HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH 3 TUSTIN AUTO CTR 01-21-85TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
HONORABLE ARYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
C01,~UNITY DEYELOPHENT DEPARTMENT
EAST TUSTIN PLANNED COI,~UNITY/TUS'FIN AUTO CENTER
NORTH OF 1-5 FREEWAY, SOUTH OF PROPOSED LAGUNA ROAD, EAST OF
PROPOSED JAIqBOREE ROAD.
APPLICATION SIJ~tARY:
This project consists of applications submitted by The [rvtne Company for
approval of Final E[R 84-2, approval of General Plan Amendment 84-1a amending
the subject property's land use designation from single family residential to
planned community commercial, and property Zone Change 84-2 changing the zone
designation from planned community residential to planned community commercial.
Consideration of a propery subdivision Is forwarded to the Council for separate
consideration pursuant to staff's report on Tentative Parcel Hap 84-1032.
DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission at its meeting on January 14,1985 considered The Irvine
Company request to permit development of the Tusttn Auto Center and by a vote o¢
4-1 approved of the project. Staff's report to the Planning Commission dated
January 14,1985 provides a comprehensive analysis of the Tustin Auto Center
proposal including the Planning Commission resolution and proposed planned
community zoning regulations.
Specifically, the Final Environmental Impact Report being submitted to Council
is comprised of the Draft EIR, written responses, response to comments, staff
technical reports, resolution of approval with mitigation measures, findings and
statements of overriding consideration, minutes from the Planning Commission
meeting and all other technical documents necessary for Council certification.
The General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would simply change the property's
intended land use and actual zoning to a designation permitting construction of
the Tustin Auto Center. The appropriate resolution for amending the General
Plan and ordinance for zone change are attached to this transmittal.
Staff supports this application and recommended approval to the Planning
Commission who conducted a public hearing and received public testimony. The
Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of this project by the City
Council.
Auto Center
January 21, 198B
page two
RECOHHENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council proceed as follows:
1) Adopt resolution 85-10 certifying EIR 84-2 as the final EIR in conformance
with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Adopt resolution 84-9 amending the land use element of the Tustin Area
General Plan by changing the property's designation from Residential Single
Family to Planned Community Commercial.
First read and introduce Ordinance 927 rezoning the subject property from
Planned Community to Planned Community/Commercial which would also include
development regulations known as East Tusttn Auto Center, City of Tustin,
Planned Community Regulations for regulation of the auto center development
and operation.
Director of Community D. evelOpmen~'c
DDL:do
attachment:
EIR Resolution 85-10
GPA Resolution 85-9
Ordinance 927 with amended PC Zone Regulations
Staff report to the Planning Commission, Jan 14, 1985 (including
original planned community zone regulations and appropriate
resolutions)
EIR 84~2 with Responses to Comments
Planning Commission minutes
Auto Center Site Plan and Roadway Cross Sections
Community Development Department
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
~5
~7
~8
RESOLUTION NO. 85-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (EIR) 84-2 FOR THE TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
The City Council of the City of Tustin, California does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
Ae
A Draft EIR 84-2 and amendments were noticed, prepared, and
processed in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, State Guidelines, and the policies of the City of
Tustin for the proposed Tustin Auto Center to be located
northerly of the Santa Aha Freeway and easterly of Jamboree
Road.
The Planning Commission, by adoption of Resolution No. 2204 on
January 14, 1985, recommends that the City Council certify EIR
84-2, as amended.
Ce
Exhibit A, attached and a part hereof, and EIR Text identifys
mitigation measures that avoid or substantially mitigate adverse
impacts of the project; adverse impacts which cannot be feasibly
mitigated; and overriding considerations justifying the proposed
project.
II.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby certify the final
EIR 84-2 for the proposed Tustin Auto Center to consist of the Draft
EIR 84-2, amendments thereto, staff's technical report, written
comments and responses, testimony received at public hearings before
the Planning Commission and City Council and responses as contained
within the minutes, and the mitigating measures and overriding
considerations as contained herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on
the day of 1985.
URSULA E. KENNEDY,
Mayor
MARY WYNN,
City Clerk
As Required 5y CE~A and the ~ty of Tust~
Tustin Auto ~ter ~ 84-2
Janua~ 21, 1985
Pursuant to the California Environmentel Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and in
aecordance with the City of Tustin guidelines, as amended, this document presents
the findings and a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding required for
approval of the proposed project.
1. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby find that changes or
alterations have been required in~ or incorporated int% the project which
avoid or substantially mitigate the significant adverse impacts identifie(l
in the final EIR as sDecificaily itemized below.
A. Water Resources
Impacts:
The site is currently subject to flooding ranging in depth from
one to three feet resulting from the inability of regional
drainage facilities to convey 100-year flood flows.
Findings:
The project includes the construction of an earthen berm
extending from an existing berm to the west of the project
site and wrapping around the project site to protect the
project from flooding. This berm will protect the site without
significantly altering existing drainage and flooding patterns
in the vicinity of the project. No increased flooding impacts
will result to adjacent properties.
Impacts:
Short-term degradation of surface water quality will coeur
during grading and initial construction activities.
Findings:
A plan for control of onsite storm runoff from the property
during construction will be prepared and submitted to the City
of Tnstin prior to the issuance of any grading permits.
Impacts:
On-site runoff volumes and velocities will increase and the
on-site drainage pattern will be altered.
Findings:
An on-site drainage plan will be submitted to the City of
Tustin for approval prior to the recordation of the final parcel
map. Methods for controlling the velocity and direc~on of
runoff will be incorporated into the project design.
Impacts:
Development of the site will effect a long-term change in
runoff quality from agricultural pollutants to urban pollutants.
Findings:
This impact will be partially reduced by the implementation
of appropriate stormwater pollution eontrol plans and periodic
cleaning of storm drains.
Resolution No.
Page 2
B. Land Use and Aesthetie~
Impacts:
Findings:
Impacts:
Findings:
The project is not consistent with the existing general plan
and zoning designations for the site and surrounding areas.
A general plan amendment and zone change are proposed as
part of the project. The project design and performance
standards included in the Tustin Auto Center Planned
Community Regulations will ensure that the proposed project
is compatible with land uses planned for areas adjacent to and
near the project site.
Implementation of the proposed project would result in the
introduction of high intensity night lighting in the East Tustin
area.
The Tustin Auto Center Planned Community Regulations
contain lighting performance standards stipulating the type of
lighting which may be used, the maximum height of each
fixture, and the allowable wattage per square foot. Only
sharp cut-off fixtures at a maximum height of 20 feet are
allowed, thereby localizing light and glare impacts.
.Transportation/Circulation
Impacts:
Findings:
The proposed project will contribute a small increment to an
existing and projected cumulative traffic impact at several
intersections in the area. The project will generate 8,205
ADT and 845 p.m. peak hour trips. Traffic from the project
will incrementally worsen traffic conditions at the Red Hill
Avenue/I-5 ramps and the intersections of Red Hill Avenue
and Irvine Boulevard and Red Hill Avenue and Laguna Road.
Construction of the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange will
provide substantial mitigation of project related traffic
impacts by directing project related and other traffic from
Red Hill Avenue. The Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange has
been committed for construction by the City of Tustin as a
lo~ally funded project (Tustin City Council Resolution No. 84-
65).
Noise
Impacts:
Activities at the auto center facilities will increase overall
ambient noise levels in the area by a few decibels. The
nu.mber of individually audible and potentially intrusive traffic
noise events will increase as a result of the auto center
development.
Resolution No.
Page 3
Ee
Findings:
Impacts:
Findings:
Impacts..
Findings:
Air Quality
Impacts:
Findings:
Impacts:
Findings:
The Tustin Center Planned Community Regulations contain
operational performance standards which will mitigate noise
impacts to an insignificant level. Other recommended
operational and site planning measures will also reduce
project impacts.
Short-term noise impacts will occur during project
construction.
Compliance with city noise standards regarding hours of
operation and the use of muffled construction equipment will
minimize construction noise impacts.
The project site is exposed to noise impacts from the Santa
Aha Freeway. Over one-half of the project site is exposed to
freeway noise leveis in excess of the City of Tustin's noise
objective of 65 CNEL for commercial land uses.
The project design incorporates a wall of at least eight feet in
height along this edge. This wall will serve to attenuate noise
from the freeway and wiU reduce on-site noise levels to
acceptable.levels.
Short-term increases in dust and exhaust emission will occur
in the vicinity of the project during construction.
Compliance with Rule 403 of the SCAQMD Rules and
Regulations and wetting of graded areas will mitigate fugitive
dust emissions during construction.
Long-term regional increases in mobile and stationary-source
emissions will result due to the increase in motor vehicle and
energy usage.
The proposed project includes bicycle and pedestrian facilities
provided to reduce motor vehicle usage. Sidewalks will be
provided along Jamboree and Laguna Road and on all internal
roads. All roadways being constructed as a part of the project
have sufficient width to allow for bicycle lanes. No further
mitigation measures are feasible to reduce motor vehicle air
quality emissions.
Resolution No.
Page 4
The City Couneil of the City of Tustin further finds that although changes,
alterations~ or conditions have been incorporated into the Drojeet which will
s,.ubstantially mitigate or avoid significant effects identified in the final EIR
eartain of the significant effects cannot be mitigated to fully aeeeptabl~
levels. The remaining imDaets identified below may continue to be of
si[~nifieant adverse impact even when all known feasible and identified
mitigation measures are applied.
Projeet implementation will result in the termination of on-site
agrieulturel production and the loss of 60 acres of "Farmland of Statewide
Importaneen as identified by the California State Department of
Conservation.
Findings:
The project is currently committed to non-agricultural use.
The Tustin General Plan Land Use Element currently
designates the site for urban (residential) land use. The
existence of an Irvine Ranch Water District improvement
finance district and the issuance of bonds to finance urban
level water and sewer improvements for the project site and
surrounding areas further indicates the existing commitment
to urban development of this area. There are no economically
or physically feasible measures available to mitigate this
impact.
The proposed project will generate approximately 8,205 ADT and 845 P.M.
peak hour trips. Traffic from the project will inerementally worsen traffic
conditions at the Red Hill Avenue/I-5 ramps and the intersections of Red
Hill Avenue and Irvine Boulevard, and Red Hill Avenue and Laguna Road.
Findings:
Construction of the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange will
provide substantial mitigation of project related traffic
impacts by diverting project related and other traffic from
Red Hill Avenue. The Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange has
been committed by the City of Tustin as a locally funded
project (Tustin City Council Resolution No. 84-65). Prior to
construction of the interchange, the State Department of
Transportation must approve connection of the interehange to
the state freeway system and the City of Tustin must select
and institute a meehanism to finance construction of the
interchange. Until such time as these approvals and actions
are taken and the interchange is constructed, traffic
generated by the project will adversely impact operating
conditions at the Red Hill Avenue/I-5 ramps and the
intersections of Red Hill Avenue and Irvine Boulevard, and
Red Hill Avenue and Laguna Road.
Resolution No.
Page 5
The project site is located within the Eastern Corridor study area and
approval and construction of the auto center project prior to completion of
the route location study could influence the study by eliminating some
potential alternative alignments of the corridor.
Findings:
The City of Tustin will participate in the Eastern
Transportation Corridor Study and cooperate with the County
of Orange and the other lo.al agencies involved and affected
by the study. It is not considered economically feasible to
de]ay approval and implementation of the project until the
corridor study is completed.
Short-term construction equipment emissions and long-term mobile and
stationary emissions will oeeur with project implementation ereating an
adverse impact on the air quality of the South Coast Air Basin.
Findings..
As with any urban development project, air quality impacts
cannot be completely mitigated. In approving the project,
subject to the conditions and mitigation measures set forth,
the city has done an that is teehnieany and reasonably
possible at the municipal level.
E. Increased demand for limited regional water resources.
Findings:
The project neeessitates increased water use and, therefore,
inereased demand for regional imported water. This impact
cannot be mitigated on an individual project basis although
the city will require implementation of an feasible
conservation measures.
F. Increased long-term demand for finite fossil fuel resourees resulting from
project eleetrieal and natural gas requirements.
Findings:
The project necessitates an increased eumulative demand for
finite fuel resources. Although servicing agencies antieipate
adequate fuel supplies for the project, the long-term demand
for fossil fuel resources will be unavoidably increased.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby find that certain changes or
alterations (e.g., mitigation measures) required in or incorporated into the
[~rojeet are within the responsibility and jurisdietion of a public aganey other
than the City of Tustin and ,an or should be adopted by the respective agency
as itemized below:
A. California Department of Transportation: Approval of the eonneetion of
the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange to the state freeway system.
Resolution No.
Page 6
The City Council of the City of Tustin has weighed the benefits of the proposed
project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determinin~ whether to
approve said project. The City Council does hereby further find~ determine~
and state~ puts, rant to the provisions of Section 15093 of the state CEQA
Guidelinest that the cocurrence of the certain significant environmental
effects identified in the final EIR and set forth in paragraph 2 abovet have been
evaluated against the following ovartiding considerations:
A. The project will result in the following substantial economic, social, and
environmental benefits to the City of Tustin and sureounding areas:
(1)
At build-out, the project is anticipated to yield a positive annual
fiscal surplus of $1,306,200 to the city's general fund. Total annual
revenues are projected at $1,414,700 and total costs at $108,500.
The consolidation of auto dealerships in one location will result in less
vehicle miles traveled than would be typical of a strip pattern of auto
dealerships. This fact is reflected in the trip generation rates for the
Icvine Auto Center, a similar t~pe of development, which are
considerably lower per acre than the observed rates for individual
auto dealars.
(3)
The proposed project will provide improvements to the local
circulation system consisting of the extension of Lag~ma and
Jamboree Roads.
The following economic and social considerations make the project
alternatives identified in the final EIR infeasible.
