Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 TTM 16527 DR 03-015ITEM #2 Report to the Planning Cornmission DATE: OCTOBER 13, 2003 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16527 DESIGN REVIEW 03-016 PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT: TUSTIN GATEWAY BUSINESS PARK, L.L.C. VOIT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 26 CORPORATE PLAZA, SUITE 260 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTN: JAMES V. CAMP LOCATION: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUEST: 1) 1123 WARNER AVENUE (REMAINING VACANT 14.63 ACRES OF THE FORMER STEELCASE PROPERTY) PLANNED COMMUNITY INDUSTRIAL (PC-IND) A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) HAS BEEN CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZATION TO CREATE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16527 TO SUBDIVIDE PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 2002-237 INTO SEVEN (7) LOTS, ONE (1) OF WHICH WILL CONTAIN THIRTEEN (13) OF THE NINETEEN (19) BUILDINGS OFFERING FUTURE OWNERS FEE TITLE TO THE LAND UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING AND AN UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN THE COMMON AREA (PARKING LOTS, DRIVE AREAS, AND LANDSCAPE AREAS); THE REMAINING SIX (6) BUILDINGS WILL BE LOCATED ON FEE SIMPLE LOTS; AND, 2) AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT NINETEEN (19) NEW INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS RANGING FROM 3,800 TO 37,802 SQUARE FEET FOR A TOTAL OF 266,324 SQUARE FEET. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission adopt: 1. Resolution No. 3894 adopting the Final Mitigated Negat ve Declaration for Design Review 03-015 and recommending the City Council adopt the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map 16527; Planning Commission Report DR 03-015, ']-]' 16527 October 13, 2003 Page 2 Resolution No. 3895 recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 16527 to subdivide Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237 into seven (7) lots, for the purpose of developing thirteen (13) buildings under condominium ownership and six (6) buildings on fee simple lots; and, 3. Resolution No. 3896 approving Design Review 03-015 for the site and architectural design of the development of nineteen (19) new industrial buildings ranging from 3,800 to 37,802 square feet for a total of 266,324 square feet. The project includes the development of a vacant 14.63-acre site located at the northeast corner of Warner Avenue and Pullman Avenue with new warehousing and office uses (Attachment A - Location Map). The site is located between the former Steelcase property (also known as Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 2002-237) along the west property line, Bell Avenue to the north, an A.T. & S.F. railroad easement to the east, and Warner Avenue to the south. The property is surrounded by industrial uses including warehousing, manufacturing, and research and development. The site was previously part of a 36.51-acre parcel with approximately one million square feet of building area for warehousing, manufacturing, and office exclusively used by Steelcase, Inc. Design Review (DR) 02-036 recently authorized the demolition of 508,674 square feet of building area and the remodel of the remaining 469,903 square feet of warehouse to be used as a warehouse with accessory offices and a showroom for a tile manufacturer and distributor. In conjunction with DR 02-036, Parcel Map 2002-237 subdivided the parcel into a 21.88-acre parcel and a 14.63-acre parcel. Final Parcel Map 2002-237 has been recorded, and the remodel is nearing completion. The project site is located within the Planned Community-Industrial (PC-IND) zoning district and Industrial General Plan land use designation; the Planned Community District Regulations were enacted through adoption of Ordinance No. 400 (Zone Change 68- 172) on June 3, 1968. The site layout and building designs require approval of a design review application, typically approved by the Community Development Director; since the tentative tract map requires a recommendation by the Planning Commission to the City Council, the design review application has been referred to the Planning Commission for concurrent consideration. Tentative Tract Map 16527 To accommodate the proposed development described in more detail in the following sections, the project site would need to be subdivided into seven (7) numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot (Attachment B - Tentative Tract Map 16527). Tentative Tract Map 16527 would subdivide Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237 that previously divided the former Steelcase property into two (2) separate parcels. The tract would include the following lots listed in the table that are larger than the minimum required lot size of 30,000 square feet (or 0.69 acres): Planning Commission Report DR 03-015, 3-]' 16527 October 13, 2003 Page 3 f I Square Footaoe I Acres Parcel 2 I Existinq Parcel Map 2002~237 963,282.8 I 14.63 Proposed Tentative Tract Map 16527 Lot 1 73,565 1.69 Lot 2 78,212 1.80 Lot 3 49,356 1.13 _Lot 4 52,891 1.21 Lot 5 66,953 1.54 Lot 6 67,731 1.55 Lot 7 211,577 4.86 Lot A 36,955 0.85 TOTAL 637,240 14.63 Lots 1 through 6 will be fee simple lots to accommodate six (6) individual industrial buildings ranging from 19,913 to 37,802 square feet in size. All six (6) lots will maintain reciprocal access, while also independently complying with the applicable developments standards (i.e. setbacks, lot coverage, parking, etc.). The six (6) individual lots will maintain street frontage along a newly created cul- de-sac ("A' Street) accessed solely from Bell Avenue and will not have access from Warner Avenue. · Lot A, a cul-de-sac, situated north to south, will be created consistent with the City of Tustin Standard Industrial Cul-de-sac detail to be accessed only from Bell Avenue at the north end. The cul-de-sac ("A" Street) will be 570 feet in length, will have a sixty (60)-foot right-of-way per City of Tustin Standard No. 104, will provide independent access to Lots 1 through 6, and will be dedicated in fee to the City of Tustin to become a public street at the applicant's request. · Lot 7 will contain a condominium warehouse/office complex comprised of thirteen (13) buildings offering future owners fee title to the land underneath the building and an undivided interest in the common area (parking lots, drive areas, and landscape areas). The lot will have two (2) points of access from Warner Avenue only, which includes a common driveway with 1123 Warner Avenue at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Pullman Avenue. Condition 3.2 of Resolution No. 3895 would require the submittal of organizational documents (i.e., covenants, conditions, and restrictions) for the development. Since the north and south property lines currently extend to the centerline of Bell Avenue (local street) and Warner Avenue (major arterial street) and the streets already exist and are maintained by the City of Tustin, Condition 2.3 of Resolution No. 3895 (Attachment E) would require the dedication of all remaining roadway easements to the City. Fee dedications of necessary street right-of-way are consistent with the Planning Commission Report DR 03-015, 'Cf' 16527 October 13, 2003 Page 4 Circulation Element Implementation Program as authorized by the City Council; the Tustin Subdivision Code, as permitted by the Subdivision Map Act, mandates consistency with the Circulation Element. Proposed Uses The proposed project will function as two (2) different developments offering different industrial building product types (Attachment C - Submitted Plans). The six (6) individual lots on the north half of the site (Lots 1 through 6) are designed to accommodate six (6) large buildings for warehousing and distribution, which will also be able to accommodate large semi-trailer trucks and smaller single-unit trucks. The remaining Jot (Lot 7) on the south half of the site is designed for smaller warehouses in a condominium setting and would be served by smaller single-unit trucks. Condition 5.5 of Resolution No. 3896 is included to specify the size of trucks that can be accommodated in this area. All buildings would include mezzanine and ground floor spaces for administrative offices; there would be up to 11,900 square feet of office area in any one (1) of the large buildings on Lots I through 6 and up to 3,300 square feet within any one (1) of the buildings in the condominium complex on Lot 7. Distribution and warehouse uses are identified as permitted uses within the Planned Community Industrial district. Administrative, professional, and business offices are also permitted; however, they must be associated and accessory to any of the other uses permitted within the district. As proposed for all buildings, the offices are integrated with the warehouse area and are less than fifty (50) percent of the square footage for each building area; up to thirty-six (36) percent of the overall development is proposed to be office. The total amount of office in any specific building would be limited based upon the amount o available parking and also whether the office is associated and accessory to the other use(s) within the building space. Site Plan Buildings 1 through 6 will be accessed directly from Bell Avenue via "A" Street, which terminates at the north side of Lots 5 and 6; two (2) identical driveways will be located approximately twenty-five (25) feet from the east and west property lines along Bell Avenue to provide access along the rear of the buildings. Buildings 1 through 6 will maintain the required thirty (30) foot front yard setbacks from "A" Street and all other required setbacks. In addition to required parking and landscape areas, each building will have a dock, loading area, and double-bin trash enclosures. .Buildings 7 through 19 on Lot 7 will be accessed from three (3) driveways along Warner Avenue that include two (2) driveways at the existing entrance driveway at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Pullman Street and a driveway approximately twenty-five (25) feet west of the east property line. The location of the intersection of Warner Avenue and Pullman Street precludes the former Steelcase property and project site (Parcel 1 and 2 of PM 2002-237) from having independent site access and a shared entrance driveway is necessary to provide ingress and egress to both parcels. As such, the applicant was previously required to record a reciprocal access agreement to ensure the two parcels PJann"ing Commission Report DR 03-015, TT 16527 October 13, 2003 Page 5 maintain shared use of the entrance driveway at Warner Avenue (Condition 1.6 of Resolution No. 3860 - Attachment D). To ensure adequate maintenance of the entrance driveway, pedestrian facilities, landscaping, and other site improvements, the applicant was also required to establish a maintenance association. Lot 7 will continue to comply with these requirements per Condition 3.1 of Resolution No. 3895 that requires the pre-existing agreements to be updated to reflect the newly created lots in Tract 16527. In addition to required parking and landscape areas, the site layout of Lot 7 accommodates truck deliveries and loading activities behind the buildings. Buildings 7 through 10, and 14 through 17 will have individual, double-bin trash enclosures and Buildings 11, 12, 13, 18, and 19 will have individual, single-bin trash enclosures. In addition, due to the size of the remaining building on the former Steelcase property, Condition 2.5 of Resolution No. 3895 requires a thirty (30) foot "non-buildable" easement along the west property line of Lots 2, 4, 6, and 7 to comply with the total allowable floor area per the 2001 Uniform Building Code. The thirty (30) foot "non-buJldable" easement supplements an identical thirty (30) foot easement on the adjacent property to comprise a sixty (60) foot building-to-building setback from the existing Steelcase building to the proposed buildings on Lots 2, 4, 6, and 7. The sixty (60) foot setback allows an unlimited allowable floor area for the existing former Steelcase building. Lot Coverage/Floor Area Ratio (FAR) The maximum allowed lot coverage for the site is fifty (50) percent; the maximum proposed lot coverage on any one (1) lot is forty-three (43) percent with an overall average of thirty-seven (37) percent. The maximum General Plan FAR is 0.60:1; the highest proposed FAR for the seven (7) lots is 0.55:1 and the overall average FAR is 0.45:1. Development of the site would adhere to lot coverage and density standards for the Planned Community Industrial (PC-IND) zoning district and Industrial land use designation of the Tustin General Plan. Traffic/Circulation The applicant has submitted a traffic analysis prepared by LSA Associates Inc. ("LSA") (Exhibit A of Resolution No. 3894). The analysis shows that the trip generations for the project are consistent with the operations of the former Steelcase facility. As proposed, all of the traffic from Lot 7 and a majority of the traffic from Lots 1 through 6 will travel to and from the site via one (1) of two (2) intersections: Warner Avenue/Pullman Street and Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue. Intersection capacity analyses were performed for these two (2) critical intersections The Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue intersection is presently at Level of Service ("LOS") A, which is the best level (LOS A through D are considered acceptable). LOS A is maintained with the addition of the proposed project. While the project will not impact the current LOS of the Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue intersection, the project traffic will comprise approximately seven (7) percent of the traffic volume at the intersection once the area is built out. To minimize project impacts, the applicant would be required to provide a proportionate share toward the cost of constructing a future traffic signal per Condition 8.2(i) of Resolution No. 3896. Planning Commission Repo~ DR 03-015, TT16527 O~ober13,2003 Page 6 The Warner Avenue/Pullman Avenue intersection was also analyzed at LOS D or better and acceptable operations are maintained at this location for project conditions and build out conditions. This intersection also serves as a project access, and the proposed project volume at this location will not have a significant impact. The traffic analysis also analyzed the capacity of surrounding roadways and concluded that the project will not generate significant traffic nor impact existing levels of service. As noted previously, the proposed project will share a common drive aisle with the former Steelcase property immed ately to the west of the subject drive aisle will be located at the intersection of Warner Avenue property. The shared and Pullman Avenue and may result in vehicle conflicts due to the convergence of three (3) on-site drive aisles within close proximity to the intersection (Attachment C - Submitted Plans). The traffic analysis recommends specific stop sign locations on Lot 7 to help facilitate circulation, which have been incorporated as Condition 6.16 of Resolution No. 3896. Fire Access As proposed, the three (3) north/south drive aisles on Lots 5 and 6 will exceed the maximum distance for a drive aisle without a turn-around as required by the Orange County Fire Authority. Emergency access vehicle gates will be installed at the terminus of each drive aisle to ensure adequate access across the development. A reciprocal access agreement would be required by Condition 1.6 of Resolution No. 3895 to ensure adequate access between Lots 5, 6, and 7. A significant landscaping buffer will be planted around the gates to clearly identify the development boundary as required per Condition 4.4 of Resolution No. 3896. Parking As proposed, all required parking would be provided on each building site (Attachment C - Submitted Plans). There would be a total of 659 on-site parking spaces to accommodate the 460 required spaces for the warehouse and office uses as shown in the table below: PARKING LOT BLDG. MAX. PARKING MAX. 1/1000+1/2000 TOTA N . O OF ICE 3/00(~'~ WAl~=un. .......... L PARKING PARKING ,.- ,..vo ~' uuu G SF REQ'D ROV '1 1 10,150 31 19,895 20 30,045 51 70 2 2 11,900 36 22,162 22 34,062 58 75 3 3 8,600 26 10,913 11 19,513 37 55 4 4 10,000 30 12,774 13 22,774 43 61 5 5 10,476 32 25,332 23 35,808 55 74 6 6 11,836 36 25,366 23 37,202 59 74 TOTAL 62,962 116,442 179,404 303 409 Planning Commission Repod DR 03-O15, TT16527 O~oberl3, 2003 Page 7 PARKING LOT BLDG. MAX. PARKING MAX. 111000+112000 TOTAL NO. NO. OFFICE 3/1000 SF WAREHOUSE (>20,000) BLDG. SF 7 7 3,038 10 4,752 5 7,790 8 2,445 8 3,825 4 6,270 9 2,445 8 3,825 4 6,270 10 3,038 10 4,752 5 7,790 11 1,482 5 2,318 2 3,800 12 1,800 6 2,750 3 4,550 13 3,011 10 4,589 5 7,600 14 2,165 7 3,386 3 5,550 15 3,300 10 5,025 5 8,325 16 2,165 7 3,386 3 5,550 17 3,300 10 5,025 5 8,325 18 2,828 9 4,423 4 7,250 19 1,814 6 2,837 3 4,650 .OTS SUB- 7-19 TOTAL 32830 5._~.