HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 99-086 ~ RESOLUTION NO. 99-86
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FINAL NEGATIVE
3 DECLARATION AS ADEQUATE FOR THE ADOPTION OF
ORDINANCE NO.1222 RELATED TO HOUSING INCENTIVES AS
4 REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT.
5
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
6
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
?
s A. That the adoption of Ordinance No. 1222 is considered "projects"
pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act;
9 and
~o B. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this-ordinance and
has been made available for public review between September 17,
~1 1999 and October 7, 1999.
~2 C. Whereas, the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin has
considered evidence presented by the Community Development
~3 Director and other interested parties with respect to the subject
Negative Declaration, and on September 27, 1999 recommended
14 that the City Council certify the Negative Declaration.
15
D. The City Council of the City of Tustin has reviewed and considered
~6 the Final Negative Declaration and has determined that the
Negative Declaration is adequate and complete.
17
II. A Final Negative DeClaration has been completed in compliance with
~s CEQA and state guidelines. The City Council has received and considered
the information contained in the Negative Declaration prior to
~9 recommending approval of the proposed project, and found that it
adequately discussed the environmental effects of the proposed ordinance.
20 Further, the City Council finds the adoption of the Density Bonus Ordinance
involves no potential for any adverse effects, whether individually or
2~ cumulatively, on wildlife resources; and, therefore, makes a De Minimis
Impact finding related to the California State Department' Fish and Game
22 Code Section 711.4.
23
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on
24 the 1st day of November, 1999.
T~/RACY I 'LS~Y/X~ '
25
26
27
28 /j~L/jA~~~~-
29
M~LA STOKER
erk -I
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 99-86
Initial Study & Negative Declaration
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
300 Centennial Way, 'Tustin, C,,1 92780
(714) 573-3100
INITIAL STUDY
A. BACKGROUND
Project Title: Density Bonus Ordinance
Lead Agency: City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, California 92780
Lead Agency Contact Person: Justins Willkom Phone: (714) 573-3174
Project Location: Citywide
Project Sponsor's Name and Address: N/A
General Plan Designation: Residential land uses
Zoning Designation: Residential Districts
Project Description: Adoption of a density bonus ordinance in accordance with the State
Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915)
Surrounding Uses:
North: County of Orange East: County of Orange and City of Irvine
South: City of Irvine West: City of Santa Ana
Other public agencies whose approval is required:
['] Orange County Fire Authority [22] City of Irvine
['] Orange County Health Care Agency [22] City of Santa Ana
[22] South Coast Air Quality Management ['~ Orange County
District EMA
["] Other
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 checldist in Section D below.
[']Land Use and Planning [']Hazards
[SBPopulation and Housing ["]Noise
["]Geological Problems [~]Public Services
[']Water [']Utilities and Service
Systems
['3Air Quality [']Aesthetics
["]Transportation &Circulation [DCultural 'Resources
["]Biological Resources [']Recreation
[']Energy and Mineral Resources [']Mandatory Findings of
Significance
C. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[5~ I fred 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.
["] 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.
['] I f'md 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 proposedproject.
Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director
D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Directions
1 ) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources i lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects
like the one involved (e.g., the project falls 'outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"answer should be
explained where it is based on project-specific factors and general standards (e.g., the project will not expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take into account the whole action involved, including off-site, on-site, cumulative project level,
indirect, direct, construction, and operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
"Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If
there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, and EIR is
required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant
Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect
to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-
referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has
been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3)(D). In this case, a brief
discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of
and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether
such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,
where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies
normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in
whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the Significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and,
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
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 m the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the Califomia 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? [] [] [] []
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? [] [] [] []
Less Than
Significant
Potentially FFith Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: - Would the project: Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directl½ 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 Califomia
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 Califomia
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, of
other means? [] [] [] []
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? [] [] [] []
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? [] [] [] []
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation
plan? [] [] [] []
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: - Would the project:
a) CaUse a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as 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 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:
Less Than
S~gni~cant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporation Impact No ]rapact
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- I-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 waste water disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? '- [] [] [] []
VII.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:
Would the project:
a) Create a 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 envhzonment? [] [] [] []
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school? [] [] [] []
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to 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? [] [] [] []
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
pl : [] [] [] []
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland rites, 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 uges 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 pattem of the site
or area, including througt~ 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 vdthin a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? [] [] [] []
h) Place within a 100-year flood haT~rd 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? [] [] [] []
Less Than
Significant
POtentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal pro~am, 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? [] [] [] []
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 excess noise levels? [] [] [] []
XILPOPULATION 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? [] [] [] []
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [] [] [] []
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the pi-oject result in substantial adverse physical
impactsassociated 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? [] [] [] []
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? [] [] [] []
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
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? [] [] [] []
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? [] [] [] []
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory? [] [] [] []
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? CCnmulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)? [] [] [] []
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly? [] [] [] []
ATTACHMENT A
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
DENSITY BONUS ORDINANCE
BACKGROUND
The State Planning and Zoning Law (Government Code Section 65915) created
a Density Bonus Law to offer land use based incentives to increase the economic
feasibility of affordable housing development. The law was amended in 1989
requiring that all local governments adopt an implementing ordinance and
establish procedures for processing such proposal.
