Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 CUP 94-023 DR 94-030 9-18-95NO. 1 9-18-95 ATE: SEPTEMBER' 18, 1995 Inter-'Corn TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SOBJEC~ AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-023 & DESIGN REVIEW 94-030 (MCDONALD'S) RECOMMENDATION Pleasure of the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT There are no fiscal impacts associated with this project, as.this is an owner initiated project. The applicant has paid application fees to recover the cost of processing this application. BACKGROUND On January 23, 1995, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit and Design Review to establish a fast-food McDonald's restaurant with drive-thru service on a one acre vacant pad within the Costco/K-Mart Center located at the southeast corner of Bryan Avenue and Tustin Ranch Road. On February 21, 1995, the City Council held a public hearing on an appeal of the Planning Commission decision. The City Council approved the construction of the proposed facility, subject to the conditions in Resolution No. 95-21 (Attachment A). The applicant has completed construction of the restaurant, with the exception of the berming and screen walls required by conditions of approval for the project. Conditions contained in Resolution 95-21 require the wall and earthen berm to be 4.5 feet in height adjacent to the drive-thru lane on Bryan Avenue and Tustin Ranch Road. The applicant is now requesting an amendment to the conditions of approval to modify the berm landscaping and to reduce the height of the wall and berm from 4.5 feet to approximately 3 feet along Bryan Avenue, 3 feet-8 inches around the corner and a 3.5 foot earthen berm along Tustin Ranch Road (Attachment B). It is necessary for the City Council to review this requested amendment (rather than the Planning Commission) since the City Council was the final approving authority for the original project and that the applicant is requesting amendment to conditions which were added by the City Council during the appeal process. City Council Report Amendment to CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 September 18, 1995 Page 2 K-Mart is located south of the McDonald's restaurant and Costco is located to the east. Existing multiple-family residential uses are located across Tustin Ranch Road to the west and across Bryan Avenue to the north. There are four other vacant tenant pads within the Costco/K-Mart Center: two that are adjacent to Bryan Avenue, and two that are immediately east of K-Mart. The East Tustin Specific Plan requires that opaque screening of parking areas abutting arterial highways be a minimum height of 30" (2.5 feet) and a maximum of 42" (3.5 feet) in height. The screening around the perimeter of drive-thru lane was not required by the East Tustin Specific Plan, but rather proposed to minimize potential impacts associated with the drive-thru facility as part of the City review of the conditional use permit. A public hearing notice identifying the time, date and location of the public hearing for the proposal was published in the Tustin News. Property owners within 300 feet of the site were notified by mail of the hearing and notices were posted on site, at City Hall and the Police Department. A copy of this staff report and the agenda for this meeting have been provided to the applicant and property owner. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The existing restaurant is located on the northwest portion Of the site with the drive-thru lane wrapping around the east, north and west sides of the building. Vehicles enter the drive-thru facility near the southwest corner of the building, order and pick-up their items along the north side of the building (adjacent to Bryan Avenue) and exit past the west side of the restaurant. As originally proposed, the Planning Commission approved conditions to require a 3.5 foot high screen wall and earthen berm around the perimeter of the drive-thru lane. In response to significant concerns expressed by adjacent residents during the appeal process, the.applicant proposed to increase the screen wall and berm to a height of 4.5 feet to minimize noise and light impacts associated with the drive-thru facility. City Council Report Amendment to CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 September 18, 1995 Page 3 currently, the eastern 20 feet of the wall along Bryan Avenue has been completed to the required height of 4.5 feet (54") which screens the entry lane of the driVe-thru facility and effectively blocks headlights from vehicles in the drive-thru lane facing the Sevilla development across Bryan Avenue to the north. As presently built, the westerly 120 feet of wall adjacent and parallel to Bryan Avenue is approximately 3.2 feet (38") in height along the ordering and pick-up windows. The screen wall around the corner of the drive-thru lane (the western 50 feet in length) has been constructed at approximately 3.7 feet (44") in height. The wall is presently unfinished with a temporary wood "cap" pending Council decision on this application. The existing wood "cap" would be replaced with a masonry "trim cap", if the applicant's request is approved. An additional 22" in height would be needed for the Bryan Avenue wall to satisfy the original conditions of approval. The landscaped berm along Tustin Ranch Road is at a height of 3.5 feet and would need to be increased 12 inches to. meet the original conditions. The proposed revisions suggest that the remainder of the wall and berm would vary in height from 3.2 feet to 3.7 feet in height. The applicant is concerned that a 4.5 foot high solid barrier will pose a security hazard to the restaurant and customers, may be aesthetically unpleasant and might become an easy target for graffiti (see Attachment B). The applicant is also requesting to modify the landscaping proposed along the Tustin Ranch Road edge of the drive-thru lane to include grass sod on the berm and to eliminate two eucalyptus trees and one 24-inch.box canary island pine tree. The existing trees and shrubs adjacent to the sidewalk would remain. The Police Department has reviewed the amendment and believes that it is important for police surveillance from perimeter streets to view in-store customers above the waist, cashiers and occupants of vehicles in the drive-thru facility. They would support maintaining the wall along Bryan Avenue at 3.2 feet in height and that around the curved portion of the drive-thru (behind the corner) additional shrubs could be planted to a height of 4.5 feet. In addition, the berm along Tustin Ranch Road could be increased to 4.5 feet and still provide the necessary visibility. City Council Report Amendment to CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 September 18, 1995 Page 4 During the Planning Commission and City Council hearings on this item, neighboring residents voiced concern with potential noise impacts associated with the drive-thru facility and the potential impacts from lights from the building, signs and car headlights. Several conditions of approval were incorporated into this project by the City Council to address these concerns, as follows: Relocate the building 10 feet to the east in order to provide additional berming and landscaping along Tustin Ranch Road; Increase the height of the berm on Tustin Ranch Road to 4.5 feet in height; Signs and building lights on the west and north elevation will be turned off a closing time; Increase the height of the screen wall along Bryan Avenue and at the corner to 4.5 feet; .Provide landscaped berm on the street side of the screen wall on Bryan Avenue to increase the visible landscaped area and minimize the amount of visible wall. These additional conditions were included in the project to minimize the potential impacts identified as a concern bY the surrounding residents. With the current height of the screen wall/berm, the headlights of vehicles waiting in the drive-thru lane are visible from off-site to motorists travelling eastbound on Bryan Avenue and northbound on Tustin Ranch Road. The proposed modification to the landscaping on the berm along Tustin Ranch Road would replace shrubs with lawn area. The lawn is proposed to extend from the drive-thru lane across the top of the berm to within approximately 5 feet of sidewalk. The plan proposes that oleander shrubs and eucalyptus trees be maintained at the edge of the sidewalk. While lawn area on the inside slope of the berm facing the drive-thru and restaurant is consistent with other open space areas on the site, the lawn on the right-of-way side of the berm is inconsistent with the landscape theme for the center and existing adjacent landscaping. City Council Report Amendment to CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 September 18, 1995 Page 5 Should the Council wish to approve the requested amendment, the following cOnditions of approval could be added in order to minimize potential impacts: ® Additional shrubs shall be installed at the top of the berm, adjacent to the screen wall at the corner and shall be encouraged to grow to a height of approximately one-foot above the wall. ~ The berm located between Tustin Ranch Road and the drive-thru lane shall be increased to 4.5-feet in height above the drive- thru lane. · Additional shrubs and trees shall be installed on the street side of berm to the top of the berm with a row of shrubs on top of the berm. Lawn is permitted on the side of the berm facing the restaurant. Ail trees along Tustin Ranch Road and Bryan Avenue shall be planted consistent with the approved landscaping plans for the project. No modifications to the number, location or size of trees shall be approved as part of this amendment. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS During review of the original project, it was determined that environmental issues relating to this project were previously addressed by Environmental Impact Report 85-2 (as subsequently approved with supplements and addenda). Also, appropriate mitigating measures identified in EIR 85-2 were included as conditions of approval for the project. Staff reviewed the proposed amendments with regard to the original initial study (Attachment C) and determined that the initial study adequately addresses the project and that no further environmental review is .required. Should the City Council wish to approve this request to modify the conditions of approval, the Council would need to recertify that the program EIR is adequate to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. City Council Report Amendment to CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 September 18, 1995 Page 6 CONCLUSION The proposed'amendment will change some of the conditions that were originally added to the project to address the concerns of~ surrounding residents. Should the City Council wish to approve the amendment to the conditions of approval to reduce.the height of the screen wall and berm, staff has identified some potential conditions of approval for consideration. Upon direction from the 'Council, staff would be able to prepare any confirming resolutions requested for consideration at the October 2, 1995 meeting. Sara J.~ Pashalides AssociaVte Planner Assistant City Manager Attachments: Location Map Site Plan Attachment A - City Council Resolution No. 95-21 Attachment B - Letter of Amendment Attachment C - Initial Study LE ,ATi 0 N MAP,._?" ,( ? / H "2 N V ~1 N I lC---3I] I o 1. QVOU HONVU NIIS~I ~nN~^v N'¢A~ pu~ HOr~v'd NLLSi'U. ~u~Jn~seti sPl~UO(3OiM Ee e._· 10 11 12 13 - 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 RESOLUTION NO. 95-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-023 AND DESIGN REVIEW 94-030 TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,871-SQUARE FOOT FAST-FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU SERVICE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TUSTIN RANCH ROAD AND BRYAN AVENUE ON LOT 1 OF TRACT 1-4610. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: A, Be That proper applications for conditional Use Permit 94-023 and Design Review 94-030 were filed on behalf of McDonald's Corporation requesting approval of a 2,871-square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-thru service at the southeast corner of Tustin Ranch Road and Bryan Avenue on Lot 1 of Tract 14610. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said applications on January 23, 1995 by the Planning Commission, and on February 21, 1995 by the City Council. C · Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Municipal Code, the Council finds that the location, size, architectural features and general appearance of Design Review 93-005 will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole. In making such findings, the Commission has considered at least the folloWing items: 1. Height, bulk and area of buildings. 2. Setbacks and site planning. 3. Exterior materials and colors. 4. Type and pitch of roofs. . Size and spacing of windows, doors and other openings. o Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television antennae. ATTACHMENT A 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 95-21 Page 2 De . Landscaping, parking area design and traffic circulation. · · Location, height and standards of exterior illumination. - Location and appearance of equipment located outside of an enclosed structure. 10. Location and method of refuse storage. 11. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood. 12. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and- public thoroughfares. 13. Proposed signage. 14. Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council. That establishment, maintenance, and operation of drive-through service will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, evidenced by the following findings: i · On-site traffic concerns have generally been mitigated through the separation of the drive-through aisle from the on-site parking. The potential for pedestrian/vehicle conflicts has been mitigated through the construction of two internally illuminated signs reading, "pedestrian crossing" at the crosswalk on the west side of the restaurant. Further, the textured brick pavers proposed for the crosswalk surface will visually and textually alert drivers to the crosswalk. 10 11 12 13 - 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 Resolution No. 95-21 Page 3 E · 3. Off-site traffic concerns caused by the number of vehicles waiting in the drive aisle to enter the queuing aisle during peak hours have generally been mitigated through the proposed speed of service, aided by the location and design of the menu order window, pay window, pick-up window, and length of drive-thru lane. · The use will not create a noise nuisance as the proposed loudspeaker will be used infrequently and shall conform to the Tustin Noise Ordinance and shall be designed so as not to impact adjacent commercial properties. · The fast food restaurant would be open from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.-, Sunday through Thursday, 6:00 a.m. to 12 midnight, Friday and Saturday, compatible with other uses in the center. · · The project, as conditioned, would provide adequate screening around the drive-thru aisle through the use of earthen berms and masonry walls to ensure that vehicle movements and headlights do not visually impact the adjacent streets or surrounding properties. The project, as conditioned, would ensure that there would be continuous screening at the corner of Tustin Ranch Road and Bryan Avenue, by relocating the pedestrian path approximately 15 feet to the south. · The use would not create offensive odors as the proposed operation does not utilize a char-broiler method for cooking. That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the proposed use will not be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, nor to the general welfare of the City of Tustin as stated above. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 95-21 Page 4 Fe That the project has been reviewed for consistency with the 'Air Quality Sub-Element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent or has been conditioned to be consistent with ~he Air Quality Sub-Element. II. The City Council hereby approves Conditional Use Permit 94-023 and Design Review 94-030 allowing construction of a 2,871-square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-thru service at the southeast corner of Tustin Ranch Road and Bryan Avenue on Lot 1 of Tract 14610, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A, attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 21st day of February, 1995. ry E. Wynn, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) THOMAS R. ~2~RELLI MAYOR SS MARY E. WYNN, 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. 95-21 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 21st day of February, 1995, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: SALTARELLI, POTTS, DOYLE, THOMAS, WORLEY COUNCILMEMBER NOES: NONE COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED' NONE E. Wynn, .City Clerk 10 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 ~20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-023 AND DESIGN REVIEW 94-030 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 95-21 GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date-stamped February 21, 1995, on file with~the Community Development Department, as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development Department in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director may also approve minor modifications to the plans if such modifications are determined to be consistent with the approved plans. (1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.3 Design Review and Conditional Use Permit approval shall become null and void unless all building permits are issued within eighteen (18) months of the date of this Exhibit and substantial construction is underway. (1) 1.4 The applicant and property owner shall sign and return an Agreement to Conditions Imposed form prior to issuance of building permits. (1) 1.5 The applicant shall hold and defend the City of Tustin harmless for all claims and liabilities arising out of the City's approval of the entitlement process for this project. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY (2) CEQA MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS (3) . UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (4) DESIGN REVIEW (7) PC/CC POLICY *** EXCEPTIONS Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 2 PLAN SUBMITTAL 2.1 At building plan check the following shall be submitted: (3) A. Construction plans, structural calculations, and Title 24 energy calculations. Requirements of the Uniform Building Codes, State Handicap and Energy Requirements shall be complied with as approved by the Building official. (2) B. Preliminary technical detail and plans for all (3) utility installations including cable TV, telephone, gas, water and electricity. Additionally, a note on plans shall be included stating that no field changes shall be made without corrections submitted to and approved by the Building Official. (2) C. Final grading and specifications consistent with the (3) site plan and landscaping plans, prepared by a registered civil engineer for approval of the Community Development Department and based on the Orange County Surveyor's bench mark datum. (2) D. A precise soils engineering report provided by a (3) soils engineer within the previous twelve (12) months as determined by the Building Official. (4) 2.2 Architectural plans submitted for plan check shall bear the approval of the project architect for the center. (2) 2.3 Prior to issuance of any bUilding permits, all requirements of the TR/TDM Program for the Center shall be satisfied, subject to review and approval of the Public Works/Engineering Division. OPERATIONAL STANDARDS (5) 3.1 The hours of operation for the restaurant and drive-thru service shall be limited to 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 6:00 a.m. to 12 midnight, Friday and Saturday. (5) 3.2 Ail loading vehicles shall be parked in designated areas and loading shall be completed during non-peak hours. Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 3 (4) 3.3 The use of the trash compactor shall be limited to those hours between 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. (4) 3.4 No Loitering signs shall be installed on the subject property with details and locations of said signs to be approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. (4) 3.5 The hours of operation of the outdoor Playland shall be limited to between 8:00 a.m. to 9~00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday. (4) 3.6 Ail exterior building illumination on the west and north elevations of ~the restaurant shall be installed on a timer so that the illumination is turned off at the closing, time of the establishment. (4) 3.7 Decorative type trash receptacles shall be permanently located on the site: adjacent to restaurant entrance/exits, in the playland and parking areas. The design and location shall be indicated on the construction plans-and subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department. (4) 3.8 In the event the applicant wishes to install a speaker order board, said order board shall be located on the east side of the proposed building, subject to the approval by the Community Development Department as to the exact location and completion of a noise study prior to any speaker box installation. Said noise study must validate that there will be no negative· decibel level impacts on residential property across Tustin Ranch Road to the west and across Bryan Avenue to the north. The applicant shall deposit the full cost of said noise study and said consultant shall be selected at the sole discretion of the City of Tustin. SITE AND BUILDING CONDITIONS (4) 4.1 Provide exact details for exterior doors and window types on construction plans. Door and windows shall be consistent with design for the center. (4) 4.2 Ail mechanical and electrical fixtures and equipment shall be adequately and decoratively screened. The Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 4 screen shall be considered as an element of the overall design of the project and shall either blend with the architectural design of the building or be integrated into the landscape design. A dense type of landscaping could be utilized for screening. (1) 4.3 Ail exterior accent colors to be used shall be subject to review approval of the Community Development Department and shall be consistent with samples provided on the color board. All exterior treatments shall be coordinated with regard to color, materials and detailing and clearly~ noted on submitted construction plans and elevations. (4) 4.4 Provide plans and details for all lighting fixtures. Note locations on site plan and building elevations. One footcandle of light throughout the site, parking lot, drive-thru aisle and adjacent to the building, is required. Fixtures on building and in playland shall be of a decorative design. Freestanding fixtures in the parking area shall match existing fixtures in the Center. (4) 4.5 Ail exposed metal flashing or trim shall be painted to match the building. (1) 4.6 Note on final plans that a six-foot-high chain linked fence shall be installed around the site prior to building construction stages. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the site for construction vehicles. (1) 4.7 Exterior ( 4 ) indicate elevations of the building shall any fixtures or equipment to be located on the roof of the building and equipment heights. The building parapet shall be an integral part of the building design, and shall screen all roof mounted equipment. All roof-mounted equipment and vents shall be a minimum of six inches below the top of the parapet.' (4) 4.8 Ail roof access shall be provided from the inside of the building. (4) 4.9 No exterior downspouts shall be permitted. Ail roof drainage shall utilize interior piping, but may have exterior outlets at base of building. Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 5 (4) 4.10 Six (6) inch continuous concrete curbing shall be used through the parking lot, drive-thru aisle and adjacent to sidewalks, except where required to satisfy handicap access requirements. (4) 4.11 Roof scuppers shall be installed with a special lip device so that .overflow drainage will not stain the walls. (4) 4.12 Indicate the location of all exterior mechanical equipment. Gas and electric meters shall either be enclosing in the building or boxed behind a screen wall designed consistent with the main building. (4) 4.13 Note on plans that outdoor storage shall be prohibited. (4) 4.14 The pedestrian walkway and drive-thru crosswalk shall be relocated approximately 15 feet south of the proposed location, to be perpendicular to Tustin Ranch Road right- of-way in order to ensure adequate screening of the drive-thru lane at the intersection of Tustin Ranch Road and Bryan Avenue. The walkway shall be designed in compliance with ADA, handicap accessibility requirements. (4) 4.15 The decorative columns on the south and east elevations of the building should be increased in depth 6 to 12 inches, to be consistent with design details of buildings within the Center, subject to final approval by the Community Development Department. (4) 4.16 The building and drive-thru facility shall be shifted ten to fifteen feet to the east in order to provide additional berming and landscaping along the Tustin Ranch Road frontage, subject to the approval of the Community Development Department. NOISE (1) 5.1 Ail construction operations, including engine warm-up, deliveries of materials and equipment, shall be subject to the provisions of the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance, as amended, and may take place only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction activities may be permitted outside of these limitations if the Building Official determines that said activity is of urgent necessity, or finds that the activity will not Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 6 adversely impact adjacent properties or the health, safety and welfare of the community. No Sunday or Holiday construction shall be permitted. (1) 5.2 Construction hours shall be clearly posted on the project site to the satisfaction of the Building Official. (4) 5.3 Intercom speaker boxes and equipment for drive-thru facilities shall be subject to the provisions of the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance and shall be located to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department staff so that no noise is directed toward adjoining businesses and properties. LANDSCAPING, GROUNDS AND HARDSCAPE ELEMENTS (1) 6.1 Submit at plan check complete detailed landscaping and irrigation plans for all landscaping areas consistent with adopted City of Tustin Landscaping and Irrigation Submittal Requirements and consistent with the landscaping concept plan. Said plans shall be consistent with the existing landscape palette for the center. Provide summary table applying indexing identification to plant materials in their actual location. The plant table shall list botanical and common names, sizes, spacing, actual location and quantity of the plant materials proposed. Show planting and berming details, soil preparation, staking, etc. The irrigation plan shall show location and control of backflow prevention devices (screened from view from right-of-way and on-site by shrubs), pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing and coverage. Details for all equipment shall be provided. Show all property lines on the landscaping and irrigation plan, public right-of-way areas, sidewalk widths, parkway areas, existing landscaping and walls and proposed new wall locations. The Department of Community Development may request minor substitutions of plant materials or request additional sizing or quantity. Note on plans that adequacy of coverage of landscaping and irrigation materials is subject to field inspection at project completion by the Department of Community Development. (7) 6.2 The submitted landscaping plans at plan check shall reflect the following requirements: Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 7 ae Shrubs shall be a minimum of 5 gallon size and shall be spaced a minimum of 8 feet on center When intended as screen planting. Bo Ground cover shall be planted between 8 to 12 inches on center. Ce When 1 gallon plant sizes are used, the spacing may vary according to materials used. De Ail plant materials shall be installed in a healthy vigorous