Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 16-59RESOLUTION NO. 16-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT THE FINAL JOINT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (MCAS TUSTIN FEIS/EIR), AS AMENDED BY SUPPLEMENT AND ADDENDUMS, IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2016-001, CONCEPT PLAN 2016-001, SUBDIVISION 2016-02NESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 18003, DESIGN REVIEW 2016-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 2016-01; 2016-02; 2016-015; 2016-023, MINOR MODIFICATIONS 2016-01 AND 2016-02 AND DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 870,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL MIXED USE PROJECT WITHIN PORTIONS OF PLANNING AREA 9-12 OF NEIGHBORHOOD E OF THE MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That proper application has been submitted by Flight Venture LLC for the development of an 870,000 square foot commercial mixed use project on an approximately 38 -acre site currently owned by the City of Tustin within a portion of Planning Area 9-12 of the MCAS Tustin Specific plan. B. That the development application includes the following requests: Development Agreement 2016-001 to facilitate the development and conveyance of an approximate thirty-eight (38) acre site within the boundaries of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. 2. Concept Plan 2016-001 to develop a new 870,000 square -foot commercial mixed use project with a retail use (food hall) and conference center and ensure necessary linkages are provided between the development project, the integrity of the specific plan and purpose and intent of the neighborhood is maintained and applicable city requirements are identified and satisfied. 3. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 18003 to subdivide an approximately 38 - acre site into twenty-one (21) numbered lots for the development of a commercial mixed use project with a retail use (food hall) and conference center. 4. Design Review 2016-001 for the design and site layout of Phase 1 Lots Resolution No. 16-59 Page 1 of 4 1-10 of VTTM 18003 of a commercial mixed-use project with a retail use (food hall) and conference center. 5. Conditional Use Permit 2016-001, 2016-002 and Conditional Use Permit 2016-015 and 2016-023 for the establishment of on-site alcohol consumption, joint use parking, live entertainment and the projection of mechanical equipment. 6. Minor Modification 2016-001 for the allowance of a 10% parking reduction for Phase 1 of the project site and Minor Modification 2016- 002 an increase in building height for Building A for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 of project site. C. That the site is zoned as MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (SP1) within a portion of Planning Area 9-12 of Neighborhood E; and designated as MCAS Tustin by the Tustin General Plan. 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. D. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on September 27, 2016, by the Planning Commission. Following the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 4320 through 4324 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed project. E. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on October 18, 2016, by the City Council. The City Council continued the item to November 1, 2016. F. On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On December 6, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-76 approving a Supplement to the FEIS/EIR for the extension of Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and the future alignment of Valencia North Loop Road. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. And, on May, 13, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-32 approving a second Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. The FEIS/EIR along with its Addenda and Supplement is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEIS/EIR, Addenda and Supplement considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. An Environmental Checklist attached hereto as Exhibit A has been prepared and concluded that these actions do not result in any new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of Resolution No. 16-59 Page 2of4 any previously identified significant impacts in the FEIS/EIR. Moreover, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since certification of the FEIS/EIR. G. That in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the checklist has been considered and found to be complete and adequate prior to approving the project as proposed. II. The City Council hereby finds that the project is within the scope of the previously approved Program FEIS/FEIR and that pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15168 (c) and 15162, no new effects could occur and no new mitigation measures would be required. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting on the 1 st day of November, 2016. ATTEST: ERICA N. RABE, City Clerk Resolution No. 16-59 Page 3 of 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 16-59 I, Erica N. Rabe, City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 16-59 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 1St day of November, 2016, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: Nielseri, Berns --Pin, Gomez., Murray Puckett (5) COUNCILMEMBER NOES: (0 ) COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: (0 ) COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: (0 ) &W, ERICA N. RABE, City Clerk Resolution No. 16-59 Page 4 of 4 Exhibit A Environmental Checklist COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST For Projects With Previously Certified/Approved Environmental Documents: Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin This checklist of environmental impacts takes into consideration the preparation of an environmental document prepared at an earlier stage of the proposed project. The checklist and evaluation evaluate the adequacy of the earlier document pursuant to Section 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. A. BACKGROUND Project Title(s): Flight at Tustin Legacy Lead Agency: City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Erica H. Demkowicz Phone: 714-573-3127 Person: Project Location: That certain site comprised of approximately 38 acres within Neighborhood E/Planning Area 9-12 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, generally bounded by Aston Street to the northwest, Barranca Parkway to the southwest, Armstrong Avenue to the northeast, and the future Legacy Park on the north, all in Tustin, Orange County, California. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 MCAS Tustin Specific Plan MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Project Description: LPC West LLC is proposing "Flight at Tustin Legacy," (the "Project") an approximately 870,000 square foot phased commercial mixed-use development. Phase I, which is projected to commence construction in Fall of 2016, will Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 2 include up to approximately 390,440 square feet of development, comprised of four office buildings, a small office campus, a retail/conference center and associated parking to be provided on a shared basis, all as depicted on the accompanying site plan. The retail uses may include a food hall, intended to serve local commercial developments. The balance of the Project is expected to be constructed in one future phase, which may be further broken out into two sub -phases. The buildings will range from one to five stories. The Project will be fully consistent with the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and is within the Specific Plan Planning Area 9-12's authorization of 1,267,324 buildable square feet of commercial floor area. The Project will include biofiltration planter boxes and/or basins placed along the perimeters of buildings and in other appropriate areas throughout the project site in order to detain and treat stormwater. A Modular Wetland System will also be placed along streets to provide for additional biofiltration treatment. Project Approvals will include: vesting tentative tract map; development and building permits (including, without limitation, grading, mechanical, electrical and plumbing permits); conditional use permits for joint -use parking, on- site alcoholic beverage sales / ancillary live entertainment, and added height for screened mechanical equipment; a concept plan; minor modification for reduction in parking and increased building height pursuant to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan; all required approvals by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the County of Orange Health Department; a Development Agreement; and a Disposition and Development Agreement. Surrounding Uses: Northeast: Vacant Land Northwest: Future Linear Park (aka Legacy Park) Southeast: Vacant Land Southwest: Light Industrial and Commercial Previous Environmental On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Documentation: Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On December 6, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-76 approving a Supplement to the FEIS/EIR for the extension of Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and the future alignment of Valencia North Loop Road. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 3 Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR that reduced overall nonresidential development within the Specific Plan Area, replaced the originally proposed golf course with a linear park system and combined Planning Areas 9-12 so that Neighborhood E would have a single unified trip budget and set of development standards. And, on May, 13, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-32 approving a second Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. The FEIS/EIR along with its Addenda and Supplement is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEIS/EIR, Addenda and Supplement considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. 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 Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Geology and Soils ❑ Hydrology and Water Quality ❑ Air Quality ❑ Transportation & Circulation ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Agricultural Resources C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ Hazards and Hazardous Materials ❑ Noise ❑ Public Services ❑ Utilities and Service Systems ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Recreation ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance ❑ 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A 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. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 4 ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) 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 on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant impact' or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. 0 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 all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. ❑ 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 all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 5 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 of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use`? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson 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 district 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`? No Substantial Change From New Significant More Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ p Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 6 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 of people? 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 of Fish 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 plan's, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish 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 direct 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? 0 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 defined 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 unique geologic feature? No Substantial Change From New Significant More Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑X ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ x❑ Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 7 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: 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 of a 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 soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit 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 defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant 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? No Substantial Change From New Significant More Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ 0 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 8 d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government 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 within 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 working in the project area? 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 existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream 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? No Substantial Change From New Significant More Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 9 h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 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 in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 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? No Substantial Change From New Significant More Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ I] ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ I] Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 10 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 airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 0 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 numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere'? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. 