~.0890 ~ OVER ALL TOTAL 95,792 167,332 263~'124 Condition 5.1 of Resolution No. 3896 requires that any change submitted to the City for review and approval. PARKING PARKING REQ'D PROVIDED 15 12 12 15 7 9 15 10 15 10 15 13 9 157 250 460 659 to this distribution be Architecture There are six (6) large freestanding buildings on the north side of the site and thirteen (13) smaller buildings grouped together to appear as a large massing along Warner Avenue. The development pattern in the immediate area consists of large building masses with parking areas between the building and the right-of-way. While there are thirteen (13) individual buildings along Warner Avenue, Buildings 7 through 10 are paired together along the north property line of Lot 7 to be in line with Buildings 1 through 6 to create an industrial campus setting. "A" Street is the central axis of the entire development that terminates at the center point of Buildings 14 and 16. Buildings 11 through 19 are grouped together, combined with two (2) large screen walls on the south elevation, to appear and function as the southern "anchor" of the campus setting. All nineteen (19) buildings are concrete, tilt-up panes with a smooth finish and will have repeating wall colors and pattern for consistency throughout the entire development to complement the nearby remodeled former Steelcase building. There are %-inch v-reveals and recesses on the walls to further articulate the windows, arches, and contrasting colors. The building colors are as follows: Planning Commission Repo~ DR 03-015, TT16527 O~oberl3, 2003 Page 8 1 nnntinn l~rRnd ~nlnr Main wall area ICI Silver Shores (240) Main wall arches ICl La Mesa (634) Bottom of wall arches ICl Meadowlark (602) Top building trim ICI Natural White (815) Metal canopy ICI Glass windows Eclipse ~nmmnn ~nlr~r gray tan dark tan white Old Redwood (160) brick red Evergreen with silver reflective coating All of the buildings are thirty (30) feet tall, except for all of the entry tower elements, which are thirty-three (33) feet tall. A metal canopy, painted a brick red color, is located in front of the storefront systems, at a height of ten (10) feet, to add visual interest and help further identify each building entrance. To soften the appearance of the building massing along Warner Avenue and Bell Avenue, a combination of landscaping materials including grass, ground cover, shrubs, and trees clusters are proposed as described in the landscaping section. Ground- and Roof-Mounted Equipment The buildings are designed with adequate parapet height to screen all roof-mounted equipment. Condition 2.2 of Resolution No. 3896 requires all rooftop equipment to be installed and maintained to be a minimum of six (6) inches below the parapet and not visible from the public right-of-way. Lighting The applicant will submit a photometric plan during plan check that demonstrates the minimum security lighting throughout the site with building-mounted and pole-mounted lights. Specifications for the lighting fixtures and illumination will be reviewed at plan check as required by Condition 2.2 of Resolution No. 3896. Condition 2.2 also requires the lighting to be directed on-site with a maximum height of twenty (20) feet for light poles to avoid light and glare on adjacent properties. Landscaping The site currently includes a large quantity of mature eucalyptus trees. As a result of development of the site, a majority of the existing trees would be removed. However, the applicant is proposing a variety of trees, plants, groundcover, and turf grass along the public right-of-way, on the east and west property line, and within the site. Pursuant to the City of Tustin Landscaping and Irrigation Guidelines, one (1) tree is required per every thirty (30) linear feet of interior and exterior boundaries; 144 trees are required and 144 trees are provided. Also, one (1) tree is required per every four (4) parking stalls; 166 trees are required and 166 trees are provided. The proposed trees are a variety of fifteen (15) gallon and twenty-four (24)-inch Camphor Trees, Carrotwoods, Canary Island Pines, Bradford Pears, Brisbane Box, and Mexican Fan Palms. The Canary Island Pines will be planted primarily along the west property lines of Lots 2, 4, 6, and 7 to complement the pines planted along the east property line of 1123 Warner Avenue. The Mexican Fan Palms will be planted at project entries and at the end of the cul-de-sac to add visual interest to the development as a whole. Planning Commission Report DR 03-015, 'IF 16527 October 13, 2003 Page 9 A variety of Wax-leaf Privets, Daylilies, Star Jasmine, India Hawthorne, Variegate Tobira, Lantana, and Rosemary will be planted throughout the development, around the base of the buildings, and around the project perimeter. Marathon Turf grass will be planted along Bell Avenue and Warner Avenue. A berm detail will be provided during the plan check process for the area along Warner Avenue to complement the existing berm at 1123 Warner Avenue per Condition 4.5 of Resolution No. 3896. Condition 4.3 is included to require continuous maintenance of all landscaped areas. Project Phasing The project developer intends to construct the entire project in a single phase. However, if the project is constructed in more than one (1) phase, the first phase would need to include, at a minimum: all site improvements on Lot 7, Lot A, and either Lots 1, 3, and 5 or Lots 2, 4, and 6. This requirement is to ensure: 1) Lots 5 and 6 would have adequate emergency access via Lot 7 per Condition 1.2 of Resolution No. 3896; and, 2) Lots 1, 3, and 5, and Lots 2, 4, and 6 have the necessary shared access and circulation improvements to support development. Environmental Analysis A draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the proposed project and was available for public review from September 23, 2003, to October 13, 2003 (Exhibit A of Resolution No. 3894). All potential impacts can be reduced to a level of insignificance through mitigation measures, which are included as conditions of approval for the project. A decision to approve Design Review 03-015 and recommend the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 16527 may be supported by the findings contained in Resolution Nos. 3895 and 3896. Matt West Associate Planner Karen Peterson Senior Planner Attachments: Attachment A - Location Map Attachment B -Tentative Tract Map 16527 Attachment C - Submitted Plans Attachment D - Resolution No. 3860 Attachment E - Resolution Nos. 3894, 3895, and 3896 S:~C, dd~PCREPOR'~DR 03-015 TT 16527(Ga~eway),doc ATTACHMENT A Location Map ,OC~T]ON PROJECT NO. ADDRESS TTM 16527 DR 03-015 LOCATION: 1123 Warner Avenue (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237) REQUEST: AUT .HORIZATION TO CREATE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16527 TO SUBDIVIDE PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 2002-237 INTO SEVEN (7) LOTS, ONE (1) OF WHICH WILL CONTAIN THIRTEEN (13) OF THE NINETEEN (19) BUILDINGS OFFERING FUTURE OWNERS FEE TITLE TO THE LAND UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING AND AN UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN THE COMMON AREA (PARKING LOTS, DRIVE AREAS, AND LANDSCAPE AREAS); THE REMAINING SIX (6) BUILDINGS WILL BE LOCATED ON FEE SIMPLE LOTS; AND, 2) AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT NINETEEN (19) NEW INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS RANGING FROM 3,800 TO 37,802 SQUARE FEET FOR A TOTAL OF 266,324 SQUARE FEET. ATTACHMENT B Tentative Tract Map 16527 i ATTACHMENT C Submitted Plans >- ~ z EB~SEBBEE~ IBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBB~ BBBBBBBBBB ~]T~OD"[VTA~ ~'~Vz~ >~UVd 883N~sna ! ~ ~.~'AA~ J.~'E) NI.LSf'I.L 8BBBBBBBBB D 8IAIO D"IV~ :~UVd SS~N~sne .......... ~ BBBOBB BBBBBB I]IAIO DqVIA[ 2~vd SS~N~Sn~ ....... ~ I~!A!Ogq¥l~I 7[}IYJ~A ),l~lVa SS3NISfl9 ~k~'/~A::l/~) NI/Sn.L .o~o~w~,~,n=w.~,~,~ ' ATTACHMENT D Resolution No. 3860 RESOLUTION NO. 3860 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2002-237 TO SUBDIVIDE A 38.04-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 1123 WARNER AVENUE INTO A 22.61-ACRE PARCEL AND A 15.43-ACRE PARCEL TO ACCOMMODATE EXISTING AND FUTURE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: That Voit Development submitted Tentative Parcel Map 2002-237 to subdivide an existing 38.04-acre parcel into two lots of 22,61 acres and 15.43 acres to accommodate development plans approved by Design Review 02-036, which authorized the demolition of 508,674 square feet of existing warehouse area and the rehabilitation of 469,903 square feet of the remaining warehouse area to be used as a warehouse with accessory offices and a showroom for a tile manufacturer and distributor, and related site improvements at 1123 Warner Avenue; That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for Tentative Parcel Map 2002-237 on February 24, 2003 by the Planning Commission; That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan, Tustin Zoning Code, Planned Community District Regulations, State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Code; D. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; E. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat; That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems. That Warner Avenue is identified as a major arterial street, and Bell Avenue is identified as a local street. Since the noah and south property lines currently extend to the centerline of Bell Avenue and Warner Avenue, and the streets already exist and are maintained by the City of Tustin, requiring fee dedications of necessary street right-of-way would Planning Commission Resolution 3860 February 24,2003 Page 2 be consistent with the Cimulation Element Implementation Program as authorized by the City Council and the Tustin Subdivision Code, as permitted by the Subdivision Map Act, which mandates consistency with the Circulation Element; That the location of the intersection of Warner Avenue and Pullman Street precludes each parcel from having independent site access and a shared entrance driveway is necessary to provide ingress and egress to both parcels. As conditioned, the shared use of the driveway will be ensured through the recordation of a reciprocal access agreement and the maintenance of site improvements on both parcels will be ensured through the formation of a maintenance easement; and, That the proposed project involves the subdivision of less than four (4) parcels and is Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15315 (Class 15) of Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (GuideLines for the California Environmental Quality Act). II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 2002-237 to subdivide an existing 38.04-acrs parcel into two lots of 22.61 acres and 15.43 acres to accommodate development plans approved by Design Review 02-036, which authorized the demolition of 508,674 square feet of existing warehouse area and the rehabilitation of 469,903 square feet of the remaining warehouse area to be used as a warehouse with accessory offices and a showroom for a tile manufacturer and distributor, and related site improvements at 1123 Wamer Avenue, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 24~ day of February 2003~ ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary kOZAK Planning Commission Resolution 3860 February 24, 2003 Page 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3860 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 24th day of February 24, 2003. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary GENERAL (1) 1.1 (1) 1.2 (1) 1.3 (1) 1.4 EXHIBIT A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2002-237 RESOLUTION NO. 3860 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped February 24, 2003 on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified, or unless otherwise indicated, as modified by the Community Development Director in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director may also approve subsequent minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are consistent with provisions of the Tustin City Code or other applicable regulations. Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to recordation of the final map for the project, subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department. The subject approval shall become null and void unless a final map is submitted for review and approval within twenty-four (24) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2002-237 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. SOURCE CODES (1) (2) (3) (4) STANDARD CONDITION CEQA MITIGATION UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S DESIGN REVIEW EXCEPTIONS (5) (6) (7) RESPONSIBLEAGENCY REQUIREMENTS LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES PC/CC POLICY Exhibit A Planning Commission Resolution 3860 February 24, 2003 Page 2 (1) 1.5 As a condition of approval, the applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to .attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. (1) 1.6 A draft reciprocal access and circulation agreement shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. MAPSUBMI'I-I'AL (1) 2.1 Final Parcel Map 2002-237 shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council and recorded with the County of Orange within ninety (90) days of this approval. 2.2 The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval identified in Design Review 02-036, as approved by the Community Development Director on February 19, 2003. All demolition identified in Design Review 02-036 shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map so that no portion of the existing building will cross a property line. (1) 2.3 The subdivider shall conform to all applicable requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. (1) 2.4 As required by the Subdivision Map Act, the subdivider shall execute a Subdivision and Monumentation Agreement and furnish the Improvement/Monumentation Bonds as required by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the Final Map. (3) 2.5 This subdivision shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City of Tustin Water Quality Ordinance and all Federal, State and Regional Water Quality Control Board rules and regulations. (3) 2.6 A thirty. (30) foot "No Build" easement shall be identified on the reference site plan along the west property line of Parcel 2 to comply with Section 505.2 of the 2001 California Building Code for allowable Exhibit A Planning Commission Resolution 3860 February 24, 2003 Page 3 floor area. The thirty (30) foot is half of the required sixty (60) foot side yard setback from the reconfigured building to be located on Parcel 1. (1) 2.7 The applicant shall dedicate all remaining roadway easements along Bell Avenue and Warner Avenue to the City of Tustin. CC&Rs (1) 3.1 Prior to approval of the final map, a maintenance easement shall be recorded at the County-Clerk Recorder's office identifying the party responsible for maintaining the easement area including hardscape and landscape improvements therein at the Pullman Street entrance. The maintenance easement shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Department and the City Attorney prior to recordation of the final map. The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with the review of these documents. A copy of the final documents shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within five (5) days after their recordation. ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY (5) 4.1 Prior to recordation of Final Parcel Map 2002-237, the applicent shall obtain all necessary approvals from the Orange County Fire Authority. FEES (1) 5.1 Deleted (1) 5.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project by the City Council, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of forty-three dollars ($43.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. ATTACHMENT E Resolution Nos. 3894, 3895, and 3896 RESOLUTION NO. 3894 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AS ADEQUATE THE FINAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16527, AND ADOPTING THE FINAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR DESIGN REVIEW 03-015 AND FINDING ALL FEASIBLE MITGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCOPORATED AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: That Design Review 03-015 and Tentative Tract Map 16527 are considered "projects" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act; A draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and distributed for public review. The draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration evaluated the implications of the project; and, The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Director and other interested parties with respect to the subject draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. I1. A Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, attached hereto as Exhibit A, has been completed in compliance with CEQA and State guidelines. The Planning Commission has received and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 16527 and approving Design Review 03-015 and found that it adequately discusses the environmental effects of the proposed project. On the basis of the initial study and comments received during the public hearing process, the Planning Commission finds that there will not be a significant effect as a result of the project. In addition, the Planning Commission finds that the project involves no potential for any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Resolution No. 3894 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of October, 2003. LINDA C. JENNINGS Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3894 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of October, 2003. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 ffl4) 573-3100 NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Title: Design Review (DR) 03-015 and Tentative Tract Map 16527 Project Location: 1123 Warner Avenue, Tustin, County of Orange Project Description: A request by the Voit Development Company to construct the "Tustin Gateway Business Park", consisting of nineteen (19) new industrial buildings on the remaining vacant 14.9 acres of the former Steelcase property at the northeast corner of Warner Avenue and Pullman Avenue. The buildings will range from approximately 3,800 to 37,000 square feet in size. The application also includes Tentative Tract Map 16527 to subdivide Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237 into seven (7) parcels, one (1) of which will contain thirteen (13) of the nineteen (19) buildings offering future owners fee title to the land underneath the building and an undivided interest in the common area (parking lots, drive areas, and landscape areas); the remaining six (6) buildings will be located on fee simple lots. Project Proponent: City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Matt West Telephone: (714) 573-3118 The Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study for the above project in accordance with the City of Tustin's procedures regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, and on the basis of that study hereby finds: [] That there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. That potential significant effects were identified, but revisions have been included in the project plans and agreed to by the applicant that would avoid or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Said Mitigation Measures are included in Attachment A of the Initial Study which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not required. The Initial Study which provides the basis for this determination is attached and is on file at the Community Development Department, City of Tustin. The public is invited to comment on the appropriateness of this Negative Declaration during the review period, which begins with the public notice of Negative Declaration and extends for twenty (20) calendar days. Upon review by the Communky Development Director, this review period may be extended if deemed necessary. REVIEW PERIOD ENDS AT 4:00 P.M. ON OCTOBER 13, 2003. Date September 23, 2003 Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (7]4) 573-3100 INITIAL STUDY A. BACKGROUND Project Title: Tustin Gateway Business Park Lead Agency: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Matt West Phone: 714/573-3118 Project Location: 1123 Warner Avenue Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Voit Development Company 26 Corporate Plaza, Suite 260 Newport Beach, CA 92660 General Plan Designation: Industrial Zoning Designation: Planned Community Industrial (PC-IND) Project Description: A request to construct the "Tustin Gateway Business Park", consisting of nineteen (19) new industrial buildings on the remaining vacant 14.9 acres of the former Steelcase property. The buildings will range from approximately 3,800 to 37,000 square feet in size. The application also includes Tentative Tract Map 16527 to subdivide Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237 into seven (7) parcels, one (1) of which will contain thirteen (13) of the nineteen (19) buildings offering future owners fee title to the land underneath the building and an undivided interest in the common area (parking lots, drive areas, and landscape areas); the remaining six (6) buildings will be located on fee simple lots. Surrounding Uses: North: Industrial/Warehouse South: Industrial/Warehouse East: Industrial/Warehouse West: Industrial/Warehouse Other public agencies whose approval is required: [] Orange County Fire Authority [] [] Orange County Health Care Agency [] [] South Coast Air Quality Management [] District Other: City of Irvine City of Santa Aha Orange County EMA B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Ixnpact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. [] Aesthetics [] Air Quality [] Cultural Resources [] Hazards & Hazardous Mater/als [] Land Use/Planning [] Noise [] Public Services [] Transportation/Traffic [] Mandatory Findings of Significance [] Agriculture Resources [] Biological Resources [] Geology/Soils [] Hydrology/Water Quality [] Mineral Resources [] Population/Housing [] Recreation [] Utilities/Service Systems DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: [] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that although the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated impact" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described in the attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially signifigant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier E1R OR NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR OR NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and no further documentation is required. _~__~_~.r~./~',.~*~-~ Date September 23,2003 Elizabeth Binsack Community Development Director 1) 2) 3) 4) s) 6) 7) 8) 9) Directions A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors and general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). All answers must take into account the whole action involved, including off-site, on-site, cumulative project level, indirect, direct, construction, and operational impacts. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" enthes when the determination is made, and EIR is required. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross- referenced). Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier E[R or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and, b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. AESTHETICS- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program &the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Wilhamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control d/strict may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number o£r~eo~le? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact Nolmpact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through cYtrect removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defmed in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or mfique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence ora known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial so/1 erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic trait or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defmed in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (2001 ), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or akemative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significam hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govermment Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located ;vithin an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or ~vorking in the project area? Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.~ the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the ex/sting drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a sU'eam or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or sl~uctures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure ora levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities? Potentially Significant Impact Lesx Than Significant With Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporation Impact No Impact [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] 1) Potentially impact stormwater nmoff from post- construction activities? m) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work n) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater rtmoff to cause environmental harm? p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established commumty? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE- Would the project result m: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established m the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies'? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less Than Significant Potentially With Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporation Significant Impact No Impact [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] © [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public aL'port or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excess noise levels? XII.POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial mtmbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIH. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, th order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Less Than Significant Potentially }Vith Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XIV. RECREATION- a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or requh'e the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i/e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less Than Significant Potentially With Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporation Significant Impact No Impact [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ATTACHMENT A EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DESIGN REVIEW 03-0'15 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP '18527 1123 WARNER AVENUE BACKGROUND The subject site is located in an urbanized area of the city developed with industrial buildings and uses. The property is bordered by buildings generally over 100,000 square feet with warehousing, distribution, and research and development uses. The site is currently vacant, previously containing approximately half a one million square foot industrial building complex for the use of Steelcase, Inc. Steelcase, Inc. recently completed a demolition and remodeling project, which included the demolition of approximately half the complex, which was located on the newly created Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237 where the proposed project is located. The proposed project consists of constructing nineteen (19) new industrial buildings on the remaining vacant 14.9 acres of Parcel 2. The buildings will range from approximately 3,800 to 37,000 square feet in size and accommodate a range of uses such as offices, warehousing, distribution, manufacturing, and research and development. The application also includes Tentative Tract Map 16527 to subdivide Parcel 2 into seven (7) parcels, one (1) of which will contain thirteen (13) of the nineteen (19) buildings offering future owners fee title to the land underneath the building and an undivided interest in the common area (parking lots, drive areas, and landscape areas); the remaining six (6) buildings will be located on fee simple lots. An initial study was prepared to determine if the new structures would have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. 1. AESTHETICS Items c & d - Less Than Significant Impact: The project includes construction of nineteen (19) new industrial/office buildings on the remaining vacant 14.9 acres of the former Steelcase property. The site spans from Warner Avenue to Bell Avenue between the remaining parcel of the former Steelcase property and the A.T. & S.F. Railroad right-of-way. The site is surrounded by buildings generally over 100,000 square feet with warehousing, distribution, and research and development uses. The buildings will be located in approximately the same location as the previous building area. The new buildings will have similar large massing and appearance to nearby development along Warner Avenue and Bell Avenue. While the proposed project consists of nineteen (19) buildings, they will be configured to appear as a large building mass. The buildings will also have similar building colors and wall articulations as other developments and dense perimeter and parking lot landscaping. In addition, the project will include new freestanding light standards with shielding as necessary and building-mounted lighting at 90-degree angles. The lighting will not create a new source of substantial light or glare affecting day or nighttime views in the area. The proposed appearance, placement of the new buildings, landscaping, and lighting will reduce potential impacts related to the visual character of the site and area to a level of insignificance. Attachment A DR 02-03 l Page 2 of 12 Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Field Inspection Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Items a & b - No Impact: The site is surrounded by buildings generally over 100,000 square feet with warehousing, distribution, and research and development uses. The subject property is not located on a scenic vista and will not disturb any trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings located on a State scenic highway. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Field Inspection 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Items a, b & c - No Impact: The property is currently a vacant, graded parcel not used for a farming or agricultural use; the site was previously developed with approximately 500,000 square feet of industrial building area. The new buildings will have no impacts on any Prime or Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, nor will it conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. The proposed project will not result in conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Tustin General Plan Field Inspection Submitted Plans Tustin City Code 3. AIR QUALITY Items a, b, c, d & e - Less Than Si.qnificant Impact: The project will temporarily increase the amount of short-term emissions to the area due to grading of the property and construction activities. Since the site is relatively flat, only minor grading will be required. The project is below the thresholds of significance established by Tables 6-2 and 6-3 of the Air Quality Management District's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The Air Quality Management District's CEQA Air Quality Handbook is intended to provide professional guidance for analyzing and Attachment A DR 02~031 Page 3 of 12 mitigating air quality impacts of projects when preparing environmental documents. The construction of less than 1,102,520 square feet of building, the grading of less than 177.00 acres, and the operation of less than 276,000 square feet of industrial is not considered a significant impact. Since the total building area will be 266,324 square feet on 14.9 acres of land and is less than the threshold, no impact is anticipated. Less than significant short-term emissions associated with grading, construction, and operation of the proposed project will comply with the regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the City of Tustin Grading Manual, which includes requirements for dust control. As such, the proposed project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any applicable air quality plan, result in a cumulatively considerable increase of any criteria pollutant as applicable by Federal or ambient air quality standard, nor will it expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or create objectionable odor affecting a substantial number of people. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules & Regulations City of Tustin Grading Manual Project Application Field Inspection 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Item e - Less Than Significant Impact: The property is currently a vacant 14.9-acre lot. The site is located between Warner Avenue and Bell Avenue generally between the remaining parcel of the former Steeicase property and the A.T. & S.F. Railroad right-of-way and is surrounded by buildings generally over 100,000 square feet with warehousing, distribution, and research and development uses. To fulfill an existing contractual agreement with the City of Tustin, the property owner will need to install new sidewalks in locations where sidewalks do not currently exist. Installation of sidewalks along Bell Avenue will cause the removal of a few mature eucalyptus trees. While these trees are not unique and there is no tree preservation policy, the project will include the planting of replacement trees and landscape materials in accordance with the Tustin Landscape and Irrigation guidelines. Implementation of the proposed project will reduce any impacts related to the removal of trees to a level of insignificance. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Field Inspection Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Attachment A DR 02-03 I Page 4 of 12 Items a, b, c, d, & f- No Impact: The property is currently a vacant 14.9-acre site surrounded by buildings generally over 100,000 square feet with warehousing, distribution, and research and development uses. The site is not inhabited by any sensitive or special status species of animals. The proposed project will have no impacts on animal populations, diversity of species, or migratory patterns. The project will include the planting of new trees and landscape materials, which will be provided in accordance with the Tustin Landscape and Irrigation guidelines. No impacts to any unique, rare, or endangered species of plant or animal life identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will occur as a result of this proposed project. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Field Inspection Submitted Plans Tustin City Code 5. CULTURALRESOURCES Items a, b, c, & d - No Impact: The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical, archaeological, or paleontological resource since none are known to exist on the project site and the site is not located in an area of high paleontological sensitivity. There are no unique geologic features on the site. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin Zoning Code Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan Tustin Historical Resources Survey Report 6. GEOLOGY & SOILS Items a-ii, a-iii, & d - Less Than Siqnificant Impact: The proposed building will be located on expansive soil and is located within an area that may subject people or structures to strong seismic ground shaking and seismic- related ground failure including liquefaction. However, a soits report is required to be submitted prior to building permit issuance per the 2001 Uniform Building Code to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 18, which requires proper excavation and fills for buildings, structures, foundations, and retaining structures, and appropriate construction techniques to ensure seismic stability. Attachment A DP, 02-031 Page 5 of 12 Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Tustin General Plan Tustin City Code 2001 Uniform Building Code Project Application Field Evaluation Items a-i, a-iv, b, c, & e- No Impact: The project site is not located within an area on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. The project will not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, and will not result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. Since all new buildings in the City are required to operate on the existing sewer system, the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems will not be necessary. Sources: Tustin General Plan Tustin City Code 2001 Uniform Building Code Project Application Field Evaluation 7. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Items a, b, c, d, e, f, .q, & h - No Impact: The project includes construction of nineteen (19) new industrial/office buildings on an existing vacant 14.9-acre site and is not anticipated to result in exposure to hazardous substances or interfere with emergency response or evacuation. The applicant is not proposing to transport, use, or dispose of hazardous materials, and future tenants of building will be required to comply with current regulations before transporting, using, or disposing of hazardous materials. The project area is not located on any potential impact zones identified for John Wayne Airport and not adjacent to wildland areas that would be subject to fires. All grading and construction is subject to compliance with all applicable Uniform Building and Fire Codes. As such, the project is not anticipated to result in any significant hazards. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required. Sources: Uniform Building and Fire Codes Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan Attachment A DR 02-031 Page 6 of 12 8. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY Items a, b, c, d, e, k, I, m, n & o - Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is relatively fiat, and the proposed project will continue to maintain a relatively flat site with improved site drainage, including roads, curbs and gutters, and additional landscaping. There will be new construction and there is the potential to impact stormwater runoff from construction and post-construction activities or stormwater pollutant from loading docks and delivery areas. There is also the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters and changes in the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff. However, the project is required to comply with the City's Water Quality Ordinance and most recently adopted NPDES permit (Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Order R8-2002-0010), thus reducing any potential impacts to a level of insignificance. Together, these regulations minimize water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into local waters. As such, the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degrade water quality in the area. Mitigation Measures: None Required. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code California Seismic Hazard Zone Map, Tustin Quadrangle, January 17, 2001 Items f, .q, h, i, j, & p - No Impact: The project site is relatively fiat, and the proposed project will continue to maintain a relatively flat site with improved site drainage and additional landscaping that will not result in substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off-site. The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Flood Insurance Rate Map, nor is the project located within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which will impede or redirect flood flows. The project site will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, or by inundation by seiohe, tsunami, or mudflow. Mitigation Measures: None Required. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Federal Insurance Rate Map Attachment A DR 02-031 Page 7 of 12 9. LAND USE PLANNING Items a, b & c- No Impact: The subject property is designated by the General Plan Land Use Map as Industrial and zoned Planned Community Industrial (PC-IND). The proposed project will be consistent with the applicable land use and zoning regulations. The proposed project will not divide an established community since it includes construction on an existing site completely surrounded by other similar industrial buildings in an urbanized area. The proposed project is not located in a conservation plan or natural community conservation plan area. Mitigation Measures: None Required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan Tustin Zoning Map 10. MINERAL RESOURCES Items a & b - No Impact: The proposed project will occur on a currently vacant site; however, the site was recently paved and had approximately 500,000 square feet of industrial building area. Construction on the site will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource and is not located in a mineral resource recovery site. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan 11. NOISE Items a, b, c & d- Less Than Significant Impact: The project includes construction of approximately 266,000 square feet of industrial and office building area on an existing vacant site. Although, the grading and construction of the site may result in typical temporary construction noise impacts, the Tustin Noise Ordinance only allows construction activities to occur during the daytime on Monday through Saturday to eliminate construction noise during the nighttime hours. Attachment A DR 02-031 Page 8 of 12 Long-term noise in the area is not anticipated to increase significantly since activities will take place in enclosed buildings and the amount of on-site and off-site traffic is typical of an industrial development and not considered to be significant. The site is also located near the SR-55 Freeway, which generates significantly more noise than is anticipated for the proposed project. The proposed project will not create excessive ground vibrations, nor will it create a permanent increase in the existing ambient noise levels beyond the established standards. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan Item e & f- No Impact: While the project is located within the airport land use plan for John Wayne Airport, the typical aircraft noise level in the area is approximately 65dBA CNEL and the Noise Ordinance allows noise levels up to 70dBA for industrial sites. Also, standard building techniques will provide sufficient insulation to prevent people working in the buildings from being exposed to excessive noise. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan Tustin Zoning Code 12. POPULATION & HOUSING Items a, b, and c- No Impact: The proposed industrial project will not induce substantial population growth in the area and will not induce substantial population growth wherein new streets or new public services will need to be created. Since the site was recently improved with approximately 500,000 square feet of industrial building area, the construction of the new buildings will not displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan Attachment A DR 02-031 Page 9 of 12 13. PUBLIC SERVICES Item a - No Impact: The proposed project is in an existing urbanized area where fire and police protection are currently provided. No increase in population is anticipated. The project will not create demand for an alteration of or addition to government facilities or services (i.e. fire and police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities). Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code 14. RECREATION Items a & b - No Impact: The project is not located in proximity to recreational facilities. As an industrial development, the project will not increase the use of existing parks or contribute to a substantial deterioration of park facilities, nor will the project include recreational facilities that will have an adverse physical effect on the environment. No parkland dedication will be required as a result of this project. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code 15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Item a and d- Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation: The traffic analysis for this project is contained in a document prepared by LSA Associates Inc. ("LSA") (Attachment B). Intersection analyses were performed for the two critical intersections (Warner Avenue/Pullman Street and Red Hill Avenue/ Bell Avenue) to determine if any significant traffic impacts would result from the project. The Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue intersection is presently at Level of Service ("LOS") A, which is the best level (LOS A through D are considered acceptable). LOS A is maintained with the addition of the proposed project. While the project will not impact the LOS of the Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue intersection, the project traffic will comprise approximately seven (7) percent of the traffic volume at the intersection once the project is finished. To minimize cumulative impacts, the applicant should be required to participate in a Capital Improvement Program project to signalize the Red Hill Avenue/Belt Avenue intersection and provide a proportionate share toward the cost of constructing the traffic signal. The Warner Avenue/Pullman Avenue intersection was also analyzed at LOS D or better and acceptable operations are maintained at this location for project conditions and Attachment A DR 02-031 Page 10 of 12 cumulative conditions. This intersection also serves as a project access, and the proposed volume at this location will not have a significant impact. The traffic analysis also concludes that the project will not generate a significant traffic impact on the surrounding street system. While the project is identified to have an impact on the volume of the Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue intersection, the project impacts are not considered significant as a whole. In addition, the analysis shows that the trip generations for the current project are consistent with the operations of the former Steelcase facility. The proposed project will share a common drive aisle with the property owner immediately to the west of the subject property. The shared drive aisle will be located at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Pullman Avenue and will have potential vehicle conflicts if not appropriately mitigated. The LSA analysis provides an on-site recommendation so that acceptable project access will be provided. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Mitigation Measure 1: The applicant shall pay an "in-lieu" traffic impact mitigation fee of $14,000 to the City of Tustin prior to issuance of a Certificate of Use and Occupancy for the proposed project. The "in-lieu" fee shall be based upon the proportionate share of the cost to mitigate traffic impacts that are a direct result of the proposed project, based upon the traffic study prepared by LSA, dated September 12, 2003, for the project. The study indicates a seven percent (7%) proportionate share for the project impacts at the Red Hill/Bell intersection, which translates to $14,000 (7% x $200,000 improvement cost). The City shall apply the "in-lieu" fee to projects in the vicinity of the proposed project that provide traffic relief. The "in-lieu" fee shall relieve the applicant of any further traffic mitigation obligations. Mitigation Measure 2: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Use and Occupancy, the applicant shall install a minimum of two (2) stop signs at the internal, east/west and north/south drive aisles of Lot 7, at the Warner Avenue/Pullman Avenue entrance, to control traffic entering the common drive aisle shared with the property at 1123 Warner Avenue. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Attachment B - "Tustin Gateway Traffic Analysis" by LSA Associates, Inc. (Dated September 12, 2003) Item e - Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will result in nineteen (19) new buildings. Six (6) of the largest buildings will be on fee simple lots with reciprocal driveways and access. Since the A~Xachment A DR 02-031 Page 11 of 12 three (3) north/south drive aisles will exceed the maximum distance for a drive aisle without a turn-around as required by the Orange County Fire Authority, emergency access vehicle gates will be installed at the terminus of each drive aisle to ensure adequate access across the development. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Items b, c, f & .q - No Impact: The proposed project will not induce substantial population or growth wherein the project will not result in changes to air traffic patterns, or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation such as bus turnouts or bicycle racks. The project includes sufficient parking on-site to comply with current parking requirements for the proposed use. As such, no impacts to parking are anticipated. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Parking Analysis 16. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Items a, b, c, d, e, f & .q - No Impact: The proposed project will not exceed requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board or require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. The proposed project will utilize the existing sewer and storm drain systems and thus will not require construction of a new storm water drainage facility or solid waste facility. The project will utilize the City's existing trash hauler contract, thus not requiring a new trash hauler. Adequate water supply from existing resoumes will be available to serve the proposed project. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan 17, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Items a, b & c- No Impact: The project grading, construction, and operation are not anticipated to result in any significant impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, geology Attachment A DR 02-031 Page 12 of 12 and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, and traffic. The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment nor achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of the long-term. It does not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable or that will cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan S:\Cdd\MATT~Desig n Reviev/~R 03-015 (Gateway Bus. Park)\ENV~DR 03-015-ND Attachment A.doc ATTACHMENT B Tustin Gateway: Revised Traffic Analysis LSA September 12, 2003 Mr. James Camp Voit Development Company 26 Corporate Plaza, Suite 260 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject: Tustin Gateway: Revised Traffic Analysis Dear Mr. Camp: In response to comments raised by the City of Tustin on August 27, 2003, LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) has revised the original August 1, 2003, technical analysis of the trip-making potential of the proposed Tustin Gateway project. The original August 1 technical analysis responded to a City of Tustin request that the previous January 14, 2003, trip generation estimation be updated to reflect the new project and that the access locations be evaluated based on this new trip generation (Comment # 19). Additionally, Tustin staff requested that the intersection of Warner Avenue/Pullman Street be evaluated for level of service (LOS) impacts with the addition of project-related traffic (Comment #21). City of Tustin Engineering staff reviewed the original August 1 submittal and responded with eight comments and a request for revision. This technical analysis provides that response and revision. Figure I illustrates the Tustin Gateway site plan. The Tustin Gateway project, along with the recently approved tile/building material use, constitutes the entire site previously occupied by Steelcase. For purposes of this analysis, an existing setting is presented that evaluates the current operations adjacent to the site without either the proposed or approved project. Project related traffic is then added to the existing traffic base to determine direct project-related impacts. Finally, the potential traffic contribution from the approved, but unoccupied tile/building materials use is added to the existing plus project condition to establish a "cumulative" traffic base for use in the evaluation of project access and traffic signal warrants Access to Buildings I through 6 will occur primarily via Bell Avenue through a new internal roadway that terminates in a cul-de-sac at the project entry. Additional access to Bell Avenue is provided at two driveways to the east and west of the internal roadway. Buildings 7 through 19 will take access to the arterial street system via Warner Avenue at the intersection at Warner Avenue/Pullman. The project entry/exit creates the northerly leg of this intersection. A minor driveway is also planned along Warner Avenue to the east of Pullman Street. TRIP GENERATION The potential trip generation for the Tustin Gateway project is illustrated in Table A (attached). Table A also includes the trip generation for the previous Steelcase facility. (now vacant) and the recently approved tile/building material use. This is the format for trip generation that was included in the January 14, 2003, materials. The proposed Tustin Gateway project is a collection of office/warehouse operations totaling 266,324 square feet. As noted in Table A, 95,792 square feet of the project are considered office use. Approximately 45,781 of those square feet are in mezzanine and could be storage or warehouse. However, to present as a worst-case trip generation estimate, this mezzanine space is considered to exhibit the higher trip generation potential of office use. The project, then, is estimated to generate approximately 2,290 average daily trips (ADT), of which 303 would occur in the a.m. peak hour and 315 would occur in the p.m. peak hour. Based on the layout of the buildings and the adjacencies of access, Buildings 1 through 6 are presumed to use Bell Avenue as access, while Buildings 7 through 19 will use Warner Avenue. Buildings I through 6 have the potential to generate approximately 1,570 ADT, of which 208 would occur in the a.m. peak hour and 216 would occur in the p.m. peak hour. The remaining 720 ADT, 95 a.m. peak hour, and 99 p.m. peak hour trips are attributable to Buildings 7 through 19. This calculation is based on the square footages of each portion of the project applied to the total trip generation. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Project trips are assigned to the adjacent streets based on probable origins/destinations of employees and patrons. The SR-55 Freeway provides regional circulation to the project. Red Hill Avenue and Warner Avenue are the most proximate and direct north/south and east/west routes, respectively. For Buildings 1 through 6, 100 percent of the trip generation will enter/leave the site via Bell Avenue and travel to Red Hill Avenue. At Red Hill Avenue, 70 percent will move to/from the north and onto the SR-55 and/or I-5 freeways, while 30 percent will move to/from the south and the SR-55 and/or 1-405 freeways. For Buildings 7 through 19, the distribution of east/west travel was split evenly (45 percent in each direction), with a minor 10 percent to/from the south along Pullman Street. Figure 2 illustrates the trip assignment at the driveways based on this trip distribution. A trip assignment that includes the potential traffic contribution from the approved tile/building materials use to the proposed Tustin Gateway project is prepared. For purposes of this analysis, the approved project is assigned to the local streets, 70 percent via Warner Avenue and 30 percent via Bell Avenue. The remaining trip distribution for the approved tile/building materials use is the same as the proposed Tustin Gateway project. That is, once to Red Hill Avenue, 70 percent will move to/from the north, while 30 percent will move to/from the south. Figure 3 illustrates the trip assignment for both the approved and proposed projects. ANALYSIS Levels of service (LOS) have been identified for the intersections of Warner Avenue/Pullman Street and Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue. Existing midweek a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic counts were collected at these intersections in July 2003. LOS was determined based on the existing geometries and these traffic volumes using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (1CU) methodology for Warner Avenue/Pullman Street. The Highway Capacity Manual, Unsignalized Intersection methodology was used to determine LOS at Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue, as this is a stop controlled (Bell Avenue) intersection. Project-related peak hour traffic volumes arc added to the existing condition to determine the prqject's incremental effect on LOS at these intersections. Both the traffic counts and the ICU and HCM worksheets are provided as attachments to this letter. 09/12/03<<PSVCO330\tech_analvsis doc>, 2 The tables below present the resulting existing and the existing plus project LOS. Warner Avenue/Pullman Street LOS Analysis A.M. PEAK P.M. PEAK CONDITION 1CU LOS ICU LOS Existing Condition 0.28 A ' 0.45 A Existing Plus Project Condition 0.30 A 0.49 A Existing Plus Project Plus Approved Conditions 0.32 A 0.59 [ A As seen in the table, the intersections currently operate at satisfactory LOS during both peak hours. Warner Avenue/Pullman Street operates at LOS A during both peak hours. This represents a free flow non-congested operation at this location. The intersection is forecast to continue to operate at LOS A when the project traffic is added to the existing traffic base. Addition of Tustin Gateway project-related traffic will not adversely affect the operation of Warner Avenue/Pullman Street. Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue LOS Analysis A.M. PEAK P.M. PEAK CONDITION LOS LOS Existing Condition B C Existing Plus Project Condition I C D Existing Plus Project Plus Approved Condition C D Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue operates with levels of service below the LOS E threshold. Levels of service C and D will prevail at the unsignalized intersection with the proposed project, and the approved and proposed project. Red Hill Avenue traffic is unaffected by the traffic control (i.e., the stop sign) or the addition of project related traffic. The stop sign on Bell Avenue means the minor street traffic wishing to turn left onto northbound Red Hill Avenue must wait for adequate gaps in traffic to negotiate this movement. This delay is expected at this type of intersection and does not adversely affect the overall level of service with or without the proposed project. A traffic signal warrant has been conducted at the intersection of Red Hill Avenue/Bell Avenue to determine whether a traffic signal is an appropriate traffic control device to address right of way for the existing and existing plus project conditions. The Caltrans Traffic Manual, Chapter 9 presents traffic signal warrants to be used when considering the installation of a traffic signal. These eleven warrants are frequently used by municipal and regional agencies as a guide to determine the need for a traffic signal. As the Caltrans manual states, the use of proper engineering judgement, not the results of a traffic signal warrant, should be the ultimate indicator of the feasibility and suitability of a traffic signal at a particular location. LSA used the Peak Hour warrant to determine whether a traffic signal may be warranted. 09/12/03<<P:WCOq30\tec h_analvsJs doc>, .~ Figure 4 illustrates this warrant. The traffic signal is not warranted in the existing condition, but may be warranted due to the increase in p.m. peak hour traffic on Bell Avenue with the addition of trips generated by either the approved or proposed project. The City of Tustin should monitor the actual volume of traffic at this intersection subsequent to the construction and/or operation of the approved tile/building materials use and the proposed Tustin Gateway to determine whether the peak hour forecasts materialize and whether the traffic signal is warranted. The project traffic as indicated in the trip generation and assignment comprises approximately seven (7) percent of the traffic volume in the existing plus project condition at this intersection. The project's peak hour traffic volume contribution to the intersection should also consider the cumulative contribution of all traffic in the area including the MCAS Tustin Reuse project. The site plan has been coordinated with the architect to conform to the City requirements and guidelines for parking dimensions and provision, aisle widths, trash enclosures, etc. Turn radii are included on the site plan to illustrate the ability to maneuver on site with double unit trucks (see Figure 1 ). All driveways and connections to Bell Avenue, Warner Avenue at the minor ingress/egress and the proposed road should be stopped controlled and signed and striped as such. At the Warner Avenue access, the internal easffwest double loaded parking aisle should be stopped controlled at the access throat to allow for unimpeded movements from Warner Avenue into the site. This will facilitate the movement of vehicles to/from the approved tile/building materials use. Based on the trip assignment in Figure 3, the Warner Avenue access will serve up to 200 vehicles per hour in the morning and evening peak hour from the approved use. Therefore, a predominant movement will be along the intemal east/west drive aisle to the intersection. All other movements should be considered subordinated to the east/west drive aisle and should yield right-of-way in order to keep the intersection of Warner Avenue/Pullman Street clear. The internal double loaded parking aisles east/west adjacent to Warner Avenue and north/south along the westerly project border should be stopped controlled to allow unimpeded movements to/from the drive aisle serving the approved tile/building materials use. This will also allow for vehicle queuing into the site away from the Warner Avenue access throat. This concludes our analysis in response to City of Tustin comments. Please feel free to contact me with any comments or questions. Sincerely, Attachments 09/12/03({P:/VC0330\tech_analv sis doc. 4 Table A - Tustin Gateway Business Park Trip Generation Estimate Total AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Size Units ADT In Out Total In Out Total 'revious Steelcase Site Uses Trip Rate~ Trip Generation Manufacturing Trip Rate~ Trip Generation 56.680 TSF 15.00 1.87 0.23 2.10 0.33 1.62 1,95 850 106 13 119 19 92 111 921.897 TSF Total Previous Steclcase Site Trip Generation ~.pproved & Operational Tile/Material Uses Warehouse 410.723 TSF Trip Rate~ Trip Generation Dffice 44.310 TSF Trip Ratel Trip Generation Ketail 14.870 TSF Trip Rate~ Trip Generation !total Tile/Material Trip Generation Future Uses (14.9 Acre Site) Warehouse 170.532 Trip Rate~ Trip Generation .fficc 95.792 Trip Rate~ Trip Generation oral Proposed Tustin Gateway Trip Generation Total Site Trip Generation2 Residual Trips from Previous Uses TSF TSF 5.00 0.43 0.17 0.60 0.26 0.49 0.75 4,609 396 157 553 240 452 691 5.460 502 170 672 258 544 802 5.00 0.43 0.17 0.60 0.26 0.49 0.75 2,054 177 70 246 107 201 308 15.00 1.87 0.23 2.10 0.33 1.62 1.95 665 83 l0 93 15 72 86 50.00 3.84 4.16 8.00 3.42 2.58 6.00 744 57 62 119 51 38 89 3.462 317 142 458 172 311 484 5.00 0.43 0.17 0.60 0.26 0.49 0.75 853 73 29 102 44 84 128 15.00 1.87 0.23 2.10 0.33 1.62 1.95 1,437 179 22 201 32 155 187 2.290 252 51 303 76 239 315 5,75Y ~ 569 193 762 248 550 798 -292 -67 -23 -90 10 -7 4 TSF - Thousand Square Feet t Trip Rates from Tusfin General Plan Traffic Analysis, January 16, 2001. .< ~, ~or] Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: Southland Car Counters N-S STREET: Redhill E-W STREET: Bell DATE: 9/312003 DAY: WEDNESDAY LOCATION: City of TustJn PRO3ECT# 03-1337-001 LANES: 6:00 AM 6:18 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7;45 AM 8:00 AM B: 15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM 10;30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM ).1:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR 3 3 0 20 132 359 12 21 141 369 15 27 158 408 14 35 173 482 27 27 155 562 23 24 140 490 10 22 139 415 15 13 142 323 9 VOLUMES = 189 1180 0 0 3408 125 EASTBOUND WESTBOUND EL , ET ER WE WI' WR 0 1 0 TOTAL 2 3 2 4 3 2 )- 3 3 1 2 6 3 3 2 7 528 552 612 721 77)- 672 597 496 EL ET ER WL ~ 18 0 29 0 0 WR I TOTALI 0 4949 AM Peak Hr Begins at: 730 AM PEAK VOLUMES = I 113 626 0 I 0 1942 74 I I PEAK HR, FACTOR: 0,888 0.862 CONTROL: signalized 1 9 0 0.656 12 0 0 0.000 0 2776 0.900 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: Southland Car Counters N-S STREET: Redhill E-W STREET: Bell DATE: 9/3/2003 DAY: WEDNESDAY LOCATION: City of TusUn PROIECT# 03-1337-001 lANES: 1:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:30 PM 1:45 PM 2:00 PM 2:15 PM 2:30 PM 2:45 PM 3:00 PM 3:15 PN 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 6:00 PM 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 PM NORTHBOUND NL NT NR I 3 19 417 17 402 2.2 570 18 568 10 715 11 758 14 679 10 642 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR 3 0 0 I 0 TOTAL I NL NT VOLUMES =] 121 4751 202 4 15 61 161 11 7 18 244 12 13 18 177 10 6 31 256 4 11 34 209 3 4 10 210 3 3 7 144 6 7 11 SL ST 0 1603 EL ET 66 O 190 WL WT WR 0 0 0 TOTAL 718 616 879 810 1030 995 916 820 TOTAL 6784 PM Peak Hr Begins at: PEAK VOLUMES = I 45 2794 PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.923 CONTROL: signalized 1 500 PM 819 16 0.803 25 0 0.483 62 0 0 0 I 3761 0,000 I 0.913 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: Southland Car Counters N-S STREET: Pullman E-W STREET: Warner DATE: 7/23/2003 DAY: WEDNESDAY .OCA~ON: City of Irvine PRO3ECT# 03-1169-001 LANES: 6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6:30 AM 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AH 10:15 AH 10:30 AM 10:45 AN 11:00 AN 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM NORTHBOUND NL NT NR 1 1 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND W~-51 POUND SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR 2 O 1 2 7 6 10 10 9 7 6 4 9 10 17 5 10 8 12 6 TOTAL 134 10 9 77 243 136 16 12 87 271 149 14 11 82 272 213 42 7 104 376 184 80 12 94 389 168 55 7 73 325 171 50 7 60 306 149 31 8 87 293 TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES: 80 0 56 0 0 0 0 1304 298 73 664 0 247S AM Peak Hr Begins at: PEAK VOLUMES = 42 0 PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0,784 CONTROL: Signalized; 745 AM 27 0 0 0.000 0 0 736 227 33 331 0 1396 0.912 0.000 0.897 Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: Southland Car Counters NiS S"TREET: Pullman E-W STREET: Warner DATE: 7/23/2003 DAY: WEDNESDAY LOCATION: City of Ir~lne PRO.1ECT# 03-1169-001 LANES: 1:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:30 PM 1:45 PM 2:00 PM 2:15 PM 2:30 PM 2:45 PM 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 6:00 PM 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 PM NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR 1 1 29 7 32 10 52 10 69 11 91 11 82 11 91 9 36 8 EL EASTBOUND WESTBOUND ET ER WL WI' WR 2 0 1 2 TOTAL 120 15 8 188 367 126 17 8 194 387 135 23 11 228 459 149 18 14 266 527 153 14 13 281 563 162 17 7 223 502 156 13 8 251 528 161 14 8 239 466' TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL VVT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 482 0 77 0 0 0 0 1162 131 77 1870 0 3799 PM Peak Hr Begins at: 445 PM PEAK VOLUMES = 333 0 42 PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0,919 0 0 0.000 620 62 42 1021 0 2120 0.953 0.000 0.941 CONTROL: Signalized; INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION NO.: 1 NORTH/SOUTH: Pullman iAST/WEST: Warner Avenue Existing Conditions Move- Volume V/C Ratio ment Lane Capacity AM PM AM PM NBL 1 1,700 42 333 0.03 * 0.20 * NBT 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 NBR 1 U 1,700 27 42 0.00 0.00 SBL 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 SBT 0 0 0 0 0.00 * 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 * EBT 3 5,100 736 620 0.19 * 0.13 EBR 0 0 227 62 0.00 0.00 WBL 1 1,700 33 42 0.02 * 0.03 WBT 3 5,I00 331 1,021 0.07 0.20 * WBR 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 q/S Critical Movements 0.03 0.20 ;/W Critical Movements 0.21 0.20 a_ight Turn Critical Movement 0.00 0.00 Zlearance Interval 0.05 0.05 [CU 0.28 0.45 ~evel of Service (LOS) A A Existing Plus Project Conditions Move- Volume V/C Ratio ment Lane Capacity AM PM AM PM NBL I 1,700 42 333 0.03 * 0.20 NBT 1 1,700 8 3 0.02 0.03 NBR 0 0 27 42 0.00 0.00 SBL 1 1,700 7 33 0.00 0.02 SBT 1 1,700 2 8 0.01 * 0.03 SBR 0 0 7 34 0.00 0.00 EBL 1 1,700 36 11 0.02 0.01 EBT 3 5,100 736 620 0.19 * 0.13 EBR 0 0 227 62 0.00 0.00 WBL 1 1,700 33 42 0.02 * 0.03 WBT 3 5,100 331 1,021 0.07 0.20 WBR 0 0 35 10 0.00 0.00 q/S Critical Movements 0.04 0.23 UW Critical Movements 0.21 0.21 Right Turn CriticaI Movement 0.00 0.00 Clearance Interval 0.05 0.05 llCU 0.30 0.49 ILevel of Service (LOS) A A ICU - Intersection Capacity Utilization V/C - Volume to Capacity Ratio Right Turn Conditions: P - Protected right turn movement U - Unprotected right turn movemem N - No right turn on red F - Free right turn lane INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION NO.: 1 NORTH/SOUTH: Pullman ;AST/WEST: Warner Avenue Existing Conditions Move- Volume V/C Ratio merit Lane Capacity AM PM AM PM NBL 1 1,700 42 333 0.03 * 0.20 * NBT 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 NBR 1 U 1,700 27 42 0.00 0.00 SBL 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 SBT 0 0 0 0 0.00 * 0.00 * SBR 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 EBL 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 * EBT 3 5,100 736 620 0.19 * 0.13 EBR 0 0 227 62 0.00 0.00 WBL 1 1,700 33 42 0.02 * 0.03 WBT 3 5,100 331 1,021 0.07 0.20 * WBK 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 N/S Critical Movements 0,03 0.20 !E/W Critical Movements 0.21 0.20 ~Jght Turn Critical Movement 0.00 0.00 21earance Interval 0.05 0.05 [CU . 0.28 0.45 Level of Service (LOS) A A Existing Plus Proiect Plus Approved Conditions Move- Volume V/C Ratio ment Lane Capacity AM PM AM PM NBL I 1,700 42 333 0.03 0.20 * NBT 1 1,700 30 15 0.03 * 0.03 NBR 0 0 27 42 0.00 0.00 SBL 1 1,700 49 115 0.03 * 0.07 SBT 1 1,700 11 30 0.04 0.09 * SBR 0 0 49 115 0.00 0.00 EBL i 1,700 118 60 0.07 0.04 * EBT 3 5,100 736 620 0.19 * 0.13 EBR 0 0 227 62 0.00 0.00 WBL 1 1,700 33 42 0.02 * 0.03 WBT 3 5,100 331 1,021 0.09 0.21 * WBR 0 0 118 59 0.00 0.00 N/S Critical Movements 0.06 0.29 E/W Critical Movements 0.21 0.25 Right Turn Critical Movement 0.00 0.00 Clearance Interval 0.05 0.05 ICU 0.32 0.59 ~evel of Service (LOS) A A Notes: ICU - Intersection Capacity Utilization V/C - Volume to Capacity Ratio Right Turn Conditions: P - Protected right turn movement U - Unprotected right turn movement N - No right turn on red F - Free right turn lane Redhill Ave & Bell Avenue HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing) Conditions AM 3: Bell Avenue & Redhill Avenue Lane Configurations ~.~ ~ fff f 'b Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Walking Speed (ft/s) Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) pX, platoon unblocked vCl, stage 1 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 2414 tC, 2 stage (s) pO queue free % 2831 684 1511 2868 209 2016 626 23 100 97 100 100 100 59 100 Volume Left 9 113 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 26 .279 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Queue Length (ft) 63 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane LOS F D Approach LOS F Average Delay 3.5 P:\VCO330~AM Exisitng Conditions.sy6 LSA Associates, Inc LSAASSIRVl-ST51 Redhill Ave & Bell Avenue HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existin~ Conditions PM 3: Bell Avenue & Redhill Avenue Lane Configurati_on_s ..... Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Fector Pedestrians Walking Speed (fids) Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) pX, platoon unblocked vC1, stage 1 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, 2 stage (s) pO queue free % 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1848 3711 281 3219 3719 931 835 2794 43 100 91 100 100 100 94 100 Volume Left 25 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 133 794 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Queue Length (fl) 88 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane LOS F A Approach LOS F Average Delay 1.8 P:\VCO330\PM Exisitng Conditions.sy6 LSA Associates, Inc LSAASS1RVI-ST51 Redhill Ave & Bell Avenue HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Plus Proiect AM 3: Bell Avenue & Redhill Avenue Lane Configurations ~ ~ ~"~/l' Grade Peak Hour Factor Pedestrians Walking Speed (ft/s) Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) pX, platoon unblocked vC1, stage 1 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, 2 stage (s) pO queue free % 0% 0% 0% 0% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2578 2996 745 1625 3093 209 2137 626 0 100 94 100 100 100 34 100 Volume LeE 34 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 10 250 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Queue Length (ft) Err 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane LOS F E · Approach LOS F Average Delay 190.1 P:\VCO330~AM Exisitng Plus Proj.sy6 LSA Associates, inc LSAASS1RVI-ST51 Redhill Ave & Bell Avenue HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existin~ Plus Proiect PM 3: Bell Avenue & Redhill Avenue urations ~ ~ ff~ Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Walking Speed (ftJs) Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) pX, platoon unblocked vCl, stage 1 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1898 3761 299 3300 3787 931 871 2794 tC, 2 stage (s) pO queue free % 0 100 84 100 100 100 92 100 Volume Left 140 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 68 770 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Queue Length (fi) Err 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane LOS F B Approach LOS F Average Delay 631.2 P:\VCO330\PM Exisitng Plus Proj .sy6 LSA Associates, Inc LSAASSlRVI-ST51 Redhill Ave & Bell Avenue HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Plus Proiect Plus Approved AM 3: Bell Avenue & Redhill Avenue Lane Configurations ~t~ '~ '~"~'~, Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Walking Speed (ft/s) Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) pX, platoon unblocked vCl, stage 1 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 2668 3085 778 1694 3216 209 2204 626 tC, 2 stage (s) pO queue free % 0 100 90 100 100 100 18 100 Volume Left 64 193 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 cSH 5 235 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Queue Length (ft) Err 157 0 0 0 0 0 Lane LOS F F Approach LOS F Average Delay 321.1 P:\VCO330~AM Exisitng Plus Proj Plus Approved.sy6 LSA Associates, Inc LSAASSlRVI-ST51 RedhiIl Ave & Bell Avenue HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existin~ Plus Proiect Plus Approved PM 3: Bell Avenue & Redhill Avenue Lane Configurations Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Pedestrians Walking Speed (fi/s) Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) pX, platoon unblocked vC1, stage 1 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 2044 3907 317 3456 3951 931 907 2794 tC, 2 stage (s) pO queue free % 0 100 80 100 100 100 83 100 Volume Left 205 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 cSH 46 746 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Queue Length (ft) Err 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane LOS F B Approach LOS F Average Delay 825.2 P:\VCO330\PM Exisitng Plus Proj Plus Approved.sy6 LSA Associates, Inc LSAASSIRVI-ST51 RESOLUTION NO. 3895 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16527 TO SUBDIVIDE PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 2002-237 INTO SEVEN (7) LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING A TOTAL OF 266,324 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: That Voit Development submitted a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237 into seven (7) lots, one (1) of which will contain thirteen (13) industrial buildings offering future owners fee title to the land underneath the building and an undivided interest in the common area (parking lots, drive areas, and landscape areas); the remaining six (6) industrial buildings will be located on fee simple lots at 1123 Warner Avenue; That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for the Tentative Tract Map on October 13, 2003, by the Planning Commission; That the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan, Tustin Zoning Code, Planned Community District Regulations, State Subdivision Map Act, and the City's Subdivision Code; That the site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in that the development of the new lots will comply with the development standards of the Planned Community Industrial (PC~IND) zoning district; That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development in that the development of the new lots will comply with the maximum permitted Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.60:1 per the General Plan Industrial land use designation; That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat; That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems; That the north and south property lines extend to the centedines of Warner Avenue, an existing major arterial street maintained by the City Planning Commission Resolution 3895 October 13, 2003 Page 2 of Tustin, and Bell Avenue, an existing local street maintained by the City of Tustin. As conditioned, requiring grants in fee of these existing street right-of-ways would be consistent with the Circulation Element Implementation Program as authorized by the City Council and the Tustin Subdivision Code, as permitted by the Subdivision Map Act, which mandates consistency with the Circulation Element. In addition, the applicant has elected to construct and grant in fee Lot A, an industrial cul-de-sac, as part of the project; That the location of the intersection of Warner Avenue and Pullman Street precludes the former Steelcase property and project site from having independent site access and a shared entrance driveway is necessary to provide ingress and egress to both parcels. As conditioned, the shared use of the driveway will continue to be ensured through the recordation of an updated reciprocal access agreement and the maintenance of site improvements on both parcels will be ensured through the recordation of an updated maintenance easement; and, As conditioned, all necessary dedications and/or reservation requirements, as applicable, including but not limited to, dedication of all required street and flood control right-of-way easements, vehicular access rights, sewer easements and water easements defined and approved as to specific locations by the City Engineer and other agencies will be provided. That the Planning Commission has recommended the City Council adopt as adequate the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map 16527 by adopting Resolution No. 3894 in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 16527 to subdivide Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237 into seven (7) lots for the purposed developing of 266,324 square feet of building area at 1123 Warner Avenue, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 13th day of October 2003. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK LINDA C. JENNINGS Chairperson Planning Commission Resolution 3895 October 13, 2003 Page 3 Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3895 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of October, 2003. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary GENERAL (1) 1.1 (1) 1.2 (1) 1.3 (1) 1.4 EXHIBIT A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16527 RESOLUTION NO. 3895 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped October 13, 2003, on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified, or unless otherwise indicated, as modified by the Community Development Director in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director may also approve subsequent minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are consistent with provisions of the Tustin City Code or other applicable regulations. Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to recordation of the final map for the project, subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department. The subject approval shall become null and void unless a final map is submitted for review, approval, and recordation within twenty-four (24) months of the date of this Exhibit. Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. Approval of Tentative Tract Map 16527 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. (1) (2) (3) (4) STANDARD CONDITION CEQA MITIGATION UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S DESIGN REVIEW EXCEPTIONS (5) (6) (7) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENTS LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES PC/CC POLICY Exhibit A Planning Commission Resolution 3895 October 13, 2003 Page 2 (1) 1.5 As a condition of approval, the applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. (1) 1.6 The reciprocal access and ciroulation agreement shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with the review of these documents. A copy of the final documents shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within five (5) days after their recordation. The agreement shall identify reciprocal access and ciroulation, at a minimum, as follows: A. Lots 1, 3, 5, and 7 shall maintain reciprocal vehicle and pedestrian access; B. Lots 2, 4, 6, and 7 shall maintain reciprocal vehicle and pedestrian access; and, C. Lots 5, 6, and 7 shall maintain reciprocal access for emergency access only. (1) 1.7 The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval identified in Design Review 03-015 (Resolution No. 3895), as approved by the Planning Commission on October 13, 2003. MAP SUBMITTAL (1) 2.1 The subdivider shall conform to all applicable requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. (1) 2.2 As required by the Subdivision Map Act, the subdivider shall execute a Subdivision and Monumentation Agreement and furnish the ImprovementJMonumentation Bonds as required by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the Final Map. Exhibit A Planning Commission Resolution 3895 October 13, 2003 Page 3 (1) 2.3 The applicant shall grant in fee to the City the remaining roadway right- of-way currently extending to the centerline of Bell Avenue and Warner Avenue for the full width of the property and appropriate right-of-way for corner cut-offs at the driveway and street locations. 2.4 Lot A shall be granted in fee to the City, at the applicant's request, and shall be identified on the final map as a standard industrial cul-de-sac and bonds for construction shall be executed prior to recordation of the final map. In addition, Lot A shall be constructed in the first phase of development as identified in Condition 1.2 of Resolution No. 3896 as a standard industrial cul-de-sac prior to acceptance by the City. (3) 2.5 A thirty (30) foot "No Build" easement shall be identified on the Final Tract Map along the west property lines of Lots 2, 4, 6, and 7 to comply with Section 505.2 of the 2001 California Building Code for allowable floor area. The thirty (30) foot is half of the required sixty (60) foot side yard setback from the existing building on Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 2002- 237. (1) 2.6 The subdivider shall show on the final map and satisfy dedication and/or reservation requirements, as applicable, including but not limited to, dedication of all required street and flood control right-of-way easements, vehicular access rights, sewer easements and water easements defined and approved as to specific locations by the City Engineer and other agencies. Specifically, where water facilities are to be located in private streets, the easement shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet wide for main lines. Easements ten (10) feet wide and extending five (5) feet beyond all fire hydrants and services laterals shall also be required, including ten (10)-foot wide water service lateral easements and meter box easements. Easements shall be located within unobstructed areas and clear access to the meter boxes shall be provided at all times. (1) 2.7 Upon recordation of the Final Map, the applicant shall obtain new address numbers from the Engineering Division. (3) 2.8 This subdivision shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City of Tustin Water Quality Ordinance and all Federal, State and Regional Water Quality Control Board rules and regulations. CC&Rs (1) 3.1 Prior to approval of the Final Map, an updated maintenance easement shall be recorded at the County-Clerk Recorder's office identifying the Exhibit A Planning Commission Resolution 3895 O~ober 13, 2003 Page 4 par~y responsible for maintaining the easement area at the Warner Avenue/Pullman entrance, including pavement, hardscape, and landscape improvements. The maintenance easement shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Department and the City Attorney prior to recordation of the final map. The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with the review of these documents. A copy of the final documents shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within five (5) days after their recordation. 3.2 Prior to issuance of building permits or recordation of the final map, whichever occurs first, all organizational documents for the project on Lot 7, including any covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs), shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Department and the City Attorney's Office and recorded with County Recorder's Office. Costs for such review shall be borne by the subdivider. A copy of the final documents shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within five (5) days of recordation. At a minimum, the following items shall be included: The City shall be included as a party to the CC&Rs for enforcement purposes of those CC&R provisions in which the City has interest as reflected in the following provisions. However, the City shall not be obligated to enforce the CC&Rs. B. The requirement that association bylaws be established. Provisions for effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair, and maintenance of all common areas and facilities including buildings and amenities, landscaped areas, walls and fences, private roadways (i.e., walks, sidewalks), etc. Maintenance standards shall also be provided. Examples of maintenance standards are shown below. All common area landscaping and private areas visible from any public way shall be properly maintained such that they are evenly cut, evenly edged, free of bare or brown spots, debris, and weeds. All trees and shrubs shall be trimmed so they do not impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Trees shall be pruned so they do not intrude into neighboring properties and shall be maintained so they do not have droppings or create other nuisances to neighboring properties. All trees shall also be root pruned to eliminate exposed surface roots and Exhibit A Planning Commission Resolution 3895 October 13, 2003 Page 5 damage to sidewalks, driveways, and structures. All private roadways, sidewalks, and open space areas shall be maintained so that they are safe for users. Significant pavement cracks; pavement distress, excessive slab settlement, abrupt vertical variations, and debris On travel ways should be removed or repaired promptly. Common areas shall be maintained in such a manner as to avoid the reasonable determination of a duly authorized official of the City that a public nuisance has been created by the absence of adequate maintenance such as to be detrimental to public health, safety, or general welfare. Membership in the association shall be inseparable from ownership in individual units. Architectural controls shall be provided and may include, but not be limited to, provisions regulating exterior finishes, roof materials, fences and walls, accessory structures such as mechanical equipment, television and radio antenna, and signs, consistent with the Tustin City Code and the Planned Community Industrial zoning district. Parking controls shall be provided and may include, but not be limited to, provisions regulating vehicle and truck deliveries, vehicle and truck parking, loading and unloading activities, etc. ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY (5) 4.1 Prior to recordation of Final Tract Map 16527, the applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals from the Orange County Fire Authority. FEES (1) 5.1 The applicant shall submit to the City of Tustin a CC&R review fee of $190.00 at the time of submittal. The CC&R Review fee includes one initial check and recheck of the document. If subsequent review is required, an hourly fee of $150 per hour (or rate in effect at the time of submittal) for City Attorney and $50 per hour (or rate in effect at the time of submittal) for Planning staff is required. Exhibit A Planning Commission Resolution 3895 October 13, 2003 Page 6 (1) 5.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project by the City Council, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of forty-three dollars ($43.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. RESOLUTION NO. 3896 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 03-015 AUTHORIZING SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NINETEEN (19) NEW INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS RANGING FROM 3,800 TO 37,802 SQUARE FEET The Planning Commission does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: That a proper application for Design Review 03-015 was filed by the Voit Development Company requesting authorization to construct nineteen (19) new industrial buildings ranging from 3,800 to 37,802 square feet, for a total of 266,324 square feet, at 1123 Warner Avenue, also known as (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002-237). That the proposed uses are consistent with the Tustin General Plan in that the property is designated as "Industrial" which provides for the establishment of light industrial and commercial uses. In addition, the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub- Element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub-Element. The project is located within the Planned Community Industrial (PC- IND) zoning district where light industrial uses such as warehousing, distribution, research and development, and office uses are permitted. That the Planning Commission considered Design Review 03-015 on October 13, 2003, in conjunction with the public hearing for Tentative Tract Map 16527. Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin City Code, the Planning Commission finds that the location, size, architectural features, and general appearance of the proposed development will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole in that the building location, height, massing, and scale, and the proposed architectural design and site amenities are consistent with the existing retail buildings of the shopping center with the use of an arched veranda, keystones at the parapet, a matching storefront, and features which are compatible with the setting and similar to other commercial uses in the area. In making such findings, the Commission has considered at least the following items: Height, bulk, and area of buildings; Setbacks and site planning; Exterior materials and colors; Resolution No. 3896 Page 2 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Type and pitch of roofs; Size and spacing of windows, doors, and other openings; Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television antennae; Location, height, and standards of exterior illumination; Landscaping, parking area design, and traffic circulation; Location and appearance of equipment located outside an enclosed structure; Location and method of refuse storage; Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood; Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares; Proposed signage; and, Development guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council. As proposed, contribution to the construction of the traffic signal at the intersection of Red Hill Avenue and Bell Avenue is the proportionate share of the cost to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts that are a direct result of the proposed project, based upon the traffic study prepared by LSA, dated September 12, 2003, for the project. The applicant shall pay an "in-lieu" traffic impact mitigation fee of $14,000 to the City of Tustin prior to certificate of occupancy for the proposed project. The study indicates a seven percent (7%) proportionate share for the project impacts at the Red Hill/Bell intersection, which translates to $14,000 (7% of a $200,000 improvement cost). As conditioned, there will be sufficient pedestrian facilities on Bell Avenue to accommodate the project with implementation of the recorded Agreement to Construct Sidewalks dated February 18, 1998, and the existing drive aprons along the north property line will be required to be constructed to meet current Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. That the Planning Commission has approved a Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act by adopting Resolution No. 3894 that demonstrates all potential impacts related to the project can be mitigated to a level of insignificance. II. The Planning Commission hereby approves Design Review 03-015 to construct nineteen (19) new industrial buildings for a total of 266,324 square [eet at 1123 Warner Avenue, also known as (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 2002- 237), subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. Resolution No. 3896 Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting On the 13th day of October, 2003. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary LINDA C. JENNINGS Chairperson STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3896 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of October, 2003. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary GENERAL (1) 1.1 (1) 1.2 (1) 1.3 (1) 1.4 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DESIGN REVIEW 03-015 OCTOBER 13, 2003 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped October 13, 2003, on file with the Community Development Department, as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve subsequent minor modifications to plans during plan check or conditions of approval if such modifications are consistent with provisions of the Tustin City Code. This approval shall become null and void unless substantial construction is underway within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit. If the project is constructed in more than one (1) phase, the first phase shall include, at a minimum: site improvements on Lot 7, Lot A, and either Lots 1, 3, and 5 or Lots 2, 4, and 6. This requirement is to ensure: 1) Lots 5 and 6 would have adequate emergency access via Lot 7; and, 2) Lots 1, 3, and 5 and Lots 2, 4, and 6 have the necessary shared access and circulation improvements to support development. Phase one (1) shall also include all infrastructure for the entire project. Time extensions may be granted if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. All conditions in this Exhibit shall be complied with prior to issuance of building permits or as specified, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. Approval of Design Review 03-015 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. SOURCECODES (1) (2) (3) (4) STANDARD CONDITION CEQA MITIGATION UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S DESIGN REVIEW EXCEPTIONS (s) (6) (7) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENTS LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES PC/CCPOLICY Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 2 (1) As a condition of approval of Design Review 03-015, prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. (1) 1.6 Any violation of any of the conditions imposed is subject to the payment of a civil penalty of $100.00 for each violation, or such other amounts as the City Council may establish by ordinance or resolution, and for each day the violation exists, subject to the applicable notice, hearing, and appeal process as established by the City Council by ordinance. (1) 1.7 The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with any necessary code enforcement action, including attorney fees, subject to the applicable notice, hearing, and appeal process as established by the City Council by ordinance. PLAN SUBMITTAL (C) 2.1 At the time of building permit application, the plans shall comply with the most recently adopted codes. The City is currently using the 2001 California Building Code (CBC), 2001 California Mechanical Code (CMC), 2001 California Plumbing Code (CPC), 2001 California Electrical Code (CEC), California Title 24 Accessibility Regulations, City Ordinances, and State and Federal laws and regulations. (c) 2.2 Building plan check submittal shall include the following: · Seven (7) sets of construction plans, including drawings for mechanical, plumbing, and electrical. · Two (2) copies of structural calculations. · Two (2) copies of Title 24 energy calculations. · Elevations that include all proposed dimensions, materials, colors, finishes, and partial outlines of adjacent buildings on-site and off-site where applicable. · Details forwindows and doors. · Roof material shall be fire-rated class "B" or better. · Details of all proposed lighting fixtures and a photometric study showing the location and anticipated pattern of light distribution of all proposed Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 3 fixtures. All new light fixtures shall be consistent with the architecture of the building and all exterior lighting shall be designed and arranged as not to direct light or glare onto adjacent properties, including the adjacent streets. Wall-mounted fixtures shall be directed at a 90 degree angle directly toward the ground. All lighting shall be developed to provide a minimum of one (1) foot-candle of light coverage, in accordance with the City's Security Ordinance. A note shall be provided on the plans that "All parking areas shall be illuminated with a minimum of one (1) foot-candle of light, and lighting shall not produce light, glare, or have a negative impact on adjacent properties." The location of any utility vents or other equipment shall be provided on the roof plan. Cross-section details showing the installation of the proposed rooftop equipment. Rooftop equipment shall be installed and maintained six (6) inches below the parapet so as not to be visible from the public right-of- way. An elevation showing rooftop equipment installation related to the height of the parapet and proposed equipment must be identified at plan check submittal subject to the approval of Community Development Department Director. Note on plans that no field changes shall be made without prior approval from the Building Official and architect or engineer of record. (c) 2,3 The building plan check plans shall indicate that restrooms are accessible to persons with disabilities as per State of California Accessibility Standards (Title 24). Plumbing fixture units are required to comply with the 2001 California Plumbing Code Chapter four (4) Table 4-1 as per type of group occupancy, or as approved by the Building Official. (c) 2.4 The building plan check plans shall indicate vehicle parking, primary entrance to the building, the primary paths of travel, cashier space, sanitary facilities, drinking fountain, and public telephones are accessible to persons with disabilities. (c) 2.5 Prior to building permit issuance, clearance from the Orange County Fire Authority shall be required. Information to ensure compliance with requirements of the Orange County Fire Authority, including information regarding fire flow and installation of fire hydrants, shall also be submitted and subject to approval of the City of Tustin Public Works Department. (c) 2.6 Prior to issuance of building permits, a landscape/irrigation plan shall be submitted for review and approval. (c) 2.7 Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit for approval by the Community Development, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to control predictable pollutant run-off. This WQMP shall Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 4 identify the: structural and non-structural measures specified detailing implementation of BMPs whenever they are applicable to the project; the assignment of long-term maintenance responsibilities (specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessee, etc.); and, reference to the location(s) of structural BMPs. (c) 2.8 The applicant shall comply with all City policies regarding short-term construction emissions, including periodic watering of the site and prohibiting grading during second stage smog alerts and when wind velocities exceed 15 miles per hour. (c) 2.9 Pursuant to the City of Tustin's Security Ordinance and the Uniform Fire Code, street numbers shall be displayed in a prominent location on the street side of the building. The numerals shall be no less than six (6) inches in height and shall be of contrasting color to the background to which they are attached and illuminated during hours of darkness. (c) 2.10 Prior to issuance of grading permits, seven (7) sets of final grading plans consistent with the site and landscaping plans as prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted and shall include the following: · Technical details and plans for all utility installations including telephone, gas, water and electricity. · Three (3) copies of precise soil report provided by a civil engineer and less than one (1) year old. Expanded information regarding the levels of hydrocarbons and ground water contamination found on-site shall be provided in the soil report. All pavement "R" values shall be in accordance with applicable City of Tustin standards. · Information demonstrating that all site drainage shall be handled on-site and will not be permitted to drain onto adjacent properties. · Information demonstrating that all drainage, vegetation, circulation, street sections, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and storm drains will comply with the on-site Private Improvement Standards. · Two (2) copies of Hydrology Report. (c) 2.11 The engineer of record shall submit a final compaction report to the Building Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (c) 2.12 The engineer of record shall submit a pad certification to the Building Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (c) 2.13 A surety/cash bond shall be required to assure work is completed in accordance with approved plans prior to permit issuance. The engineer's estimated cost of the grading, drainage, and erosion control shall be submitted to the Building Official for determination of the bond amount. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 5 (C) 2.14 (C) 2.15 (C) 2.16 (C) 2.17 (C) 2.18 (C) 2.19 (C) 2.20 (C) 2.21 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain an address number for each building from the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department the City of Tustin. Prior to submittal of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the applicant shall submit a deposit of $2,700.00 for the estimated cost of review of the WQMP to the Building Division. The actual costs shall be deducted from the deposit, and the applicant shall be responsible for any additional review cost that exceeded the deposit prior to issuance of grading permits. Any unused portion of the deposit shall be refunded to the applicant. Prior to issuance of any permits, the property owner shall record a Notice of Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) with the County Clerk Recorder on a form provided by the Community Development Department to inform future property owners of the requirement to implement the approved WQMP. The Community Development shall determine whether any change in use requires an amendment to an approved Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) indicating that coverage has been obtained under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) State General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that the NOI has been obtained shall be submitted to the Building Official. In addition, the applicant shall include notes on the grading plans indicating that the project will be implemented in compliance with the Statewide Permit for General Construction Activities. A note shall be provided on final plans that a six (6) foot high chain link fence shall be installed around the site prior to building construction stages. A nylon fabric or mesh shall be attached to the temporary construction fencing. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the site for construction vehicles. No outdoor storage shall be permitted except as approved by the Tustin Community Development Director. Trash service shall be provided on-site with surrounding enclosures and shall be located on the property and maintained to avoid health issues for neighboring properties. Adequate size trash enclosures with solid metal, self-closing, self-latching gates shall be provided. Said enclosures shall be screened by a solid decorative wall consistent with the adjacent building's material and finish and be of a minimum height of six feet. The location of the enclosures and types of screening and details of the enclosures shall be Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 6 shown on the site plan when submitted at building plan check and subject to approval by the Community Development Department. The location of the bin, size, and quantity shall be reviewed and accepted in writing by Federal Disposal. ARCHITECTURE (4) 3.1 All exterior treatments shall be consistent with the submitted color/material samples and noted on all construction plans and elevations submitted for Building Permit Plan Check, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department at final inspection. (4) 3.2 Exact details of the exterior door/storefront, building parapet, and cornices shall be provided on the construction plans. (4) 3.3 All exposed metal flashing or trim shall be painted to match the building. (4) 3.4 No exterior down spouts or roof scuppers shall be permitted. All roof drains shall utilize interior piping, but may have exterior outlets at the base of buildings. (4) 3.5 Sign permits shall not be issued until completion of the project and a tenant obtains zoning clearance and a business license. LANDSCAPING (1) 4.1 Complete landscape and irrigation plans that comply with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines shall be submitted at plan check. (1) 4.2 An irrigation plan shall be submitted which shows the location and control of backflow prevention devices at the meter, pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing, and coverage details for all equipment including efficient irrigation systems which minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize the amount of water which will reach the plant roots. Drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors, and automatic irrigation systems shall be used to increase irrigation efficiency. ('1) 4.3 All plant materials shall be installed in a healthy and vigorous condition, typical to the species, and shall be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, support structures (trellis, etc.), trimming, mowing, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing, regular watering, and replacement of dead or diseased dying plants. Unhealthy or dead trees shall be replaced within seventy-two (72) hours upon notification by the City. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 7 (1) 4.4 A sufficient landscaping buffer shall be identified on the landscaping plan and installed around the three (3) emergency access gates to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. (1) 4.5 The applicant shall identify on the landscape plan and install a minimum four (4) foot high landscape berm adjacent to Warner Avenue. The berm shall have a minimum two to one slope and be landscaped to complement the existing berm along Warner Avenue at the former Steelcase property at 1123 Warner Avenue. A berm detail shall be submitted and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. USE RESTRICTIONS (***) 5.1 The project shall provide a minimum of 460 parking spaces dispersed to accommodate the warehouse and office uses. Each lot shall independently contain the required parking spaces as follows: LOT NO. 1 2 3 4 $ 6 7 PARKING MAX. 1/1000+ TOTAL BLDG OFFIC PARKING MAX. 112000 BLDG. PARKING PARKING NO. E 3/1000 SF WAREHOUSE t>20,000) SF REQ'D PROVIDED 1 10,150 31 19,895 20 2 11,900 36 22,162 22 3 8,600 26 10,913 11 4 10,000 30 12,774 13 5 10,476 32 25,332 23 6 11,836 36 25,366 23 TOTAL 62,962 116,442 7 3,038 10 4,752 5 8 2,445 8 3,825 4 9 2,445 8 3,825 4 10 3,038 10 4,752 5 11 1,482 5 2,318 2 12 1,800 6 2,750 3 13 3,011 10 4,589 5 14 2,165 7 3,386 3 15 3,300 10 5,025 5 16 2,165 7 3,386 3 30,045 51 70 34,062 58 75 19,513 37 55 22,774 43 61 35,808 55 74 37,202 59 74 179,404 303 409 7,790 15 6,270 12 6,270 12 7,790 15 3,800 7 4,550 9 7,600 15 5,550 10 8,325 15 5,550 10 Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 8 17 3,300 10 5,025 5 8,325 15 18 2,828 9 4,423 4 7,250 13 19 1,814 6 2,837 3 4,650 9 TOTAL 32,830 50,890 83,720 157 250 TOTAL {LOTS 1-7) 95,792 167,332 263,124 460 659 Any change to the uses, square footage, or parking spaces shall be submitted to Community Development Department for review and approval. (2) 5.2 Public address systems and buzzers shall be prohibited. (2) 5.3 If in the future the City determines that a parking, circulation, or noise problem exists, the applicant shall be required to submit a new study and implement immediate interim and permanent mitigation measures upon review and approval by the Community Development Department and the Public Works Department. (1) 5.4 All construction operations, including engine warm-up and deliveries of materials and equipment, shall be subject to the provisions of the Tustin Noise Ordinance and shall take place only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, unless otherwise determined by the Building Official. (***) 5.5 Due to on-site circulation restraints on Lot 7, only Lots 1 through 6 may accommodate large, semi-truck trailers; Lot 7 may only accommodate single-unit trucks or smaller. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (1) 6.1 A separate 24-inch by 36-inch street improvement plan, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer, will be required for all construction within the public right-of-way. Construction and/or replacement of any missing or damaged public improvements will be required to be completed adjacent to this development prior to issuance of Certificate of Use and Occupancy for the first building. Said plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: · Curb and gutter; · Sidewalk, including curb ramps for the physically disabled; · Drive aprons; · Street lighting; · Catch basin/storm drain laterals/connection to existing storm drain system; Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 9 · Domestic water facilities; · Sanitary sewer facilities; · Landscape/irrigation; and, · Underground utility connection. In addition, a 24-inch by 36-inch reproducible construction area traffic control plan, as prepared by a California Registered Traffic Engineer or Civil Engineer experienced in this type of plan preparation, will be required. (1) 6.2 Prior to issuance of a rough grading permit, preparation of a sedimentation and erosion control plan for all work related to this development will be required. (1) 6.3 Release/approval from East Orange County Water District shall be obtained prior to receiving water service. Backflow prevention devices shall be installed in accordance with applicable standards and codes and shall be installed within an easement of suitable size to allow for unobstructed access, inspection, testing, and maintenance. Specifically, where facilities are to be located in private streets, the easement shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet wide for main lines. Easements ten (10) feet wide and extending five (5) feet beyond all fire hydrants and services laterals shall also be required, including ten (10) foot wide water service lateral easements and meter box easements. Easements shall be located within unobstructed areas and clear access to the meter boxes shall be provided at all time. (1) 6.4 Hydraulic analysis of the proposed water system and ability to meet OCFA fire flow demands and requirements shall be performed and certified by the developer. (1) 6.5 The developer shall be responsible for all costs related to the installation of new potable and fire related water services and the abandonment, at the water main, of all existing potable water and service connections. (1) 6.6 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, preparation of plans for and construction of the following shall be required: All sanitary sewer facilities shall be submitted as required by the City Engineer and local sewering agency. A domestic water system shall be designed and installed to the standards of the City of Tustin Water Services Division. Plans shall also be reviewed and approved by the Orange County Fire Authority for fire protection purposes. The adequacy and reliability of the water system design and the distribution of fire hydrants will be evaluated. The water distribution system and appurtenances shall also conform to the applicable laws and adopted regulations enforced by the Orange County Health Department. Any required reclaimed water system shall meet the standards as required by Exhibit A Resolution Nb. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 10 the City of Tustin Water Services Department. The developer shall be responsible for all costs related to the relocation of any existing fire hydrants and the installation of new fire hydrants. (1) 6.7 All drive aprons shall be designed in accordance with the current Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The maximum cross slope of the sidewalk shall be two (2) percent and the maximum ramp slope of the drive apron shall be ten (10) percent. (2) 6.8 Prior to issuance of precise grading permit, preparation and submittal of a final grading plan showing all pertinent elevations as they pertain to the public right-of-way along with delineating the following information is required: a) b) c) Final street elevations at key locations. Final pad/finished floor elevations and key elevations for all site grading. All pad elevations to be a minimum of 1.0 foot above base flood elevation as defined by FEMA. All flood hazards of record. (1) 6.9 Existing sewer, domestic water, reclaimed water, and storm drain service laterals shall be utilized whenever possible. (.1) 6.10 Any damage done to existing street improvements and utilities shall be repaired before acceptance of the tract and/or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the development on any parcel within the subdivision. (1) 6.11 Prior to any work in the public right-of-way, an Encroachment permit shall be obtained from and applicable fees paid to the Public Works Department. (1) 6.12 Prior to issuance of building permits, both horizontal and vertical intersection sight lines shall be submitted per City of Tustin Standard No. 510 for all affected streets. The site lines need to be shown on the grading plan, site plan, and landscape plan. All landscaping within the limited use area will need to comply with City of Tustin Standard No. 510. (1) 6.13 In addition to the normal full size plan submittal process, all final development plans including, but not limited to: parcel maps, records of survey, public works improvements, private infrastructure improvements, final grading plans, and site plans are also required to be submitted to the Public Works Department/Engineering Division in computer aided design and drafting (CADD) format. The standard file format is AutoCad Release 14 or 2000 having the extension DWG. Likewise, layering and linetype conventions are AutoCad-based (latest version available upon request from the Engineering Division). Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 11 The CADD files shall be submitted to the City at the time the plans are approved and updated CADD files reflecting "as built" conditions shall be submitted once all construction has been completed. The subdivision bonds will not be release until the "as built" CADD files have been submitted. 6.14 The Project Applicant/Contractor shall submit and obtain approval from the Public Works Department of a Project Recycling Plan prior to the issuance of any grading, encroachment, or building permit. The Project Recycling Plan shall demonstrate recovery and recycling of at least fifty (50) percent of the total waste generated by the project and shall consist of the following components: · In a narrative form, describe efforts which will be utilized to minimize the generation of waste during project construction; · Provide an estimate of the total amount of waste to be generated for the entire duration of project construction; · Provide an estimate of the total amount of recyclable materials generated by project construction, identified by recyclable material type; · Identify waste hauler(s) to be utilized during project construction. Please note that the City has an exclusive waste collection franchise with Federal Disposal Service of Santa Ana. No other haulers are to be utilized pursuant to City Code Section 4322; · Identify recyclable material processing facilities which will be utilized to process materials generated by project construction; · Demonstrate that no waste generated by the project will be sent directly to any landfill; · Prior to the final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, submit a final report to the Public Works Department detailing actual quantities of the items listed above as well as a narrative summary of the recycling efforts implemented during the project; · Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant is required to submit recycling plans to the Public Works Department for each project tenant which demonstrates recycling or diversion from landfills of at least fifty (50) percent of the total waste anticipated to be generated by each tenant; and, · Prior to issuance of any grading, encroachment, or building permit, applicant is required to submit waste trash enclosure plans to the Public Works Department which demonstrate the provision of the adequate physical space to accommodate all planned tenant recycling programs. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 12 (1) (1) 6.15 This development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City of Tustin Water Quality Ordinance and all Federal, State, and regional water quality control board rules and regulations. 6.16 Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Use and Occupancy, the applicant shall install a minimum of two (2) stop signs at the internal, east/west and north/south drive aisles of Lot 7, at the Warner Avenue/Pullman Avenue entrance to control traffic entering the common drive aisle shared with the property at 1123 Warner Avenue. ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY (5) Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit a fire hydrant location plan to the Fire Chief for review and approval. All fire hydrants shall be located a minimum of forty (40) feet from the building served by the hydrant. (5) 7.2 Prior to the recordation of a subdivision map or the issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall obtain approval of the Fire Chief for all fire protection access roads to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of every structure on-site. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 744- 0499 or visit the OCFA website to obtain a copy of the "Guidelines for Emergency Access" to ensure these requirements can be met with the current site plan. (5) 7.3 Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit plans and obtain approval from the Fire Chief for fire lanes on required fire access roads less than 36 feet in width. The plans shall indicate the locations of red curbs and signage and include a detail of the proposed signage including the height, stroke, and colors of the lettering and its contrasting background. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 744- 0499 or visit the OCFA website to obtain a copy of the "Guidelines for Emergency Access Roadways and Fire Lane Requirements" to ensure these requirements can be met with the current site plan. (5) 7.4 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall obtain the approval from the Fire Chief for the construction of any gate across required fire department access roads. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 744-0499 or visit the OCFA website to obtain a copy of the "Guidelines for Design and Installation of Emergency Access Gates and Barriers" to ensure these requirements can be met with the current site plan. (5) 7.5 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a note shall be placed on the site plans stating that all commercial structures exceeding 6,000 square feet (per amendment) and all structures exceeding fire department access requirements shall be protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system in a manner meeting the approval of the Fire Chief. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 13 (5) 7.6 Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence of adequate fire flow. The "Orange County Fire Authority Water Availability for Fire Protection" form shall be signed by the applicable water district and submitted to the Fire Chief for approval. If sufficient water to meet fire flow requirements is not available an automatic fire extinguishing system may be required in each structure affected. (5) 7.7 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit plans for any required automatic fire sprinkler system in any structure to the Fire Chief for review and approval. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 744- 0499 to request a copy of the "Orange County Fire Authority Notes for New NFPA 13 Commercial Sprinkler Systems." (5) 7.8 Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Use and Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system shall be operational in a manner meeting the approval of the Fire Chief. (5) 7.9 A note shall be placed on the fire protection access easement plan indicating that all street and road signs shall be designed and maintained to be either internally or externally illuminated in a manner meeting approval of the Fire Chief. (5) 7.10 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for combustible construction, the builder shall submit a letter on company letterhead stating that water for fire-fighting purposes and all-weather fire protection access roads shall be in place and operational before any combustible material is placed on-site. Building permits will not be issued without OCFA approval obtained as a result of an on-site inspection. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 744- 0499 to obtain a copy of the standard combustible construction letter. (5) 7.11 Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Fire Chief a list of all hazardous, flammable and combustible liquids, solids or gases to be stored, used, or handled on-site. These materials shall be classified according to the Uniform Fire Code and a document submitted to the Fire Chief with a summary sheet listing the totals for storage and use for each hazard class. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 744-0499 or visit the OCFA website to obtain a copy of the "Guideline for Completing Chemical Classification Packets." (5) 7.12 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and submit to the Fire Chief a copy of a "Hazardous Materials Disclosure Chemical Inventory and Business Emergency Plan" packet. Please contact the OCFA Hazardous Materials Services Section at (714) 744- 0463 to obtain a copy of the packet. Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 14 (5) 7.13 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit a detailed letter of intended use for each building on-site to the Fire Chief for review and approval. (5) 7.14 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, plans for the fire alarm system shall be submitted to the Fire Chief for review and approval. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 744-0499 or visit the OCFA website to obtain a copy of the "Guideline for New and Existing Fire Alarm Systems." (5) 7.15 The alarm system shall be operational prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy. FEES (c) 8.1 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of forty-throe dollars ($43.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant has not deliverod to the Community Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations for any interosted party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. (c) 8.2 Prior to issuance of any permits, the applicant shall pay the following fees. Payments will be required based upon the rate in effect at the time of permit issuance and aro subject to change. All applicable Building plan check and permit fees shall be paid to the Community Development Department. All applicable Grading plan check and permit fees shall be paid to the Community Development Department. Orange County Firo Authority plan check and inspection fees to the Community Development Department based upon the most curront schedule. New development fees in the amount of $0.10/sq.ft. of new floor area to the Community Development Department. School facilities fee to the Tustin Unified School District subject to any agreement roached and executed between the District and the applicant. The current fee is $0.34/sq.ft. of new floor area. Transportation System Improvement Program (TSIP), Benefit Area "B" fees in the amount of $3.31/sq.ff. of new floor aroa of construction to the Community Development Department. However, based upon a letter from Cindy Dopf, dated February 26, 2003, acknowledged by City of Tustin Building Official, Khanh Exhibit A Resolution No. 3896 October 13, 2003 Page 15 Nguyen, the new development receives credit for up to 508,674 square feet of building area if building permits are obtained by February 27, 2004. Payment of the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fees to the Tustin Public Works Department at the time a building permit is issued. The current fee is $3.30/sq.ft. of new floor area. However, the fee is waived for new development up to 508,674 square feet of building area. Payment of the Orange County Sanitation District No. 7 Sewer Connection Fees at the time a building permit is issued. The current fee is $675.00/1,000 sq.ft, of new floor area. However, the new development receives credit for up to 508,674 square of building area if building permits are obtained by March 13, 2004, or one year from the date of demolition permit issuance. The applicant shall pay an "in-lieu" traffic impact mitigation fee of $14,000 to the City of Tustin prior to certificate of occupancy for the proposed project. The "in-lieu" fee shall be based upon the proportionate share of the cost to mitigate traffic impacts that are a direct result of the proposed project, based upon the traffic study prepared by LSA, dated September 10, 2003, for the project. The study indicates a seven percent (7%) proportionate share for the project impacts at the Red Hill / Bell intersection, which translates to $14,000 (7% of a $200,000 improvement cost). The City shall apply the "in-lieu" fee to the Red Hill/Bell Avenue Capital Improvement.