HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPT 1 P.C. ACT AGENDA 03-17-86ACTION AGENDA
GENDATM
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR PEETING
MARCH 10, 1986
REPORTS
NO. 1
3-17-86
CALL TO ORDER:
7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Well, Puckett, Baker, McCarthy
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
PRESENTATIONS: None.
PUBLIC CONCERNS: (Limited to 3 minutes per person for items not on the agenda)
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL
OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE
YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
(ALL MATFERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED
ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO
SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME OF THE
VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR
PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.)
1. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting February 24, 1986
Resolution No. 2305 denying off-site beer and wine at 13842 Newport Avenue,
Suite A.
Puckettmoved, Baker seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2b
Applicant:
City of Tustin
Request:
To update and amend the Noise Element of the Tustin Area General
Plan.
Presentation:
Jeff Davis, Associate Planner
McCarth~ moved, Puckett seconded to approve General Plan Amendment 86-2b by the
adoption of Resolution No. 2310. Motion carried 4-0.
Action Agenda
March 10, 1986
page two
4. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2c
Applicant:
Location:
Physician's Office Service, Inc.
1101 Sycamore Avenue
Request:
To amend the land use diagram of the Land Use Element of the
Tustin Area General Plan. The proposal is to change the land
use from multi-family residential to Public and Institutional.
Presentation:
Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner
Puckett moved, Baker seconded, to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 86-2c
by the adoption of Resolution 2314. Notion fatled: Wetl, McCarthy opposed.
5. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 86-2d
Applicant:
Location:
City of Tusttn Planning Commission
The area bounded by Sixth Street on the south, "B" Street on the
east, 333 feet northerly of Sixth Street on the north and 200
feet easterly of Pacific Street as the westerly boundary.
Request:
To amend the land use diagram of the Land Use Element of the
Tustin Area General Plan. The proposal is to change the current
designation of Residential Single Family to Multiple Family
Residential.
Presentation:
Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner
A total of 16 people spoke at the public hearing section. 15 were opposed and I was
in favor of this amendment.
Puckett moved, RcCarth~ seconded, to continue this item to the March 24, 1986
Planning Commission. Notion carried 3-1. (Baker opposed)
6. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2e
Applicant:
Location:
City of Tusttn
1800 San Juan Street
Request:
To amend the land use diagram of the Land Use Element of the
Tusttn Area General Plan from the current Multi-Family
designation to the Public and Institutional designation.
Presentation:
Ed Knight, Senior Planner
Puckett moved, Baker seconded to recommend approval of .General Plan Amendment 86-2e
by the adoption of Resolution"2312. Notion carried 4-0.
Actlon Agenda
March 10, 1986
page three
7. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2f
Applicant:
Location:
City of Tustin
13881 to 13895 Browning Avenue
Request:
To amend the land use diagram of the Land Use Element of the
Tustin Area General Plan from the current Single-family
Residential designation to the Multi-family Residential
designation.
Presentation:
Ed Knight, Senior Planner
Puckettmoved~ Baker seconded to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 86-2f
by the adoption of Resolution 2313. Motton carrted 4-0.
8. VARIANCE 86-2
Applicant:
Location:
H.B. Sign Company
17th Street and Carroll Way
Request:
Authorization to vary with the sign code and construct a 260
sq. ft. monument sign.
Presentation:
Jeff Davis, Associate Planner
Puckettmoved, Baker seconded, approval of Variance 86-2. The sign is to be tl~ same
size and the base of the sign be raised to no more than 5'. Staff shall create a new
Resolu~on to reflect those lt~l~ttons. This Resolutto~wt11 be put on the next
consent calen~r. Motion carried 4-0.
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Presentatt on:
USE PERMIT 86-8
Shu Jul Huang on behalf of Master Chicken
17292 - L McFadden Avenue
Authorization for an on-site beer and wine sales license.
Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner
Wet1 moved, McCarthy, approval of Use PeAt 86-8 by the adoption of
eso u on w a nor addition). Motion carrl~ 4-0.
AOMI#ISll~TIVE MATERS
01d Business
10. Pacific Bell Emergency Episode Transportation Management Plan
Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner
Action Agenda
March 10, 1986
page four
Puckett moved, McCarthy seconded to recommend approval of the proposed Pactftc Bell
Emergency Eptsode Transportattod Management Plan to the City Councll. Morton carried
4--0.
New Bustness
None,
STAFF CONCERNS
11. Oral Report on Council acttons of March 3, 1986.
Presentation: Donald D. Lamm, Otrector of Community Development
COHM[SS[ON CONCERNS
AD&OURIEdENT
Puckett moved~ McCarthy seconded to adjourn at 11:10 p.m. to the March 24, 1986
meeting. Motion carried 4-0.
AGENDA
llJSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 10, 1986
C~L TO ORDER:
7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Wetl, Puckett, Baker, McCarthy
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION
PRESENTATIONS:
PUBLIC CONCERNS:
None.
(Ltmtted to 3 mtnutes per person for 1rems not on the agenda)
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION ON A SUBJECT, PLEASE FILL
OUT THE CARDS LOCATED ON THE SPEAKER'S TABLE. ALSO, PLEASE GIVE
YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
(ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED
ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE WILL BE NO
SEPARATE'DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS PRIOR TO THE TIME.OF THE
VOTING ON THE MOTION UNLESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, STAFF OR
PUBLIC REQUEST SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED AND/OR REMOVED
FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE ACTION.)
Minutes from Planning Commission meeting February 24, lg86
Resolution No. 2305 denying off-site beer and wine at 13842 Newport Avenue,
Suite A.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2b
Applicant: City of Tusttn
Request: To update and amend the Noise Element of the Tusttn Area General
Plan.
Jeff Davis, Associate Planner
Presentation:
Agenda
March 10, 1986
page two
4. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2c
Applicant:
Location:
Physician's Office Service, Inc.
1101 Sycamore Avenue
Request:
To amend the land use diagram of the Land Use Element of the
Tustin Area General Plan. The proposal is to change the land
use from multi-family residential to Public and Institutional.
Presentation:
Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner
5. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 86-2d
Applicant:
Location:
City of Tustin Planning Commission
The area bounded by Sixth Street on the south, "B" Street on the
east, 333 feet northerly of Sixth Street on the north and 200
feet easterly of Pacific Street as the westerly boundary.
Request:
To amend the land use diagram of the Land Use Element of the
Tustin Area General Plan. The proposal is to change the current
designation of Residential Single Family to Multiple Family
Residential.
Presentation:
Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner
6. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2e
Applicant:
Location:
City of Tustin
1800 San Juan Street
Request:
To amend the land use diagram of the Land Use Element of the
Tustin Area General Plan from the current Multi-Family
designation to the Public and Institutional designation.
Presentation:
Ed Knight, Senior Planner
7. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2f
Applicant:
Location:
City of Tustln
13881 to 13895 Browning Avenue
Request:
To amend the iand use diagram of the Land Use Element of the
Tustin Area General Plan from the current Single-family
Residential designation to the Multi-family Residential
designation.
Presentation: Ed Knight, Senior Planner
Agenda
March 10, 1986
page three
8. VARIANCE 86-2
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Presentation:
H.B. Sign Company
17th Street and Carroll Way
Authorization to vary with the sign code and construct a 260
sq. ft. monument sign.
Jeff Davis, Associate Planner
Applicant:
Locati on:
Request:
Presentation:
USE PERMIT 86-8
Shu Jul Huang on behalf of Master Chicken
17292 - L McFadden Avenue
Authorization for an on-site beer and wine sales license.
Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner
AOMI#ISll~ATIVE HATTERS
Old Business
10. Pacific Bell Emergency Episode Transportation Management Plan
Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner
New Business
None.
STAFF CO#CER#S
11. Oral Report on Council actions of March 3, 1986.
Presentation: Oonald O. Lamm, Director of Community Development
CO~ISSION CONCERNS
AD3OURNH£NT
Adjourn to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
MINUTES
TUSTIN PLA#NING COMMZSS~O#
REGULAR I~ETING
FEBRUARY 24, 1986
CALL TO OROER:
7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Wetl, Puckett, Baker, McCarthy
PLEDGE OF ALLEGZAIICE/ZBVOCATIO#
PRESENTATIONS:
None.
PUBLTC CONCERNS:
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes from Planning Commi'Sslon~ meettng February 10, 1986.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Baker seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion
carried 4-0.
P.UBL[C HEARX#GS
2. USE PERMIT NO. 86-6
Applicant:
Locatt on:
Request:
Ron Bamburger on behalf of La Mancha Development Co.
13482 Newport Avenue, Unit A
Authorization'for an off-site beer and wine sales license.
Presentation:
Laura Pickup, Assistant Planner
Commissioner Baker questioned the use of Lambert School. Laura Pickup explained it
is used for annex courses for the highschool and a preschool.
Commissioner Wetl acknowledged receipt of a letter from Martine Pilcher of 1045 San
Juan, requesting denial of the Use Permit.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 24, 1986
page two
Chair Well opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. The following people spoke:
Jack Miller, 17352 Parker Dr., supported the staff position of denial highlighting
problems associated with minors obtaining alcohol, loitering, theft, etc.
Eon Bamber~er, La Mancha Development, supported the project and submitted a petition
containing approximately 30 signatures of residents.near the proposed site who ..
support the placement of a convenience market at the site.
Michael Austin, Southland Corp. (7-11), handed out information on Southland Corp's
policy on alcohol sales, loitering prohibition, and signs. He explained ABC's
intention is to not issue a license to a business within 200' of a school; this
project is within 600'. In order to sell alcohol, sales clerks must be over 18 years
of age according to a new State law that went into affect January 1986.
Commissioner Puckett moved, McCarthy seconded to deny Use Permit 86-6 and directed
staff to prepare an appropriate resolution. Motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC HE~INGS (continued)
3. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2a
{pplicant:
(equest:
Presentation:
The City of Tusttn
An amendment to the Circulation Element of the City of Tusttn,
adding text and diagrams to the existing Element.
~dward M. Knight, Senior Planner
Terry Austin, Austin Foust Associates, made himself available to answer questions.
Commissioner McCarthy questioned how staff's recommendation concerning cancellation
of the overpass on Newport Avenue would affect this study. Mr. Austin explained that
the connection of Newport Avenue to Edinger is what is important; it is a matter of
i~lementation but not a matter for the circulation plan.
Commissioner Puckett questioned where the scenic highway would be in Tustin. Ed
Knight explained that the Scenic Highway Element has been incorporated into the
Circulation Element. Most of the highways are located in East Tustin and have a
minimum of 18'-20' of landscaping which is far in excess of the 5' minimum
landscaping according to the Element.
Commissioner Well clarified page 8 population projection of 86,000 by the year 2000
and that it includes not only the City of Tustin but also part of the sphere of
influence area in North Tustin. Also, page 4." population within the
incorporated limits has grown to... 33,717 in ~g~O~ . . ."; she would like that
changed to match Table 3-1, 30,271.
Chair Well opened the public hearing at 8:21 p.m. Seeing no one wishing to speak,
she closed the hearing at 8:21 p.m.
Commissioner Puckett moved, McCarthy seconded to adopt Resolution 2307 reco,)b)~nding
adoption of the amended Circulation Element to the City Council. Motion carried 4-0.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 24, 1986
page three
4. USE PERMIT NO. 86-7
m
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
William Hockenberry on behalf of Dopp and Curl Development Corp.
Northeasterly corner of 2nd and "C" Streets (185-195 "C" Street).
Authorization to develop an office building in the C-2 Central
Commercial Zone.
Presenteti on:
Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development
Chair Well opened the public hearing at 8:27 p.m. The following people spoke:
William Hockenberry, Architect, made himself available to answer questions.
Craig Curl, Oopp & Curl, addressed Exhibit "A" number 8 requiring a new water main on
"C" Street or 2nd Street and requested clarification.
Don Lamm explained that this condition was generated by the Engineering Department
which recommended, "... the developer will need to contact the O.C. Fire Marshall
for fire protection requirements. This may require the developer to construct a new
water main in either "C" Street or 2nd Street." Engineering may believe there is
going to be a problem providing adequate fire flows to serve this building. Who is
responsible for the cost depends on what is necessary. If Mr. Curl's building is the
only person causing this need and nobody else would benefit, he would be the person
financially responsible. If the water main would benefit surrounding property owners
or if other owners were allowed to connect into it, a reimbursement agreement could
then be established or someone else could participate financially.
Seeing no one further wishing to speak, Chair Well closed the hearing at 8:34 p.m.
Commissioner McCarthy moveld, Puckett seconded to approve Use Permit 86-7 by the
adoption of Resolution 2306. Motion carried 4-0.