(1)
The "No Project" alternative is rejected because it fails to meet the
objectives set forth for the project, particularly the objectives of
providing an increased ~evenue base to the city and creating a
development which provides for a range of auto-related uses to serve
the City of Tustin and surrounding communities.
(2)
The "Existing General Plan" alternative is rejected because it fails to
meet the objectives set forth for the project, particularly the
objectives of providing an increased revenue base to the city and
creating a development which provides for a range of auto-related
uses to serve the City of Tustin and surrounding communities.
Residential use of the site is considered less desirable than the
proposed commercial use given the site's proximity to the I-5 freeway.
(3)
The "Residential Development at Ten Dwelling Units to the Aere'
alternative is rejected because it fails to meet the objectives set
forth for the project, particularly the objectives of providing an
increased revenue base to the city and creating a development which
provides for a range of auto-related uses to serve the City of Tustin
and surrounding communities. Residential use of the site is
Resolution No.
Page 7
(4)
considered less desirable than the proposed commercial use given the
site's proximity to the I-5 freeway.
The "Alternative Locations" alternative is rejected because
development of the proposed project on the other available sites in
the city would result in greater environmental impacts than would
development of the project on the proposed site. The potential
alternative sites would result in greater impacts to existing residents
or would require substantially increased site improvement costs than
would the currently proposed site. The proposed site offers the best
combination of distance of existing residents, freeway visibility, and
freeway access.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 85-g
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 05 THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF
THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE TUSTIN AREA GENERAL PLAN
FOR AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE I-5 FREEWAY, PROPOSED JAMBOREE
ROAD, PROPOSED LAGUNA ROAD, AND A LINE 192 FEET WEST OF
THE EL MODENA CHANNEL, AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT "A"
The City Council of the City of ~ustin does hereby resolve as follow~:
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
II.
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 by the Planning Commission and City Council on
the application of Poston Tonaka on behalf of the Irvine Company
to reclassify the land use from Residential/Single Family to
Planned Con~nunity/Commercial for an area bounded by the I.-5
Freeway, proposed Jamboree Road, proposed Laguna Road, and a
line 192 feet west of the E1 'Modena Channel, as shown in Exhibit
That the Planning Commission, by Resolution No. 2205 adopted on
January 14, 1985, recommends approval of the proposed amendment
to the Land Use Element of the Tustin General Plan.
D. That Environmental Impact Report No. 84-2 for the subject area
has been certified by the City Council by the adoption of
Resolution No. 85-
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 City Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment 84-1a,
amending the Land Use Map of the Land Use Element of the Tustin Area
General Plan from Residential/Single Family to Planned
Community/Commercial for an area bounded by the I-5 Freeway, proposed
Jamboree Road, proposed Laguna Road, and a line 192 feet west of the
E1Modena Channel, as shown in Exhibit "A".
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on
the day of 1985.
URSULA E. KENN'EDY,
Mayor
MARY WYNN,
City Clerk
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. 927
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN
REZONING AN AREA BOUNDED BY THE I-5 FREEWAY, PROPOSED
JAMBOREE'ROAD PROPOSED LAGUNA ROAD, AND A LINE 192 FEET
WEST OF THE EL MODENA CHANNEL, FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY TO
PLANNED COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT "A" AND
INCLUDING THE INCORPORATION OF PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS
FOR THE EAST TUSTIN A~TO CENTER
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby'ordain that the Tustin
City Code, Zoning Ordinance, and Zoning'Map be amended as follows:
A. The zoning classification for the area bounded by the I-5
Freeway,-proposed Jamboree Road, proposed Laguna Road, and a
line 192 feet west of.the E1Modena Channel, as shown by Exhibit
"A" and known as Zone Change No. 85-1 is hereby changed from the
Planned Community District to the Planned Community/Commercial
District.
BJ
Development of the subject property shall be governed by the
Planned Community Regulations for the East Tustin Auto Cent.er
date~ November 1984, shown as Exhibit "B" attached hereto and a
part hereof, as now existing or hereafter amended by Ordinance
of the City Council.
Signing for the subject area shall be governed by a Master Sign
Plan as approved and adopted by resolution of the Planning
Co~ission.
D. Final Master Development Plan for subject properties shall
require the review and approval of the Planning Commission.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on
the day of 1985.
URSULA E. KENNEDY,
Mayor
MARY WYNN,
City Clerk
L
EAST TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
CITY OF TUSTIN
PLANN~ COMMUNITY REGULATIONS
L
NOVEMBEI~ 1984
THE IRVINE COMPANY
Amended by the Planning Commission
January 14, 1985
TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
PT~TNED COMMUNITY ~EGULATIONS
CIT~ OF TUSTIN
Novembe= 1984
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I
SECTION II
SECTION III
SECTION IV
SECTION V
SECTION VI
SECTION VII
SECTION VIII
Subsection A.
Subsection B.
Subsection C.
Subsection D.
Subsection E.
Subsection F.
Subsection G.
Subsection H.
Subsection I.
Subsection J.
INTENT.AND RURPOSE
STATISTICAL ANALESIS
GENERAL NOTES
DEFINITIONS
US~S PERMITTED
ZONING MA~
SITE P~AN REVIEW
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Building Setbacks
Building Heights
Par~ing
Landscaging
Walls and Fences
Sound Attenuation
Signage
Storage and Loading'
Refuse Collection Area
'1
3
9
11
11
12
13
14
16
17
SECTION I. INTENT AND PURPOSE
The Plan~ed Community Regulations are intended to guide
the planning and design of an auto sales, leasing and
la=ed service center. The Regulations promote =he quali=y
development of the p=o~ect by establishing standards ~or the
site planning, architec=ural design, and ~terials for all
stru¢=ures which will become a par2 o~ the Center.
While the Auto Center serves a unique ~unc=ion within
~he Tustin area, 2he Planned Community Regulations seek
in=egrate this Center into the surrounding community in a
manner that is compatible with existing and ~uture develop-
men= in =he community.
-1-
SECTION II. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
The Tus=in Auto Cen=e= Planned Co,emuni=y has been
lished as one (1) basic group:
Net Acree
Auto Sales, Leasing & Se=vice
40.00
This group shall be served by:
Public streets
Landscape bur[er area
TOTAL GROSS ACRES
13.95
1.51
55.46
-2-
SECTION III. GENERAL NOTES
Within =he Planned community area, =he continued use of
the land fo= agricultural purposes wi=A uses, structures
and appurtenances accessory thereto shall be permitted
subject =o =he applicable zoning codes of =he City cf
Tustin.
2. Wa=e= service and sewage disposal facilities wi=bin the
Planned Community area shall be furnished by the Irvine
Ranch Water District. However, temporary services by
other agencies may be necessary.
3. Regardless of =he provisions of this supplemental text,
no construction shall'be allowed within the boundaries
of the Auto Center Planned Conm~unity except =ha= which
complies with all provisions of.applicable building
codes and =he =arious mechanical codes related =hereto.
4. Any land use proposal or development standard ~ot speci-
fically covered by =his plan and its supplemental text
shall'be subject to the regulations of =he City of
T~stin zoning codes.
5. Whenever the regulations contained herein conflict with
=he regulations of Tustin zoning codes, =he regulations
contained herein shall take precedence.
6. A plan for silt control for all storm runoff from =he
to the issuance of a grading permit. The plan shall be
tain =he integrity of silt control facilities during
normal opera=ion.
?. Approval by =he Air Quality Management District o~ any
plans, devices, o= facilities fo= =he control of any air
poilu=ants which may be generated, shall be requited.
8. Grading within =he zone shall be subject to =he approval
of the Director of ~ublic WorKs.
9. Energy conservation provisions shall be considered when
building orientation, materials and design ate being
developed.
-3-
10. After co-~encement of alterations or construction of
any structure, or improvement thereon, =he owner shall
diligently prosecute the wor~ =hereon, to an end =hat
the structure shall not remain in a partly ~inished
condi=ion any 19nger than reasonably necessary for
completion =hereof.
11. Ail mechanical appurtenances on building foci top~
shall be screened ~rom view ~rom adjacent public
streets and buildings in a manner meeting the approval
of the Director of Planning.
12. CC&Rs for the subject project, to include provisions for the
maintenance and replacement of landscaping, shall be submitted
to and approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance
of building permits.
13.
Prior to the issuance of building permits for subject project,
a Master Development Plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Commission and approved by resolution. Said plan shall
incorproate by text, diagram and illustration the following
elements:
Co
ee
building materials and colors
landscape.plan, to include theme, plant materials,
irrigation system and fixtures
wall plans to show elevations, materials, and location
signing to include locations, size, height, materials,
and intensity of lighting
performance standards for noise control
perimeter lighting fixtures, location, and intensity.
-4-
SECTION IV. DEFINITIONS
1. Advertisin~ Surface: The total area of =he face of any
signing structure.
2. Cow,non'Area: Areas designated by Parcel Map for land-
scape 0r employee parking purposes and deeded to a
legally forme~ Auto Center Merchants' Association.
Dedicated Streets: ~eference to all streets or rights-
of-way wi=bin =his ordinance shall mean dedicated vehi-
.cular rights-of-way, including any median paving or
landscaping located within that right-of-way.
4. Gross Acreage: The entire land area within =he boundary
o~ =he project, measured to the right-of-way of any
abutting arterial highway or =he centerline of any
interior street.
5. Net Acreage: The total land area of the land described
in =he use or other permit. Net acreage shall consti-
tute the total buildable area.
· Front - Any parcel's frontage which faces onto an
interior street shall be deemed a front
property line, whether facing =he interior
loop road or facing.toward an entrance
street.
- The property line of any parcel which is
adjacent to =he perimeter streets of
Jamboree Road, Laguna Road, Myford Road, or
the I-$ Freeway.
Side
Those property lines which separate one
subdivided parcel w~ich has been designated
for retail use from another such subdivided
parcel or from a designated common
employees' parking lo=.
Service & Storage Buildings: Ail structures on any
retail parcel whose primary purpose is other than the
display, sale or lease of automobiles and related
merchandise.
SECTION V. USES PERMITTED
A. Uses
Auto, Cruck, and recreational vehicle sales, leasing
and service (dealerships and/or independents).
Service industries may include, buC are hOC limited
to, CAe following:
a. Repair, maintenance and servicing of appliances
or oomponenC parts for motor vehicles.
Tooling.
¢. Testing shops (excluding noise producing or
noxious perfor~=~ce testing).
Repair, maintenance and servicing of above-
listed items provided that said industries are
not the point of customer delivery or collec-
tion.
e. Diagnostic labs.
f. ExperimenCal auComobile assembly and [abrica-
~ion'._
g. Vehicular storage areas (exclusive of impound
yards).
Uses Permitted Sub~ec= to Granting of a CUP by the
Pl~--in~ Cofl~w~ssion iE Not Included in Auto Deale~shi~
1. Tire, battery and accessory shops and accessory
~ndoor inetallaCion [aciliCies.
2. AuCo and vehicle glass shops.
Auto and ~ruc~ rentals.
4. Paint and rescoraCion shops (independent of dealer-
ships).
· 5. Body Shops (independent of dealerships).
.--6--
6. Se=vice indus=riss which 9=ovide a se=vice to uses
listed in Se==ion A., above.
'C. Uses Ps=mi=red Sub,sc= to Gran=in~ of a CUP by the
Planning Commission
1. Car wash.
2. Service
3. Moro=cycle sales.
-7-
SECTION VII. SITE PLAN REVIEW
Design ~sview by the City of TusCin is required prior
to submitting pla~s and specifications for plan check and
building permit processing. This review shall be conducted
by the Co-=unity Develotmaent Department in accordance with
9olicies of the City of Tustin. Approvals shall remain
valid for a period of 18 months. Decisions by =he Co--~unity
Develotmaent Department shall be final unless appealed to =he
Planning Commission within seven days of =he Co--~uni=y
Development Department's decision.
The Applicant shall submit six (6) sets of sire plans
and elevations =o =he Co--.unity Development Depar~ent =hat
include =he following inf0=mation as applicable:
1. North Arrow.
2. Title Block=
a. Scale of Map~
b. Name and Address of Applicant;
c. Date of preparation.
3. Ail boundary lines on the subjec~ property fully dimen-
sioned and'tied in with the centerline of adjacent or
The n~me, location and width of any adjacent public or
private s~reets. Widths should include any required
street widening.
The name, location and width of any water courses,
structures, irrigation ditches, and any other permanent
physical ~eatures o~ the land.
6. The width and location of all existing o= proposed
public or private easements.
7. Ail proposed improvements properly dimensioned.
All parking spaces and aisles drawn and dimensioned with
the flow of traffic noted by arrows and calculations of
the required number of pa=king spaces.
-9-
The location and width of all vehicular and pedestrian
access openings into and out of the property.
10. Ail proposed walls and fences, including height and
material, and all proposed exterior lighting.
11. Ail proposed landscaping in as much detail as possible.
11. The zoning and existing land use of the subject
property and properties contiguous to its boundaries.
13. Location of nearest walls and structures and adjacent
properties, =he use =herein, and adjoining driveways.
14.
A brief description of =he intended use of the
property, hours of operation, number of employees, and
other general characteristics that would apply =o the
proposal.
15. Indicate all existing fire hydrants and wa=er main
sLzes.
16. Indicate building size, tyl:u of construction,'and
building elevation.
17.
Indicate all existing street lights, utility poles,
trees and signs within the public right-of-way adjacent
=o =he site.
The Director of Co-~unity Development shall respond to sub-
mittal of =he above-lis=ed information within thirty (30)
days. Such response .may constitute approval, approval with
conditions dee~ed necessary to protect the public health,
safety and welfare, or disapproval of Applicant's site
plan. If no ac=ion is taken within =he allotted time, the
site plan shall be deemed approved, unless the time limit is
waived by the Applicant.