The Density Bonus Ordinance states that when a developer agrees to provide:
(1) At least 20 percent of the total units affordable to Lower Income
Households; or
(2) At least 10 percent of the total units affordable to Very Low Income
Households; or
(3) 50 percent Senior citizen housing.
The city shall either:
(a) Grant a Density Bonus of at least 25 percent, and at least one Concession
or Incentive, unless the City Council makes a written finding that the
additional concession or incentive is not required in order to provide for
affordable housing, or
(b) Provide other Incentives of Equivalent Financial Value based upon the land
cost per dwelling unit.
There would be no physical improvement or changes in the environment as a
result of the adoption .of this ordinance. Impacts of potential future projects would
be evaluated in conjunction with each future project.
1. AESTHETICS
Items a throuqh d- "No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonus for affordable housing project. No
physical improvements are currently proposed in conjunction with the
adoption of this ordinance. As such, the proposed ordinance will not have
any effects on aesthetics in the area including scenic vistas or scenic
resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rocks outcropping, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The proposed ordinance
will not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the plan area or its
surroundings. Impacts related to any future project would be identified and
evaluated in conjunction with a specific project.
Density Bonus.- Initial Study
Attachment A
Page 2 of 7
Sources: Tustin Zoning Code
Tustin General Plan
Govemment Code Section 65915
Miti.qationlMonitoring Required: None Required
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Items a through c- "No Impact": The proposed ordinance would allow for
higher densities and provide incentives to encourage the development of
affordable housing, however, no physical improvements are currently
proposed in conjunction with the ordinance. The proposed ordinance will
have no impacts on any farmland, nor will it conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Willamson Act contract. The ordinance will not result in
conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use. Impacts related to any
future project would be identified and evaluated in conjunction with a
specific project.
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Miti.qation/Monitorin.q Required: None Required
3. AIR QUALITY
Items a through e -"No Impact. The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects,
however, no physical improvements are currently proposed in conjunction
with the ordinance. As such, the ordinance will not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of any applicable air plan, violate any air quality standard,
result in a cumulatively considerable increase of any cdteria pollutant as
applicable by federal or ambient air quality standard, nor will it expose
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or create
objectionable odor affecting a substantial number of people. Impacts related
to future project would be evaluated when a specific project is proposed.
Sources: South Coast Air Quality Management Distdct Rules and
Regulations
Tustin General Plan
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Required
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Items a throu.qh f- "No Impact": The proposed ordinance-would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects,
Density Bonus - Initial Study
Attachment A
Page 3 of 7
however, no physical improvements are currently proposed in conjunction
with the ordinance. No impacts to any unique, rare, or endangered species
of plant or animal life identified in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service would occur as a result of this ordinance. Impacts related to
future project would be evaluated when a specific project is proposed.
Sources: Tustin General Plan
.Miti,qation/Monitorinq Required: None Required
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Items a throuqh d -"No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects,
however, no physical improvements are currently proposed in conjunction
with the ordinance. As such, the ordinance will not adversely affect any
historical resources or archaeological resources or destroy or disturb a
unique paleontological resource, human remains or geological feature.
Impacts related to any future project would be identified and evaluated in
conjunction with .a specific project.
Sources: Cultural Resources District
Tustin Zoning Code
General Plan
Miti~ation/Monitoring Required: None Required
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Items a (I), a (ii), a (iii), a (iv), b, c, d and e -"No Impact"' The proposed
ordinance would establish provisions for granting density bonuses for
affordable housing projects, however, no physical improvements are
currently proposed in conjunction with the ordinance. As such, the
proposed ordinance will not expose people to potential adverse geologic
impacts, including the risk of 10ss, injury, or death involving the rupture of a
known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, landslides, soil
erosion, or loss of top soil, nor is the project on unstable or expansive soil.
Impacts related to any future project would be identified and evaluated in
conjunction with a specific project.
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Miti~ation/Monitorinq Required: None Required
Density Bonus - Initial Study
Attachment A
Page 4 of 7
7. HAZARD AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Items a through h -"No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects,
however, no physical improvements are currently proposed in conjunction
with the ordinance. As such, the proposed ordinance will not result in
significant hazards (i.e. explosion, hazardous materials spill, interference
with emergency response plans, wildland fires, etc.), nor is the project area
located within an airport land use plan, or vicinity of a private airstrip.
Impacts related to future project would be evaluated when a specific
project.is proposed.
