The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPH 2 G.P. AMEND 89-02b 06-19-89m ~ ~m/m ~ m '"~ '".~ ~ PUBLIC HEADING -~ NO. 1 DATE: ,1UNE 19, 1989 ~ TO: FROM: SUBJECT: HONORABLE HA¥OR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL COIqlqUNIT¥ DEYELOPIqENT DEPARTHENT .GENERAL PLAN *AHENDIqENT 89-02(b) AND ZONE CHANGE 88-03 .J APPLICANT- HR. HICHAEL G. PAD IRVINE OFFICE INDUSTRIAL COIqPANY 2 PARK PLAZA, SUITE 300 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92714 CONSULTANT: MR. CHRIS MARTIN CDC ENGINEERING, INC. 15520-B ROCKFIELD BLVD. IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92718 LOCATION - NORTHWEST CORNER OF EDINGER STREET/~IAI~BOREE ROAD ENVI RONHENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WI~I THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONHENTAL QUALITY ACT. 1) A REQUEST TO RECLASSIFY .THE GENERAL PLAN LAND ~SE DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FROM P & I (PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL) TO I (INDUSTRIAL). 2) A REQUEST TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY FROI~ P & I (PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL) TO PC-IND (PLANNED COI~UNI~' INDUSTRIAL) RECOI~ENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions' ® Adopt Resolution No. 89-83 certifying the Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 89-02(b) and Zone Change 88-03; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 89-84 approving General Plan Amendment 89-02(b); and 3. Adopt Ordinance No. 1025 approVing Zone Change 88-03. C¶ty Couhcll Report GPA 89-02(b) June 19, 1989 Page two BACKGROUND On June 12, 1989, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2617 and 2618 recommendlng approval to the City Council of General Plan Amendment 89-02(b) and Zone Change 88-03. The applicant 18 requesting a General Plan Amendment and .Zone Change for an 18.4 acre stte located at the northwest corner of Edtnger Street (previously Moulton Parkway) and Jamboree Road to accommodate industrial development. The proposed General Plan Amendment would change the land use designation on the subject site from P & ! (Public and Institutional to ! (Industrial). The proposed Zone Change would change the zontng designation from P & I (Public and [nstitutional) to PC-ZND (Planned Community- Industrial). The subject site is currently vacant and was created with the realignment of Edinger St. reet and the Jamboree Road railroad overpass. Prior to the realignment, 'it was part of MCAS Tustin, which accounts for the P & I land use/zoning designation. Surrounding uses include MCAS Tustln to the south and west, the A.T. & S.F. railroad, and Irvine Industrial Complex-Tustin to the north, and vacant land designated for Public and Institutional u~es to the east. A public hearing notice denoting the time, date, and location of this hearing was published in the Tustin News. Property owners within 300 feet of the project site were notified by mail pursuant to State law. In addition, a copy of the meeting's agenda and staff report for this item has been forwarded to the appl i cant and consul rant. DISCUSSION . General Plan Amendment 89-02(b) - The proposed change to the General Plan land u~ designation w6'uld allow a logical expansion of the existing Irvine Industrial Comp,lex-Tustin located to the north. The designation .of this site to accommodate industrial land uses would be compatible with existing adjacent land uses, particularly when considering the military base operations to. the south and west and the industrial development to the north. The Land Use Element of the General Plan encourages industrial, type land uses in this area of the community to buffer the operations of the military base from other more sensititve uses in the Community. ® Zone Change,88-03 - The proposed zoning designation of PC-IND (Planned Community --Industrial) would allow for compatible industrial land uses and consistent zoning with adjacent properties to the north. By establishing the PC-IND designation on this property, the site would be included within the Irvine Industrial Complex-Tustin and would be subject to the provisions Community Development Department Ctty Counctl Report GPA 89-02(b) June 19, 1989 Page three I I and development standards of that complex (see At, tachment A). These standards and regulations tdentify permitted and conditionally permitted uses, development standard~, parktng requirements and other design related 1terns. Typical uses that would be permitted Jn this PC-IND designation lnclude manufacturing and light industrial uses, research and development uses, and commercial and office support uses. At this t~me, no specific development plans are proposed. Any slte specific proposals would be subject to the City's Design Revtew process, and' revtew by outside agencies to ensure that the adopted provisions of the PC-IND district and other concerns are satisfied and Implemented. CONCLUSION Staff believes that the proposed General' Plan Amendment and Zone Change are appropriate in light of the surrounding military and industr.ial land uses and would provide for orderly and harmonious development of the area and City. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 89-83 certifying the Negative Declaration, Resolution No. 89-84 approving General 'Plan Amendment 89-02(b) and Ordinance No. 1025 approvi6g Zone Change 88-03. Daniel Fox Associate Planner ~ChTistin& A. -Shiffgleton ~ ' Director of Community D~velopment DF :CAS:ts ' Attachments- Negative Declaration Resolution No's. 89-83 and 89-84 Ordinance No. 1025 Communit.y_ Development Department N_EGAT!VE DECLARAT!.ON CITY OF TUSTIN . 300 CENTENNIAL 'WAY, TUSTIN, CA.. 92680 i i · ProJect Tttle~ h..,PA 89-02(b), zc 88-03 Ftie ~o. : .. Project Location: Northwest corner of-Edinger Street/Jamboree Road Project Description: Amendment to the land use map from Public and Instituc to Industrial and Zone Change from Public and Institutiona~ to PC- Industr Project Proponent: The Irvine Office and Industrial Company Contact Person: Daniel Fox Telephone: 544-8890 Ext. 254 ii iiii ! ! The Community Oeve.lopnmnl; Department has conducted an initJal study for the above project in accordance wtth the City of Tusttn's procedures regarding lmplenmntatton of the California EnvlFonmen~al 0ualtty Act, and on the basis of that study hereby find: That there, is no substantial evidence' that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. That potential significant affects w. ere identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and agreed to by the applicant that -would avoid or mitigate the affects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Saqd revisions-are attached to and 'hereby made a part'of this Negative Declaration. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not required. i The initial study _,.,which provides the basis for this determination fs on file at the Commun')ty Development Department, City of Tustin. The public is invited to comment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the review period, w~ich begins with the public notice of a Negative Declaration and extends for seven calendar days. Upon review by the Community Development Director, this review period may be extended if deemed necessary.. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS 4:30 p.m. on June 12, 1989 :oal Lal. DATED: Community Development Director lo' CITY-OF TUSTIN community Development Department ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY FORM · o Address and Phone Number of Proponent ~ F~g C_~'~,' * U ~ m i~~ · · Date of Checklist Submitted ~J)~E !'~, ~.~ ~q~ .... · I 'Agency Requiring Checklist ('~-['~, OF 'T'uST'I,~J Name of Proposal, if applicable II. En~i~tai I~ (Explancrtions of all '~/es" and "m.cr/oe" answers are required on attached sheets,) I. Em-th. Will the propos=l result im a. Unstable earth conditions or in ctxu~es in geologic substructures? b* Disruptiam~ displacements, comRoction or over¢overing of the soil? " c. Change in topography ar ground surface relief fecrtures?~ The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X fo Any lncre~e in wind ar water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltationt deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream ar the bed of the ocean or any bayt inlet ar lake? o 2, g. Exposure of people or property to geolo- gic hazards such as earthquakes, lanclslicl~, muclslides, ground failure, or similar hazcrcls? Air. Will the .proposal result ins Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? · b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Water. Will the proposal result in= a. Changes in currents, ar the course of dl- rection of water movements, in either marine ar fresh waters? b. Chmges in absorption rotes, drainage pat- terns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c. Alterations to the cou~e or fl~w of flood waters? cl. Chcr~je in the 'amount of surface water in. any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, .ar in my alteration of surface water quality, cluding 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 with- drawals, ar through interception of on aquifer by cuts or excavations? . h. Substantial reduction in the a.mount o.f water .otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water re- lated hazcrds such as flooding ar tidal waves? _X ,× 5, 0 8, .9. Plant Life. Will the proposal result lm Cl~e in the diversity of species, ar number of ~ species of plants (including trees, shrubs~ grass~ crops~ and aquatic plants)? b. Reductian of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reductian in ocreage of any agricultural crop? ' Animal Life. Will the proposal result in= b~ Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic orgenisrns' ~r ir~ects)? Reductim of the numbers of any uniqUe, rare or enclangered specie~ of animals? lntrod~ctien of new species of mlmais into an area, ar result in a barrier to the migratian ar movement of minmls? Deterioratian to existing fish ar..wildlife habitat? ' ' Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severn noise levels? Light md Glare. Wlll the proposal produce new light ar glare? Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub- stantlal alteration of the pres~:t or planned land use of an area? Natural Resam~es. Will the proposal result in: · a. Increa~ in the rate of u~e of any natural resources? Yes X X be o. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? Yes I0. Rl~k of UpaS. Will the propo~l ln~ol~ A risk of an explosian or the release of h~zarcim~ subst~ (Including, but not limited to, oil, pestlcidee, .chemicals or radiation) in the event of m accident ar up~t condltlom? X Pms~le Interference with m emergency reaponse plem ar ~n emergenc~ mmcuatlon plan? ' I1. 12. 13. Population. Will tile proposal alter the location, distrbution, density, or growth rate of the -humon population of on area? I-Ic~si~ Will the proposal affect existing hous- ing, or create a demand for additional housing? Trc.~portatlon/Circulatlcn, Will the proposal result in: 14. a~ bo' Generation of substantial additional vehicular, movement? · Effects on 'existing parking facilities, or de~ far ~ ~arking? - ~ Substantial Impact ~ existing trm=par- tation sy=terr=? d. Alteratians to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase jn traffic hazards'to motor vehicle=, bicyclists ar pedestrians? Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need far new or altered govemmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Par~s ar other recreational facilities? Ye~ 15. e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? .. . f. Other governmental services? ~gy. Will the proposa~ result im a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon exist- ing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy?: ... 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 systerr~? c. Water? cl. Sewer or septic tanks? e, Starm water drainage? f,' Solid waste and disposal? · 17' Humm I-lealt~ Will the propasal result in= a, Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b, E~xposure of people to potential health hazards? 18.. 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 aesthetical, ly offensive site open to public view? Re~:reatian, Will the proposal result in an. impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. iii ii I a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destructian of a prehistoric or historic ~logical site? III. IV. b. Will the propcwal re,uit in ~ physical or (msthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, struc~re, or object? .. c. Does the proposal-hcnm the potential to cause a physical chcmge which wauld affect unique ethnic cultural values? Will the proposal re=trict existing religious ar sacred use= within the potential impact Mmdatory F-indings of Signiflcmce. Does the project have the potential to. degrade the quality of the enviranment, · substantially reduce the habitat of a fi,h or wildlife ~pecies, cc~se a fish or wild- life population to drop below self .us-. raining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or enclahgered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods · of California history or prehistory? bo Does the prajecf have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of lang-term, enviranmental goals? (A short- term impact an the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brC~f, definitive period of time while long-term .i~acts will endure well into the future.) Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively con- siderable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each re~urce is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts an the enviranment is significant.) d. Does the project have enviranmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Discumion of Environmental Evaluation Oetermination ' (To be completed by the Lead Agency) Y~ .On the basis of this initial evaluatiam I find that the proposed proi~'t ¢OUL.D NOT have a significant effect ~n the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find. that although the prapmed prelect could have a.signiflcant effect ~an .the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this 'case bL, cc~se the mitigatlan measures described an an attached sheet have be~ added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION Will. BE PREPARED, I find the pmpased project MAY have a significant effect an the envira~- merit, and an ENVIRQNMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Signature DZBCUBBZON OF ][NVZI:IO~AZ, EV'AL~TTON GP~ 89-02b a.l~d SC 88-03 (ZRV'ZH'B COI(~.]~N~) PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUPPLEMENT - The proposed project is a request to change the G~neral Plan land use designation from P & I (Public · and -Institutional) to I (Industrial) and the zoning designation from P & I (Public and Institutional) to PC-IND (Planned Community - Industrial) on An 18.4 acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Edinger Street and Jamboree Road. No actual'development plans are being, considered at this time. Unless otherwise specified in the following sections, any physical development of the property will require, at minimum, plans to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and separate environmental review as part'of the City,s design review process. Appropriate mitigation measures and mitigation monitoring in response to the site specific plans would be developed at the time of any subsequent reviews. The project site is situated in an urban area. The U.S. Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin is located to the west and south (zoned Public and Institutional), the A.T. & S-.F. railroad and various industrial uses .to the north (zoned Planned Community Industrial), and vacant'land zoned Public and Institutional to the east. · 1. E~RTH - The land u~e designation amendment and zone change would not result in any 'changes to the existing earth conditions and topographic features of the site since no ... specific grading'or site specific plans are being considered as part of this request --Appropriate soils reports and grading plans would be required as part of the City,s design review process and any subsequent review. sources: City of Tustin Building Division Standard procedures for design review for the City of - Tustin, Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 2. /~IR - The land use. amendment and zone change would not result ..in any degradation to the existing air quality. sources: AQMD standards for preparing EIR documents. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. SC SSION OF GP~, 89-02b and ZC 88-03 (ZRV~NE COMPANY) Page 2 · WATER a,c,d.e.f,_~.h,i- 'The change in land use designation 'would not result in any change to the existing water conditions based on a review of the site by City Staff· sources: City of Tustin Building Division. City of Tustin Public Works Department). Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. WATER b - Any future development authorized under the Zoning Code would add impervious surface area to the property which could effect drainage and absorption rates. ~ppropriate drainage plans would be required as part of the City,s building permit process and any subsequent review. sources: City of Tustin Building Division. City of Tustin Public Works Department. Standard procedures for design review for the City of Tustin, Community Development. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. · PLANT LIFE - The project site will remain unchanged relative to the existing plant life. The site is free from any plant lifp, wi~h the exception of'~ommon weeds and grasses. Any development under the existing or proposed land use designation and zoning would result in removal of the existing vegetation. sources: Field Observations. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 1 ANIMAL LIFE'- The subject property is free of any significant population of animals, fish, or wildlife. sources: Field Observations. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. NOISE a -' The change in land use from 'public and institutional to industrial would not result in any increase to existing noise levels on the site or in the immediate area in that no specific development is proposed at' this time. Actual noise levels as a result of physical development could vary significantly depending upon the actual use of the property. Future noise impacts would be evaluated at the time of subsequent submittals and reviewed for conformance with the City,s Noise Ordinance; DISCUSSION OF F, NVI~~~ EV2~U~TION GP~ 89-02b and SC 88-03 (IRVINE COHP~NY) Page 3 · sources= . City of Tustin Zoning Code. City of Tustin General Plan Noise Element. Standard procedures for design review for the City of Tustin, Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. NOISE b- There are existing noise so'urces from the roadway, railroad, and military base operations which may expose future users of the site to additional noise. Any development would need to satisfy the City,s Noise Ordinance and Building Codes to achieve required interior noise levels. sources= City of Tustin Zoning Code. City of Tustin General Plan Noise Element. Standard procedureS ~or design review for the City of Tustin, Community Development Department. · Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. · LIGHT,ND GLARE "~ bhange in land use designation and zoning would not result in any increased light or glare on the property since no site specific plans.are proposed as part of this request. Future development proposals Would be reviewed for potential impacts at tha~time. ~ · ~ · sources:' City of Tustin Zoning Code. City of Tustin Security Code. Standard proce~ures for design review for the Tustin, Community Development Department. City of Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. L~ND USE - The project proposes to change the land use designation and zoning on a vacant 18.4 acre property, from Public and Institutional to Industrial. The Marine base, and other industrial uses are existing adjacent to the site as seen in field observations and illustrated on the General Plan land use map. This property was previously a portion of the marine base which accounts for its present public and institutional zoning. The ProPosed land use designation appears to be appropriate given the characteristics of the existing industrial complex north of Edinger Street and the military base south of Edinger Street. The proposed zoning of PC-IND would adopt the existing zoning regulations and uses for the Irvine Industrial Complex - Tustin,- situated immediately north of this property. DZSCUSSZON OF ENVI~~~ EV'ALU'ATION GPA 89-02~ and-ZC 88-03 (IRVINE COHP2~NY) Page 4 sources=. City of Tustin Community Development' Department: City of Tustin General Plan Land Use Map. Field Observations. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. · 1TATURAL RESOURCES - The change in land use would not result in any increased use of natural resources since no actual development is associated with this request. ~ny future development will use resources in the form of construction materials and daily operations· Given the scale of potential development, the use of natural resources is not anticipated to be a factor in development of this property. sources= City of Tustin Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 10. RISK OF UPSET - The change in land use would not result in any increased risk of upset to the- property or the neighb, orhood since no site specific plans are proposed as part of this request. However, industrial uses could be a greater threat than institutional uses. Development of this property with industrial uses would require review as to its potential for upset and compliance ~with applicable building code requirements and Fire Department requirements. The site is not located within any seismicly sensitive areas. sources= City of Tustin Community Development Department. Orange County Fire Department, City of Tustin General Plan). Standard procedures for design review for the City of Tustin, Community Development Department. · Mitigation .Monitoring: None Required. 11. POPULATION - The proposed project would not .result in any direct increase in population in that no. additional dwelling units would be created with the proposed land use change. However, industrial, uses typically attract people to the area by way of new jobs. and the need to work. close to home where institutional uses typically service the needs of the existing population. Any future development on this site would be evaluated for impacts on population. DISCUSSION OF ENV~ItO~AL EVALU:A~:I:ON GP/~ '89-02b a.~d SC 88-03 (IRVINE COMPANY) Page 5 sources: City of Tustin Housing Element of the General Plan. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 12. HOUSING '- As previously mention in section 11 above, the change to industrial land uses could create a demand for additional housing by the creation of new jobs in the area. Any future development on this site would be evaluated for impacts on housing. The proposal would not displace any existing housing. · . sources: City of Tustin Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 13. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION - The changeof land use from public and institutional to industrial would not in itself' increase or have an effect on the exi:sting traffic conditions in this area. The Public Works Department has indicated that th~ proposed land use change Would not have an effect on traffic given the conditions of the existing street system~ however, at the time specific development plans are proposed, a traffic study would most likely be required to evaluate in detail, the effects of the specific development plans on the existing street system. Any~§ubmittal of site specific plans would be subject to City rev.iew and the provisions of CEQA. sources: City of Tustin Traffic Engineer. City of Tustin Public Works Department. ~ Standard procedures for design review for the City of 'Tustin, Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES - All services are existing and are adequate to serve the proposed l~nd use amendment and zone change. The availability of. public services (i.e Police, Fire, and City Maintenance) to adequately serve the future development of the site would be. reviewed at the time of any subsequent submittals. sources: Orange County Fire Department. City of Tustin Police Department. City of Tustin Community Development Department. City of Tustin Public Works Department. Standard procedures for design review for.the Tustin, Community development Department. o City of DISCUSSION oF' ENVI~~~ EV'ALUATION GP~ 89-02b and ZC 88-03 (IRV~NE Page 6 Mitigation Monitoring.:- None Required. 15. ENERGY - The change in land use would not result in any Change in'the, use of energy since site specific plans are not proposed as part of this request. Given the scale and type of development, it is not anticipated that development~would result in a substantial usage of energy; however, future develop would be reviewed to determine the possible impacts. sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. UTILITIES- The site is in an urban area with all utilities available to the site from Edinger Street and through the public utilities easement along the north.'property line and would be adequate to accommodate industrial development. sources: City of Tustin Public Works Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required'. 17.. ~ HEALTH - The change in land use would not be' expected -.. to result' in any effects on human health. The proposed uses that would be permitted _~on the property are light manufacturing, research and.development, commercial seDvices, and office support uses '~hich typically do not create conditions that negatively effect human health. Uses that' involve large amounts of chemicals or flammable materials require approval of a conditional use permit to specifically evaluate the use on a case by case basis pursuant to the provisions of the PC-IND regulations. In either case, the review process would also require separate environmental review in accordance with the provisions of CEQA. sources: Orange County Fire Department. City of Tustin Police Department. City of Tustin Community Development Department. Standard procedures for design review for the City of Tustin, Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 18. ~ESTHETICS - The change in land use would not result in any change to aesthetics in the area since site specific plans are not proposed as part of this request. The proposed PC- IND zoning designation would adopt the existing zoning regulations and development standards applied to the industrial complex situated immediately to the north. Site DZBCUBBION OF ENVIRONMENT]fL EFALITATION GPA 89-021~ and SC 88-03 (ZRVINE COMPANY) Page 7 spec~fi'c development plans would be subject to the' City,s design review process by the Community Development Department to ensure the aesthetic qualities of the area. sourceB: City of Tustin Zoning Code. Standard procedures, for design review for the City of Tustin, Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 19. RECREATION'- The proposed land use change would not result in an increase need for recreational opportunities. Industrial uses typically do not demand extensive recreational amenities from the community as do residential land uses. sources: City of Tustin General Plan Land Use Element. City of Tustin Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES - The change in land use will not have any effect on the cultural resources in that the General Plan does not identify any cultural resources on this property. sources= City of Tustin General PIan. City of Tustin Historic,-Resources SUrvey. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFIC~/qCE - The change in land use will not result in any adverse environmental impacts as a result of the proposed land use designation amendment and zone change. Again, no site specific plans are proposed as part of this request. Subsequent review of site development plans by various agencies, services, and the Community Development Department would be required. 'I~ this connection, separate environmental review of the site specific plans would be required as part of the City's design review process and in accordance with CEQA. sources= City of Tustin General Plan. City of Tustin Zoning Code. City of Tustin Community Development, Public Works, and Police Departments. Orange County Fire Department.. Standard procedures for design review for the City of Tustin, Community Development Department. Mitigation Monitoring: None Required. .. o- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25' 26 27 :28 RESOLUTION NO. 89-83 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CERTIFYING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89-02(b) AND ZONE CHANGE 88-03, 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: A. General Plan Amendment 89-02(b) and Zone Change 88-03 are considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California · Environmental Quality Act. B. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and has .been distributed for public review. Ce 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 Decl arati on. D. The Planning Commissi. on has evaluated the proposed final Negative Declaration and determined it to be adequate and complete as evidenced . by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2625. II. A Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The C?~y COuncil having final approva~ author;ty over General Plan Amendment 89-02ib) and Zone Changev8-03, has reviewed 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 there is no substantial evidence that there will be any significant adverse environmental effects as a result of the approval of the 'project because mitigation measures identified in the Negatiee Declaration have been incorporated into the project which mitigate any potential significant environmental effects to a point where clearly no significant effects will occur. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tusttn, at a regular meeting on the day of , 1989. Ursula lE. Kennedy, Mayor M~r~ IWynn, ' City Clerk 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 89-84 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 8g-O2(b), A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM P&I (PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL) TO I (INDUSTRIAL) ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EDINGER STREET AND'JAMBOREE ROAD. The City Council of the City of Tustln does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: A, Government Code Section 65356.1 provides that when it is deemed to be in the public interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General Plan. B. That a proper application has been filed by the Irvine Company for the purpose of reclassifying the General Plan Land Use designation of the property located at the northwest corner of Edinger Street and Jamboree Road from P & I (Public and Institutional) to I (Industrial). · C. That a public hearing before the City Council to consider General Plan Amendment 89-02(b) was duly called, noticed, and held on June 19, 1989. D. The Planning Commtssfu)n recommended approval-to the City Council of General Plan Amendment 89-02(b) as evidenced by Planning Commission Resolution' No. 2617. E® Government Code Section 65358(b) states that no mandatory element of a General Plan shall be amended more frequently than 4 times per calendar year. However, each amendment may include more than I change. Appropriately, in conjunction with General Plan Amendment 89-02(b), 4 other Amendments shall be considered I amendment per Government Code Section 65358(b). F. This General Plan Amendment has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental. Quality Act. It has been determined that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. G. The proposed Industrial designation is in the best interest of the public and surrounding properties in that an Industrial designation would allow greater land use compatibility between the adjacent military operations and industrial uses. H. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with other elements of the General Plan, particularly the Land Use Element. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 9~1 25 2(i 28 Resolution No. 89-84 Page two II. The City Counct1 hereby approves General Plan Amendment 89-02(b) as sho~n on Exhlbtt A, amendtng the .General Plan Land Use designation from P&I (Publlc and Institutional) to I (Industrial) on the property located at the northwest corner of Edlnger Street and Jamboree Road. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the day of' , 1989. ii ii lin - - - ursula E. ~ennedy, ~ Mayor ~ry wynn~ city Clerk · / · o !.-. INDUSTRIA GENERAL PlaN AMENDMENT 89-02(b) .. .1, .o EXHIBIT A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19~ 21 9.2 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. 1025 AN ORDINANCE' OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 88-03, A REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EDINGER STREET AND JAMBOREE ROAD FROM P & I, (PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL) TO PC-IND (PLANNED COMMUNITY - INDUSTRIAL). The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That'a proper application has been filed by the Irvine Company's Irvtne Office and Industrial Company for the purpose-of rezoning an 18.4 acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Edinger Street and Jamboree Road from P & I (Public and Institutional) to PC-IND (Planned Community-Industrial). B. That a public hearing before the City Council to consider Zone Change 88-03 was duly called, noticed, and held on June 19, .1989. C. 'The Planning Commission' recommended approval to the City Council of Zone Change 88-03 as evidenced by Plann4ng Commission Resolution No. 2618. D. This Zone Change has been reviewed in accordance wi th the California Environmeni~al Quality Act. It has been determined that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. E. The proposed zoning is consistent with the General Plan, particularly the Land Use Element, and General Plan Amendment 89'-02(b), in that the proposed zoning would allow compatible uses and orderly development in the neighborhood. F. The proposed zoning is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare and would be compatible with the existing adjacent military operations and industrial uses. II. The City Council hereby approves Zone Change 88-03 as shown on the attached Exhibit A, amending the City of Tustin Zoning Map to rezone an 18.4 acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Edinger Street and Jamboree Road. from P&I {Public and Institutional) to PC-IND (Planned Community-Industrial). 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ordinance No. 1025 Page two, . . .- · . PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Counct1 of the Clty of Tustln, at a regular meetlng on the day. of ......... , 1989. Ursula E. Ke~hedy, Mayor Mary Wynn, City Clerk *'lee . ! PC-IND (PLANN ,, UN! ZONE CHANGE 88-03 EXHIBIT. A ·