ADMIMISTRATIVE MK{'{'ERS
.Old Business
None.
New Business
None.
STAFF CONCERNS
5. Oral Report on Council actions of Februar~ 18, 1986.
Presentation:
Donald D. La,,.,,, Director of Community Development
CONCERNS
Commissioner Well requested the City Council Agenda and Action Agenda reflect, under
"Recommended Action", when items are recommended by the Planning Commission instead
of the Community Development Department.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 24, [g86
page four
Commissioner Puckett questioned how many sites are available in the Auto Center. Don
Lamm informed that staff is still negotiating with a few dealers, there are three
committed at this time.
Commissioner Baker asked when Bryan Avenue would open again. Don Lamm answered that
Bryan is due to open. in March.
Commissioner Well announced she would be absent from the Planning Commission meetings
on April 14th and June 9th.
Commissioner Well requested the City Attorney's office ~provtde the Commission with a
copy of a an article from Best and Krte~er entitled "Potential Personal Liability of
Board and Council Members under State Law, Government Code Section 825.6
ADJOURI~E:~'I'
Commissioner McCarthy moved, Baker seconded to adjourn at 8:46 p.m. to the next
regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 4-0.
KATHY WEIL, Chairman
DONNA ORR, Recording Secretary
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
15
1¢
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2~
25
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2305
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR THE AUTHORIZATION FOR OFF-SITE BEER AND WINE
SALES AT 13842 NEWPORT AVENUE, SUITE A.
The Planning Commission of the city of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
That a proper application (Use Permit 86-6) has been filed by La
Mancha Development Company requesting authorization for an
off-site beer and wine sales license at 13842 Newport Avenue,
Suite A.
B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said
application.
Co
That establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use
applied for will, under the circumstances of this case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general
welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood
of such proposed use, evidenced by the following findings:
1. That an alcoholic beverage sales establishment is
inappropriate at this location due to its proximity to
C.C. Lambert Elementary School and Tustin High School;
e
That an alcoholic beverage sales establishment at this
location is inappropriate due to its proximity (less than
100') to residential properties because of increased noise
light intensity and loitering caused by the proposed
applicant's use.
Do
That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use
applied for will be injurious or detrimental to the property and
improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, nor to
the general welfare of the city of Tusttn as evidenced by
compliance with the city's Zoning and Development standards.
That the project is categorically exempt from the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act as specified in
Section 15303.
II.
The Planning Commission hereby denies Use Permit 86-6 to authorize
off-site beer and wine sales at 13842 Newport Avenue, Suite A as
applied for.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tusttn Planning Commission,
held on the day of , 1986.
DONNA ORR, Recording Secretary
KATHY WEIL, Chairman
Pl nnin Commission
OATE:
SUBJECT:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
ACTION:
MARCH 10, t986
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2b:
THE 'rUST'IN AREA GENERAL PLAN
REVISIONS OF THE NOISE ELEMENT OF
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL INPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED
IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF TIlE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
TO AMEND THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN
RECOII~ENDATION:
It ts recommended that the Commission recommend to the Ctty Counctl approval of
General Plan Amendment No. 86-2b by the adoption of Resolution No. 2310.
BACKGROUND:
In May 1975, the existing Noise Element of the Tusttn Area General Plan was
adopted. Pursuant to State Planning Law, the legislative body may, if it deems
it to be in the public interest, amend the various elements of the General
Plan. Submitted for the Commission's consideration is an amended copy of the
Noise Element which, as a house-keeping item, should be forwarded to the City
Council with a recommendation for adoption.
DISCUSSION:
In accordance with State planning law, the revised Noise Element addresses
several distinct areas of concern. Generally, the Element identifies present
and potential noise sources, noise sensitive areas, and establishes policies and
objectives on how the city should deal with noise related matters.
Information collected for this document came from a variety of sources, but some
specific sources should be noted. Definitions contained in the Element are
those used by the Office of Noise Control, California Department of Health.
Noise contours established for arterial highways within the city were developed
in cooperation with Orange County Environmental Health, as was the 24 hour study
of the*Browning Corridor. Finally, noise contours projected for transportation
systems in East Tustin were prepared as a part of EIR 85-2 by Michael Brandman
Associates.
Community Development Department
Planning Commission
Noise Element
page 1~o
CONCLUSIONS:
In that the revised edition of the Noise Element more accurately reflects
existing and potential noise related conditions than does the previous edition,
and since it has been drafted in conformance with applicable State law, it is
recommended that the Commission adopt Resolution No. 2310 forwarding the Noise
Element to the City Council for final approval.
' A)s~ciate Planner
JD:do
attach:
Resolution No. 2310
Revised Noise Element
Community Development Department
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2310
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION
OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2b AMENDING THE TEXT OF
THE NOISE ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN
The Planning Commission of the. city of Tusttn does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
That Section 65358 of the Government Code of the State of
California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public
interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General
Plan.
That upon direction of the City Council the Noise Element of the
Tustin Area General Plan is to be amended to reflect present
noise conditions impacting the city of Tustin.
Ce
That in accordance with Section 65358 of the Government Code of
the State of California, a public hearing before the Planning
Commission was duly called, noticed and held for the purpose of
amending the Noise Element of the Tusttn Area General Plan.
Specifically, the following changes are to be made:
1. The Noise Element of the Tustin Area General Plan shall be
amended to read as presented in the attached Exhibit "A".
That a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been
prepared in conformance with the California Environmental
Quality Act.
That General Plan Amendment No. 86-2b would be in the public
interest and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the
surrounding property owners based upon the following:
Existing and potential noise sources that impact, or may
impact, the city of Tustin have been identified.
2. Noise sensitive areas and land uses have been identified.
That an implementation program as outlined in Exhibit "A"
will assist in accomplishing the stated objective of
reducing, to all extent as practical, any negative impacts
associated with noise.
4. That the revised Noise Element as drafted is consistent
*wtth all other elements of the Tusttn Area General Plan.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
2~
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 2310
page two
II.
The Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that General Plan Amendment 86-2b be approved thereby amending the
Noise Element of the Tustin Area General Plan for properties within
the East Tustin Specific Plan Project Area identified on Exhibit "A."
attached hereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission,
held on the day of , 1996.
KATHY WEIL, CHAIRMAN
DONNA ORR, RECORDING SECRETARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
INTRODUCTION.
A.
PURPOSE AND REQUIREMENTS ....
B. RELATIONSHIP TO-OI'HER ELEMENTS·
C. DEFINITIONS ...........
II. GOALS AND POLICIES ..........
III. IDENTIFICATION OF NOISE SOURCES· . .
A. EXISTING SOURCES ........
B. POTENTIAL SOURCES ........
IV.
IDENTIFICATION OF NOISE SENSITIYE AREAS ......
A. INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES ....
B. SCHOOLS .................
C. PARKS ....... ' ....
D. CHURCHES ..........
IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM ....
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT...
VI.
VII. APPENDICES ......
A. SUPPORT DATA FOR CONTOUR MAP..
B.
24 HOUR NOISE STUDY IN BROWNING CORRIDOR..
........ 9 - 10
....... 10 - 11
.12
· .12
· . 13
· . 15 - 16
· . 17
· ·20
LIST OF TABLES AND EXHIBITS
1. NOISE CONTOUR MAP (Exhibit 1) .............. 9.a.
2. PROJECTED CONTOURS FOR EAST TUSTIN AREA (Exhibit 2)... 11.a.
3. PROJECTED NOISE LEVELS FOR EAST TUSTIN AREA (TABLE I).. 11.b.
NOISE ELE~NT
CHAPTER I. INTROOUCTION
Ao PURPOSE AND REqUIREmENTS
As requtred by Section 65302 of the Government Code, a Notse
Element shall be incorporated, as a mandatory element, into a
city or county General Plan. General purposes of such an element
are to provtde sufficient Information concerning the Community
Noise Environment and to develop strategies to reduce adverse
impacts of noise related factors. Specific requirements are to
identify noise related problems and issues; to 1denttfy
particular noise sources; t~provide a standardized mechanism for
the measurement of noise generated within, or what would have an
impact upon the study area; to establish and implement specific
policies that address noise conditions that may adversely affect
the inhabitants of this jurisdiction; and finally, to coordinate
all of this information into a document that shall be a guideline
for use in the development of the land use element of the General
Plan. In this manner, noise compatible land uses can be
established as well as creating a base upon which Subsequent
noise control ordinances are to be adopted. Noise control
measures are to be applied to existing conditions as well as in
conjunction with future planning and development processing.
-1-
The sources of environmental noise to be considered in this
element as required by Section 65302f of the Government Code
shall include the following:
Highways and freeways;
Primary 'arterials and major local streets;
Passenger and freight on-line railroad operations and rapid
transit systems;
Commercial, general aviation,
military airport operations,
heliport, heltstop, and
aircraft overflights, jet
engine test strands and all other ground facilities and
maintenance;
Local industrial plants, i~cluding but not limited to,
railroad classification_yards;
Other g~ound stationary noise sources identified by local
agencies as contributing to the community noise environment.
Section 65302f further states 'that certain formula shall be used
to present noise exposure information identifying noise levels
generated from the above 'listed sources. For the purposes of
this element, noise contours identifying exposure levels shall be
shown in terms of Community Noise Equivalency Level {CNEL).
These contours will be used as a guide for establishing a pattern
of land uses in the land use element that minimizes the exposure
of community residents to excessive noise.
-2-
Finally, this element shall include implementation measures and
possible solutions that address existing and foreseeable noise
problems. This element shall also serve as a guideline for
compliance with the state's noise insulation standards.
B. RELATIONSHXP TO OTHER ELI~ENTS
As required by the State Government Code, in the preparation of a
single element to a city's General Plan consideration must be
given to the relationship of that element to the remaining
components of the plan. Since no element of the General Plan may
supersede or replace any other mandatory element, an internal
consistency among elements must also be demonstrated. The other
elements most relevant to th~ Noise Element are the Land Use and
Housing Elements.
By addressing type, location and density of land uses within the
city, the Land Use Element recognizes the need for orderly and
compatible development patterns. In this broad policy document,
issues relating to noise sources and noise exposure are
incorporated in general terms. Additionally the Land Use Element
addresses noise compatible land uses.
More specifically related to the Noise Element, the following
goals established in the Housing Element demonstrate consistency
between those two elements.
-3-
1. The provision of decent, safe and suitable housing
accommodations for all persons who reside in the city.
2. The provision of quality living environment with protection
and preservation of the health, safety and welfare of the
residents Of the city.
3. The encouragement of development reducing dependency upon
the automobile (thereby reducing associated noise) for
transportation by locating housing facilities convenient to
service and employment centers thereby enabling walking or
bicycling.
As to the relationship between the remaining elements of the
General Plan, where policies provide: buffer zones between
transportation systems; where permanent open space is mandated;
and/or references are made to the enhancement of the general
welfare of the community resulting from the improvement of
environmental conditions. This Noise Element is considered to be
consistent with those elements.
C. DEFI#ITIONS
For the purposes of this Noise Element, the following definition of
terms'shall be used.
Decibel, db: A unit for describing the amplitude of sound, equal
to 20 times the .logarith of the base l0 of the ratio of the
pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which
is 20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter).
'4-
A-Weighted Sound Level: The sound pressure level in decibels as
measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting filter
network. An A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and
very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar
to the response of the human ear and gives good correlation with
subjective reactions to noise.
CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level. The-average equivalent
A-weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after
addition of five decibels to sound levels in the'evening from 7
p.m. to 10 p.m. and after addition of 10 decibels to sound levels
in the night before 7 a.m. and after 10 p.m.
Equivalent £nerg7 Level~ LEQ~ The sound level corresponding to a
steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a
time varying signal over a given sample period. Leg is typically
computed over l, 8 and 24 hour sample periods.
Noise Exposure Contours: Lines drawn about a noise source
indicating constant energy levels of noise exposure. CNEL and
Ldn are the metrics utilized herein to describe community
exposure to noise.
-5-
Ambient: The composite of noise from all sources near and 'far.
In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal
or existing level of environmental noise at a given locatlon.
Intrusive Noise: That noise which .intrudes over and above the
exfsttng ambient noise at a given location. The relative
intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its multitude,duration,
frequency and ttme of occurrence, and tonal or informational
content as well as the prevailing ambtent noise level.
Equal Noisiness Zones: Defined areas or regions of a community
wherein the ambient noise levels are generally similar (within a
range of 5 db). Typically, all sites within any given noise
SOUrCes.