BuildinG Setbacks
1. No structure of any kind, and no part thereof, shall
be placed on any site closer to a property line than
herein provided. The following structures and
improvements are specifically excluded from these
setback provisions:
a. Roof overhang.
Steps and walks.
o. Paving and associated curbing in relation to the
landscape area, except that customer parking
areas shall not be within 10 feet of the street
property lines.
d. Fences, except that no fence shall be placed
within the street setback area for service or
storage buildings.
e. Landscaping.
f. %Signs and displays identifying the owner, lessee
or occupant.
g. Lighting.
2. No setback is required from interior property lanes.
3. Setback from street property lines:
Sales or display buildings shall be set back a
minimum of 10' from the interior loop road and a
minimum of 60' from the entrance streets. Roof
overhangs may not project nearer than 5' to the
property line.
Service and storage buildings shall be set back
a minimum of 60' from the front proper~y lines
and a minimum of 65' from the rear property
lines. However, a service or storage building
may be built at the rear property line provided
that it does not exceed the height and length
described in Section VIII.F., paragraphs 2 and 3
of this document, subject to Planning Commission
approval.
Buildin~ Heights
1-. Buildings shall he a maximum of 30' 'in height to top
of ridge line.
Automobile display and signage shall not be allowed
on top of any building.
Automobile storage'in the second level of a building
shall be allowed only if fully screened from view,
including the line of sight from the second story of
any structures w~ich may be built across Jamboree
and Laguna Roads.'
Parking
1. Each auto dealer shall provide a minimum of eleven
(11) offstreet parking spaces per nm~ buildable acre
whic~ shall be reserved for employee parking only.
In the event that employee parking is provided in a
common parking lot, each dealer shall provide
separate parking space on his/her premises for any
demonstrator automobiles which are driven by a
company employee.
If employee parking is provided in a common facility
shared by several merchants, a recorded document
shall be filed with the Building and Planning
Departments and shall be signed by the Owner of the
common site, stipulating to the permanent reserva-
tion of use of the site for employee parking
purposes.
4®
Each automobile dealer shall provide a minimum of
six onsite parking spaces reserved exclusively for
customers' use. Additional customer parking shall
be allowed at curbside where appropriately striped.
Onsite handicapped parking shall be provided as
required by the governing agencies.
-12-
Landscape
1. Every site on which a 'building is placed shall be
landscaped according to plans approved as specified
herein and maintained thereafter in a sightly and
well-kept condition pursuant to the standards agreed
u~on by the Auto Center Me=chants' Association.
Such maintenance shall include regular irrigation,
fertilization, cultivation and tree pruning.
The property owner, lessee or occupant shall land-
scape a 5' strip ~,~ediately behind the property
line adjacent to any interior street of the Auto
excepting walkways and driveway areas. The Auto
Center Merchants' Association shall maintain this
landscape in compliance with the Declaration of
Covenants, Condit£ons and Restrictions of this Auto
Center.
The property owner, lessee or occupant shall provide
irrigation and maintenance facilities for the land-
scaped areas, and shall keep said facilities in good
working order at all times.
®
Landscaping shall be installed within thirty (30)
clays of occupancy or completion of =he building,
whichever ccm~s first.
Site landscaping shall be compatible with the land-
scape master plan which has been developed as a
guide to coordinate the species of plant'materials,
thus providing continuity of landscape within the
Center.
The project developer shall provide a continuous
landscape buffer between the Auto Center and
J~mboree and Laguna Roads. Additionally, land-
scaping shall be provided in the median of Jambo=ee
Road.
Undeveloped areas :eserved fo= future expansion,
such as the freeway interchange or any parcel not
promptly built out, shall be maintained in a weed-
free condition but need not be landscaped.
-13-
Lighting
1. O£fsite and street lighting will be provided by the
project's developer.
All exterior lighting shall comply with the pro-
jec='s Planned Lighting Criteria, as set forth in
the Project Design Criteria on file with the City
Tustin.
Lighting plans shall be submitted showing the design
layout and exact fixture mounting and wattage 9re-
posed by each auto dealer.
Areas of display shall be lighted by sharp cutoff
fixtures equal to Elsco Manufacturing Co.'s Auto
King VI to direct lighting downward only.
"Front row" lighting standards adjacent to the Auto
Center interior roads shall not exceed 20' in height
and shall have no more than three fixtures per
standard' at a minimum of 40' on center. The
interior of the display area may be illuminated by
fixtures no closer than 60' to the front line of
display lights. These fixtures shall be on
standards no higher than 20', shall be spaced no
closer than 60' on center, and shall have no more
than four fixtures per pole.
Average wattage for the entire display area shall
not exceed 1.$ watts/square foot. Display areas
within 125' of Jamboree Road or Laguna Road shall
not exceed 1 watt per square foot.
Service and storage parking areas shall be lighted
by standards no higher than 24' which shall contain
no more than two fixtures of the above described
specification per pole. Average wattage for the
entire storage area shall not exceed 0.2 watts per
square foot.
Creative lighting design and reinforcement of
lighting intensity to provide varying degrees of
light intensity for merchandising and highlighting
purposes are encouraged as long as the overall
average wattage is. not exceeded.
-14-
lO.
S~ot fixtures shall be directed downward only,
except.at spot display locations along the project's
perimeter walls.
Strings of incandescent fixtures shall not ~e
allowed in any exterior area.
Walls and Pences
All service, storage and trash areas shall be
screened ~rom view ~rom any street by a wall. Land-
scape screening alone shall not be deemed suffi-
cient.
walls constructed on the perimeter of the Auto
Center shall be in keeping with the project's Design
Criteria. These walls shall be no less than 8' and
no greater than 10' in height, with the exception
that the wall height ~ay be increased to 14' in
order to accc""~odate a building backed against the
property line. This increase in height shall be
permitted ~or not more than 50 percent of the
property. The property owner shall provide addi-
tional landscaping to minimize the visual impact of
this wall height on adjacent streets.
If a. building is constructed as permitted in the
above paragraph, no sloping roofs shall be used on
such a structure, and any drainage shall be away
from the wall into the site. No facias, gutters,
other roof edge treatments shall be visible above
the 14' height of the wall.
Offsets in the perimeter walls are encouraged when
adjacent to a 14' high structure. Such offsets
shall be compatible with the project's design
criteria.
G. Sound Attenuation
Ail body repair work and all comp=esso= work shall
be performed in an enclosed area only. Access doors
to such enclosures shall ~ace away from Jamboree
Road.
1. Auto dealers adjacent to Jamboree Road ~ay not open
service bay doors toward Jamboree Road.
Auto dealers adjacent to Laguna Road may not open
service bay doors toward Laguna Road unless the
doors are no higher =hah =he perimeter wall which
screens them from ~aguna Road.
4. Air compressor exhaust stacks shall contain a
muffling device.
Exterior loudspeakers shall be directed away from
the perimeter streets which surround the Auto Center
and shall be mounted no higher than 11' above the
~,~ediate finished grade.
Air conditioning units may not be mounted on top of
any building which is less than 65' from a rear
H. Siqnaqe
Signs shall be allowed subject to the-provisions of
the Tustin Auto Center Sign Criteria, as approved by
the City cf Tustin Planning Commission.
Project developer shall supply signage adjacent to
the freeway and at both entrances =o =he project
announcing =he Auto Center location. Additionally,
the developer shall supply freeway directional
travel signs at the nearest freeway offramps.
3. Roof-mounted signs shall not be allowed.
4. Billboard signage shall not be allowed.
I. Storage and Loadin~ Areas
1. Nc ma=.rials, supplies or equipment, including fi=m-
owned or operated trucks, shall be stored in any
area on a sire except inside a closed building or
behind a visual harrier or service area which
screens =he equipment from view of all public.
streets. The singular exception shall be any
vehicles which are a par= of the merchant's customer
display.
2. Neither the loading dock nor =he offloading opera-
=ions for automotive parts and other supplies shall
be visible from any public streets.
Refuse Collection Areas
All ou=doo= refuse ¢ollec=ionareas sAall Be
v~sually screened ~=on ac=ess s==ee=s, ~=eeway, and
Repor to the
pl nnin Commission
ITEM NO. ¢
DA'F[:
SUB,IECT:
APPLICANT:
~'TATU$:
P,I~QUF. ST:
~UltlARY ~4, ~985
'fll[ I1WZI~ C~IPANY:
IlORTII OF T-6 FTIF.~TIAY, SOIITII OF PROPOSi~I) LAGUII~ ROAD, F.~ST OF
R~SIDOITTAI..'/S I NGi~ FAiqZLY
M. ANNE:I) (:mIiUNITY
BACXG~OUNO:
One of the first objectives of the East Tustin Specific Plan process was the
preparation of b~ckground data to'define the opportunities and constraints of
the subject area. One of the background reports included a marketing report
done to research the potential of residential, office, and commercial retail
uses. The report indicated a strong potential for retail and office uses
immediately north of the I-6 freeway, and a.ver7 strong potential fora regional
car mall in this sam area.
A potential opportunity developed to process and begin construction on the auto
center on a shorter time frame than the overall East Tustin specific plan
process. The Zrvine Company requested that the auto center entitlement process
be accelerated and removed from the specific plan process; and the City agreed
to this proposal.
The original site was on the west side of Jamboree Blvd., and extended as
far west as the Kathr~n spur ratlroad tracks, approxtmatel7 BO0 feet east of
Browning. At that time, in order to accommodate the increased interest in the
auto center, the site expanded west to Browning Avenue and encompasses slightly
over 100 acres.
Community ~topm~t Department
REPORT TO THE PLANN%NG COMMISSION
EAST TUSTI~ PLANNEO ¢OMMUNITY/T~STIN AUTO
PAGE THREE
As sta~ed tn the California Envtronment~l ~uality Act (C£~A), t~e purpose
of an Environmental Impact Report ts ~ tden:tfy ~e significant effects
of a peo~ec: on t~ envteonm~t, ~ tdentt~ al~r~a:tves ~ ~e
and ~ tndtca~ ~e ~nner In whtc~ ~c~ signift~nt effect ~n ~
mttlga~d or avoided. ~ssenttally, an EIR ser~es ~ dual pu~ose of an
tnfo~tton and disclosure ~cu~n:, w~tc~ Info~ ~ve~n:al dectston
mkees, Identifies ways ~at envteonmn~l damge can be avotded or
reduced, ~qut~ changes ~ p~ven: significant effecM and dlsclose
~e publlc ~e ~asons w~ ~ gove~n~l agen~ appeov~ a p~]ec:
significant effecM a~ Involved.
To acco~ltsh ~ts ~t of paraders, ~e SMte has tden:t~ted a sertes
~ods that ~e lead-agen~ can use. These methods tnclude: changtng a
peo~ec:; t~ostng conditions; choostng an al~rnattve way; adopttng p~ans
oe ordinances; ~sapprovtng ~e pro~ec:; ~tndtng that changtng oe alte~tng
:he pro~ect ts not feasible; tn ~ ~se of unavoidable t~ac:s, a
s~nt of ove~dtng considerations.
]n certifying an ~ZR, ~ lead agen~ s~tes ~at :~e ~]R has been
commend tn ~11ance wtt~ C~A and ~at ~e dectston mk~ng body has
reVt~ed and considered ':~e lnfo~t~on ~n ~e f~nal.~]R. Thts ac:ton
~ken ~foee ~e dectston mklng, body ~n constder project approval.
As a part of ~e ~R cer:t~Ica:ton process, ~e lead agency must mke
cee~tn ftndtngs as ~ the disposition of eac~ ~gntflcant
Identt~ted tn ~e body of ~e ~R. These ~t'ndtngs ~n et:her show
~e significant effect has been avotded or subs~nttal~y ~essened, oe
the ~spOnstbt~tty of another publtc ~gency, oe ~at spectftc ec~omtc,
socta] oe o~ee considerations ~ke Infeasible :he mitigation ~asures
peo~ec: al~atlves 1den:tried tn ~e ~tnal ~]R. ~oe each unavoidable
environing1 1~act ~a~ cannot ~ fully mt:tga~d, ~e dects~on~ktng
body ~n ~lance ~e ~neft~' of a proposed project against ~ese
t~acts. [~ the beneft~ ou~etg~ ~e avoidable adverse ef~ects, ~ese
adverse ef~ec~ my be considered accep~ble..~n what ts kn~n ~s a
S~te~nt of Overriding Consideration, the agen~ shal~ sta~ ~n
~e spectftc ~asons ~ support t~ actton on ~e final ~]R. AI~ ~e
ftndtngs and s~n~ ~s: ~ suppoe~d by subs~nttal evtden~ ~n
record.
The ~aft ~nvtron~n~l ~act Repo~ ~oe ~e Tus:tn Auto Cente~ was
prepared In confor~nce wt~ ~e ~qut~n~ of t~e ca11~ornt~
~nvteon~n~l ~ua11~ Act ~nd .tn accoedanc~ ~tt~ ~e C~A guidelines.
Inventories ~e extsttng environing1 conditions, po~nttal significant
environing1 effec~ and posstble ~:tgatton ~asu~s. ':t analyzes
cu~lattve tmac~ of ~e proposed pro~ec: and the ge~ tnductng
1~ac~. ]: fur~er lays out alternatives ~ ~e proposed
As a ~sul: of submitting ~e draft ~R to tn:erest ~oups and
Community Developmen~ Departmen~
R£PORT TO ll(E PLANNING COMMISSION
EAST TUSTIN PLANNED COMMUNITY/TUSTIN AUTO
PAG[ TWO
A Notice of P~eparation was submitted to affected public agencies and local
citizen groups. Citizens and local groups su~oundtng the auto canter site
reacted negatively to the proposed location and the Company and the City held
several meetings to Outline these issues. As a result of these meetings, the
site was moved to its present location, and reduced in size to approximately
fifty (50) acres. A meeting was held wtth local citizen groups to present the
revised location and proposed development.
