Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03 Z.C. 94-006 02-21-95
NO. 3 2-21-95 DATE: FEBRUARY 21, 1995 Inter-Corn TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJSCT: ZONE CHANGE 94-006 (CALIFORNIA PACIFIC HOMES) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions: . Approve the Environmental Determination for the project by adopting Resolution No. 95-22 and; 2; Have first reading by title only and introduce Ordinance No. 1145, as submitted or revised. 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 On February 13, 1995, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3331 recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change 94-006. Amendments to the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) are being requested to modify the development standards for the. construction of patio cover and trellis structures within patio home developments. Patio homes are permitted within the Medium and Medium High Density Land Use Designations of the ETSP, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. The ETSP currently requires patio covers to satisfy the same setback and distance between building requirements as required for main structures. The proposed amendments would eliminate the need to conform to main building setback and distance between building requirements and refer to the Uniform Building Code for required separation between structures. Existing provisions for patio covers to cover no more than 50 percent of the private yard area would remain unchanged. The proposed amendment would apply to all properties located within the ETSP area which are developed as a "patio home development" City Council Report Zone Change 94-006 February 21, 1995 Page 2 A 1/8 page display'ad public hearing notice identifying the time, date and location of the public hearing for the project was published in the Tustin News. Since there are more than 1,000 property owners within the boundaries of the ETSP, no mailing of notices is required pursuant to Government Code Section 65091(3). Notices were posted at City Hall and the Police Department. The applicant was informed of the availability of a staff report for this item. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission and City Council approved amendments to the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) to establish development standards for "patio home" developments in May of 1993. Provisions were also included to require patio cover and trellis structures to conform to the same setbacks as the main building. The individual patio home units typically have usable private yard areas between the adjacent units which can accommodate patio and landscaping improvements. In most cases, compliance with the setback requirements for patio covers as originally requested by The Irvine Company does not, in most cases, feasibly accommodate the construction of a patio cover as the patios would be ineffective in size. ~ In order to provide greater flexibility to accommodate useable patio covers within the patio, home developments, the following revisions to the ETSP are proposed. The portions of the ETSP proposed to be deleted are marked with strikeouts and the portions proposed to be added are highlighted as shaded areas. "covered patio, trellis or canopies shall ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: _~ p~::e~::~::~:~to ~he re uired setbacks ~,,d ~?.~........~[.9?~.~....more'.'.'..Shan.. 50 percent of the ~:::~:~:~:~:~:~:~ :.:.~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: : :::[:~:::~:::::: :::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: : The primary purpose for setbacks as they relate to patio cover and trellis structures, is to insure that there is adequate separation of structures. The Uniform Building Code (UBC) would require a minimum of three (3) feet separation of any patio cover from an existing structure. However, under the proposed amendments, a patio cover would be able to be located directly adjacent to a private yard fence if there were no other structures located within three (3) feet of the fence in the adjacent yard. The existing provisions to require that no more than 50 percent of the private yard area is covered by a patio cover would remain unchanged. City Council Report Zone Change 94-006 February 21, 1995 Page 3 The combination of compliance with the UBC and the 50% coverage requirement would be the key factors in locating a patio cover or trellis structure resulting in the greatest flexibility possible. The proposed amendment would also be similar to other similar density developments within the ETSP area. Current provisions of the ETSP do not establish specific setback requirements for patio covers in the Medium and Medium-High Land Use Designations of the ETSP for multiple family units. In those situations, compliance with provisions of the UBC would still be required in order to obtain a Building Permit, even thoUgh it is not specifically stated in the ETSP. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Based upon review of the proposed amendments, as well as Environmental Impact Report 85-2, as modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda, it has been determined that environmental issues relating to this project have previously been addressed. With this information in mind, it is recommended that the City Council make the finding that requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met and that no further environmental review is required. CONCLUSION The proposed amendments to the ETSP would provide for flexibility in locating patio cover and trellis structures within the Patio Home Developments, while insuring that the Uniform Building Code requirements related to separation of structures are being met. Based upon the information presented above, it is recommended that the City Council approve Zone Change 94-006 by having first reading by title only and introduce Ordinance No. 1145, as submitted or revised. Daniel Fox, AICP Senior Planner DF :br;mp:ZC94006 Attachments: Initial Study Resolution No. 95-22 Ordinance No. 1145 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92680 (714,) 523-3105 INITIAL STUDY I. BACKGROUND Name of Proponent Address and Phone Number of Proponent T- I3F. z :M, C Date Check List Submitted. Agency Requiring Check List Name ofProposal, if applicable ~'(~ c~4-OO(,tv . ENVII~ONMENTAL lam PA CTS Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? Change in topography er ground surface relief features? The destruction, covering or modification o£any unique geologic or physical features? Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the 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? bo C. d. e. YES MAYBE WI NO o . YES MAYBE NO g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as . earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? _Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emission or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. - Alteration of air movement, moisture, or. temperatures, or any chan~e in climate, either locally or regionally? Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh water? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff?. c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? ,,.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 a~ flooding or tidal waves') Plant Life. V, qll 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 °r endangered species °f plants? . c. Introduction of new species ofplants 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? 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? 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. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardou~ 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. V~qll the proposal alter the location, distribution, density; or - growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing,. \Vill 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? 6. 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 seryices 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. Engcg:y.. Vqqll the proposal result in' a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or ener,,v? b. Substantial increase in demand, upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? YES MAYBE NO 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 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. 19. 20. 21. 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? Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportuniti'es? Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in: b. The alteration of or the destruction ora prehistoric or historic archaeological site? .. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric er 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 YES MAYBE NO 22. Mandatory Findings of Significance. bo 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? . 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 wkich 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.) 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. PART III - DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION EXHIBIT A TIERED INITIAL STUDY RESPONSES FOR ZONE CHANGE 94-006 BACKGROUND The proposed project is an application by California Pacific Home to amend the East Tustin Specific Plan (ETSP) regarding the limitation for patio cover and trellis structures within Patio Home Developments. Subsection "a" of Section C3, Projections into Required Setbacks, currently requires patio covers to satisfy the same setback and distance between building requirements as required for main structures. The proposed amendments would eliminate the need to conform to main building setback and distance between building requirements and refer to the Uniform Building Code for required, separation between structures. Provisions for patio covers to cover.no more than 50 percent of the private yard area would remain unchanged. This is a tiered initial study that is based on and incorporates by reference, the environmental analysis included in EIR 85-2, which was previously certified on March 17, 1986, and subsequently amended with supplements and addenda for the ETSP. In conformance with CEQA, the purpose of this tiered initial study is to identify and focus the environmental analysis for the project on significant new environmental impacts that were not previously considered in the Program EIR. EIR 85-2, as subsequently amended with supplements and addenda, identified several impact categories where a Statement of Overriding Consideration 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" and an evaluation has been made to ensure that projects previously identified have not been intensified. Mitigation measures identified in the EIR to minimize the impacts that would be applicable to this project have been identified. EIR 85-2, as subsequently amended with supplements and addenda, also identified several impact categories where impacts could be lessened to a level of insignificance with the imposition of mitigation measures. Staff ha~ reviewed each of these impact categories to be sure no new project impacts associated with the project would occur that were not identified in the Program EIR. For the purposes of this initial study check list, these items have been checked "No" and the mitigation measures identified in the Program EIR that would be applicable to this project that are included as part of the project'have been identified. Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 2 Impact categories not identified to have a potential impadt in EIR 85-2, as subsequently amended-With supplements and addenda, have been also checked "No" and were also-reviewed to ensure'that no new impacts would be created by the project. Since the scope of the entire ETSP is rather broad, and the subject project is a relatively minor amendment to the ETSP, most of the impact categories are not applicable.° 1. EARTH Items B and C - "Yes": The Program EIR addresses the impact of development and the resultant negative effects on the earth. 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, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change will not result in any significant disruption, displacement, compaction or 'overcrowding of the soil which was not previously considered in EIR 85-2, as' amended with supplements and addenda, as development authorized by the ETSP would not be altered by the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment would provide flexibility in the placement of patio cover structures within private yard areas only. Items A, D, E, F and G - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, 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, as amended w-ith supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change will not have any additional affects on the earth, not previously considered in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, as grading .activities are typically not associated with the construction of patio covers. Sources: City of Tustin Building Division Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 3 2. 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. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared to address necessary compromises for the overall benefit of the Specific Plan and the region. The proposed Zone Change would not result in any degradation of existing air quality based upon SCAQMD guidelines for preparation of EIRs which was not previously considered in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, as development authorized by the ETSP would not be altered by the proposed amendment. Items B and C - "No" The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda~ 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, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not affect air quality in any way not previously considered in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. Sources: Proposed Zone Change SCAQMD Standards EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. WATER Items B, C-and F - "Yes": The Program EIR addresses the impact of development and the resultant negative effects on water. 