-6-
CHAPTER II. GOALS AND POLICIES
A. GOALS
Ultimately, it is the goal of the Noise Element to establish a
standard by which an environment for the people that live and
work within the City of Tustin may be created minimizing the
detrimental effects associated with noise. The importance of
this goal is magnified when it is taken into consideration that
according to the Environmental Protection Agency, approximately
80 million people are significantly impacted by noise, 40 million
of which are exposed to levels that can damage their hearing or
otherwise affect their heal~.
Noise is not only detrimental to well-being, but also costly.
The World Health Organization has estimated that over $4 billion
is spent by United States industry each year for noise-related
absenteeism, reduced efficiency, workman's compensation claims,
and mental illness.
In addition to hearing loss, noise also can have a considerable
effect on human activities such as communication, sleep and task
performance, thereby contributing to annoyance and indirectly
affecting the general state of an individual's health and
well-being. (Source: Coun~ of Orange, Noise Element)
-7-
Realizing such problems, it is the specific objective of this
element to establish the basis from which future development
within the City of Tustin shall be approached, at least in part,
in terms of reducing negative impacts resulting from noise.
Additionally, by identifying.major, noise producing sources, and
determining an acceptable noise level conducive to the orderly
and compatible development of the City; and giving proper
consideration to existing land uses, this element seeks to reduce
in the most appropriate manner overall noise levels as they
currently exist.
-8-
CHAP~R III. IDENTIFICATION OF NOISE SOURCES
As required by Section 65302f of the Government Code, the following
noise sources havng an impact on the Community Noise Environment have
been identified.
A. EXISTING SOURCES
The north/south Costa Mesa Freeway (Interstate 55) from Fatrhaven
Avenue to Warner Avenue. {A significant portion of this freeway
is recessed, which contributes favorably toward noise control.)
The diagonal northwest/southeast Santa Aha Freeway (Interstate
5), from Williams Street to Myford Road.
Primarily seven major arterial streets; Seventeenth Street,
Irvine Boulevard, First Street, McFadden Avenue, Newport Avenue,
Red Hill Avenue, Edinger Avenue and Walnut Avenue. Exhibit .1
shows the noise contours for these selected street systems.
The Santa Fe Railway line in the southern sector, running
northwest/southeast commencing.at the intersection of the Newport
Freeway and Edinger Avenue, paralleling Moulton Parkway to Myford
Road.
L!
The Harlne Corps Air Statlon (Helicopter) on the southern-most
edge of Tusttn. In addition to the facility itself, the
"Browning Corridor" must be considered as a noise source. The
corrfdor ts used as restricted airspace for helicopter
operations. This airspace covers an area 1,O00 feet on etther
stde of the center 11ne of Myford Road and extends lO nautical
mtles north of the air statton boundary. A 24 hour notse study
of thts corrtdor ts Included tn Appendtx VII B of this Element.
The major air approach pattern to the 3ohn Wayne Airport, which
traverses the city from Irvlne Boulevard at Prospect Avenue to
Warner Avenue at the Newport Freeway Impacts the Ctty.
The light industrial area contained within the southwestern-most
sectors of the City.
B. POTI~#TIAL SOURCES
In addition to listing existing noise sources, potential sources are
also identified.
New sources in conjunction with and resulting from, the
development of Mixed Land Uses in the presently undeveloped area
bounded by Irvine Boulevard and Interstate 5 between Myford Road
and Browning Avenue. These uses may include, but are not limited
to, residential units of varying density, a 50 acre auto center,
and traditional commercial/retail uses.
-10-
Noise that will be generated by new automotive transportation
systems in the East Tustin {Peter's Canyon} area including but
not limited to: The Eastern Corridor, the Foothill Corridor, the
Portola Parkway, the extension of Jamboree and Myford Roads, and
the reconstruction of the Myford Road/Interstate 5 interchange.
Projected CNEL contours for major circulation systems within the
East Tustin area are listed in Table I and Exhibit 2.
The Sante Fe Railway line listed as an existing noise source was
at one time considered as a path for a proposed high speed rail
system (Bullet Train).
Expansion of the number of flights from 41 to 55 at John Wayne
Airport has been approved. ~dditionally, a proposal to increase
the number to 71 has been suggested. However, the increase in
flights is currently involved in litigation proceedings, so the
precise number of future flights is undetermined. None the less,
any expansion increasing the number of flights would increase the
number of noise incidents impacting the community noise
environment.
-11-
!
!
!
1
!
I
I
I
!
i
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CNEL Noise. Contour~
EAST TUSTIN SPECIRC PLAN
City of Tustin
EXHIBIT
TABLE !
FUTURE NO[SE LEVELS
EAST TUSTI' N
Roadway
Lower Lake
Foothill
Portola
Racquet Hill
La Colina
Irvine Blvd.
Bryan Avenue
Jamboree Road
Myford
Distance to CNEL Contour
From Centerline of Roadway (feet)
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL
North of Foothill
RW 42 91
West of Lower Lake
East of Lower Lake
RW 38 82
RW 91 195
Jamboree to Myford
East of Myford
West of Jamboree
79 169 365
117 251 542
RW 70 151
West of Jamboree
RW 82 177
West of Jamboree
Jamboree to Myford
Browning to Jamboree
Jamboree to Myford
96 208 447
76 Z64 353
51 110 237
51 110 237
Santa Ana Fwy to Bryan 84
Bryan to Irvine Blvd. 77
Irvine Blvd. to La Colina 88
La Colina to Racquet Hill 93
Racquet Hill to Portola 87
Portola to Foothill 72
Foothill to Myford 56
Santa Aha Fwy to Laguna 101
Laguna to Bryan 84
Bryan to Irvine Blvd. 86
Irvine Blvd. to Portola 87
Portola to Jamboree 77
North to Jamboree 64
180 388
167 359
190 410
200 431
188 404
156 335
120 258
217 468
180 388
185 399
188 404
167 359
138 298
RW - indicates contour falls within road right-of-way
CHAPTER IV. IDENTIFICATION OF NOISE SENSITIVE AREAS
As important as it is to identify sources of noise generation, areas
that are sensitive, by nature of their particular land uses to the
impacts of noise, must also be listed. Such areas are:
A. IIlSTITIn'IOIIAL FACILITIES
Health Care Medical Center (Hospital) at 14662 Newport Avenue.
Tustin Hacienda (rest home) at 240 East Third Street.
Western Neurological Care Center at 165 Myrtle Street.
Tustin Manor (rest and care home) at 1051 Bryan Avenue.
Tustin Gardens (senior citizen housing) at 275 6th Street.
B. SCHOOLS
Foothill High School at 19251 Dodge Avenue
Hillview High School at 19061 Foothill Blvd.
Tusttn High School at 1171 Laguna Road
Columbus Tustin Intermediate at 17952 Benta Way
Currie Intermediate at 1402 Sycamore Avenue
Hewes Intermediate at 13232 Hewes
Guin Foss (Adult Education) at 18492 Vanderl~p Avenue
Arroyo Elementary at 11112 Coronel Road
Estock Elementary at 14741 N. "B" Street
-12-
Heideman Elementary at 15571 Williams Street
Loma Vista Elementary at 13822 Prospect Avenue
Nelson Elementary at 14392 Browning Avenue
Thorman Elementary at 1402 Sycamore Avenue
Tusttn Memorial Elementary at 12712 Browning Avenue
Veeh Elementary at 1701 San Juan
Utt School Site {presently leased to a private school however may
be re-opened as a public school site)
C. PARKS
Peppertree Park at First and "C" Street
Pine Tree Park at Redhtll and Bryan Avenue
Centennial Park at Sycamore ~nd Devonshire
Frontier Park at Mitchell and Utt
Utt Park at Nisson and Pasadena
Magnolia Tree Park at Alder and Fig Tree
North Tusttn Parkette at Santa Clara and Fairmont
McFadden Park at McFadden and Pasadena
Columbus Tustln Park at Prospect and Irvine Blvd.
D. CHURCHES
1st Christian Church of Tustin at 1362 Irvine Blvd.
1st Advent Christian Church at 555.W. Main Street
Tustin Presbyterian Church at 225 W. Main Street (with preschool)
-13-
Jehovah's Witnesses at 170 Pasadena
Church of Christ at 16481W. Main
1st Southern Baptist Church at 13841Redhill (with private
school)
Church of Scientology at 1451 Irvine Blvd.
1st Church of Christ Scientist at 140 E. Main
St. Cecelia's Catholic Church at 1301 Sycamore {with private
school)
B'Nai Israel at 655 "B" Street
Redhill Lutheran Church at 13232 Redhill (with private school)
-14-
CHAPTER VI. INPLE~ENTATIO# PROGR~
These implementation polictes suggest general priority policies for
the ct ty of Tustln to foll o~ tn Implementing this Element of the
General Plan.
The city shall:
Review development to avoid existing noise impact areas until
operational changes or other noise abatement measures are
implemented.
Act to reduce noise levels and encourage development of
noise-reducing materials and equipment in its purchasing policy.
Noise should be made a consideration in city purchasing decisions
for equipment producing noise levels greater than 65 dB(A) at 50
feet under normal operating conditions. Recommended policy is
that purchase of less noisy item should be required if reduction
is 5 dB from noisier item and cost is no more than 1.1 times
greater, or noise reduction is 10 dB over competitive item and
cost is no more than 1.25 times greater.
Discourage regional, state or federal actions which increase the
noise levels in the city, and take a strong stand on actions
which increase the noise levels beyond acceptable limits.
-15-
Aid in, and strongly encourage, the enforcement of federal and
state standards for noise-producing equipment including cars,
motorcycles, trucks, etc.
Work with the Orange County Airport Land Use'Commission in
developing a plan for con~attble use in airport noise and crash
hazard areas.
Discourage actions by private deVelopers which increase noise
impact or do not account for noise impact already existing when
feasible alternative actions exist.
Encourage the use of circulation systems which do not produce
high noise levels, including bicycle and pedestrian systems.
Not allow credit for open space areas in developments in
zones with a CNEL 65+'except when shielded from noise sources by
appropriate noise barriers.
Maintain and revise as necessary a comprehensive noise ordinance
relating to noise sources and requiring sound insulation in
building construction in all noise impact areas proposed for
residential or other noise-sensitive development.
-16-
CHAPTER VI. E#VIRONMEBTAL ASSESSMENT
The Noise Element as drafted will have no adverse impact on the
environment and in fact is designed to enhance the quality of living
within the city of Tustin. Documentation supporting the finding of no
adverse impact is found in Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution
No. 2310.
VII. APPENDICES
-18-
A. SUPPORT DATA FOR CONTOUR HAP (Exh~btt 1)
-19-
FHWA ~ ,HWAY TRAGIC NOISE PR~DICTIO~
Fi'rst Street between Centennial' & Prospect
ADT - 22500 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
S Speed in mph 30 30 30
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
A - Automobiles 1413 922 233
M - Medium =tucks 29 19 4
H - Hen%7 ~rucks 14 ....9 2
o( Si=e descriptor (Sof= - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
(~ard ' 0.0} .......
D Dis=ance =o Roadway in fee: 50 50 50
~- An,lc =o Seamen= (R/gh=) -90 -90 -90
An~le ~o Segment (Left~ 90 90 90
Leq Hourly Equivalen= Sound Level (dBA)
A - Au=omoblles 64.8 62.9 57.0
M - Mmdium =rusks 56.7 54.8 48.9
H - Heavy :tucks 60.1. ~.58.3. 52.3
T = Combined Total (dBA) 66.5 64.7 58.7
- LEQ = 64'.67
CNEL = 67.97
LDN - 67.37
'65.
79.
60.
170.
/
/
~, 55.
307.
50.
792.
45,
1707.
PRO~XA~ 425-D
6-4-84
FI{WA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NCISE PRlgDICTION
First Street between 55 Frwy. & Prospect
ADT ' 21850 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
__ $ Speed in mph 30 30 30
r
NX l" Traffic Volume (per hour)
I, ' A = Automobiles 1372 895 226
M = Medium trucks 28 18 4
(~ard =
D Distance :o Roadway in feet 50 50
~, ~le =o Segme.~ (~gh=) -90 -90 -90
~% ~le ~o Segment (La~) 90 90 ~0 m,
Leq Hourly Eq~valen~ Sound Level (dBA)
A = Automobiles 64.7 62.8 56.8
M = Medi~ cruc~ 56.6 54.7 48.7
H = llea~ cruc~ 60.0 58.1
T = Combined Total {dBA) 66.4 64,~ 58.6
LEQ = 64.54
CNEL - 67.84
LDN - 67.25
? P,O~g.AM 425-D
6-4-84
50.
45.
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
First Street between Centinnial & Newport Ave.