The original auto center site of 100 acres is now being proposed as a
residential project by The Ir~tne Company and was.also removed from the East
Tusttn Specific Plan process. A Nottca of Preparation has been submitted and an
Environmental Impact Report is being prepared for the proposed project. It is
anticipated that a public hearing will be held on the proposal within the next
few months.
APPLICATION
In order to facilitate the Tusttn Auto Canter, the following actions must be
taken' in the following order:
1. Recommend certification of Draft Environmental Impact Report 84-2.
2. Recommend an amendment' to the Tusttn Area General Plan*from Residential/
Single Family.to Planned Community/Commercial as shown in Exhibit A.
3. Recommend a change of zoning designation from Planned Community to Planned
Community/Commercial. A set of Planned Community regulations will also be
enacted to govern the development of the auto center.
DRAFT EI~IROIII~IITAL I~ACT II[PORT (DEIR)
The following is a synopsis of the environmental process leading up to a
public hearing. An initial environmental study was done for the proposed
project and reviewed by staff-and it was subsequently determined that an
environmental impact report was required for the subject project. The
City retained the firm of Michael Brendman Associates (MBA) to prepare
this document and at the same time prepared a Notice of Preparation and
submitted this to interested local groups along with state and local
government agencies. MBA began preparing the document and subsequently
Incorporated comments from the HOP into the document. This document was
submitted to City staff for review ~s a 'screencheck' with additional
Informer!on and revisions incorporated. This revised document hepresanted
the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) which was submitted to local
groups, state and local agenct.es, along wt~ a Notice of Completion. The
normal review period is 45 days for a draft [IR, but the CiO requested
and received a thirty (30) day review. All the comments and responses
received during that review period have been enclosed along with this
staff report.. The minutes and actions of both the Planning Commission and
City Council will also be incorporated into the body of the final
environmental impact report.
community I::)~-,v~iopr~-n~ Department
REPORT TO THE Pt,ANNIHG C01~I$$1'0N
EAST TUST[I,I PLANNED COHMUNI~TY/TUS"r'1:N AUTO CENTER
PAGE FOUR
governmental agencies, Re C1~ has received commenta regarding
contant o1= Re ~a1=1: [IR. The CttT's consultant has responded ~o Rase
comman~ and Ray have been enclosed In R1s staff r'epo~ as a pa~ of Re
~'ecord.
At each stage of t~e environmental process, Re documents submitted for
revtew have represented the independent~ evaluation and analysts of City
sta1=t'. The consultanl: was ~tatned by Re ¢1~, and is answerable l:p.
tnpu~. The scr'eenchecl~ documenl: was reviewed by sta1=! and ~vtsed by Re
consu]tanl:. The d~a1=l: documen~ was ~ur'~:her' ~evtmved by sta1=~.
Sta1=f ~ecommend$ 1:o Re P1anntng Commission Re1: Dr'aC1: EIR 84-2, plus
amendmenl:s, ts an acceptable document: and tn con¢ormence wtR Re
Calt~ormta Environmental qualt~ Ac1:, $~1:e Guidelines, and Re
ot= Re City Council. The r'esolul:ton recommending cer'~t1=Ical:Jon ot
documenl: 1:o Re ¢t~ Counctl has been enclosed, and a par~: o1=
resolul:ton ts an £xMbtt A which detat~s each 1repack:, and t~ 1=fndtng o1=
stgnt1=ance. Unavoidable stgnt1=Ican~: e1=1=ec~ have been balanced
statemenl: o1= oven"tdtng consider'al:ions.
GENERAL Iq. All J~IE]IDI~lfl' A#D Z01~ CltAIIGE:
The lnt~:tal ur'ban designation Re sub~ec~ stte ~ecatved was tn Re ~973
revtston 1:o Re Land Use Element, wher'e Re st~:e was shown as
~estdenl:tal/$tngle ~amtl~. The de¢~nttion o1= Rts designation ~s detailed
tn Re land usa element as a "l:~-adtl:tona] restdenl:tal subdivision
detached, owner-occupied' units, each on 1~ own par'ce1 o1= land.
Population denstl:tes wtRln Rts classt1=tcatton wtll var'7 ~rom 2 per'sons
~ 20 per'sons pe~' case".
P~Hor' Co Rts land use designation, Re sub~ect ar'aa was shown as Open
Space/~gr'lcull:ur'al, whtc~-has been t~ use o1= Re land ~ Re presenl~.
The ar~a has been tn an agrtcall:ur'al pmser've up to ~anuary ~, ~984', when
its non-~ene~a~ status ended. ~hel: Rts means essenl:tallT, Is 1~a1:
D'vtne Company placed Re land In a noe-~enewa~ stal:u$ tn ~g74, whtch
dtctal:es Re1: Re land loses t1~s per'1=er'red tax advantages tn l~n year's,
and cannol: be r'ene~ed. Thts ecl:Ion was taken tn anl:lctpal:ton ot'
urbanizing Re stl:e based on t1~ ~estden~:tal designed:ton.
The Ct1:7 o¢ Tusl:tn annexed Re sub,ecl: ar'aa tn Januar'~ o1= ~77, and
pr'ezoned Re site as Planned Communt~. One o1= Re condtl:tons o1= Re
pr'ezone was ~at: prior' ~ Re issuance o1= any butldtng per'~tts, a spect1=~c
plan would be pr'epar'ed 1=or Re r'evtow and app~val ot' Re P~anntng
Commission and Ct~:7 Council. The tnl:~'egr'ated land use pat:~:er~s could
constsl: ot' suppor~c commercial, mixed r'estdenl:tal and public
The Easl: Tus~tn $pect1=tc Plan process begtn appr'oxtmal:al7 a ~ear' ago as
Re msul~: ot' Re Company's tn~esl: tn planning for' Re ur'bantzatlon ot=
Re Easl: Tusl:tn Ar'ea. Thetr' willingness 1:o begin Re planning pr'ocass was
fur'Re~" de¢tned by Re 1=ac~: Ra~ most o1= Re total s~udy ar'aa was ~moved
~ Community Development Departmen~ /
REPORT TO THE PLA~N%~G COMMISSION
EAST TUSTIN PLANNED COMMUNITY/TUST]~ AUTO C£NT~
PAG£ FIV£
fro. the agricultural preserve t, $984, .wtth the remaining areas removed
tn 1986 and $988. Thts planntng process ts a comprehensive program geared
to exa,rlne more than land uses In the East Tus~tn ~ree. P~ov~dlng ~d
tnfrastruc~, environing1 concerns, publlc facilities, affordable
housing and ~lanctng ~vanue ~ ~s~ are al1 asp~ of ~ts plan.
revtsed, ~e proposed East Tus~n plan should ~fle~ n~ conditions stnce
1973, co~nt~ values and lo~1 at~t~des.
Early tn ~e planntng process, ~e C~'s consultants ~v~ed ~e
noe~ of ~e I-S Friday be'~een J~m~oe~ and Hyford ~oad, and Sou~
B~an Avenue ~or non-restdentta~ uses. Thts was ~ne ~cause of ~ts
areas proxfm~ ~ ~e I-5 Fre~ay, the ~rket po~nttal for co~rctal
uses, and 1ts po~ntt~l ~ ~ea~ a ~venue su~lus ~ ~e City. Alt~oug~
the area can ~ mttlga~d ~or residential uses, tt ~as ~elt that ~s area
could serve as a ~uffer ~ ~u~ ~stdenttal areas ~ the north,
providing n~ded ~rctal on a co~n~ level.
The essential aspec~ of any general plan a~ndmn~ ts.~at the c~ange ~e
"tn ~e public ~n~rest~ and ~ co~attble wtth ~e ~als and pollctes
~e co~nt~. T~e'proposed aum cen~r st~ can acco~l~sh ~ese
paeaM~rs ~y' several Mans. The change ~ a Planned Co~n~ allows
n~ set of s~ndards ~ be applted ~ the proposed s~ta. The land use
elemnt defines Planned Co~nl~ ~s both a land use and a 'zoning
classlftcatton that can ~ntegr~m mtxed 'uses co~at~ly by design
s~ndards. To assu~ ~e o~ectlve of co~a~tbtltty of land use wtth ~e
char~c~r of surrounding develipMnts, precise develop~n~ plans are
reviled'and approved prior ~ ~u~ortzatton for developmm~.
This land use definition ts ~nsts~n~ ~t~h ~e zoning and ~gulat~ons
p~oposed for ~e subject p~3ect. ~e p~-zo~ ~or the a~ requtres the
developmn~ of a speclftc plan p~oe ~ pe~tt Issuance. Thts.~qu~remnt
~st ~ acco~ltshed w~e~er each p~ec~ ts revl~ed Individually, or ~e
entire area Is planned at one
The Planned Co~nt~ ~gulat~ons regula~ ~re ~an butldtng
setbacks, and landscaping. They address tssues ~at a~ dlrec~ly ~la~d
~ ~e uses co~attb~11~ w~t~ the surrounding area, such as nOt se
at~nuatton and 1tg~ ln~nst~. Spectftc ~gula~tons governing l~gh~tng
are ~ncluded, along ~th sound at~nuatton yells. A ~t o~ Planned
Co~nt~ ~gulattons ~11~ s~ff ~ tatloe t~e proposed land use ~ the
surrounding areas.
Currently, ~e proposed au~ ~n~ stte ts not surrounding by any
extsttng~ develop~nt; The closest extst~ng residential uses
approxt~ly-Z,O00 feet away. But ~t ts antlcfpated that the area w~11
soMday urbanize, and the Co~a~ has app~ted foe a Gene~l Plan Amnd~nt
~ a11~ ~stdenttal uses ~ ~e ~es~ of ~ts stte. It ts s~ff's
Commun.tty Development Department
REPORT TO T~E PLANNING COMMISSION
~I~ST TUSTIN PLANNED COHHUN1:TY/TUST]:N AUTO C£NTEP,
PAGE SIX
¢ontantlon that the proposed land use designation change to Planned
Community/Commercial c~n be compatible with the surrounding aree. and is
in the public interest. Further. that the adoption of'a Planned
Co,,,unity/Commercial zoning designation and accompanying Planned Community
Regulations allow the use to be compatible with existing and future uses
in the area. and ensure a develop~nt of high quality that will provide
needed revenues to pay for the cost of governmental services.
I~£Cl)I~ATZOI:
Staff ~eco..aends that the Planning Commission take the following actions:
1. Recommend certification of Draft EIR 84-2 as a final £II~ to -the Ctt4y
Council by .~he adoption of Resolution No. 2204.
2. Recommend that *,.he land use designation of the Tustin Area General Plan be
amnded from Residential/Single Family to Planned Community/Commercial to
the City Council. by the adoption of Resolution No. 2205.
3. Recommend to the City Council that the zoning designation for the subject
auto center site be changed from Planned community to Planned
Community/Commercial..and a set of development regulations known as the
Eas~ Tustin Planned Communtty/Tusttn Auto Center be 'included as.a pal-t of
the zone change, by .the adoption of Resolution No. 2206.
Senior Planner
£MK:lg
¢omrnuniW Developrnen~ Depa~ment
24,
B
!
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
.10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19i
21
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. ~204
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIF]CATION
OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT' {EIR) 84-2 AND
AMENDMENTS, AS FINAL EIR 84-2
~e Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California does hereby
resolve as follows:
I. The Planning Con~ission finds and determines as follows:
A. That an Environmental Impact Report would be required due to
potential effects identified in an initial questionnaire done
for the proposed Tustin Auto Center.
Be
That a Draft Environmental Impact .Re,orr for the proposed
project has been prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, for
the City of Tustin.
That distribution of the Draft EIR was made to interested public
and private agencies with a solicitation of comments and
evaluation.
D. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on the
Draft EIR.
That incorporated within the Oraft EIR are the commnts of the
public, ca~nissions, staff and responsible agencies.
That the Draft EIR and amendments were pr,Dared in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act, State guidelines
and the policies of the City of Tustin.
That the subject Draft EIR has been reviewed by staff, and
represent their independent evaluations and analysis.
That the Draft EIR and amendments have been reviewed and
considered, and that mitigation measures have been incorporated
into the project that eliminate or substantially lessened the
significant environmental effects there of as identified in
Draft EIR and amendments; and it is determined that any
remaining significant effects on the environment found to be
unavoidable are hereby found to be acceptable by the inclusion
of a statement of overriding considerations. This statement and'
all environmental effects and mitigating measures are listed in
the attached document, Exhibit "A". Mitigation measures are
specified as conditions contained in this resolution.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
Planning Comission
Resolution No. 2204
page two
II. The Planning Co~tssion of the City of Tustin does herby recon~end
certification of Oraft EIR 84-2, plus amendmentg as a final EIR 84-2
to the City Council.
PASSED ANO AOOPTEO at a regular meeting of the Planning Comission, held on
the day of , lg85.
RONALD H. WHITE
Chairman
DONNA ORR
Recording Secretary
]~IBIT &
Pursuant to the ¢~i~¢omia .Environmental Q,,ml~ty Act of 1970, ss amended, and in
aeeoedanne with the City of TustLn ~ideltnes, as amended, this doeumant .pee~...ts
the ftndtnqs and a brief explanation of the mtionele foe each flndinq ~tuired foe
approval of the ~oposed project.
1 The p1~nn~., Comm~ion of the C~t~ of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t
~.~ ~ ~te~flom ~ve ~n ~ M~ ~ ~at~ ~ ~e
o~t wM~ avoid ~ ~tt~l7 initiate ~e ~ffi~t auve~e
~m~e~ identffi~ in ~e ~ ~ ~ ~ffi~7 itemiz~ bdow.