condition typical to the species and landscaping must be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. This will include but not be limited to trimming, mowing, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing, regular watering, or replacement of diseased or dead'plants. (5) 6.3 Ail landscaping should be kept below the window areas to maintain visibility. (4) 6.4 The landscaping and site plans shall be modified where applicable, to include the following items: ne A row of 5 gallon dwarf oleanders or other alternative shrub shall be provided at the southeast corner of the building, between the turf area and the service sidewalk. Be Boston Ivy proposed along the screen wall along the outside of the drive aisle shall be eliminated and replaced with creeping .fig or other alternative vines consistent with the City's Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines and, where possible, bougainvillea or other alternative vine~ shall be planted as accent landscaping along the screen wall adjacent to the drive-thru lane. Ce Pursuant to Section 3.8.3I of the ETSP, an opaque screen of not less than 30 inches nor more than 42 inches shall be provided to screen the parking area located at the southwest corner of the subject site, adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road. The site plan indicates the 4 stalls are proposed to be at an elevation of 92 feet and the adjacent earthen berm is at an elevation of 93 feet. An additional opaque screen (wall or berm) shall be provided to Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 8 reach an elevation of 94.5 feet adjacent to the west side of the four proposed parking spaces. De The existing masonry wall located north of the drive-thru lane along the Bryan Avenue frontage shall be relocated to be adjacent to the drive-thru aisle and increased in height, from the easternmost edge of the drive-thru lane to the western terminus of the wall, in order to provide a solid screen 4.5 feet above the finished grade of the drive-thru aisle. E · The screen wall proposed around the northwest corner of the subject site shall be relocated to be closer to the curb of the drive-thru lane in order to avoid the removal of the existing olive trees at this intersection. In addition, the height of this wall shall be increased to provide 4.5 feet of vertical screening above the. elevation of the drive-thru lane. F· An earthen berm, sCreen wall, or combination thereof as determined necessary, shall be provided along the west side of the drive-thru aisle adjacent to Tustin Ranch Road (approximately 110 feet in length from the southern end of the proposed corner screen wall to the southern terminus of the drive-thru lane, which is north of the required screening noted in Condition 6.4.C.) to provide 4.5 feet~of vertical screening above the elevation of the drive-thru lane. The final design and landscaping treatment of the berm shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. G, A landscaped earthen berm shall be provided adjacent to the 4.5 foot screen wall on the north side of the drive-thru lane on the street side. The final design and landscaping treatment of the berm shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. (1) 6.5 Ail landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy condition such that all plant materials are evenly cut, evenly edged, free of bare or brown spots, free of debris, weeds or dead vegetation. Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 9 SIGNS (4) 7.1 Business identification wall signs, including logos, shall comply with the following standards: a · Tenant identification shall be limited to a maximum of 240 square feet aggregate copy area allocated as desired among up to four building elevations. Any deviation in excess of that shall be approved by the Director of the Community Development Department. (4) 7.2 Ail incidental signs for this project including entry, exit, yield and handicap signs, shall be designed consistent with such signage used elsewhere in the center, subject to.review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. (4) 7.3 No sign component shall flash, blink or be otherwise animated. Such animation is strictly prohibited. (4) 7.4 Two internally illuminated "Pedestrian Crossing" signs shall be installed adjacent to the drive-thru: one on the north side of' the building adjacent to the pick-up window and the other on the west side of the building, next to the textured pedestrian walkway. *** 7.5 Ail exterior illuminated signs shall be installed on a timer so that the illumination is turned off at the closing time of the establishment. (4) 7.6 The sign copy on the proposed tower signs shall have an opaque background, except for the "M" logo. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (5) 8.1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit for approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant run-off. This WQMP shall identify: the structural and non-structural measures specified detailing implementation of BMPs whenever they are applicable to Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 10 the project; the assignment of long-term maintenance responsibilities (specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessee, etc.); and, reference to the location(s) of structural BMPs. FIRE DEPARTMENT (5) 9.1 Prior to installation, plans for an approved fire- suppression system for the protection of commercial-type cooking equipment shall be submitted to the Fire Chief for approval. (5) 9.2 Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, street improvement plans with fire lanes shown shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Chief. Indicate the locations of red curbing and signage. Provide a drawing of the proposed signage with the height, stroke and color of lettering and the contrasting background color. (5) 9.3 Prior to the issuance of any building permi'ts, construction details for any emergency access gate shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Chief. Contact the Orange County Fire Department at (714) 744-6623 for a copy of the "GUidelines for Fire Department Emergency Access." (5) 9.4 The following notes shall be provided on the site plan: ae Fire Department Final Inspection Required. Schedule inspection 2 days in advance. Phone (714) 832-1011. Be Locations and classification of extinguisher to be determined by the fire inspector. Ce Storage, dispensing or use of any flammable and combustible liquids, flammable and compressed gasses and other hazardous materials shall comply with Uniform Fire Code Regulations. D. Building(s) not approved for high piled combustible storage. Materials in closely packed piles shall not exceed 15 feet in height, 122 feet on pallets or in racks and 6 feet for tires, plastics and some flammable liquids if high stock piling, comply with UFC, Art. 81 and NFPAS Std. 231, 231C and 231D. Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 11 Ee Plans of modifications to or new fire protection, detector or alarm system(s) shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. FEES (1) 10.1 Prior to issuance of any permits, payment shall be made of all required fees, as may be in effect at the time of permit issuance, including, but not limited to: ae Ail applicable plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department, based on the most current schedule, as may be amended prior to permit issuance. Be New development.fees to the Community Development Department in the amount of $.10 per square foot or as may be amended prior to permit issuance. Ce School facilities fees to the Tustin Unified School District, subject to any agreement reached and executed between the District and applicant. D. Sewer and water connection fees to the Irvine Ranch Water District, and E · Major thoroughfare and bridge fees to the Tustin Public Works Department in the amount of $2.84 per square foot of floor area, or as may be amended prior to permit issuance. *** 10.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $25.00 (twenty five dollars) pursuant to AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statues of 1990, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour'period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the approval for the project granted herein shall be considered automatically null and void. Exhibit A Resolution No. 95-21 CUP 94-023 and DR 94-030 Page 12 In addition, should 'the Department of Fish and Game reject the Certificate of Fee Exemption filed with the Notice of Determination and require payment of fees, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, within forty-eight (48) hour of notification, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $1,250 (one thousand, two hundred fifty dollars) pursuant to AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statues of 1990. If-this fee is imposed, the subject project shall not be operative, vested or final unless and until the fee is paid. July 31, 1995 TO The City Council of the City of Tustin Re: Block Wall and Berm for McDonald's Drive Thru, 2452 Bryan Avenue One of the conditions imposed by City Council during the final approval of McDonald's plans, increased the height of the block wall and berm around the drive thru to 54". The original approval by staff and Planning Commission called for a wall (as I recollect) that met basic city requirements of 36", to prevent lights from cars in the drive thru lane from impacting neighboring homes. Now that the wall is built, a portion of it is presently at 54". We can now evaluate its