Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 Z.C. 95-001 09-05-95 NO. 2 / ,"9-5 -95 · ATE: SEPTEMBER 5, 1995 Inter-Com TO: WILLIAM 1%. HUSTON, CITY MAN1%GER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE 95-001 (OLEN PROPERTY SERVICES) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions: Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 95-72; and · Have first reading by title only and introduction of Ordinance No. 1158 approving Zone Change 95-001' 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 applicant proposes to rezone a 4.85 acre property from Planned Community-Industrial (PC-IND) to Planned Community- Industrial/Business (PC-IND/BUS). The Planned Community District Regulations (Ordinance 400) were originally adopted in 1968 for the industrial area on which the site is located The subject property is located on the north side of Warner Avenue, west of Red Hill Avenue and is developed with an eleven building business park totalling approximately 72,446 square feet of floor area. The proposed changes would allow for a variety of general and professional office and commercial service uses. This would be in addition to the light industrial uses currently allowed on the site. City Council Report ZC 95-001 September 5, 1995 Page 2 In 1979, the Planned Community District Regulations were amended to allow retail and business office uses on certain properties within a PC designation with the approval of a CUP, including the property immediately to the east of the subject property at the northwest corner of .Red Hill and Warner Avenues. The surrounding development to the north and west includes light industrial uses in the PC-IND district, light industrial and office use to the east in the PC-IND/BUS district and light manufacturing within the City of Santa Ana to the south. To the east is a PC- IND/BUS development and the Marine Corp Air Station, Tustin across Red Hill Avenue. A public hearing notice identifying the time, date and location of the public hearing on this project was published in the Tustin News. Property owners within 300 feet of the site were notified of the hearing by mail and notices were posted on the site, at City Hall and at the Police Department. The applicant was informed of the availability of a staff report for this item. DISCUSSION The present zoning designation of Planned Community-Industrial (PC- IND) on the subject property allows for a variety of light industrial, manufacturing, assembly and R&D uses. currently, office uses are only allowed if they are considered accessory to a permitted industrial type land use. The proposed zoning designation of PC Industrial/Business (PC-IND/BUS) allows for all of the uses permitted within the PC-IND district, as well as, professional and general offices and limited retail with the approval of a CUP (Exhibit A. to Ordinance 1158). If approved, any proposed office uses developed on this site will form a small synergistic core of office uses, as the property immediately to the east is also zoned PC-IND/BUS. Together these two properties will provide beneficial office opportunities for the industrial community in the southern portion of the City. The applicant has applied for a master Conditional Use Permit for the entire property to authorize general and professional office and commercial services. This would avoid the need for each potential tenant to apply for and obtain a separate CUP from the Zoning Administrator. This approach would also facilitate the leasing of office space as tenants come and go over time. City Council Report ZC 95-001 September 5, 1995 Page 3 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION It is not anticipated that the project will result in any adverse impacts to the transportation and circulation system within the area. As previously mentioned, the site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt-up concrete industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet, and 289 parking spaces. If the entire development was occupied by office uses, the total parking needed would be 289 parking spaces. 'Office use requires a parking ratio of one space for each 250 square feet of office area. Retail uses require a higher parking rate than office uses at one space for each 200 square feet of floor area. If retail uses were proposed, the available parking would be analyzed at the time of CUP submittal. However, the applicant has stated that retail uses are not desired on the site at this time and would not be incorporated into any anticipated CUP application. Therefore, adequate parking exists on-site to accommodate the proposed Zone Change for commercial offices. A Traffic Study has also been prepared by the applicant (Attachment A to the Initial Study). The study has been found acceptable by the Public Works Department. Findings of the study indicate.that the proposed project will not adversely affect the adjacent circulation system or the Warner/Red Hill Avenue intersection. ~ENERAL PLAN The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Industrial. According to the City's Land Use Element, this designation allows .for manufacturing, assembly, research and development, warehousing and office related uses. Numerous goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan also directly support the applicant's proposed Zone Change request for office uses. City Council Report ZC 95-081 September 5, 1995 Page 4 CONCLUSION Staff has reviewed the proposed Zone Change to Planned Community Industrial/Business (PC-IND/BUS) District and determined that it is consistent with the General Plan and will not adversely impact the public health, safety and welfare of the community. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution 95-72 certifying the Negative Declaration as adequate and have a first reading by title only and introduction of Ordinance 1158 approving Zone Change 95-001, as submitted or revised. Robert De~g Assistant Planner Christine Shing~eton Assistant City'Manager Attachments: Location Map Site Plan Initial Study/Negative Declaration Resolution No. 95-72 Ordinance No. 1158 LOCATION / MAP,~/' Z WARNER AVENUE NO SCALE ___ -mil ~_L J .WARNER AVENUE COMMUNITy DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (714) 573-3105 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Title: Project Location' Project Description: Project Proporl_ent: Lead Agency Contact Telephone: The Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study for the above project in accordance with the City of Tustin's prOcedures regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, and on the basis of that study hereby finds: That there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. That potential significant effects were identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and agreed to by the applicant that would avoid or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Said Mitigation Measures are included in Attachment A of the Initial Study which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not required. The Initial Study which provides the basis for this determination is attached and is on file at the Community Development Department, City of Tustin. The public is invited to comment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the review period, which begins with the public notice of Negative Declaration and extends for twenty (20) calendar days. Upon review by the Community Devel~)pment Director, this review period may be extended if deemed necessary. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS 4:00 P.M. ON Date -'~',~]'-q ' q 5 NEGDEC. PM5 3704.A A,.,,5,.,Fr- lq/ ..... Christine A. Shingleton ,"' Community Development Director COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (7]4) 57s-s]os INITIAL STUDY BACKGROUND Name of Proponent ~./d.A.C.lq.IEF' CC~r"C)C3I'-~--'~. Address and Phone Number of Proponent k . 9-0 co,-~,--2~. ¢M~, --x:,-,,,,~_ ~ Date Check List Submitted Agency Requiring Check List Name of Proposal, if applicable '7~ c~ }q ~ II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 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 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 offthe site? 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 F-I N LI Li IXi r-i r-I F-IFil>ri g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? o Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emission or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? YES c. Alteration of air movement, moisture~ or temperatures, or any change 'in climate, either locally or regionally? [---] 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh water? ~ ] Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff?. ao bo c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change 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? 4. Plant Life. Will 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 numbi~rs of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? MAYBE NO¸ 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? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: ao bo 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)? Reduction of the numbers of any. unique, rare or endangered species of animals? '-- c. Introduction of new species °fanimals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light 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. Wil! the proposal involve: 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? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? -- Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: 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? 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? 15. Energy. Will 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 II II NO I6. 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 systems? 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? 19. 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 punic view? 20. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 21. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. The alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic bailding, 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 il NO 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 of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history.. · . or prehistory? bo 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 while long-term impacts will endure well into the future). Co 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.) do Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Ill. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION SEE ATTACHMENT A IV. DETERMINATION a the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in Attachment A attached hereto have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Signature Name(Print) "~ ("~ ~'-'~ ,.,.j - ,'T~D.I~d 5 · 3 ZO2A SECTION ~ - DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTi~L EV~LU~TION PROJECT DESCRIPTION - The proposed project is a request to change the Zoning District designation of the 4.85 acre property located at 1371- 1431 Warner Avenue from PC Industrial to PC Industrial/ Business to allow for office as well as retail and service commercial and industrial uses (Exhibit A). The property is presently developed with eleven (11) one and two story industrial buildings (four 2 story & seven I story) totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 on-site parking spaces. The proposal does not require a change in the General Plan Land Use Designation which is presently classified as Industrial. No new development is proposed as part of this project. The project site is situated in an urban setting. Immediately surroUnding development to the north, and west is also industrial and consists of tilt up concrete buildings in the City of Tustin. To the south is light industrial development within the City of Santa Ana. To the east is a light industrial/R&D development and the Marine Corp Air Station, Tustin.~ The zoning designations of these properties include PC Industrial, PC Industrial/Business, Public & Institutions and Light Manufacturing (City of Santa Ana). i · EARTH - A through G - "No" The project would not result in any disruption, displacement, compaction or overcrowding of the soil. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet and 289 parking spaces· The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review· sources: city of Tustin Community Development DePartment Submitted Application Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. · AIR - A through C - "No" The project would not result in any degradation of existing air quality based upon SCAQMD guidelines for preparation of EIRs. The site is presently developed with 72,446 square feet consisting of eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future 'development will be subject to separate environmental review. soUrces: City of Tustin Community Development Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. Exhibit A - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Zone CMange 95-001 July 21, 1995 Page 2 · · · · WATER - A through I - "No" The project would not result in any additional change to absorption rates, water movement, flood waters, discharge into surface waters, flow of groundwater, quantity of ground water or water consumption. The total square footage on-site 72,446. Sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. PLANT LIFE - A through D - "No" The project would not result i~'any additional changes to plant life. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings. The total square footage on-site is 72,446. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Application Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. ANIMAL LIFE - A through D - "No" The project would not result in any additional change to animal life. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings. The total square footage on-site is 72,446. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Application Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. NOISE - A and B - "No" The project would not result in degradation of existing noise standards. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review· Source: City of Tustin Zoning Code Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. Exhibit A - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Zone C~ange 95-001 July 21, 1995 Page 3 · LIGHT AND GLARE - "No" The project would not result in additional light and glare· The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet, totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. souroe: City of Tustin Community Development Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 8. LAND USE - "No" The project site maintains a General Plan Land Use designation of Industrial. According to the City's Land Use Element, this designation allows for manufacturing, assembly, research and development and warehousing. Therefore, the project is consistent with the current Land Use designation of the City's General Plan. The present zoning designation of PC Industrial allows for a variety of light industrial, manufacturing, assembly and R&D uses. Office uses are only allowed if they are considered accessory to a permitted industrial type land use under the Planned Community .regulations. The proposed zoning designation of PC-IND/BUS would allow for all of the uses permitted within the PC industrial zone, as well as professional and general offices and limited retail commercial with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP. These proposed uses are consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The present development consists of single and two story tilt up buildings totaling 72,446 square feet which are conducive to offices. Additionally, the adjacent industrial development to the east is zoned PC- IND/BUS and contains offices. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings ranging in.size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Exhibit A - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Zone CMange.95-001 July 21, 1995 Page 4 source: City of Tustin Community Development Department City of Tustin General ~lan · Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. NATURAL RESOURCES - A and B - "No" The project would not result in any additional use of natural resources and no expansion is proposed. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be s~bject to separate environmental review. Source: City of Tustin Community Development Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 10. RISK OF UPSET - A and B - "No" The project would not result in any additional risk of upset. The site is developed with eleven one and two.story tilt up concrete industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet, totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any fUture development will be subject to separate environmental review. Sources: City of Tustin Building Division Orange County Fire Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 11. POPULATION - "No" The proposed change in zoning will not result in an increase in density. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet, and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Sources: Submitted Application Community Development Department Mitigation/Monitoring: Exhibit A - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Zone CMange 95-001 July 21, 1995 Page 5 12. HOUSING - "No" The project would not result in the addition or deletion of any housing at this time. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Source: Submitted Application Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 13. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION - A through F - "No" The project would not result in any impacts to the transportation and circulation system within the area. The site is presently developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet, totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. If the entire development was occupied by office uses, the total parking needed would be 289 parking spaces, there- fore adequate parking exists on-site to accommodate the proposed Zone Change. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. A Traffic Study prepared by the applicant (Attachment A) and found to be adequate by the Public WOrks Department states the proposed project will not adversely affect the adjacent circulation system or Warner/Red Hill Avenue intersection. The current Level of Service (LOS) for the Warner/Red Hill Avenue intersection is "A" and will remain unchanged. The Intersection Utilization Capacity (IUC) for the Warner/Red Hill Avenue intersection is .56% and will increase to .59% as a result of the proposed Zone Change. However, this is still below the cut off point of .62% for LOS "A". Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department City of Tustin Community Development Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. Exhibit A - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Zone Change 95-001 July 21, 1995 Page 6 14. PUBLIC SERVICES - A throuqh F - "No" The project'will not require additional public services. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet. The proposal does not include any new improvements at 'this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 15. ENERHY - A and B - "No" The project would not require any additional energy. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet. The prbposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 16. UTILITIES - A throuqh F - "No" The project would not require any additional utilities services. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Source: City of Tustin Public Works Department Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 17. H~%N HEALTH - A and B - "No" The project would not negatively affect human health. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. sources: City of Tustin Building Division Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. Exhibit A - Discussion of-Environmental Evaluation Zone C~ange 95-001 July 21, 1995 Page 7 18. SOLID WASTE - "NO" The project would not create additional solid waste. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not .include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department Submitted Application Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 19. AESTHETICS -"'No" The project would not impact the aesthetics of the area. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,296 square feet to 8,854 square feet, totaling 72,446 square feet and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Source: City of Tustin Community Development Department MitigatiOn/Monitoring: None required. 20. RECREATION - "No" The project would not impact recreation needs of the area. The site is developed with eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Application Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 21. CULTURAL RBSOURCES - A through D - "No" The project would not affect cultural resources of the area. The site is developed with 'eleven one and two story tilt up concrete industrial buildings totaling 72,446 square feet, and 289 parking spaces. The proposal does not include any new improvements at this time. Any future development will be subject to separate environmental review. Sources: Submitted Application Historical Survey Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. Exhibit A - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Zone CMange 95'001 July 21, 1995 Page 8 22. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE - A throuqh D - "No" ae The proposed project would not have the potential to degrade the environment or habitat of significant animals or periods in California History as the subject site is a developed site. be The proposed project would not have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals. The proposed project would not result in cumulative impacts. 0 The proposed project would not result in any adverse effect on human beings, either directly or indirectly based upon the analysis conducted in the preparation of this Initial Study. Sources: Items 1 through 21 of this Initial Study Submitted Application Mitigation/Monitoring: None required. 2020 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE · SANTA ANAo CALIFORNIA 92701 · TELEPHONE (714) 667-0496 FAX (714) 667-7952 Mayg, 1995 Olen Property Services Corp. 20 C'or~.rate PaJk Irvine, CA 92714-6047 ATTENTION: Mr. Paolo Ghio, Project Manager SUBJECT: WARNER PARK PROJECT TRIP'GENERATION Dear Sir: INTRODUCTION Olen Property Services Corporation is planning to convert a 72,446 square foot industrial building in Warner Corporate Park in the City of Tustin to office uses. Austin-Foust has investigated the trip generation of this proposal and compared it against the currently zoned industrial uses to determine if any impacts will be created by the change. ANALYSIS The project site is located in traffic analysis zone (TAZ) 71 of the Central County Traffic Model as illustrated in the attachment. This entire zone is categorized for a ~PC Commercial' in the traffic model. The category is a hybrid of commercial, office and industrial use~ with an appropriate average trip rate as illustrated in the accompanying table. Examination of this table discloses the following about the proposed project, compared with that which is currently assumed for the traffic zone where the site is situated: Overall, the office building will generate 42 percent less daily trips than the current site "allocation" (914 ADT for the project compared with a site "allocation" of 1,583 ADT.) 2. Trip generation of the proposed project during the critical PM peak hour is less than allocated for this zone by the traffic model (131 vph vs 166 vph included in the model). ATTACHMENT A Olen Property Services Corp. May 9, 1995 Page 2 . The proposed office use AM peak hour trip generation is somewhat more than is currently included in the traffic model (133 vph compared with 79 vph in the model). However, the morning peak period is not critical as determined by a level of service (ICU) analysis. An analysis of the project on the existing level of service at the adjacent intersection of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue discloses a minimal impact in the PM peak hour (i.e. the ICL/increases by hhree percent f.~m 0.56 to 0~9x. and no impact in the AM ~.-:~ak hour. The project's morning traffic contributes essentially all its traffic to the non-critical directions and therefore does not increase the ICU. In both the .AM and PM peak periods the resulting intersection level of service remains at-an 'A' level. CONCLUSION In summary, it is concluded that the proposed 72 TSF office use generates less total daffy and critical PM peak hour trips than would be the case for the ~typicai~ land use anticipated in this area designated as ~PC Commercial.~ The existing ICI./at the nearby intersection of Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue is increased slightly in the afternoon from 0.56 to 0.59, but remains within an acceptable range. The project's trip generation which is higher than planned.by this zone's designation only during the non-critical AM peak hour (it is actually lower on a daily and PM peak hour basis), does not result in any increase at all in the existing AM peak hour ICU. If you have any questions regarding this analysis, please call. Sincerely, LAND USE UNITS TRIP GENERATION TAZ 71 _AM PEAK HOUR-- lB OB TOTAL --PM PEAK HOUR-- IB OB TOTAL ADT Trip Rates General Office PC Commercial Trip Generation Existing PC Commercial Pmposed . ..