ADT = 1650~ ,- ~ DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
S Speed in mph . , 30 S0 30
Nx Traffic Volume (per hour)
' A - Au:omobiles 1017 664 167
M - Medium :tucks 20 13 3
H - Hea~ =ruc~ 10 6 1
~ Si:e descriptor (Sof:
(~ard - 0.0} _
D Distance co Roadway in
~- ~&le :o Se~n: (=&h:) -90
Leq Hourly Equlvalen: Sound Level (dBA)
A - Auc~obil~ 63.4 61.5 55.5
M- Me~ cruc~ 55.3 53.~ 47.4
H - lleavy :ruc~
T - C~mbined To~al (dBA)
LEQ - 63.24
CNEL ~ '66.54
LDN = 65.95
~0.
135.
55.
292.
50.
45.
1356.
YROOttAM 425-D
6-4-84
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Irvine Blvd. between 55 Frwy. a Prospect
32050 DAYTIME EVENi
S Speed in mph 35 35 35
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
~ A = Automobiles 2012 1314 331
M - Medium trucks 41 27 6
H - Heavy trucks 20 13 3
~ Site descr~4~tor (Sol= - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
= o.o>
D Distance to Roadway in.feet 50 50 50
An~le to Seymour (~ght) -90
Anzle to Segment (Left) 90 90 90
Leq Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (dBA)
A - Aut~blles 68.0 66.2 60.2
M - Mmdium trucks 59.8 58.0 52.0
H - Heavy trucks 62.6 60.8 54.8
T - Combiged Total IdBA~ 69.6 67.8 61.8
IJ~Q = 67,74
OIEL = 71.04
I~N = 70.4~
70.
5~.
125,
6-4-84
2?0.
55.
582.
50.
1255.
45.
2705.
FHWA ..,iGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE ~REDICTI0m
Irvine,Blvd. between Prospect & Holt
ADT m 24400 DAYTIME EVE:'.'.Iij mZGHTTIME
S m~.m Speed in mph ..... 35 35 35
Nz ~ Trafff: Volume (per hour)
" , A - Automobiles 1532 1000 252
'! M = Medium trucks 31 20I! 5
I H = Heavy trucks. 15 10 I 2
c( '1 Si~e descriptor (Sof~ - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
,, (~ard - 0,0)
D Distance ~o Roadway in feec 50 50 50
[ ~le ~o Se~en: (~h:) -90 -90
~le to Se~ent (L~f~) ~9 90 93., .....
Leg ~o~ly Eq~val~: Sou:4 Level (dBA)
A - Au~omobil~ 66.8 65.0 59,0
M = Me~ :ruc~ 58.6 56.8 50.8
H- Ilea~ :ruc~ 61.5 59.6 __iL.L ....
T - Combined Total (dBA) 68.4 66.6 60,6
LEQ = 66.55
CNEL = 69.86
LDN = 69.26
1 U? .
~0.
232 .
499.
50.
1077.
5
45.
2320.
F~WA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Irvine'Blvd. between Holt Ave. and Myford
ADT - 22050 DAYTIME EVENING
S Speed in mph 35 35 35
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
' A -Aucomobiles 1384 904 228
M - Medium cru~k~ 28 18 4
I, H - Heavy ~rucks 14 9 2
(X Si=a descrlpcor (Sofc= 0.5)
, .5 .5 .5
(~ard - o.o)
~, An$1e =o Seamen= (l~gh=) -90 -90 -90
,~ II An~le Co Segment
A - AuComobtles 66.4 64.5 58.6
M - M~dfum :rucks 58.2 56.4 50.4
I{ - }loavy =tucks ~l .N ~q.?
LEQ - 66.11
C~ - 69.42
LDN - 68.82
~0.
962.
PROGI~I~{ 425-G
45.
2116.
C
FHWA HIGHWAY TI~IC NOISE PREDICTION
McFadden between Lyon & Williams
ADT - 18450 DAYTIME NIGH%~fIME
S Speed in mph .....
NX Traffic Vol-me (per hour) 1158 756 191
' A = Automobiles 23 16 23 3 1
.5 .5 .5
c~ Site descriptor (Soft - 0.5)
( ,rd - o.o)
50 50 50
D Dis=an,c,e to Roadway in feet
-90 -90
)~ An~le to Se~ent (~ght) 90
90
9O
Anzle to Se~nent
L Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (dBA) 65.6 63.8 57.8
eq A - Automobiles 5.7.4 55.6 49.6
M - ~di,-. ~r%~:ks 60.2 58.4 52.4
~ -'Heavy ~rucks
67.2 65.4 59.~
T - Combined Total ~dBA~
-. LE( - 65.34
C~ - 68.64
LDN - 68.05
?RD~P.A~ 425-D
6-4-84
F~%;A ~NIGHWAY T"i~.~VFIC NOISE PPJ~DICTION
McFadden between Williams & Walnut
ADT = 25500
ua:'rlMz ZV~/~ING NIGHTTll~E
S $1~eed in mph 35 35 35
Nx ~r~f&c Vo~e- (per hour)
, A - AuC~ob~l~ 1601 1045 26~
H - Hea~ ~c~ 16 10 2
~ Si=a d~cr~=or (Soft - 0.5) .5 .~ .~
D Distance to Eoadw~ ~ ~eet 50 50 50
~le =o Se~t (~ght) -90 -90 -90
~zle ~o SeCant fLef~} 90 90 90
L~ Ho~ly Eq~val~~ Sound L~el (dBA)
A - Auc~obil~ 67.0 65.2 59.2
M = ~ tr~ 58.8 57.0 51.0
~ - llea~ ~ru~3 6~.7 59,8 53,8
T' = C~bined Total ~dBA) 68.6 66.8 60.8
LEQ = 66.74
CN~ = 70.05
I2~N = 69.45
107.
P RI3G'RA~ 425-0
6-4-8A
232.
50.
45.
2320.
F~WA 'hAGHWAY TRAGIC NOISE PREDICTIOm
McFadden between Walnut & Newport
ADT = 11700 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIM~
S Speed in mph 35 3~ 35
Nx Tra~fi: Volu~e (per hour)
' A = Au=omobiles 734 479 121
~ - ~edium :ru¢~ · 15 9 2
H - Heavy trucks ...... 7 4 1
~ Si:e 4~cr~=or (Sof= - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
D Distance :o Roadway in ~eec 50 50 50
~ia =o Seine (~&h=) -90 -90 -90
~zle to Se~ent' (Left) ~O 9Q 90
Leq Ho=ly ~val~: Sound Level (dBA)
A - Au=~b~ 63.6 61.8 55.8
M - ~ :r~ 55.5 53.6 47.6
T = Combined Total (dBA) 65.2 R~.4 ~7_&
L~Q m 63.36
~ = 66.66
LDN = 66.07
60.
139.
55.
701.
~ROGBAM 4ZS-D
~-4-~4-
q
;
FHWA [{IGI, IWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Walnut. Ave. @ ~tersection of Newport
ADT = 14150 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
S Speed in mph 40 40 40
NX T?affic Volume (per hour)
A - AuCumobiles 888 580 146
M - Medium ~rucks 18 11 3
H - Heav~ =tucks 9 5 1
~ Si:e descrip=or (Sol= - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
D Dis=ante co Roadway in fee= ~0 50 50
Angle =o Se~men=
Anmle =o Segment (Left) 90 90 90
Leq Hourly Wquivalen= Sound Level (dBA)
A - Au=omobiles 65.9 64.1 58.1
M - Medium =tucks 57.7 55.8 49.8
H - Hgavy trucks 59.9 58.1 52.1
T - COmbined Tota~ (dBA) 67,4 65,5 59.6
LEQ = 65.53
CNKL - 68.83
LDN - 68.24
65.
69.
60.
193.
~.
415.
50.
895.
P BOGP~ 425-D
6-4-84
45.
19~0.
FHWA a~GHWA¥ TRAFFIC NOISE P~EDICTION
Walnut'Ave. @ ~ntersection of Red Hill
ADT - 12800 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
§ Speed in mph 40 ~,0, 40
Nx T, raffic Volume (per hour)
A - Automobiles 803 524 132
X - Medium trucks 16 10 2
H = Heavy t,rucks. 8. 5 1
~ Site descriptor (Soft =
(t~ard - o.o)
D Dis, tance :o Roadway in feet 50 5.0 50
'x Angle to Se~nen= (P-~ght) -90 -90 -90
An~le to Segment CLeft) go go 90
L Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (dBA)
eq A - Au=~obil~ 65.5 63.7 57.7
M- ~di~ =r~ 57.2 55.4 49.4
H - Hea~ ~ruc~ 59.5 57.7 51.7
T - Combined Tgt~I {dBA} 67.0 65.1 59.1
I2~Q m 65.10
CNEL = 68.40
LDN = ·67.80
60.
181,
55.
391.
PRDGT. AM 425-D
6-4-84
50.
842.
45.
1815.
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE P~EDICTION
~{alnut ~Aye. between Browning & Franklin
ADT- = 18700 DAYTIME EVENING
S Speed in mgh 35 35 35
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
A - Au=omobtles 1174 766 193
~ - Medium trucks 24 15 3
H - Heav~ Crucks 12 7 1
(~ Site descrtpcor (Soft - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
D Dtpcancm co ~oadway tn feet 50 50 50
~le ~o Seine (~ghc) -90 -90
~zle to Se~ent (Left) 90 90 90
L Ho~ly Eq~valen= Sound Level (dBA)
eq A - ~g~obtl~ 65.7 63.8 57.9
M- ~ :r~ 57.5 55.6 49.7
H - Hea~ =ruc~ ,,60.3 58.5 52.5
· - C~tned Total ~dBA~ 67.3 65.~ 59.~
~,ZQ - 65.40
CB-EL - 68.70
LDN - 68.10
~5.
82.
60.
190.
95.
409.
882.
P~ 425-D
6-4-84
45.
1900.
FHWA ! B-WAY TY~k~YI¢ NOISE PtU~DIUTI0~
Walnut'Ave. between Red Hill & Browning
ADT = ~AA~Q DAYTIME EVENING NIG~TTIME
Traffic Volu~e (per hour)
A - Au=omobiles 907 592 149
M - Medium =~c~ 18 12 3
H - Hea~, t~c~ 9 6 1
S~Ue d~c=~pCor (Sof: m 0.5) .5 .5 .5
D~s=ance Co ~oa~way ~n fee= 50 50 50
~81e co Se~u= (~Sh=) -90 -90 -90
~zle to 9e~en: (Left) 90 90 90
Ho~ly Eq~val~: Soun~ ~vel (dBA)
A - Auc~obil~ 6~.6 62.7 56.7
M- ~di~ :r~ 56.4 54,5 48.5
H -Hea~ c~c~ - 59.2 57.3 51.4
I~EQ = 64.28
,' CNEL = 67.58
LDN - 66.98
65.
'14.
60.
160.
55.
345.
PIU~. ~ 425-D
6-4-84
50.
745.
45.
1605.
FHWA HIGHWAY Ttt~.FFIC NOISE PI~EDICI'ION
Walnut ,Ave. between Franklin & Myford
9500
S Speed in mph 45 45 43
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
A -.Automobiles 596 389 98
M - Medium trucks 12 8 2
H - Heavy trucks ~ ~ 4 1
c~ Site descriptor (Soft - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
(~rd. o.o) ,,
D Dis~an~ to Roadway in Eeet 50 50 ~o
Angla to Segment (Right)
Leq Hourly Equ/valent Sound Level (dBA)
I - Automobiles 65.5 63.7 57.7
M - Medium truaks ~7.2 55.3 ~9.3
H - Heavy trucks 59.0 ~7.1.. ~l.l
T - Combined TO~t (a~!) 66.9 Rs.fl Sq.0
L~Q = 65.00
CNEL = 68.30
LDN = 67.70
65.
60.
178.
5~,
PKOGI~H 425-D
6-4-84
50,
82~.
1787,
FHWA 5~GHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
between 55 FrW3, & De] Arno
ADT - 235Q9 DAYTIME EVENIN~ NIGHTTIME
S Speed in mph 40
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
' A - Au=omobiles 1475 963 243
M - Medium trucks- 30 19
H - Heav~ trucks 1 ~ .... 9 ?
~ Site descriptor (Soft - 0.5) .$
D Discance~ =o Ro~way in fee,~
~sle ~o Seine
~zla to Se~ent (La~) qn ~n on
Leq Ho~ly Eq~val~t Sound Level (dBA)
~- Me~ tr~ 59.9 58.0 52.0
H - Hea~ truc~ A9 ~ ~n.3 54.3
T - C~bine4 Tote% (dBA)-
LEQ = 67.73
CNEL = 71.04
LDN = 70.44
70.
PP~U~ 425-D
6-4-84
60.