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. Mitigation measures were- identified in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change 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 not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed amendment would provide flexibility in the placement of patio cover structures within private yard Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 4 areas only. There would be no additional effeCt on drainage or water than that which was previously considered. Items A, D, E,' G, H and I - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts to the Specific Plan area related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to water quality. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposal will not result in. any impacts not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. Sources: Proposed Zone Change City of Tustin Building ~Division EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. PLANT LIFE Items A throuqh D - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts t© 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, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not result in any additional change to plant life not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, as the proposed amendment would provide flexibility in the placement of patio cover structures within private yard areas only which would have no effect on plant life. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. · ANIMAL LIFE Items A through D - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 5 · resultant negative effects to animal life. Applicable mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not result in any additional change to existing animal life not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, as no additional development is proposed as part of the Zone Change. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. NOISE Items A - "Yes": The Program EIR addresses the impact of development and the resultant negative effects of noise. The City Council considered the benefits of the ETSP original program EIR, as amended with supplements and addenda, 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. The proposed Zone Change would not result in any additional changes to noise levels not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The change in standards for the placement of patio cover structures would have no impact on noise levels. Items B - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, 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, as amended with supplements and addenda. These measures are not applicable to this project because the change in standards for the placement of patio cover structures would have no impact on noise levels. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 6 · LIGHT AND GLARE "Yes": The Program EIR addresses the impact 'of 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, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not result-in any additional change to light and glare not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed amendment would provide flexibility in the placement of patio cover structures within private yard areas only which would not produce any light or glare. Furthermore, natural light would not be significantly affected on a~jacent properties, as the proposed changes would not substantially impede sunlight from reaching adjacent properties as provisions would limit patio cover structure to cover not more than 50 percent of the private yard area. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. · LAND USE "Yes": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects on 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 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. The proposal will not result in any alterations of present or planned land uses for the East Tustin Specific Plan not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. Patio cover and trellis structures are currently authorized in the East Tustin Specific Plan. The proposal would provide flexibility for ..... ~ ..... ~ ~vers within private yard areas only. Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 7 Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda East Tustin Specific Plan · Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. NATURAL RESOURCES Items A and B - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified no impacts to the project site related to the proposed development an~ .the resultant negative effects to natural resources. Mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as- amended with supplements and addenda, regarding natural resources. The proposed Zone Change would not result in any additional change to natural resources not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed amendment would provide flexibility in locating patio covers within private yard areas only. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. 10. RISK OF UPSET Items A and B -"No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified no impacts to the project site related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects'. from risk of upset. Furthermore, the proposed Zone Change would not result in any change to the risk of upset. Sources: Proposed Zone Cha'nge EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. Exhibit A - Initial' Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 8 · 11. POPULATION "Yes": The.certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts from the Specific Plan regarding population. The 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, as amended with supplements and addenda. There would be no change to anticipated Population for the ETSP project area associated with the proposed Zone Change.' The proposed change to patio cover standards would not change existing or permitted densities. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. 12. HOUSING "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts on housing. Mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements .and addenda, relating to new housing developments. The proposed Zone Change would not create a need for additional housing. No dwelling units are being eliminated or proposed in conjunction with the proposal. Sources: Proposed Zone Change East Tustin Specific Plan Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Items A and B - "Yes": The Program EIR identifies that the ETSP will generate traffic in the vicinity. The City Council considered the benefits of the Specific Plan and balanced those benefits against the project's unavoidable effects and chose to adopt .a 'Statement of Overriding Considerations. Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 9 Applicable mitigation measures were incorporated into the ETSP Program EIR. The proposed Zone Change would not increase traffic or demand for parking not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. Items C through F - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to transportation/circulation. Mitigation measures were identified in-EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not increase traffic or demand for parking not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda East Tustin Specific Plan Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES Items A, through F - "Yes": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, 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, as amended with supplements and addenda, and recommended for implementation. The proposed Zone Change would not result in any additional need for additional public 'Services not considered .by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. Fire and police services are currently in place to service existing developments; school facilities, parks and roads will not be affected by the Zone Change. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 10 15. ENERGY Items A and B - "Yes": The certified. EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts of the proposed development and the resultant negative effects related 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. Additionally, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, and recommended for implementation. The proposed Zone Change would not result in any additional need for energy not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, as no new development is proposed as part of the proposed Zone Change. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. 16. UTILITIES Items A thr°uqh F - "Yes": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts of the proposed development and the resultant negative effects related to utilities. 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, as amended with supplements and addenda, and recommended for implementation.. The proposed Zone Change would not result in any additional need for utilities not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, as no new development is proposed as part of the proposed Zone Change. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqation/Monitorinq ReqUired: No additional mitigation required. Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 11 17. HUMAN HEALTH Items A and B - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to human health. Mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85- 2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The~proposed Zone Change would not create new health hazards to those living or working in the vicinity not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The modification to the development standard is similar to what is currently permitted. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No additional mitigation required. 18. SOLID WASTE "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects of solid waste. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended with .supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not create additional solid waste not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, as no new development is proposed as part of the proposed Zone Change. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and' addenda Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. 19. AESTHETICS "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts, 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, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 12 result in any significant aesthetic impacts not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would provide for flexibility in locating patio cover structures within private yard areas. In addition, any future development proposals for patio covers would be subject to the City's Design Review process which takes aesthetics into consideration by requiring that the size, height, architectural features, materials and colors of the patio cover are compatible with the adjacent residence. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqati°n/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. 20. RECREATION "No'L: The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with sUpplements and addenda, identified impacts related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to recreation. Consequently, mitigation meaSures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not create a need for additional recreational services not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed amendment would not affect development densities or park land dedication requirements. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda MitiqatiOn/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. 21. CULTURAL RESOURCES Items A throuqh D - "No": The certified EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, identified impacts related to the proposed development and the resultant negative effects to cultural resources. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda. The proposed Zone Change would not result in the alteration or destruction of archaeological sites and historic Exhibit A - Initial Study Responses Zone Change 94-006 January 23, 1995 Page 13 buildings, or cause a physical change which will affect cultural values not previously considered by EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda, as no specific development plans are proposed. Sources: Proposed Zone Change EIR 85-2, as amended with supplements and addenda Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. '22. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Items A throuqh d - "No": The proposed Zone Change would not result in the degradation of the environment. There is no potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long- term, environmental goals. There are no cumulative impacts and there would be no adverse effect to human beings for the reasons stated above. The Program EIR 85-2 addressed all of these concerns, and this project is fully within the scope of t~at discussion. Sources: As Previously Noted Mitiqation/Monitorinq Required: No additional mitigation required. PART IV - DETERMINATION EXHIBIT B INITIAL STUDY RESPONSES FOR ZONE CHANGE 94-006 On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project tEAS 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, it's supplements and addendum 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 i~. r~uired. / ' /i,: · · N~ME ~J~~ f~ ~ TITLE ~_~,~ [5~ JJ[.-~ DF :\ZC94006.ENV 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 95-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN (FINAL EIR 85-2, AS MODIFIED BY SUBSEQUENTLY ADOPTED SUPPLEMENTS AND ADDENDA) IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROGRAM EIR FOR ZONE CHANGE 94-006 AND ALL FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City. Council finds and determines as follows: Ao That Zone Change 94-006 is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act; and B . That the project is covered by a previously- certified Final Environmental Impact Report for the East Tustin Specific Plan which serves as a Program EIR for the proposed project. II. The East Tustin Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (85-2) previously certified on March 17, 1986, and modified by subsequently adopted supplements and addenda, was considered prior to approval of this project. The City Council, having final authority over the subject project hereby finds that this project is within the scope of the East Tustin Specific Plan previously approved. Ail feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the Program EIR are incorporated into this project. The Final EIR is, therefore, determined to be adequate to serve as a Program EIR for this project and satisfies all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Based on EIR 85-2, the City Council has found that the project involves no potential for any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources and therefore makes a De Minimis Impact Finding related to Assembly Bill 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990. In addition, there will not be a significant effect on the environment as applicable mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR have been incorporated into the project's approval which mitigate any potential significant environmental 10 11 12 13 · 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Resolution No. 95-22 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 21st day of February, 1995. Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk THOMAS R. SALTARELLI MAYOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) 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. 95-22 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: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. 1145 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 94-006 TO AMEND SUBSECTION "a" OF SECTION 3.6.3.C3 OF THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN ENTITLED "PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED SETBACKS" RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PATIO COVER AND TRELLIS STRUCTURES WITHIN PATIO HOME DEVELOPMENTS. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That an application has been filed by California Pacific Homes, requesting approval of Zone Change 94-006 to amend Subsection "a" of Section 3.6.3.C3 of the East Tustin Specific Plan entitled "Projections into Required Setbacks" related to the development standards for the construction of patio cover and trellis structures within. Patio Home developments. m . That a public hearing was duly notice, called and held on said application on February 13, · 1995 by the Planning Commission and on February 21, 1995 by the City Council. C . That an Environmental Impact Report (EIR 85-2 for the East Tustin Specific Plan) has been previously certified in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act for the subject project. m o Proposed Zone Change 94-006 would not be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare in that the amendments would provide for flexibility in locating patio cover structures while insuring that the Uniform Building Code requirements for separatio~ of structures would be satisfied. m o Proposed Zone Change 94-006 would be consistent with the City's General Plan, particularly the Land Use Element in that the amendments would provide for orderly development. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Ordinance No. 1145 Page 2 II. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the. City of Tustin DOES HEREBY ORDAIN as follows: Section 1. Subsection "a" of Section 3.6.3.C3 of the East Tustin Specific Plan entitled "Projections into Required Setbacks" is hereby amended to read as follows, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto: Covered patzo, trellzs or cano zes .................. ~ ..... '"":' "':'":'"":: ' ~-:::'":: ':"'": "i' :: ::::: ~ ::':'"::: ===================== 7::: '":::'":': ' ' ~ ~ .~ '"'"':'":'":'"":'"':'"':":::':: ' ':::":::;:".' :::::::::'":::.' :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .' :'::;:':':::':::'::::: ::".' ::':::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: re qu :: re d s e t ba c k s .... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :'~':'"'"'"~"<~'~'~'~'""'":'~":f~'"'""~f'han 50 percent of the p'~'i~':'~'"'""~"~':'"'""~'~'~:'~':~':':':'::~:~ Section 2. Severability Ail of the provisions of this ordinance shall be construed together in order to accomplish the purpose of these regulations. If any provision of this ordinance is held by a court to be unconstitutional, such unconstitutionality shall apply only to the particular facts, or if a provision is declared to be unconstitutional as applied to all facts, all of the remaining provisions of this ordinance shall continue to be fully effective. 28 i0 i! 12 !3 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ordinance No. 1145 Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 21st day of February, 1995. THOMAS R. SALTARELLI MAYOR MarY E. Wynn, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 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 Ordinance No. 1145 was duly and regularly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 21st day of February, 1995 and passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 21st day of February, 1995, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Mary E. Wynn, City Clerk EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO. 1145 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL (1) 1.1 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to the approval of any ~subsequent patio cover or trellis structure submittals utilizing the amended standards within the East Tustin Specific Plan area, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.2 The applicant shall sign and return an Agreement to Conditions Imposed form prior to any subsequent patio cover or trellis structure approvals utilizing the amended standards ,within the East Tustin Specific Plan area. (1) 1.3 The applicant shall hold and defend the City of Tustin harmless for all claims and liabilities out of City's approval of the entitlement process for this project. PLAN SUBMITTAL *** .2.1 Within 30 days of approval, the applicant shall submit 20 copies of the applicable pages of the East Tustin Specific Plan, and a camera ready master, with all revisions as approved by the subject Ordinance. FEES (1) 3.1 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $25.00 (twenty-five dollars) pursuant to AB 3185, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990, enabling the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the approval 'for the project granted herein shall be considered automatically null and void. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITIONS (2) PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY (3) MUNICIPAL CODE (4) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT Exhibit A Ordinance 1145 Page 2 In addition, should the Department of Fish and Game reject the Certificate of Fee Exemption filed with the Notice of determination and require payment of fees, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, within forty-eight (48) hours of notification, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of $850 (eight hundred fifty dollars) pursuant to AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990. If this fee is imposed, the subject project shall not be operative, vested or final unless and until the fee is paid.