduction in apartment units can
not be used to recalculate the 25% apartment
unit limitation and give rise to a claim for
additional apartment units. In addition, once
the 25% apartment unit limitation is achieved,
no further approvals for apartment units will
be granted by the City."
6. Hotels.
ae
The last sentence in Section 1.4 of the ETDA shall
be deleted in its entirety.
Section 1.4.1, added by the First Amendment to ETDA
is hereby deleted in its entirety, and a new
Section 1.4.1, Hotel, is added to read as follows:
"1.4.1 Hotels. Developer agrees that, for a
period of ten (10) years following the
effective date of this SECOND AMENDMENT, it
shall~ not construct a hotel on its property
located between Portola Parkway on the north,
the Atchison, Topeka and santa Fe railroad
right-of-way to the south, Myford Road to the
west, and Culver Drive to the east."
7. East Tustin Phasing Plan. The East Tustin Phasing Plan
identified in Section 1.9 of the ETDA, and amended by the First
Amendment, shall be amended to read as follows:
EAST TUSTIN PHASING PLAN
CUM.
DWELLING DWELLING
UNITS UNITS
CUM.. AUTO
SQ. FT. SQ. FT. CENTER
RETAIL RETAIL DEALERS
955 955 0 0 3
740 1,695 0 0 4
1,095 2,790 0 0 2
1,303 4,093 400,000 400,000 1
1,273 5,366 663,000 1,063,000 0
1,192 6,558 0 1,063,000 0
1,212 7,770 0 1,063,000 0
288 8,058 . 80,000 1,143,000 0
8,058 8,058 1,143,000 1,143,000 10
8. Maximum Number of Residential Dwellinq Units. The
maximum number of residential dwelling units authorized by the
Specific Plan (7,950 dwelling units) and the Phase I Residential
Area as authorized by Tentative Tract No. 12345 (1,228 dwelling
units) shall be reduced from a total of 9,178 dwelling units to a
total of 8,058 dwelling units. However, the original maximum
number of dwelling units permitted by the Specific Plan and
Tentative Tract No. 12345 as of the date of the ETDA (December
1986) was a tOtal of 9,178 units and this maximum number of units
shall still be used for purposes of calculating the 25% limitation
on apartment units as described in Section 2.1 of the ETDA, as
modified by this Amendment No. 2.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Developer have each executed this
SECOND AMENDMENT effective as of the date first written above.
CITY OF TUSTIN
THE IRVINE COMPANY
By
Mayor
By
By
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk
ETDAREV.2
City Attorney
RESOLUTIONS
& ORDINANCES
RESO. 95-44: ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION
ORD. 1148:
DEVELOPMENT
AMENDMENTS
AGREEMENT
RESO. 95-114: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
ORD. 1150: ZONE CHANGES/SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENTS
1 RESOLUTION h~O. 95-44
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A RESOLUTION O? THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECERTIFYING FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 85-2, AS MODIFIED
BY SUBSEQUENTLY APPROVED SUPPLEMENTS AND
ADDENDA, WITH ADDENDUM NO. 5 RELATED TO
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-001, ZONE CHANGE 94-
004, AMENDMENTS TO THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC
PLAN AND SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EAST TUSTIN
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, 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:
A.
That an application has been filed by The
Irvine Company, requesting approval of General
Plan Amendment 94-001, Zone Change 94-004,.
Amendments to the East Tustin Specific Plan,
and Second Amendment to the East Tustin
Development Agreement.
That an Initial Study was prepared during the
review process which determined that no
significant environmental impacts beyond that
previously considered would occur as a result
of the proposed project and that an addendum
to Environmenta'l Impact Report (EIR) 85-2
would be required for this project.
C ·
That Addendum No. 5 to EIR 85-2 was prepared
in compliance with Section 15164 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
De
That pursuant to CEQA, EIR 85-2 has previously
been prepared and certified and adequately
'addresses the general environmental setting of
the project, significant environmental
impacts, and the alternatives and mitigation
measures related to each significant
environmental effect and that no additional
environmental .impacts or mitigation measures
were identified in Addendum No. 5 to EIR 85-2.
m o
That Addendum No. 5 to EIR 85-2 prepared for
the project addresses only minor technical
changes or additions and none of the
conditions described in Section 15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines have occurred.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 95-44
Page 2
II. The Irvine Company shall pay City's defense costs
(including attorneys' fees) and indemnify and hold
City harmless from and against any claims, losses,
liabilities, or damages assessed or awarded against
City by way of judgement, settlement or stipulation
(including awards for costs, attorneys' fees, and
expert witness fees), arising from actions filed
against the City challenging the City's approval of
Addendum No. 5 to EIR 85-2.
III. The East Tustin Specific Plan Final Environmental
Impact Report (85-2), previously certified on March
17, 1986, as modified by subsequently adopted
supplements and addenda, was considered prior to
the City Council approval of this project. The
City Council hereby finds: this project is within
the scope of the East Tustin Specific Plan
'previously apprOved; the effects of this project,
relating to grading, drainage, circulation, public
services and utilities, were examined in the
Program EIR, particularly in the traffic analysis
contained in the Technical Appendices of said EIR,
as modified by subsequently approved supplements
and addenda, and Addendum No. 5 to EIR 85-2
addressing the 'proposed amendments incorporated
herein by reference. Ail feasible mitigation
measures and alternatives developed in the Program
EIR are incorporated into this project. The Final
EIR, is therefore determined to be adequate to
serve as a. Program EIR for this project and
satisfies all requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
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 of Approval
related to General Plan Amendment 94-001, Zone
Change 94-004, the East Tustin Specific Plan
Amendments and the Second Amendment to the East
Tustin'Development Agreement.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 95-44
Page 3
PASSED AND ADOPTED bb· the City Council of the City of
Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 20th day of November,.
1995.
JIM POTTS
MAYOR
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
~S
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 five; that the above and foregoing
Resolution No. 95-44 was duly passed and adopted at a regular
meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 20th day of
November, 1995, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. 1148
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EAST
TUSTIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AS DEFINED BY SECTION
65865.2 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, BETWEEN
THE CITY OF TUSTIN AND THE IRVINE COMPANY
PERTAINING TO DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE EAST TUSTIN
SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as
follows-
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
ne
That on April 7, 1986, the East Tustin Specific
Plan was adopted by the City Council.
Be
C·
That as a required element of the East Tustin
Specific Plan, a Development Agreement was adopted
by the City on_ November 3, 1986, prior to
authorization of any development within the project
area·
That the proposed Second Amendment to the East
Tustin Development Agreement has been submitted by
The Irvine Company pursuant to applicable
provisions of state law and local ordinances and
with the concurrence of the City of Tustin.
De
That Addendum #5 to EIR 85-2 has been prepared in
conjunction with the proposed project in
conformance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
E ·
That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and
held by the Planning Commission on March 13, 1995
and continued to March 27, 1995, and by the City
Council on June 5, 1995. Project scope changes
were further considered by the Planning Commission
on october 9, 1995 pursuant to Government Code
Section 65857. A second public hearing was duly
noticed, called and held by the City Council on
November 20, 1995.
F·
The Second Amendment would be consistent with the
objectives, policies, general land uses and
programs specified in the General Plan, as
amendment by General Plan Amendment 94-001,
particularly the Land Use Element which encourages
well balanced land uses and while maintaining a
healthy diversified economy.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1148
Page 2
G o
The Second Amendment would be compatible with the
uses authorized by the East Tustin Specific Plan,
as amended by Zone Change 94-004.
He
The Second Amendment would be in conformity with
public necessity, public convenience, general
welfare and good land use practices in that the
Second Amendment would provide for dedication of
land devoted for park purposes, while still
providing for the overall residential and
commercial development anticipated by the East
Tustin Specific Plan.
The Second Amendment would not be detrimental to
the health, safety and general welfare of the
community in that the amendment would reduce the
overall allowable dwelling unit count within the
Tustin Ranch area from 9,178 units to 8,058 units
which represents a twelve (12%) reduction.
J ·
The Second Amendment would not affect the' orderly
development of the property in that the land use
patterns, as amendment by General Plan Amendment
94-001 and Zone Change 94-004 would provide for
potential commercial and residential development
consistent with the capacity of the supporting
infrastructure and street improvements.
K·
The Second Amendment would have a positive fiscal
impact on the City which is required to be
monitored through the East Tustin Fiscal Monitor as
the elimination of the hotel from the' phasing
schedule as a revenue generator would be replaced ·
by an equivalent amount of retail space in the
phasing schedule.
II. The Irvine Company shall pay City's' defense costs
(including ~attorneys' fees) and indemnify and hold City
harmless from and against any claims, losses,
liabilities, or damages assessed or awarded against City
by way of judgement, settlement or stipulation (including
awards for costs, attorneys' fees, and expert witness
fees), arising from actions filed against the City
challenging the City's approval of the Second Amendment
to the East Tustin Development Agreement.
III. The City Council hereby approves the Second Amendment to
the East Tustin Development Agreement as included in
Exhibit A attached hereto and subject to final approval
of the City Attorney.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1148
Page 3
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin,
at a regular meeting on the 20th day of November, 1995.
JIM POTTS
MAYOR
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1148
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 five; that the above and foregoing
Ordinance No. 1148 was duly and regularly introduced at a
regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20th day of
November, 1995 and passed and adopted at a regular meeting of
the City Council held on the 4th day of December, 1995, by the
following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
EAST TUSTIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT (the "SECOND AMENDMENT") to the East
Tustin Development Agreement (the "ETDA") is made effective
, 1995, by and between The Irvine Company, a
Michigan corporation ("Developer"), and the City of Tustin, a
California municipal corporation ("City"), with respect to the
following:
RECITALS
ae
Be
This SECOND AMENDMENT amends the ETDA entered into by and
between City and Developer effective December 3, 1986, and
approved by City by Ordinance No. 978. The ETDA concerns all
of that real property (the "Property") described in Exhibit
"A" to the ETDA and delineated on Exhibit "B" thereto, which
description and delineation are incorporated herein by this
reference. At the time of its entry into the ETDA, Developer
was the fee owner of the Property, and is the fee owner of the
areas of the Property specifically involved in this SECOND
AMENDMENT. The ETDA has been amended once previously,
effective March 16, 1992, and approved by City by Ordinance
No. 1082 ("First Amendment"). The term "ETDA" is used herein
to refer to the ETDA as amended by the First Amendment.
The ETDA provides for the development of the Property in
accordance with the East Tustin Specific Plan adopted by City
on March 17, 1986 (the "Specific Plan").
C ·
De
The Specific Plan and ETDA provided for the reservation of
school and park sites anticipated to be needed to serve the
future residents and occupants of the ProPerty. As the
Property has been developed, however, certain sites reserved
for school or park purposes are no longer needed for those
purposes, and should be redesignated for residential
development subject to the dedication of a new neighborhood
park, and parking for a future neighborhood park. City and
Developer have also considered the feasibility of development
of hotel uses on the Property, and have determined that hotel
construction is unlikely within the next ten years, and the
ETDA should be amended accordingly.
Amendments to the Specific Plan, approved by the City Council
on , 1995, provide for changes in the Land Use
Designations of the East Tustin Land Use Plan relating to the
release of certain school and park sites.
m ·
In light of the foregoing, City and Developer desire to
further amend the ETDA to accomplish the foregOing purposes
and to provide for the development of the Property in
accordance with the Specific Plan, as amended.
ORDINANCE 1148 EXHIBIT A
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and of
the mutual covenants hereafter contained, and for the purposes
stated above, City and Developer hereby agree as follows:
1. Incorporation of Amendments to Specific Plan. Exhibit
"C" to the ETDA, as amended, which is the Specific Plan, is hereby
amended as set forth in the attached Exhibit "C". Among other
minor changes, the amendments to the Specific Plan accomplish the
following:
ae
The Land Use Designation of the East Tustin Land Use Plan
for Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315 is changed from HS
(High School) to designate approximately 16 acres at ML
(Medium-Low) Density Residential with a Neighborhood Park
Site located at the northeast corner of Tustin Ranch Road
and Heritage Way, and approximately 24 acres at M
(Medium) Density Residential as generally depicted in
Exhibit C-1.
-OR-
A. (ALT.) The Land Use Designation of the East Tustin
Land Use Plan for Parcel 2 of- Parcel Map
88-315 is changed from HS (High School) to
designate approximately 17 acres at ML
(Medium-Low) Density Residential with a
Neighborhood Park Site located at the
northeast corner of Tustin Ranch Road and
Heritage Way, and approximately 23 acres at M
(Medium) Density Residential as generally
depicted in Exhibit C-2.
The Land Use Designation of the East'Tustin Land Use Plan
for Lot 27 of Tract 13627 is changed from GC (General
Commercial) to designate approximately 19 acres at MH
(Medium-High) Density and approximately 12 acres at GC
(General Commercial).
·
ae
Site Access, Landscaping Setback and Building Height, and
Special Development Restrictions.
Vehicular access to the Medium Density Site from Irvine
Boulevard shall be at its signalized intersection with
Robinson Road. Vehicular Access from Tustin Ranch Road
shall be at, or southerly of, the intersection of Palermo
and Tustin Ranch Road.
Be
Ce
De
m ·
An expanded thirty five (35) foot setback along Tustin
Ranch Road from the edge of the curb to the residential
improvements shall be provided, consisting of nine (9)
feet of landscaped right-of-way and an additional twenty
six (26) feet of landscaped area, all thirty five (35)
feet of which is to be annexed for maintenance purposes
to the Tustin Ranch Landscape and Lighting District (the
"Lighting District"). The Lighting District shall be
responsible for maintenance of the landscaping in all
landscape setback areas around the Medium Density Site
and in dedicated right-of-way.
The building height of any future development provided on
the Medium Density sites shall be limited to two (2)
stories.
No more than 400 apartment units may be considered on the
Medium Density site located adjacent to Irvine Boulevard,
away from Tustin Ranch Road.
A "For-Sale" townhome or single-family detached
residential product shall be provided at a maximum of 16
dwelling units per acre on the Medium Density site
located at the southeast corner of Irvine Boulevard and
Tustin Ranch Road.
E. (ALT.) (If Land Use Alternative C-2 for Medium-Low
Density adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road is
selected, this Paragraph E may be eliminated.)
·
A·
Neiqhborhood Park.
DeVeloper shall dedicate by separate instrument at the
time of recordation of a final map on Parcel 2 of Parcel
Map 88-315, a minimum net acre~neighborhood park
to be located on the northeast corner of Tustin Ranch
Road and Heritage Way. The Developer shall receive land
credit in the East Tustin Parkland Dedication Summary
maintained by the City's Community Services Department
for the amount of land area dedicated to the City for the
neighborhood park.
(OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO ADD TO THIS
PARAGRAPH A)
In addition, Developer shall contribute $
toward the improvement of the neighborhood park.
The Developer shall receive an additional land
credit in the East Tustin Parkland Dedication
Summary maintained by the CitY,s Community Services
Department based upon the above amount of
contribution. Said contribution shall be made
prior to issuance of the first building permit for
residential development on Parcel 2 of Parcel Map
88-315. The amount of land credit that will be
given for the contribution shall be calculated by
dividing the contribution amount by the value of
one (1) buildable acre of residential land with
typical urban infrastructure services to
accommodate development at the densities shown on
the approved Land Use Plan for Parcel 2 of Parcel
Map 88-315, as determined by an appraiser selected
by the City, with appraisal costs borne by the
Developer (i.e.: If the value of the contribution
equals $400,000 and the value of one (1) acre of
land is appraised at $800,000, the land credit
would equal $400,000 divided by $800,000 or .5
acres) .
-OR-
A (ALT.) Developer shall design, construct and dedicate
to City, prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the first residential unit
developed on Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315, a
minimum net acre neighborhood park to
be located on the northeast corner of Tustin
Ranch Road and Heritage Way. The design of
the neighborhood park shall be subject to
input from the Parks and Recreation Commission
and final City Council approval. City agrees
that the approval of the park design shall be
expedited to the greatest extent possible so
that there will be no delay in Developer
obtaining Certificates of Occupancy for
residential units on Parcel 2 of Parcel Map
88-315. The Developer shall receive land
credit in the East Tustin Parkland Dedication
Summary maintained bY. the City's Community
Services Department for the amount of land
area dedicated to the city for the
neighborhood park. .The Developer shall
receive an additional land credit in the East
Tustin Parkland Dedication Summary based upon
the value of the improvements provided in the
neighborhood park by the Developer. The value
of the improvements shall be based upon actual
construction costs, as verified by the City,
and Developer agrees to provide true and
correct supporting documentation. The amount
of land credit that will be given for the
improvements shall be calculated by dividing
the actual construction costs by the value of
one (1) buildable acre of residential land
with typical urban infrastructure services to
accommodate development at the densities shown
on the approved Land Use Plan for Parcel 2 of
Parcel. Map 88-315, as determined by an
appraiser selected by the City, with appraisal
costs borne by the Developer (i.e.: If the
value of the improvements equals $400,000 and
the value of one (1) acre of land is appraised
at $800,000, the land credit would equal
$400,000 divided by $800,000 or .5 acres).
4. Release of Reserved Park Site. 'In order to satisfy
Condition 5.1.B of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2603
approving Tentative Tract Map 13627, City has determined in the
Specific Plan, as amended, to release Lot 17 of Tract 13627 for
residential development provided that the Developer dedicates to
the City an approximate .18 acre portion of Lot 17 of Tract 13627,
as generally depicted in Exhibit H, to provide.parking for the
future neighborhood park site located on Lot 16 of Tract 13627.
Said dedication shall occur as part of any future subdivision or
development of Lot 17 of Tract 13627.
·
Apartment Development.
a.
The second sentence in Section 2.1, Permitted Uses,
of the ETDA shall be revised to read as follows:
"As a standard governing the exercise of the
City's discretion to issue conditional use
permits for the construction of apartment
projects under the Specific Plan, the City
agrees that the Developer will be allowed to
construct apartment projects in the medium
high and medium density areas of the Property
totalling 25% of the maximum number of
dwelling units permitted by the Specific Plan
and Tract No. 12345 as of the date of the ETDA
(December 1986) which maximum was 9,!78
dwelling units."
Be
New sentences shall be inserted after the second
sentence in Section 2.1, Permitted Uses, of the
ETDA and are added to read as follows:
"For purposes of calculating the percentage of
apartments allowed pursuant to this Agreement,
the 1,854 City approved apartment units, as of
the date of Amendment No. 2, and any apartment
units approved by City and built by Developer
(or any successor) after the date of Amendment
No. 2, shall always be used in calculating the
25% apartment unit limitation as stated above.
To the extent that Developer or its successors
in interest, after'the date of Amendment No. 2
convert apartment units to condominium units,
the resultant reduction in apartment units can
not be used to recalculate the 25% apartment
unit limitation and give rise to a claim for
additional apartment units. In addition, once
the 25% apartment unit limitation is achieved,
no further approvals for apartment units will
be granted by the City."
6. Hotels.
a.
The last sentence in Section 1.4 of the ETDA shall
be deleted in its entirety.
Be
Section 1.4.1, added by the First Amendment to ETDA
is hereby deleted in its entirety, and a new
Section 1.4.1, Hotel, is added to read as follows:
"1.4.1 Hotels. Developer agrees that, for a
periOd of ten (10) years following the
effective date of this SECOND AMENDMENT, it
shall not construct a hotel on its property
located between Portola Parkway on the north,
the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railroad
right-of-way to the south, Myford Road to the
west, and Culver Drive to the east."
7. East Tustin Phasinq Plan. The East Tustin Phasing Pla~
identified in Section 1.9 of the ETDA, and amended by the First
Amendment, shall be amended to read as follows:
EAST TUSTIN PHASING PLAN
CUM. CUM. AUTO
DWELLING DWELLING SQ. FT. SQ. FT. CENTER
UNITS UNITS RETAIL RETAIL DEALERS
955 955 0 0 3
740 1,695 0 0 4
1,095 2,790 0 0 2
1,303 4,093 400,000 400,000 1
1,273 5,366 663,000 1,063,000 0
1,192 6,558 0 1,063,000 0
1,212 7,770 0 1,063,000 0
288 8,058 80,000 1,143,000 0
8,058 8,058 1,143,000 1,143,000 10
8. Maximum Number of Residential Dwelling Units. The
maximum number of residential dwelling units authorized by the
Specific Plan (7,950 dwelling units) and the Phase I Residential
Area as authorized by Tentative Tract No. 12345 (1,228 dwelling
units) shall be reduced from a total of 9,178 dwelling units to a
total of 8,058 dwelling units. However, the original maximum
number of dwelling units permitted by the Specific Plan and
Tentative Tract No. 12345 as of the date of the ETDA (December
1986) was a total of 9,178 units and this maximum number of units
shall still be used for purposes of calculating the 25% limitation
on apartment units as described in Section 2.1 of the ETDA, as
modified by this Amendment No. 2.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Developer have each executed this
SECOND AMENDMENT effective as of the date first written above.