Sources: Orange County Fire Authority
Orange County Health Agency
Tustin General Plan
Mitigation/Monitorinfi Required: None Required
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Items a through i -"No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses 'for affordable housing projects,
however, no physical improvements are currently proposed in conjunction
with the ordinance. The ordinance will not result in any change in the
amount or direction of surface or groundwaters. Impacts related to any
future project would be identified and evaluated in conjunction with a
specific project:
Sources: Tustin General Plan
MitigationlMonitorin,q Required: None Required
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Items a throu~h c- "No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects.
This is in accordance with the State Law requiring cities to adopt
implementing ordinances and establish procedures for processing such
proposals. No physical improvement is proposed in conjunction with the
ordinance. The ordinance is consistent with the intent of the City's General
Plan to provide affordable housing to low income families. The proposed
ordinance will not physically divide an established community or conflict with
any applicable habitat conservation plan. Impacts related to density
increases would be identified and evaluated in conjunction with a specific
project.
Density Bonus - Initial Study
Attachment A
Page 5 of 7
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Tustin Zoning Code
Mitigation/Monitorinq Required: None Required
10. MINERAL RESOURCES
Items a and b -"No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects,
however, no physical improvement is currently proposed in conjunction
with the ordinance. The proposed ordinance will not result in loss of a
known mineral resource, or availability of a locally important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on the general plan or other applicable
land use maps. Impacts related to any future project would be identified
and evaluated in conjunction with a specific project.
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Miti,qation/Monitorinq Required: None Required
11. NOISE
Items a throuqh f- "No Impact": Thd proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects.
No physical improvement is currently proposed in conjunction with the
ordinance. As such, the proposed ordinance will not expose persons to
noise levels in excess of standards established in the general plan, noise
ordinance, or excessive ground vibrations, nor will it create a permanent
increase in the.existing ambient noise levels. Impacts related to any future
project would be identified and evaluated in conjunction with a specific
project.
Sources: Tustin City Code
Tustin General Plan
Mitifiation/Monitorin.q Required: None Required
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Items a,' b, and c- "No Impact": The proposed ordinance would allow
developer to construct additional units beyond the permitted number of
units allowed by the Zoning Code or the General Plan. However, there
are no physical improvements proposed in conjunction with the ordinance.
Impact associated with the increase in population and housing as a result
of this ordinance would be identified and evaluated in conjunction with a
specific project.
Density Bonus - Initial Study
Attachment A
Page 6 of 7
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Mitigation/Monitorin.q Required: None Required
13. PUBLIC SERVICES
Item a -" No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish provisions
for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects, however, no
physical improvements are currently proposed in conjunction with the
ordinance. As such, the proposed ordinance will not create demand for
alteration or addition of government facilities or services (fire and police
protection, schools, parks, etc.). Impacts related to any future project
would be identified and evaluated in conjunction with a specific project.
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Miti.qation/Monitorin,q Required: None Required
14. RECREATION
Items a and b - "No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects,
however, no property acquisitions or physical improvements are currently
proposed in conjunction with the ordinance. No physical changes to the
number of residential units are proposed at this time and the ordinance will
not increase demand for neighborhood parks 'or recreational facilities.
Impacts related to any future project would be identified and evaluated in
conjunction with a specific project.
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Miti.qation/Monitorinfi Required: None Required
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Items a throu.qh .q -"No Impact": The proposed. ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects,
however, no physical improvements are currently proposed in conjunction
with the ordinance. As such, no alteration in the traffic generation and
circulation patterns within the project area would be affected by the
proposed ordinance. The proposed ordinance will not result in changes to
air traffic patterns, emergency access, level of service standards, or conflict
with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative
transportation. Impacts related to any future project would be identified
and evaluated in conjunction with a specific project.
Density Bonus - Initial Study
Attachment A
Page 7 of 7
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Miti.qation/Monitorin.q Required: None Required
16. UTILTIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Items a throu.qh .q - "No Impact": The proposed ordinance would establish
provisions for granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects,
however, no property acquisitions or physical improvements are proposed
in c. onjunction with the ordinance. The adoption of the ordinance will have
no impacts to water treatment, water supply, wastewater treatment, and
solid waste disposal. Impacts related to any future project would be
identified and evaluated in conjunction with a specific project.
Sources: Tustin General Plan
Miti.qation/Monitoring Required: None Required
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to establish provisions for
granting density bonuses for affordable housing projects. Since no
physical improvements are proposed in conjunction with the ordinance,
the ordinance does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment nor achieve short-term environmental goals to the
disadvantage of the long-term.
S:\CDD~JUSTINA\current planning\density bonus nd attachment A.doc
RESOLUTION CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF TUSTIN )
RESOLUTION NO. 99-86
Pamela Stoker, 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 '~s
five; that the above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of
the City Council held on the 1st day of November, 1999, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES: Worley, Thomas, Doyle, Potts, Saltarelli
COUNCILMEMBER NOES: None
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED None
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: None
la Stoker, City Clerk