270.
55.
50.
1255.
2705.
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
5dJn§er between De] Arno & Red HJ]]
ADT ~ 13450 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
S Speed in mph 40 40 40
Nx Traffic Volume (pe~' hour)
, A - Au=umobiles 844 551 139
M - Medium ~ucks 17 11 2
..... · ' H - Heavy trucks ,,. 8 5 1
C( SiUe desori~Cor (SofU = 0.5) .5 .5 .5
D Distance co Roadway in
'x ~gle Co Seine (~ghC) -90 -90 -90
~le =o Se~ent (Left~ 90 90 90
Leq Ho~ly Eq~val~= Sound Level (dBA)
A - Au=~obiles 65.7 63.9 57.9
M -. ~ ~r~ 57.4 55.6 49.6
H - H~a~ ~ruc~ 59.Z , .57.9 ~1.9
T - C~biOed Total ~dBA) 67.2 65.3 ~9~4
LEQ - 65.31
CNEL - 68.61
LDN - 68.02
PRDGRAM 425-D
6-4-84
60.
187 .
.55.
403.
50.
45.
1871.
FHWA h~GHWA¥ TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Mou]to0 Pkwy. between Red Hi]]& Harvard
ADT - 6700 :
DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
S S~eed in mph 50 50 50
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
' A - Au~omobiles 420 2.74 69
M - MedSum trucks 8 5 1
H - Heavy trucks ,,, 4 2
~ Sire descriptor (Sol: - 0.5) - .5 .5 .5
,, (~ard - 0.0)
D .,Distance Co Roadway in feet 60 60 60
z An~le Co Se~;men~ (Egh~)
An~le Co Segment (te~) 90 90 90
Leq Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (dBA)
A - Automobiles 64.0 62.1 56.1
M- Medium :rusks 55.6 53.7 47.7
H - Hg, avy trucks 56.9 55.1 49.1
T - ~mbined Total (dBA) 6.5.2 t3.4 57.4
LEQ - 63.37
CNEL - 66.67
LDN - 66.08
60.
1 V '? .
55.
36t.
77~.
45,
1678.
PP,~ 425-D ..
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
17th be. tween Tustin & 55 Frwy.
ADT - 41900 : DAYTIME EVENING NIGItTTIME
Speed in mph 45 45 45
Traffic Volume (per hour)
' A - Au=omobil~s 2631 1717 433
M - Medium :tucks 54 35 8
H - Heav~ trucks - 27 17 4
Si:e desc=ipcor (Sof= - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
Distance =o ~o~way in feet 60 ~0 ~O
~1~ ~o Se~= (~shc) -90
~la ~o Se~e.= (Left) ~0 ~9 90
Ho=ly Eg~val~: Sound L~el (dBA)
A - AuC~obil~ 70.8 68.9 62.9
M = ~ :ruc~ 62.4 60.6 54.6
H- Hea~ :rue~ 64.2 62.4 56.4
T - C~bi~ed To~l (dBA) 72.1 70,3 64.3
LEQ =, 70.26
CNEL ,, 73.56
LDN = 72.96
70.
104.
224.
60.
4~,
55.
1042.
PROGRAM 425-D
6-4-84
50.
2246.
4839.
FHWA h~.GHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE P~EDICTION
17th between 55 Frwy. & Yorba
ADT . 36900 DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTI
S I~ Speed in mph 45 45 45
NX I Traffic Volume (per hour)
i ' A · Au=omobiles 2317 1512 382
~ ~ ', l~ium :tucks 47 31 7
:, H - Hea~ ~c~' 23 1~ 3
~ '
Siva 4~c~:or (Sol: - 0.5) .5
D D~,:amce ~o Ro~way im fae:· ,, , 60 .... 60 60
~le ~o 8e~n: (~h=) -90 -90 -90
~zle ~o Se~en~ (Left) 90 90 90
Leq Hourl~ ~val~= Sound Level (dBA)
A - Au=~obil~ 70.l
M- ~ ~r~ 61.9 60,0 54.0
H - Hea~ :ruc~ 63.7 ,. 61.8 55.8
T - C~bined Tota% ~dBA) 71.6 69.7 63.7
LgQ - 69.70
CNEL = 73.01
LDN = 72.41
20~.
60.
950.
P P. OG'~ 42.5-D
6-4-84
2048.
441~.
· FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
17th between Yorba & Prospect
ADT- t77~1~1 ri:ME EVENIN
~;. Speed in mph 45 45 45
NX Traffic. Volume (per hour) .
, A m jl&U~.o)bil~ 2053 1340 338
14 - Medium trucks ~2 27 6
._ ~ - ~ea~ t~c~ 2I,m '13 3
D Dis~anc., tO Roadway in fea~ 60 ~0 60
'I.,eq Ho~ly ~valen~ Sound ~vel (dBA)
A - Au=~obil~ , 69.7 67,8 61.9
~- ~d$~ =r~ 61.3 59.5 53.5
__ H - Hea~ =~c~ 63.1 61.3 ~.3
T - ~om~$ned T0~41 (dBA} 71.0 ~2 ~3~2
LEQ - 69.18
~NEL m 72.48
LDN ' 71.89
'! 0 ·
1 b",7 .
(JO,
4~.
P ROCPJ~/ 425-D
6-4-84
50.
1~7.
FHWA }~ {WAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
17th between Prospect & Molt
ADT - 27350
~; .... Speed in mph 45, 45 45
Nx Traffic Volume (per hour)
, A - Automobiles 1717 1121 283
M- M.dium trucks 13~ 23i
.... H - Heav~ truak- 11 2
~ Site descriptor (Soft -, 0.5) .5 .5
(Hard - 0.0)
D Distance to Roadway in feet 50 50 50
(/3, Angle Co Se~meuc (P./.ghC) -90 -90 -90
~x An~le Co Segment (Left) 90 90 90
Leq Hourly Equivalent Sound ~vel (dBA)
A - AuComobiles 70.1 68.2 62.3
M- N~dium trucks
61.8 59.9 53.9
H - Heavy Cru-~= .._ 63.5 61.7 55.7
T - Combined Tgcal ~dBA) 71.5 69.6 63.6
LEQ = 69.59
CNEL - 72.89
LDN ~ 72.30
70.
69.
3~2.
PROGRAM 425-D
6-4-84
55.
4 ~,
3622.
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
ADT - 15909 D~
~. Speed in mph 35 35 35
NX Traffic Volume (per hour).,
' A - Automobiles 998 631 164
M - MedHum =~ucks 20 13 3
...... .. H - Hea%7 trucks 10 6 1
°( Site descriptor (Soft - 0,5) ,5 ,5 ,$
(Ha:d - 0.0}
D Distance to Roadway in feet 50 50
An=le ~o Segment (Left) 90 90 90
Leq Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (dBA)
A - Au=~obilas 65.0. 63.1 57.1
56,8 5a,9 49.0
H - Heavy ~ru,k- 59.6 57.7 51,8
' · - C~,-b~ed Tg=al (dBA) §6,6 6~,? ~8~7
LEQ = 64,69
CNEL = 68,00
LDN = 67,40
7~.
~0.
170.
55.
~07.
~ 0.
792 .
PROGRAM 425-D
6-4-84
45.
1707.
. %
FHWA B.~HWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Newport Ave. @ ~ntersection of 0Id Irvine
' ADT - 19500 ' DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
:~.;.. Speed in =ph 35 35 35
NX Traffic Vo~.,--e (per hour) .
, A- Au~obil~ 121~ 799 201
.... ' · H- ge~' ~c~, ll 8 2
D D~stancm ~o Ro~wa~ ~ feet ~0 50 50
~- ~,1. =o S.~uc (=,h=) -90 -90 -90
~zla ~o Se~en~ (Le~} 90 90 90
L Ho~ly ~wal~= Sound L~el (dBA)
eq A - ~=~b~ 65.9 6&.0 58.0
M - ~ Cr~ ' 57.7 55.8 49.8
_ E - Eea~ C~c~ 60.5 58.6 52,7
T - ~iqad Tot~! {dBA) 67.4 65.6 59.6
z2~q - 65.58
~ = 68.88
LDN = '68.29
65.
90.
60,¸
190.
55.
422.
· 909.
PROGKAM. 425-D
6-4-84
45.
1900.
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
NeWport Ave between Irvine & Byran
ADT = 27100
~:___ Spee4 in mph 35 35 35
NX Tr~fic Vol~ (per hour)
M - Me~ :~uc~ - · 35 22 .5
....... .. H ~ Hea~ tru,c~ 17 11 2
~ S&ce 4~cr~or (Sof~ - 0,5) .5 .5 .5
-=~ ~le,=o S~men= ~Le~) 90 90 90
Leq Bo~ly Eq~valen: Sound Lmvel (dBA)
A - Au=~ob~ 65.9 64.0 58.1
~7.7 55.9 49.9
H -, Hea~ ~-~ 60~5 58.7 52.7
LEQ - 65.61
C~ = 68.91
LDN - 68.31
60.
2~3.
55.
523.
l12B,
P RO~ILa~I 42f-D
6-4-84
45.
243U.
FHWA' HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Newport-Ave. between Bryan & Main
DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME
.¥ Speed in mph _.. 35 35 35
MX Traffic Volume (per hour)
, A - Automobiles 1S29 998 252
H - Medium ~rucks 31 20 5
...... H - Hea~ ~ruc~ 15 10 2
~ Si2m 4~cripcor (Sof~ - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
(Hard - 0.0)
D Distance ~o ~oadway ~ feet 50 50 50
'z ~Sle ~o Seine (~ghC) -90 -90 -90
~le ~O Secant (Left] 90 90 90
L Ho~y Eq~va~c Sound Level (dBA)
eq ~ - ~uC~ob~ 66.8 65.0 ~9.0
H- ~ cr~ ' 58.6 56.8 50.8
H m Hea~ t~c~ 61.4 59.6 53.6
' ~ - q~bined To~% (dBA) 68.4 66.6 60.6
LZQ m 66.54
CNEL ' 69.85
LDN = 69.25
60.
~92 .
50.
106L),
PRDGlt~M 425-D
6-4-84
45.
2285.
40.
4923'.
. FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PRF. DICTION
Newport Ave. between Main & Walnut
':'=~ -~ ]~,ItfW OAXTIME EVENING-NIGHTTIME
'1
.~; .... Speed in mph 35 35 35
Nx Traffic Volume (per hour) .
, A - Automobiles 2012 1314 331
~ - Medium ~ruck~ 41 27 6
H m Heavy tru-~- 20 13 3
~ Si:a descriptor (Soft - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
.~ An$1e ~o Seamen, (p,i~h,) ----
-90 -90 -90
90 90 90
Leq Hourly Equ/valenc Sound Level (dBA)
A - Automobiles 68.0 66.2 60.2
M - Medium trucks
59.8 58.0 52.0
H - Heavy trucks 62.6 60.8 54.8
LEQ = 67.74
CNEL = 71.04
.- LDN = 70.44
PRDGP~M 425-D
6-4-84
bO.
27b .
5~2.
50.
1255.
45.
270'9'.
· FHWA }._,~h'WAY TRAFFIC NOISE PKEDICTION
· ' ':'~ · u~z~znm mvmmAN~ NIGHTTIME
~; ..... 'Speed in mph 35 35 35
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
, A - Au=omobiles 1592 1039 262
~ - Medium trucks 32 21
.... H - Heav~ trucks 16 10 2
o¢ Site desc=~pcor (Soft - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
(~ard - o,0)
D D~aCance Co Roadwa7 in feec 50 50 50
~a'lele to Sem~ent CLef~} g0 90 90
Leq ~O~1¥ F.,qu:Lvalenc Sound Level (dBA)
A - AuComobile.~ 67.0 65.1 $9.2
~ ~ Mediu~ Cru=ks
58.8 57.0 51.0
H - Heavy trucks 61.6 59.8 53.8
~.~m.... 'T ' Combined T .al aBA] , 68.6,
LEQ = 66.72
CNEL - 70.02
LDN - 69.43
ab.
10;'.'
PROGRAM 425-D
6-4-84
60.
232.
55.
/,99.
50.
1077.
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Newport Ave. between Walnut & Southerly Terminus
~; .... Speed in mph 35 35 35
NX Traffic Volu~e (per hour)
, A - Au=omobiles 860 561 t41
~ SiCa d~c=~Co= (Sol: - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
( rd. o.0) ....
~la to Se~en: (:9~) ~0 9~ 9Q
Leq Ho~ly ~vale~: Soumd Level (dBA)
A - Au:~oblles , 6A.3 62.5 56.5
T - C~bined Toga% (dBA) ~.q R4.1 58.1
LEQ = 64.05
CS~J~ = 67.35
LDN = 66.75
65.
72.
60.
PROGRAH 425-D
6-4-84
50.
722.
45.
1~7.
FHwA fI1GHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Red Hi]'l between Irvine Blvd. & Byran Ave.
- i 7oo
Speed in mph 35 35 35
Tr~fic Vol~e (per hour)
~ A - ~C~obil~ 860 561 141
Si=e 4~cri~=or (Suf= - 0.5) .5 .5 .5
(Hard - 0.0}
Dis=ance =o Roadway in feet 50 ~50 50
~mla :o Se~ent (Left) 90 90 90
Ho~ly ~valen= Sound Level (dBA)
A - Au=~obil~ 64.3 62.5 56.5
56.1i ~4.3 48.3
LEQ - 64.05
~TEL .. 67.35
LDN = 66.75
65.
72.
PRO~ 425-D
6-4-84
335.
50.
722.
45.
1557.
FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Red Hill between San Juan & Edinger
.ADT m 30~09
Speed in mph 35 35 35
Traffic Volume (per hour)
A - Au:omobiles 1934 1262 319
M., Medium =tucks 39 26 6
H - Heav~ =tucks 19 13 3
Site descriptor (Sof: - 0,5) .5 .5 .5
(;Hard - 0.0)
Di,s=ance =o Roadway in fee= 50 50 50
Aa&le t.o Se~menl: (l:U. gh*') -90 -90 -90
An~le t:o Se~rment: fLef~) ~0 90 90
l{ourly gquivalen= Sound Level (dBA)
A., Au=omobiles 67.8 66.0 60.0
M ,. Medium ~rucks '
59.7 57.8 51.8
H = Heavy trucks 62.5 60~6 54.6
T - COmbined Total {dBA~ 69.4 67.6 61.6
LEQ = 67.56
CNEL = 70.87
LDN = 70.27
70.
5 'i' ·
123.
60.
266,
55.
50.
12~6.
Pt~O~P,~ 425-D
6-4-84
266/~.
.FHWA Hz~flWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION
Red.Hill between Edinge~ & Warner
ADT - 26750
,,._.. Speed in mph 40 40 40
NX Traffic Volume (per hour)
A - Au=omobiles 1680 1096 277
M - Medium ~rucks 34 22 5
.... H - Heav~ =tucks 17 11 2
Cf Si=e descr±p=or (Sof: = 0.5) .5 .5 .5
(~ard - 0.0)
D Dis=ante to Roadway in fee= 50 50 50
=o s.,..: -90 -90 -90
Anzle :o Se~en: (Le~) 90 90 90
Leq Hourly F-~valen: Sound Level (dBA)
A = Au:omebiles 68.7 66.9 60.9
M = Medium ~rucks '
60.4 58.6 52.6
H = Heav~ =ru.k. 62.7 60.9 54.9
T ' Combined Total ~dBA) 70.2 68.3 62.3
LEQ = 68.30
CNKL = 71.60
LDN = 71.00
70.
63.
65.
1-37 .
60.
296.
55.
639.
50.
137'7.
P PJ3GP~ 425-D
6-4-84
45.
2966~.
B. 24 HOUR HOISE STUDY I# BROg#IHG CORRIDOR
-20-
Plannin Commission
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ONNER:
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
ZONE:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION;
REQUEST:
NARCH 10,.1986
GENERAL PLAN JU~ND~ENT NO. 86-2c
PHYSICIANS OFFICE SERVICES
P.O. BOX 4008
AUSTIN, TX 78765
1101 SYCAMURE AVENUE
DONALD YUST (RANCHO LA PAZ APANTNENTS)
461 S. GLASSELL
ORANGE, CA 92666
AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO
COMPLY NITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL qUALITY ACT.
(R-3) MULTIPLE-FAMILY
MULTIPLE FAMILY
TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FROM HULTIPLE-FJU4ILY TO
PUBLIC AND INSTITUTXONAL
RECOI~ENDED ACTION:
Recommend to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 85-2c by the
adoption of Resolution 2314.
PROJECT AMALYSIS:
On November 5, 1984 the City Council approved Use Permit 84-16 which authorized
the construction of a 57,563 square foot medical office building at the
Healthcare Medical Center (formerly Tustin Community Hospital) at 14662 Newport
Avenue. In conjunction with that approval, a new parking lot was provided on
part of the Tustin Block Co. property. When that new parking lot was completed,
construction of the office building commenced and now is approximately 50~
completed. The Healthcare Medical Center is now looking toward the future to
providing more hospital and medical facilities for the community.
Community Developmen~ Department ~'
Planning Commission Report
Heal thcare
page two
The request ts to change the Rancho La Paz Apartment property from a
Multiple-Family designation to a Public and Institutional designation. Thts 1.8
acre complex has 26 two and three bedroom unit apartments with 52 carports. The
property is bounded on the south by Sycamore Avenue, on the west and north by
the Healthcare Center and on the east are apartments that front on Del Amo
Avenue. These apartments on the east are zoned R-3 and have a multiple-family
general plan designation. The zoning and general plan designation for the
Healthcare Center is Public and Institutional.
If the general plan designation is changed to Public and Institutional for this
project the Planning Commission should consider that this change would be made
"in the public interest", and not merely because a property owner desires this
amendment. In this particular case, the Healthcare Medical Center is the only
center of its kind in the City of Tustin that provides medical and hospital
services for the residents of this community. It may be more important to the
community to have adequate hospital and medical facilities then to retain the 26
unit apartment complex. If this fact 4s found to be true and subsequently
approved, a zone change would then follow for the Public and Institutional
District. Under the PSI zoning regulations, a use permit would then be required
for any facilities that would replace or change the use of the apartment
complex. That use permit will require the review and approval of the Planning
Commission.
Associate Planner
MAC:do
attach: plans
Resolution 2314
Community Development Department
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2c
WALNUT
GPA 86-2c
MULTI-FAMILY TO
PUBLIC & INSTITUTIONAL
(MF TO P&I)
CITY OF TUSTIN
RESOLUTION. NO. 2314
ATE: MARCH 10, 1986
EXItlBIT A
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
23
26
27
RESOLUTION NO. 2314
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN FOR 1101 SYCAMORE AVENUE
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve
follows:
as
The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
Ae
Section 65356.1 of the Government Code of the State of
California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public
interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General
Plan.
Be
That in accordance with Section 65356 of the Government Code of
the State of California, a ,public hearing was duly called,
noticed, and held on the application of Physician Services to
reclassify the land use from Multiple-Family to Public and
Institutional for the property at 1101 Sycamore Avenue known as
the Rancho La Paz Apartments.
Cm
That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and
is hereby recommended for adoption.
That a change in classification would be in the public interest
and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the
surrounding property owners.
II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that
General Plan Amendment 86-2c be adopted, amending the Land Use
Element for the property located at 1101 Sycamore Avenue known as the
Rancho La Paz Apartments.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission
on the day of , 1986.
KATHY WEIL, CHAIRMAN
DONNA ORR, RECORDING SECRETARY
Planning Commission
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ENYTRONHENTAL
STATUS:
ZON I NG:
GENERAL
PLAN:
REQUEST:
I~ARCH 10,' 1986
GENERAL PLAN AI~IENDMENT 86-2d
Ali ACTION INTTIATED BY TIlE PLANNING COR~ISSZON
NORTHSIDE OF 6th STREET BET'~EEN 'B" STREET AND PACIFIC
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR TO CONFOR~ WITH THE
CALIFORNTA ENVIROI~ENTAL QUALITY ACT.
R-1
STNGLE-FAHILY
CHANGE THE GENERAL
#ULTIPLE-FAHTLY
PLAN DESIGNATION F'ROtt SINGLE-FAiIILY TO
RECOI'~ENDED ACTION:
Recommend to the City Counctl approval of General Plan Amendment 86-2d by the
adoptton of Resolution No. 2315.
BACKGROUND:
On February 10, 1986 the Planning Commission dtrected staff to advertfse a
public hearing for this proposed gefleral plan amendment. Th~s action Nas ~aken
~n response to a proposal from some of' the property owners on the north side of
Sixth Street.
Most of the properties in the proposed general plan amendment area are 60 feet
wide and 333 plus feet in depth. The existing single-family homes are situated
on the front 100 feet of these parcels which face the industrial complex while
the remaining area of these properties is not being utilized.
i,. Community Development Department
Planning Cormlsston Report
GPA 86-2d
page ~o
It is questionable whether these properties along 6th Street are suited for
single-family residential uses due to the noise and truck traffic created by the
industrial users directly across the street at the Foster Arts Center.
Approximately 35~ of the parcels in this area are presently being used as
multiple family residences. If this amendment were approved, a zone change
would then be requested for the R-3 (Multiple-Family) District. Staff would
then recommend that Use Permits be obtained for all new developments in this
area so that the Planning Commission could review all proposals. This process
would help the City and surrounding owners to be assured of orderly development
tn the area.
MARY ANN CHAMBERLAIN,
Associate Planner
'MAC:do
attach: map
Resolution 2315
Community Development Department
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
21
22
23
2{
25:
2¢
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2315
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN FOR GPA 86-2d
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustfn does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
Section 65356.1 of the Government Code of the State of
California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public
interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General
Plan.
Be
That in accordance with Section 65356 of the Government Code of
the State of California, a public hearing was duly called,
noticed, and held on motion from the Planning Commission to
change the land use from Single-Family to Multiple-Family for
the properties described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
Ce
That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and
is hereby recommended for adoption.
De
That a change in classification would be in the public interest
and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the
surrounding property owners.
II.
The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that
General Plan Amendment 86-2d be adopted, amending the Land Use
Element for the properties described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto
from Single-Family to Multiple-Family.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission
on the day of , 1986.
KATHY WEIL, CHAIRMAN
DONNA ORR, RECORDING SECRETARY
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2d
~'L CAMINO
GPA 86-2d
SINGLE FAMILY TO MULTI-FAMILY
(SF TO MF)
CITY OF TUSTIN
-'~.$OLUTION NO. 2315
DATE: ;IARCH 10, 1985
EHHIBIT A
Report to the
Planning Commission
ITEM NO.
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
MARCH 10, 1986
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2e
CITY OF TUSTIN
1800 SAN JUAN STREET
FRDM (HF) HULTI-FA~ILY TO {P&I) PUBLXC AND INSTITUTIONAL
RECOI~ENDED ACT[ON:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2312 which
recommends that City Council approve GPA 86-2e.
BACKGROUND:
As a result of Annexation ~135, the Laguna/East Tustin Drive County island was
incorporated into the City of Tustin. The proposed General Plan amendment will
make the General Plan designation consistent with current land use.
DISCUSSION:
The purpose for this General Plan
existing land uses into conformance.
land use of the properties.
amendment is to bring General Plan and
There will be no change in the existing
The Church of Latter Day Saints is presently on the property at 1800 San Juan
Street. The current General Plan designation os (MF) Multi-Family.
The appropriate General Plan designation would be {P&I) Public and Institutional
for the Church of Latter Day Saints on'San Juan Street.
Planning Intern
CH:do
~ .... Community Development Department
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2e' &86-2f
' SAN ~ JUAN -- STF~EET --
1~60~ ~ ~: :':':':':':':':' - .....
- :~:::::::::::::::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'
~ ':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':':' ~ ~ ~m~° Z
'~::~:~:~:~:~:~:~::,:~:~:~:~:~::': .... ,,,,, ·
' ~" :"~ ~ I I-'"~°
( /~2~ ~qt
~8 7~
SIE. RRA ,/VISTA ~.,
T EL, CAMINO R~AL
-~~ I .... -- .. / ~
GPA 86-2e
GPA 86-2f
MULTI-FAMILY TO
PUBLIC & INSTITUTIONAL
(MF TO P&I)
SINGLE FAMILY TO
MULTI-FAMILY
(SF TO MF)
CiTY OF TUSTIN
- '~SOLUTION NO. 2312 (GPA 86-2e)
DATE: ,1,-~RCH 10, 1986
EXHIBIT A
1
2
3
4
'5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19~
20
21
22
23
2~
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2312
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR 1800
SAN JUAN STREET
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
Section 65356.1 of the Government Code of the State of
California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public
interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General
Plan.
That in accordance with Section 65356 of the Government Code of
the State of California, a public hearing was duly called,
noticed and held on the application of the City of Tustln to
reclassify the land use at 1800 San Juan Street from (MF)
Multi-Family to (P&I) Public and Institutional. Shown on'
Exhibit A.
That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and
is hereby recommended for adoption.
That a change in classification would be in the public interest
and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the
surrounding property owners.
II.
The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that
General Plan Amendment 8602e be adopted, amending the Land Use
Element for 1800 San Juan Street, as shown in Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission
held on the day of , 1986.
KATHY WEIL, Chairman
DONNA ORR, Recording Secretary
Report to the
Planning Commission
ITEM NO.
DATE:
SUBJECT:
API)LICANT:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
MARCH 10, 1986
GENERAL Pt. AN AINENDINENT 86-2f
CITY OF TUSTIN
13881 to 13895 BRO#NING
FRON (SF) SINGLE-FAMILY TO (NF) NULTI-FA~ILY
RECOI~IENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2313 which
recommends that City Council approve GPA 86-2f.
BACKGROUND:
As a result of Annexation #135, the Laguna/East Tusttn Drive County island was
incorporated into the City of Tustin. The proposed General Plan amendment will
make the General Plan designation consistent with current land use.
DISCUSSION:
The purpose for this General Plan amendment is to bring General Plan and
existing land uses into conformance. There will be no change in the existing
land use of the properties.
The property at 13881 to 13895 Browning currently has several multi-family
dwellings and has a General Plan designation of {SF) Single-Family.
The property at 13881 to 13895 Browning Avenue should be a designation of
Multi-Family (MF).
CH:do
Corn munity Development Department
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2e &86-2f
SAN ~' JUAN STREET
! 1"~601 I,~ N ~.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
, v.v.v.v.v.
~3BOZ ~ - ' "'"*'*"**"'*'
~ /~l ~ /~o~ :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.?;.:..,....v....F.....v...
~ U~IN [ ~ST ~lV
~ ~ I
~ IEl, CAMINO REAL
GPA 86-2e
GPA 86-2f
MULTI-FAMILY TO
PUBLIC & INSTITUTIONAL
(MF TO P&I)
SINGLE FAMILY TO
MULTI-FAMILY
($F TO UF)
CITY OF TUSTIN
'SOLUTION NO. 2313 (GPA 86-2f)
DATE: ?,ARCH 19, 1986
~IJTDTT ,~
1
2
3
4
5
The
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 II.
18;
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2313
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR 13881
TO 13895 BROWNING, FROM (SF) SINGLE-FAMILY TO (MF)
MULTI-FAMILY
Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
Ae
Section 65356.1 of the Gbvernment Code of the State of
California provides that when it is deemed to be in the public
interest, the legislative body may amend a part of the General
Plan.
That in accordance with Section 65356 of the Government Code of
the State of California, a public hearing was duly called,
noticed and held on the application of the City of Tustin to
reclassify the land use' at 13881 to 13895 Browning Avenue from
(SF) Single-Family to (MF) Multi-Family. Shown on Exhibit A.
Ce
That a Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and
is hereby recommended for adoption.
Dm
That a change in classification would be in the public interest
and not detrimental to the welfare of the public or the
surrounding property owners.
The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that
General Plan Amendment 86-2f be' adopted, amending the Land Use
Element for 13881 to 13895 Browning Avenue, as shown in Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission
held on the day of , 1986.
KATHY WEIL, Chairman
DONNA ORR, Recording Secretary
Planning Commission
DATE:
SUB3ECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATIOII:
ZONING:
REQUEST:
MARCH 10, 1986
VARIANCE 86-2
H. B. SIGN INC.
17261 1TTH STREET
CG PUD
INCREASE SIZE OF THE MILLERS OUTPOST SIGN AT 17261 17TH STREET,
FRENCH QUARTER SHOPPING CENTER.
RECQIIqENDEO ACTION:
That the PlannJng Commission deny Variance application by the adoption of
ResolutJon No. 2203.
SURqARY:
The subject application has been submitted by the H. 8. Sign Company to
construct a new and larger monument sign for Millers Outpost located at [7th and
Carroll Way tn the Tusttn French Quarter Shopptng Center. The current monument
stgn fs an exlsttng non-conforming stgn and the approval of the subject
application would Increase the level .of non-conformity. The proposed'monument
sign would also create a vtsual obstruction to motorists exttlng the shopptng
center onto 17th Street.
BACKGROUND:
Use Permtt 84-14 approved the remodel and expansion of the shopping center at
17th and Carroll Way, formerly referred to as the Ralphs Shopptng Center. At
the time of shopping center Improvements, a large "Ralphs" pole stgn was present
on the property whtch was an extsttng non-conforming sign. At that t~me the
developer agreed to remove the large "Ralphs" pole s~gn tn exchange for the
approval of a new monument sign pursuant to the voluntary reduction sectton the
Ctty Sign Code.
Corn munity Development Department
Planning Commission Report
March 10, 1986
page two
At the time of remodel, the proposed sign was a monument with landscape planter
totaling 9'2" high and 18' wide with up to three tenant identifications.
However, in the conditions of approval of Use Permit 84-14, the total area of
the monument sign was reduced to 7' high by 15' wide with up to three tenants
identified. The sign ordinance allows a 75 square foot sign up to 6' high.
Also, only center identification is a)lowed on the sign.
DISCUSSION:
There are two occasions when a variance may be granted for a sign. They are:
1) that because of exceptional circumstances applicable to the subject property,
the strict interpretation of the Code deprives the property of privileges other
properties in the area have, and 2) that the subject property will not receive
special privileges inconsistent with the limitations other properties in the
area have. The requested variance does not apply to either of these two points.
Although the proposed sign has a total sign area of 75 square feet, the
monument will be higher than the Sign code would allow. The monument would be
14'2" high and 16'9" wide (240 sq.ft.). Also, tenant identification only
proposed is planned although only center tdentt'fication would normally be
allowed. Additionally, the proposed sign would be a visual obstruction to
motorists. It is suggested that if the variance is granted that .the location of
the sign be changed so that no visual obstruction will occur.
CONCLUSIONS:
Since the sign already on-site is a non-conforming sign and the proposed change
would increase the level of non-conformity as well as create a traffic hazard it
is recommended that the variance application be denied.
CH:em
Community Development Department
RESOLUTION NO. 2303
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, DENYING VARIANCE
APPLICATION NO. 86-2 FOR MILLERS OUTPOST
AT 17TH AND CARROLL WAY
The Planning Commission of the city of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
Ae
That a proper application, (Variance No. 86-2), was filed on
behalf of Millers Outpost requesting authorization to vary from
the requirements of the city of Tustin Sign Code for the
installation of a 14'2" high by 16'9" wide monument sign.
That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said
application.
That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property, relative to size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, a strict application of the Zoning Ordinance does
not deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and under identical zone
classification, evidenced by the following findings:
The current sign is an existing non-conforming sign and the
proposal would increase the level of non-conformity.
2. The proposed sign would create a visual obstruction to
motorists exiting shopping center onto 17th Street.
That the granting of a variance as herein provided will
constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district
in which the subject property is situated.
That this project is categorically exempt from the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act. (Class 11.)
That the granting of the variance as herein provided will be
contrary to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance or the public
safety, health and welfare, and said variance should be granted.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
21
23
25
26
28
Resolution No. 2303
Page two
II. The Planning Commission hereby denies variance application 86-2.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission,
held on the day of , 198
KATHY WEIL,
Chairman
DONNA ORR,
Recording Secretary
Repor to the
Planning Commission
iTEM NO.
DATE:
SUBOECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
PROPERTY
ONNER:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
SI'Krus:
REQUEST:
HRRCH 10,- 1986
USE PERIIIT 86-8
SI{U-dUI HUANG OF THE RRSTER CHICKEN
17292 MCFADDEN, SUITE L, TUSTIN
17292 #CFADDEN AVENUE, SUITE L
40ANNE BOULTER
16302 Magellan
Hunt¶ngton Beach, CA 92647
C-1 - RETAIL COI~ERCIAL
. CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT SECTION 15303.
AUTHORIZATION FOR ON-SITE BEER AND NINE SALES LICENSE
RECOI~ENDED ACTION:
That the Planning Commission approve Use Permit 86-8 by the adoption of
Resolution No. 2311.
SUI~ARY:
The applicant, Shu-Jui Huang is requesting authorization for an on-site' beer and
wine sales license in order to supplement the menu offered by an existing
restaurant called The Master Chicken. Although a large part of the business is
for take-out customers, The Master Chicken provides approximately 12 indoor
seats. As appl(ed for, this license authorizes the on-site consumption of beer
and wine. No off-site sales will be authorized.
AMALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS:
Although staff has been concerned with off-site sales of liquor, this type of
license allows the applicant to exercise some control over the age of the
consumers who purchase and/or consume the beverages. The applicant will not be
authorized, should this application be approved, to sell beer and wine for
off-site consumption.
Community Development Deparlment
Planntng Commi sston
Master Chtcken
page two
The Master Chicken had previously operated two restaurants in Tustin, one of
which was in the Newforth Center which has been torn down, the other is still in
operation on McFadden Avenue. The old location in the Newforth Center had
previously held an on-site beer and wine sales license and no reports of police
related problems had been-reported.
The applicants feel that by the approval of Use Permit 86-8 and the subsequent
issuance of an on-site beer and wine sales license, that their business will be
greatly enhanced. Staff has considered this application and has determined that
on-site beer and wine sales would be appropriate for this location.
Assistant Planner
LP:do
attach: Resolution 2311
Site Plan
Community Development Department
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
RESOLUTION NO. 2311
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CIl~F OF TUSTIN, APPROVING USE PERMIT 86-8 FOR THE
ON-SITE SALES OF BEER AND WINE AT 17292 MCFADDEN
AVENUE, SUITE L
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
Ae
That a proper application (Use Permit 86-8) has been filed by
Shu-Jui Huang of The Master Chicken to request authorization for
an on-site beer and wine sales license.
Ce
II.
That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said
appl i cati on.
That establishment, maintenance and operation of the use applied
for will not, under the circumstances of this case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general
welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood
of such proposed use, evidenced by the following findings:
The use is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and the
Tusttn Area General Plan.
That the sale of alcoholic beverages is permitted in the
C-1 zone subject to issuance of a Use Permit (Section
9232-b(p)).
That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use
applied for will not be injurious or detrimental to the property
and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property,
nor to the general welfare of the City of Tustin, and should be
granted.
E. This project is categorically exempt from the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (Section 15303).
The Planning Commission hereby approves Use Permit 86-8 to authorize
the on-site sales of beer and wine at 17292 McFadden Avenue, Suite L,
subject to the following conditions:
2. All alcoholic beverages must be consumed upon the premises.
This permit does not authorize the sale of beer and wine for
off-site consumption.
27
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
Resolution 2311
page two
A11 signs must be brought ~nto conformance w~th the Tust4n Sign
Ordinance No. 684.
4. The applicant must sign and return an "Agreement to Conditions
Imposed" form as prepared by the Community Development Director.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tusttn Planning Commission,
held on the day of , 1986.
KATHY WEIL, Chairman
DONNA ORR,
Recording Secretary
Report to the
Planning Commission
ITEM NO. 10
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
RRRCH 10,. 1986
PACIFIC BELL E~ERGENC¥ EPISODE TRANSPORTATION HANAGE~ENT PLAN
PACTFIC BELl
SOUTHMESTERLY CORNER OF REDHILL AND EDINGER AVENUE
M (INDUSTRIAL)
RECOI~ENDED ACTION:
Recommend approval of the proposed Pacific Bell Telephone Transportation Plan to
the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
The Pacific Bell development, on the southwest corner of Redhtll Avenue and
Edtnger Avenue was approved by Resolution 2177 (Use-Permit 84-10) with the
following conditions that relate to transportation flow:
*
Preparation, submission and implementation of an Emergency Episode
Transportation Management Plan to be reviewed by the City Community
Development Director and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
* An O.C.T.D. bus bay shall be provided on the Redhill Avenue frontage
adjacent to this property.
DISCUSSION:
The Pacific Bell Company has submitted its Emergency Episode Transportation
Management Plan that addresses the conditions imposed.
The plan will be used in the event of a smog alert and is in compliance with
South Coast Air Quality Management District regulations. In the proposed plan,
Pacific Bell will coordinate smog alert activities through, the North Hollywood
office which is the sector report center. In the event of a smog alert, the
center will notify the Tustin office for appropriate actions to be taken. The
actions that will be taken are as follows:
Stage 1
A. Maintain a "blanket" First Stage Alert during the main smog season, May
through October, by displaying a First Stage poster at each exit.
Corn munity Development Department
Planning Commission RePort
Pacific Bell
page two
Stage 2
A. The goal of a second stage episode is to significantly reduce the number of
vehicle miles driven'by employees going to and from work.
B. The Location Coordinator will assist Commuter ~omputer/OCTD (Orange County
Transit District) wi th the establishment and maintenance of a rtdesharing
program.
C. Restrict the use of Company work vehicles to those performing work of an
essential nature.
D. Maintain records as required by the SCAQMD.
Stage 3
A. Reduce the number of employees to only those necessary to essential service
operations. Instruct all other employees to remain home on the day of the
predicted third stage episode.
B. Maintain records as required by SCAQMD.
C. Reduce fleet vehicle mileage.
Pacific Bell will also p~rtictpate in alternative employee transportation plan.
A Rldeshare program will be coordinated through OCTD and commuter computer. The
plan will encourage the use of carpools and vanpools. Also involved in the
proposal is 100 parking spaces adjacent to the building reserved for carpool
use. In addition,, tenant work starting times will range from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30
a.m. for most employees which should alleviate possible traffic problems.
CONCLUSZONS:
The plan proposed by Pacific Bell is directed to reduce traffic flow problems in
the South Tusttn area. The company seems to be very supportive of carpools and
vanpools. The Emergency Episode Transportation Management Plan is in accordance
with' the conditions imposed in Resolution 2177. In addition, a OCTD bus turnout
has been provided along Redhill. The turnout complies' with Orange County
regulations for bus turnouts as shown on the attachment. The turnout complies
with the conditions imposed.
Planning intern
H:do
Community Development Department
Repor'[ to the
Planning Commission
ITEM NO. 11
#~rch 10, 1986
SUB4ECT: REPORT ON COUNCIL ACTIONS - March 3, 1986
Oral presentation to be glven by Donald D. Lam, Dtrector of Community
Development
do
Attachments: City Counctl Actton Agenda - March 3, 1986
Corn munity Development Department
7:02 I.
ALL PRESENT II.
III.
ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF Tile TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 3, 1986 - 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PROCLAMATIONS
ACCEPTED 1. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF-UNIVERSITY WOMEN - TENTH ANNIVERSARY
BY JOSEPHINE COLLINS, PRESIDENT
TO BE I~ILEO 2. "ORANGEWOOD WEEK" - APRIL 12-18, 1986
CAMP ITdSTIN IV. COMMUNITY NOTES
WILL BE I~LRCH 24TH THROUGH 28TH
SPACE AND SKI PROGR~ WILL BE I~CH 21ST THROUGH 23RD
CONGRATULATED ASSISTANCE LEAGUE ON RED GARTER REVIEW
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
ADOPTED RESOLUTION 1, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2a - RESOLUTION NO. 86-27
NO~ 86-27 RESOLUTION NO. 86-27 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-2a, AMENDING THE CIRCULATION
ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN
CONTINIJEO TO 2. EAST TUSTIN PLANNED COMMUNITY (TUSTIN RANCH) - RESOLUTIONS NO. 86-28;
3-17 86-29; 86-30; 86-31; AND 86-32; AND ORDINANCES NO. 966 AND 967
RESOLUTION NO. 86-28 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) 85-2 AS
REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-29 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-1a, AMENDING THE LAND .USE
ELEMENT TEXT AND DIAGRAM OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR THE AREA
BOUNDED BY THE SANTA AHA FREEWAY (I-5) TO THE SOUTH; EXISTING RESIDEN-
TIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN AND THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNI-
TIES OF LEMON HEIGHTS AND COWAN HEIGHTS TO THE WEST; UNINCORPORATED LAND
TO THE NORTH; AND UNINCORPORATED AREA WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
LINE (MYFORD ROAD) FOR THE CITY OF IRVINE TO THE EAST; ENCOMPASSING
APPROXIMATELY 1,740 ACRES COMMONLY KNOWN AS EAST TUSTIN (EXHIBIT "A"
'ATTACHED HERETO)
RESOLUTION NO. 86-30 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-1b, AMENDING THE CIRCULATION
ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR THE AREA BOUNDED BY: THE
SANTA AHA FREEWAY (I-5) TO THE SOUTH; EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN AND THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES OF LEMON
HEIGHTS ANO COWAN HEIGHTS TO THE WEST; UNINCORPORATED LAND TO THE NORTH;
AND UNINCORPORATED AREA WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE LINE (MYFORD
ROAD) FOR THE CITY OF IRVINE TO THE EAST ENCOMPASSING APPROXIMATELY
1,740 ACRES, COMMONLY KNOWN AS EAST TUSTIN (EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED
HERETO).
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 1 3-3-86
RESOLUTION NO. 86-31 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, ADOPTING GENERAl_. PLAN AMENDMENT 86-1c, AMENDING THE SEISMIC
SAFETY ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR THE AREA BOUNDED BY:
THE SANTA ANA FREEWAY (I-5) TO THE SOUTH; EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP-
MENT IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN AND THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES OF LEMON
HEIGHTS AND COWAN HEIGHTS TO THE WEST; UNINCORPORATED LAND TO THE NORTH;
AND UNINCORPORATED AREA WITHIN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE LINE (MYFORD
ROAD) FOR THE CITY OF IRVINE TO THE EAST ENCOMPASSING APPROXIMATELY
1,740 ACRES, COMMONLY KNOWN AS EAST TUSTIN (EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED
HERETO),
ORDINANCE NO. 966 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, REZONING FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY TO PLANNED COMMUNITY/RESIDEN-
TIAL; PLANNED COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL; PLANNED COMMUNITY/MIXED USE . AND
PLANNED COMMUNITY/COMMUNITY FACILITIES FOR THE AREA BOUNDED BY: THE
SANTA ANA FREEWAY (I-5) TO THE SOUTH; EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN AND THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES OF LEMON
HEIGHTS AND COWAN HEIGHTS TO THE WEST; UNINCORPORATED LAND TO THE NORTH;
AND UNINCORPORATED AREA WIT IN THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE LINE (MYFORD
ROAD) FOR THE CITY OF IRVINE TO THE EAST ENCOMPASSING APPROXIMATELY
1,740 ACRES, COMMONLY KNOWN AS EAST TUSTIN (EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED
HERETO).
RESOLUTION NO. 86-32 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION, BY RESOLUTION OF THE
COUNCIL, SECTIONS 1.0 AND 2.0 OF THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN (SPECIFIC
PLAN NO. 8).
ORDINANCE NO. 967 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN ADOPTING SECTION 3.0 OF THE EAST TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN (SPECIFIC
PLAN NO. 8) AND EXHIBIT "C" AS THE LAND USE PLAN.
Recommendation:
2)
3)
4)
6)
7)
8)
9)
1) Adopt Resolution No. 86-28;
Adopt. Resolution No. 86-29;
Adopt Resolution No. 86-30;
Adopt Resolution No. 86-31;
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 966 have first reading by title only;
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 966 be introduced;
Adopt Resolution No. 86-32;
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 967 have first reading by title only; and
M.O. - That Ordinance No. 967 be introduced.
JOHN BUTLER VI. PUBLIC INPUT
SPOKE RESARDING GEl'rING PEOPLE TO VOTE.
RICHARD VINING, 400 W. )lAIN ST:, ASKED ABOUT HAVING THE OLD FIRE HYORRNT REMOVED FROM IN FRONT
OF HIS HOME. BOB LEDENDECKER RESPONDED THAT kI4EN WE HAVE CONVERTED ALL THE SERVICES, THE OLD
HYORANT WXLL BE RE]~OVEO.
VII.
APPE~)VED
/ JvE
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 18, 1986, ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
2. APPROVAL OF DEMANDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $309,305.17
RATIFICATION OF PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $137,917.86
APPROVED STAFF 3.
RECOMI~ENDATION
REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 86-1; CLAIMANT: GARY WILLIAM DICKEY; DATE OF
LOSS: 12/5/85; DATE FILED WITH CITY: 1/22/86
Reject subject claim as recommended by the City Attorney.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA Page 2 3-3-86
k~-'~VED STAFF 4. REJECTION OF CLAIM NO. 85-47; CLAIMANT: SOLOM MCNUbTY; DATE OF LOSS:
L ~ENDATION 8/29/85; DATE FILED WITH CITY: 10/24/85
(OESTEREY REQUESTED TftAT Reject subject claim as recommended by the City Atl~orney.
a4ERE POLLING PLACES HAVE CItANGED, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS BE INSTALLED.
&OOPTED 5. RESOLUTION NO. 86-33 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
~ESOLUTION NO. 86-33 TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING VOTING PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES,
APPOINTING PRECINCT BOARD MEMBERS AND FIXING COMPENSATION FOR THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF SAID CITY ON TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 1986,
HERETOFORE CALLED BY RESOLUTION NO. 85-123 OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Adopt Resolution No. 86-33 as recommended by the City Clerk.
~DOPTEO 6.
~ESOLt[TION NO. 86-34
~DOPTEO 7.
~ESOLUTION NO. 86-35
¥ VEO STAFF 8.
U:..~[NDATIOII
;ONTINUED TO
)-17-86
RESOLUTION NO. 86-34 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE INTERSECTION
OF MOULTON PARKWAY AND MYFORD ROAD AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO
ADVERTISE FOR BIDS
Adopt Resolution No. 86-34 as recommended by the Director of Public
Works/City Engineer.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-35 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR EL CAMINO
REAL EXTENSION FROM TUSTIN AUTO CENTER TO MYFORD ROAD AND DIRECTING THE
CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS
Adopt Resolution No. 86-35 as recommended by the Director of Public
Works/City Engineer.
INSTALLATION OF NO PARKING SIGNS ON SYCAMORE AVENUE BETWEEN RED HILL
AVENUE & NEWPORT AVENUE FOR STREET SWEEPING PURPOSES
Authorize .the installation of no parking signs for street sweeping
purposes on Sycamore Avenue between Red Hill Avenue and Newport
Avenue to restrict on-street parking from 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon on
Mondays as recommended by the Engineering Division.
VIII. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DISCLOSURE ORDINANCE & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN - ORDI-
NANCE NO. 964 AND RESOLUTION NO. 86-14
ORDINANCE NO. 964 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN CALIFORNIA ADDING SECTION 5600 TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING
REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE DISCLOSURE OF HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
RESOLUTION NO. 86-14 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN NAJ~tING THE ORANGE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT AS THE AGENCY RESPON-
SIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING AND ENFORCING THE REQUIREMENTS OF STATE OF
CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY BILL NO. 2185
IX. NEW BUSINESS
~P~lVEI) SUBJECT 1. PETERS CANYON REGIONAL PARK MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
CHANGES BY THE COUNTY
Recommendation: Approve the Memorandum of Understanding in order to
memorialize the County of Orange's commitment that the City of Tustin
will participate in review and approval of subject park development and
access plans.
SITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 3 3-3-86
AP"'~'qVED STAFF
~ MENDATION
2. PURCHASE OF COMPUTERIZED DIAGNOSTIC ENGINE ANALYZER
Recommendation:
engine analyzer
$15,233.35.
Authorize the purchase of a computerized diagnostic
from Allen Group of Santa Aha in the amount of
X. REPORTS
1ATIFIED EXCEPT 1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - FEBRUARY 24, 1986
APPEALED ITEM NO. 4
RECEIVED AND FILED 2.
~ECEIVED AND FILED 3.
~ECEIVED AND FILm:n 4.
EXPANSION OF PROPANE COMPANY ADJACENT TO 1021 EDINGER STREET
Recommendation: Receive and file.
PLACEMENT OF EDISON COMPANY LFFILITY POLES
Recommendation: Receive and file.
FRONTIER PARK COMPLAINTS
Recommendation: Receive and file.
XUSTON X I. OTHER BUSI NESS
REQUESTED A~JOU~N~NT TO A ~OSED
· POS~SIBU~ LITIGATION.
SESSION ON FRIDAY, MARCH 7, 1986, AT 7:30 A.N. REGARDING
A~ ~fE1) CO-HOSTING ~J~DIDATES NIGHT S~ONSORED BY ll4E ANERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN.
APPROVEO CO-HOSTING CANDIDATES FORUM SPONSORED BY THE CHNqBER OF COI~lqERCE.
12:42 XII. ADJOURNMENT
To.a Closed Session on Friday, March 7, 1986, at 7:30 a.m. regarding
possible litigation, thence to a Budget Workshop on March 10, 1986, at 7:00
p.m. and thence to the next Regular Meeting on March 17, 1986, at 7:00 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA PAGE 4
3-3-86
ACTION AGENDA OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE TUSTIN .REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MARCH 3, 1986
7:00 P.M.
12:42 1. CALL TO ORDER
ALL 2. ROLL CALL
PRESENT
APPROVED 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 18, 1986, ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
NONE 4. OTHER BUSINESS
12:43
ADJOURNMENT
To the next Regular Meeting on March 17, 1986, at 7:00 p.m.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION AGENDA Page I 3-3-86