effect, which is highly undesirable. For some very significant reasons, it is respectfully requested that the City Council re-evaluate this issue, and approve a wall height that will met or exceed city standards. Some of the major ~considerations are: SECURITY A 54" high wall will conceal most of the three drive thru windows, as well as the occupants of the cars in the drive thru lane, from the street. This provides an opportunity and an invitation to an armed robber (who favor drive thru cashiers) to accomplish an robbery while being completely concealed from vehicles, including police, passing by on Bryan Avenue. A high wall provides excellent cover for anyone who wishes to hide behind the wall while waiting for an opportunity to attack a customer(s) in the drive thru lane, or rob the cashier. All of these activities are free to take place without being seen from Bryan Avenue. The concealment of this area from the street makes it impossible for police or anyone else cruising by to observe the activities therein. CUSTOMER DISCOMFORT The higher, 4 1/2 foot wall creates a tunnel effect, that is discomforting to many people. Once entering the drive thru lane, the occupants of most vehicles can not see out, and even can not see past the "end of the tunnel" where it curves around from Bryan Avenue to Tustin Ranch Road. This can have a claustrophic effect, particularly whenever the drive thru lane is full of cars. I am concerned about the atmosphere this creates, particularly at night where there are female customers, especially those with children. Most women, nowadays, don't like being confined within an area obstructed from public view at night. APPEARANCE A 54" wall would be seven feet above its foundation. The original plans call for sloping the landscape area from the sidewalk up to one foot from the top of the wall. Although this ATTACHMENT B O~nnted Cn ~ec)'c!ed Paper requirement may have been relaxed, any slope greater than 3:1 will result in (1) recycled water runoff carrying mud and soil across the public sidewalk, and (2) a visually offensive high block wall out of proportion to the landscaping and the building beyond it. The present slope to the wall, as graded and landscaped, will not present any problems. GRAFFITI A tall block wall is a temptation for graffiti artists. We do not need targets for this criminal activity. I propose to comply with the standards of the City of Tustin, and provide a wall and landscaped berm that will be no less than 36", but will actually vary from 38", then up to 44" for that curved portion along Tustin Ranch Road. The berm will have a 5:1 slope, and will be landscaped with lawn, and oleander ~shrubs, along with the specified trees, and will generally be 42" above the drive thru lane. I concur completely with the concept that neighboring homes, both across Bryan Avenue and Tustin Ranch Road be protected from headlights of cars in the drive thru lane. I have measured many cars and mini-vans, and have found that the top of their headlights generally does not exceed 27". I am confident that a wall and berm of 38" to 44" will adequately protect these homes from headlight glare, as was the original objective. Your favorable consideration of this proposal will be appreciated. Respect fu 1 ly,~;~ ~Ja'mes H. Frisbie ~wner-Operator COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (7149 573-3105 INITIAL STUDY BACKGROUND Name of Proponent Address and Phone Number of Proponent I Date Check List Subdued ]- 3 - ~ Y Agency Requiring Check List Tame of Proposal, if applicable ENVYRONMENTAL 13{PACTS 1. Earth. Will the proposal result'in: 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 feature_4? 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 beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river _ or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? YES MAYBE NO' LJ ATTACHMENT C g. Exposure of people or propervg to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emission or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors7 c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperatures, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh water? YES MAYBE [-!' bo Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff7. c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? eo 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 wa~es? 4. Plant Li,%. \,~11 the proposal result in: 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? Animal Life. Will the proposal result in.' 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 numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? YES MAYBE NO 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? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Lieht and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate or use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any nOnrenewable natural resource? . 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substartces (including, but nor 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? 7-1 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or. ~owth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. W'rll the proposal result in: 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? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e.. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 1 5. Ener~ov. \~,511 the proposal result in: 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? YES MAYBE NO ":"71 '"VI" 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial - alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems7 c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. Solid Waste. Will the proposal create additional solid waste requiring - disposal by the City? Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 20. Recreation. V~qll the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 21. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in.' ao b.. The alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? -. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to-a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? c. The potential to cause a physical change which wOuld affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? YES MAYBE NO 22. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range ora rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important-examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?. -. b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brieg- definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future). 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 of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION SEE ATTACHMENT A YES MAYBE NO ATTACt{MENT A PART III: DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION INITIAL STUDY RESPONSES CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-023 DESIGN REVIEW 94-030 Backqround The purpose of this initial' study is to desermine if EIR 85-2, which was previously~certified on March 17, 1986, and subsequently amended with supplements and addenda for the East Tustin Specific Plan, adequately addresses any potential impacts of the proposed project and; therefore, can serve as a Program EIR for this project. This proposal is covered by a previously certified program EIR (85- 2) for the ETSP. Section 15150 of the CEQA guidelines permits an EIR or other environmental document to incorporate by reference all or portions of another document containing information relevant to that EIR. Therefore, in referencing EIR 85-2, this Initial Study hereby incorporates East Tustin Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report 85-2, City of Tustin, December 1985 (State Clearinghouse #85052217), as well as the Technical Apoendices, Response to Comments, Supplement (November 15, 1986) and Addenda (May 1989). The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify any conditions affecting the project site which were not addressed by the program EIR. On February 10, 1992, the Tustin'Planning Commission approved Tract 14610 and.Design Review 91-55 for the Master Site Plan for a 274, 175-square foot retail center known as the Tustin Annex. The approved development consists of two major retail tenants or "anchors", with a combined floor area of 238,055-square feet, and five individual tenant pads. An Environmental Determination recertifying Final Environmental Impact Report 85-2, as adequate to serve as the program EIR for the proposed shopping center project, was approved and filed. The applicant, McDonald's Corporation, now proposes to constrUct a third component of the previously approved shopping center, a drive-thru restaurant. The restaurant will be approximately 2,'900 square feet in size to be located on an approximate one acre site within the Tustin Annex Shopping Center. The previously approved Master Site Plan established site entrances, building locations, parking area layout and design theme for the entire center. The current proposal is for the'architectural design of one of the pad buildings of the retail/commercial center. In addition, a conditional use permit is requested to permin the establishment of a drive-thru restaurant. The site, located in Sector 12 of the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) area, is designated Mixed Use. A variety of land uses are - Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 2 - in the vicinity. To the north, across Bryan Avenue, are multiple family residences. Residential development is also to the west, across Tustin Ranch Road. The commercial development (Costco and K-Mart) of the Tustin Annex are located to the east and south. The pr0pe~ty is .legally identified as Lot 1 of Tract 14610. EIR 85-2 identified several impact categories where a Statement of Overriding Considerafion was adopted by the City for the entire ETSP area. For the purposes of this initial study check list, these items have been checked "Yes" Mitigation measures identified in the EIR to minimized the impacts that would be applicable to this project have been identified. EIR 85-2 also identified several impact categories where impacts could be lessened to a level of insignificance with the imposition of mitigation measures. For the purposes of this'initial study check~ list, these items have been checked "No" and the mitigation measures identified in the EIR that would be. applicable to this project have been identified. Potential impact categories in EIR 85-2 not identified to have a potential impact have been check "No" and were reviewed to ensure that no new impacts would be created by the project. Since the Specific Plan included a variety of uses, and this project is a relatively small scale commercial project some of the impact. categories are not applicable. 