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, in 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'? 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 require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Substantial Change From New Significant More Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ x❑ ❑ ❑ p Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 11 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? 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? No Substantial Change From New Significant More Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ ❑X ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑ ❑ 0 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 12 No Substantial Change From New Significant More Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ❑ ❑ ❑x 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? ❑ ❑ ❑x 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)? ❑ ❑ ❑x c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ❑ ❑ ❑x Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 13 SECTION E EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Flight at Tustin Legacy BACKGROUND On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of WAS Tustin. On December 6, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-76 approving a Supplement to the FEIS/EIR for the extension of Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and the future alignment of Valencia North Loop Road. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR and, on May 13, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-32 approving a Second Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. The FEIS/EIR along with its Addendums and Supplement is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. The FEIS/EIR, Supplement, and Addendums analyzed the environmental consequences of the Navy disposal and local community reuse of the Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin site per the Reuse Plan and the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Specific Plan). The CEQA analysis also analyzed the environmental impacts of certain "Implementation Actions" that the City of Tustin and City of Irvine must take to implement the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The MCAS Tustin Specific Plan proposed, and the FEIS/EIR analyzed, a multi-year development period for the planned urban reuse project (Tustin Legacy). When individual discretionary activities within the Specific Plan are proposed, the lead agency is required to examine the individual activities to determine if their effects were fully analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The agency can approve the activities as being within the scope of the project covered by the FEIS/EIR. If the agency finds that pursuant to Sections 15162, 15163, 15164, 15168 and 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines no new effects would occur, nor would a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects occur, then no supplemental or subsequent EIR is required. Tustin Legacy is located in central Orange County and approximately 40 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles. Tustin Legacy is that portion of the former MCAS Tustin within the City of Tustin corporate boundaries. Owned and operated by the Navy and Marine Corps for nearly 60 years, approximately 1,585 gross acres of property at MCAS Tustin were determined surplus to federal government needs, and MCAS Tustin was officially closed in July 1999. The majority of the former MCAS Tustin lies within the southern portion of the City of Tustin. The remaining approximately 73 acres lies within the City of Irvine. Tustin Legacy is in close proximity to four major freeways: the Costa Mesa (SR -55), Santa Ana (1-5), Laguna (SR -133) and San Diego (1-405). Tustin Legacy is also served by the west leg of the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR 261). The major roadways bordering Tustin Legacy include Red Hill Avenue on the northwest, Edinger Avenue and Irvine Center Drive on the northeast, Harvard Avenue on the southeast, and Barranca Parkway on the southwest. Jamboree Road transects the Property. John Wayne Airport is located approximately three miles to the south and a Metrolink Commuter Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 14 Rail Station is located immediately to the northeast providing daily passenger service to employment centers in Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego counties. LPC West LLC is proposing "Flight at Tustin Legacy," (the "Project" or "Proposed Project") an approximately 870,000 square foot phased commercial mixed-use development. Phase I, which is projected to commence construction in Fall of 2016, will include up to approximately 390,440 square feet of development, comprised of four office buildings, a small office campus, a retail / conference center and associated parking to be provided on a shared basis, all as depicted on the accompanying site plan. The retail uses may include a food hall, intended to serve local commercial developments. The balance of the Project is expected to be constructed in one future phase, which may be further broken out into two sub -phases. The buildings will range from three to five stories. The Project will be fully consistent with the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and is within the Specific Plan Planning Area 9-12's authorization of 1,267,324 buildable square feet of commercial floor area. The Project will include biofiltration planter boxes and/or basins placed along the perimeters of buildings and in other appropriate areas throughout the project site in order to detain and treat stormwater. A Modular Wetland System will also be placed along streets to provide for additional biofiltration treatment. Project approvals will include: vesting tentative tract map; development and building permits (including, without limitation, grading, mechanical, electrical and plumbing permits); conditional use permits for joint -use parking, on-site alcoholic beverage sales / ancillary live entertainment, and added height for screened mechanical equipment; a concept plan; design review; minor modification for reduction in parking and increased building height; all required approvals by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the County of Orange Health Department; a Development Agreement; and a Disposition and Development Agreement. An Environmental Analysis Checklist has been completed and it has been determined that the Project is within the scope of the previously approved FEIS/EIR and that pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15162 and 15168(c), no new effects could occur, and no new mitigation measures would be required. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. The following information provides background support for the conclusions identified in the Environmental Analysis Checklist. 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? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 15 No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Specifically, the Proposed Project would not cause aesthetic impacts that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. The Project proposes to permit uses that were previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. Therefore, the Project would not change the future development condition that was analyzed in the FEIS/EIR and there would be no change to development intensity, building height restrictions (including allowed minor modifications of 10% pursuant to the terms of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan), setbacks, signage, and other development standards compared to that analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, and the Project will comply with all requirements of the MCAS Specific Plan governing project design. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to aesthetics and visual quality that would occur as a result of the implementation of the Project. The minor modification and conditional use permit to allow additional building height and mechanical equipment represent de minimis changes that would not be visible from off-site public locations and, additionally, mechanical screening would be screened to further ensure there are no adverse visual impacts. There is no new information relative to aesthetics and visual quality that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Proposed Project and is implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. No new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to aesthetics and visual quality. The implementation of the Project would continue the visual change from the abandoned military facilities onsite to residential, commercial, industrial and institutional uses and development. This visual change, as part of the overall visual change of the former base to the larger Tustin Legacy development was not a significant impact in the FEIS/EIR. There are no designated scenic vistas in the Project area; therefore, the Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The Project Site is also not located within the vicinity of a designated state scenic highway. The Project would not change the conclusions of the historical analysis of the historic blimp hangars from the FEIS/EIR relative to visual changes since the Proposed Project would not affect these hangars. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to aesthetics. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR were certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No new impacts or substantially more severe aesthetic impacts would result from the adoption and implementation of the Project; therefore, no new or revised mitigation measures are required for aesthetics and visual quality. No refinements related to the Project are necessary to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 16 and no new mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-58 through 3-67, 4-81 through 4-92), Addendum 1 (Page 5-3 through 5-7), and Addendum 2 (Page 24 through 26) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan 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 of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. There were no agricultural uses on the Site in the recent past. There are currently no agricultural uses on the Site. The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to agriculture and forest resources that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to agricultural resources that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. The impacts of the implementation of the Specific Plan are already analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. There is no new information relative to agricultural resources that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to agricultural resources. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 17 regard to agricultural resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: In certifying the FEIS/EIR, the Tustin City Council adopted Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations on January 16, 2001 concluding that impacts to agricultural resources on other areas of MCAS Tustin were unavoidable (Resolution No. 00-90). No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-83 through 3-87, 4-109 through 114), Addendum 1 (Page 5-8 through 5-9), and Addendum 2 (Page 27 through 28) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district 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 that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 18 The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to air quality that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. There would be no change to the allowed development intensity, building height restrictions, setbacks, signage, other development standards or vehicle trips that would lead to increased air emissions from vehicle trips. An access analysis prepared for the project confirms that the Proposed Project would generate fewer trips than the maximum allowed within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan and that were described and analyzed in Addendum 1. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to air quality that would occur as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. There is no new information relative to air quality that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Project and its implementation are consistent with and previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to air quality. The Tustin City Council adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the FEIS/EIR on January 16, 2001 to address significant unavoidable short-term (construction), long-term (operational), and cumulative air quality impacts for the Specific Plan. The City also adopted mitigation measures to reduce these unavoidable adverse impacts. Consistent with the findings in the FEIS/EIR, implementation of future development on the Project Site could result in significant unavoidable short-term construction air quality impacts because it is part of the "project' analyzed in the FEIS/EIR for which this finding was made. Construction activities associated with the Project Site were previously addressed in the FEIS/EIR. There is no substantial new information that shows there will be different or more significant short-term air quality impacts on the environment from the Project than described in the FEIS/EIR. There is no substantial new information that shows there will be different or more significant long-term and/or cumulative impacts on the environment as a result of the Project than described in the FEIS/EIR. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to air quality. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required. Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. However, the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 19 and Supplement also concluded that Specific Plan related operational air quality impacts were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-143 through 3-153, 4-207 through 4-230, 7-41 through 7-42), Addendum 1 (Page 5-10 through 5-28), and Addendum 2 (Page 27 through 32) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan 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 of Fish 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 of Fish 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 direct 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to biological resources that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. The Project proposes to develop the same areas as proposed in the Specific Plan and previously Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 20 analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. There are no new or increased significant adverse project - specific or cumulative impacts with regard to biological resources that would occur as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to biological resources that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts on biological resources. Based on current delineations of wetlands and jurisdictional waters, the Project will not affect wetlands or jurisdictional waters. The impacts resulting from the implementation of the Project, if any, would be those identified in the FEIS/EIR. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to biological resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that `require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-75 through 3-82, 4-103 through 4-108, 7-26 through 7-27), Addendum 1 (Page 5-28 through 5-39), and Addendum 2 (Page 33 through 35) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined 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 unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 21 No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to cultural resources that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. The Project proposes to develop the same areas as proposed in the Specific Plan and previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The impacts of the Specific Plan on cultural resources, including any that may be present on the Project Site, were considered in the FEIS/EIR. It is possible that previously unidentified buried archeological or paleontological resources within the Project Site could be discovered during grading and other construction activities. Consequently, future development is required to perform construction monitoring for cultural and paleontological resources to reduce potential impacts to these resources to a level of insignificance as found in the FEIS/EIR. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to cultural and paleontological resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-68 through 3-74, 4-93 through 4-102, 7-24 through 7-26), Addendum 1 (Page 5-40 through 5-45), and Addendum 2 (Page 36 through 37) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 22 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: • 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 of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Strong seismic ground shaking? Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit 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 defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Implementation of the Project would not cause any direct impacts to geology and soils. The Project proposes to develop the same areas as proposed in the Specific Plan and previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to geology and soils that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to geology and soils that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR as prepared. Therefore, the Proposed Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to geology and soils. The FEIS/EIR found that impacts to soils and geology resulting from implementation of the Specific Plan would include non -seismic hazards (such as local settlement, regional Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 23 subsidence, expansive soils, slope instability, erosion, and mudflows) and seismic hazards (such as surface fault displacement, high-intensity ground shaking, ground failure and lurching, seismically induced settlement, and flooding associated with dam failure). The FEIS/EIR concluded that compliance with state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, would avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to geotechnical issues. No substantial change is expected during implementation of the Project from the analysis previously completed in the certified FEIS/EIR. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental ER or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to geology and soils. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans and Studies FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-88 through 3-97, 4-115 through 4-123, 7-28 through 7-29), Addendum 1 (Page 5-46 through 5-49), and Addendum 2 (Page 38 through 40) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: — Would the project: a) Create a significant 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 reasonable 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? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 24 d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government 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 within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or 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 working in the project area? 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The entire MCAS Tustin site was reviewed for hazardous materials prior to start of redevelopment activities. Federal regulations require the Navy to complete remediation of hazardous materials prior to conveyance of properties to other landowners. The FEIS/EIR included a detailed discussion of the historic and then -current hazardous material use and hazardous waste generation within the Specific Plan area. The Navy is responsible for planning and executing environmental restoration programs in response to releases of hazardous substances for MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR concluded that the implementation of the Specific Plan would not have a significant environmental impact from the hazardous wastes, substances, and materials on the property during construction or operation since the Navy would implement various remedial actions pursuant to the Compliance Programs that would remove, manage, or isolate potentially hazardous substances in soils and groundwater. As identified in the FEIS/EIR, the Project Site is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) and is subject to height restrictions. The Proposed Project does not propose changes to (or exceedances of) the maximum 100 -foot height limitation included in the Specific Plan. The Project Site is not located in a wildland fire hazard area. Implementation of the Project will not cause any direct impacts to hazards and hazardous materials. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regards to hazards and hazardous materials that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to hazards and hazardous materials that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Project and its implementation are Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 25 consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts from hazards and hazardous materials. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to hazards and hazardous materials. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-106 through 3-117, 4-130 through 4-138, 7-30 through 7-31), Addendum 1 (Page 5-49 through 5-55), and Addendum 2 (Page 44 through 47) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) for Southern Parcels 4-8, 10-2, 14, and 42, and Parcels 25, 26, 30-33, 37 and Portion of 40 and 41 Finding of Suitability to Lease (FOSL) for Southern Parcels Care -out Areas 1, 2, 3, and 4 Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) Tustin General Plan 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 existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in flooding 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 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 26 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 storm water 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 of 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 structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities? 1) Potentially impact stormwater runoff 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 areas? 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 runoff to cause environmental harm? p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to hydrology and water quality. There would be no change to development intensity, building height restrictions (including minor height modifications of 10% and 10% reduction in parking allowed by the MCAS Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 27 Tustin Specific Plan), setbacks, signage, and other development standards. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to hydrology/water quality that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to hydrology/water quality that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to hydrology/water quality. As concluded in the FEIS/EIR, preparation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for future development projects on the Project sites in compliance with all applicable regulatory standards would reduce water quality impacts from development activities to a level of insignificance. The Project has prepared such a WQMP. Therefore, the Project would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts to water quality than what was previously identified in the FEIS/EIR. No increase in development intensity is proposed as part of the Project. Future development will be required to comply with Specific Plan development standards, including FAR and landscaping and would require preparation of a WQMP. The Proposed Project would not result in an increase of impervious surface area from the amount that was previously analyzed in the Specific Plan. The Project proposes no change to the drainage pattern and water management systems previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The drainage pattern and water management systems in the Project Site vicinity would remain consistent with the Tustin Legacy Master Drainage Plan. Therefore, the analysis and conclusions in the FEIS/EIR relative to impacts related to groundwater supply, groundwater levels, or local recharge have not changed. In addition, no change to the backbone drainage system is proposed. Therefore, no new or more severe impacts related to drainage patterns, drainage facilities, and potential flooding would result from the Project. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to hydrology and water quality. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-98 through Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 28 3-105, 4-124 through 4-129, 7-29 through 7-30), Addendum 1 (Page 5-56 through 5-91), and Addendum 2 (Page 48 through 51) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to land use and planning. There would be no change to development intensity, building height restrictions (including minor height modifications of 10% and 10% reduction in parking allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan), setbacks, signage, and other development standards. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to land use and planning that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to land use and planning that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to land use planning. Implementation of the Project would not physically divide any Specific Plan land use, conflict with the Specific Plan, or conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to land use and planning. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 29 measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR were certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-3 through 3-17, 4-3 through 4-13, 7-16 through 7-18), Addendum 1 (Page 5-92 through 5-94), and Addendum 2 (Page 52 through 54) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a 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? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. There are no known mineral resources located at the site. The Project would not cause new impacts to mineral resources that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to mineral resources that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to mineral resources that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to mineral resources. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to mineral resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 30 measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR were certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-91), Addendum 1 (Page 5-95), and Addendum 2 (Page 55) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan XI. NOISE: Would the project: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? 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 airport 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 excessive noise levels? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The ambient noise environment on the site is influenced by the surrounding roadways, existing uses, and aircraft noise from flight operations at John Wayne Airport. However, none of these exterior noise sources would impact the project beyond levels analyzed and described by the FEIR/EIS, and the project would be able to achieve the interior noise standards set forth in Section 5.507.4 of the California Green Building Standards Code. Implementation of the Project will not cause any direct impacts to noise. There would be no change to development intensity, traffic generation building height restrictions Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 31 (including minor height modifications of less than 10% allowed by the MCAs Tustin Specific Plan), setbacks, signage, and other development standards. No new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to noise are identified as a result of the approval and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to noise that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Proposed Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to noise. The Project would not modify the noise -related land use distribution within the Tustin Legacy site. All proposed land uses were included in the Specific Plan. Consequently, long-term traffic -related noise impacts associated with implementation of the Project have previously been identified and analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. Short-term noise impacts were also analyzed in the previously certified FEIS/EIR; implementation of any future project would be required to comply with applicable adopted mitigation measures and state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, thus avoiding significant short-term construction -related noise impacts. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to noise. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR were certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observation Submitted Plans and Studies FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-154 through 3-162 and 4-231 through 4-243), Addendum 1 (Page 5-96 through 5-101), and Addendum 2 (Page 57 through 60) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 32 XII. POPULATION & 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 numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to housing and any associated population. There is no new information relative to population and housing that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Proposed Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to population and housing. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to population and housing. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-18 through 3-34, 4-14 through 4-29, and 7-18 through 7-19), Addendum 1 (Page 5-101 through 5-111), and Addendum 2 (Page 61 through 62) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 33 XIII. 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, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to public services. There would be no change to the permitted levels of development intensity, which would lead to an increased demand for public services. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to public services and facilities that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to public services and facilities that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to public services and facilities. Fire Protection Fire protection for the Tustin Legacy Site was discussed and analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The Project results in no changes to that previous analysis, and no increased or new environmental effects on the environment from those previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The Project will be subject to OCFA regulations regarding construction materials and methods, emergency access, water mains, fire flow, fire hydrants, sprinkler systems, building setbacks, and other relevant regulations. Adherence to these regulations will reduce the risk of uncontrollable fire and increase the ability to efficiently provide fire protection services to the Site. Pursuant to the FEIS/EIR, the existing fire stations in the Project vicinity with additional firefighting personnel and equipment will meet the demands created by the Project and other development within Tustin Legacy. No new or expanded facilities were identified as being required and therefore no physical impacts were identified. Police Protection Police protection for the project site was discussed and analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The Project results in no changes to that previous analysis, and no increased or new environmental effects on the environment from those previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. Implementation of the Project would not increase the need for police protection services in addition to what was previously anticipated in the FEIS/EIR. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 34 Schools The Project will not directly result in any residential development. Therefore, the Project does not generate K-12 students and there is no impact to K-12 schools. Parks Parks for the project site were discussed and analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The Project results in no changes to that previous analysis, and no increased or new environmental effects on the environment from those previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. Other Public Facilities The FEIS/EIR concluded that public facilities would be provided according to a phasing plan to meet projected needs as development of the Specific Plan proceeded. The FEIS/EIR does identify that the City will require certain conditions for individual future development projects (identified as Implementation Measures on pages 4-67 through 4-70) to be complied with as appropriate. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to recreation. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-47 through 3-57, 4-56 through 4-80 and 7-21 through 7-22), Addendum 1 (Page 5-112 through 5-122), and Addendum 2 (Page 63 through 65) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin General Plan 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? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 35 b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Project will be adjacent to the Linear Park and will facilitate access to the Park by tenants of the mixed-use commercial development, consistent with the levels anticipated by the previously certified FEIR / EIS. The Proposed Project would not result in an increase of development intensity or change in uses that would result in increased use of existing parks or recreational facilities. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to recreation that are identified as a result of the implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to recreation that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement was prepared. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to recreation. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to recreation. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-47 through 3-57, 4-56 through 4-80, 7-21 through 7-22), Addendum 1 (Page 5-122 through 5-127), and Addendum 2 (Page 66 through 67) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Tustin City Code Section 9331d (1)(b) Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 36 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)? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not result in an increase of development intensity or change in uses, building height restrictions (including minor height modifications of 10% and 10% reduction in parking allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan), setbacks, signage, and other development standards. More specifically, the MCAS Specific Plan allocates 1,267,324 square feet of non-residential development to Planning Areas 9-12 (Neighborhood E), and allocates a unified trip budget to Neighborhood E of 17,516 average daily trips (ADT). These allowable development square footages and neighborhood trip budgets were previously analyzed in the MCAS Specific Plan Final EIR/EIS and the First Addendum thereto. The 870,000 sf Project is located entirely within Neighborhood E and would utilize only approximately 68% of the developable square footage in Neighborhood E under the MCAS Specific Plan, and would utilize just more than half of the developable area in Neighborhood E under the proposed MCAS Specific Plan Amendment. As documented in an access analysis independently reviewed and approved by the City, the Project would generate 9,484 ADTs, which is less than half of the Neighborhood E Trip Budget under the MCAS Specific Plan. Therefore, the Project is less intense, generates fewer trips, and (as explained further below) would have less effect on the circulation network Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 37 than initially described and analyzed in the Final EIR/EIS and the First Addendum thereto. In short, there are no changes to the land use intensity or density and resulting trip generation. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to transportation and traffic that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project that were not previously analyzed in the FEIR/EIS, Addendums, and Supplement. Based on this analysis, there are no new or increased significant adverse project - specific or cumulative impacts with regard to traffic and transportation that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to traffic and transportation that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to traffic and transportation. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to recreation. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement. However, the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement, also concluded that Specific Plan related traffic impacts were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR, Addendums, and Supplement, was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans and Studies FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-118 through 3-142, 4-139 through 4-206 and 7-32 through 7-42), Addendum 1 (Page 5-127 through 5-146), and Addendum 2 (Page 68 through 73) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Page 3-35 through 3-62, Page 3-70 through 3-81, Page 3-82 through 3-88, and Page 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 38 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? d) 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? e) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? f) 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? g) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? h) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? i) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and odors)? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not result in an increase of development intensity or change in uses cause any direct impacts to utilities and service systems. There are no new or increased significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts with regard to utilities/services systems that are identified as a result of the adoption and implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to utilities and service systems that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. As a result, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to utilities and service systems. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 39 The FEIS/EIR identifies that the City will require certain conditions for future individual development projects identified as "Mitigation" or "Implementation Measures" (pages 4-43 through 4-46) to be complied with as appropriate. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to utilities and service systems. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans and Studies FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-35 through 3-46, 4-32 through 4-55 and 7-20 through 7-21), Addendum 1 (Page 5-147 through 5-165), and Addendum 2 (Page 74 through 76) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Page 3-35 through 3-62, Page 3-70 through 3-81, Page 3-82 through 3-88, and Page 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 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.) Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 40 c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Project would allow site-specific development of a commercial mixed-use project permitted within Neighborhood E of the MCAS Specific Plan. The Project would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The Proposed Project would not change development intensity, building height restrictions (including minor height modifications of 10% and 10% reduction in parking allowed by the MCAs Tustin Specific Plan), setbacks, signage, and other development standards. The FEIS/EIR previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Specific Plan, including mandatory findings of significance associated with the implementation of the Project. The Project would not cause unmitigated environmental effects that were not already examined in the FEIS/EIR; there are no new mitigation measures required; and there are no new significant adverse project -specific or cumulative impacts in any environmental areas that were identified, nor would any project -specific or cumulative impacts in any environmental areas be made worse as a result of the Project. All feasible applicable mitigation measures identified in the FEIS/EIR are incorporated into the Project approvals. Further, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent EIR to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to environmental impacts. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplement; applicable measures are included as conditions of entitlement approvals. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans and Studies FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 5-4 through 5-11) MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Page 3-35 through 3-62, Page 3-70 through 3-81, Page 3-82 through 3-88, and Page 3-104 through 3-137) Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Flight at Tustin Legacy Page 41 CONCLUSION The above analysis concludes that all of the proposed project's effects were previously examined in the FEIS/EIR, Supplement, and Addendums, that no new effects would occur, that no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects would occur, that no new mitigation measures would be required, that no applicable mitigation measures previously not found to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and that there are no new mitigation measures or alternatives applicable to the project that would substantially reduce effects of the project that have not been considered and adopted. A Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program and Findings of Overriding Considerations were adopted for the FEIS/EIR on January 16, 2001, and shall apply to the Project, as applicable. 102061824.4. DOC