CITY OF TUSTIN
THE IRVINE COMPANY
By
Mayor
By
By
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk
ETDAREV.2
City Attorney
1 RESOLUTION NO. 95-114
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 94-001 TO CHANGE THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN LAND
USE MAP ~ON CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE EAST
TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby
resolve as follows:
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
ae
Be
That an application has been filed by The
Irvine Company, requesting approval of General
Plan Amendment 94-001 to change the land use
designation of ~the City's General Plan Land
Use Map on certain, properties within the East
Tustin Specific Plan area.
That a public hearing was duly notice, called
and held on said application by the Planning
Commission on March 13, 1995 and continued to
March 27, 1995, and by the City Council on
June 5, 1995. Project scope changes were
further considered by the Planning Commission
on October 9, 1995 pursuant to Government Code
Section 65857. A second public hearing was
duly noticed, called and held by the City
Council on November 20, 1995.
Ce
That an Environmental Impact Report EIR 85-2,
as modified by subsequently approved
supplements and addenda, for the East Tustin
Specific Plan has been certified with Addendum
No. 5 in conformance with the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act for
the subject project.
Do
Proposed General Plan Amendment 94-001 would
be consistent with good land use design
placing higher density residential products
adjacent to major arterials minimizing traffic
and noise impacts.
E ·
Proposed General Plan Amendment 94-001 would
provide consistency with existing and proposed
zoning and provisions of the East Tustin
Specific Plan related to allowed uses and
number of allowed units within the Specific
Plan area.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 95-114
Page 2
F .
Proposed General Plan Amendment 94-004 would
be consistent with the policies of the General
Plan Land Use and Housing Elements with
balanced land uses and not precluding owner
occupied dwellings.
II. The Irvine Company shall pay City's defense costs
(including attorneys' fees) and indemnify and hold
City harmless from and against any claims, losses,
liabilities, or damages assessed or awarded against
City by way of judgement, settlement or stipulation
(including awards for costs, attorneys' fees, and
expert witness fees), arising from actions filed
against the City challenging the City's approval of
General Plan Amendment 94-001.
III. The City Council hereby approves General Plan
Amendment 94-001 as follows:
ne
The Land Use Designation on the City's General
Plan Land Use Map shall be changed as follows:
·
Lot 6 of Tract 12870 shall be changed
from Public & Institutional (P&I) to
Planned Community Residential (PCR) as
shown in Exhibit A attached hereto.
·
A portion of Lot 27 of Tract 13627
located adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road
along the entire Tustin Ranch Road street
frontage and includes approximately 19
acres shall be changed from Planned
Community Commercial Business (PCCB) to
Planned Community Residential (PCR) as
shown in Exhibit B attached hereto.
Be
The changes to the City's Land Use Map
identified in subsection A above are
contingent upon the execution of the Second
Amendment to the East Tustin Development
Agreement as adopted by Ordinance No. 1148.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 95-114
Page 3
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 20th day of November,
1995.
JIM POTTS
MAYOR
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
SS
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 five; that the
above and foregoing Resolution No. 95-114 was duly passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City
Council, held on the 20th day of November, 1995, by the
following Vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
TOWNSHIP DRIVE
RE$1DENTI
RAWLINGS
SITE '
EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION: PC PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL
PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATION: PC RESIDENTIAL
LOT 6 OF TRACT 12870 A.P.#: 501-093-16
SOURCE: CITY OF TUSTIN
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC
PLAN
GPA 94-001
EXHIBIT A
Figure 1-3
EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION: PC COMMERCIAL/BUSINESS
PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATION: PC RESIDENTIAL.,~
PC COMMERCIAL/BUSINESS
LOT 27 .OF TRACT 13627 A.P.#: 502-452-01
SOURCE:CITY OF TUSTIN
EAST
TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
GPA 94-001
EXHIBIT B
Figure 1-4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. 1150
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE
94-004 TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION AND
THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE PLAN ON
CERTAIN PROPERTIES WITHIN THE EAST TUSTIN
SPECIFIC PLAN AREA, INCLUDING TEXTURAL AND
STATISTICAL SUMMARY REVISIONS TO THE EAST
TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN~
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain
as follows:
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
ne
That an application has been filed by The
Irvine Company, requesting approval of Zone
Change 94-004 to change the zoning and the
East Tustin Specific Plan Land Use Plan on
certain properties within the East Tustin
Specific Plan area, including textual and
statistical summary revisions to the East
Tustin Specific Plan.
B.
That a public hearing was duly notice, called
and held on said application by the Planning
Commission on March 13, 1995 and continued to
March 27, 1995, and by the City Council on
June 5, 1995. Project scope changes were
further considered by the Planning Commission
on October 9, 1995 pursuant to Government Code
Section 65857. A second public hearing was
duly noticed, called'and held by the City
Council on November 20, 1995.
Ce
That an Environmental Impact Report EIR 85-2,
as modified by subsequently approved
supplements and addenda, for the East Tustin
Specific Plan has been certified with Addendum
No. 5 in conformance with the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act for
the subject project.
De
Proposed Zone Change 94-004 would be
consistent with good land use design placing
higher density residential products adjacent
to major arterials minimizing traffic and
noise impacts.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21¸
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1150
Page 2
.
Proposed Zone Change 94-004 would be
consistent with the policies of the General
Plan Land Use and Housing Elements with
balanced land uses and not precluding owner
occupied dwellings.
II. The Irvine Company shall pay City's defense costs
(including attorneys' fees) and indemnify and hold
City harmless from and against any Claims, losses,
liabilities, or damages assessed or awarded against
City by way of judgement, settlement or stipulation
(including awards for'costs, attorneys' fees, and
expert witness fees), arising from actions filed
against the City challenging the City's approval of
Zone Change 94-004.
III. The City Council hereby approves Zone Change 94-004
as follows:
ne
The Zoning Designation on the city's Zoning
Map shall be changed as follows:
i ·
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315 shall be
changed from Planned Community Community
Facility (PCCF) to Planned Community
Residential (PCR) as shown.in Exhibit A
attached hereto.
·
A portion of Lot 27 of Tract 13627
located adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road
along the entire Tustin Ranch Road street
frontage and includes approximately 19
acres shall be changed from Planned
Community Commercial (PCC) to Planned
Community Residential (PCR) as shown in
Exhibit B attached hereto.
.
The East Tustin Land Use Plan shall be changed
as follows:
·
A portion of Lot 27 of Tract 13627
located adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road
along the entire Tustin Ranch Road street
frontage and includes approximately 19
acres shall be changed from General
Commercial (GC) to Medium High Density
(MH) as shown in Exhibit C attaChed
hereto.
·
The underlying land use designation
related to the Elementary School
designation located on Lot 6 of Tract
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1150
Page 3
12870 shall be Medium-Low Density (ML) as
shown in Exhibit C attached hereto·
·
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315 shall be
changed from High School (HS) to
designate approximately 16 acres at
Medium-Low (ML) Density Residential with
a Neighborhood Park Site located at the
northeast corner of Tustin Ranch Road and
Heritage Way, and approximately 24 acres
at Medium (M) Density Residential as
generally depicted in Exhibit C attached
hereto.
-OR-
3. ALT.
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 88-315 shall be
changed from High School (HS) to
designate approximately 17 acres at
Medium-Low (ML) Density Residential with '
a Neighborhood Park Site located at the
northeast corner of Tustin Ranch Road and
Heritage Way, and approximately 23 acres
at Medium (M) Density Residential as
generally depicted in Exhibit C attached
hereto.
C ·
The East Tustin Specific Plan document shall
be changed to read as shown in Exhibit D
attached hereto.
Do
The changes to the City's Zoning Map and the
East Tustin Specific .Plan identified in
subsections A, B and C above are contingent
upon the execution of the Second Amendment to
the East Tustin Development Agreement and
General Plan Amendment 94-001 as adopted by
Ordinance No 1148 and Resolution No. 95-114
respectively.
IV. In order to implement the above changes, the
applicant shall submit to the Community Development
Department the following materials within 30 days
of final approval by the City Council:
A·
Twenty (20) copies and one (1) reproducible
copy of the East Tustin Specific Plan with
revisions required in Sections II.B and II.C
above.
3
41
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1150
Page 4
Be
Twenty (20) copies and one (1) reproducible
copy of a large scale Land Use Plan of the
East Tustin Specific Plan with revisions
required in Section II.B above.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City
· of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 20th day of
November, 1995,
JIM POTTS
MAYOR
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1150
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 five; that the
above and foregoing Ordinance No. 1150 was duly and
regularly introduced at a regular meeting of the City
Council held on the 20th day of November, 1995 and passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held
on the 4th day of November, 1995, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
_.)
.o
13211
SITE
EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION: PC COMMUNITY FACILITY
PROPOSED DESIGNATION: PC RESIDENTIAL
PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 88-315 A.P.#: 500-221-02 A.P.#: 500-221.-03
SOURCE: CITY OF TUSTIN
EAST
TUSTIN SPECIFIC
PLAN
ZC 94-004
EXHIBIT A
Figure 1- 5
EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION: PC COMMERCIAL
PROPOSED DESIGNATION: PC RESIDENTIAL, PC COMMERCIAL
Lot 27 of Tract 13627 A.P. 502-452-01
SOURCE: CITY OF TUSTIN
EAST
TUSTIN
SPECIFIC
PLAN
ZC 94-004
EXHIBIT B
Figure 1-6
·
·
1 FGEND
REFER TO
FIGURE 1-4 & 1-6
REFER TO
FIGURE 1-3
~ ~2.P.X. · ZONIN~ t,.XNO U~E AREA
REFER TO
FIGURE 1-5
·
ALTERNATE LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS
CONSIDERED
EAST TUSTIN
ZC 94-004
SPECIFIC PLAN EXHIBIT C
ZONE CHANGE 94-004
ORDINANCE 1150 EXHIBIT D
EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN TEXT REVISIONS
2.1 Land Use
(ETSP Pages 2-1 through 2-4)
The Land Use Plan, illustrated in Exhibit C, incorporates the
planning goals and objectives in designating a variety of
residential and non-residential land uses circumscribed and linked
by an appropriate arterial circulation system. Each of the parcels
within the~plan having a specific land use designation is referred
to as a "land use area". These areas have been aggregated into 12
easily identifiable zones called "Sectors". The sector boundaries
are defined by major roadways and topographical features; each
sector contains one or more land use area. Table 2.1 summarizes
the land use statistics. More detailed statistics for each sector
are provided in thc Section 2.14.
Gross acres have been used for computing acreages and residential
densities on the following tables Gross acres include all land
within a sector or land use area exclusive of arterial street
rights-of-way.
Table 2.1
Statistical Summary
Land Use Designation
Acreage
Residential
Estate (up to 2 du/ac)
Low (up to 5 du/ac)
Medium Low (up to 10 du/ac)
Medium (up to 18 du/ac)
Medium-High (up to 25 du/ac)
.+:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:
:::::::::::::::::::::::
...........
:::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::
Open Space
Community Parks ~ ....... :~::~
Golf Course 150 :~:~:::~::
............. ..
Commercial/Business
Neighborhood Commercial
General Commercial
Mixed Use
. .........
121
Institutional
Elementary Schools~
Intermediate Schools
Other Uses
Roads (arterial and major only ** i~i) i0'i i~i~i~
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 2
** i~ Acreage for all roads other than arteriaI and major roads, has
been included in the acreage for the surrounding land uses.
Residential Land Use: The Land ~se Plan designates five
residential categories, each .of which has maximum density.
Residential densities are controlled in all of the following: land
use areas, sectors and the Specific Plan Area...
Mixed Use Designation: The .Land Use Plan designates 121 acres in
the southeast corner of the site, in Sector 12 between Bryan Avenue
and the I-5 Freeway, as a mixed"use area. A 70-acre commercial
center
......... ~ ...... 1 will be developed in this area. Additional
commercial uses or office and research and development uses may
also be developed within this area. The Mixed Use designation
permits flexibility for location and configuration of these uses.
It also creates the opportunity for development to respond to
future changes in economic and market forces. The Development
Standards for the Mixed Use Area are defined in Section 3.0.
Non-Residential Land Uses: The Land Use Plan (LUP) includes a
number of non-residential uses such as: (1) Schools, (2) Parks, (3)
Open Space and Recreation Facilities, and (4) Commercial Land Use
Designations. These are summarized in the following table:
Table 2.2
Land Uses Inteqral to the LUP
Institutional Use
Quantity
Intermediate School
Community Park
Golf Course
Commercial/Business Use
Approximate
Total Acreage
4O
General Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 3~
Table 2.3
Land Uses Anticipated in LUP
Institutional Use
Quantity
Approximate
Total Acreage
Elementary School
Public Neighborhood Parks
Private Neighborhood Parks
The exact number, location and size of private neighborhood
parks will be established with subdivision maps.
............................................... ~ ...................................................................
==================================================:
an area,
...................
neighborhood parks are generally located in various se6'~"6'~'~' of the
Plan.
Three (3) communi.~y ...... p. grks are more specifically located; they
include an cight ~ii!iiiii~i~i~ ...................... acre site near the junior high school, a
20-acre site, and~'~:'~':':'~':':'~':~i-acre site incorporating a knoll situated
south of Portola Parkway'.
Elementary and Intermediate schools and public neighborhood parks
are symbolically illustrated on the Land Use Plan. The specific
sizes, locations and numbers of these facilities will be determined
in accordance with the provisions of Subsection 2.8.
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 4
2.10 Schools
(ETSP Paqes 2-13 and 2-14)
The Specific Plan area is within ~he boundaries of the Tustin
Unified School District. The school district expects that the
completion of the development in the East Tustin Specific Plan Area
will require new facilities as well as the use of some of the
existing facilities. ~
The Specific Plan symbolically identifies a maximum number of
school sites to serve the largest estimated population growth.
These schools have all been' generally located in areas that are
central to estimated student population growth. One intermediate
school site has 'been identified for the Specific Plan area. This
aa~ ~aa ~~ w~ ~ ~aa~
' t f Ir~..~ ~-~.. th
The ultimate requirement for the precise number of schools is based
on the number of students that are to be generated from the
residential areas within the Specific Plan area. The demand for
schools may vary depending on the actual type and number of units
built in each land use category. The size of school sites may vary
depending on specific school district needs and joint school/park
programs. Also phasing and precise locations of sites are
dependent on timing of development and more precise planning within
sectors. The number, location, and size of schools illustrated
symbolically on the Spccific Plan usc cxhibit ~!~i~i!i!ii~i~i!iiiii~i~i~ should
be considered as a general guide, subject to ..... ~~'~9~Uation.
As development plans are prepared for each sector the land owner
and school district will .make specific provision for school
facilities. These provisions should be accomplished prior to final
development. The actual size and number of sites may cause an
adjustment to acreage within the land use areas. If any school
that is shown on the Land Use Plan is not needed or if the site
acreage is less than estimated then. the acreage that has been
allocated to the school site will be reallocated to the underlying
residential use. However, the maximum number of units permitted
within the sector where the acreage adjustment is made will not be
changed except as provided in Section 3.0.
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 5
Acreage
ETSP Pages 2-25 and 2-25
Table 2.4 Statistical Analysis
Maximum
Land Use Density
Total
Allowable
Units
SECTOR I
125
Estate Density Residential
2 du/ac
Subtotal 125
SECTOR 2
74 Estate Density Residential
~ i~i~i Low' Density Residential
~ i~i iiiiiiiiiiiii'i 'Medium Low Density Residential
37.35 i~i~ Medium Density Residential
t5 20 ....... ** Junior High School
2. du/ac
5 du/ac
10 du/ac
18 du/ac****
Subtotal
SECTOR 3
6 i~2i Low Density Residential
o ~ it?:0 ** Elementary School
..~ ~ ~.~ ..i. v ::::::::: =========================== __
5 du/ac
Subtotal 17 i~i~i
SECTOR 4
Estate Density Residential
2 du/ac
68 +
SECTOR 5
98
18
Estate Density Residential
Low Density Residential
2 du/ac
5 du/ac
Subtotal 116
SECTOR 6
Subtotal
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 6
SECTOR.7
97 Medium Density Residential
~46 i~ii~i~ Medium High Density Residential
o 10 ** Elementary School
150 i!~ii~i~i GO1 f Course
18 du/ac
25 du/ac
SECTOR 8
77
26
o 10 **
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Elementary School
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
4 du/ac ~4~
18 du/ac
Subtotal 117 i~i~i~3i
::::::::::::::::::::::
SECTOR 9
39
Low Density Residential
5 du/ac
Subtotal 39
SECTOR 10
46
~,5 ~i~Si
~:::::::::.:::-
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
5 du/ac
18 du/ac
Subtotal 71
5s2 i~i~i~i _+
:::::::::::::::::::::::
SECTOR 11
~.:.'~'<... <..:.:.. · .: .......... :..>:..:.:.: ...... ... ..... ,.............-... · · · .-.... ...... .....-.....-.-...-.......-...-.-.....-.-.-.:,:.-.- -.......-.-.-.-....~......-.....v.....-.- .+-. ................ -~ .......................... ..... .............. ....:.
~:: ~:::i2::~?:~::~::~i~:/:~ii::i:/~i~::iii:/:iii:/:~::~i~?:~::~?::~?~M~::~i~ ~ ::!:: D~:~::~i~::::::::R~".S.'i~ ~ ~h~:::::::: :: :: :: :: : :: : :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: ~ ~ 0 ~ ~
~ ~ ........ Medium High Density Residential 25 du/ac
4 ~ ** Neighborhood Park
10 ~3~ Neighborhood Commercial
Subtotal 177
SECTOR i2
121
Mixed Use
Subtotal 121
7,236***
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 7
Total allowable number of permitted units within a given
sector may be increased if a sector unit transfer occurs as
described in Subsection 2.1.
** The precise acreage and locations of private and public
neighborhood parks, elementary school and intermediate school
will be determined as part of the review of the Sector
Subdivision Maps as identified under Review Procedure
Subsection 1.5 and consistent with policies established in
Subsections 2.9 and 2.10 of the Specific Plan.
*** If the maximum allowable units in Tentative Tract Map No.
12345 are not constructed, the unconstructed units may be
transferred to the Specific Plan area.
**** Maximum density on Lot 11 of Tract 13627 shall be ten (10)
dwelling units per acre.
o This acreage figure is an estimated allocation.for this land
use. If it changes, other land uses acreage allocations in
this sector may Change. However, the total allowable units
for the sector will remain the same.
Total Allowable Units assumes that if a school and/Or park
currently designated for this sector is not built in'this
sector and that the acreage goes into residential use. If
these facilities are constructed, the land use area density
limitation precludes construction of the total allowable
sector units and such unbuilt units would be transferred to
another sector.
Ordinance ·1150
Exhibit D
Page 8
Sector 2
(ETSP Paqes 2-28 and 2-29)
This sector consists of approximately ~"~ ~!i~i!~! acres and extends
~ · ~ :.,...:.:.:.:.:.:...:.
from the northernmost tip of the site south ~'"'·'the proposed future
road. The sector is bounded on the west by the crest of the
north/south Peters Canyon ridge, Peters Canyon Wash, and Lower Lake
Drive; on the north and east by the City boundary; and on the south
by the Future Road. The land beyond the eastern edge of the Sector
is in the County's jurisdiction and is currently planted with
orchards. The Sector encompasses a broad valley which contains the
west tributary of Peters Canyon Wash. Much of the valley is
relatively flat.
This sector is planned to include a variety of land uses. The
residential uses will range from the estate density to medium hi.lb
density. Estate density residential is located in the western and
northern hillsides; low density is located in the upper valley and
on a low knoll extending south from the north/south ridge; medium
low and medium density occur in the central and upper portions of
the valley; and medium h~ i~i~ ........... density is located at the southerly
end of the valley adjacen~ .......... ~'o the Future Road. These various
residential densities have been organized relative to the
topography access and visibility from existing development to the
west ~ ~ .... ~ ~ ~ .... ~^~ ~ A1 .... ~ ..... ~ ~hioh
................... cf ~..~ ..llcy. An intermediate school has been
sited along Peters Canyon Wash. The precise location and size of
these facilities ~!~i~i~!i~ili~i~i~!~i~ shall be determined as described in
Subsection 2.10 ~ ............ ~ ............ ~'~ific ~=~ '- ^~-~
~&A. ~&A ~AA~ .................
.........................
community park ........................................ is planned just south of the ........... ~ntc--~ ~'~':'?~:~¥"?~:::~i~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~
school site i~!~i!iii!~i~i~i~!~!i.i.i.~i, along the wash. A regional
trail and Cl~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~ay are planned in proximity to Peters Canyon
Wash reflecting Orange County General Plan.
The following policies apply to Sector 2:...
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 9
Sector 6:
(ETSP Paqes 2-36)
This triangular configured sector contains 31 acres of flatland and
has the potential to be circumscribed by arterial roadways. It is
situated along the eastern edge of the site, bounded by the
proposed Future Road extension on the west, Portola Parkway on the
south and the Specific Plan boundary on the east '~ ~ .....
~"~ ..... ~ ~ -~ .... ~ ~- ~ .... ~- Medium high density
residential development is planned for the remainder of this sector
The following policies apply to Sector 6:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :i::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: '
A ~. In addition to the specific submittal requirements for the .
Subdivision Map of this Sector, refer to Section 1.5, a
conceptual landscape plan for arterial roadways within this
sector shall also be submitted with the Subdivision Map for
approval by the Director of Community Development, refer to
Section 2.12, Implementation for specific requirements.
B ~. Concurrent with a Subdivision Map submittal for any portion of
this Sector, a Conceptual Site Plan shall also be submitted
for the entire sector as identified in Section 2.14.1.
Concurrent with the submission of the Sector Subdivision Map
as required under Section 1.5, the precise location of the E1
'Modena Fault will be determined by a detailed geological
investigation conducted by the landowner and appropriate
building setbacks should be established in conformance with
current State Standards.
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 10
Sector 8
(ETSP Paqes 2-39 and 2-40)
This sector consists of 117 i~!i!3! .......... acres and is virtually flat. It is
situated adjacent to the eX[~'~ing community on the west, and is
bounded by the La Colina extension on the south, the Future Road
extension on the east and the Racquet Hill Drive extension on the
north.
Most of the sector has been designated for low density residential
development along the western boundary so as to be compatible with
the adjacent residential development. Approximately 26 acres along
Future Road have been allocated for Medium Density Residential.
Also planned for this area is an elementary school, the precise
location and size will be determined as identified in Subsection
The following polices apply to Sector 8:...
Ee
The distance between the edge of the western right-of-way of
the "Future Road" and the closest point of the foundation of
the closest residence of Pavillion/Saltair shall be a minimum
of 1,000 feet plus or minus 100 feet measured on a horizontal
plane. The noise impacts of the Future Road on the existing
residences to the west of the Specific Plan area shall be
further mitigated by a continuous noise barrier consisting of
a combination of berm, soundwall, and residences adjacent to
the Future Road. This requirement for a continuous noise
barrier applies along the western side of Future Road adjacent
to the medium density residential development in Sector 8 and
the low density development in between. The noise barrier
line-of-sight from the residences along Saltair and Pavillion
to vehicles traveling along the Future Road behind such noise
barrier. In addition, in designing and orienting the
residences in the two medium-density residential areas in
Sector 8 and the low-density development in between, the
developer shall, to the maximum extent feasible and consistent
with other sound planning practices, construct multi-story
structures which further mitigate the 'noise impacts of the
Future Road on the existing residences to the west .of the
Specific Plan. A design goal impact of 55 or less CNEL for
the existing residences at the foundation is hereby
established. At such time that further noise analysis is done
in this area (at the Tentative Tract stage), this analysis
will model the projected CNEL level at these existing
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 11
F.
residences to confirm that the noise e~ level of 55 CNEL will
be met.
It is the explicit intent of the East Tustin S~i~i~!ifi~!~! Plan
that La Colina Road in the Specific Plan area c6'~~'~'~'~'~o the
existing La colina Road and to the major arterial known as
"Future Road." this road shall consist of a four lane
residential street, and should be incrementally' improved,
beginning with a two lane road. The roadway should not exceed
a total right-of-way of 80 feet, and the first two lanes
should be built at the edge of the right-of-way, with a raised
landscape median making up the rest of the potential right-of-
way.
The precise alignment of La Colina Road will be determined at
the Tentative Tract stage. The City and County will prepare
a joint study, examining the impacts and mitigation measures
of the connection, and recommending specific measures to deter
through traffic.
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 12
Sector 11
(ETSP Paqes 2-43)
This sector consists of approximately 183 acres. It is .bounded by
the Future Road alignment on the west, Irvine Boulevard on the
north, Myford Road on the east, and Bryan Avenue on the south.
Several land uses are proposed within this sector. The residential
uses include ~!d!!ii~iiiiiiiiiii~i~ and medium density which is i~i~ to be
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
located in eh~ -'~-'~'~:'~"~"~'"~' ~,,-~...~ ~:!~i~!!~i~i~::i::i~i~:~fi~i6:.~ of th~:~:~:~:~:~:ector.
Medium high residential development is to be situated along the
eastern boundary of the site encompassing the entire area between
Bryan Avenue and Irvine Boulevard ~ ~0-~crc -~ ~-~
~ii. ~ ~ ccnt~a~ lly i~~ to ~ ~--~ ~ ~ ~,,~ ....
~ ~ ~ ~ .-.-.......-...
~t ..... on. At the northeast corner of the sector, a i0 ~2~S~-acre
neighborhood commercial site has been Planned at the inter~:ction
of Irvine Boulevard and Myford Road, an important entry point into
the City from the east ~ -~ .... ~ ....
dcscr~d ~.~ ~°"~t~~ ~ 2.10 ~f ~ o~_~ .......................
.... ~ .... P i a n. A
~ ~AA~ ~ ........-...........v
............
neighborhood parks has ~ been generally located in the
the ~d~u~.~.~.~.~ med'~'~'~ ........ density residential development. The
precf~'~ ......... i~'~h~'i'~'h~'~'~'~bf this ~h~ park~~. ~- ~.~ to be determined as
:.:.:.:.:.:...:.:.....: ... :.:.....: ...... ~ ~ ....... ...
described in Sub~ection 2.8 .......... ~"f'"'""this S:'~ecif:'~:~':':':Plan.
The following polices apply to Sector 11:...
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 13
Acreage
ETSP Paqes 3-13 and 3-14
EAST TUSTIN STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Maximum
Land Use Density
Total
Allowable
Units
SECTOR ,1
125
Estate Density Residential
2 du/ac
Subtotal 125
SECTOR 2
74 Estate Density Residential
~ i~ii~i Low Density Residential
50 i~i~i Medium Low DenSity Residential
37.35 ~4~?~ Medium Density Residential
15 12~O ** Junior High School
2 du/ac
5 du/ac
10 du/ac
18 du/ac****
Subtotal 271 ~i~6116
-.:.:.:.: :.:.::: -
SECTOR 3
.6 i~ii~ Low Density Residential
0 8 i!ii0 ** Elementary School
: :.:.: :.:.:.:
5 du/ac
Subtotal 17 2ii2
:::::::::::::::
SECTOR 4
:::::.:::::-:::::::.
Estate Density Residential
2 du/ac
68+
Subtotal ~ ~ o ~i~ii~igi
:::::::::::::::::::::
SECTOR 5
98
18
Estate Density Residential
Low Density Residential
2 du/ac
5 du/ac
:.:.:.:,:.:,:.:
Subtotal 116
SECTOR 6
Subtotal 3 1. i~ii~i~i~i
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 14
SECTOR 7
97 Medium Density Residential
~4~ itit~O Medium High Density Residential
o 10 ** Elementary School
~ =n it!581 Golf Course
.u .~ %J
18 du/ac
25 du/ac
Subtotal ~ ~ii~!6
::::::::::::::::::::::
SECTOR 8
77
26
O 10' **
4 **
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Elementary School
4 du/ac 849
18 du/ac ~
Subtotal 117 i~?1;3
SECTOR 9
39-
Low Density Residential
5 du/ac
:::::::::::::::::::::::
Subtotal 39
SECTOR 10
46
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
5 du/ac
18 du/ac
Subtotal 71
SECTOR 11
55 ~:~ Medium High Density Residential 25 du/ac
4 ~ ** Neighborhood Park
...........
i0 ::~::3::: Neighborhood Commercial
:::::::::::::::
Subtotal 177
SECTOR 12
121 Mixed Use
Subtotal 121
7,236***
Ordinance 1150
Exhibit D
Page 15
Total allowable number of permitted units within a given
sector may be increased if a sector unit transfer occurs as
described in Subsection 2.1.
The precise acreage and locations of private and public
neighborhOod parks, elementary school and intermediate school
will be determined as part of the review of the Sector
Subdivision Maps as identified under Review Procedure
Subsection 1.5 and consistent with policies established in
Subsections 2.9 and 2.10 of the Specific Plan.
*** If the maximum allowable units in Tentative Tract Map No.
12345 are not constructed, the unconstructed units may be
transferred to the Specific Plan area.
**** Maximum density on Lot 11 of Tract 13627 shall be ten (10)
dwelling units per acre.
o This acreage figure is an estimated allocation for this land
use. If it changes, other land uses acreage allocations in
this sector may change. However, the total allowable units
for the sector will remain the same.
Total Allowable Units assumes that if a school and/or park
currently designated for this sector is not built in this
sector and that the acreage goes into residential use. If
these facilities are constructed, the land use area density
limitation precludes construction of the total allowable
sector units and such unbuilt units would be transferred to
another sector.
Ordinance
Exhibit D
Page 16
1150
(ETSP Page 3-47)
Ce
District
Estate
Low
Residential
Off-Street Parking
Spaces Covered Credit for
Required Assigned Guest/
Spaces/Unit Unassigned
~ 2 ~ 2 Car Garage 2 per unit
On-Street
P:rking
O~
1. Sector 8, 9, 10 2 2 Car Garage 2 per unit
2. Sector 2 2 2 Car Garage 2 per unit
Medium Low 2 2 Car Garage i!i ,-5 per unit
Medium & Medium High
1. Detached 2 2 Car Garage i~i ,-5 per unit
2. Attached
Studio 1.0 1 Carport (1)
1 Bedroom 1.5 1 Carport (1)
2 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
3 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
4 Bedroom 2.5 2 Carports (1)
3. Multiple Family (apartments)
Studio 1.0 1 Carport (1)
1 Bedroom 1.5 1 Carport (1)
2 Bedroom 2.0 ~ % Carport (1)
3 Bedroom 2.0 2 Carports (1)
4 Bedroom 2.5 2 Carports (1)
4. Patio Homes(2)
1-3 Bedrooms 2.0 2 Car Garage iii~ ,--5 per unit
4 Bedrooms 2.5 2 Car Garage ~i.l.i ,--5 per unit
(1)
Attached single family and multiple family developments shall provide a minimum of iii~ ,-2-5 per
unit open unassigned parking spaces for 4 or more dwelling units. If a two car enclosed
private garage is provided, a guest parking standard of iii~ '-~ open unassigned spaces per unit
shall apply.
(2)
Required guest parking for Patio Home products must be located within a 200 foot radius
measured from the nearest building frontage facing a street, drive or court of the designated
unit which the parking space is intended to serve.
ETSPAMEND.4
SENT BY PACKARD - HUGHES INTER�20 -95 , 9 490 , FINANCE UEP IMENI• (14 U44 otl254 2
DALE A KIKEN
2111 La Colina Drive
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705
November 17, 1995
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Re November 20, 1995 Hearing
public Flea ina Notice GPA 94 -001
Attn. Pamela Stoker
City Clerk
Dear Ms. Stoker
NOV 2 0 191
This letter is sent in response to your above - referenced Public Hearing
Notice. After vocal opposition by local residents to increasing traffic use, La
Colitis Drive and portions of Redhill Avenue were deleted from the Orange County
Mast r Plan of Arterial Highways (IMPAH"). The East Tustin Specific Plan has
cont mplated the use of La Colina Drive as a Master Plan Arterial. To date, we are
una are of any modification of the plan to accomodate the changed use of La
Coll a Drive.
Despite La Colina s deletion from the MPAH, we resident. in and around La
Coli a Drive continue to experience the attendant problems associated with
incr sing usage of our neighborhood street by regional commuters and the ever
urg oning density of Tustin Ranch Market Place Shoppers and new development
esid nts.
To my knowledge, the County of Orange has repeatedly sought cooperation
rom the City of Tustin in redesigning local traffic patterns to minimize the use of
a C line Drive. The City of Tustin has not cooperated. Instead, the City of
Tust has watched as automobiles line up on Northerly Tustin Ranch Road far
no d the left lane turn pocket awaiting the opportunity to turn left or Westerly
onto nine Boulevard. The insufficient turn pocket and lack of second left -hand
urn ant induce travelers to seek their route to Newport Avenue through La Colina
riv . The City of Tustin has further induced regional traffic use of La Colint by
rov ing a large left -hand turn pocket on Northbound Tustin Ranch at La Colina,
opt er with a fast cycling left -hand turn signal. During evening rush hour, I
outi ely see groups of 10 cart at a time making that turn and barreling toward the
top sign at Ranchwood, where a new traffic backup begins between Ranchwood
nd !frowning.
The permissive protective left -hand turn signal on Southbound Newport
von a at La Colina further induces regional traffic through our neighborhood.
SEAT BY PACKARD—HUGHES 1N1EKC iii
2U S y asHrn 9 r1NMN(s Vat' i Mall i-
Pamela Stocker, City Clerk
City of Tustin
November 18, 1995
Page 2
/14 sac UOL3,tr J
Additionally, poor design of the Newport Avenue - Old Irvine / Irvine Boulevard
intersections dissuades regional traffic and further induces usage of La Colina.
Once complete, Portola Parkway will funnel thousands of regional traffic
commuters to Tustin Ranch Road. Those travelers seeking the fastest route to
Newport Avenue, Seventeenth Street, the 55 Freeway or the 22 Freeway will again
find La Colina their first outlet.
The expanding and successful Tustin Ranch Market. Place is an increasing
attraction to regional customers, drawing more travelers through La Colina.
Any amendment or zoning changein and around our area should contemplate
the impact of noise, traffic and pollution upon our neighborhood. Mitigation
meaanres should be taken to minimize traffic use of La Colina, while maintaining
neighborhood access, induce utilization of Master Plan Arterials, and minimize the
deleterious impact of traffic upon our neighborhood. Specific stops should be
taken to provide disincentives for regional traffic use of La Colina.
I hope that these issues will be thoroughly contemplated and that specific
measures will be taken to minimize the impact of these land use changes upon our
neighborhood.
Thank you.
DAR /sf
Very ruly you