1. EARTH Items B, and C - "Yes": The project site is within the ETSP area and is primarily flat. The site has been mass graded in accordance with Tract 14610. Minor grading will be required to prepare the site for construction. Applicable conditions of approval will accommodate the restaurant and drive-thru and incorporate mitigation measures identified in the certified EIR 85-2. Items A, D, E, F, and G~- "No": The project site is within the Specific Plan area for which the certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the necessary grading activity that would occur in order to accommodate the various types of development and the resultant change to existing landform and topography of the area. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2 and were implemented during mass grading of Tract 14610. Additional conditions of approval related to construction activities will be added to'this project. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 3 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitication/Monitorinq Recruired: A detailed soils engineering report and grading plans for the site are required as a condition of approval to ensure that all grading activities on the site minimize the grading impacts, in addition, all structures will be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. . AIR Item A - ',Maybe": The program EIR finds that development within the Specific Plan will result in an incremental degradation of air quality in conjunction with other.past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Since this project alone is relatively small in scale and ~will not generate a significant amount of air pollutant emissions, the impacts will not be significant. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared to address necessary compromises for the overall benefit of the Specific Plan area and region. Conditions of approval will be required for the project to meet all applicable mitigation measures, as required by the certified EIR 85-2. Items B, and C "No"- The development of a 2,900 square foot restaurant and drive-thru is within the Specific Plan area covered by the program EIR. The certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to air quality. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2 and this proposal has incorporated those measures related to air quality -into either the submitted plans or will be' included in 'the conditions of approval, for the subject project. Sources- Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Recuired- Construction activity dust generation shall be reduced throuc¼~.. ~=~.'~lar_-c~ watering as Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 4 required by the SCAQMD Rule 403. Additionally, applicable mitigation measures encouraging use of alternative transportation methods have been incorporated into the Tustin Annex Master Plan. All measures identified in certified. EIR 85-2, as appii~able, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. ~ o WATER Items B, C and F - "Yes": This project site is within the ETSP area for which the certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to surface runoff, drainage flows, water quality and water percolation. The impacts associated with this Design Review are no greater than those previously evaluated in the EIR 85- 2. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the plan's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. The certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to water quality. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to water quality into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval for the subject. project. Items A, D, E, G, H, and I - "No": The project site is within the Specific Plan area. The certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to water quality. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to water quality into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources- Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Recuired-Mitigation measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, included plans to accommodate increased runoff flows associated with the proposed developments by incorporating on-site and off-site drainage improvements, providing erosion control measures and developing appropriate Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 3 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: A detailed soils engineering report and grading plans for the site are required as a condition of approval to ensure that all grading activities on the site minimize the grading impacts, in addition, all structures will be designed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Codes to promote safety in the event of an earthquake. o AIR Item A "Maybe": The program EIR finds that development within the Specific Plan will result in an incremental degradation of air quality in conjunction with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Since this project alone is relatively small in scale and will not generate a significant amount of air pollutant emissions, the impacts'will not be significant. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared to address necessary compromises for the overall benefit of the Specific ~!an area and region. Conditions of approval will be required for the project to meet all applicable mitigation measures, as required by the certified EIR 85-2. Items B, and C "No": The development of a 2,900 square foot restaurant and drive-thru is within the Specific Plan area covered by the program EIR. The certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to air quality. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2 and this proposal has incorporated those measures related to .. air quality · into either the submikted otans ~or wi.ll be included in--the conditions of approval',-'for the 'subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitgxinq Required- Cons~ru-tion activity dus% generation shal~ be reduced through regular watering as Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 4 required by the SCAQMD Rule 403. Additionally, applicable mitigation measures encouraging use of alternative transportation methods have been incorporated'into the Tustin Annex Master Plan. - All measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, as applicable, have been inCorporated..into the"proj~ct as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. o WATER Items B, C and F - "Yes": This project site is within the ETSP area for which the certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to surface runoff, drainage flows, water quality and water percolation. The impacts associated with this Design Review are no greater than those previously evaluated in the EIR 85- · 2. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the plan's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. The certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to water quality. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to water quality into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval for the subject ,project. Items A, D, E, G, H, and I - "No": The project site is wishin the Specific Plan area. The certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to water quality. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to water quality into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, included plans to accommodate increased runoff flows associated with the proposed develooments by incorporating on-site and off-site drainage improvements, providing erosion control measures and developing appropriate - Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 5 pollution control plans. These measures have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. . o PLANT LIFE Items A, B, C and D - "No": The project site has been rough graded, and is presently vacant. The certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to plant life. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to plant life into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Mitigation measures require revegetation on graded and cut-and-fill areas where structures or improvements are not constructed, with consideration given to the use of drought-tolerant plant ~materials, especially those native to the foothills and coastal plains of Southern California. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as submitted, or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. ANIMAL LIFE Items A throuqh D - "No": The project site is within the East Tustin Specific Plan area. The certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts, to the project site related to the proposed · development.~nd the resultant.negative effects to animal life. Applicable mitigation'measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to animal life into either the submitted plans or would be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 .Page 6 Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: Those measures identified in certified E%R 85-2, including revegetation of the site, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or would be incorporated as conditions of approval. o NOISE Item A - "Yes": Development of the site would result in short-term construction noise impact, and a long-term increase in the ambient noise levels in and around the project site as a result of increased vehicles in the area. The City Council considered the benefits of the ETSP in the original program EIR and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the ETSP. Mitigation measures addressing the acoustic environment were identified in the program EIR, and are included in the submitted project, or would be conditions of approval. Item B - "No": The project site is within the East Tustin Specific Plan area and the certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects of noise. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those~measures related to.noise into the submitted plans or they will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Mitigation measures included in the program EIR required additional studies to identify exterior noise levels to ensure compliance with City Noise Ordinance. In addition, the City's Noise Ordinance No. 828 has specific requirements in regard to construction noise. Those measures identified in certified EIR 85-2 and the City of Tustin Ordinance No. 828, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. In addition, a condition fo approval has been included requiring the intercom speakers within the menu ordering board to comply with the Noise Ordinance. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 7 7. LIGHT AND GLARE "Yes": The proposed commercial development would create a minimal amount of additional light within a center which is already illuminated. The lighting from the signs, pedestrian safety lights and decorative wall lights will not have a significant impact. The project site is within the East Tustin Specific Plan Area in which the program EIR 'and Addendum for the Marketplace and Annex addresses the impact of commercial development and the resultant negative effects from light and glare. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. Mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to light and glare into the submitted plans or the mitigation measures would be included in the conditions of approval for 5he project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required- Conditions of approval for the project require that a lighting plan be submitted for the project, and prohibits lights that create any glare or have a negative impact on adjoining properties. o LAND USE "No": The project site is within the Easn Tustin Specific Plan Area for which the certified'EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects of land use. The program EIR identifies that the development of the project site would result in the gradual conversion of existing open space into urban use. The City council considered tke benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. This project is consistent with the planned land uses within the shopping center. Mitigation measures identified in EIR 85-2 have been incorporated into the Tustin Annex Master Plan or would be required as conditions of approval which avoid or substantially lessen the significant envircnmenta! effec~ as identified in the program EIR. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 8 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Adherence to and compliance with the guidelines and provisions of the East Tustin Specific Plan would ensure that the development of the proposed restaurant and drive-thru complies with mitigation measures specified in the certified EIR 85-2. o NATURAL RESOURCES Items A and B - "No"- The project site is within the sPecific Plan. area for which the 'certified EIR 85-2 identified, no impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to natural resources. Mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2 regarding natural resources. Those mitigation measures identified in the program EIR 85-2 have been incorporated into East Tustin projects, where applicable. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 Eas~ Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No mitigation measures are required. 10. RISK OR UPSET Items A and B - "No"- The project site is within the Specific Plan area for which the certified EIR 85-2 identified no impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects from risk of upset. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tussin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 Eas5 Tustin Specific Plan Mitication/Monitorinq Recuired- No mitigation measures are Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 9 required. 11. POPULATION "Yes": This project site is within the ETSP area for which the certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts from the plan on population. Thc City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effect. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2 Development of the proposed restaurant and drive-thru would not add population to the East Tustin area since it is a commercial project. The project would provide a service to the existing and planned population. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No mitigation measures are required for this project. 12. HOUSING "No"- This project site is within the ETSP area for which the certified EIR 8S-2 identified impacts on housing. Mitigation measures were identified in EIR 8S-2 relating to new housing developments. Since this project is a commercial development and there will not be any impacts on housing and no mitigation measures are required. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitorinq Required- No mitigation measures are required. 13. TRANsPORTATiON/CiRCULATiON Items A and B - "Yes"- The site is within the specific plan area for which E!R 85-2 identified impacts related to traffic. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 10 Implementation of the Specific Plan will result in an increase of vehicular traffic and the need for improved transpornation and circulation facilities. Consistent with the requirements of CEQA, EIR 85-2 discusses environmental effecns in proportion to their severity and probability of occurrence. Moreover, in the' process of preparing EIR 85-2 in was determined that,~ given the level of specificity of planning for the project, certain impacts., including infrastructure engineering plans, could be more comprehensively addressed with subsequent, focused studies as part of future discretionary actions (i.e., subdivision maps, grading permits, etc.). EIR 85-2 also states that no significant adverse impacts beyond those discussed in the EiR are anticipated as a result of subseqqent focused studies. However, the Tusti~ City Council reserved the power to incorporate any measure, including off-site traffic improvements recommended'by such subsequent studies. Therefore, during the evaluation of Tract 14610 a detailed, project-Specific traffic analysis was prepared by a licensed traffic engineer and reviewed by Community Development Department staff and the City Traffic Engineer. The analysis evaluates on-site circulation, existing on-street traffic conditions, specific plan area buildout traffic forecasts obtained from the ETSP, and capacity impacts of project- generated traffic. During design review of this project, on-site and of=-sine traffic impacts were reviewed. Exhibit A is a queuing study prepared for this restaurant/drive-thru projec%, which concludes that the amount of stacking distance and the "nhree- window" operation is adequate to serve this project. This proposed fast-food restaurant will generate approximately 150 p.m. peak hour trips, which is a substantial increase over the allocation for a restaurant in the Tustin Annex Traffic Analysis, dated January 22, 1992. The entire Tustin Annex site is allocated 1308 p.m. peak hour trips per the Easu Tustin Specific Plan, Traffic Analysis Zone ~42. With this proposal, 195 p.m. peak hour trips remain without addiniona! mitigation being required. The amount of additional reta~ and financial uses (24,000 square feet) originally anticipated for construction in this center can be accommodated wiuhoun additional mitigation. However, should funure uses be more intense than originally anticipated, additional environmental review will be necessary and further mitigation measures may be necessary. Therefore, the project is consistent wi~h ElK 85-2 and the ETSP, and original traffic mitigation measures remain valid. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 11 Items C, D, E, and F - "No"- The project site is within the specific plan area for which EIR 85-2 identified impacts related to the development and reSultant negative effects on transportation and circulation. There are no significant new environmental i~pacts created by the proposed project which were not considered in the previous program EIR 85-2 and additionally referenced documents. Mitigation measures identified in the certified EIR and recommended for implementation have been incorporated into the submitted plans, or will be included as conditions of approval for the project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Conditions of approval required that Tract 14610, and any portion thereof, meet the requirements of the ETSP, Ordinance No. 1062, Tustin City Code and City parking standards. Further, adherence to and compliance with those provisions and standards will ensure that the development of the proposal complies with mitigation measures specified in certified EIR 85-2. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES Items A throuqh F - "Yes"- Implementation of this project to construct a 2,900 square foot restaurant, will not result in an increase in the demand for and utilization of public services, since it is proposed to be located within an existing shopping center that is already receiving public services. The subject site is within the Specific Plan area for which the certified EIR 85-2 identified potential impacts from the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to public services. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific-' plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. Additionally, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2 and recommended for implementation. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to public services into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources- Field Verification Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 12 Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, such as that Stating the project sponsor shall work cloJely with the Police Department, the Orange County Fire Department, Tustin Unified School District, and other governmental services to ensure adequate security, safety and services for the project have been incorporated into the project. All measures identified in the certified EIR 85-2, as applicable, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. 15. ENERGY Items A and B - "Yes": The project will minimally increase the demand for and consumption of energy, Since it is only a 2,900 square foot building which will not have a high energy demand- The project site is within the Specific Plan area for which certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts of the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to energy. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. Consequently, mitiganion measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to energy into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Mitigation measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, require that building construction shall comply with the Energy Conservation Standards set forth in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, and that energy conservation techniques be considered. Mitigation measures related to energy, as applicable, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as condi%ions of approval. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 13 16. UTILITIES Items A throuqh F - "Yes . The pro]ect wm!_, not significantly increase the demand for utilities due to its relatively small size and scale when compared to the surrounding existing developments within the Tustin Annex. The project site is within the Specific Plan area for which the certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to utilities. The City Council considered the benefits of the specific plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects on the use of utilities. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the specific plan. Mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2 where feasible. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to utilities into either the submitted plans or will be included 'in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the. subject project . Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin .City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Mitigation measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, re~aire that water -- conservation methods as required by state law, Energy Conservation Standards and building construcnion techniques as set forth in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, and other measures be implemented to mitigate potential effects on utilities. Applicable mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. 17. H~. HEALTH Items A and B - "No": The project site is within the Specific Plan area for which certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to human health, nhis project will not have significant effects on human hea!~h since it is a minor new development. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to human health into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 14 Sources: Field Verification Submitted-Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Those measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, related to human health such as the prevention of constructiOn generated dust, as applicable, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. 18. SOLID WASTE '"Yes":. The project site is within the Specific Plan area for · 'which the certified EtR 85-2 identifiedimpacts to the project- site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects of solid waste. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to solid waste into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subject project. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: Those measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, related to the removal of solid waste, as applicable, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or will be incorporated as conditions of approval. 19. AESTHETICS "No"- The proposed 2,900 square foot restaurant and drive- thru requires the processing of a Design Review application by the Community Development Department. The project is compatible to size, scale and appearance of existing developments within the Tustin Annex. The project is within the ETSP Area and the certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to aesthetics. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified through design review in conjunction with EIR 85-2. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 15 This proposal has incorporated those measures related to aesthetics into either the submitted plans or will be included in the conditions of approval, where applicable for the subject project. - ' Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitorinq Recuired: Those measures identified in certified EIR 85-2, such as those stating that architectural and site design reflect the Urban Design Guidelines section of the ETSP, as applicable, have been incorporated into the project as submitted or would be incorporated as conditions of approval. 20. RECREATION "No": The proposed project is within the Specific Plan area and the certified EIR 85-2 identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to recreation. Since this project is a commercial development, there are no impact= On recreation. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: There are no mitigation measures required for this project. 21. CULTURAL RESOURCES Items A throuqh D - "No"- This project is within the Specific Plan area and the certified EIR 85-2 idennified impacts to the project site related to the proposed deveiopmen5 and the resultant negative effects to cultural resources. This project is not within an area identified as an archaeological site. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2. This proposal has incorporated those measures related to cultural resources into either the submitted plans or will be included in uhe conditions of approval, where applicable, for the subjec% project. Attachment A Environmental Evaluation CUP 94-023; DR 94-030 Page 16 Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Certified EIR 85-2 East'Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: There are no mitigation measures required for this project. 22. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Items A, B, C and D - "No": The project in and of itself will not cause negative impacts to wildlife habitat nor achieve any short-term environmental goals, nor have impacts which are potentially individually limited but are cumulatively .considerable and-could potentially have an indirect.adverse impact on human beings. The program EIR 85-2 addressed all of these concerns and this project is fully within the scope of that discussion. Source: Submitted plans Certified EIR 85-2 Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: None PART IV - DETERMINATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-02~ AND DESIGN REVIEW 94-030 On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project HAS utilized all feasible mitigation measures as identified in Final Environmental ImpaCt Report 85-2 certified on March 17, 1986, and subsequently adopted supplements and addenda. The program EIR 85-2 for the East Tustin Specific Plan is adequate to serve as the program EIR as significant impacts were identified and corresponding mitigation measures were recommended to be incorporated into the approval process for individual projects. Therefore, no additional documentation is required. SP: ~np\CUP94023. ENV