-~. Gene~l Office TOTAL 72.446 TSF 72.44~ -rSF 72.446 TSF 72.446 'I~F 1.60 .24 134 32 .27 1.09 59 20 79 59 20 79 116 17 133 116 17 133 .29 1~2 131 .96 133 Z29 12.62 2135 70 96 166 1,583 70 96 166 1,583 21 110 131 21 110 131 914 914 65 36 33 Figure 1 AREA)[ ZONE SYSTEM (TUSTIN POI~TION OF THE STUDY 77. Red Hill & Warner Existing LANES CAPACITY ,NBL 2 3400 NBT 3 5100 NBR 0 0 AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL V/C VOL V/C 237 .07* .'.442 .13 492 .10 2150 .42' 0 0 SBL - 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 1176 SBR d 1700 375 EBL 2 3400 161 EBT 0 0 0 EBR 1 1700 253 WBL 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 Right Turn Adjustment Clearance Interval 0 .23'... 801 .22 325 .16 .19 .05* 319 0 .15 302 .09* .18 EBR .05* .05* .05* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .56 Exi st lng+Project LANES CAPACITY NBL 2 3400 NBT 3 5100 N~.R 0 0 AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL V/C VOL V/£ 248 .07* 444 492 .10 2150 0 0 .13 .42' SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 3 5100 1176 .23* 801 .16 SBR d 1700 467 .27 342 .20 EBL 2 3400 174 .05' 406 .12' EBT 0 0 0 0 EBR 1 i700 255 .15 313 .18 WB[ 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 EBR .05* .05* Righ't Turn Adjustment Clearance Interval .05* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .59 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 95-72 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CERTIFYING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR ZONE CHANGE 95-001 INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: ae Zone Change 95-001 is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act. Be A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has been distributed for public review. Co Whereby, the City Council of the City of Tustin has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Director and other interested parties with respect to the subject Negative Declaration. Do The'City Council has evaluated the proposed final Negative Declaration and determined it to be adequate and complete. II. A Final Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The City Council, having final authority over Zone Change 95-001, has received and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration, prior to approving the proposed project, and found that it adequately discussed the environmental effects of the proposed project. On the basis of the initial study and comments received during the public review process, the City Council has found that the proposed projects would not have a significant effect on the environment. 10 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28 Resolution No. 95-72 Page 2 ~ASSEDANDADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the .City of Tustin, California, held on the 5th day of September, 1995. JIM POTTS Mayor Valerie Crabill Chief Deputy City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 95-72 Valerie Crabill, Chief Deputy City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is 5; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 95-72 was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 5th day of September, 1995. COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBERABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER:ABSENT: Valerie Crabill Chief Deputy City Clerk 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 .2.6 ORDINANCE NO. 1158 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 95-001, A REQUEST TO AUTHORIZE A ZONE CHANGE FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY INDUSTRIAL (PC-IND) DISTRICT TO PLANNED COMMUNITY INDUSTRIAL/BUSINESS (PC-IND/BUS) DISTRICT ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1371-1431 WARNER AVENUE. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as follows' · I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: a. That Zone Change 95-001 was submitted to the City Council by Olen' prOperty Services for consideration. Be That a public hearing was duly noticed, called and held on said application by the Planning Commission on August 14, 1995 and by the City Council on September 5, 1995. C. That the project will not have a significant effect on the environment as conditioned, and a Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). D. That the proposed Zone Change to Planned Community Industrial/Business (PC-IND/BUS) District is consistent with the Tustin Area General Plan and, in particular, the Land Use Element which designates this property industrial, which would accommodate a'broad range of industrial/commercial uses and development. .