A. Wate~ Resources
hnpacts:
The site b cmrrently subject to floedh~ ran~dnq in depth from
one to th~e feet ~esttltin~ from the inability of reqlonal
clraina~e facilities to ~onvey 100-yea~ flood flows.
The peoject includes the eonst2metion of an em'theft berth
extendinq from an exL~tinq be~m to the west of the project
site and veeappin~ around the project site to protect the
project from floedin&. This berm wLll protect the site without
significantly alterh~ extstin~ drainage and floodin~ patterm
La the vicinity of the pro~eet.
Shoet-te~m deqradation of surface wate~ quality will occur
durL.~ ~mdinq and Mitial censtruetion activities. -
A plan foe site centrol of all storm runoff from the property
durin& censt~uetion will be prepm'ed and submitted to the City
of Tustin prim' to the issuance of any ~tedtn~ permits.
On-site runoff volumes and velocities will increase and the
on-site drainage pattern wLll be alter~L
An on-site clraflmg~ plan will be submitted to the City of
Tusttn foe approval prior to the recordation of the ff~.al parcel
map. Methods foe controH~n~ the velocity and direction of
~unoff will be ineoepoeated into the project design.
Impacts:
Development of the site will effect a long'term ~ange tn
~unoff quality from agt. ieulturel pollutents to urban pollutants.
This impact will be partially ~-duced by the implementation
of appropriate sto~mwate~ pollution control plans and periedie
e. leanin~ of storm ck's.Lns.
Resolutica No.
Page 2
Land Use and Aesthetics
The peo~eet L~ not consistent with the e3dsting general plan
and zoning dasign&tions for the site and suerounding areas.
A general plan amendment and zone ehenge a~e proposed as
part of the project. The peoject design and performance
sta~d-~dS included in the Thst~n Auto Canter Planned
Community Re~,ln~ons will ensure that the proposed project
is compatible with land uses planned ~oe a~eas adjacent to and
nen~ the project site.
Imgacts:
Implementation of the peogceed project would ~esult Lq the
introduction of high intensity night lighting tn the m,._-t Tusttn
The Tustin Auto Center Planned Community Regulations
eontaht lighting performance standaz~ stip,,~=ting the type of
lighting which may be used, the mnx-imum height of each
fixture, and the allowable wattage per square foot. Only
sharp cut-off fixtures at a m*~mum height of 20 feat are
allowed, thereby localizing light and ~hu-e impacts.
C. Ttansporta~on/Ch'eulation
T. mpae~:
The propmed project will contribute a small inerement to an
ex/st/hq and pro~ect_~d amnulattve traffic impact at several
tntereaet~ons tn the a~ea. The project wig generate 8,205
ADT and 845 p.m. peak hotw trips. Traffic from the pro~ect
will inerementally woesen t~affle eondittons at the Red
Avenue/I-$ tamps and the tnte~eetions of Red ~ Avenue
and Irvtne Bouleverd end Red mll Avenue and Laguna Road.
Construetien of the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange will
provide substantial mitigation of project ~alated t~affle
impacts by dire~dr~ proje~ ~!ated and other traffic from
Red Nll1 Avenue. The Jamboeee Road/I-5 tnterehange has
been committed by the City of Tustin as a locally funded
~oje~t (Tustin City Council Resolution No.
D. NoL~e
Lmpaets:
Activities at the auto center faeiliUes will increase overall
ambient noise levels tn the area by a few decibels. The
number of individua~ly audible and potentially intrusive t~affte
noise events will lnerense as a ~esult of the auto eente~'
development.
l~esolution
hnpaet3~
~pacts.-
hn~cts:
The Tustin Center Planned Community Regulations
ogerational pet-formanee standards which will mitigate noise
imp~e~ to an insignificant level Other recommended
project
Short-term moise tmgaets will oeeu~ during project
Compliance wi$~ city noise stan,'~-,'ds regarding hours of
ope~atien and the use of muffled eonstructlon equipment
minimize construction noise imparts.
The project site is exposed to noise impacts from the Santa
Ana Freeway. Over one-~if of the project site is ex~x~ed to
freeway noise levels in exe_a~__ of the City of Tustin~ noise
objective of 65 CNEL for commercial land uses.
The project dastgn ineorporatas a wall of at least eight feet in
height along this edge. This wail will serve to attenuate noise
from the freeway and will reduce on-~ite noise levels to
acceptable levels.
Short-term increases in dust and exhaust emission will oeeur
in the vicinity of the project durtng construction.
Complienee with Rule 403 of the SCAQMD Rules and
Re~,IAtions and wetting of graded areas wm mitigate fugitive
Long-term regional inereases in mobile and stationerF-souree
emL~ior~ wLll result due to the increase in motor vehicle and
energ7 usage.
The ptotx~ed project includes bicycle and pedestrian facilities
provided to reduce motor vehicle usage. Sidewal~ will be
provided along Jamboree and Laguna Road and on all intem,.al
roads. Ail roadways being constructed as a part of the project
have sufficient width to allow for bicycle lanes.
Resolution No.
Pa&e 4
The Pt~nnir~ Comr~is~ion of the City of Tustin furthe~ finds that although
~s%~es~ alterations? or conditions have been incorporated -.into the oroiect
which will substantial1}, mitigate oe avoid sip~nifteant effects identified in.t.h.~
final ~_r~_~ ~l't~in of the si~nfficent effects esrmot ~e mitigated to ~uli,y
a_~__~table levels. The remsn~ tmpaats identified below may ~ontinue to
of st?ff~cent adverse ~m?aet even when all ~nown feasible and identified
mitip/ation measures are applied.
A. Project implementation will result in the termination of cfi-site
a~.ieultural Deoduetion and the lc~__ of 60 acwes of 'l~ern~lA~d of Statewide
Impoetanee~ as identified by the California State Department of
Conservation.
The project is euleently committed to non~t~ use.
The Tustin General Plan Land Use Element currently
d_~__~nates the site fo~ u~ban (residential) land use. The
A~qenee of an' Irvine Ranch Water District improvement
finance district and the issuance of bonds to flrmnee u~ban
level water and sewer improvements fo~ the project site and
steeoundtn~ ereas fm'the~' indicates the existir~ commitment
to urban development of this area. There are no economically
ce physi--~y feasible meastmes ava/lable to mit/gate th/s
B. The proposed project will ~enerate approximately 8,205 ADT and 845 P.._M.
peak houl' tripe. Treffle from the Droje~t will inel. ementnlly worsen r2alile
conditions at the Red H~11 Avenue/l-5 remp~ and the intersections of Red
l~tll Avenue and L-vine Boulevard, and tted 1~11 Avenue and La~,una Road.
Construct/on of the Jamboree RoadfI-$ interchange will
provide substantial mitigation of project related traffic
impacts by divertinq project related and other traffic from
Red Hill Avenue. The Jamboree Road/I-$ interohan~e has
been committed by the City of Tustin ss a locally funded
project (Tustin City Council Resolution No. 84-65). Prioe to
~tion of the interehen~e, the State Department of
Transportation must approve connection of the interchange to
the state freeway s~tem and the City of Tustin must select
and institute a mechanism to finance construotion of the
inte~ettan~eo Until such time as these approvals and actions
are taken and the interchange is constructed, traffic
t~nerated by the project will adversely impact operatin~
conditions at the Red Hill Avenue/I-5 ramies and the
intersections of Red Hill Avenue and Irvine Boulevard, and
Red Hill Avenue and ~ Road.
Resolution I~o.
Page S.
The project ~ite is loeatad within the ~J-tem Corridor study area and
approval and construction of the auto center project p~ioe to completion of'
the route location study could influence the study by eliminating some
potential .alternative alignments of the couridor.
Findings: The City of Tustin will participate in the Esstern
Transportation Cori-idoe Study and cooperata with the County
of Orange and the other local agencies involved and affected
by the study. It is not conside~d eeonomtonlly fessible to
delay apgroval and implementation, of the project ~mtil the
coerldor study is completed.
De
Short-term constuuetion equipment emissions and long-term mobile and
stationary emissions will oeo. ur with project implementation creating an
adverse impact on the air quality of the South Coast Air B~sin.
As with any urban development project, air quality impacts
cannot be compled:ely mitigated. In approving the project,
subject to the condttiom and mitigation measures set forth,
the city hms done all that is technically and ~easonably
possible at the municipal level
Iner,.~ed demand foe limiting regional water resourcos.
Findinga.- The project necessitates increased watee use and, therefore,
increased demand for regional imported water. This impact
~nnot be mitigated on an indivi~,-1 projeat basis although
the ~ity will r~quiro implementation of '~ll feasible
cor~ervation me~.
Increased lonq,-term demand foe finite fossil fuel resouroes resultin~ from
peojeet electrical and natural gas requirements.
Finding: The proje~: neeessitates an ine~sed c-um,,~ntive demand foe
finite fuel rnsourcos. Althouqfl servicing agencies anticipate
adequate fuel supplies foe the project, the long-term demand
foe fos~ fuel resouroes will be unavoidably ineressed.
The Plmnning CommL~/on of the Cit~ of Ttmtin does hereby find that certain
eh,m~,,es oe alterations (e~f.~ mitigation m.essur~..) .re..q~i..r~d in. oe in.e.?porated
into the [:n'o~eet are within the .t~[x~lsibilit.~ an. cl..~rl~m.e~on, o.! a. ,?lotte a~e?.e~y
other than the Ctt~ of Tustin one een oe snotua oe aooptecl o7 me e~spe~muve
a~enc~y sa itemized below-.
A. California Department of Transportation-- Approval of the connection of
the Jamboree Road/I-$ interehen~e to the state freeway s~stam.
Resolution
Pag~ $
The Plan, i~. Comr~!-~aon of the Cit7 of Tust~n has wei1~hed the benefits of the
progceed project ?ir~c its unavoid~hle environmental r~sks in determinin~
whether to approve _~d project. The ~q~nnir~.. Commission does hereb7 further
ft~d_ determine, and state? ~R~suant to the provisions of Section 15093 of the
stat~ C]~A du~d~]in~? that the, occurrence of the ~et*taln sit~nffieant
envil~nmental effects ide~ifled tn the ~rml ~ and set forth in ~a~a~-~ph 2
above~ have been evnhmted a~i,wt the fonowin~ over~din~ considerations:
AL The peoJe~.t will result tn the followinq substantial economic, social, and
environmental benefits to the City of Tustin and surroundin~ areas:
(1)
At build-out, the project ts anticipated to 7ield a positive annual
fiscal surplus, of $1,306,9.00 to the eity~ general fund. Total arw,,~1
revenues are projected at $1,414,700 and total costs at $108,500.
(2)
The eousolidation of auto dealerships tn one location will result in
vehicie miles traveled than would be typionl of a st~p pattern of auto
deale~hi~. Th~ fart ts reflected in the trip ~eneration rates for the
lrvine Auto Center, a similar type of development, which are
.considerably lower pet acre than the observed rates for individual
:auto deelers.
(3)
The propmed project will provide improvements to the local
~ir~,!ation sTstem ~onsistinq of the extension of Lacuna and
B. The followinq economic and social eousiderations make the project
altarnative~ identified tn the final ~rR infeasible.
The ~t~o Project" alternative is rejected because tt fa(l_~ to meet the
objecttves set forth fc~ the project, partimdarly the objectives of
provtcltn~ an increased revenue base .to the city and oeeatinq a
development which provides for & renqe of auto-related uses to serve
the City of Tustin and surrnundin~ ~ommuni~es.
(2)
The ~.~lsting General l~an" alternative ~s rejected because it fads to
meet the objectives set forth for the project, parti~,i-~17 the
objectives of providin~ an inereased revenue b~e to the city and
ereaUnq a development which provides for a range of auto-~elated
uses to serve the City of Tustin and surroundinq ~ommunities.
(3)
The ~Residential Development at Ten DweLlh~ Units to the Aoee"
alternative ts rejected because it fa~ to meet the objectives set
forth foe the project, par~ieulerly the objectives of providtnq an
increased revenue base to the city and oeeatinq a development which
provides foe a m~e of auto-related uses to serve the City of Tustin
Resolution No.
Page 7
(4) The "Alternative Locationsn alternative is ~eje~ted because
development of the progosed p~ojeat ou the other available sites in
the eit7 would result in greate~ environmental impacts than would
development of t~he p~oje~t on the p~oposed site.
1
2
3
4
5
$
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2205
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE LAND USE MAP OF THE LAND USE
ELDIENT OF THE TUSTIN ARF. A GENERAL PLAN FOR AN AREA
BOUNOED BY THE I-5 FREEWAY, PROPOSED JAMBOREE ROAD,
PROPOSED LAGUNA ROAD, AND A LINE lg2 FEET WEST OF THE
EL MOOENA CHANNEL, AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT "A"
The Planning Commission of the City of Tustih does hereby Pesolve as
follows:
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
A. Section. 65355.1 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.
B. 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 Poston Tonaka on behalf
of the 1trine Company to reclassify the land use from
Residential/Single Family to Planned Community/Commercial for an
area bounded by the I-$ Freeway, proposed Jamboree Road,
proposed Laguna Road, and a line 192 feet west of the E1Modena
Channel, as shown in Exhibit "A".
C. That a draft Environmental I~act Report has been prepared for
the subject project, and was recommended for certification to
the City Council, by the adoption of Resolution No. 2204..
D. 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 84-1a be adopted, amending the Land Use Map of
the Land Use Element of the Tustin Area General Plan from
Residential/Single Family to Planned Community/Commercial for an area
bounded by the I-5 Freeway, proposed Jamboree Road, proposed Laguna
Road, and a line 192 feet west of the E1 Modena Channel, as shown in
Exhibit "A".
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission
held on the day of 1985.
RONALD H. WHI~
Chairman
DONNA ORR
Recording Secretary
LU
LU
.(
Z
.(
Z
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2206
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Ok THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, RECOMMENDING REZONING OF A ARE. A
BOUNDED BY THE I-5 FREEWAY, PROPOSED JAMBOREE ROAD.
PROPOSED LAGUNAROAO, AND A LINE 192 FEET WEST OF
THE EL MODENA CHANNEL, FROM PLANNED COMMUNITY TO
PLANNED COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT "A"
AND INCLUDING THE INCORPORATION OF PLANNED COMMUNITY
REGULATIONS KNOWN AS THE EA~'T TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
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, (Zone Change No. 85-1) has been filed
by Poston Tanaka, on behalf o7 the Irvine Company, to change the
zone for an area bounded by the I-5 Freeway, proposed Jamboree
Road, proposed Laguna Road, and a line lg2 feet west of the E1
Mod,ne Channel, . from Planned Community to Planned
Community/Commercial as shown in Exhibit "A", and incorporating
planned community regulations known as the East Tustin Auto
Center.
B, That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held on said
applicaton.
C. That a zone change.should be granted for the following reasons:
That the proposed change would not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding
property owners.
That the inclusion of a Planned Community zone and
incorporation of development regulations will ensure that
the proposed use will be compatible with future and
existing developments.
3. The proposed zone designation is in conformance with the
Land Use Element of the Tustin Area General Plan.
De
Development of subject property shall be in accordance with the
policies adopted by the City Council; Uniform Building Codes as
administered by the Building Official; Uniform Fire Code as
administered by the Orange County Fire Marshal; and street
improvement requirements as administered by the City Enqineer.
Final development plans shall require the review and approval of
the Community Development Director.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12:
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
26
27
28
Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2206
page two
F. A draft' Environmental Impact Report (OEIR 84-2) has been
prepared for this subject project, and has been recommended for
certification to the City Council by the adoption of Resolution
No. 2204, and mitigation measures are specified as conditions .in
this resolution.
6. That a Master Sign Plan for the Tustin Auto Center shall be
prepared and submitted to the Planning Commission for adoption
by resolution.
II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council
approval of Zone Change No. 85-1 from Planned Community to Planned
Community/Commercial for an area bounded by the I-5 Freeway, proposed
Jamboree Road, proposed taguna Road, and a line 192 feet west of the
E1 Modena Channel, as shown in Exhibit "A", and incorporates Planned
Community Regulations known as the East Tustin Auto Center.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, held on
the day of , 1985.
RONALD H. WHITE
Chairman
DONNA ORR
Recording Secretary
clVW
[.
L
L'
L
EAST TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
CITY OF TUSTIN
PLANNED COMMUNITY REGULATIONS
L
L
NOVEMBER, 1984
THE IRVINE COMPANY
TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
COMMUNITY REGULATIONS
CITY OF TUSTIN
Novembe= 1984
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I
SECTION ii
SECTION III
SECTION IV
SECTION ?
SECTION VI
SECTION VII
SECTION VIII
INTENT .AND ~URPOSE
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
G~m~AL NOTES
DEFINITIONS
USKS PERMITTED
ZONING MA~
SITE P~%N REVIEW
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Subsection A.
Subset=ion B.
Subsec=ion C.
Subse¢=ion D.
Subsec=ion E.
Subset=ion F.
Subse==ion G.
Subse¢=ion H.
Subsection I.
Subsec=ion J.
Building Se=bac~s
Building Heigh=s
Pa=~ing
~andscaging
Lighting
Walls and Fences
Sound A==enua=ion
Signage
Storage and Loading
Refuse Colle¢=ion Area
Pa~e
'1
2
3
9
11
11
12
12
14
15
16
17
SECTION I. INTENT AND PURPOSE
The Planned Community Regulations are intended to guide
2he planning and design of an auto sales, leasing and
la=ed service center. The Regulations promote the quality
site planning, architectural design, and materials for'all
structures which will become a part cf the Center.
While the Auto Center serves a unique function within
the Tustin area, the Planned Community Regulations seek to
integrate this Center into the surrounding co.~,unity in a
manner that is compatible with existing and future develop-
ment in the community.
-1-
SECTION II. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
The Tus=in Auto Center Planned Community h~s been estab-
lished as one (1) basic group:
A=to Sales~ Leasing & Se=vice
¢0.00
This group shall be se=ve~ by:
Public streets
Landscape buffer a=ea
TOTAL GROSS ACRES
1~.95
1.51
55.46
-2-
SECTION III. GENERAL NOTES
Within the Planned community area, the continued use of
the land fo= agricultural purposes with uses, structures
and appurtenances accessory thereto shall be permitted
subject to the applicable zoning codes of the City of
Tustin.
Water service and sewage disposal facilities within the
Planned Co,-~unity area shall be furnished by the Irvine
Ranch Water District. However, temporary services by
other agencies may be necessary.
Regardless of the provisions of this supplemental text,
no construction shall'be allowed within the boundaries
of the Auto Center Planned Community except that which
complies with all provisions of.applicable building
codes and the various mechanical codes related thereto.
Any land use proposal or development standard ~ot speci-
fically covered by this plan and its supplemental text
shall'be subject to the regulations of the City of
Tustin zoning codes.
W~enever the regulations contained herein conflict with
the =egulations of Tustin zoning codes, the regulations
contained herein shall take precedence.
'A plan for silt control for all storm runoff from the
property during the construction shall be prepared and
submitted to the City of Tustin for their revzew prior
to the issuance of a grading permit. The plan shall be
in effect during initial operation of the tract to main-
tain the integrity of silt control facilities during
normal operation.
Approval by the Air Quality Management District of any
plans, devices, or facilities for the control of any air
pollutants which may be generated, shall be required.
Grading within the zone shall be subject to the approval
of the Director of Public Works.
Energy conservation provisions shall be considered when
building orientation, materials and design are being
developed.
-3-
10.
11.
After ¢o.~encement of alterations or cons=ruction of
any structure, or improvement thereon, the owner shall
diligently prosecute the work thereon, to an end that
the ,structure shall not remain in a partly finished
condition any lgnger than reasonably necessary for
completion thereof.
All mechanical appurtenances on building roof tops
shall be screened from view from adjacent public
streets and buildings in a manner meeting the approval
of the Director of Planning.
-4-
SECTION IV. DEFINITIONS
0
Advertising Surface: The total area of the face of any
signing structure.
Co---on'Area: Areas designated by Parcel ~ap for land-
scape 0r employee parking purposes and deeded to a
legally formed Auto Center Merchants' Association.
Dedicated Streets: Reference to all streets or rights-
of-way within this ordinance shall mean dedicated vehi-
cular rights-of-way, including any median paving or
landscaping located within that right-of-way.
Gross Acreage: The entire land area within the boundary
of the project, measured to the right-of-way of any
abutting arterial highway or the centerline of any
interior street.
Net Acreage: The total !and area of the land aescribed
in the use or other permit. Net acreage shall consti-
tute the total buildable area.
~ront - Any parcel's frontage which faces onto an
interior stree~ shall be deemed a front
pr.perry lane, whether facing the interior
loop =.ad or facing toward an entrance
street.
Rea r
- The property lane of any parcel which is
adjacent to the perimeter streets of
Jamboree Road, Laguna Road, Myford Road, or
the I-5 Freeway.
- Those property Lines which separate one
subdivided parcel which has been designated
for retail use from another such subdivided
parcel or from a designated common
e~loyees' parking Lot.
Service & Storage ~uildin~s= Ail structures on any
display, sale or lease of automobiles and =elated
merchandise.
SECTION V. USES PERMITTED
A. Uses Permitted
Auto, truck, and recreational vehicle sales, leasing
and service (dealerships and/or independents).
Service industries may include, but are not limited
to, the ~ollowing~
a. Repair, maintenance and servicing of appliances
or component par=s ~or motor vehicles.
b. Tooling.
c. Tss=ing shops-(excluding noise producing
noxious performance testing).
Repair, maintenance and servicing of above-
listed items provided that said industries are
not the point of customer delivery or collec-
tion.
e. Diagnostic labs.
Experimental automobile assembly and ~abrica-
g. Vehicular storage areas (exclusive of impound
yards).
Uses Permitted Subject to Grantin~ of a CUP b~ the
Plannin~ Commission i~ Not Included in Auto Dealership
1. Tire, battery and accessory shops and accessory
£ndoor installation facilities.
2. Auto and vehicle glass shops.
3. Auto and truck rentals.
4. Paint and restoration shops (independent of dealer-
ships).
· 5. Body Shops (independent of dealerships).
.--6--
lis=ed in Sec=ion A., above.
Uses ~ermi==ed Sub,cc= =o G=an=ing. of a CUP by =he
Plannin~ Co~m-tssion
1. Ca= wasA.
2. Se=vice sSa=ion.
3. Mo=o=cycle sales.
-7-
SECTION VII. SITE PLAN REVIEW
Design Review by the City of Tustin is required prior
to submitting plans and specifications for plan check and
building permit processing. This review shall be conducted
by the Community Development Department in accordance with
policies of the City of Tustin. Approvals shall remain
valid for a period of 18 months. Decisions by the Community
Development Department shall be final unless appealed to the
Planning Co.~ission within seven days of the Community
Development Department's decision.
The Applicant shall submit six (6) sets of site plans
and elevations to the Co..~unity Development Department that
include the following information as applicable:
1. North Arrow.
2. Title Block:
a. Scale of Map~
Name and Address of Applicant~
C. Date of preparation.
All boundary lines on the subject property fully dimen-
sioned and tied in with =he centerline of adjacent or
nearby st=.ets.
The name, location and width of any adjacent public
private streets. Widths should include any required
street widening.
The name, location and width of any water courses,
structures, irrigation ditches, and any other permanent
physical features of the land.
6. The width and location of all existing or proposed
public or private easements.
7. Ail proposed improvements properly dimensioned.
All pa=king spaces and aisles drawn and dimensioned with
the flow of traffic noted by arrows and calculations of
the required number of parking spaces.
-9-
0
lO.
ll.
13.
14.
The lOcation.and width of all vehicular and pedestrian
access openings into and out of the property.
All proposed walls and fences, including height and
mate=iai, and all proposed exterior lighting.
All proposed landscaping in as much detail as possible.
The zoning and existing land use of the subject
property and properties contiguous to its boundaries.
~ocation of nearest walls and structures and adjacent
properties, the use therein, and adjoining driveways.
A brief description of the intended use of the
property, hours of operation, n,~m~er of employees, and
other general characteristics that would apply to the
proposal.
15. Indicate all existing fire hydrants and water main
16. Indicate building size, .type of construction, and
building elevation.
17.
Indicate all existing street lights, utility poles,
trees and signs within the public right-of-way adjacent
to the site.
The Director of Co,,~unity Development shall respond to sub-
mittal of the above-listed information within thirty (30)
clays. Such response may constitute approval, approval with
conditions deemed necessary to protect the public health,
safety and welfare, or disapproval of Applicant's site
plan. If no action is taken within the allotted time, the
site plan shall be deemed approved, unless the time limit is
waived by the Applicant.
-10-
SECTION VIII. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Building Setbacks
1. No structure of any kind, and no part thereof, shall
be placed on any site closer to a property line than
he=.in provided. The following structures and
improvements are specifically excluded from these
se=back provisions:
a. Hoof overhang.
b. Steps and walks.
Paving and associated curbing in relation to the
landscape area, except that customer parking
areas shall not be within 10 feet of the street
property lines.
Fences, except that no fence shall be 91aced
within the street setback area for service or
storage buildings.
e. Landscaping.
f. %Signs and dlsplays £dentifying the owner, lessee
or occupant.
g. Lighting.
2. No setback is required from interior property lines.
3. Setback from street property lines:
Sales or display buildings shall be set back a
minimu~ of 10' from the interior loop road and a
minimum of 60' from the entrance streets. Roof
overhangs may not project nearer than 5' to the
property line.
Service and storage buildings shall be set back
a minimum of 60' from the front property lines
and a minimum Of 65' from the rear property
lines. However, a service or storage building
may be built at the rear property line provided
-ll-
Be
that it does no= exceed ~he height and length
described in Sec=ion VIII.~., paragraphs 2 and 3
of this document, subject to Planning Commission
approval.
Buildin~ Heights
1. Buildings s~all be a ~ximum of 30' 'in height to top
of ridge line.
2. Automobile display and signage shall not be allowed
on top of any building.
0
Automobile storage'in the second level of a building
shall be allowed only if fully screened from view,
including =he line of sight from the second story of
any structures which may be built across J~m~oree
and Lacuna Roads.
Parking
1. Each auto dealer shall provide a minim,,m of eleven
(11) offstreet parking spaces per net buildable acre
which shall be reserved for employee parking only.
In the event that em~loyee pa=king is provided in a
co--,on parking lot, each dealer shall ~rovide
separate parking space on his/her premxses for any
demonstrator automobiles which are driven by a
company employee.
3. If employee parking is provided in a common facility
shared by several merchants, a recorded document
shall be filed with the Building and Planning
Depaz=ments and shall be signed by the Owner o~ the
common site, stipulating to the permanent =ese=va-
=ion of use of the site for employee parking
purposes.
4. Each automobile dealer shall provide a minimum of
six onsite parking spaces reserved exclusively for
customers' use. Additional customer parking shall
be allowed at ourbside where appropriately striped.
5. Onsite handicapped parking shall be provided as
required by the governing agencies.
£
L
[
[
[
f'
~. ~andsca~e
Every site on which a'building is placed shall be
landscaped according to plane approved as specified
herein and maintained thereafter in a sightly and
well-kept condition pursuant to the standards agreed
upon by the Auto Center Merchants' Association.
Such maintenance shall include regular irrigation,
fertilization, cultivation and tree pruning.
The property owner, lessee or occupant shall land-
line adjacent to any interior street of the Auto
Center for the entire length of street frontage,
excepting walkways and driveway areas. The Auto
Center Merchants' Association shall maintain =his
landscape in compliance with ~he Declaration of
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of ~his Auto
Center.
The property owner, lessee or occupant shall provide
irrigation and maintenance facilities for the land-
scaped areas, and shall keep said facilities in good
working order at all ~imes.
e
Landscaping shall be installed within thirty (30)
~ays of occupancy or completion o£ the building,
whichever comes first.
Site landscaping shall be compatible with the land-
scape master plan whic~ has been developed as a
guide to coordinate the species of plant materials,
thus providing continuity of landscape within the
Center.
The project developer shall provide a continuous
landscape buffer between the Auto Center and
Jamboree and Laguna Roads. Additionally, land-
scaping shall be provided in the median of Jamboree
Road.
Undeveloped areas reserved for future expansion,
such as the freeway interchange or any parcel not
promptly built out, shall be maintained in a weed-
free condition but need not be landscaped.
-13-
Lightinq
Offsite and street lighting will be provided by the
project's developer.
Ail exterior lighting shall com~ly with the pro-
jec='s Planned Lighting Criteria, as set forth in.
the Project Design Criteria on file with the City of
Tustin. ~
3. Lighting plans shall be submitted showing the design
layout and exact fixture mounting and wattage pro-
posed by each auto dealer.
4. Areas of display shall be lighted hy sharp'cutoff
fixtures equal to Elsco Manufacturing Co.'s Auto
King VI to direct lighting downward only.
"Front row" lighting standards adjacent to the Auto
Cmntmr interior roads shall not exceed 20' in height
and shall have no more than three fixtures per
standard at a minim,,m of 40' on cmnter. The
interior of the display area may be illuminated by
fixtures no closer than 60' to the front line of
display lights. These fixtures shall be on
standards no higher than 20', shall be spaced no
closer than 60' on center, and shall have no more
than four fixtures per pole.
kverage wattage for the entire display area shall
not exceed 1.5 watts/square foot. Display areas
within 12S' of Jamboree Road or Laguna Road shall
hoc exceed 1 watt per square foot.
Service and storage parking areas shall be lighted
by standards no higher than 24' which shall contain
no more than two fixtures of the above described
specification per 9ole. Average wa=rage for the
entire storage area shall not exceed 0.2 watts per
square foot.
Creative lighting design and reinforcement of
lighting intensity tO provide varying degrees of
light intensity for merchandising and highlighting
purposes are encouraged as long as the overall
average wattage is. not exceeded.
-14-
lO.
Spot fixtures shall be directed downward only,
except.at spot display locations along the project's
perimeter walls.
Strings of incandescent fixtures shall not ~e
allowe~ in any exterior area.
Walls and ~ences.
All service, storage and trash areas shall be
screened from view from any street by a wall. Land-
scape screening alone shall not be deemed suffi-
cient.
walls constructed on the perimeter of the Auto
Center shall be in keeping with the project's Design
Criteria. These walls shall be no less than 8' and
no greater than 10' in height, with the exception
that the wall height may be increased to 14' in
order to accommodate a building backed against the
property line. This increase in height shall be
property. The property owner shall provide addi-
tional landscaping =o minimize the visual impact of
this wall height on adjacent streets.
If a building is constructed as permitted in the
above paragraph, no sloping roofs shall be used on
such a structure, and any drainage shall be away
from the wall into =he site. No facias, gutters, or
other roof edge treatments shall be visible above
the 14' height of the wall.
Offsets in the perimeter walls are encouraged when
adjacent to a 14' high structure. Such offsets
shall be compatible with the project's design
criteria.
G. Sound Attenuation
Ail body repair work and all compressor work shall
be performed in an enclosed area only. Access doors
to such enclosures shall face away ~rom Jamboree
Road.
Auto dealers adjacent to Jamboree Road may not open
service bay doors toward Jamboree Road.
-15-
Auto dealers adjacent to Laguna Road may not open
service bay doors toward Laguna Road u~less the
doors are no higher than the perimeter wall which
screens them from ~aguna Road.
Air compressor exhaust stacks shall contain a
muffling device.
Exterior loudspeakers shall be directed away from
the perimeter streets which surround the Auto Center
and shall be mounted no higher than 12' above the
~ediate finished grade.
Air conditioning units may not be mounted on top
any building which is less than 65' from a rear
property line.
Si~nage
Signs shall be allowed subject to the. provisions o~
the Tustin Auto Center Sign Criteria, as approved by
the City of Tustin Planning Commission.
Pro~ect developer shall supply signage adjacent =o
the freeway and at both entrances to the project
announcing the Auto Center location. Additionally,
the developer shall supply ~reeway directional
travel signs at =he nearest freeway offr~mps.
signs shall not be allowed.
4. Billboard signage shall not be allowed.
Storage and Loadin~ Areas
1. No ~aterials, supplies or equipment, including
owned or operated trucks, shall be stored in any
area on a site except inside a closed building or
behind a visual barrier or service area which
screens the equipment ~rom view of all public.
streets. The singular exception shall be any
vehicles w~ich are a part o~ the merchant*$ customer
Neither the loading doc~ nor =he offloading ope=a-
tions for automotive parts and other supplies shall
~e visible from any public streets.
ad~acenc prope~2 by an opaque screen.
MINUTES
TUSTIN PLANNING COHI~IISSION
REGULAR ~ETING
JANUARY 14, 1985
CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.mo, City Counctl Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INYOCATION
ROLL CALL: White, Well, McCarthy, Puckett, Sharp
PRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC CONCERNS:
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting December 10, 1984.
Commissioner Sharp moved, Well second to approve Item 1. Motion carried 5-0.
Item 2 was removed from the Calendar for further discussion.
2. Resolution 2201, Use Permit 84-27, 6th Street Mini Warehouse.
Commissioner Well was concerned that the findings of hardship to allow the variance
were not complete. Commissioner Puckett moved, Sharp second to approve Resolution
2201 with Exhibit "A". Motion carried 4-1, Well opposed.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. VARIANCE 84-4
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Presentation:
Mr. William Brown
153 N. Yorba
Authorization to vary from the minimum lot width, front yard
setback and maximum lot coverage requirements of the Single
Family (R-l) District.
Jeff Davis, Assistant Planner
Don Lamm, Director of Community Development, informed the Commission that the
applicant requested the item be continued once more due to the applicant's illness.
Chairman White opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. Seeing no one wishing to speak
he closed the hearing at 7:36.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Well second to continue Variance 84-4 to their next
meeting. Motion carried 5-0.
Planntng Commission Minutes
January t4, 1985
page two
PUBLXC HEARINGS
4. DEIR 84-2, GPA 84-1a, ZC 85-1
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Poston Tanaka on behalf of The Irvine Company
Bounded by I-5 freeway, proposed Jamboree Road, proposed Laguna
Road and a line 192 feet west of the E1Modena Channel.
Actions regarding the East Tusttn Planned Community/Tustin Auto
Center
Certification of Draft Environmental Impact Report 84-2.
Amendment of Tustin Area General Plan from
Residential-Single Family to Planned Community Commercial,
GPA 84-1a.
Change of zoning designation from Planned
Community-Residential to Planned Community-Commercial, ZC
85-1
Don Lamm presented staff's report as contained in the Report to Planning Commission
dated January 14, 1985.
Commissioner Sharp questioned how many residents were mailed notices of the hearing.
Chairman White opened the public hearings on DEIR 84-2, GPA 84-1a, Zone Change 85-1
and Parcel Map 84-1032 at 7:44 p.m. The following people spoke:
Coralee Newman, The Irvtne Company, reviewed the original plan for the auto center on
Browning and Bryan Streets and the meetings with the East Tustin Homeowners
Associations (approximately 10 associations). Per the meetings with the community
groups The Company agreed to commit to the following: 1) the center would be smaller
in size than originally proposed; 2) the center would be moved to the newly proposed
location; 3) that the Company would bring a residential project adjacent to the auto
center to serve as a buffer to the existing residents located along Browning between
Browning and Jamboree; and, 4) the Company would plan to have an inward oriented auto
center with attractive landscaped buffers and walls along the perimeters as well as
with the residential proposal.
She further summarized that the residential Phase II project will be in front of the
Commission hopefully in the spring.
Planning Commission Mil
January 14, 1985
page three
.es
Bonnie Holms, The Irvtne Company, answered questions. One, what is the value of the
project or the significance to the City? The project has the potential to increase
the City budget from 1/4 to 1/3. A year ago a market research analysis was
commissioned to identify what market opportunities existed in East Tustin and what
areas might be brought into this portion to supplement existing retail. The area
identified with the greatest lack was automotive servicing, sales and supplies. The
State Board of Equalization reports indicated that Tustin in 1983 was achieving less
than 3~ of the revenues of the surrounding cities. The Irvine Auto Center generated
in excess of 1.4 million dollars in tg83 for the City of Irvine.
Secondly, what has The Company done to rest the community's concerns on the original
proposal? 1) The Company has now oriented the'project inward to promote the
development as a car shopping mall. They are proceeding on this basic principal to
bring the shoppers inside the premises to travel past various other business. This
will give the dealers a marketing advantage and gives The Company the opportunity to
concentrate the customer parking on the interior and prohibit it on the exterior.
They can also concentrate the lighting and noise on the interior. In the Planned
Community regulations, it specifies that interior lighting can occur only in the
interior strip where the sales buildings and parking display areas will be allowed.
They are stipulating that a "sharp cut-off" fixture be used. It has the capability
of projecting display lighting forward 30 feet while throwing lighting to the rear of
the standards only 8 feet. It illuminates the merchandise without imposing
significant light onto the sidewalk or interior street. Therefore, no significant
quantity of high intensity lighting can reach the perimeter. (Coralee presented the
Commission with pictures displaying the lighting.) As an additional safeguard to the
lighting concern, The Company is specifying that the service areas and inventory
parking areas which are forced to the perimeter of the dealers parcels will have a
maximum lighting intensity allowable which basically computes to security level
lighting.
By orienting inwardly, The Company will be able to achieve significant sound
attenuation. The project will contain the noise within its boundaries principally by
the creation of a perimeter of sound attenuation walls that also serve to
aesthetically enhance the project by blocking the service areas from view. The walls
will vary from 8-10 feet in height and occassionally will rise to 14 feet. They will
have landscape and rolling berms to create a pleasant street scape. As indicated in
the picture displayed in the Chambers, the wall changes both in height and in its
horizontal line. Setbacks are being encouraged to break up the visual impact so as
not to create tunnel vision down Jamboree Road.
Third, what traffic impacts will the project have? The beneficial aspects are: The
Company plans to extend existing Laguna Road from Browning Avenue ultimately tying
into Myford. They anticipate that most of the traffic coming to the project will
travel along Laguna from the Myford or Redhill interchange. The traffic engineer
indicates that no significant traffic will travel down Browning to reach the
project. She pointed out that Myford Road, Myford interchange at 1-5 freeway is
committed and on Caltrans schedule for 1988 completion, and the implementation of an
interchange at Jamboree and I-5 is currently under consideration by the City Council.
Fourth, what impact will this project have on the existing flood problem? This is a
major problem. The Company proposes to construct an additional berm starting at the
berm adjacent to Bryan Avenue running roughly parallel with Bryan Avenue along the
northern edge of the auto center and over to E1Modena Channel.
Planning Commission Min, ces
January 1¢, 1985
page four
This will serve to direct any flood waters coming to that area, delivering them into
the channel. Additionally, they will extend a berm along the eastern side of the
center and return it along the southern side separating it from the freeway. The
bottom line is they can't represent they are improving the flood situation on
Browning because they have no direct impacts on it. They can say they are having no
negative impacts. The whole ~looding issue on this specific project site is
separated from Browning Avenue residents. The Company will address further
improvements to deal with the Browning Avenue residents at the hearing for the
proposed residential site.
Finally, what will an auto center look like?' The display areas will be on the
interior of the internal~street. They are not stipulating a specific architectural
style, it may limit them. The dealers will probably have a better idea of what look
might best convey the type of business they are trying to establish in Tusttn.
However, the Company does not want a hodge-podge of buildings. They are suggesting a
range of materials and colors and are encouraging the use of color and liteness to
offset the structures and pavement. They will require the dealers to submit their
plans at least three different times for the architectural review process. The
interior street will contain a common landscape theme tree to tie into the theme
trees along the perimeter.
Hubert Clark, 1942 San Juan, representing the San Juan Meadows Homeowners directly
across the street from the proposed auto center, commented about the cooperation they
have had from The Company and City. He expressed their concern over loud speakers
and requested beepers be used. The flood situation is still a problem. Also, is
concerned what the project would look like from Jamboree to the west until it reaches
Browning. In the proposal there seems to be some conflicts, Page 24 item 3.1.2,
first paragraph, "... if the homes are approved". He understood that the center
and homes would be done concurrently. Page 82, Section 4.0, paragraph 3 says, "the
residential project which, if approved..." He again understood it would be done at
the same time. He thanked Don Lamm for his careful planning in notifying the
residents because within 300 feet of the center there are no residents, yet staff was
careful to notify many people who are concerned with the project.
Chairman White asked Mr. Clark to clarify his concern with the improvements between
Browning and Jamboree. Mr. Clark said that there has not been any clue what the
residents might expect to be done in the area west of the Laguna area and east of
Browning. That is within the home section, but he did think it was going to be in
conjunction with the auto center plans.
Chairman White asked for clarificatin on the flooding issue. Bob Ledendecker, City
Engineer, explained that the outline in the environmental document on the drainage as
relates to Browning Avenue indicates it would not impact the area any worse than what
exists today. As part of the project, there will be two constrictions removed within
the channel that runs adjacent to Bryan Avenue that will permit more water to enter
the channel at the intersection of Bryan and Browning. It should take water
currently diverted down Browning Avenue and take it easterly along Bryan Avenue in
the E1Modena/Irvine Channel.
Commissioner McCarthy questioned if the two bridges restricting the E1Modena Channel
on Bryan will be removed simultaneously with the project and if the culvert under
Bryan will be built simultaneously. Mr. Ledendecker said yes, the railroad bridge
has already been removed. The second restriction, the temporary wooden bridge into
the residential unit on the north site of Bryan, will be removed. Thirdly, an
Planning Commission Minutes
January 14, 1985
page five
enlargement of the culvert that crosses under Bryan Avenue on the E1Modena Irvtne
Channel alignment. These three measures will allow additional flow through the
channel at Bryan and Browning. Eventually, as the channel is improved to its
ultimate as development occurs upstream in the watershed additional enlargement of
the channel will have to take place.
Commissioner Sharp asked how the berm works near Browning where it crosses Jamboree
Road. Bob responded that the sheet flow is generally to the south and east. The
roadway will be constructed at an elevation as high as the berm to hold the water
back. The water will be passed through some type of a drainage device under Jamboree
Road and along the berm.
Commissioner McCarthy asked if Caltrans had committed in writing to the interchange
at I-5 and Jamboree. Bob said they have met with them on a preliminary basis and
have initiated the environmental document for the interchange. Staff has not
received a formal indication from them. We have to go through a design project
report which is being done concurrently with the environmental document for the
interchange. All initial indications have indicated there would be no problem. The
major problem is funding, and we have committed to a locally funded project rather
than wait for Caltrans funding.
Chairman White questioned if the city's review of the hydrology report would ensure
this project would not add any further water to the residents west of Browning. Bob
responded that we would in addition have to adhere to the Federal Insurance Act of
which we are a party as a City. We would have to protect the development to a 100
year storm. In addition, we cannot impose any of the 100 year storm into an area
that currently does not have any tn~act from it.
Mr. Clark further addressed the issue of the channel, Exhibit 5 in the EIR. The berm
proposed would come down the existing channel along Bryan to Browning with a break at
proposed Jamboree. He recalled the rain storm last year that caused flooding in the
school, down Browning and San Juan and was curb to curb and going over. It
completely flooded the field with about 3 feet of water in the proposed section for
the new housing. This was caused by the construction of the new drainage under the
road at Browning and Bryan which caused the area to the southwest quandrant to be
lower than the northeast quandrant. When the site and housing are completed, the
channel will be widened, deepened, probably cemented and will probably carry a lot
more water than presently. However, with the berm as indicated in the EIR, if it is
carried to that point, he is concerned it would seem to channel more water into the
school, down south on Browning onto San Juan and into the homes.
Bob Kallenbaugh, civil engineer and consultant to The Irvine Company, concurred with
Bob Ledendecker that there is no adverse impact on the existing residences due to the
construction of the auto center project. The berm to be constructed along Bryan
Avenue will direct the flows away from the auto center site but the removal of the
actual constrictions in the channel due to the 90° turn under Bryan Avenue and one of
the existing wooden bridges will have a beneficial effect as far as passing
additional water through the Bryan/Browning intersection.
Commissioner McCarthy questioned if these improvements would be prior to the
development of the housing area. Mr. Kallenbough said these improvements are planned
to be constructed as part of the Phase II residential project which would occur prior
to the next rainy season. Commissioner McCarthy was then further concerned because
Mr. Ledendecker said the improvements would be done simultaneously with the auto
center.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 14, 1985
page si x
Bonnie Holms clarified that they put forward proposals for both projects at the same
time in the EIR to give the total picture. However, the improvements necessary for
this project would not include improving the channel by removing the constrictions
because of the fact that the existing flood water coming down Browning cannot get to
the auto center and visa versa; water coming to the auto center cannot get back to
Browning. In essence there is already created a berm that separates the
two projects. For that reason, they determined it would be advantageous to go ahead
with the proposed berming procedure. They are committing to the improvement in the
channel, removal of the constriction of the bridge and also the improvement of the
channel passing under Bryan Avenue. They view these projects as coming through the
residential project because the residential project will directly impact Browning
Avenue. They have stated in the proposal and the consultant concurred, the
improvements through this project will actually improve the flooding condition on
Browning Avenue by doing as Bob Ledendecker mentioned; allowing mere water to pass
down the channel, proportionately less water to overtop the channel and flood
Browning Avenue. However, they felt for the purposes of this conversation they
should confine their remarks to this project alone. The schedule for the residential
project should fall very closely behind this project. They anticipate this project
will come before the Commission within the next several months. The start of
construction is anticipated mid-late summer. This would be one of the elements of
construction that would start at the beginning of the project.
Bonnie continued by responding to Mr. Clark's concern about the loud speaker system.
The Company has not stipulated in the community regulations that beepers only be
allowed because that concern is being addressed in another manner. The Company is
working with an amplification system company to determine what muffling devices and
muffling level would be reasonable to impose on the loud speaker system and the cost
advantages to the dealers. They're stipulating maximum loud speaker height and they
will review the locations to ensure there is some sort of screening for the noise.
Further, they are stipulating the speakers should be directed toward the interior of
the project.
Chairman White asked for further clarification on the drainage problem on Browning
and the improvements proposed.
Mr. Ledendecker responded that the drainage projects within the channel on Bryan
Avenue could be delayed with the residential project, but at the same time we have to
have a date certain when these facilities would be completed. The construction of
the new culvert under Bryan Avenue is more time consuming. We would have to have the
work completed by October 15th of any upcoming wet year. Our staff would recommend
we have a date certain tied to when this facility would be constructed. We could tie
it to the completion of being out of the culvert under Bryan by October 15th. It
would fall into the category of working within a regional flood control facility.
The County does not desire work to be performed between October 15th and April 15th.
Chairman White wondered if it is possible to complete this type of construction in 10
months. Bob responded yes.
Clarence Dalen, 1921 Burnt Mill Rd., echoed Mr. Clark's concerns. He feels there is
nothing positive about the auto center except tax revenue. The traffic, flooding and
noise are all negative factors. He recalled a flooding incident in his neighborhood
which included one loss of life and didn't see how the auto center or improvements at
the intersection at Browning and Bryan could do anything but back up the water into
his neighborhood.
Planning Commission Minutes
3anuary 14, 1985
page seven
Alice Huber, owns property from 13881 thru 13995 Browning and lives at 13891 Dall
Lane, expressed her deep concern and opposition to the project. She voiced her
concern with flooding by rain and also the periodic release of water by the water
department down their street.
Seeing no one further wishing to speak, Chariman White closed the public hearing at
8:35 p.m. He introduced a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Nemick directed to the
Commission.
Commission discussion ensued concerning the traffic impact and measures to alleviate
the problems. McCarthy suggested widening Myford to four lanes from the 1-5 to Bryan
and also widening Bryan from Myford to Browning. Terry Austin reviewed the EIR
graphs and drawings denoting cumulative and background volumes of traffic
circulation. The residential project between Browning and Jamboree does not put any
traffic on the neighboring section of Redhill. The report addresses Redhill, Myford
and Bryan and shows the diversion to Jamboree not actual volumes on Jamboree. If we
assume we have the Jamboree interchange and the section to the north, before you put
the project in, there could be something like about 5,000 vehicles per day. As you
extend Jamboree to the south to meet with Bryan, it increases even more. As Jamboree
is completed, it will divert more and more traffic from Redhill.
In further discussion concerning the parking requirements inside the center, Don Lamm
explained that the requirements were proposed by The Irvine Company based on other
auto centers throughout Orange County. As outlined in the site plan, Lot 5 is
proposed to be a common parking area for all employees of the auto center. Bonnie
Holms elaborated that per acre an existing business might require 9 - 10 employee
parking spaces. We have stipulated that at least 11 spaces per acre per business
must be reserved for employee parking which can be achieved on their site or in the
common parking lot. In addition, we are requiring they provide employee parking on
their site for any demonstrator cars which their salesmen will drive. The customer
parking will be available at curb side on the interior street. They will have
on-site parking stalls for at least six customers plus handicap stalls.
Commissioner Well further questioned loading and unloading. Bonnie said they are
encouraging the dealers to provide facilities on their premises but are leaving as an
option that in the middle lane of the interior street, the truck drivers could
off-load there.
Commissioner Well expressed concern with the landscape maintenance section in the
Merchant's Association CC&R's. She would like to include replacement of dead plants.
Don Lamm said this could be included into the document that goes to City Council.
Don responded to Mr. Whtte's concern over definition. We can require The Irvine
Company to submit specific wording and definition of each of these. In particular,
we have referred to the master landscape plan being returned tothe Commission for
future review. We can require that the master landscape, sign and design criteria
package be returned for Commission review as an agreed to condition of the zoning.
Mr. White is in favor of this and would like to include walls and exterior speakers.
He would also like to have an opportunity to review the hydrology report.
Sharp would be in favor of including these conditions in the parcel map especially
the hydrology report. McCarthy would like something in writing from Caltrans
regarding the Jamboree interchange.
P;annlng Commission HI~
3anuary 14, 1985
page eight
~s
Mr. Lamm pointed out that Resolution 2204 with the mitigation measures would be
adequate to cover their concerns raised. The other conditions would be for you to
review design criteria, landscape, stgnage, walls and performance standards
concerning such things as outside loud speakers. These conditions can be
incorporated into the planned community zone regulations.
White wondered if we could require another plan be processed that the planned
community would require processing of a landscape and wall master plan.
Lamm c~nttnued that the other remaining conditions concerning the hydrology and
Caltrans review would be preferred to be incorporated into the parcel map conditions.
Puckett moved, Well second Resolution 2206 with amendments requiring prior to
approval of building permits a master landscape and wall plan be submitted to the
Commission for approval consistent with the elevation drawings. Also the sign plan
wording in the zone change be clarified. And, that design criteria also be processed
through the Commission. These should be drafted and written into the planned
community zone regulations. Exterior public address systems shall be prohibited
unless a plan containing mitigation mesures is processed through the Commission and
can demonstrate it will not be a problem to the adjacent residents. No vote was
taken at this time.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Wetl second to adopt Resolution No. 2204 to certify the
draft environmental impact report and forward to City Council for final adoption of
the final environmental impact report. Motion carried 4-1, McCarthy opposed.
Commissioner Sharp moved, Well second to adopt Resolution No. 2205 to change the
general plan designation for the auto center area from single family residential to
planned community commercial. Motion carried 4-1, McCarthy opposed.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Well second to adopt Resolution No. 2206 to change the
zone from the planned community residential to planned community commercial as
amended above. Motion carried 4-1, McCarthy opposed.
5. PARCEL MAP NO. 84-1032
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Poston Tanaka on behalf of The Irvine.Company
Bounded by I-5 freeway, proposed Jamboree Road, proposed Laguna
Road and a line 192 feet east of the E1Modena Channel.
To subdivide the property for the East Tusttn Planned
Community/Tustin Auto Center.
Presentation:
Donald Lamm, Director of Community Development
Don Lamm presented minor changes to the conditions imposed.
Commissioner Sharp moved, Puckett second to approve Resolution No. 2207 to include
the revised conditions as presented by Don Lamm. Motion carried 4-1, McCarthy
opposed.
Chairman White recessed the meeting at 9:20 p.m. and reconvened at 9:34 p.m.
Planntng Commission Mtnutes
January 14, 1985
page ntne
PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued)
6. USE PERMIT NO. 85-1
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Presentatt on:
Leonard Construction
Walnut Plaza Center, Walnut and Newport Avenues
To install a pole sign of (50) fifty feet.
Jeff Davis, Assistant Planner
Jeff Davis presented staff's report as contained in Report to Planning Commission
dated January 14, 1985.
Chairman White opened the public hearing at 9:38 p.m. The following person spoke:
Michael LePore, Leonard Construction, agreed with the staff report and felt a pole
sign would be more readable than a monument sign.
Seeing no one further wishing to speak, Chairman White closed the hearing at 9:45
p.m.
Commission discussion ensued concerning the benefits of a pole sign versus a monument
sign and the number of existing pole signs on Newport.
Commissioner Puckett moved, Sharp second to approve Use Permit 85-1. Motion failed
3-2, McCarthy, Well, White opposed.
Commissioner Well moved, McCarthy second staff recommendation to deny Use Permit
85-1, and to approve a monument sign subject to review of the elevations at the next
meeting. Motion carried 3-2, Puckett, Sharp opposed.
AOMINISll~ATIYE MAITERS
Old Business
7. Continued consideration of Tentative Parcel Map 84-1033, Dow Avenue.
Presentation: Mary Ann Chamberlain, Associate Planner
Commissioner Sharp moved, White second moved approval of Resolution No. 2202 and
recommended staff send a letter to the applicant indicating that if they want
to deviate they should address the City Council. Motion carried 5-0.
New Business
8. Report Concerning the Appropriate Zoning for Yorba Street from First Street to
Irvine Boulevard.
Presentation: Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development
Commissioner Well moved, Sharp second to approve the staff recommendation as
contained in Report to Planning Commission dated January 14, 1985. Motion caried
5-0°
Planning Commission ~inutes
January 14, 1985
page
STAFF CONCERNS
9. Report on Council Actions January 7, 1985.
Presentation: Donald D. Lamm, Director of Community Development
COHI~XSSIO# CONCERNS
Commissioner Well questioned when the Specific Plan would be available and if the
planning Commmtsston could 9et a thorou9h progress report for the Santa Fe and East
Tustin time frame.
Commissioner Puckett suggested a letter be sent to Ed Knight congratulating him on
his promotion.
Commissioner Puckett questioned if the City is now allowing the sale and rental of
adult video movies.
Chairman White publicly commended Paul Chrison, Director of EMA Regu]attons, for his
chairmanship of the subdivision committee.
ADJOURNPlEIrr
Adjourn to January 28, [985.
AdjOL
Reco
ted at 10:10 p.m. to their next regularly scheduled meeting.
ORR
'~i ng Secretary