~. E. That the proposed Zone Change to PC-IND/BUS is in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the surrounding area in that the proposed zoning district designation of PC-IND/BUS is compatible with commercial uses surrounding the development. Fe That the proposed Zone Change will not adversely impact the public health, safety and welfare of the community, but benefit the community by increasing the marketability of the current project site and therefore, increase the future economic viability through employment opportunities and additional tax revenues. Moreover the proposed project has been reviewed for compliance with all applicable provisions of the City of Tustin Zoning Code. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 Ordinance No. 1158 Page 2 Ge That the existing development on the subject site is compatible with offices uses. He 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 with the Air Quality Sub-Element. II. The City Council hereby approves Zone Change 95-001 changin~ the zoning designation of the property located at 1371 - 1431 Warner Avenue, from Planned Community Industrial (PC-IND) District to Planned Community Industrial/Business (PC-IND/BUS) District as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of September, 1995. JIM POTTS Mayor VALERIE CRABILL Chief Deputy City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF TUSTIN SS CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE 1158 VALERIE CRABILL, Chief Deputy 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. 1158 was duly and regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5th day of September 1995, by the following vote: CO UNCILMEMBERAYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Valerie Crabill, Chief Deputy City Clerk M .o o. pc IND MORG : -L 'ZONE CHANGE -- · TUSTIN, M'A P CA. PER. RES. NO. DATED .PER. ORD.. NO. DATED [~il -EXi STIN G PC ~~ 'p~opos~ ~c IND/BUS IND/BUS EXHIBIT A PAHT I. 13;DUSTRY SECTION I. P-~..MITT~ USES. · Minimum Site Ar~. 30,000 square feet "- L~tent and ~e - ~nuf~i~ ~tivi~ pro~d~ ~t ~h ~~ ~e ;ont~ ~hia ~ building or ~ntffou~ ~~e noir, d~t, ~ke ~ ~a~don co ~e ~o~ag e~nment nor ~n~u U~s primm~y en~g.-d in ress~a:h activRies, ie. cb.tdi~ but not limited to ~ htbomtories ~nd '-~-/'ae,.~iti~ dmmlo.~nt.~l l~oeator~ ~nd fa~ties m~t eom~tible light m~uf~cmring sim' .tier to the following list of - Development fac~ti~ for nat. ional we~ on ~ s~ md ~ F~ M~ or D~ ~. M~~, ~ ~bly. t~g ~d ~ ~ ~m~n~ ~,'~m~t ~d ~~ and ~ ~d ~n~ ~ ~ but ~ ~J~e~ m ~e f~M~g ~ of ~1~ .. Co~~ ~don Control, T~~ ~d R~on ~uipmen~ C~tml Me~g ~~enu ~~p~ Auto UeJ~ ~o ~~nt ~d T~on ~ipm~t ~oto~p~c ~quipment . T~g E~~t : M~~ to ~e but aot ~t~ to ~ f~ll~g ~ of ~pl~~' Mxaufa~re acd/cr ~mb!y of produ~,.~ such as but not/imited to ~e follow/ng Iist of · Ais,~ft and Rehted Components Automobil.~ and AutomobiI.* P~ts Boats Clocks and Co~e~ Cc~c Produc~ / / Si;k Toys Tr2ii~.rs Tru~,s . -. 'l'am m-~a~tu.'~ of products or .:rodu~:s rnadn from rear, ri=Is mgh = but not limit~ to t~e fr, il~sing ~,. of . Th~ mam~a~rin~, .~gmpoundi=~, ~ or u-e~t:n~at of items suez a~ but not ~ De V,'oedworkin$ s,ho.m, su~ ,=: (?rovi.ded th~ if a pLan~r, router, stick~ or mould~ is mzint~t, ~ door~ :nd windows in ti~ outsidz ~ of tim mom in which mid m~hina~ is ~ sh~ be kep~ dm~ ~-~e ~d rn~e is in ~). F ,urr, irurm Wood E, D!stn'bution ~ War~ho~ag A~_.inlst~.tive, pr?fe~ot~l ~ bus~==ts offlc~ .usociat~t with and a~ss~r), to axu/of the · BI",s 1 ..'-.u~ photometry, phot'o~n.~'~-'_vin{, printing, publLshin{ =.ud. boe, kbindin.;, pruvid,.~t that Cafet,~ria, cafe, re~:aurant or auditori-.:m azr~.-~ted with mci i=e!d,.-ntal th any of the F~ing 5.~rvice stations vd'd be lmerrr'..itr.--'d r.:~j-'. to the dcvelot~n.-~.t ::andards oanmin=d in ti.ix A._~ic'.,i:::re, .-~ a continu=tion of 'J'.-' exLiting land us--, -_nd all =.~.e,~a'?- s:r,::rares and appurte."~.-.ce !.hall be Fe.?.i:tcd. 9. S;a:c. Czunty :nd :,luniciual F~ciLki=s .~':ck si ~:~ and po:kc stations, civic '.::::.-.:., l:.brariei, etc. PAR=~ I AND.~ 0F~C~~J~D~~ CIX~OFT~'TINORDIN~ZENOo ~O 1. All uses au~mo~d in Par~ I,. Se~mn of of =hese raguAa=ions. Surv~ 3.s/mihxrGmnexal o~.c~-q, s'~b'jec~ ~:o a si~ o a. Ar~ ~-d ~g supt._lies b. Saka~s c. B£~cle sales (~cl~g ~p~, no ou~i~ ~p~y) g. ~~~~, ~es (See Set,on ~I) . -~ h. S~-~n~i~ s~s (~~) (See Set, on ~I~ 5. Services business, ax~mp, lified by the follow.ing sales inci- den~ =her~to, when Conduc'~ed within a bui.ia~ng, subjec', to a site dev~lopm~n= use permi=. -2- P~Blic u~li=y ~usiuess of.~ces (excluding Travel a~nc~ ~ AL1 s~ns shall confo=m s=~~ =o p~v~ns of $£gn Co~ ,~o. 6S4. b:- ~as~_r si~n plans shall Be re~-*~d for all business/pro- fess/onal uses a= ~ha ~ 8f Use Permi= su~mi~. 4. Pa=king . As-~ ~u ~ec~cn ~ (Or~-~-_~- ~o. 400) following Off, cs: One (1) space, for each 250 s~-~ fee= o~ gross floor area. One (1)' park/ng spac~ for each 100 s~are fee= of ~oss floor ar~a. Same as office pa~king req-{~--=s One (1) pa=king-spac~ for each ~e (3) sea=s. 5. Physical dev~lopm~n= Develop-= shall confo=n ~o pr~-~ns II~, G, H, I, J,. K, and L of =hese gui~e//nes (Ordinanc~ ~o. 400]- . - -- -~ · Section III . Spec/A1 Regnla~/~ns Any s~Ie of alcohol beverages r~quir~s a conditional use per=i=: