HomeMy WebLinkAbout17 (JOINT ITEM TPFA 2) 1ST AMEND TO LEGACY DDA 06-01 03-20-07Agenda Item 17
Reviewed:
AGENDA REPO T City Manager
er
.' Finance Director Nva
._
MEETING DATE: MARCH 20, 2007
TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
FROM: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF
SUBJECT: FIRST AMENDMENT TO TUSTIN LEGACY DISPOSITION AND
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 06-01 (MASTER DEVELOPMENT SITE)
SUMMARY
Approval is requested of a First Amendment to the Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) for the Master Development site between the City of Tustin, Tustin
Public Financing Authority, and Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC ("TLCP" or the
"Developer") for the sale and development of certain property at Tustin Legacy
("Project").
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No.07-29 finding that the First Amendment to DDA 06-01 is within
the scope of the Final Joint Program EIS/EIR for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS
Tustin, as amended by an Addendum and no additional analysis or document is
required under CEQA.
2. Approve and authorize .the City Manager, or Assistant City Manager to execute the
First Amendment to DDA 06-01 and to carry out all actions necessary to implement the
amendment including execution of all related douments and instruments.
That the Tustin Public Financing Authority:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 07-01 finding that the First Amendment to DDA 06-01 is within
the scope of the Final Joint Program EIS/EIR for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS
Tustin, as amended by an Addendum and no additional analysis or document is
required under CEQA.
2. Approve and authorize the City Manager, or Assistant City Manager to execute the
First Amendment to DDA 06-01 on behalf of the Tustin Public Financing Authority
and to carry out all actions necessary to implement the amendment including
execution of all related documents and instruments.
FISCAL IMPACT
The project involves no direct fiscal impacts on the City of Tustin anticipated at this time.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
The original DDA 06-01 was entered into by and between the City of Tustin and Tustin
Legacy Community Partners, LLC (TLCP), a Delaware limited liability company on May
3, 2006. The original DDA sets forth the parameters of development and conveyance.
by the City of Tustin and Tustin Public Financing Authority (hereinafter the "Agency") of
certain property at Tustin Legacy (the former MCAS Tustin) to TLCP. Members of
TLCP include Centex Homes, Shea Homes and Shea Properties (the "Developer").
Under the original DDA, TLCP will serve as the master developer, the land development
entity that will entitle the Property, build out certain defined Tustin Legacy Backbone
Infrastructure, and then sell finished development parcels to residential builders for
construction of vertical improvements (homes) in Neighborhood D and rough graded
parcels to builders for construction of vertical residential and non-residential
development in Neighborhoods B, D and E. TLCP have also indicated that they will
also act as vertical builders for a large portion of the Property. The DDA contemplates
that certain portions of the Property will be developed by third party developers as well.
Pursuant to the Original DDA, a scope of development (Attachment 28), schedule of
performance (Attachment 17), and a -variety of terms and conditions required of TLCP
were identified. In the Original DDA, the Property was proposed to be developed
around four (4) potential conveyance phases to the Developer: Phase 1 was to have
begun in September 2006, Phase 2 begins in September 2009, Phase 3 begins in July
2011, and Phase 4 to be defined pursuant to a process defined in the Original DDA.
The Original DDA establishes certain key terms, including but not limited to the phasing
and conditions precedent to the City's obligation to sell and convey each phase of the
property to the Developer, the purchase price of the property, profit participation
payments, obligations of the Developer for deconstruction of the. Property and
development of the Property under the established schedule of performance including
obligations for construction of Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure and Local
Infrastructure.
A Summary of First Amendment to the DDA
First Amendments now being proposed to the DDA can be summarized as follows:
1. Minor amendments to clarify the DDA language as it affects Section 1.13.1,
3.2,3.3 and 3.4 of the original DDA as it relates to closing dates and 'clarification
for extensions to closing dates and how these extension relate to default
provisions in the Original DDA.
2. Neighborhood E: A modification to the scope of development to relocate the
Sports Park/detention basin originally proposed at Red Hill and Warner Avenue.
The detention basin component would be incorporated into detention facilities
within the Linear Park and constructed with Phase 1 of the Linear Park; whereas
the Sports Park component would be relocated to Phase 2. Commercial/business
uses would replace the original sports park site in Phase 1. The sports park
relocation site would be at the southeast of the extension of Carnegie and the
Linear Park.
3. Neighborhood G: A modification to relocate and defer construction of a
Congregate Care facility at Valencia and Tustin Ranch Road until Phase 2 and to
replace the original Congregate Care site in Phase 1 with residential uses.
4. Neighborhood D: The Developer has modified the square footage distributions
within the portion of the Community Core located south of Warner Avenue
(Planning Area 13 and 14) consistent with the Implementation Strategy required
by the Original DDA that was previously considered and approved by the City
Council for this area.
5. Given the moderations in the housing market, minor alterations to the Original
DDA Schedule of Performance (Attachment 17 and Exhibit F of Attachment 28)
are proposed.
6. The Developer proposes to delete a grade separated vehicular under -crossing at
Tustin Ranch Road just north of the Community Park that is currently shown as a
Developer required Backbone Infrastructure Improvement in Attachment 10 of
the Original DDA (improvement 129) and replace it with a grade separated
pedestrian/bicycle bridge over -crossing between the Neighborhood and Linear
Park proposed along the east side of Tustin Ranch Road and the north side of
the Community Park located on the west side of Tustin Ranch Road north of
Legacy Crossing.
7. Instead of six (6) arches within the Linear Park as required by the Original DDA
as part of Local Infrastructure Improvements, the Developer will be required to
construct an iconic grade separated pedestrian bridge structure with functional
purpose that incorporates arch features for the pedestrian bridge at Warner
Avenue /Community Park, and unique iconic pedestrian bridges over Tustin
Ranch Road/Community Park, and Armstrong/Linear Park subject to approval of
the design by the City.
This proposal requires that the cost of all grade separated crossings have costs
associated with the complete construction of these facilities that are at a
minimum equal to the total costs of the six (6) arches and three (3) bridges as
originally identified in the Original DDA (a total cost of $19,813,005), as will be
certified by the Public Works Director and Assistant City Manager. Any cost
escalations necessary to accommodate construction of the iconic bridge
structures will be a Developer obligation.
8. Amendments to Attachment 17 Schedule of Performance and Exhibit G of
Attachment 28 related to requirements for substantial progress related to closing
requirements by development phase.
Financial Analysis of the Amendment
Based on the amendments proposed by TLCP, the City has asked Keyser Marston, Inc.
to undertake a com arison regarding the impact of the proposed modifications
(KMA) p
on land value of the transaction with the Developer. This is ensure that the proposed
amendments do not create a net positive financial impact on land values , based on the
original DDA cash flow model. Based on KMA's financial review using the same value
assumptions as contained n the original DDA cash flow model, the proposed
amendments would not have a positive impact on the Developer's Internal Rate of
Return (IRR) and thus would not require an adjustment in the proposed land payments
to the City.
Environmental Documentation
In considering approval of the First Amendment to DDA 06-01, the City and Public
Financing Authority has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act and the applicable state and local implementing guidelines (collectively
"CEQA") through the preparation of an initial study. The conclusion of the initial study is
that the amendment is consistent with the Final Joint Program Environmental Impact
Report for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin, as amended in April 2006 by a
Final Addendum (including a minor Errata to the Addendum). City staff are
recommending that the City Council and Public Finance Authority each adopt
resolutions with applicable environmental findings supporting this conclusion.
Christine Shingleton
Assistant City Manager
Attachments: DDA Amendment
C.C. Resolution 07-29
TPFA Resolution 07-01
Initial Study
RESOLUTION NO. 07-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN PUBLIC FINANCING
AUTHORITY FINDING THAT THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
DISPOSAL AND REUSE OF MCAS TUSTIN ("FEIS/FEIRYY)
AND ITS ADDENDUM IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE
PROJECT EIS/EIR FOR THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO
TUSTIN LEGACY DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT 06-001 (MASTER DEVELOPER) AND THAT
ALL APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES WILL BE
INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT AS REQUIRED BY
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
I. The Tustin Public Financing Authority does hereby resolve as follows:
A. That the First Amendment to the Tustin Legacy Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA 06-01 (Master Developer is proposed by
and between the City of Tustin, Tustin Public Financing Authority and
Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC. (the developer), a Delaware
limited liability company.
B. That the First Amendment to the Tustin Legacy Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA 06-01 (Master Developer is considered a
"Project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act;
C. That 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 April 3, 2006, the City
Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the
Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for
the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR and its
Addendum is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality
Act ("CEQA"). The FEIS/FEIR and its Addendum considered the potential
environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine
Corps Air Station, Tustin;
D. The City prepared a comprehensive Environmental Checklist for the First
Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA 06-01)
(Master Developer) along with proposed amendments to the Specific Plan
and a Development Agreement which is also being processed by the
developer, attached as Exhibit A hereto. The Environmental Checklist
concluded that the proposed project does not result in any new significant
environmental impacts, substantial changes or a substantial increase in the
severity of any previously identified significant impacts in the FEIS/EIR and
Addendum. Moreover, no new information of substantial importance has
surfaced since certification of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum.
Page 2
II. The Tustin Public Financing Authority finds that the project is within the scope of
the previously approved Program FEIS/FEIR and its Addendum 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 at a regular meeting of the Tustin Public Financing Authority
held on the 20th day of March, 2007.
LOU BONE
Chairman
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, do 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. 07 -XX was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the day
of , 2007 by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 07-29
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
FINDING THAT THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE DISPOSAL AND REUSE OF MCAS TUSTIN
CFEISIFEIR") AND ITS ADDENDUM IS ADEQUATE TO
SERVE AS THE PROJECT EIS/EIR FOR THE FIRST
AMENDMENT TO TUSTIN LEGACY DISPOSITION AND
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 06-001 (MASTER
DEVELOPER) AND THAT ALL APPLICABLE MITIGATION
MEASURES WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE
PROJECT AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
I. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
A. That the First Amendment to the Tustin Legacy Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA 06-01 (Master Developer is proposed by
and between the City of Tustin, the Tustin Public Financing Authority and
Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC. (the developer), a Delaware
limited liability company.
B. That the First Amendment to the Tustin Legacy Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA 06-01 (Master Developer is considered a
"Project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act;
C. That 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 April 3, 2006, the City
Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the
Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for
the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR and its
Addendum is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality
Act ("CEQA"). The FEIS/FEIR and its Addendum considered the potential
environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine
Corps Air Station, Tustin;
D. The City prepared a comprehensive Environmental Checklist for the First
Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA 06-01)
(Master Developer) along with proposed amendments to the Specific Plan
and a Development Agreement which is also being processed by the
developer, attached as Exhibit A hereto. The Environmental Checklist
concluded that the proposed project does not result in any new significant
environmental impacts, substantial changes or a substantial increase in the
severity of any previously identified significant impacts in the FEIS/EIR and
Addendum. Moreover, no new information of substantial importance has
surfaced since certification of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum.
Page 2
II. The City Council finds that the project is within the scope of the previously
approved Program FEIS/FEIR and its Addendum 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 at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on the
20th day of March, 2007.
LOU BONE
MAYOR
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, do 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. 07 -XX was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the day
of , 2007 by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
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 and the following evaluation 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): Disposition and Development Agreement 05-01 Amendment, Development
Agreement' 06-002, and Specific Plan Amendment 07-001
Lead Agency: City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92780
Lead Agency Contact Person: Justina Willkom Phone: (714) 573-3115
Proj ect Location: Neighborhoods B, D, E, and G of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan
Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC
26840 Aliso Viejo Parkway, Suite 100
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
General Plan Designation: MCAS Tustin Specific Plan
Zoning Designation: MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (SP -1 Specific Plan), Neighborhoods B, D, E,
and G
Project Description: Proposed - amendment of a previously approved Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA 05 -01 -Master Developer), Development
Agreement 06-002, between the City of Tustin and Tustin Legacy
Community Partners, LLC, and Minor Amendment to the MCAS Tustin
Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (See attachment A for further project description).
Surrounding Uses: North: Edinger Avenue and Residential Uses
East: Jamboree Road/Industrial Uses
South: Light Industrial/Business Parks
West: Red Hill Avenue, Business Complexes
Previous Environmental Documentation: Program Final Environmental Impact
Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Program FEIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine
Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin (State Clearinghouse #94071005) certified by the Tustin City Council
on January 16, 2001 and its Addendum approved by the City Council on April 3, 2006.
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.
F]Land Use and Planning
RPopulation and Housing
F]Geology and Soils
[:]Hydrology and Water Quality
F]Air Quality
F] Transportation &Circulation
RBiological Resources
❑Mineral Resources
F]Agricultural Resources
C. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
F]Hazards and Hazardous Materials
F]Noise
F]Public Services
FlUtilities and Service Systems
F]Aesthetics
RCultural Resources
RRecreation
RMandatory Findings of
Significance
F-1 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
F-1 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.
F-1 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL .IMPACT REPORT is required.
F-1 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.
F1 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.
Preparer:
Juana Willkom, Senior Planner
Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director
Christine A. Shingleton, A i tart City Manager
D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
See Attachment A attached to this Checklist
Date: 3�g � 01
Date ..Z -
Date
Date
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?
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?
El
El
No Substantial
New
More
Change From
Significant
Severe
Previous
Impact
Impacts
Analysis
❑
❑
❑
El
❑
❑
El
El
Z
F�
E]
Z
El
F-1
Z
El
El
Z
F�
E]
Z
El
F-1
Z
F�
E]
Z
El
El
Z
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?
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:
No Substantial
New More Change From
Significant Severe Previous
Impact Impacts Analvsis
El
El
F]
1:1
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? EI ❑
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? EJ ❑
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? ❑ El
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? EI ❑
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? EI EJ
No Substantial
New
More
Change From
Significant
Severe
Previous
Impact
Impacts
Analvsis
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?
EJ
❑
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? EI ❑
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? EJ ❑
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? ❑ El
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? EI ❑
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? EI EJ
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?
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?
1:1 , 1:1 E
1:1
No Substantial
New
More
Change From
Significant
Severe
Previous
Impact
Impacts
Analysis
F-1
El
1:1 , 1:1 E
1:1
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?
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?
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?
No Substantial
New More Change From
Significant Severe Previous
Impact Impacts Analysis
El
El
Z
El
F-1
Z
El
El
Z
El
El
Z
El
F�
El
o
�
El
El
El
El
El
0
El
El
�
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?
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?
F-1
El
No Substantial
New
More
Change From
Significant
Severe
Previous
Impact
Impacts
Analysis
D
�
Z
F-1
El
Z
F�
F�
Z
❑
o
Z
❑
o
Z
1:1
El
Z
El
F-1
Z
Z
Z
1:1
El
El
F-1
Z
Z
Z
F�
El
1:1
El
F-1
El
El
r-1
El
El
Z
Z
Z
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? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
No Substantial
New More Change From
Significant Severe Previous
Impact Impacts Analysis
0
IN
El z
El 0
El E
El E
El E
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
AMENDMENT TO DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 05-01.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 06-002
PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 07-001
NEIGHBORHOODS B, D, E, AND G OF MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN
PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
A Final Joint Environmental Impact Statement' Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the
Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program for the EIS/EIR was prepared by the City of Tustin and the Department of the
Navy (DoN) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
National Environmental Policy (NEPA). The FEIS/EIR analyzed the environmental consequences
of the Navy disposal and local community reuse of the MCAS Tustin site per the Reuse Plan and
the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse 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/Reuse Plan. The FEIS/EIR and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program were adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. The DoN
published its Record of Decision (ROD) on March 3, 2001. On April 3,12-006, the City Council
adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR.
The MCAS Tustin Specific Plan proposed and the FEIS/EIR and Addendum analyzed a multi-year
development period for the planned urban reuse project. when individual activities with the
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan are proposed, the agency is required to examine the individual
activities to determine if their effects were fully analyzed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. The
agency can approve the activities as being within the scope of the project covered by the FEIS/EIR
and Addendum. If the agency finds that pursuant to Sections 15162, 15164, 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 environmental
document is required. For the proposed Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA)
Amendment, Development Agreement (DA), and Specific Plan Amendment (SPA.) project, the
City prepared a comprehensive Environmental Checklist and the analysis is provided below to
determine if the project is within the scope of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum and if new effects
would occur as a result of the project.
PROJECT LOCATION
The property subject to the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA 05 -01 -Master
Developer, hereinafter the "Original DDA"), Proposed DDA Amendment, Development
Agreement (DA) 06-002, and Specific Plan Amendment 07-001 consists of approximately 820
acres at Tustin Legacy. Tustin Legacy is that portion of the former Marine Corps Air Station
(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 was officially closed in
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 2
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 also located in central Orange County and approximately 40 miles southeast of
downtown Los Angeles. Tustin Legacy is in close proximity to tour major freeways: the Costa
Mesa (SR -55), Santa Ana (I-5), Laguna (SR -133) and San Diego (I-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 west, Edinger Avenue and Irvine
Center Drive on the north, Harvard Avenue on the east, and Barranca Parkway on the south.
Jamboree Road transects the Property. John Wayne Airport is located approximately three miles
to the south and a Metrolink Commuter Rail Station is located immediately to the north
providing daily passenger service to employment centers in Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, and
San Diego counties.
The Property is within the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. That portion of the Property subject to
the Original DDA, Proposed DDA Amendment, Proposed DA 06-002, and Proposed Specific
Plan Amendment is within an 820 acre footprint. The estimate of Property within this footprint
that might ultimately be conveyed to the Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC (Developer)
for private development as identified in the Original DDA is approximately 420 acres in size.
The Property subject to the Original DDA, Proposed DDA Amendment, Proposed DA 06-002,
and Proposed Specific Plan Amendment also includes property that will not be transferred by the
City to the Developer, including property owned or to be owned by the City of Tustin, the Tustin
Unified School District including but not limited to certain public uses, public utilities, and
public right-of-way areas, and approximately 15 acres of property that could be privately
developed; however, a final disposition of ownership decision could not be made at the time of
execution of the Original DDA (this is the 15 acre "Hangar Parcel").
The majority of the Property subject to the Original DDA, Proposed DDA Amendment,
Proposed DA 06-002, and Proposed Specific Plan Amendment is currently owned by the City of
Tustin. A portion of the Property is also currently owned by the Department of the Navy and is
expected to be transferred to the City of Tustin subject to the Navy's issuance of a Finding of
Suitability to Transfer (FOST) and deed provisions mutually acceptable to the Navy and City.
The City will transfer the Property for private development to the Developer (unless excluded
pursuant to the Original DDA) in phases.
PRESENT CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY
Historically, the Property was used as a Marine Corps helicopter training facility. Currently, the
actual footprint of the Property is largely undeveloped land that was previously used for interim
agricultural out -leasing by the Marines, and also improved with landing strips and tarmac areas.
Permits for demolition of abandoned buildings on the Property have been issued and existing
facilities are in the process of being removed, with obsolete infrastructure also programmed for
removal. The City has nearly completed a Phase I roadway project, the Valencia/Armstrong
project, which included some demolition of tarmac areas, landing strips, and demolition of some
obsolete utilities. The Valencia/Armstrong project also included the installation of water and
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, .'PA 07-001
Page 3
sewer Backbone Infrastructure on a portion of the Property and interim storm drain retention
facilities. Interim earth work. and mass grading of the Property by the Developer is also
proposed to begin shortly.
As required by the Original DDA, the Developer has obtained approval of a Sector A Map which
encompasses the entire Property and is completing preconditions to the Phase 1 conveyance.
The Developer has also begun processing the Sector B maps for MCAS Tustin Specific Plan
Neighborhoods E and G, and the required accompanying Concept Plans for each Neighborhood
(Neighborhoods D, E, and G). Sector B Map for Neighborhood D is expected to be submitted
shortly. Certain major amendments or refinements to the DDA and Specific Plan Amendment
are being requested to facilitate submittals and to clarify Original DDA terms and conditions as
described in more detail under the DDA section.
PROJECT COMPONENTS
The project evaluated in this environmental review includes two components described further in
sections below:
• DDA (Master Developer) Amendments
• Development Agreement 06-002
• Specific Plan Amendment 07-001
AMENDMENTS TO THE ORIGINAL DDA
Background
The Original DDA was entered into by and between the City of Tustin and Tustin Legacy
Community Partners, LLC (TLCP), a Delaware limited liability company on May 3, 2006. The
original DDA sets forth the parameters of development and conveyance by the City of Tustin
and Tustin Public Financing Authority (hereinafter the "Agency") of certain property at Tustin
Legacy (the former MCAS Tustin) to TLCP. Members of the TLCP include Centex Homes,
Shea Homes, and Shea Properties (the "Developer").
Under the original DDA, TLCP will serve as the master developer, the land development entity
that will entitle the Property, build out certain defined Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure,
and then sell finished development parcels to residential builders for construction of vertical
improvements (homes) in Neighborhood D and rough graded parcels to builders for construction
of vertical residential and non-residential development in Neighborhoods B, D and E. TLCP
have indicated that they will also act as vertical builders for a large portion of the Property. The
DDA contemplates that certain portions of the Property will be developed by third party
developers.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 4
Pursuant to the Original DDA, a scope of development (Attachment 28), schedule of
performance (Attachment 17), and a variety of terms and conditions required of TLCP were
identified. In the Original DDA, the Property was proposed to be developed around four (4)
potential conveyance phases to the Developer: Phase 1 began in September 2006, Phase 2
begins in September 2009, Phase 3 begins in July 2011, and Phase 4 to be defined pursuant to the
process defined in the Original DDA. The Original DDA establishes certain key terms,
including but not limited to, the phasing and conditions precedent to the Agency's obligation to
sell and convey each phase of the Property to the Developer, the purchase price of the property,
profit participation payments, obligations of the Developer for deconstruction of the Property,
and development of the Property under the established schedule of performance including
obligations for construction of Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure and Local Infrastructure.
Description of DDA Amendments
1. Minor amendments to clarify the language in Sections 1. 13, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 of the
Original DDA related to default provisions in the Original DDA and the Attachment 17
Schedule of Performance.
2. Neighborhood E: A modification to the scope of development to relocate the Sports
Park; detention basin originally proposed at Red Hill and Varner Avenue. The detention
basin component would be incorporated into detention facilities within the Linear Park
and constructed with Phase 1 of the Linear Park, whereas the Sports Park component
would be relocated to Phase 2. Commercial/business uses would replace the original
sports park site in Phase 1. The sports park relocation site would be at the southeast of
the extension of Carnegie and the Linear Park.
This amendment required a financial review to confirm that the amendment has not
created net positive financial impacts on land value when all DDA Amendments are
considered, based on the Final DDA Pro Forma (more specifically, the Business Plan
residual land values) considered in the Original DDA (this is when all DDA changes
requested are taken into consideration). Based on the proposed DDA Amendment
language and conditions including revisions to Attachments 17 and 28, a determination
has been made that the DDA Amendment will have an immaterial impact on the original
value assumptions as contained in the DDA Business Plan cash flow model and would
not require an adjustment in proposed land payments to the City of Tustin.
3. Neighborhood G: A modification to relocate and defer construction of a Congregate Care
facility at Valencia and Tustin Ranch Road until Phase 2 and to replace the original
Congregate Care site in Phase 1 with residential uses.
The Proposed DDA Amendment also required a financial review to confirm that the
amendment has not created a net positive impact on land values when all DDA
amendments are considered based on the Final DDA Pro Forma (more specifically, the
Business Plan residual land values) considered in the Original DDA (this is when all
DDA changes requested are taken into consideration). Based on the proposed DDA
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 5
Amendment including revisions to Attachments 17 and 28, a determination has been
made that the DDA Amendment will have an immaterial impact on the original value
assumptions as contained in the DDA Business Plan cash flow model and would not
require an adjustment in proposed land payments to the City of Tustin.
4. Neighborhood D: The Developer modified the square footage distributions within the
portion of the Community Core located south of Warner Avenue (Planning Areas 13 and
14) consistent with the Implementation Strategy required by the Original DDA that was
previously considered and approved by the City Council for this area.
The Proposed DDA Amendment has also required a financial review to confirm that the
DDA Amendment has not created a net positive impact on land values when all DDA
Amendments are considered based on the Final DDA Pro Forma (more specifically, the
Business Plan residual land values) considered in the Original DDA (this is when all
DDA changes requested are taken into consideration). Based on the proposed DDA
Amendment including revisions to Attachments 17 and 28, a determination has been
made that the DDA Amendment will have an immaterial impact on the original value
assumptions as contained in the DDA Business Plan cash flow model and would not
require an adjustment in proposed land payments to the City of Tustin.
5. Minor alterations to the Original DDA Schedule of Performance (Attachment 17 and
Exhibit F of Attachment 28) are proposed.
6. The Developer proposes to delete a grade separated vehicular under -crossing at Tustin
Ranch Road just north of the Community Park that is currently shown as a Developer
required Backbone Infrastructure Improvement in Attachment 10 of the Original DDA
(improvement 129) and replace it with a grade separated pedestrian/bicycle bridge over -
crossing between the Neighborhood and Linear Park proposed along the east side of
Tustin Ranch Road and the north side of the Community Park located on the west side of
Tustin Ranch Road north of Legacy Crossing. Costs associated with this modification
will need to be considered pursuant to item #7 below.
7. Instead of six (6) arches within the Linear Park as required by the Original DDA's
provisions for Local Infrastructure Improvements, the Developer will be required to
construct an iconic rade separated pedestrian bridge structure with functional purpose
that incorporates arch features for the pedestrian bridge at Warner Avenue/Community
Park, and unique iconic pedestrian bridges over Tustin Ranch Road/Community Park,
and Armstrong/Linear Park, subject to approval of the design by the City.
This proposal requires that the cost of all grade separated crossings have costs associated
with the complete construction of these facilities that are at a minimum equal to the total
costs of the six (6) arches and three (3) bridges as originally identified in the Original
DDA (a total cost of $19,813,005), as will be certified by the Public Works Director and
Assistant City Manager. Any cost escalations necessary to accommodate construction of
the iconic bridge structures will be a Developer obligation.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 6
8. Modification of Attachment 10 entitled Description of Developer's Backbone
Infrastructure Work and Attachment 11 entitled Description of Local Infrastructure
Work.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive
planning, and reduce the economic risk of development, the California Legislature adopted the
Development Agreement Statute of the Government Code. Pursuant to the Statute, the City may
enter into an agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property and
to provide for the development of such property and to establish certain development rights
therein.
Development Agreement (DA) 06-002 is proposed by Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC.
Pursuant to Section 1.7 of the Original DDA entered on May 3, 2006, the City agreed to consider
a future application for a Development Agreement by TLCP to assist in the implementation of
the DDA and the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan ( Specific Plan).
The general purpose of Development Agreement 06-002 is to give the following assurances to
Developer:
1. Assurance to Developer that, in return for Developer's commitment to the
comprehensive planning for the Property that is contained in the DDA and the
Specific Plan, the City will in turn remain committed to the DDA and the Specific
Plan;
2. Assurances to Developer that as Developer becomes obligated for the costs of
designing and constructing the public improvements included in the DDA and the
Specific Plan, and makes dedication, Developer will become entitled to complete
the private development portions of the DDA and the Specific Plan that justify
those obligations; and
3. Assurances to Developer that in the City's administration of the DDA and the
Specific Plan, Developer will be allowed the flexibility, consistent with the DDA
and the Specific Plan, to respond to the marketplace in terms of housing types and
intensities, the development of mixed uses, and reconfiguration of land uses, so
long as in so doing overall intensity and density of development, and the range of
uses within sectors identified in the DDA and the Specific Plan are not exceeded.
These assurances require the cooperation and participation of the City and
Developer and could not be secured without mutual cooperation in and
commitment to the comprehensive planning effort that has resulted in the DDA
and the Specific Plan.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 7
The DA will include, but not be limited to, the following provisions:
• The term of DA 06-002 which will commence on the effective date and will
continue; for a term of twenty (20) years thereafter unless the term is terminated,
modified, or extended by circumstances set forth in DA 06-002.
• The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, maximum
height and size of proposed buildings, the design improvement and construction
standard and specifications applicable to the development of the Property, and
provisions for the reservation and dedication of land for public purposes, as set
forth in the DDA and Existing Land Use Regulations which includes City's
General Plan, Zoning Code, Specific Plan, and all other ordinances, resolutions,
rules, and regulations of the City governing the development and use of the
Property in effect as of the effective date of the DA.
• Vested Right to carry out and develop the Property in accordance with DDA,
Development Plan, Existing Land Use Regulations and the provisions included in
DA 06-002.
• The timing of development as set forth in the DDA.
• Construction of infrastructure and public facilities as set forth in the DDA.
• Dedications as set forth in the DDA, Specific Plan, and dedication of certain
right-of-way areas to the applicable agencies as necessary for construction of
required, off-site traffic and circulation mitigation as required by the DDA,
Specific Plan, or by Developer pursuant of the Final EIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin,
as amended.
• Annual review of Developer's performance.
• Indemnity by the Developer to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City
from any and all actions, suits, claims, liabilities, etc.
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
Minor Amendments to the MCAS Specific Plan are proposed to support improvements planned
within the TLCP footprint. The amendments include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Amendment to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, Table 3-4 for all residential
housing types that the covered parking requirements can be satisfied with tandem
parking. Up to forty (40) percent of the attached units within Neighborhood G can
satisfy their covered parking requirement with tandem parking spaces.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 8
• Amendment to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, Section 3.13.2, to clarify that a
covered tandem garage is a minimum dimension of 10 feet by 40 feet, and an
open tandem parking condition within a parking structure is a minimum
dimension of 9 feet by 36 feet.
• Amendment to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, Section 3.13.1(J), to allow 9 feet
by 18 feet standard parking stall and 2.4 foot two-way drive aisle. For parking
structure conditions, the column will be held back 2 feet from the drive aisle as
measured from centerline of the column. At an end condition where a parking
stall abuts a solid wall within a parking structure, an additional 1 foot and 6 inches
will be added to the end stall.
• Amendment to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, Section 3.13.1(J), to allow S feet
by 16 feet compact parking stall and 24 foot two-way drive aisle. At an end
condition where a parking stall abuts a solid wall within a parking structure, an
additional 1 foot and 6 inches will be added to the end stall.
• Amendment to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, Section 3.13.1(J), permitting
(without qualifying) up to twenty (20) percent of the required parking spaces for
non-residential developments may be designated for compact parking.
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
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?
No Substantial Change. from Previous Analysis. The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and
Specific Plan Amendment will not directly cause aesthetic impacts. Development activities
proposed by the TLCP and City of Tustin have been previously considered within the
Program F EIS/E IR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum and have been found to have no
demonstrable negative aesthetic effect on the site.
There are no designated scenic vistas in the project area; therefore, the proposed DDA
Amendment and Development Agreement would not result in a substantial adverse effect
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 9
on a scenic vista. Although the project site is not located within the vicinity of a designated
state scenic highway, the FEIS/EIR concluded that the loss of both historic blimp hangars
would be a significant visual impact, the loss of only one hangar would be less than
significant. The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would
not change the conclusions of the analysis from the FEIS/EIR relative to these visual
changes since the status of the hangars would not be affected by the proposed DDA
changes.
The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would not modify the
land use plan adopted in the Specific Plan but rather modify and refine the Master
Development Plan in the DDA only. No changes in original uses identified or permitted
in the Specific Plan are being requested; therefore, the types of uses to be developed are
consistent and would result in similar visual changes as those previously analyzed. While
the loss of the six (6) proposed arch structures in the Linear Park as outlined in the Original
DDA could pose a visual change, the Master Developer will be required to construct an
iconic grade-scTarated pedestrian bridge that incorporates arch features for the pedestrian
bridge at Warner Avenue/Community Park and unique iconic pedestrian bridges over
Tustin Ranch Road/Community Park and Armstrong/ Linear Park.
All implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The mitigation measures applicable to the project have
been implemented with adoption of original Specific Plan. No refinements need to be made
to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no new mitigation measures are required.
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-84, 4-109
through 114) and Addendum (Page 5-3 through 5-8)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
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
Agencv, to non-agricultural use?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 10
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 Analysi.% The proposed DDA Amendment, DA,
and Specific Plan Amendment will not directly cause Agricultural impacts. Development
activities proposed by the TLCP and City of Tustin have been previously considered within
the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum and have been found to have no
new effects, nor would a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects occur as a result of the proposed project.
The physical impact area for the proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan
Amendment is the same as that identified in the FEIS/EIR. Implementation of the
proposed project would continue to impact areas mapped (though not used) as Prime
Farmland. Designated Farmland of Statewide Importance within the Specific Plan area is
outside of the Master Developer footprint and is located north of Barranca Parkway, west
of Harvard Avenue, and east of Jamboree Boulevard. The area is currently under
development. Additionally, there are no areas subject to a Williamson Act contract, and
conservation of farmland in this area was deemed unwarranted by NCRS. Implementation
of the proposed project would not change the impact conclusions presented in the
FEIS/EIR. The loss of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance would
remain a significant and unavoidable impact. The mitigation options previously identified
in the FEIS/EIR are still infeasible and would be ineffective to reduce the localized adverse
effects associated with the loss of mapped/designated farmland.
There are no new feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented that would
reduce the significant unavoidable impact associated with the conversion of Farmland to
urban uses. Mitigation options identified in the FEIS/EIR determined to be infeasible are
still infeasible and ineffective to reduce impacts to a level considered less than significant.
There would not be a substantial increase in the severity of project -specific and cumulative
impacts to agricultural resources beyond that identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum;
however, these impacts would continue to be significant unavoidable impacts of the
proposed project. The Tustin City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the FEIS/EIR on January 16, 2001.
Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
11itigation/Monitoring Required: In certifying the FEIS/EIR, the Tustin City Council
adopted Findings of Fact and Statement in Overriding Consideration concluding that
impacts to agricultural resources were unavoidable (Resolution No. 00-90). No mitigation
is required.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 11
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-84, 4-109
through 11.4) and Addendum (Page 5-8 through 5-10)
Resolution No. 00-90
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Tustin General Plan
M. AIR QUALITY —Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be retied
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?
6) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
IVo Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed DDA Amendment, DA,
and Specific Plan Amendment will not directly cause Air Quality impacts. Development
activities proposed by the TLCP and City of Tustin have been previously considered within
the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum and have been found to have no
new effects, nor would a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects occur as a result of the proposed project.
Consistent with the conclusion reached in the FEIS/EIR, the proposed project would result
in significant short-term construction air quality impacts. Because the proposed DDA
Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment only involve redistribution of land uses
within the threshold of the Specific Plan and the previously approved FEIS/EIR and its
Addendum, the project would not substantially increase the type or severity of construction
related air quality impacts from those identified in the FEIS/EIR.
A Statement of Overriding Considerations for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City
Council on January 16, 2001, to address significant unavoidable short-term, long-term, and
cumulative air quality impacts.
Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 12
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures have been adopted by the
Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIS/EIR for operational and construction activities.
However, the FEIS/EIR and Addendum also concluded that the Reuse Plan related
operational air duality impacts were significant and could not be fully mitigated. A
Statement of Overriding Considerations for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City
Council on January 16, 2001 (Resolution No. 00-90). No new mitigation measure is
required.
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-143
through 153, 4-207 through 4-230, pages 7-41 through 7-42 and Addendum
Pages 5-10 through 5-28)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Resolution No. 00-90
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?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 13
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 physical impacts resulting from
development uses proposed with the DDA amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment
would be similar to those identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Specifically, impacts
to on-site vegetation and loss of habitat for the loggerhead shrike, a CDFG species of special
concern, would be less than significant. It would be noted that project construction activities
would be completed in compliance with federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918
(MBTA). The MBTA governs the taking and killing of migratory birds, their eggs, parts,
and nests.
The FEIS/EIR and Addendum found that implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS
Tustin Specific Plan would not result in impacts to federally listed threatened or endangered
plant or animal species; however, the FEIS/EIR determined that implementation of the
Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (including the proposed project site) could
impact jurisdictional waters/wetlands and the southwestern pond turtle, which is identified
as a "species of special concern" by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG),
or have an impact on jurisdictional waters/wetlands. Mitigation measures were included in
the MCAS Tustin FEIS/EIR to require the relocation of the turtles and establishment of an
alternative off-site habitat, and to require the applicant to obtain Section 404, Section
1601, and other permits as necessary for areas on the project site affecting jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. or vegetated wetlands. Therefore, no substantial change is expected
from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
The proposed project is within the scope of development considered with the analysis of the
FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin.
Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously. completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
,Vlitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin
City Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the project or as conditions of approval for the project.
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-75 through 3-
82, 4-103 through 4-108, 7-26 through 7-27 and Addendum pages 5-28
through 5-40)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 14
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?
No S'ukvtantial Change from Previous Analysi& The proposed DDA Amendment, DA,
and Specific Plan Amendment will not directly cause impacts to cultural resources.
Development activities proposed by the TLCP and City of Tustin have been previously
considered within the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum. Numerous
archaeological surveys have been conducted at the former MCAS Tustin site. In 1988, the
State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) provided written concurrence that all open
spaces on MCAS Tustin had been adequately surveyed for archaeological resources.
Although one archaeological site (CA -ORA -3 81) has been recorded within the Reuse Plan
area, it is believed to have been destroyed. It is possible that previously unidentified buried
archaeological or paleontological resources within the project site could be significantly
impacted by grading and construction activities. With the inclusion of mitigation measures
identified in the MCAS Tustin FEIS/EIR that require construction monitoring, potential
impacts to cultural resources can be reduced to a level of insignificance.
There is no new technology or methods available to reduce the identified significant
unavoidable project -specific and cumulative impacts to historical resources associated with
the removal of Hangars 28 and 29 to a level considered less than significant. Therefore,
these unavoidable project -specific and cumulative impacts also occur with implementation
of the proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan. Amendment. A Statement of
Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on
January 16, 2001, to address potential significant unavoidable impacts to historical
resources resulting from the removal of both blimp hangars. No substantial change is
expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and
Addendum.
All implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
AlfitigationliVfonitof-ing Regifired: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City
Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 15
for the project or as conditions of approval for the project. No refinements need to be made
to the FEIS'EIR mitigation measures and no new mitigation measures are required.
Sourcc,s: Field Observations
FEIS/ EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-68 through 3-
74, 4-93 through 4-102, 7-24 through 7-26, and Addendum Pages 5-40
through 5-45)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
�
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Tustin General Plan
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 (2001), 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 proposed DDA Amendment, DA,
and Specific Plan Amendment will not cause any direct impact to geology or soil.
Development activities proposed by the TLCP and City of Tustin have been previously
considered within the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum and have been
found to have no demonstrable negative geology or soil effect on the site. The FEIS/EIR
indicates that impacts to soils and geology resulting from implementation of the Reuse Plan
and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would include non -seismic hazards (such as local
settlement, regional subsidence, expansive soils, slope instability, erosion, and mudflows)
and seismic hazards (such as surface fault displacement, high-intensity ground shaking,
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 16
ground failure and lurching, seismically induced settlement, and flooding associated with
dam failure. However, the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum concluded that
compliance with state and local regulations and standards, along with established
engineering procedures and techniques, would avoid unacceptable risk or the creation o
significant impacts related to such hazards. No substantial change is expected for
development of the project from -the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
All implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations would
avoid the creation of potential impacts. No new mitigation is required.
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-88 through 3-
97, 4-1.15 through 4-123, 7-28 through 7-29 and Addendum Pages 5-46
through 5-49)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
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?
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?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-0021 SPA 07-001
Page 17
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 proposed DDA Amendment, DA,
and Specific Plan Amendment will not involve the creation of a hazard or hazardous
materials. Development activities proposed by the TLCP and City of Tustin have been
previously considered within the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would result
generally in the same types of land uses being developed within the project area. As
identified in the FEIS/EIR, these uses would generate and use small amounts of hazardous
materials for operation and maintenance activities.
The FEIS/EIR and its addendum include a detailed discussion of the historic and then -
current hazardous material use and hazardous waste generation within the Specific Plan
area. The DoN 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 DoN 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 and the Addendum, the project site is within the boundaries of
the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) and is subject to height restrictions. The
proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment do notose ro changes to
p p g
height limitation included in the Specific Plan, nor do they pose an aircraft -related safety
hazard for future residents or workers. The project site is not located in a wildland fire
danger area.
Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Implementation of activities and development at the
project site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be
required by law. No new or modified mitigation is required for the project.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 18
Sources: Field Observation
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages (3-106 through 3-
1.171 4-130 through 4-138, 7-30 through 7-31, and Addendum Pages 5-49
through 5-55)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) for Southern Parcels 44, 10-21 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
11 21 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 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?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 19
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysi& The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and
Specific Plan Amendment will not cause direct impact to hydrology and water quality.
Development activities proposed by the TLCP and City of Tustin have been previously
considered within the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum and have been
found to have no demonstrable negative hydrology and water quality effect on the site.
As concluded in the FEIS/EIR, preparation of a WQMP in compliance with all applicable
regulatory standards would reduce water quality impacts from the development activities to
a level of insignificance. Implementation of the proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and
Specific Plan Amendment would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts to
water quality than what was previously identified in the FEIS/EIR. The types of land uses
proposed are substantially the same, with minor square footage distribution among
planning areas. The amount of impervious surface proposed for construction would not
change substantially; therefore, analysis and conclusions in the FEIS/EIR relative to
impacts related to groundwater supply, groundwater levels, or local recharge have not
changed substantially. In addition, no change to the backbone drainage system is proposed;
therefore, no new or more severe impacts related to drainage patters, drainage facilities, and
potential flooding would result from the implementation of the DDA Amendment, DA; and
Specific Plan Amendment.
Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations would
reduce any potential impacts related to water quality and groundwater to a level of
insignificance and no mitigation is required. Measures related to hydrology and drainage
were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS
Tustin; these measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project or
as conditions of approval for the project.
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-98 through 3-
1059 4-124 through 4-129, 7-29 through 7-30 and Addendum Pages 5-56
through 5-92)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
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,
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 20
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?
ivo Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The project being evaluated involves an
amendment to the Original DDA, a new Development Agreement, and modifications to
parking standards. The proposed project would not substantially alter the land uses
proposed for development or the location of the land uses in relation to communities within
the Specific Plan area, rather the distribution of land uses has been slightly modified and
minor adjustments to Planning areas and development phases are proposed. The Specific
Plan area is surrounded by existing development and development on-site would not
physically divide an established community. The proposed development would result in the
continuation of similar uses.
Also, the proposed project will not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan. Implementation of activities and development at the project
site could be subject to subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required
by law. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the
FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that there would
be no significant unavoidable land use impacts. The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and
Specific Plan Amendment do not increase the severity of the land use impacts previously
identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; therefore, no refinements needed to be made to
the FEIS/EIR mitigation and no new mitigation measures are required.
Sources: Field Observation
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-3 to 3-17, 4-3
to 4-13, 7-16 to 7-18 and Addendum Pages 5-92 to 5-95)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
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 F EIS/EIR and Addendum indicated
that no mineral resources are known to occur anywhere within the Specific Plan area. The
proposed project will not result in the loss of mineral resources known to be on the site or
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 21
identified as being present on the site by any mineral resource plans. Consequently, no
substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and
Addendum.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required.
Sources: Field Observation
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-91) and
Addendum (Page 5-95)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
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 proposed DDA Amendment, DA,
and Specific Plan Amendment would slightly modify the land use distribution within the
Specific Plan which would result in a slight redistribution of the traffic generated by the
implementation of the project. However, the backbone circulation system identified for the
implementation of the project is substantially the same or less Average Daily Trips as that
presented in the original DDA and Specific Plan. Consequently, the severity of the long-
term traffic related noise impacts would not be increased more than previously identified in
the FEIS/EIR and Addendum.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 22
With respect to the short-term noise impacts, implementation of the DDA Amendment,
DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would be required to comply with adopted mitigation
measures and state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering
procedures and techniques, thus avoiding sifmificant short-term construction -related noise
impacts.
As discussed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum, John Wayne Airport is located southwest of
the project site. Based on review of the Airport Land Use Plan for John Wayne, the project
site is not located within the 60 CNEL contour for airport operations. The proposed DDA
Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would not involve the development of
any uses that would expose people to excessive noise related to aircraft operations.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that with
implementation of identified mitigation measures, there would be no impacts related to
noise. The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment do not increase
the severity of the noise impacts previously identified in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum;
therefore, no refinements need to be made to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no new
mitigation measures would be required.
Sources: Field Observation
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-154 through 3-
162) and Addendum (Page 5-96 through 5-99)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Tustin General Plan
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?
,Vo Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The proposed DDA Amendment, DA,
and Specific Plan Amendment provide a similar amount and type of housing as that
included in the original DDA and the Specific Plan. The amendment proposes a slight
redistribution of development activities within the project boundary. No additional new
housing, removal of existing housing, or displacement of any people to necessitate
construction of additional housing are proposed with the DDA Amendment, DA, and
Specific Plan Amendment beyond the number of units already analyzed in the Specific
Plan and previously approved FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Similar to the conclusions
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 23
reached in the FEIS/EIR, the proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan
Amendment would not have an adverse effect on population and housing.
Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Because no significant impacts were identified, no
mitigation was included in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum related to population/housing. The
proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment do not change the
conclusions of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum and no new mitigation is required.
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-18 to 3-34, 4-
14 to 4-29, and 7-18 to 7-19) and Addendum Pages (5-101 through 5-112)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Tustin General Plan
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:
The FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin requires developers of the site to contribute to the creation
of public services such as fire and police protection services, schools, libraries, recreation
facilities, and biking/hiking trails; however, new facilities will be provided within the
Master Developer footprint to which the applicant will contribute a fair share.
Fire Protection. The proposed project will be required to meet existing Orange County
Fire Authority (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 would reduce
the risk of uncontrollable fire and increase the ability to efficiently provide fire protection
services to the site. The number of existing fire stations in the areas surrounding the site
and a future fire station proposed at Edinger Avenue and the West Connector Road will
meet the demands created by the proposed project.
Police Protection. The need for police protection services is assessed on the basis of
resident population estimates, square footage of non-residential uses, etc. Implementation of
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
LPDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 24
the DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would not increase the need for
police protection services in addition to what was anticipated in the FEIS/EIR and
Addendum. The developer as a condition of approval for the project would be required to
work with the Tustin Police Department to ensure that adequate security precautions are
implemented in the project at plan check.
Schools-
The
chools_
The FEIS/EIR and Addendum previously considered future development of the portion
of the Specific Plan area within the SAUSD as being non-residential uses resulting in an
indirect student generation impact. However, the TLCP is now proposing minor
refinements to their development plan that would result in both non-residential and
residential development uses which would result in both indirect and direct student
generation impacts.
The impacts to schools resulting from the implementation of the proposed DDA
Amendment, DA and Specific Plan Amendment would be similar to that identified in the
FEIS/EIR. Consistent with SB 50, the City of Tustin has adopted implementation
measures that require the Master Developer to pay applicable school fees to the TUSD,
IVSD, and SAUSD to mitigate indirect and direct student generation impacts prior to the
issuance of building permits.
The payment of school mitigation impact fees authorized by SB 50 is deemed to provide
"full and complete mitigation of impacts" from the development of real property on
school facilities ('Government Code 65995). SB 50 provides that a state or local agency
may not deny or refuse to approve the planning, use, or development of real property on
the basis of a developer's refusal to provide mitigation in amounts in excess of that
established by SB 50.
Other Public Facilities Libraries). Since certification of the FEIS/EIR, the Orange County
Library (OCPL) entered into an agreement with the City of Tustin for the expansion of the
Tustin Branch library. The expansion of the library is a capital improvement of a public
facility that will directly benefit development activities within the Specific Plan area.
Developers within the Specific Plan area are required to make a fair share contribution to a
portion of the development costs of the library expansion.
To support development in the reuse plan area, the Reuse Plan/Specific Plan requires public
services and facilities to be provided concurrent with demand. The FEIS/EIR and
Addendum concluded that public facilities would be provided according to a phasing plan to
meet projected needs as development of the site proceeded. The proposed DDA
Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would not increase the demand more than
what was already analyzed in the previously approved FEIS/EIR and Addendum; therefore,
no substantial change is expected.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 25
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that there would
be no significant unavoidable impacts related to public services. The proposed DDA
Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would not result in a substantial increase
in the severity of impacts to public services beyond that identified in the FEIS/EIR and
Addendum. Therefore no new mitigation measures are required.
Sources: Field Observation
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-47 to 3-57, 4-
56 to 4-80 and 7-21 to 7-22) and Addendum (Pages 5-112 through 5-122)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Tustin General Plan
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities, such that substantia( 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?
The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would include a
modification to relocate and defer construction of the sports park originally proposed at Red
Hill and Edinger Avenue until Phase 2 and to replace the original sports park site in Phase 1
with commercial/business uses. The new sports park relocation site would be at the
southeast of the extension of Carnegie and the linear park. Since the proposed DDA
Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment only involves a relocation of a sports park,
impacts associated with recreation facilities were analyzed and addressed in the FEIS/EIR
and Addendum. The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment
would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts related to recreation services
compared to conclusions of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum.
Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/ EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
MitigationlMonitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that there would
be no significant unavoidable impacts related to recreation facilities. Additionally, the
proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would not result in a
substantial increase in the severity of impacts to recreation facilities beyond that identified in
the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Therefore no new mitigation measures are required.
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 26
Sources: Field Observation
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages 3-47 to 3-57, 4-56
to 4-80, 7-21 to 7-22 and Addendum Pages 5-122 through 5-127
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Tustin City Code Section 9331 d (1) (b)
Tustin General Plan
XV. TRANS PORTATION/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)?
The FEIS/EIR and Addendum concluded that traffic impacts could occur as a result of build
out of the Specific Plan. The FEIS/EIR concluded that there could be significant impacts at
18 arterial intersections (see Table 4.12-6 of the FEIS/EIR for a complete list) and the levels
of service (LOS) at two intersections would improve compared to the no -project condition.
The trip generation resulting from implementation of the original Specific Plan and
Addendum would create an overall Average Daily Trip (ADT.) generation of 216,440 trips.
The original Specific Plan also established a trip budget tracking system for each
neighborhood to analyze and control the amount and intensity of non-residential
development by neighborhood. The tracking system ensures that sufficient ADT capacity
exists to serve the development and remainder of the neighborhood. The proposed DDA
Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment would result in a redistribution of trips that
would not exceed the trip budget analyzed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum.
No Significant changes to on-site circulation would occur with the proposed project. Austin
Foust Associates, Inc. has prepared the Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis -
March 2007 (Exhibit A) to identify and evaluate how the traffic impacts from the proposed
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 27
project differ from the original analysis as presented in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. The
study has shown that the proposed Legacy Park land use and arterial circulation changes
within the TLCP footprint have not resulted in new significant impacts that would require
mitigation. Therefore, there are no changes to the previous traffic findings included in the
original FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Moreover, the proposed on-site circulation system is
found to provide adequate capacity in accordance with the performance criteria applied to
the project. The City's Traffic Engineer also has reviewed the analysis and concurs with the
conclusion the revised. analysis.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No new impacts or substantially more severe impacts
would result from implementation of the DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan
Amendments than were originally considered by the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. Therefore,
no new or revised mitigation measures are required.
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 3-118 through 3-
142, 4-139 through 4-206 and 7-32 through 7-42) and Addendum (pages 5-
127 through 5-147)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/ Reuse Plan ( Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
Tustin General Plan
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis, March 2007, Austin Foust
Associates, Inc. (Exhibit I)
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?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 28
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment will not directly cause
impacts to utilities and service systems. Development activities proposed by the TLCP and
City of Tustin have been previously considered within the Program FEIS/EIR for MCAS
Tustin and Addendum. The FEIS/EIR and Addendum analyzed new off-site and on-site
backbone utility systems required for development of the site as necessary to support the
proposed development, including water, sewer, drainage, electricity, natural gas, telephone,
cable television, and solid waste management. In accordance with the FEIS/EIR and
Addendum, the applicant is required to pay a fair share towards oft -site infrastructure and
installation of on-site facilities. In addition, development of the site is required to meet
federal, state, and local standards for design of waste water treatment, drainage system for
on-site and off-site, and water availability. As concluded in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum,
no unavoidable significant impacts would result. The proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and
Specific Plan Amendment would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts than
what was evaluated in the FEIS/EIR.
Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No new impacts or substantially more severe impacts
would result from implementation of the DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan
Amendment; therefore, no new or revised mitigation measures are required.
Sources: Field Observations
EEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 3-35 through 3-
461) 4-32 through 4-55 and 7-20 through 7-21) and Addendum (pages 5-147
through 5-165)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 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
DDA 05-01 Amendment, DA 06-002, SPA 07-001
Page 29
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
The FEIS/EIR and Addendum previously considered all environmental impacts
associated with the implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan
and the proposed DDA Amendment, DA, and Specific Plan Amendment. With the
enforcement of the FEIS/EIR and Addendum mitigation and implementation measures
approved by the Tustin City Council in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the
project or as conditions of approval, the proposed project would not cause unmitigated
environmental effects that will cause substantial effects on human beings either directly
or indirectly nor degade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitats
or wildlife populations io decrease or threaten, eliminate, or reduce animal ranges, etc.
To address cumulative impacts, a Statement of Overriding Consideration for the
FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001 (Resolution No.
00-90) for issues relating to aesthetics, cultural and paleontological resources,
agricultural resources, and traffic/circulation. The project does not create any impacts
that have not been previously addressed by the FEIS/EIR and Addendum.
Sources: Field Observations
FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 5-4 through 5-11)
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (Pages 3-35 through 3-62, pages 3-
70 through 3-81, pages 3-82 through 3-88, and pages 3-104 through 3-137)
and Addendum
Resolution No. 00-90
Tustin General Plan
CONCLUSION
The proposed project's effects were previously examined in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS
Tustin and Addendum. No new effects will occur, no substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects will occur, no new mitigation measures will be
required, no applicable mitigation measures previously not found to be feasible would in
fact be feasible, and no new mitigation measures or alternatives applicable to the project
that have not been considered are needed to substantially reduce effects of the project.
Implementation of activities and development at the project site could be subject to
subsequent environmental review under CEQA as may be required by law. No substantial
change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the Program FEIS/EIR for
MCAS Tustin and Addendum.
Exhibit A
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis
March 2007
By Austin Foust Associates, Inc.
City of Tustin
LEGACY PARK OF TUSTIN LEGACY
Traffic Analysis
March 2007
WA W A!/ST/N-FOUST ,4SSOC/AYES, /NC.
DRAFT
City of Tustin
LEGACY PARK OF TUSTIN LEGACY TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Prepared by:
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
2223 East Wellington Avenue, Suite 300
Santa Ana, California 92701-3161
(714) 667-0496
March 6, 2007
CONTENTS
1.0 - INTRODUCTION
Page
Background.................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Scopeand Methodology................................................................................................................1-3
PerformanceCriteria...................................................................................................................... 1-4
Relationshipto Other Studies........................................................................................................1-4
References....... .............................. .................................................................... ........ .................... 1-8
2.0 PROPOSED PROJECT
LandUse and Trip Generation....................................................................................................... 2-1
ProposedProject............................................................................................................................ 2-1
Trip Budget for Non -Residential Uses.......................................................................................... 2-6
3.0 ON-SITE ROADWAY SYSTEM
PlannedCirculation System........................................................................................................... 3-1
IntersectionControls......................................................................................................................3-
Intersection Lane Geometry.......................................................................................................... 3-6
4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS
DailyTraffic Forecasts.................................................................................................................. 4-1
Intersection Levels of Service....................................................................................................... 4-1
TurnPocket Lengths.......................................................................................................... 0 .. 0 0 0 .. .... 4-6
Conclusions.............. ..... ...................... ................. ............................................. ...................... ......4-6
APPENDICES:
A: Land Use and Trip Generation
B: Intersection Capacity Utilization Calculations
C: Turn Pocket Length Methodology
D: External Traffic Volumes
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis i 922004rpt5.doc
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND EXHIBITS
Figures
Page
1-1 2007 Tustin Legacy Master. Developer Footprint ...................... 0.6 .............. 0 ... 00 .................. 0 ...... 00.0 1-2
2-1 2007 Tustin Legacy Master Development Footprint..................................................................... 2-3
2-2 Legacy Park Circulation System...................................................................................................2-5
3-1 Legacy Park Circulation System...................................................................................................3-2
3-2 Recommended Traffic Control Measures —Community Core Area ............................................. 3-3
3-3 Recommended Traffic Control Measures — Neighborhood E ....................................................... 3-4
3-4 Recommended Traffic Control Measures — Neighborhood G (Planning Area 15) ....................... 3-5
3-5 Intersection Lane Configurations —Community Core Area ................................. .......... ............ ... 3-7
3-6 Intersection Lane Configurations — Neighborhood E ............ ....... ........... ........................ ......... ...... 3-8
3-7 Intersection Lane Configurations — Neighborhood G (Planning Area 15) .................................... 3-9
4-1 Legacy Park ADT Volumes............................................:..............................................................4-2
4-2 Intersection Location Map.............................................................................................................4-5
A-1 Tustin Legacy Traffic Model (TLTM) Traffic Analysis Zone System ........................................ A-3
B-1 Intersection Location Map............................................................................................................ B-2
C-1 Turn Pocket Length Methodology................................................................................................ C-2
Tables
1-1 Volume/Capacity Ratio Level of Service Ranges for Intersections..............................................1-5
1-2 Performance Criteria for Analyzed Intersections ..........................................................................1-
1-3 Level of Service Descriptions — Signalized Intersections.............................................................01-7
2-1 Land Use and Trip Generation Summary ......................................................................................2-2
2-2 Tustin Legacy Trip Generation......................................................................................................2-4
2-3 Tustin Legacy Trip Budget............................................................................................................ 2-7
2-4 Planning Area Trip Budget Comparison (Non -Residential Uses) ............................................... 2-11
4-1 Peak Hour Intersection ICU Summary.......................................................................................... -
4-2 Left -Turn Storage Length Requirements....................................................................................... 4-7
4-3 Right -Turn Storage Length Requirements................................................................................... 4-10
A-1 ADT and Peak Hour Trip Generation Rate Summary.................................................................. A-2
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis ii 922004rpt5.doc
Chapter 1. 0
INTRODUCTION
This report presents traffic findings for proposed changes to the development plan in
Neighborhoods D and E and Planning Area 15 portion of Neighborhood G of the Master Developer area
in the Tustin Legacy project in the City. of Tustin. The revised portions of the Master Developer footprint
(seeb Figure 1-1) will be known as Legacy Park and will henceforth be referred to throughout this report as
the "Proposed Project." The purposes of this report are 1) to determine that the land use changes by the
p J p �
Master Developer do not exceed the "trip cap" established for the Master Developer's footprint at Tustin
Legacy, 2) to identify and evaluate the traffic impacts of the Proposed Project on-site as well as at the
external .off-site intersections on the periphery of Tustin Legacy, and 3) to present data that will be the
basis of design for key on-site project roadways in the Legacy Park area of Tustin Legacy (Neighborhood
D including the area referred to as the "Community Core" south of Warner Avenue, Neighborhood E,
and Planning Area 15 portion of Neighborhood G).
BACKGROUND
A Final Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) was
certified as complete in January 2001 for the Reuse and Disposal of the Marine Corps Air Station
(MCAS), Tustin. The EIS/EIR also evaluated the adoption of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. All
elements were identified as the original "project." A comprehensive traffic report was prepared for the
MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, and that report was used in preparing the Circulation section of the Final
Joint EIS/EIR. The "Program EIS/EIR" mitigation measures identified for the original project were the
subject of agreements with the adjacent Cities of Irvine and Santa Ana, and those in Tustin were planned
to be implemented in phases according to a phasing plan described in the traffic study. In 2006, a traffic
report was carried out in support of an Addendum to the EIS/EIR in which certain Specific Plan
Amendments were adopted including certain administrative clarifications and minor Specific Plan
modifications that largely affected property within the Master Developer footprint including the
Neighborhoods being analyzed zed in this report. The former site of the MCAS Tustin is now referred to as
"Tustin Legacy" and Legacy Park is a portion within this site.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 1-1 922004tpt5.doc
C
N
The total trip generation with the Proposed Project for Tustin Legacy (including the portion in
City of Irvine) is the same as the trip cap established in the original Specific Plan in 2001 and included in
the current Specific Plan with 216,440 average daily trips (ADT).
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
The subject areas addressed in this report are as follows:
1. Proposed Project and Current Specific Plan Land Use and Trip Generation
2. On -Site Roadway System
3. Traffic Forecasts and Intersection Evaluation
The first of these describes the Proposed Project and its relation to the trip generation ceiling
established as part of the original Specific Plan and contained in the current Specific Plan. Also discussed
is the -non-residential land use/trip budget tracking system for each neighborhood in the current Specific
Plan and for the Proposed Project.
The second subject area being addressed involves the on-site circulation of the Proposed Project
in Neighborhoods D and E and Planning Area 15 of Neighborhood G (collectively referred to as Legacy
Park). The Legacy Park circulation system information presented here includes midblock lanes,
intersection lane geometrics, and type of intersection control.
The third subject area provides traffic forecasts for on-site and adjacent intersections that reflect
the land use refinements and the local roadway system in the Proposed Project site. Average daily traffic
and peak hour levels of service at signalized intersections are derived and turn pocket lengths for
intersections within the Proposed Project site are estimated. Because the changes included. in the
Proposed Project compared to the current Specific Plan as amended in 2006 are minor and that the ADT
projections outside the Proposed Project boundaries show minimal change compared to the 2006 Specific
Plan assessment, the only off-site intersections analyzed are along the periphery of Tustin Legacy
(Edinger Avenue, Red Hill Avenue and Barranca Parkway).
To derive the long-range traffic forecasts for this analysis, updated traffic forecast data was
prepared from the recently updated Irvine Transportation Analysis Model (ITAM). The ITAM was
approved by OCTA as meeting all of the County's consistency guidelines, and the particular version
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 1-3 922004Ypt5.doc
selected for this application is that recently used for transportation planning work in Irvine which includes
projects that were approved priorto the end of 2006 (i.e., various residential projects in the Irvine
Business Complex (IBC) and the Heritage Fields/Orange County Great Park project in the former MCAS
El Toro site). It includes an update to the land use and circulation for Tustin Legacy. The model provides
intersection data in the City of Tustin as well as in the City of Irvine. The forecasts in this report are
based on the ITAM described here and include the year 2025 time frame for traffic forecasting with
corresponding assumptions with respect to local and regional transportation improvements.
PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
Traffic level of service (LOS) is designated "A" through "F" with LOS "A" representing free
flow conditions and LOS "F" representing severe traffic congestion. Table 1-1 summarizes the
volume/capacity (V/C) ranges that correspond to LOS "A" through "F" for intersection locations. The
traffic analysis evaluates the peak hour intersection volumes for the Proposed Project. The intersection
findings are based on intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values. Table 1-2 describes the intersection
evaluation criteria. The threshold levels established here reflect levels of significance applicable in this
report and are consistent with previous assessments of the project area. Table 1-3 describes the general
LOS conditions for intersections.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER STUDIES
Several traffic studies that have been carried out in this area are of relevance to the traffic analysis
presented here. The projects and studies briefly summarized below have all been approved and have been
incorporated where appropriate as background conditions in this analysis.
Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin Disposal and Reuse Traffic Study (Reference 1) —
This traffic study dated November 17, 1999, was included as Appendix F of the EIS/EIR for Disposal and
Reuse of MCAS Tustin dated December 1999. The traffic study presented the results of a circulation
analysis performed as part of the EIS/EIR addressing the disposal and reuse of MCAS Tustin. This traffic
study includes the traffic impact results related to the preferred alternative (Reuse Alternative 1). The
land use and circulation plan for Reuse Alternative 1 is known as the original Specific Plan.
Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis (Reference 2) - This traffic study dated February 22, 2006, was
referenced in the 2006.Addendum to the Final EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 14 922004rpt5.doc
Table 1-1
VOLUME/CAPACITY RATIO LEVEL OF SERVICE RANGES
FOR INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service (LOS) Volume/Capacity (V/C)
A .00—.60
B .61—.70
C .71 — .80
D .81—.90
E .91-1.00
F Above 1.00
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 1-5 922004rpt5.doc
Table 1-2
PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR ANALYZED INTERSECTIONS
I. V/C Calculation Methodology
Level of service to be based on peak hour intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values
calculated using the following assumptions:
Saturation Flow Rate: 1,700 vehicles/hour/lane
Clearance Interval: .05
Right -Turn -On -Red Utilization Factor*: .75.
* "De -facto" right -turn lane is assumed in the ICU calculation if 19 feet from edge to
outside of through -lane exists and parking is prohibited during peak periods.
II. Performance Standard
Level of Service "D" (peak hour ICU less than or equal to .90).
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 1-6 922004rpt5.doc.
LOS
Table 1-3
LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS — SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Levels of service (LOS) for signalized intersections are defined in terms of control delay as follows:
DESCRIPTION
A LOS "A" describes operations with low control delay, up to 10 seconds per vehicle.
This LOS occurs when progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive
during the green phase. Many vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may tend
to contribute to low delay values.
B LOS "B" describes operations with control delay greater than 10 and up to 20 seconds
per vehicle. This level generally occurs with good progression, short cycle lengths, or
both. More vehicles stop than the LOS "A", causing higher levels of delay.
DELAY PER
VEHICLE
(secs)
<10
10-20
C LOS "C" describes operations with control delay greater than 20 and up to 35 seconds .20-35
per .vehicle. These higher delays may result from only fair progression, longer cycle
lengths, or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. Cycle
failure occurs when a given green phase does not serve queued vehicles, and overflows
occur. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still
pass through the intersection without stopping.
D LOS "D" describes operations with control delay greater than 35 and up to 55 seconds 35-55
per vehicle. At LOS "D", the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable.
Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long
cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles
not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable.
E LOS "E" describes operations with control delay greater than 55 and up to 80 seconds 55-80
per vehicle. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle
lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent.
F LOS "F" describes operations with control delay in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. > 80
This level, considered unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with oversaturation,
that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the, capacity of lane groups. It may also occur at
high V/C ratios with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle
lengths may also contribute significantly to high delay levels.
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 1-7 922004rpt5.doc
This report presents traffic findings relative to MCAS Specific Plan Amendments and a proposed
evelopment Plan for the Master Developer area of the Tustin Legacy project in the City of Tustin. The
purpose of this report is to identify and evaluate how the project proposed in the Master Developer
footprint area compares to the original Specific Plan in terms of traffic impacts. The land use and
circulation plan presented in this report is referred to as the current Specific Plan in the Legacy Park of
Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis.
City of Irvine Planning Areas 30 and 51 Heritage Fields GPA/Zone Change (Reference 3) -
This report presents the findings of a traffic study carried out to determine the impacts of a General Plan
Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change for the former MCAS El Toro site which is now being referred to
as the Heritage Fields/Orange County Great Park project located in Planning Areas 30 and 51 (PA30 and
PA51) in the City of Irvine. The PA30 and PA51 project was approved and is included in the background
conditions of this report.
REFERENCES
1. Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin. Disposal and Reuse Traffic Study, Austin -
Foust Associates, Inc., November 17, 1999 (same, as Appendix F of the EIS/EIR for
Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin dated December 1999).
2. "Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis," Austin -Foust Associates, Inc., February 22, 2006
(referenced in the 2006 Addendum to the Final EIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of
MCAS Tustin).
3. "City of Irvine Planning Areas 30 and 51 Heritage Fields GPA/Zone Change [former
MCAS El Toro site]," Austin -Foust Associates, Inc., September 7, 2006.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 1-8 922004ipt5.doc
Chapter 2,.0
PROPOSED PROJECT
The information presented in this chapter summarizes land use and trip generation for the
Proposed Project as well as for the entire Tustin Legacy area. The purpose is to make findings relative to
the trip cap established in the current Specific Plan. A review of the trip budget for non-residential uses is
also re-evaluated in this chapter.
LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION
Table 2-1 provides a summary of the land use and trip generation for the Proposed Project, and
includes the corresponding data for the current Specific Plan. The trip generation has been determined
based on the trip generation rates summarized in Appendix A, and detailed land use and trip generation
summaries by Planning Area can also be found in Appendix A. The daily trip generation rates are
consistent with those used in the original Specific Plan.
The land use data presented in this chapter includes the Proposed Project and approved
development for other areas in Tustin Legacy. The land uses in Planning Areas 4, 5, 16, 17, 19-22 as
approved for the Marble Mountain Partners (Lennar and William Lyon Homes) residential development,
the Vestar commercial development and the John Laing residential development have also been
incorporated into the land use database (see Figure 2-1 for Planning Area boundaries). Comparing the
total revised trip generation projection with the approved (current) Specific Plan shows that the Proposed
Project does not exceed the trip budget established for the Specific Plan.
PROPOSED PROJECT
A trip generation comparison between the current Specific Plan and revised plan for the entire
Tustin Legacy including the Proposed Project is summarized Table 2-2. The table shows that the
established "trip cap" of 216,440 average daily trips (ADT) remains the same as do the trips within the
Proposed Project and remaining non -project areas within Tustin Legacy.
The proposed arterial circulation system for the Proposed Project in Legacy Park is presented in
Figure 2-2. Included are the roadways in the current Specific Plan and the addition of proposed local
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-1 922004rpt5.doc
Table 2-1
LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Current S ecific Plan
Land Use Category Units Amount ADT
Propose Project
Amount ADT
Difference
Amount ADT
1. LDR (1-7 DU/Acre) DU 19033
91888
111147
101,978
114
19090
2. MDR 8-15 DU/Acre DU 19449
119592
1,335
109680
-114
-912
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre) DU 19897
129576
19897
12,576
0
0
4. Transitional Housing Room 192
941
192
941
0
0
5. Hotel Room 500
49115
500
4,115
0
0
6. Elementary/Middle School Stu 2,400
29448
29400
29448
0
0
7. High School Stu 19850
3,312
19850
39312
0
0
8. Learning Center TSF 1,293.86
79920
19293.86
79920
0
0
9. Neighborhood Commercial TSF 147.38
169480
143.07
159999
-4.31
-481
10. Community Commercial TSF 419.85
289621
509.64
349740
89.79
69119
11. Shopping Center (EQ) TSF 930.6
28,608
930.6
28,608
0
0
12. General Office TSF 2,679.73
359562
21P068.73
279451
-611.00
-89111
13. Office Park E TSF 2,343.75
209869
2,865.73
26,105
521.98
51,236
14. Military (Office) TSF 40.85
542
40.85
542
0
0
15. Light Industrial/R&D TSF --
--
456.03
39699
456.03
31,699
16. Industrial Park (E TSF 627.05
89088
332.28
49196
-294.77
-3,892
17. Park Acre 100.4
509
75.3
379
-25.1
-130
18. Regional Park Acre 84.5
423
84.5
423
0
0
21. Multi lex Theater Seat 39500
69300
35500
6,300
0
0
22. Senior Congregate TSF 158.99
970
158.99
970
0
0
24. Theatre Seat 19000
19250
19000
19250
0
0
25. Health Club TSF 30
988
20
659
-10
-329
26. High -Turnover Restaurant TSF 18
29289
--
--
-18
-2,289
27. Senior HousingAttached DU 242
840
242
840
0
0
28. Sports Park Acre 94.6
59089
94.6
59089
0
0
29. Tustin Facility SG --
6,220
--
611220
--
0
TOTAL 1 1
2169440 1
1
216,440 1
1
0
Abbreviations: ADT - average daily trips
DU - dwelling units
EQ - Equation based trip rate used
LDR - Low Density Residential
MDR -Medium Density Residential
MHDR - Medium High Density Residential
R&D - Research and Development
SG - special generator
Stu - student
TSF - thousand square feet
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-2 922004rpt5.doc
N �
1
/: �. /- '%%' �. •/%" "/ %� is �/,
LO
oQO
Ei
GaVA6VH
331doevWr
CDN
LM
00
00
00
`/Orl
w - = N
Now -m
i�
b �
� O
� O
� p
U
� z z
i.
� Q
CO
to .a
`a o : Q
QQz�
�
on cCO
0 .�
oo. 00
cl cd o u
�X
O
M
i
N
CA
U
cCi
u
U
a
Table 2-2
TUSTIN LEGACY TRIP GENERATION
Area*
Current
Specific Plan Proposed
Project
Difference
Neighborhoods D, E and G (PA 15)
1285336
1289336
0
Neighborhood G (PA20-PA21) & H (PA22)
129218
129218
0
Remainder of Tustin Legacy
755886
759886
0
Total Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
2169440
2169440
0
* See Figure 2-1 for neighborhood map.
** Legacy Park proposed project.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 24 922004rpt5.doc
Legend
x Midblock lanes
City of Tustin
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-5
Figure 2-2
LEGACY PARK CIRCULATION SYSTEM
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
922004rpt5fig2-2.dwg
EDINGER
AV
M
U�
'
B ''
�Q7
-1
N Q
i
4 4
4
4
4
VALENCIA
MOFFETT RD
�
N
n
�
N
/
Q:-
�a
~ '
rn
T
Z
7
01) ,• C�
r
�
�
<
��GP
„G„ ST
a
�
Q
�
6 6
tet.
6
4
6=
d_
WARNER 2ST -`` � 6'
WARNER AV
2
b
"A" ST 2 r
ST
CARNEGIE
\ ' G
Q Dt 4
PJEco
0
4
�i :n
U
n
Z
0
Z<
N
Q
BARRANCA PKWY
Legend
x Midblock lanes
City of Tustin
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-5
Figure 2-2
LEGACY PARK CIRCULATION SYSTEM
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
922004rpt5fig2-2.dwg
roadways, mostly two-lane local arterials, in Neighborhoods D and E and Planning Area 15 of
Neighborhood G (see previously referenced Figure 2-1 for neighborhood map) to serve the Proposed
Project.
TRIP BUDGET FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES
This section discusses the non-residential land uses/trip budget tracking system included in the
current Specific Plan. Table 2-3 compares the current Specific Plan trip budget to the Proposed Project.
Table 2-5 presents a summary table comparing the results. The overall trip budget is similar for both with
differences occurring within individual neighborhoods that result in slightly less trips (50 ADT) for the
Proposed Project compared to the trip budget established in the current Specific Plan.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-6 922004rpt5.doc
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-7 922004rpt5.doc
Table 2-3
TUSTIN LEGACY TRIP BUDGET'
Current Specific
Plan
With Proposed
Project
Planning
Area
Land Use Category
Units
Residential/Parks
Non -Residential
Residential/Parks
Non -Residential
Amount ADT Amount ADT Amount ADT Amount ADT
NEIGHBORHOOD A
y
1
Elementa /Middle School
STU
550
561
550
561
Learning Center
TSF
13293.86
7,920
15293.86
75920
Neighborhood Commercial TSF 27.12 33033 27.12
3,033
Tustin Facility
SG
6,220
61220
PA 1 Trip Budget Total
1,320.98
17,734
1,_32 0.9 8
17,734
2
Sorts Park
ACRE
24.1
13297
24.1
l ,297
3
Transitional Housing
ROOM
192
941
192
941
Neighborhood A Square Footage Total
TSF
11320.98
19320.98
Neighborhood A Tri Budget Total
17,734
17,734
NEIGHBORHOOD B
.
4
LDR Q-7 DU/Acre)
DU
145
15388
145
15388
MDR 8-15 DU/Acre)
DU
120
960
120
960
Senior Housing Attached
DU
72
250
72
250
5
MDR 8-15 DU/Acre)
DU
132
11056
132
1,056
MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
DU
438
21903
438
25903
Senior Housing Attached
DU
170
590
170
590
7
Communi Commercial
TSF
103.46
79052
103.46
7,052
General Office
TSF
144.84
19922
144.84
15922
PA 7 Trip Budget Total
248.3
8,974
248.3
89974
Neighborhood B S uare Footage Total
TSF
248.3
248.3
Neighborhood B Trip Budget Total
1
1
81974 1
81974
NEIGHBORHOOD C
6
Community Commercial
TSF
57.5
35920
57.5
3,920
Regional Park
ACRE
84.5
423
84.5
423
PA 6 Trip Budget Total
57.5
31920
57.5
35920
Nei hborhood C Square Footage Total
TSF
57.5
57.5
Neighborhood C Trip Budget Total
31920
39920
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-7 922004rpt5.doc
Table 2-3 (cont.)
TUSTIN LEGACY TRIP BUDGET'
Current Specific
Plan
With Proposed
Project
Planning
Area
Land Use Category
Units
Residential/Parks
Non -Residential
Residential/Parks
Non -Residential
Amount ADT Amount ADT Amount ADT Amount ADT
NEIGHBORHOOD D
8
High School
STU
11850
31312
11850
39312
Neighborhood Commercial
TSF
65.69
71345
61.38
61864
General Office
TSF
207
21747
21 L.31
2,804
Office Park
TSF
19383.8
11;280
19-383.8
115280
Industrial Park
TSF
319.51
31803
Light Industrial/R&D
TSF
319.51
2,591
Park
ACRE
10.3 52
10.3 52
Sorts Park
ACRE
46 29475
46 25475
PA 8 Trip Bud et Total
1,976
289487
1,976
26,851
13
MHDR 16-25 DU/Acre
DU
891 599.07
891 51907
Hotel 380 TSF)
ROOM
500
4,115
Hotel (1.90 TSF)
ROOM
500
49115
Neighborhood Commercial
TSF
9.76
19091
9.76
15091
Community Commercial
TSF
117.1
71,984
210
1410315
General Office
TSF
15512
203,065
835.71
111,090
Office Park
TSF
447.2
41193
Park
ACRE
12.9 65
14.8 75
Health Club
TSF
30
988
20
659
Theatre 28 TSF
SEAT
15000 1
15250
High -Turnover Restaurant
TSF
12
15526
PA 13 Trip Budget Total
2,060.86
355769
19740.67
369713
14
Communi Commercial
TSF
11.11
757
8
545
General Office
TSF
136.9
1,818
37.4
496
Office Park
TSF
547
59645
804.74
75688
Theatre 25 TSF
SEAT
15000
15250
High -Turnover Restaurant
TSF
6
763
PA 14 Trip Budget Total
726.01
109233
850.14
85729
Neighborhood D Square Footage Total
TSF
41762.87
41566.8
Neighborhood D Trip Budget Total
749489
72,293
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-8 922004rpt5.doc
Table 2-3 (cont.)
TUSTIN LEGACY TRIP BUDGET'
Current Specific Plan
With Proposed
Project
Planning
Area
Land Use Category
units
Residential/Parks
Non -Residential
Residential/Parks
Non -Residential
Amount ADT Amount ADT Amount ADT Amount ADT
NEIGHBORHOOD E
9-12
Neighborhood Commercial
TSF
18.13
21028
18.13
21028
General Office
TSF
528.71
71016
689.19
95145
Office Park
TSF
412.95
31944
230
21,944
Industrial Park
TSF
307.54
41285
332.28
49196
Light Industrial/R&D
TSF
136.51
15107
Park
ACRE
28.2 143
26.3 132
Sports Park
ACRE
10.4 559
8 430
Nei hborhood E S uare Footage Total
TSF
1,267.33
11406.11
Neighborhood E Trip Budget Total
17,273
19,420
NEIGHBORHOOD F
16
ShoppinCenter
TSF
448
13,772
448
13,772
PA 16 Trip Budget Total
448
13,772
448
13,772
17
Shopping Center
TSF_
47
15445
47
15445
PA 17 Trip Budget Total
47
1,445
47
19445
18
Military (Office)
TSF
40.85
542
40.85
542
PA 18 Trip Budget Total
40.85
542
40.85
542
19
Shopping Center
TSF
435.6
1331391
435.6
13,391
Multi lex Theater 70 TSF
SEAT
3,500
61300
310500
69300
PA 19 Trip Budget Total
TSF
505.6
1911691
505.6
19,691
Neighborhood F Square Footage Total
TSF
11041.45
11041.45
Neighborhood F Trip Budget Total
359450
359450
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-9 922004rpt5.doc
Table 2-3 (cont.)
TUSTIN LEGACY TRIP BUDGET'
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-10 922004rpt5.doc
Current Specific
Plan
With Proposed
Project
Planning
Area
Land Use Category
Units
Residential/Parks
Non -Residential
Residential/Parks
Non -Residential
Amount ADT Amount ADT Amount ADT AmouWt�T ADT
NEIGHBORHOOD G
15
LDR 1-7 DU/Acre
DU
533
55102
647
6,192
MDR 8-15 DU/Acre)
DU
489
3,912
375
35000
MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
DU
192
15273
192
115273
Elementary/Middle School
STU
l ,200
15224
111200
19224
Neighborhood Commercial
TSF
26.68
21983
26.68
21983
Communi Commercial TSF 130.68 8,908 130.68
8,908
General Office
TSF
150.28
19994
150.28
1,994
Park
ACRE
49
249
23.9
120
Senior Congregate
TSF
158.99
970
158.99
970
Sports Park
ACRE
14.1
758
16.5
888
PA 15 Trip Budget Total
466.63
14,855
466.63
149855
20
MHDR 16-25 DU/Acre
DU
376
2,493
376
2,493
21
LDR 1-7 DU/Acre
DU
189
11809
189
15809
MDR 8-15 DU/Acre)
DU
465
3,720
465
33720
Neighborhood G Square Footage Total
TSF
466.63
466.63
Neighborhood G Trip Budget Total
149855
14,855
NEIGHBORHOOD H
22
LDR 1-7 DU/Acre
DU
166
13589
166
130589
MDR 8-15 DU/Acre
DU
243
l ,944
243
15944
Elementary/Middle School
STU
650
663
650
663
Neighborhood H Square Footage Total
TSF
0
0
Neighborhood H Trip Budget Total
0
0
' Residential and park uses are shown for informational purposes
only and are not part of the non-residential trip budget.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-10 922004rpt5.doc
Table 2-4
PLANNING AREA TRIP BUDGET COMPARISON (NON-RESIDENTIAL USES)
Neighborhood
Planning Areas
Units
Current
Specific Plan
Proposed Project
Difference
Amount
ADT
Amount
ADT
Amount
ADT
A
1-3
TSF
111320.98
179734
11,320.98
179734
0
0
B
49597
TSF
248.3
89974
248.3
89974
0
0
C
6
TSF
57.5
39920
57.5
39920
0
0
D
8913914
TSF
41762.87
749489
49566.8
72,293
-196.07
-29196
E
9-12
TSF
19267.33
179273
19406.11
19,420
138.78
29146
F
16-19
TSF
19041.45
359450
15041.45
357450
0
0
G
15,20921
TSF
466.63
149855
466.63
149855
0
0
H
22
TSF
0
0
0
0
0
0
Notes: 1) See Figure 2-1 for neighborhood map.
2 ) Park uses are not part of the non-residential trip budget.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 2-11 922004rpt5.doc
Chapter 3,.0
ON-SITE ROADWAY SYSTEM
This chapter discusses the on-site roadway system of the Proposed Project in Neighborhoods D
and E and Planning Area 15 of Neighborhood G. The purpose is to show the type of on-site roadways,
intersection controls and intersection lane geometrics that are proposed within the project area and
confirm that the proposal meets the established operational criteria.
PLANNED CIRCULATION SYSTEM
The circulation system assumed for the traffic analysis study area for buildout 2025 conditions is
illustrated in Figure 3-1. Included are the roadways in the current Specific Plan and the addition of several
roadways, mostly two-lane local arterials. The on-site circulation system includes two six -lane major
arterials, Tustin Ranch Road and Warner Avenue, secondary arterials (Valencia North Loop, Legacy
Road, North Loop Road, Park Avenue, Armstrong Road, "A" Street between Red Hill Avenue and "C"
Street, "F" Street, "C" Street and "B" Street north of Tustin Ranch Road in Neighborhoods D and E), and
local roadways in Neighborhoods D and E and Planning Area 15 of Neighborhood G to serve the
Proposed Project. The arterial circulation system is virtually the same as established in the 2006
Addendum to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan EIS/EIR with the primary difference being the addition of
the local roadway networks in the Proposed Project area (Neighborhoods D and E and Planning Area 15
of Neighborhood G).
INTERSECTION CONTROLS
The assumed on-site traffic control measures are shown in Figures 3-2 through 3-4, for
Neighborhoods D (Community Core Area), E and G (Planning Area 15). Traffic control measures are not
project mitigation measures. Rather they address the traffic operational needs of the project site
depending on individual capacity and include a combination of traffic signals and all -way and one-way
stop signs.
A detailed analysis of traffic control measures, including traffic signals, stop -sign control and
pedestrian crossings, will be performed with the associated development's master plan and street
improvement plan reviews, and in coordination with the City Traffic Engineer, when specific project
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 3-1 922004rpt5.doc
Major Arterial (6 lanes)
Primary Arterial (4 lanes)
Secondary Arterial (2-4 lanes)
Local Collector (2-4 lanes)
Local Street (2 lanes)
City of Tustin
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 3-2
Figure 3-1
LEGACY PARK CIRCULATION SYSTEM
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
922004rpt5fig3- l .dwg
EDINGER
AV
m
�O
ip,
O
'
Z
VALENCIA
MOFFETT RD
�Z
-ri
D
<
~
MG
a
.,G,. ST
= Ln
WARNER AV
WARN�`R
I S T ;1
_O
CARNEGIE
"A" ST `�
•,�' S�
q
D
�'
JT
��
�
•
PSE
�
o
A„ S�
;10m
N
n <
70
D
O
v
70 m
o
,
Z
C
cn
a
BARRANCA PKWY
Major Arterial (6 lanes)
Primary Arterial (4 lanes)
Secondary Arterial (2-4 lanes)
Local Collector (2-4 lanes)
Local Street (2 lanes)
City of Tustin
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 3-2
Figure 3-1
LEGACY PARK CIRCULATION SYSTEM
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
922004rpt5fig3- l .dwg
N
WARNER
AV
A
i•� CY RD
„C„ ST S�
cn '-
c�
Gi „E„ S T z
F
s
A „p„
S�
Ln
ST
n
RANCH RD
Legend
Signalized Intersection
Stop Sign
Figure 3-2
RECOMMENDED TRAFFIC CONTROL MEASURES
- COMMUNITY CORE AREA
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 3-3 922004rpt5fig3-2.dwg
iQ
1
cn
� 00
/v `
A�
O7
VALENCIA NORTH LOOP
,.O
OWN
U
- MOFFETT RD
U
Z
�Z
`S
�4
GP
"G" ST
WARNER AV
Legend
Signalized Intersection
Stop Sign
Figure 3-4
RECOMMENDED TRAFFIC CONTROL MEASURES
- NEIGHBORHOOD G (PLANNING AREA 15)
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 3-5 922004rpt5fig3-4.dwg
details are available. Appropriate traffic control measures will be in accordance with City Standards, as
directed by the City Traffic Engineer, and implemented in the design of the development with the
approval of the street improvement plans.
INTERSECTION LANE GEOMETRY
This section provides the proposed intersection lane geometry information for Neighborhoods D
(Community Core Area), E and G (Planning Area 15). It has been prepared to assist in the design of the
backbone roadway system for Tustin Legacy's Legacy Park. The intersection lane geometrics for each
analyzed neighborhood area are illustrated in Figures 3-5 through 3-7. A detailed analysis of intersection
lane geometry will be performed with the associated development's master plan and street improvement
plan reviews, and in coordination with the City Traffic Engineer, when specific project details are
available. Appropriate intersection lane geometry will be in accordance with City Standards, as directed
by the City Traffic Engineer, and implemented in the design of the development with the approval of the
street improvement plans.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 3-6 922004rpt5.doc
� w4p�ER 4-
v
C. ;7 iiit � � �r � d
z f� � � � s, y. � l RD
S�- -Sol-
Sr
i� RANCH Ro
e �
Rq
tiq
Figure 3-5
INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS
- COMMUNITY CORE AREA
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 3-7 922004rpt5fig3-5.dwg
L
-1 WARN
Dow-
pop -
a
J f
z a
o �
w �
� p
m
0
1
CARNEGIE AV � �11"q" � ST
TT
Legend
"....... J. De -facto Right Turn
v
o
vG
Figure 3-6
INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS
- NEIGHBORHOOD E
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 3-8 922004rpt5fig3-6.dwg
Q
Alk -
x",
oz v�R
Q ooQ
VALENCIA NORTH
LOOP
,p
v
MOFfETT Ilk- /,� RD
WARNER AV
lzy
�o
Figure 3-7
INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS
- NEIGHBORHOOD G (PLANNING AREA 15)
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis -9 922004rpt5fig3-7.dwg
Chapter 4.0
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
This chapter discusses the performance of the circulation system of the Proposed Proj ect. As
noted in the methodology section, the Proposed Project is analyzed under long-range (year 2025) traffic
conditions, and project land uses and circulation are expected to be completed by this time. The purpose
is to confirm that the proposed roadway supporting the project will work within the established
performance criteria.
DAILY TRAFFIC FORECASTS
Under year 2025 with -project conditions along with buildout of the on-site roadways, Red Hill
Avenue, Edinger Avenue and ' Barranca Parkway along the periphery of the project are expected to be
built out with their ultimate lanes. Tustin Ranch Road is assumed to be connected between Walnut
Avenue and Edinger Avenue with a grade separation of the railroad and Edinger Avenue, and then an
indirect connection to Edinger Avenue. Access to and from the north is provided via three roadways on
Edinger Avenue (West Connector, Tustin Ranch Road and East Connector), three from the east (Moffett
Drive, Jamboree Road and Warner Avenue), four on Barranca Parkway (Aston Street, Armstrong
Avenue, Tustin Ranch Road and District Road), and three on Red Hill Avenue (Valencia North Loop,
Warner Avenue and Carnegie Avenue)
Figure 4-1 shows the average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for the on-site roadways.
INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE (LOS)
Table 4-1 provides the results of the intersection analysis for the intersections illustrated in Figure
4-2. Because the changes included in the Proposed Project compared to the current Specific Plan as
amended in 2006 are minor and that the ADT projections outside the Proposed Project boundaries show.
minimal change compared to the 2006 Specific Plan assessment, the only off-site intersections analyzed
here are along the periphery of Tustin Legacy on Edinger Avenue, Red Hill Avenue and Barranca
Parkway (see volume map in Appendix D).
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-1 922004rpt5.doc
Legend
10 ?0 30
ADT Volumes (000s)
City of Tustin
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-2
Figure 4-1
LEGACY PARK ADT VOLUMES
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
922004rpt5fig4- I .dwg
EDINGER AV
1
J
p
C)
18 4
v
NORTH LOOP
VALENCIA NORTH L,,,;;p
r
�
4
Z
Z
Q
MOFFETT RD j
�
2
w j
N
r
m
5
r J
F
Or
1
D
p,G
_
„G ^
G
ST
Q
6
45
18
43 '� 40
57 51
44 p,� x v�
�� „I „ .T
1SS .,
�9 �b
WARNER AV
__
WARN —
IN
„A., ST
ti Cb
�`
CARNEGIE
• G
`fl S� 1 jJ
PJE
o
f2
11 14,
m
M
O
Z
O
1—
N
a
Legend
10 ?0 30
ADT Volumes (000s)
City of Tustin
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-2
Figure 4-1
LEGACY PARK ADT VOLUMES
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
922004rpt5fig4- I .dwg
. Table 4-1
PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS SUMMARY
Intersection*
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
ICU LOS ICU LOS
1. Armstrong & Valencia N Loo
.60
A
.55
A
2. Tustin Ranch Rd & Valencia N
.73
C
.64
B
3. Tustin Ranch Rd & Warner N
.69
B
.80
C
4. Tustin Ranch Rd & Warner S
.58
A
.65
B
5. Armstrong & Warner
.65
B
.64
B
6. Armstron &A St
.47
A
.48
A
7. Tustin Ranch & C St/Park Ave
.60
A
.69
B
8. Loop Rd & Warner
.67
B
.64
B
9. Loop Rd & Jamboree SB Rams
.20
A
.31
A
10. N Loop Rd & Moffett
.24
A
.20
A
11. N Loop Rd & Valencia N Loo
.15
A
.16
A
13. Loop Rd S & District Rd
.38
A
.35
A
14. B St & Tustin Ranch Rd
.45
A
.49
A
15. Warner & F St/Legacy
.70
B
.63
B
16. Armstrong & C St/I St
.28
A
.30
A
18. Armstrong & E St
.32
A
.26
A
19. Warner & D St
.29
A
.38
A
20. Tustin Ranch Rd & Legacy
.79
C
.81
D
21. Armstrong & B St
.40
A
.26
A
22. Driveway A & Warner
.72
C
.80
C
23. Driveway B & A St
.43
A
.46
A
24. B St & A St
.38
A
.35
A
25. C St & A St
.41
A
.59
A
26. Drivewa . C & B St
.25
A
.14
A
30. J St & G St
.13
A
.14
A
31.BSt&GSt
.09
A
.11
A
32. L St & G St/H St
.08
A
.12
A
33. I St & H St
.07
A
.09
A
34. J St & E St
.25
A
.32
A
35.BSt&ESt
.15
A
.23
A
36. L St & E St
.12
A
.28
A
37. C St/F St & E St
.35
A
.40
A
38. I St & F St
.38
A
.55
A
39. J St & A St
.29
A
.45
A
40. B St & A St
.36
A
.57::::
A
41. C St & A St/D St
.45
A
.53
A
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-3 922004rpt5.doc
Table 4-1 (cont.)
.PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LOS SUMMARY
Intersection*
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
ICU LOS ICU LOS
42.NSt&DSt
.11
A
.18
A
43. M St & A St
.35
A
.32
A
44.KSt&ESt
.08
A
.10
A
45. K St & G St
.08
A
.11
A
46. B St & I St
.10
A
.09
A
47.JSt&ISt
.16
A
.17
A
50. B St & Valencia N Loo
.25
A
.22
A
51.NLoo Rd&BSt
.14
A
.14
A
52. East Connector & B St
.18
A
.17
A
53.DSt&BSt
.14
A
.14
A
58. D St & Moffett
.35
A
.28
A
59. C St & Moffett
.45
A
.37
A
60. N Loop Rd & Le ac
.34
A
.30
A
62. C St & Le ac
.10
A
.16
A
63.NLoop Rd&GSt
.10
A
.14
A
101. Red Hill & Edin er
.87
D
.78
C
102. Red Hill & Valencia
.84
D
.73
C
103. Red Hill & Warner
.81
D
.90
D
104. Red Hill & Carnegie
.53
A
.57
A
105. Red Hill & Barranca
.70
B
.81
D
106. Aston & Barranca
.52
A
.62
B
107. Armstrong & Barranca
.58
A
.61
B
108. Tustin Ranch Rd/Von Kannan & Barranca
.79
C
.74
C
109. West Connector & Edinger
.53
A
.70
B
110. Tustin Ranch Rd Connector & Edinger
.70
B
.79
C
111. East Connector & Edinger
.65
.74
B
C
.69
.77
B
C
112. Tustin Ranch Rd & Tustin Ranch Rd Connector
113. Tustin Ranch Rd & Walnut
.83
D
.82
D
* See intersection location map in Figure 4-2
ICU - Intersection Capacity Utilization
LOS - Level of Service
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy .Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-4 922004ipt5.doc
Figure 4-2
INTERSECTION LOCATION MAP
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-5 922004rpt5fig4-2.dwg
WALNUT AV
113
109
110
101
EDINGER AV
112
111
51
z
<
�°
52 ° 53
0
2
50
°
NORTH LOOP
G\P
11
'
�
-
PAF.
Ln
102
Q
r
�2
�
O
z
10
58 59
MOFFETT DR
z
62
cy
61
60
�. 20
r
63
-`
D
p,G'�
"G„
G
ST
9
15
3
103
22
5 P� ' � 19
8
Q
WARNER "I" _=33ST 38,
WARNER AV
3
46 45 32sr
4
0
21 42
37
s �o
c
o� 26 �`
••� 47..E 31 sl X36 41
r�, ''�
16 \ �� � s
104 23
"A" ST 24
�� 30 � � e 5 43 107
34 '��
40
13
D
?
CARNEGIE
25
18
39 14
0
0
V)
6 ..A. St `sI
Ln
M
m
o
105
U
1.06
107 108
Z
O
<
BARRANCA
PKWY
Figure 4-2
INTERSECTION LOCATION MAP
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-5 922004rpt5fig4-2.dwg
The intersection criteria involve the use of peak hour intersection capacity utilization (ICU)
values. The ICU ranges that correspond to LOS "A" through "F" were described in Chapter 1.0, and by
practice the ICU methodology assumes that intersections are signalized. Based on the peak hour
intersection performance criteria and impact thresholds discussed in Chapter 1.0, all intersections are
forecast to operate at acceptable levels (i.e., ICU value is .90 or less). (See Appendix B for detailed ICU
worksheets.)
TURN POCKET LENGTHS
This section addresses turn pocket lengths for left -turn and right -turn lanes at future signalized
intersections with exclusive right -turn and left -turn lanes. They are based on vehicle storage
requirements, and are thereby exclusive of transition lengths (typically, transitions are 90 feet for a single
lane and 120 to 150 feet for a double lane). The recommended turn pocket lengths for left -turns and
right -turns are summarized in Tables 4-2. and 4-3, respectively. A detailed analysis of the left- and right -
turn pocket lengths will be performed with the associated development's master plan and street
improvement plan reviews, and in coordination with the City Traffic Engineer, when specific project
details are available.
CONCLUSIONS
This analysis has shown that the proposed Legacy Park land use and arterial circulation changes
within the Master Development footprint of Tustin Legacy have not resulted in significant changes to the
projected trip generation or in any new significant project impacts that would require mitigation.
Therefore there are no changes to the previous traffic findings included in the original Program EIS/EIR
and the subsequent addendum completed in 2006. Moreover, the proposed on-site circulation system is
found to provide adequate capacity in accordance with the performance criteria applied here.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-6 922004rpt5.doc
Table 4-2
LEFT -TURN STORAGE LENGTH REQUIREMENTS
Intersection (N/S Rd at E/W Rd)
Movement
Peak Hour
Volume
Lanes
Volume/Lane
Length_
2. Tustin Ranch & Valencia N Loop
SBL
PM
38
2
19
150'
NBL AM 317 2 159
200'
EBL PM 521 2 261
300'
WBL PM 27 1 27
150'
3. Tustin Ranch & Warner N
SBL
PM
727
2
364
400'
WBL AM 1,675 2.9* 578
600'
4. Tustin Ranch & Warner South
NBL
PM
171
2
86
150'
EBL PM 989 2 495
500'
5. Armstrong & Warner
SBL
PM
135
1
135
150'
NBL PM 418 2 209
250'
EBL AM 201 1 201-
250'
WBL AM 150 1 150
150'
6. Armstrong &A St
SBL
AM
229
1
229
250'
NBL AM 107 1 107
150'
EBL AM 150 1 150
150'
WBL PM 216 1 216
250'
7. Tustin Ranch & C St/Park Ave
SBL
PM
258
2
129
150'
NBL AM 259 2 130
150'
EBL PM 222 1 222
250'
WBL PM 248 1 248
250'
8. Loop Rd & Warner
SBL
PM
30
1
30
150'
NBL PM 221 1 221
250'
EBL PM 51 2 26
150'
WBL PM 90 2 45
150'
9. Loop Rd & Jamboree SB Ramps
SBL
PM
171
1
171
200'
NBL PM 46 1 46
150'
EBL PM 60 1 60
150'
WBL AM 325 2 163
200'
10. N Loop Rd & Moffett
SBL
PM
69
1
69
150'
WBL AM 279 1 279
300'
11. N Loop Rd & Valencia N Loop
NBL
AM
76
1
76
150'
EBL AM 86 1 86
150'
14. B St & Tustin Ranch
SBL
PM
278
1.9*
147
150'
EBL AM 252 2 126
150'
15. Warner & F St/Legacy
SBL
PM
558
2 -
279
300'
NBL PM 51 1 51
150'
EBL PM 516 1.9* 272
300'
WBL AM 23 1 23
150'
20. Tustin Ranch & Legacy
SBL
PM
146
1
146
150'
NBL AM 330 1 330
350'
EBL PM 353 1 353
400'
WBL PM 1 116 1 116
150'
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-7 922004tpt5.doc
Table 4-2 (cont.)
LEFT -TURN STORAGE LENGTH REQUIREMENTS
Intersection (N/S Rd at E/W Rd)
Movement
Peak Hour
Volume
Lanes
Volume/Lane
Len th
22. Driveway A& Warner
SBL
PM
110
1
110
150'
NBL PM 137 1 137
150'
EBL AM 346 1 346
350'
WBL AM 63 1 63
150'
23. Driveway B & A St
SBL
PM
268
1
268
300'
NBL PM 46 1 46
150'
EBL AM 326 1 326
350'
WBL AM 159 1 159
200'
25. C St & A St
SBL
AM
116
1
116
150'
NBL AM 261 1 261
300'
EBL AM 21 1 21
150'
WBL PM 269 1 269
300'
40. B St & A St
SBL
PM
253
1
253
300'
NBL AM 295 2 148
150'
EBL PM 40 1 40
150'
WBL PM 22 1 22
150'
41. C St & A St/D St
SBL
AM
1
1
1
150'
NBL AM 471 2 236
250'
EBL PM 57 1 57
150'
WBL PM 38 1 38
150'
60. N Loop Rd & Legacy
SBL
AM
1
1
1
150'
NBL AM 79 1 79
150'
EBL PM 165 1 165
200'
WBL PM 63 1 63
150'
102. Red Hill & Valencia
SBL
AM
270
2
135
150'
NBL PM 11,120 2 560
600'
EBL AM 40 1 40
150'
WBL AM 580 2 290
300'
103. Red Hill & Warner
SBL
AM
600
2
300
300'
NBL PM 480 2 240
250'
EBL PM 280 2 140
150'
WBL AM 290 2 145
150'
104. Red Hill & Carnegie
SBL
AM
500
2
250
250'
NBL AM 120 1 120
150'
EBL PM 90 1 90
150'
WBL PM 220 1 220
250'
106. Aston & Barranca
SBL
PM
150
1
150
150'
NBL PM 130 1 130
150'
EBL AM 300 1 300
300'
WBL AM 80 1 80
150'
107. Armstrong & Barranca
SBL
PM
340
1
340
350'
NBL PM 100 1 100
150'
EBL AM 360 1 360
400'
WBL AM 170 1 170 1
200'
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-8 922004rpt5.doc
Table 4-2 (cont.)
LEFT -TURN STORAGE LENGTH REQUIREMENTS
Intersection (N/S Rd at E/W Rd)
Movement
Peak Hour
Volume
Lanes . Volume/Lane
Length
108. Von Karman/Tustin Ranch
SBL
PM
540
2 270
300'
NBL
PM
500
2 250
250'
& Barranca
EBL
PM
360
2 180
200'
WBL
AM
670
2 335
350'
110. Tustin Ranch Rd Connector
NBL
PM
430
1 430
400'
WBL
AM
430
2 215
250'
& Edinger
111. East Connector & Edinger
SBL
PM
300
1 300
300'
NBL
AM
130
1 130
150'
EBL
PM
130
1 130
150'
WBL
PM
90
1 90
150'
112. Tustin Ranch &
SBL
PM
260
1 260
300'
WBL
AM
700
2 350
350'
Tustin Ranch Rd Connector
113. Tustin Ranch & Walnut
WBL
PM
370
2 185
200'
Abbreviations:
Adj . — Adjacent
ICU — Intersection Capacity Utilization
Ln(s) — Lane(s)
N/S Rd, E/W Rd — North/South Road, East/West Road
RT — Right -Turn
Vol — Volume
Notes: The turn pocket length for right -turn lanes is determined from the estimated queue length of the highest
adjacent through movement (or left -turn movement at a T -intersection) in the AM or PM peak hour with a minimum
of 150' and rounded into increments of 50'. Only intersections that are anticipated to be signalized with dedicated left -
turn lanes are analyzed here.
* The right -turn volumes (or through at a four-way intersection) are assumed
to use five (5) percent of the shared left-
turn/right-turn lane.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis 4-9 922004rpt5.doc
a C
o
:a
W)
W)
a
o
o
o
0
�n
C>
kn
0
kn
0
W)
0
o
0
a
0
�n
'o
W)
0
v,
C
o
0
o
0
In
0
,Wn
0
to
0
tn
`N
o
to
c
kn
Q
o
o'
.kn
C�
M
M
N
N
M
M
N
N
N
N
M
M
N
N
N
M
M
N
N
N
N
N
M
N
�
M
O
Ul
�n
O�
�
d•'
�O
O�
O
C
"� •,
00
00
00
00
00
�G
�-,
ct
00
00
r-'--�
[�
�n
O�
G�
N
O
to
M
,._,
`�
M
�O
�C
1.0ry
N
ON
r-
--
00
oo
M
�n
�t
N
�
M
r-•
A
M
M
�-+C`1
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
N
PENN
,
1.10
�
^,
00
C
---�
C"O�
00
O
00
ON
00
`O
^''
00
O�
00
r-
110
�o00
00
�O
M
Cs
°00
Z
M
O
`O
O
N
01
r-
00
t�
f V
d'
M
M
0
�•
01
'-+
[�
cq
(�
O0
kn
C%l
O
0%
W
•� ;
E-•
E-•�
H
E"'
E-+
--a
F-•
.,..�
H
N
E�
E-,
F-.:
E -y
E-♦
H
�''
E-'
W
H
W
H
�"
H
F-
�'
�
��v,zw3z3v�wv�wv�z�v�zw3z3v�wv1�v�3
x
M
r••�
a) W
4
O
kn
o0
---�
N
N
. 00
`
�'
O
O�
�--�
r-+
�O
O
00
M
00
000
00
00
--"
M
00
kn
M
M
•
t-
^-'
N
N
ti'
O
O
O.
�--�
0000
00
r
. M
. N
N
- tr-
N
�O
N
00
r,,,
^,,
O�
M
M
x
�•
t�
`n
�.-+
M
M
. r -r
[�
d-
O
O�
�-+
M.
M.
�p
N
O
N
cc
N
00
tn
N
tn
cls
tn
LO
00
0�
�y�Qaaaaa��aa��aa�aa�aQa¢aQaQ
>o�c�oG���aa�o�o�o�o��a�c�c����c�c�caacxaG
� opgt�Q4�o4�C4000Qc�oQ��C��A4�aa�pQA4o��A0�
v,zw3Z
wv,wvnzwv).zw�z�En
V)
v
°O
o°
w
a
Cc
>
3
3
U
co
>
Zcis
• O
a/
OG
C13
0�
O
C�
O
O
88
a
_
CA
O
C13
[•�
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
C)
0
O
.O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
O
cr1
r.�
M
(V
M
N
N
N`
N
N
cam!
fit
.'t
tf)
N
M
M
elf)
M
x
a
a
a
a
a
01.4
(,
00
O
00
`O
�
VI)
t�
to
M
W
d•
M
cf'
00
O
I�
W)
kn
W)
N
N
^
00
�O
M
t�
M
O
'O �
M
�.,
M
....,
.�
N
�r
."-'
r",
�'i'1
�'
N
�
�'
M
M
M
r--
�
•-^
•-"
M
M
'�
�
r'"
M
-..
tn
^,
O
M
'�
00
\�O
O
CN
00
l—
V1
W)
O
O
O
O
00
(tel
kn
CN
CA
.'�, >
E'-"
E"''
F-"
E-•
�'"
E-„'
E"',
('-''
E-'+
�"'
F-+
E"'
N
�-'
�
H
E,.,,
F""'
[�
E„_,
�.
E-.'
E.,
�
,�
E--+
•
oC��O�L�
�
040000Caoam�0004o�
0'_100
�.1GO�o0Cn
�op0
dv�v�wwzwv�wwv�z3v�zw3zw
v�zv�zw�zw
.a
[�
M
r
"~
00
(2\
M
---j
tn
N
M
`O
o0
O
N
O
M
p
0
N
0
00
0
M
O
r
p
o
O
[�
�O
O
t�
p
O
�O
O
N
O
O
O
O
[�
M
kn
W)
N
111-^�
�--�
�O
N
N
kn
ONE"
O
[�
[�
kn
�'
o0
c�
l�
p
O
O
t�
00
Fr
t�
M
to
N
�'
*-•
�D
N
N
N
�O
ct
M
M
cr1
d•
C/?
N
aDQo..a¢aa.aaa¢a¢¢a¢a.aa.�a..a¢aa.¢a.¢
>a!oGo�oGaoGaGa:c�aac��c��o;��c��c�cxAC�aC�o�c�
a
w
o.oaoaIMCOmM,00cooaoaoa�ovoaa,oQasoa�oop0000�ao
a�v�wwz
z
zw3zw�v�z
zw3zw
as
on
a
x
E -y
o
CJ
V
R
C
m
°�
0
03
cl
Cd
b
��
�
�
��"��
O
�
r.
•�
•mow
.�
Cl�
C�
a
c�00O�.:
oc
o
0
0
0
O
to
O
kn
O
o
O
0
O
o
� O
�•'
N
N
M
c�1
M
03
>
cz
�
o
CU
� U
�
4�
O
O
O
,G
� O
'b
voo-4
v-••
M
M
N
kn
O
U
UC13
(A
F
U
c4-1
>C>
CG
=
C
U
N
N
Nel c�
N
0
..�
.. O
o
�l
Q4Coo
o
Cd
0000
CIS
�W)
cq
,_.,
M
N
cC r,
cd
O •�
o
c
o
o
a
� 3
E•r
^'
r0000
M
N
,lo -4 O
W
•� °' o
�
a �
a
�
�
a
�
� a•� �, as
co O CO
i
a
cz
S-4 3
�cts
w
as
a�
4-• V
N.�o O
o.
-o
-btb
cd
..� p
FoolI
�
ci
mar
� C* o -b �
z
o
o
pG'�
,
o FU �
v
a '� 3 C13 M
CA
a? x
s.
I I I
a �• cdcl
....�
Appendix A
LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION
Table A-1 ADT and Peak Hour Trip Generation Rate Summary
Figure A-1 Tustin Legacy Traffic Model (TLTM) Traffic Analysis Zone System
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis A-1 922004rpt5.doc
Table A-1
ADT AND PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION RATE SUMMARY
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units In Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
1. LDR (1-7 DU/Acre) DU .19 .56
.75
.65
.36
1.01
9.57
2. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre) DU .13 .51
.64
.56
.24
.80
8.00
3. MHDR (16-25. DU/Acre) DU .08 .43
.51
.42
.20
.62
6.63
4. Transitional Housing Room .21 .17
.38
.18
.22
.40
4.90
5. Hotel (190 TSF) Room .34 .22
.56
.32
.29
.61
8.23
6. Elementa /Middle School Stu .17 .12
.29
.00
.00
.00
1.02
7. High School Stu .32 .14
.46
.06
.09
.15
1.79
8. Learning Center TSF .66 .07
.73
.15
.34
.49
6.12
9. Neighborhood Commercial TSF 1.63 1.05
2.68
4.68
5.06
9.74
111.82
10. Community Commercial TSF 1.00 .64
1.64
2.85
3.09
5.94
68.17
12. General Office TSF 1.65 .23
1.88
.31
1.49
1.80
13.27
14. Military (Office) TSF 1.65 .23
1.88
.31
1.49
1.80
13.27
15. Light Industrial/R&D TSF 1.03 .21
1.24
.16
.92
1.08
8.11
17. Park Acre .00 .00
.00
.00
.00
.00
5.00
18. Regional Park Acre .00 .00
.00
.00
.00
.00
5.00
19. Golf Course Acre .38 .10
.48
.22
.50
.72
8.00
20. Community Facility TSF 2.00 .25
2.25
.89
1.97
2.86
25.00
21. Multiplex Theater Seat .00 .00
.01
.09
.06
.14
1.80
22. Senior Congregate TSF .19 .19
.38
.20
.22
.42
6.10
23. Specialty Retail Center TSF .00 .00
.00
1.19
1.52
2.71
44.32
24. Theatre (29 TSF Seat .00 .00
.00
.01
.01
.02
1.25
25. Health Club TSF .51 .70
1.21
2.07
1.98
4.05
32.93
26. High -Turnover Restaurant TSF 5.99 5.53
11.52
6.66
4.26
10.92
127.15
27. Senior Housing Attached DU .04 .04
.08
.07
.04
.11
3.48
28. Sports Park Acre .01 .00
.01
3.40
4.10
7.50
53.80
29. Tustin Facility SG 3.32 1.01
4.33
2.27
4.76
7.03
62.20
Note: For a land use over 300 TSF that can be defined as a campus, the square footages are combined and the
equation -based rates are applied to determine trip generation (i.e., Shopping Center, Office
Park and Industrial
Park). The land use -based trip rates for these uses are based on
the following equation:
LN(T)=AxLN(X)+B where X=land use amount and T=daily trips
----- AM Peak Hour
-----
----- PM Peak Hour -----
Coefficients Pk/ADT
Pk/ADT
Land Use Type Units A B Ratio
In
Out
Ratio
In Out
11. Shopping Ctr TSF ..643 5.866 .024
61%
39%
.087
48% 52%
13. Office Park TSF .768 3.654 .080
76%
24%
.087
36% 64%
16. Industrial Park TSF .768 3.654 .079
77%
23%
.089
32% 68%
Abbreviations: ADT - average daily trips
DU - dwelling units
LDR - Low Density Residential
MDR -Medium Density Residential
MHDR - Medium High Density Residential
R&D - Research and Development
SG - special generator
Stu - student
TSF - thousand square feet
Trip Rate Sources: MCAS Tustin EIS/EIR and ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7 1 Edition.
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis A-2 922004tpt5.doc
} � 23 106 ��
105 103
[� 20
a V � �. ; ,
14-15 � � __ � ! i � 102 0�, 109 `
16-20 22 101 ti9398
5 100 -
97
92
11-12 6
24 � i 99 � I 95 96
94
3 91 i
i 90
13 2 Jq �j 85 , 86%`, $7 89
25 84
21 83 81
� p 82 i 88 21
35 i 33 32. '. 27 78 -79 --1,80`,,
1-10 ------- 134 _,. 31 26
3600 30` 28 77
000 '
60
---SOO, 61
54,E '� 3 _ ._ _.. ` 29
37 38 39 55 �� [--59 ; 62 ;6 68
58. ` 6.� � 69 16
41 , ', 57 � : 64 ; ` 70 � 112
40 42 6 65 :: 71 / I
46
66 22
E ""72
43 47 �i 49 73 I �. 76 � � X13
'48 75
so__.__ sl_ ^ils (City of Irvine)
44 45 52 53 74 � `� ; __ _ � 8 114 � .
Legend
Planning Area Boundary (Specific Plan Boundary)
XX Planning Area Numbering System
Neighborhood
ZZ Model Zone Neighborhood Boundary
Figure A-1
TUSTIN LEGACY TRAFFIC MODEL (TLTM)
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE SYSTEM
City of Tustin - Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis A-3 922004rpt5figA-I.dwg
NEIGHBORHOOD A LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
A4 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
-- AM
Peak Hour --
-- PM
Peak Hour --
Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING AREA 1 (Zones 1-10)
6. Elementary/Middle School
550.00
STU
94
66
160
0
0
0
561
8. Learning Center
1293.86
TSF
852
92
944
196
440
636
7920
9. Neighborhood Commercial
27.12
TSF
44
28
72
127
137
264
3033
29. Tustin Facility
100.00
SG
332
101
433
227
476
703
6220
TOTAL
1322
287
1609
550
1053
1603
17734
PLANNING AREA 2 (Zones 11,12)
28. Sports Park
24.10
ACRE
0
0
0
82
99
181
1297
PLANNING AREA 3 (Zone 13)
4. Transitional Housing
192.00
ROOM
40
33
73
35
42
77
941
NEIGHBORHOOD A TOTALS
4. Transitional Housing
192.00
ROOM
40
33
73
35
42
77
941
6. Elementary/Middle School
550.00
STU
94
66
160
0
0
0
561
8. Learning Center
1293.86
TSF
852
92
944
196
440
636
7920
9. Neighborhood Commercial
27.12
TSF
44
28
72
127
137
264
3033
28. Sports Park
24.10
ACRE
0
0
0
82
99
181
1297
29. Tustin Facility
100.00
SG
332
101
433
227
476
703
6220
TOTAL
1362
320
1682
667
1194
1861
19972
A4 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD B LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
PLANNING AREA 7 TOTALS
10.
Community Commercial
103.46
-- AM Peak
Hour --
-- PM
Peak Hour --
294
Land Use Type
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
PLANNING AREA 4 (Zones 14,15)
44
216
260
1922
TOTAL
342
1. LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
145.00
DU
28
81
109
94
52
146
1388
'. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
120.00
DU
16
62
78
68
28
96
960
27. Senior Housing Attached
72.00
DU
2
?
4
6
?
8
250
TOTAL
33
129
46
145
191
168
82
250
2598
PLANNING AREA 5 (Zones 16-20)
DU
35
188
223
185
88
273
2903
10.
2. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
132.00
DU
17
67
84
75
30
105
1056
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
438.00
DU
35
188
223
185
88
_73
2903
27. Senior Housing Attached
170.00
DU
5
5
10
10
5
15
590
TOTAL
840
57
260
317
270
123
393
4549
PLANNING AREA 7
1517
16121
-- AM
Peak
Hour --
-- PM
Peak Hour --
Zone Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22 10. Community Commercial
51.73
TSF
52
33
85
147
160
307
3526
12. General Office
72.42
TSF
119
17
136
22
108
130
961
SUB -TOTAL
171
50
221
169
268
437
4487
23 10. Community Commercial
51.73
TSF
52
33
85
147
160
307
3526
12. General Office
72.42
TSF
119
17
136
22
108
130
961
SUB -TOTAL
171
50
221
169
268
437
4487
PLANNING AREA 7 TOTALS
10.
Community Commercial
103.46
TSF
104
66
170
294
320
614
7052
12.
General Office
144.84
TSF
238
34
272
44
216
260
1922
TOTAL
342
100
442
338
536
874
8974
NEIGHBORHOOD B TOTALS
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
145.00
DU
28
81
109
94
52
146
1388
2.
MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
252.00
DU
33
129
162
143
58
201
2016
3.
MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
438.00
DU
35
188
223
185
88
273
2903
10.
Community Commercial
103.46
TSF
104
66
170
294
320
614
7052
12.
General Office
144.84
TSF
238
34
272
44
216
260
1922
27.
Senior Housing Attached
242.00
DU
7
7
14
16
7
23
840
TOTAL
445
505
950
776
741
1517
16121
A-5 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD C/PA6 LH.ND US8 AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
A-6 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
-- AM Peak
Hour --
-- PM
Peak
Hour --
Land Use Type Units
In Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEIGHBORHOOD C/PLANNING AREA 6 (Zone 21)
10. Community Commercial 57.50 TSF
58 37
95
164
178
342
3920
18. Regional Park 84.50 ACRE
0 0
0
0
0
0
423
TOTAL
58 37
95
164
178
342
4343
A-6 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD D LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
PLANNING AREA 8 (NEIGHBORHOOD D NORTH OF WARNER) TOTALS
7.
High School
1850.00
STU
592
-- AM Peak Hour --
-- PM
Peak Hour --
167
Zone
3312
Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING AREA 8 (NEIGHBORHOOD D NORTH
OF WARNER)
12.
General Office
211.31
TSF
349
49
398
65
24
7.
High School
1850.00
STU
592
259
851
111
167
278
3312
974
11280
SUB -TOTAL
Light Industrial/R&D
319.51
592
259
851
111
167
278
3312-
225
2 5
28.
Sports Park
46.00
ACRE
0
0
0
156
189
345
2475
28.
Sports Park
SUB -TOTAL
ACRE
0
0
0
0
156
189
345
2475
26
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
7.19
TSF
12
8
20
34
36
70
804
13.
Office Park (EQ)
135.10
TSF
89
28
117
46
82
128
1478
(Equation base =
235.30 TSF )
54
9. Neighborhood Commercial
9.76
TSF
16
10
26
46
49
SUB -TOTAL
1091
101
36
137
80
118
198
''282
.7
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
27.44
TSF
45
29
74
1''8
-
139
267
3069
165
13.
Office Park (EQ)
522.72
TSF239
TSF
76
315
123
219
342
3963
409
(Equation base =
1153.94 TSF )
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
60
SUB -TOTAL
SUB -TOTAL
6
284
105
389
251
358
609
7032
2813.
127.68
Office Park (EQ)
299.07
TSF
137
43
180
70
125
195
2267
(Equation base =
1153.94 TSF )
240
40
190
230
1694
57
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
54.00
DU
4
SUB -TOTAL
27
23
137
43
180
70
125
195
2267
-)987
23
Neighborhood Commercial
17.21
TSF
28
18
46
81
87
168
1924
33
13.
Office Park (EQ)
32.6.70
TSF
149
47
196
77
137
214
2476
0
0
(Equation base =
1153.94 TSF )
2
SUB -TOTAL
6
33
39
32
15
SUB -TOTAL
506
177
65
242
158
224
382
4400
30
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
5.23
TSF
9
5
14
24
26
50
584
13.
Office Park (EQ)
100.20
TSF
66
21
87
34
61
95
1096
(Equation base =
235.30 TSF )
SUB -TOTAL
75
26
101
58
87
145
1680
31
17.
Park
8.70
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
44
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
44
32
17.
Park
1.60
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
33
15.
Light Industrial/R&D
162.70
TSF
168
34
202
26
150
176
1319
SUB -TOTAL
168
34
202
26
150
176
1319
34
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
4.32
TSF
7
5
12
20
22
42
483
12.
General Office
38.81
TSF
64
9
73
12
58
70
515
SUB -TOTAL
71
14
85
32
80
112
998
35
15.
Light Industrial/R&D
156.82
TSF
162
33
195
25
144
169
1272
SUB -TOTAL
162
33
195
25
144
169
1272
36
12.
General Office
172.50
TSF
285
40
325
53
257
310
2289
SUB -TOTAL
285
40
325
53
257
310
2289
PLANNING AREA 8 (NEIGHBORHOOD D NORTH OF WARNER) TOTALS
7.
High School
1850.00
STU
592
259
851
111
167
278
3312
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
61.38
TSF
101
65
166
287
310
597
6864
12.
General Office
211.31
TSF
349
49
398
65
315
380
2804
13.
Office Park (EQ)
1383.79
TSF
680
215
895
350
624
974
11280
15.
Light Industrial/R&D
319.51
TSE
330
67
397
51
294
345
2591
17.
Park
10.30
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
52
28.
Sports Park
46.00
ACRE
0
0
0
156
189
345
2475
TOTAL
2052
655
2707
1020
1899
'919
29378
PLANNING AREAS 13 AND 14 (NEIGHBORHOOD
D SOUTH OF WARNER)
PLANNING AREA 13
54
9. Neighborhood Commercial
9.76
TSF
16
10
26
46
49
95
1091
12. General Office
39.03
TSF
64
9
73
12
58
70
518
SUB -TOTAL
80
19
99
58
107
165
1609
55
10. Community Commercial
6.00
TSF
6
4
10
17
19
36
409
17. Park
12.00
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
60
SUB -TOTAL
6
4
10
17
19
36
469
56
12. General Office
127.68
TSF
211
29
240
40
190
230
1694
SUB -TOTAL
211
29
240
40
190
230
1694
57
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
54.00
DU
4
23
27
23
11
34
358
SUB -TOTAL
4
23
27
23
11
34
358
58
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
76.00
DU
6
33
39
32
15
47
504
17. Park
0.30
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
SUB -TOTAL
6
33
39
32
15
47
506
A-7 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD D LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY (cont.)
A-8 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
-- AM Peak Hour --
-- PM
Peak
Hour --
Zone
Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING AREA 13 (cont.)
59
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
106.00
DU
8
46
54
45
21
66
703
10. Community Commercial
26.00
TSF
26
17
43
74
80
154
1772
SUB -TOTAL
34
63
97
119
101
220
2475
60
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
147.00
DU
12
63
75
62
29
91
975
17. Park
0.50
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
SUB -TOTAL
12
63
75
62
29
91
978
61
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
242.00
DU
19
104
123
102
48
150
1604
SUB -TOTAL
19
104
123
102
48
150
1604
62
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
38.00
DU
3
16
19
16
8
24
252
SUB -TOTAL
3
16
19
16
8
24
252
63
17. Park
1.00
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
64
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
96.00
DU
8
41
49
40
19
59
636
10. Community Commercial
27.00
TSF
27
17
44
77
83
160
1841
SUB -TOTAL
35
58
93
117
102
219
2477
65
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
96.00
DU
8
41
49
40
19
59
636
10. Community Commercial
31.00
TSF
31
20
51
88
96
184
2113
SUB -TOTAL
39
61
100
128
115
243
'2749
66
10. Community Commercial
7.00
TSF
7
4
11
20
22
42
477
12. General Office
100.00
TSF
165
23
188
31
149
180
1327
SUB -TOTAL
172
27
199
51
171
222
1804
67
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
10.00
DU
1
4
5
4
?
6
66
10. Community Commercial
22.00
TSF
22
14
36
63
68
131
1500
12. General Office
60.00
TSF
99
14
113
19
89
108
796
SUB -TOTAL
122
32
154
86
159
245
2362
68
12. General Office
65.00
TSF
107
15
122
20
97
117
863
17. Park
1.00
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
SUB -TOTAL
107
15
122
20
97
117
868
69
13. Office Park (EQ)
447.20
TSF
255
81
336
131
233
364
4193
SUB -TOTAL
255
81
336
131
233
364
4193
70
5. Hotel (190 TSF)
250.00
ROOM
85
55
140
80
73
153
2058
SUB -TOTAL
85
55
140
80
73
153
2058
71
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
17.00
DU
1
7
8
7
3
10
113
10. Community Commercial
73.00
TSF
73
47
120
208
226
434
4976
12. General Office
141.00
TSF
233
32
265
44
210
254
1871
25. Health Club
20.00
TSF
10
14
24
41
40
81
659
SUB -TOTAL
317
100
417
300
479
779
7619
72
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
9.00
DU
1
4
5
4
2
6
60
10. Community Commercial
18.00
TSF
18
12
30
51
56
107
1227
12. General Office
178.00
TSF
294
41
335
55
265
320
2362
24. Theatre (28 TSF)
1000.00
SEAT
0
0
0
10
10
20
1250
SUB -TOTAL
313
57
370
120
333
453
4899
73
5. Hotel (190 TSF)
250.00
ROOM
85
55
140
80
73
153
2058
12. General Office
125.00
TSF
206
29
235
39
186
225
1659
SUB -TOTAL
291
84
375
119
259
378
3717
PLANNING AREA 13 TOTALS
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
891.00
DU
71
382
453
375
177
552
5907
5.
Hotel (190 TSF)
500.00
ROOM
170
110
280
160
146
306
4115
9. Neighborhood Commercial
9.76
TSF
16
10
26
46
49
95
1091
10.
Community Commercial
210.00
TSF
210
135
345
598
650
1248
14315
12.
General Office
835.71
TSF
1379
192
1571
260
1244
1504
11090
13.
Office Park (EQ)
447.20
TSF
255
81
336
131
233
364
4193
17.
Park
14.80
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
24.
Theatre (28 TSF)
1000.00
SEAT
0
0
0
10
10
20
1250
25.
Health Club
20.00
TSF
10
14
24
41
40
81
659
TOTAL
2111
924
3035
1621
2549
4170
42695
PLANNING AREA 14
74
10. Community Commercial
8.00
TSF
8
5
13
23
25
48
545
12. General Office
37.40
TSF
62
9
71
12
56
68
496
13. Office Park (EQ)
321.45
TSF
178
56
234
92
163
255
2933
(Equation base =
502.64 TSE )
SUB -TOTAL
248
70
318
127
244
371
3974
75
13. Office Park (EQ)
181.18
TSF
101
32
133
52
92
144
1653
(Equation base =
502.64 TSF )
SUB -TOTAL
101
32
133
52
92
144
1653
A-8 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
A-9 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD D LAND USE AND TRIP
GENERATION SUMMARY
(cont.)
-- AM
Peak Hour --
-- PM
Peak
Hour --
Zone
Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING AREA 14 (cont.)
76
13. Office Park (EQ)
302.10
TSF
189
60
249
97
173
270
3102
SUB -TOTAL
189
60
249
97
173
270
3102
PLANNING AREA 14 TOTALS
10.
Community Commercial
8.00
TSF
8
5
13
23
25
48
545
12.
General Office
37.40
TSF
62
9
71
12
56
68
496
13.
Office Park (EQ)
804.74
TSF
468
148
616
241
428
669
7688
TOTAL
538
162
700
276
509
785
8729
PLANNING AREAS 13 AND 14 (NEIGHBORHOOD
D SOUTH OF WARNER)
3.
MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
891.00
DU
71
382
453
375
177
552
5907
5.
Hotel (190 TSF)
500.00
ROOM
170
110
280
160
146
306
4115
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
9.76
TSF
16
10
26
46
49
95
1091
10.
Community Commercial
218.00
TSF
218
140
358
621
675
1296
14860
12.
General Office
873.11
TSF
1441
201
1642
272
1300
1572
11586
13.
Office Park (EQ)
1251.94
TSF
723
229
952
372
661
1033
11881
17.
Park
14.80
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
24.
Theatre (28 TSF)
1000.00
SEAT
0
0
0
10
10
20
1250
25.
Health Club
20.00
TSF
10
14
24
41
40
81
659
TOTAL
2649
1086
3735
1897
3058
4955
51424
NEIGHBORHOOD
D TOTALS
3.
MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
891.00
DU
71
382
453
375
177
552
5907
5.
Hotel (190 TSF)
500.00
ROOM
170
110
280
160
146
306
4115
7.
High School
1850.00
STU
592
259
851
ill
167
278
3312
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
71.14
TSF
117
75
192
333
359
692
7955
10.
Community Commercial
218.00
TSF
218
140
358
621
675
1296
14860
12.
General Office
1084.42
TSF
1790
250.
2040
337
1615
1952
14390
13.
Office Park (EQ)
2635.73
TSF
1403
444
1847
722
1285
2007
23161
15.
Light Industrial/R&D
319.52
TSF
330
67
397
51
294
345
2591
17.
Park
25.10
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
.0
127
24.
Theatre (28 TSF)
1000.00
SEAT
0
0
0
10
10
20
1250
25.
Health Club
20.00
TSF
10
14
24
41
40
81
659
28.
Sports Park
46.00
ACRE
0
0
0
156
189
345
2475
TOTAL
4701
1741
6442
2917
4957
7874
80802
A-9 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD E/PA9-12 LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD E/PLANNING AREAS 9-12 TOTALS
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
18.13
TSF
30
-- AM
Peak Hour --
-- PM
Peak
Hour --
2028
Zone
General Office
Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
37
12.
General Office
150.09
TSF
248
35
283
47
224
271
1992
Light Industrial/R&D
16.
Industrial Park (EQ)
196.90
TSF
136
41
177
64
135
199
2233
332.28
TSF
SUB -TOTAL
77
332
384
76
460
111
359
470
4225
38
12.
General Office
48.79
TSF
80
11
91
15
73
88
647
0
16.
Industrial Park (EQ)
56.63
TSF
52
16
68
24
52
76
858
340
2079
SUB -TOTAL
1695
2255
132
27
159
39
125
164
1505
39
12.
General Office
48.79
TSF
80
11
91
15
73
88
647
15.
Light Industrial/R&D
56.63
TSF
58
12
70
9
52
61
459
SUB -TOTAL
138
23
161
24
125
149
1106
40
12.
General Office
60.03
TSF
99
14
113
19
89
108
797
16.
Industrial Park (EQ)
78.76
TSF
67
20
87
31
67
98
1105
SUB -TOTAL
166
34
200
50
156
206
1902
41
12.
General Office
60.89
TSF
100
14
114
19
91
110
808
15.
Light Industrial/R&D
79.88
TSF
82
17
99
13
73
86
648
SUB -TOTAL
182
31
213
32
164
196
1456
42
17.
Park
10.10
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
43
12.
General Office
126.00
TSF
208
29
237
39
188
227
1672
SUB -TOTAL
208
29
237
39
188
227
1672
44
17.
Park
16.20
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
81
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
81
45
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
8.71
TSF
14
9
23
41
44
85
974
12.
General Office
35.00
TSF
58
8
66
11
52
63
464
SUB -TOTAL
72
17
89
52
96
148
1438
46
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
5.88
TSF
10
6
16
28
30
58
658
12.
General Office
72.05
TSF
119
17
136
22
107
129
956
SUB -TOTAL
129
23
152
50
137
187
1614
47
13.
Office Park (EQ)
59.73
TSF
49
16
65
25
45
70
808
(Equation base =
91.89 TSF )
SUB -TOTAL
49
16
65
25
45
70
808
48
13.
Office Park (EQ)
32.16
TSF
26
8
34
14
24
38
435
(Equation base =
91.89 TSF )
SUB -TOTAL
26
8
34
14
24
38
435
49
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
3.54
TSF
6
4
10
17
18
35
396
12.
General Office
87.56
TSF
144
20
164
27
130
157
1162
SUB -TOTAL
150
24
174
44
148
192
1558
50
28.
Sports Park
3.20
ACRE
0
0
0
11
13
24
172
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
11
13
24
172
51
13.
Office Park (EQ)
64.47
TSF
48
15
63
25
44
69
794
(Equation base =
138.10 TSF )
SUB -TOTAL
48
15
63
25
44
69
794
52
28.
Sports Park
4.80
ACRE
0
0
0
16
20
36
258
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
16
20
36
258
53
13.
Office Park (EQ)
73.64
TSF
55
17
72
28
51
79
907
(Equation base =
138.10 TSF )
SUB -TOTAL
55
17
72
28
51
79
907
NEIGHBORHOOD E/PLANNING AREAS 9-12 TOTALS
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
18.13
TSF
30
19
49
86
92
178
2028
12.
General Office
689.19
TSF
1136
159
1295
214
1027
1241
9145
13.
Office Park (EQ)
230.00
TSF
178
56
234
92
164
256
2944
15.
Light Industrial/R&D
136.51
TSF
140
29
169
22
125
147
1107
16.
Industrial Park (EQ)
332.28
TSF
255
77
332
119
254
373
4196
17.
Park
26.30
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
132
28.
Sports Park
8.00
ACRE
0
0
0
27
33
60
430
TOTAL
1739
340
2079
560
1695
2255
19982
A-10 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD F LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD F TOTALS
11. Shopping Center (EQ)
14. Military (Office)
21. Multiplex Theater
TOTAL
930.60 TSF 419 268 687
40.85 TSF 67 9 76
3500.00 SEAT 11 11 22
497 288 785
1194
1294
2488
-- AM Peak
Hour --
-- PM
Peak
Hour --
301
Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING AREA 16 (Zone 112)
11. Shopping Center (EQ)
448.00
TSF
202
129
331
575
623
1198
13772
PLANNING AREA 17 (Zone 113)
11. Shopping Center (EQ)
47.00
TSF
21
14
35
60
65
125
1445
PLANNING AREA 18 (Zone 114)
14. Military (Office)
40.85
TSF
67
9
76
13
61
74
542
PLANNING AREA 19 (Zone 115)
11. Shopping Center (EQ)
435.60
TSF
196
125
321
559
606
1165
13391
21. Multiplex Theater
3500.00
SEAT
11
11
22
301
203
504
6300
TOTAL
207
136
343
860
809
1669
19691
NEIGHBORHOOD F TOTALS
11. Shopping Center (EQ)
14. Military (Office)
21. Multiplex Theater
TOTAL
930.60 TSF 419 268 687
40.85 TSF 67 9 76
3500.00 SEAT 11 11 22
497 288 785
1194
1294
2488
28608
13
61
74
542
301
203
504
6300
1508
1558
3066
35450
A-11 Legacv Park of Tustin Legacv 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD G LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
A- 12 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
-- AM Peak Hour --
-- PM
Peak Hour --
Zone
Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
----------------------------------------------7----------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING AREA 15
77
9.
Neighborhood Commercial
''6.68
TSF
43
28
71
125
135
260
2983
12.
General Office
45.74
TSF
75
11
86
14
68
82
607
SUB -TOTAL
118
39
157
139
203
342
3590
78
22.
Senior Congregate
79.50
TSF
15
15
30
16
17
33
485
SUB -TOTAL
15
15
30
16
17
33
485
79
2.
MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
108.00
DU
14
55
69
60
26
86
864
SUB -TOTAL
14
55
69
60
26
86
864
80
17.
Park
4.50
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
81
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
31.00
DU
6
17
23
20
11
31
297
SUB -TOTAL
6
17
23
20
11
31
297
82
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
40.00
DU
8
22
30
26
14
40
383
SUB -TOTAL
8
22
30
26
14
40
383
83
17.
Park
3.90
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
22.
Senior Congregate
79.50
TSF
15
15
30
16
17
33
485
SUB -TOTAL
15
15
30
16
17
33
505
84
10.
Community Commercial
130.68
TSF
131
84
215
372
404
776
8908
12.
General Office
104.54
TSF
172
24
196
32
156
188
1387
SUB -TOTAL
303
108
411
404
560
964
10295
85
2.
MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
54.00
DU
7
28
35
30
13
43
432
SUB -TOTAL
7
28
35
30
13
43
432
86
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
20.00
DU
4
11
15
13
7
20
191
SUB -TOTAL
4
11
15
13
7
20
191
87
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
9.00
DU
2
5
7
6
3
9
86
SUB -TOTAL
2
5
7
6
3
9
86
88
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
44.00
DU
8
25
33
29
16
45
421
SUB -TOTAL
8
25
33
29
16
45
421
89
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
55.00
DU
10
31
41
36
20
56
526
SUB -TOTAL
10
31
41
36
20
56
526
90
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
61.00
DU
12
34
46
40
22
62
584
SUB -TOTAL
12
34
46
40
22
62
584
91
28.
Sports Park
11.50
ACRE
0
0
0
39
47
86
619
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
39
47
86
619
92
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
34.00
DU
6
19
25
22
12
34
325
SUB -TOTAL
6
19
25
22
12
34
325
93
17.
Park
10.60
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
53
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
53
94
28.
Sports Park
5.00
ACRE
0
0
0
17
21
38
269
SUB -TOTAL
0
0
0
17
21
38
269
95
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
47.00
DU
9
26
35
31
17
48
450
SUB - TOTAL
9
26
35
31
17
48
450
96
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
38.00
DU
7
21
28
25
14
39
364
SUB -TOTAL
7
21
28
25
14
39
364
97
2.
MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
68.00
DU
9
35
44
38
16
54
544
17.
Park
2.80
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
SUB -TOTAL
9
35
44
38
16
54
558
98
6.
Elementary/Middle School
1200.00
STU
204
144
348
0
0
0
1224
SUB -TOTAL
204
144
348
0
0
0
1224
99
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
37.00
DU
7
21
28
24
13
37
354
SUB -TOTAL
7
21
28
24
13
37
354
100
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
65.00
DU
12
36
48
42
23
65
622
SUB -TOTAL
12
36
48
42
23
65
622
101
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
38.00
DU
7
21
28
25
14
39
364
SUB -TOTAL
7
21
28
25
14
39
364
102
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
61.00
DU
12
34
46
40
22
62
584
17.
Park
2.10
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
SUB -TOTAL
12
34
46
40
22
62
595
103
1.
LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
44.00
DU
8
25
33
29
16
45
421
SUB -TOTAL
8
25
33
29
16
45
421
A- 12 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD
G LAND USE AND TRIP
GENERATION SUMMARY
(cont.)
-- AM
Peak Hour
--
-- PM
Peak
Hour --
Zone Land Use Type
Units
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
104 1. LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
23.00
DU
4
13
17
15
8
23
220
SUB -TOTAL
4
13
17
15
8
23
220
105 '. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
70.00
DU
9
36
45
39
17
56
560
SUB -TOTAL
9
36
45
39
17
56
560
109 2. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
75.00
DU
10
38
48
42
18
60
600
SUB -TOTAL
10
38
48
42
18
60
600
111 3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
192.00
DU
15
83
98
81
38
119
1273
SUB -TOTAL
15
83
98
81
38
119
1273
PLANNING AREA 15 TOTALS
1. LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
647.00
DU
122
361
483
423
232
655
6192
2. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
375.00
DU
49
192
241
209
90
299
3000
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
192.00
DU
15
83
98
81
38
119
1273
6. Elementary/Middle School
1200.00
STU
204
144
348
0
0
0
1224
9. Neighborhood Commercial
26.68
TSF
43
28
71
125
135
260
2983
10. Community Commercial
130.68
TSE
131.
84
215
372
404
776
8908
12. General Office
150.28
TSF
247
35
282
46
224
270
1994
17. Park
23.90
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
121
22. Senior Congregate
158.99
TSF
30
30
60
32
34
66
970
28. Sports Park
16.50
ACRE
0
0
0
56
68
124
888
TOTAL
841
957
1798
1344
1225
2569
27553
PLANNING AREA 20
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
376.00
DU
30
162
192
158
75
233
2493
PLANNING AREA 21
1. LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
189.00
DU
36
106
142
123
68
191
1809
2. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
465.00
DU
60
237
297
260
112
372
3720
TOTAL
96
343
439
383
180
563
5529
NEIGHBORHOOD G TOTALS
1. LDR (1-7 DU/Acre)
836.00
DU
158
467
625
546
300
846
8001
?. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
840.00
DU
109
429
538
469
202
671
6720
3. MHDR (16-25 DU/Acre)
568.00
DU
45
245
290
239
113
352
3766
6. Elementary/Middle School
1200.00
STU
204
144
348
0
0
0
1224
9. Neighborhood Commercial
26.68
TSF
43
28
71
125
135
260
2983
10. Community Commercial
130.68
TSF
131
84
215
372
404
776
8908
12. General Office
150.28
TSF
247
35
282
46
224
270
1994
17. Park
23.90
ACRE
0
0
0
0
0
0
121
22. Senior Congregate
158.99
TSF
30
30
60
32
34
66
970
28. Sports Park
16.50
ACRE
0
0
0
56
68
124
888
TOTAL
967
1462
2429
1885
1480
3365
35575
A-13 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
NEIGHBORHOOD H/PA22 LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
A-14 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
-- AM
Peak
Hour --
-- PM
Peak
Hour --
Land Use TypeUnits
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
ADT
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. LDR (1=7 DU/Acre)
166.00 DU
32
93
125
108
60
168
1589
�. MDR (8-15 DU/Acre)
243.00 DU
32
124
156
136
58
194
1944
6. Elementary/Middle School
650.00 STU
111
78
189
0
0
0
663
TOTAL
175
295
470
244
118
362
4196
A-14 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
Appendix B
INTERSECTION CAPACITY
UTILIZATION (ICU) CALCULATIONS
Citv of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
r
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis B-1 922004rpt5.doc
Figure B-1
INTERSECTION LOCATION MAP
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis B-2 922004rpt5figB-l.dwg
WALNUT AV
113
109
Ink 110
101
EDINGER AV
112
111
e ••
o�
N 51
Q �°
52 53
0
2
50 °
NORTH
LOOP
11
�NG\P
JPS✓;O�
1
Ln
102
P,Q
�z
o
Z
10
58 59
MOFFETT GR
I
14
62
�
z 60
61
10
63
<
G
PGS
"G" ST
�
0 9
15
3
103
22 5 PJ Lo
19
8
Q
WARN�`'R I" -=33 ST 38,
WARNER
AV
a46
45 32 ti,sl
21 37..E 42
4
r•. Sr
c`' 5
a�26 `=` •• 47 �' ,31 Sl X36
4s1
16 � �� �� 44
104
30 35
,� 43 7
23 �� \ A
4
S 40
"A" ST 24 / 3
18
2539
�`
14
13
D
co
C:ARNEGIE
CD
0
�- "A" sj ���^�
6
Cl)
m
o
105
1.06 107
108
0
Z
0
Q
BARRANCA
PKWY
Figure B-1
INTERSECTION LOCATION MAP
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis B-2 922004rpt5figB-l.dwg
L. Armstrong 6 Valencia N Loop
2025
2 3400
311
.09*
218
.06
NBT
3 5100
848
.11
AM PK
HOUR
Pig PK
HOUR
17
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2
3400
386
.11*
572
.17*
NBT
1
1700
5
.00
22
.01
NBR
d
1700
103
.06
454
.27
SBL
1
1-00
11
.01
9
.01
SBT
1
1700
1!
.041
15
.02
SBR
0
0
44
WBT
15
L1;5
EBL
1
1700
12
.01
43
.03
EBT
2
3400
303
.09*
120
.21�,
EBR
1
1100
545
.32
424
.25
WBL
2
3400
527
.16*
176
.05'
WBT
2
3400
788
.23
367
.11
WBR
0
0
6
15
Right
Turn Adjustment
EBR
.15,1
NBR
.05*
Clearance Interval*
.05+
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .60 .55
3. Tustin Ranch Rd & Warner N
2025
2 3400
311
.09*
218
.06
NBT
3 5100
848
.11
A14 PK
HOUR
P14 PK
HOUR
17
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
3 5100
0
.46*
NBT
2.5
6800
661
1.131+
1208
1.3414,
NBR
1.5
2 3400
548
1.041
1382
.15;
SBL
2
3400
578
.17
27
.21*
SBT
3
5100
1290
.25
691
.14
SBR
0
0
0
WBT
0
L1;5
EBL
0
0
0
1 1700
0
.01
EBT
0
0
0
0
EBR
0
0
0
0
WBL
2.5
16!5
695
WBT
0
6800
0
1.341*
0
1.201*
WBR
1.5
821
938
Clearance Interval
.05{
.05-1
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .69 .80
B-3
!. Tustin Ranch Rd 6 Valencia N Loop
2025
A1,4 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL
2 3400
311
.09*
218
.06
NBT
3 5100
848
.11
2063
.40'
NBR
1 1700
17
.01
58
.03
SBL
2 3400
23
.01
38
.01+
SBT
3 5100
2362
.46*
1221
.24
SBR
1 1100
159
.45
290
.1!
EBL
2 3400
155
.05�
521
.15;
EBT
1 1100
90
.05
168
.10
EBR
1 1100
201
.12
411
.24
WBL
1 1700
26
.02
21
.02
WBT
2 3400
L1;5
.08;
101
.031
WBR
1 1700
23
.01
34
.02
Clearance
Interval
.05+
.05*
rOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .73 .64
4. Tustin Ranch Rd & Warner S
2025
A14 PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3400 40 .01' 171 .05
NBT 3 5100 869 .17 1601 .31;
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 2.5 6800 1791 1.421+ 951 {.191
SBR 1.5 1174 435 1.041
340 .1011,989 .29
EBL 2 3400
EBT 0 0 0 0
EBR 1 1100 47 .03 213 .16
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Clearance Interval .05+ .05}
rOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .58 .65
Legacy Pari: of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
5. Armstrong & Warner
2025
AI4 PK HOUR
Pio PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
AM PK
HOUR
Pio PK
HOUR
1700
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2
3400
186
.051
418
.121
NBT
2
3400
102
.03
187
.08
NBR
0
0
14
.05
99
.19
SBL
1
1700
88
.05
135
.08
SBT
2
3400
136
.04*
178
.05.1
SBR
1
1700
244
.14
244
.14
EBL
1
1700
201
.121
174
.10
EBT
3
5100
1280
.25
1^63
.351
EBR
1
1700
502
.30
337
.20
WBL
1
1100
150
.09
116
.071
WBT
3
5100
1930
.38+
1479
.29
WBR
d
1100
167
.10
191
.11
Right
Turn Adjustment
.051
SBR
.01*
Clearance Interval
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .65 .64
7. Tustin Ranch & C St/Park Ave
2025
AI4 PK HOUR
Pio PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
A14 PK
HOUR
Pio PK
HOUR
1700
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2
3400
259
.081
203
.06
NBT
3
5100
774
.15
1368
.271
NBR
1
1700
88
.05
317
.19
SBL
2
3400
49
.01
258
.081
SBT
3
5100
1498
.291
794
.16
SBR
1
1700
292
.17
172
.10
EBL
1
1700
93
.05
222
.13
EBT
1
1700
81
.051
239
.14;
EBR
1
1700
103
.06
312
.18.
WBL
1
1700
220
.131
248
.151
WBT
2
3400
362
.12
216
.12
WBR
0
0
42
182
Clearance Interval
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .60 .69
6. Armstrong & A St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .47 .48
3. Loop Rd & Warner
2025
A14 PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 11,00 52 .031 221 .131
NBT 2 3400 18 .01 45 .01
NBR 1 1700 14 .01 202 .12
SBL 1 1700 16 .01 30 .02
SBT 2 3400 101 .031 123 .041
266 .16 135 .08
SBR 1 1700 3400 21 .011 51 .02
EBL 2
EBT 3 5100 1057 .21 1998 .391
EBR 1 1700 21 .01 89 .05
WBL 2 3400 53 .02 90 .031
WBT 3 5100 .178 .43-, 12 6 .25
WBR 1 1700 23 .01 41 .02
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .12�
Clearance Interval .05"-
TOTAL
051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .67 .64
B-4 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
AI4 PK HOUR
Pio PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1700
107
.06
8�
.05
NBT
2
3400
332
.121
133
.08;
NBR
0
0
88
149
.09
SBL
1
1700
229
.131
181
.11
SBT
2
3400
71
.02
240
.07
SBR
0
0
0
0
EBL
1
1700
150
.09+
100
.06;
EBT
2
3400
105
.05
164
.10
EBR
0
0
49
272
.16
WBL
1
1700
135
.08
216
.13
WBT
2
3400
192
.08;
408
.181
WBR
0
0
67
211
Clearance
Interval
.051
.05,
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .47 .48
3. Loop Rd & Warner
2025
A14 PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 11,00 52 .031 221 .131
NBT 2 3400 18 .01 45 .01
NBR 1 1700 14 .01 202 .12
SBL 1 1700 16 .01 30 .02
SBT 2 3400 101 .031 123 .041
266 .16 135 .08
SBR 1 1700 3400 21 .011 51 .02
EBL 2
EBT 3 5100 1057 .21 1998 .391
EBR 1 1700 21 .01 89 .05
WBL 2 3400 53 .02 90 .031
WBT 3 5100 .178 .43-, 12 6 .25
WBR 1 1700 23 .01 41 .02
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .12�
Clearance Interval .05"-
TOTAL
051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .67 .64
B-4 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
9. Loop Rd & Jamboree SB Ramps
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .20 .31
11. N Loop Rd & Valencia N Loop
2025
A1,4 PK
Aro PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1^00
33
.021
46
.03
NBT
Z.
3460
29
.01
81
.03�
NBR
0
0
0
.01
11
.03
SBL
1
1,100
56
.03
171
.10*
SBT
2
31200
36
.02*
40
.02
SBR
0
0
69
.04
^4
.04
EBL
1
1700
13
.01
60
.04
EBT
1
1700
3
.01*
38
.081
EBR
0
0
22
0
95
0
WBL
2
3400
325
.101
154
.051
WBT
1
1.00
16
.05
13
.04
WBR
0
0
62
63
Clearance Interval
0
.05*
0
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .20 .31
11. N Loop Rd & Valencia N Loop
2025
A1,4 PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
A14 PK
HOUR
P14 PK
HOUR
0
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1700
76
.04*
46
.03*
NBT
1
l;
22
.01
43
.03
NBR
0
0
0
.01
0
.03
SBL
0
0
0
0
0
EBL
SBT
1
1700
11
.011
16
.041
SBR
1
1700
^1
.04
41
.02
EBL
1
1700
86
.051
67
.041
EBT
0
0
0
0
0
0
EBR
1
1700
53
.03
84
.05
WBL
0
0
0
NBR
0
Clearance Interval
WBT
0
0
0
0
WBR
0
0
0
0
Clearance Interval
.05;
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .15 .16
10. N Loop Rd & Moffett
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .24 .20
13. Loop Rd S & District Rd
2025
A14 PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1,700 0 .00 2 .00
NBT 1 1-00 19 .01 215 .131
NBR 1 1 00 158 .09 4) .25
SBL 1 1700 3 .00 1 .00
SBT 1 1700 103 .061 207 .12
SBR 1 1100 0 .00 1 .00
EBL 1 1 00 0 .00 2 .00
EBT 2 3400 18 .011 .02{
EBR 0 0 0 0
WBL 1 1700 447 .261 184 .111
WBT 2 3400 52 .03 112 .04
WBR 0 0 44 33
Right Turn Adjustment NBR, .041
Clearance Interval .051 .051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .38 .35
B-5 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
A1,4 PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/1-
/CNBL
NBL
0 0
0
0
NBT
2 3400
17
.011
44
.01+
NBR
1 1700
27
.02
188
.11
SBL
1 100
33
.02*
69
.04'-
04*SBT
SBT
2 3400
36
.01
91
.03
SBR
0 0
0
0
EBL
0 0
0
0
EBT
0 0
0
0
EBR
0 0
0
0
WBL
1 1"00
21
.161
8.
.00
WBT
0 0
0
0
WBR
1 1100
81
.05
45
.03
Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.10*
Clearance Interval
.051
1.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .24 .20
13. Loop Rd S & District Rd
2025
A14 PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1,700 0 .00 2 .00
NBT 1 1-00 19 .01 215 .131
NBR 1 1 00 158 .09 4) .25
SBL 1 1700 3 .00 1 .00
SBT 1 1700 103 .061 207 .12
SBR 1 1100 0 .00 1 .00
EBL 1 1 00 0 .00 2 .00
EBT 2 3400 18 .011 .02{
EBR 0 0 0 0
WBL 1 1700 447 .261 184 .111
WBT 2 3400 52 .03 112 .04
WBR 0 0 44 33
Right Turn Adjustment NBR, .041
Clearance Interval .051 .051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .38 .35
B-5 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
L4. 8 St 6 Tustin Ranch Rd
2025
rOTAL'CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .49
16. Armstrong 6 C St/I St
2025
AM PK HOUR
PH PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
VOL
0
NBL
NBT
0
0
0
.16+
0
2 3400
NBR
0
0
0
NBR
0
110
SBL
1.5
1?00
76
.02*
2 7
.08+
SBT
0
5100
0
482
0
{.12}*
SBR
1.5
0 0
12?
{.02)
429
EBL
2
3400
252
.0,*
199
.06
EBT
3
5100
1045
.20
1610
.321
EBR
0
0
0
WBL
0
0
WBL
0
0
0
0 0
0
WBT
3
5100
1568
.31+
1250
.25
WBR
1
1?00
253
.15
104
.06
Clearance Interval
.05+
.05*
rOTAL'CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .49
16. Armstrong 6 C St/I St
2025
AI4 PK HOUR
P14 PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
A14 PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
NBL
LANES CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0
3400
0
.16+
NBT
2 3400
412
.15
4617
.14
NBR
0 0
110
SBL
1?
1?00
SBL
0 0
0
.08+
0
2
SBT
2 3400
482
.181
55?
.181
SBR
0 0
131
52
EEL
0 0
0
0
0
0
EBT
0 0
0
0
0
EBR
1 1?00
0
.00
0
.00
WBL
0 0
0
WBL
0
0
WBT
0 0
0
0
0
WBR
1 1 0
11?
.0?
176
.10
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.05*
WBR
.07+
Clearance Interval
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .28 .30
B-6
L5. Warner & F St/Legacy,
2025
A1,4 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1-00 6 .00 51 .03
NBT 3 5100 120? .24+ 554 .11+
NBR 0 0 1 1
SBL 2 3400 40? .12* 558 .161
SBT 3 5100 43? .09 1093 .21
SBR 1 1700 434 .26 513 .30
EBL 1.5 380 .11* 516 .15+
EBT 1.5 5100 106 .01 231 .14
EBR 0 6 6
WBL 1 1?00 23 .01 22 .01
WBT 1 1?00 308 .18+ 266 .16+
WBR 2 3400 867 .26 ?5? .22
Clearance Interval .05* .05*
Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .70 .63
18. Armstrong & E St
2025
DOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .32 .26
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
AI4 PK HOUR
P14 PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
0
NBT
2
3400
503
.16+
392
.13+
NBR
0
0
46
52
SBL
1
1?00
182
.11+
131
.08+
SBT
2
3400
301
.09
426
.13
SBR
0
0
0
0
EBL
0
0
0
0
EBT
0
0
0
0
EBR
0
0
0
0
WBL
0
0
0
0
WBT
0
0
0
0
WBR
1
1"00
19
.01
92
.05
Clearance Interval
.05+
.05+
DOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .32 .26
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
19. Warner 6 D St
2025
P.1,4 PK HOUR Pt4 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT .3 5100 1214 .24* 606 .12
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 0 0 0 0
SBT 3 5100 353 .09 1015 .22*
SBR 0 0 113 46
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 0 0 0 0
EBR 1 1100 34 .02 188 .11
WBL 0 0 0 0
WET 0 0 0 0
WBR 0 0 0 0
Right Turn Adjustment EBR .11*
Clearance Interval .051 .051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .29 .38
21. Armstrong & B St
2025
20. Tustin Ranch Rd & Legacy
2025
A14 PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1700
232
.14*
10
.01*
NBT
2 3400
297
.09
633
.19
NBR
0 0
0
.40{
0
0
SBL
0 0
0
205
0
SBL
SBT
2 3400
618
.211
555
.181
SBR
0 0
102
1771
54
1152
EBL
0 0
0
1700
0
.46
EBT
0 0
0
1
0
32
EBR
1 1700
2
.00
54
.03
WBL
0 0
0
.07
0
0
WBT
0 0
0
151
0
WBL
WBR
0 0
0
.04
0
.07
Right
Turn Adjustment
3400
167
EBR
.02*
Clearance Interval
WBR
.051
0
.051
20. Tustin Ranch Rd & Legacy
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .79 .81
22. Dxy A & Warner
2025
A14 PK HOUR Pt4 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1700 30 .02* 13: .08
NBT 1 1700 2 .01 8 .09*
NBR 0 0 9 150
SBL 1 1700 14 .01 110 .06*
SBT 1 1100 2 .001 3 .00
SBR 1 1100 118 .07 3; .22
EBL 1 1700 346 .20* 278 .16*
EBT 3 5100 1959 .38 2014 .39
EBR 1 1700 168 .10 44 .03
WBL 1 1700 63 .04 26 .02
WBT 3 5100 21-5 .451 207" .411
WBR 0 0 123 38
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .03*
Clearance Interval .05* .051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .40 .26 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .72 .80
B-7 Legacv Park of Tustin Lecyacv 3/07 922.004
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1740
330
.19*
83
.05
NBT
3
5100
1029
.23
1858
.40{
NBR
0
0
124
205
SBL
1
1700
42
.02
146
.09*
SBT
3
5100
1771
.35*
1152
.23
SBR
1
1700
7^5
.46
39
.23
EBL
1
1-00
32
.02*
353
.21;
EBT
2
3400
30
.02
121
.07
EBR
0
0
24
151
.09
WBL
1
1700
73
.04
116
.07
WBT
2
3400
167
.09*
95
.06*
WBR
0
0
122
141
.08
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.09*
Clearance Interval
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .79 .81
22. Dxy A & Warner
2025
A14 PK HOUR Pt4 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1700 30 .02* 13: .08
NBT 1 1700 2 .01 8 .09*
NBR 0 0 9 150
SBL 1 1700 14 .01 110 .06*
SBT 1 1100 2 .001 3 .00
SBR 1 1100 118 .07 3; .22
EBL 1 1700 346 .20* 278 .16*
EBT 3 5100 1959 .38 2014 .39
EBR 1 1700 168 .10 44 .03
WBL 1 1700 63 .04 26 .02
WBT 3 5100 21-5 .451 207" .411
WBR 0 0 123 38
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .03*
Clearance Interval .05* .051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .40 .26 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .72 .80
B-7 Legacv Park of Tustin Lecyacv 3/07 922.004
23. DNyB &ASt
2025
DOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .43 .46
25. C St & A St
2025
AI4 PK
A14 PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1100
18
.01*
46
.03
NBT
1
1700
0
.01
0
.08*
NBR
0
0
11
0
1J3
1
SBL
1
1700
52
.03
268
.16*
SBT
1
1700
0
.06*
0
.14
SBR
0
0
9/
233
1
EBL
1
1;,00
326
.19*
68
.04*
EBT
1
1100
225
.13
111
.07
EBR
1
1100
51
.03
11
.01
WBL
1
1700
159
.09
26
.02
WBT
2
3400
214
.12
363
.13+
WBR
0
0
183
'70
Clearance Interval
.05+
.05�1
DOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .43 .46
25. C St & A St
2025
24. B St & A St
2025
AI4 PK
A14 PK HOUR
PILI PK HOUR
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1700
261
.15
52
.031
NBT
1
1700
40
.11*
9
.05
NBR
0
0
153
SBL
74
0
SBL
1
1;00
116
.011
21
.01
SBT
1
1100
6
.02
64
.061
SBR
0
0
24
45
EBL
1
1700
21
.01
11
.01
EBT
1
1700
241
.161
342
.29*
EBR
0
0
26
WBT
159
488
WBL
1
1700
31
.021
269
.16-
WBT
1
1700
202
.12
291
.17
WBR
0
0
0
0
Clearance Interval
.05*
.051
24. B St & A St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .38 .35
26. Dwy C & B St
2025
A14 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 0 0 2 54
SBT 1 1700 0 .001 0 .051
SBR 0 0 0 32
EEL 0 0 0 0
EBT 1 1700 0 .00 0 .00
EBR 0 0 0 0
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 1 100 68 .20; 34 .041
ri`iBR 0 0 266 31
Clearance P .051 .051
_ancA � Int�rval
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .59 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .25 .14
B-8 LegacvPark of Tustin Legacv 3/07 922.004
AI4 PK
HOUR
PIS PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0
0
NBT
0 0
0
0
NBR
0 0
0
0
SBL
0 0
0
0
SBT
0 0
0
0
SBR
1 1700
68
.04
65
.04
EBL
0 0
0
0
EBT
1 1100
288
.17
512
.301
EBR
0 0
0
0
WBL
0 0
0
0
WBT
1 1-00
488
.29}
393
.23
WBR
0 0
0
0
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.04-1
Clearance Interval
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .38 .35
26. Dwy C & B St
2025
A14 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 0 0 0 0
NBR 0 0 0 0
SBL 0 0 2 54
SBT 1 1700 0 .001 0 .051
SBR 0 0 0 32
EEL 0 0 0 0
EBT 1 1700 0 .00 0 .00
EBR 0 0 0 0
WBL 0 0 0 0
WBT 1 100 68 .20; 34 .041
ri`iBR 0 0 266 31
Clearance P .051 .051
_ancA � Int�rval
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .41 .59 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .25 .14
B-8 LegacvPark of Tustin Legacv 3/07 922.004
30. JSt&G St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .13 .14
32. LSt&GSt/HSt
2025
AM PK
HOUR
Pro PK
HOUR
CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
1.061;
0
1
NBT
1
1.00
119
.05*
29
.04
NBR
0
0
1
36
0
SBL
0
0
0
0
1
SBT
1
100
14
.01
94
.06*
SBR
0
0
0
0
0
EBL
0
0
0
0
1
EBT
0
0
0
.01
0
0
EBR
0
0
0
0
0
WBL
0
0
0
0
1
WBT
1
1^00
0
.031
0
.03*
WBR
0
0
46
47
Clearance Interval
.05*
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .13 .14
32. LSt&GSt/HSt
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .08 .12
31. BSt&GSt
i
2025
A14 PK HOUR
PH PK HOUR
PH PK
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
46
1.031*
103
1.061;
NBT
1
1;00
1
.03
1
.06
NBR
0
0
0
0
0
SBL
0
0
0
0
5
SBT
1
1100
0
.00*
0
.001
SBR
0
0
0
0
0
EBL
0
0
0
0
0
EBT
1
1^00
2
.00
21
.01
EBR
0
0
0
0
0
WBL
0
0
0
0
0
WBT
1
1-00
0
.00*
0
.011
WBR
0
0
2
0
11
Clearance Interval
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .08 .12
31. BSt&GSt
i
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .09 .11
33. ISt&HSt
2025
AM PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
1.01}{
1
1
NBT
1
1-00
0
.00
4
.03{
NBR
0
0
6
40
0
SBL
0
0
0
0
1
SBT
1
1.00
0
.01*
0
.01
SBR
0
0
13
12
0
EBL
0
0
0
0
1
EBT
1
1,700
0
.01
0
.00
EBR
0
0
9
5
0
WBL
0
0
8
4
0
WBT
1
100
13
.03*
6
.03;
WBR
0
0
33
46
Clearance Interval
.05*
.05+
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .09 .11
33. ISt&HSt
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .07 .09
B-9 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
A14 PK HOUR
PH PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
2
11
1.01}{
NBT
1
1700
30
.02'
31
.02
NBR
0
0
0
0
SBL
0
0
0
0
SBT
1
100
1
.00
16
.01;
SBR
0
0
0
0
EBL
0
0
0
0
EBT
1
100
0
.00
0
.021
EBR
0
0
8
26
WBL
0
0
0
0
WBT
0
0
0
0
WBR
0
0
0
0
Clearance Interval
.05,
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .07 .09
B-9 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
34. J St & E St
2025
A14 PK
AM PK
HOUR
Pio PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
AM PK HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
0
38
{.021*
NBT
1
1^00
83
.06*
20
.05
NBR
0
0
8
36
2"
207
SBL
0
0
16
1.011*
135
0
SBT
1
1^00
10
.02
54
.14*
SBR
0
0
13
0
54
0
EBL
0
0
91
0
^1
0
EBT
1
100
22
.131
49
.114*
EBR
0
0
109
11
63
15
WBL
0
0
0
0
0
23
WBT
1
100
0
.04
0
.01
WBR
0
0
69
40
10
91
Clearance Interval
Clearance Interval
.05*
.051
.05+
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .25 .32
36. LSt &ESt
2025
A14 PK
AM PK
HOUR
Pio PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
PK
A14 Pk
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
NBL
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
.04
0
.04
NBT
1
1100
9
.03*
24
.144*
NBR
0
0
36
.28{
207
.241
SBL
0
0
0
.03*
0
.04{
SBT
0
0
0
.034*
0
0 0
SBR
0
0
0
EBR
0
37
EBL
0
0
0
.031
0
.121
EBT
1
1700
1
.01
18
.02
EBR
0
0
11
{.0111
15
1.0211
WBL
0
0
0
.03
23
.04
WBT
1
1100
33
.041
33
.09*
WBR
0
0
40
.05*
91
Clearance Interval
.051
.054*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .12 .28
35. B St & E St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .15 .23
37. C St & E St/F St
2025
A14 PK
AM PK
HOUR
Pio PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
49
{.031*
5
8
NBT
1
1-00
18
.04
62
.04
NBR
0
0
0
0
2
0
SBL
0
0
0
.28{
4
.241
SBT
1
1-00
45
.03*
68
.04{
SBR
0
0
0
.034*
0
0 0
EBL
0
0
2
EBR
33
37
EBT
1
1 00
1
.031
3
.121
EBR
0
0
43
0
174
0
WBL
0
0
14
{.0111
27
1.0211
WBT
1
1^00
20
.03
5
.04
WBR
0
0
13
28
Clearance Interval
.05*
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .15 .23
37. C St & E St/F St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .35 .40
B-10 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
A14 PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1100
3
.00
0
.00
NBT
1 1 100
8
.00
31
.02
NBR
0 0
0
0
SBL
0 0
0
0
SBT
1 100
480
.28{
406
.241
SBR
1 100
69
.04
141
.09
EBL
1 1100
0
.00
45
.034*
EBT
0 0
0
0
EBR
1 1100
37
.02
1!
.11
WBL
0 0
0
0
WBT
0 0
0
0
WBR
0 0
0
0
Right
Turn Adjustment
EBR
.021
EBR
.081
Clearance Interval
.05.1
.05{
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .35 .40
B-10 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
38. ISt&FSt
2025
AI4 PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC
NBL 0 0 0 1
NBT 1 1^00 2 .00 4 .00*
NBR 1 1700 412 .24 598 .35
SBL 1 1700 4 .00 34 .021
SBT 1 1700 2 .02* 4 .01
SBR 0 0 25 9
EBL 1 1.00 0 .00 1 .00
EBT 1 1700 35 .02 108 .07
EBR 0 0 3 16
WBL 1 1"00 185 .11 158 .09
WBT 1 1700 511 :30* 549 .32*
WBR 1 1,700 48 .03 102 .06
Right Turn Adjustment NBR .01+ NBR .16*
Clearance interval .05* .051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .38 .55
40. B St & A St
2025
A14 PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC
3400 295 .09* 147 .04
NBL 2
NBT 1 1700 187 .12 127 .09*
NBR 0 0 22 30
SBL 1 1;00 40 .02 253 .15*
SBT 1 1700 54 .071 173 .20
SBR 0 0 62 167
EBL 1 1700 19 .011 40 .021
EBT 2 3400 65 .02 71 .02
EBR 1 1700 138 .08 513 .30
WBL 1 1700 12 .01 22 .01
WBT 2 3400 354 .14* 227 .081
WBR 0 0 105 �.
J,
4
Right Turn Adjustment EBR .18*
Clearance Interval .051 .051
39. J St & A St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .29 .45
41. C St & A St/D St
2025
AIA PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
VIC
VOL
VIC
NBL
0
0
18
VIC
44
VIC
NBT
1
1700
0
.04*
1
.12+
NBR
0
0
43
.26*
157
.20
SBL
0
0
0
0
SBT
1
1700
0
.021
1
.10;
SBR
0
0
35
.0
173
.181
EBL
1
1700
10
.01*
8
.00
EBT
2
3400
118
.08
467
.15;
EBR
0
0
92
.00
52
.01
WBL
1
1,100
131
.08
55
.031
WBT
2
3400
411
.1^*
438
.14
WBR
0
0
169
.011
48
.011
Clearance Interval
0
.05*
0
.05*
Note:
Assumes
NIS Split
Phasing
SBR
.12{
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .29 .45
41. C St & A St/D St
2025
P14 PK
HOUR
P14 PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
VIC
VOL
VIC
NBL
2
3400
4!1
.14
244
.07*
NBT
1
1700
312
.26*
289
.20
NBR
0
0
130
57
SBL
1
1100
0
.00
1
.00
SBT
1
1700
120
.0
300
.181
SBR
1
1700
418
.25
225
.13
EBL
1
1700
20
.014-
57
.031
EBT
1
1700
4
.00
13
.01
EBR
1
1700
141
.08
435
.26
WBL
1
1 00
16
.01
38
.02
WBT
1
1700
13
.011
15
.011
WBR
0
0
0
0
Right
Turn Adjustment
SBR
.12{
EBR
.19*
Clearance Interval
.05;
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .36 .57 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .53
B-11 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
42. N St & D St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .11 .18
44. K St & E St
2025
AM PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
0
0
NBT
0
0
0
.06;
0
0
NBR
0
0
0
0
0
SBL
0
0
14
{.06}+
95
1
SBT
1
1^00
0
.04*
0
.07*
SBR
0
0
61
1i
0
EBL
0
0
0
.02+
0
1
EBT
1
1 00
20
.01
4
.00
EBR
0
0
0
0
0
WBL
0
0
0
.02
0
1
WBT
1
1^00
0
.021
0
.061
WBR
0
0
35
.14
99
Clearance Interval
.05*
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .11 .18
44. K St & E St
2025
43. M St & A St
2025
Alii PK HOUR
P14 PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
0
NBT
0
0
0
.02
0
.06;
NBR
0
0
0
0
SBL
0
0
11
24
{.06}+
SBT
1
1100
0
.011
0
.031
SBR
0
0
14
27
EBL
0
0
0
.01;
0
.02+
EBT
1
1,700
1
.00
10
.01
EBR
0
0
0
0
W8L
0
0
0
.04
0
.02
WBT
1
1,700
33
.02�
33
.021
WBR
0
0
0
0
.14
Clearance Interval
.051
.051
43. M St & A St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .35 .32
45. K St & G St
i
2025
AI's PK HOUR
PILI PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
0
NBT
1
100
0
.02
0
.06;
NBR
0
0
36
108
SBL
0
0
54
106
{.06}+
SBT
1
1-00
0
.051
4
.08
SBR
0
0
26
33
EBL
1
1-00
12
.01;
32
.02+
EBT
2
3400
74
.03
292
.09
EBR
0
0
20
15
WBL
1
17004
15
.04
26
.02
WBT
2
3400
496
.24;
228
.131
WBR
0
0
332
231
.14
Clearance Interval
.051-
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .35 .32
45. K St & G St
i
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .08 .10 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .08 .11
B-12 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
AM PK HOUR
PH PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
0
NBT
0
0
0
0
NBR
0
0
0
0
SBL
0
0
0
0
SBT
0
0
0
0
SBR
0
0
0
0
EBL
0
0
0
0
EBT
1
1700
2
.00
21
.02
EER
0
0
2
11
WBL
0
0
15
44
WBT
1
1'00
31
.03*
60
.061
WBR
0
0
0
0
Clearance Interval
.05;
.05{
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .08 .10 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .08 .11
B-12 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
46. B St & I St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .10 .09
50. B St & Valencia N Loop
2025
A14 PK
A14 PK HOUR
PM PK HOUR
PM PK
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
31
{.02�*
38
{.02}1
NBT
1
1^00
0
.02
0
.02
NBR
0
0
1
0
J
0
SBL
0
0
0
0
0
SBT
0
0
0
.091
0
.051
SBR
0
0
0
0
0
EBL
0
0
0
.011
0
.05
EBT
1
1!00
1
.00
19
.01
EBR
0
0
0
0
0
WBL
0
0
13
.01
14
.01;
WBT
1
1700
34
.03
12
.021
WBR
0
0
0
0
0
Clearance Interval
.051,
Interval
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .10 .09
50. B St & Valencia N Loop
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .25 .22
47. J St & I St
2025
A14 PK
A14 PK HOUR
PM PK HOUR
PM PK
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
-VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
17
{.01}+
9
{.01}1
NBT
1
1100
0
.02
0
.01
NBR
0
0
20
0
13
0
SBL
0
0
3
0
3
SBT
1
1^00
0
.091
0
.051
SBR
0
0
158
0
89
EBL
1
1^00
24
.011
90
.05
EBT
1
1,700
9'
.06
133
.101
EBR
0
0
10
0
41
WBL
1
1^00
9
.01
21
.01;
WBT
1
11100
149
.09*
64
.04
WBR
0
0
3
0
3
Clearance Interval
.051
Interval
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .25 .22
47. J St & I St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .16 .17
51. N Loop Rd & B St
2025
A14 PK
AM PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
64
{.04}*
131
0
NBT
1
1-00
0
.04
0
09;
NBR
0
0
0
0
16
0
SBL
0
0
0
0
SBT
0
0
0
0
0
EBL
SBR
0
0
0
0
1 1700
EBL
0
0
0
EBR
0
3
EBT
1
11.00
1
.061
3
.01
EBR
0
0
109
14
^4
WBL
0
0
13
{.01}1
5
WBT
1
1_00
53
.04
45
.03+
WBR
0
0
0
0
Clearance
Interval
.051
.05#
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .16 .17
51. N Loop Rd & B St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .14 .14
B-13 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
A14 PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
LANES CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1 1700
7
.00
.00
NBT
0 0
0
0
NBR
1 1.00
101
.06
104
.06
SBL
0 0
0
0
SBT
0 0
0
0
SBR
0 0
0
0
EBL
0 0
0
0
EBT
1 1700
3-
.021
10
.011
EBR
0 0
3
3
WBL
1 1100
84
.051
115
.07{
WBT
1 1008
.05
^4
.04
WBR
0 0
0
0
Right
Turn Adjustment
NBR
.021
NBR
.011
Clearance Interval
.051,
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .14 .14
B-13 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
52. East Connector & B St
r-
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .18 .17
58. D St & Moffett
2025
A14 PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
LANES CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0 0
0
0
0
0
NBT
0 0
0
1700
0
.01
NBR
0 0
0
0
0
7
SBL
1 1700
4
.00
74
.04*
SBT
0 0
0
.01+
0
1
SBR
1 1700
3
.02
157
.09
EBL
1 1^00
128
.08+
75
.04+
EBT
1 1^00
8
.00
39
.02
EBR
0 0
0
1700
0
.03
WBL
0 0
0
0
0
0
WBT
1 1700
75
.04+
31
.02+
WBR
1 1 00
80
.05
23
.01
Right
Turn Adjustment
WBR
.01*
SBR
.02*
Clearance Interval
0
.05*
.05+
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .18 .17
58. D St & Moffett
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .35 .28
53. D St & B St
2025
A14 PK HOUR
P14 PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1700
0
.00
0
.00
NBT
1
1700
11
.01
J
.09+
NBR
0
0
7
.00
154
.00
SBL
1
1100
4
.00
22
.01+
SBT
1
1700
29
.02*
39
.02
SBR
0
0
0
3
EBL
1
1700
6
.00
56
.03
EBT
1
1700
44
.03
198
.12+
EBR
0
0
0
0
WBL
1
1j00
81
.05
12
.01+
f WBT
1
1700
460
.28+
44
.03
WBR
0
0
11
8
Clearance Interval
.05+
.05+
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .35 .28
53. D St & B St
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .14 .14
59. C St & Moffett
72025
A14 PK HOUR
Pio PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1-00
49
.03+
18
.01+
NBT
0
0
0
.06+
0.
.01;
NBR
1
1700
0
.00
0
.00
SBL
0
0
0
.01+
0
.01;
SBT
0
0
0
.00
0
.00
SBR
0
0
0
0
EBL
0
0
0
.00
0
.00
EBT
1
1700
7
.01
61
.01
EBR
0
0
6
51
WBL
1
1700
22
.01
20
.01;
WBT
1
1^00
107
.06+
31
.02
WBR
0
0
0
0
Clearance Interval
.05*
•05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .14 .14
59. C St & Moffett
72025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .37
B-14 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
A14 PK HOUR
P14 PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1700
1
.00
2
.00
NBT
1
1700
2
.06+
1
.01;
NBR
0
0
101
1
SBL
1
1700
15
.01+
10
.01;
SBT
1
1:00
5
.00
4
.00
SBR
0
0
1
0
EBL
1
1100
1
.00
6
.00
EBT
1
1;'00
62
.04
344
.21+
EBR
0
0
3
14
WBL
1
1700
2
.00
161
.09+
WBT
1
1700
544
. JJ4.
64
.01
WBR
0
0
23
54
Clearance Interval
.05+
.05+
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .45 .37
B-14 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
60. N Loop Rd & Legacy
2025
AM PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 1 1^00 ^9 .051 48 .031
NBT 2 3400 16 .01 66 .04
NBR 0 0 12 65
SBL 1 1700 1 .00 0 .00
SBT 2 3400 17 .05* 47 .03*
SBR 0 0 231 .14 52 .03
EBL 1 1-1,00 26 .021 165 .101
EBT 1 1700 59 .03 174 .10
EBR 1 1700 35 .02 186 .11
WBL 1 1,700 33 .02 63 .04
WBT 1 100 166 .10; 153 .09*
WBR 0 0 2 1
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .0*
Clearance Interval .05* .05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .34 .30
63. N Loop Rd & G St
2025
A14 PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
A14 PK HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
V/C
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
0
0
0
31
0
10
NBT
2
3400
77
.03
110.
.06
NBR
0
0
27
2
34
6
SBL
1
1-00
4
.00
35
.02
SBT
2
3400
141
.04*
262
.08*
SBR
0
0
0
58
0
3
EBL
0
0
0
4
0
16
EBT
0
0
0
1
0
0
EBR
0
0
0
3
0
5
WBL
1
1700
19
.01*
23
.014
WBT
0
0
0
0
0
0
WBR
1
1100
31
.02
10
.01
Clearance Interval
.05*
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .10 .14
62. C St & Legacy
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .10 .16
B-15 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
A14 PK
HOUR
PM PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1-00
12
.01*
5
.00
NBT
1
1 00
31
.02
10
.01
NBR
0
0
1
4
SBL
1
100
2
.00
6
.00
SBT
1
1-00
1
.011
17
.10+
SBR
0
0
23
156
EBL
1
1.100
58
.031
3
.00
EBT
1
1700
4
.00
16
.011
EBR
0
0
1
0
WBL
0
0
3
5
WBT
1
1700
0
.001
0
.00
WBR
0
0
0
0
Clearance Interval
.05*
.05,
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .10 .16
B-15 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
101. Red Hill & Edinger
2025
AM PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3400 120 .041 350 .10
NBT 3 5100 400 .08 1450 .28"
NBR 1 11;00 150 .09 650 .38
SBL 2 3400 300 .09 1!0 .05*
SBT 3 5100 1500 .29* 420 .08
SBR 1 1^00 50 .44 420 .25
EBL 2 3400 240 .011 420 .12�
EBT 3 5100 850 .1^ 1500 .29
EBR 1 1;00 390 .23 160 .09
WBL 2 3400 650 .19 230 .07,
WBT 3 5100 1650 .32; 1400 .21'
WBR 1 1!00 130 .08 310 .18
Right Turn Adjustment SBR .10* NBR .01*
Clearance Interval .051 .051
Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for NBR
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .87 .78
103. Red Hill & Warner
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .81 .90
B-16
L02. Red Hill & Valencia
2025
A.14 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3400 650 .191 1120 .33;
NBT 4 6800 680 .10 1460 .21
NBR 1 1 00 280 .16 630 .37
SBL 2 3400 210 .08 160 .05
SBT 3 5100 1580 .31* 600 .12*
SBR 1 1-00 120 .07 20 .01
EBL 1 1 00 40 .02 20 .01
3400 420 .121 360 .111
EBT 2
EBR f 1050 X40
WBL 2 3400 580 .1 1 420 .12;
WBT 2 3400 450 .13 340 .10
WBR 1 1"00 �0 .04 220 .13
Clearance Interval .05, .05*
Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for NBR
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .84 .73
104. Red Hill & Carnegie
I� 2025
AM PK
HOUR
PH PK
HOUR
CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
2
3400
80
.02*
480
.14
NBT
4
6800
70
.11
1980
.29*
NBR
1
1_100
200
.12
280
.16
SBL
2
3400
600
.18
530
.161
SBT
4
6800
2190
.321
^0
.11
SER
1
17 00
220
.13
460
.27
EBL
2
3400
210
.06
280
.08*
EBT
3
5100
1670
.33*
1530
.30
EBR
1
1^00
230
.14
180
.11
WBL
2
3400
290
.09*
260
.08
WBT
3
5100
1410
.28
1650
.32*
WBR
1
1^00
630
.3%
6;0
.39
Clearance Interval
.05;
.051
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .81 .90
B-16
L02. Red Hill & Valencia
2025
A.14 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 2 3400 650 .191 1120 .33;
NBT 4 6800 680 .10 1460 .21
NBR 1 1 00 280 .16 630 .37
SBL 2 3400 210 .08 160 .05
SBT 3 5100 1580 .31* 600 .12*
SBR 1 1-00 120 .07 20 .01
EBL 1 1 00 40 .02 20 .01
3400 420 .121 360 .111
EBT 2
EBR f 1050 X40
WBL 2 3400 580 .1 1 420 .12;
WBT 2 3400 450 .13 340 .10
WBR 1 1"00 �0 .04 220 .13
Clearance Interval .05, .05*
Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for NBR
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .84 .73
104. Red Hill & Carnegie
I� 2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .57
Legacv Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
AM PK HOUR
Pro PK HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
100
120
.011
50
.03
NBT
4
6800
830
.12
2250
.33*
NBR
1
1^00
90
.05
60
.04
SBL
2
3400
500
.15
110
.031
SBT
4
6800
1910
.33+
1090
.16
SBR
0
0
300
10
EBL
1
1.00
20
.01
90
.05�
EBT
1
100
10
.011
20
.01
EBR
1
100
30
.02
100
.06
WBL
1
1^00
120
.0
220
.13
WBT
0.5
3400
10
{.01)
20
{.11)*
WBR
1.5
200
400
Clearance
Interval
.05;
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .57
Legacv Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
105. Red gill 6 Barranca
2025
P.14 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL
2
3400
300
.09
1050
.31*
NBT
4
6800
^20
.11*
1600
.24
NBR
1
1:00
80
.05
370
.22
SBL
2
3 400
640
.19*
250
.07
SBT
4
6800
1250
.18
830
.12*
SBR
i
1;00
110
.10
330
.19
EBL
2
3400
160
.05
230
.07*
EBT
4
6800
1510
.221
1110
.16
EBR
1
1700
380
.22
200
.12
WBL
2
3400
450
.131
190
.06
WBT
4
6800
1050
.15
1610
.24*
WBR
1
100
160
.09
530
.31
Right
Turn
Adjustment
1680
.27*
SBR
.02*
Clearance
Interval
0
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .70 .81
107. Armstrong & Barranca
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .58 .61
106. Aston & Barranca
2025
2
3400
A14 PK
HOUR
P14 PK
HOUR
CAPACITY
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1700
60
.04*
100
.06
NBT
1
1700
10
.01
10
.01*
NBR
1
1^00
30
.02
80
.05
SBL
1
1,700
70
.04
340
.20*
SBT
1
1700
10
.011
10
.01
SBR
1
1700
130
.08
370
.22
EBL
1
-1;`00
360
.211
180
.11*
EBT
4
6800
1370
.21
1650
.25
EBR
0
0
90
.21
30
1
WBL
1
1700
170
.10
40
.02
WBT
4
6800
1680
.27*
1480
.24*
WBR
0
0
150
170
Clearance Interval
.05*
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .58 .61
106. Aston & Barranca
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .52 .62
108. Tustin Ranch Rd/Von Kaman & Barranca
2025
P14 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL
2
3400
A14 PK HOUR
PH PK HOUR
500
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
100
20
.01
130
.08+
NBT
1
1-00
10
.02*
10
.04
NBR
0
0
30
5100
50
.211
SBL
1
1700
10
.01*
150
.09
SBT
1
1-00
10
.01
10
.19*
SBR
0
0
10
6860
310
.101
EBL
1
1-00
300
.18*
40
.02*
EBT
4
6800
1780
.28
1660
.25
EBR
0
0
150
6800
30
.21
WBL
1
1:00
80
.05
20
.01
WBT
4
6800
1630
.26*
1890
.281
WBR
0
0
160
40
Clearance Interval
.05*
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .52 .62
108. Tustin Ranch Rd/Von Kaman & Barranca
2025
P14 PK HOUR PH PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL
2
3400
240
.07*
500
.15
NBT
3
5100
640
.13
1140
.221
NBR
1
1700
220
.13
520
.31
SBL
2
3400
260
.08
540
.161
SBT
3
5100
1080
.211
740
.15
SBR
2
3400
320
.09
390
.11
EBL
2
3400
250
.07
360
.11
EBT
4
6860
700
.101
1390
.20"
EBR
1
1700
520
.31
320
.19
WBL
2
3400
610
.20
190
.061-
06*WBT
WBT
4
6800
1440
.21
800
.12
WBR
1
1700
430
.25
320
.19
Right
Turn
Adjustment
EBR
.16}
NBR
.051
Clearance
Interval
.05;
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .79 .74
B-17 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
109. West Connector & Edinger
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .70
111. East Connector & Edinger
2025
A14 PK HOUR
PM PK HOUR
P14 PK
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
loo
50
.03�
290
.171
NBT
0
0
0
1,700
0
.01*
NBR
1
1 00
20
.01
90
.05
SBL
0
0
0
100
0
.01
SBT
0
0
0
1100
0
.00
SBR
0
0
0
1:00
0
.06
EBL
0
0
0
1700
0
.031
EBT
3
5100
1100
.22
2300
.451
EBR
1
1^00
180
.11
90
.05
WBL
1
1/00
230
.14
50
.031
WBT
3
5100
2280
.451
1600
.31
WBR
0
0
0
1-00
0
.09
Clearance Interval
.06
.05*
Turn Adjustment
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .70
111. East Connector & Edinger
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION- .65 .69
110. Tustin Ranch Rd Connector & Edinger
2025
A14 PK
HOUR
P14 PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1700
130
.08
60
..04
j NBT
1
1,700
10
.01*
10
.01*
NBR
1
100
j0
.04
30
.02
SBL
1
100
120
.01
300
.181
SBT
1
1100
0
.00
10
.01
SBR
1
1:00
110
.06
100
.06
EBL
1
1700
50
.031
130
.08
EBT
3
5100
670
.13
1910
.401
EBR
0
0
10
.33
140
.22
WBL
1
11,00
30
.02
90
.051
WBT
3
5100
2290
.451
1380
.27
WBR
1
1-00
150
.09
100
.06
Right
Turn Adjustment
SRR
.041
.05*
Clearance Interval
.051
.051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION- .65 .69
110. Tustin Ranch Rd Connector & Edinger
2025
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .70 .79
112. Tustin Ranch Rd & Tustin Ranch Rd Connector
2025
J PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 3 5100 680 .13 2280 .451
NBR 1 100 350 .21 330 .19
SBL 1 1700 230 .14 260 .151
SBT 3 5100 2430 .481 1260 .25
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 0 0 0 0
EBR 0 0 0 0
WBL 2 3400 700 .211 300 .09;
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 1 1^'00 290 .1j 390 .23
Right Turn Adjustment `IBR .031
Clearance Interval .05{ .051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .74 .77
B-18 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
A14 PK
HOUR
P14 PK
HOUR
LANES
CAPACITY
VOL
V/C
VOL
V/C
NBL
1
1-00
410
.24*
430
.251
NBT
0
0
0
0
MBR,1
1'700
10
.10
160
.09
SBL
0
0
0
0
SBT
0
0
0
0
SBR
0
0
0
0
EBL
0
0
0
0
EBT
3
5100
560
.11
2020
.401
EBR
1
1700
560
.33
31
.22
WBL
2
3400
430
.13
320
.091
WBT
3
5100
2100
.411
1220
.24
WBR,
0
0
0
0
Cleafance
Interval
.05*
.05*
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .70 .79
112. Tustin Ranch Rd & Tustin Ranch Rd Connector
2025
J PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL 0 0 0 0
NBT 3 5100 680 .13 2280 .451
NBR 1 100 350 .21 330 .19
SBL 1 1700 230 .14 260 .151
SBT 3 5100 2430 .481 1260 .25
SBR 0 0 0 0
EBL 0 0 0 0
EBT 0 0 0 0
EBR 0 0 0 0
WBL 2 3400 700 .211 300 .09;
WBT 0 0 0 0
WBR 1 1^'00 290 .1j 390 .23
Right Turn Adjustment `IBR .031
Clearance Interval .05{ .051
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .74 .77
B-18 Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
113. Tustin Ranch Rd & Walnut
2025
AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR
LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C
NBL
2 3400
220
.06-'
500
.15
NBT
3 5100
230
.05
1880
.31
r1BR
d -1700
520
.31
290
. l i
SBL
2 3400
450
.13
160
.05#
SBT
3 5100
2040
.40"
930
.18
SBR
d 1-00
160
.09
35G
.21
EBL
2 3400
310
.09
210
.06*
EBT
2 3400�"
0
.23"
33G
.10
EBR
d 1^00
320
.19
220
.13
WBL
2 3400
300
.09*
WBT
2 3400
290
.09
90
.29*
WBR
d 1^00
40
.02
350
.21
Clearance
Interval
.05'
.054 -
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .83 .82
B-19 Leoacv Park of Tustin Legacy 3/07 922.004
Appendix C
TURN POCKET LENGTH
METHODOLOGY
These guidelines address turn pocket lengths for left -turn and right -turn lanes at signalized
intersections. They are based on vehicle storage requirements, and are thereby exclusive of transition
lengths (typically, transitions are 90 feet for a single lane and 120 to 150 feet for a double lane). The
results can be used as recommendations for design purposes.
LEFT -TURN LADES
The turn pocket lengths for left -turn lanes are determined from the graph in Figure C-1 which is
based on vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl) and signal cycle length.
Minimum Length: 150' (Serves up to 150 vphpl)
The length for more than 150 vphpl is derived as follows:
BASIS: The storage length is based on the number of vehicles to be stored during one
signal cycle. At lower volumes, the calculated length is increased to account for
random arrivals (i.e., relatively high standard deviation in relation to the average).
At higher volumes, the standard deviation in relation to the average decreases.
Hence the graph is curved rather than a straight line.
METHOD: Estimate the probable signal cycle length and select pocket length from the curve.
Round off to nearest 25' or 50' depending on the application. If the cycle length is
not known, use the dashed line in the graph.
RIGHT -TURN LADES
The turn pocket length for right -turn lanes is determined from the estimated queue length of the
adjacent through movement. The graph in Figure C-1 is based on the following:
Minimum Length: 250' (adequate for ICU up to .65)
Length for higher ICU is derived as follows:
BASIS: Derived from the estimated 95`h percentile queue for ICU values greater than .65
(taken from the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) queue lengths for different
levels of service).
METHOD: Use the highest ICU (AM or PM) to access the graph and round off to nearest 25'
or 50' depending on the application.
City of Tustin. Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis C_ I 922004rpt5.doc
LENGTH
LEFT TURN POCKET LENGTH
(Feet)
700
650
600
40
0100
550
500
450jo!'
/
400
354
300
250
200
150
15020-0- 300 400 500 600 700 800
u i
LEFT TURN VOLUME PER LANE
RIGHT TURN POCKET LENGTH
LENGTH
(Feet)
500
450
400
350
300
254
sV
.65
.70 .75 .80 .85 .90 .95 1.00
10
15 25 35 45 55 67 80
ICU or HCM Delay (highest AM/PM)
Figure C-1
TURN POCKET LENGTH METHODOLOGY
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis C-2 92200=#rptSfigC-l.dwg
e
u i
sV
s
Figure C-1
TURN POCKET LENGTH METHODOLOGY
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis C-2 92200=#rptSfigC-l.dwg
Appendix D
EXTERNAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES
City of Tustin Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Legacy Park of Tustin Legacy Traffic Analysis D- I 922004rpt5.doc
Red Hill Avenue
Future - AM
X130
<-- Lo C0<-- 1650
on
X650 Edinger
240 X11 T T T
N O tlf _j
850-- �*
390-y o
0
X10
X20
o
20 a
111
TTTT
o -i'--
N o �
as0
� �I X580 Valencia
4r �
1050 ° ° N
0
of
N
X630
E— N r' 0 1410
� �, �, i .���►
<-
210---7
210 ))T T T T Warner --j
1670-4 OD f-- N
230-��
O
O
O
CO) CD
�' to x'-10
Z-120 Carnegie
20__,;? )TTTTr
30�� � °'
0
0
X160
E--
�' o Ln o E-1050
<--L ��� X450 Barranca
160--,;,1)7TTT�'
-� O N Co -�
1510:
380
1/31/2007
Red Hill Avenue
9:1 ifi ira _ pM
X310
0 0 o F-1400
<-- v v
X230 Edinger
420—,,77
Ln u-) to --�
1500--> cn '4- cD
160—,, o
0
0 120
0 0 0 �-
<-- �, e-40
660 .R 00
40 0
TTTT
E-220
0 o cD X340
F--
� ��yly X420 Valencia
20�WTTV
360�
740 -
ICD
ao
N
O
X670
<--w o o F-1650
to
X60
280 )")T T T T rWarner
1530--), 00 rn N ---
180—y
0
0
0
X200
'-220 Carnegie
go
2 0 --- C C
100— "' N W
N
O
O
X530
F -Ln
oo� o <-1610
C1 CCt) 00
--- I 111'+ y Z-190 Barranca
230
1110 o
200-
1/31/2007
",�--Ozz
C) <-- M 'IT F -0v9
<-- ��� :;=Ovz
<--�
�JH109z::���TTTT��
— > O 0 o —�
090 1--> N o �
oz£�
0
o '
0 o 0 �0£
LO c° E—01
F— �. �► X09
6uoJIswJy O L ---->Y T T r
O£ 1--\A
0
oc
0
o «� O 1
Boz
uolsy m --,;F0 YTTr �' -->
o �—� o 00 U')
MCIO
co
U
C
cu
L
L
MM�
W
0
r'-09v
OZL
OLO O <--
_ _ E-
E-- J� I Irl lel Z-00£
il!H Pa2l —/7
��vTTv —�
Ot�9� 0 0 0
--� —�
09z 1� � M
OL 1-�,
0
0
N
Tom
M
r
cu
3
Y
L
cu
a
cu CL
Cu
L
L
cu
�-OZS
0 0 0 E--
_ IM IImI °r' <--OL L L
E-- y BOOS
2�2�1 OIS� , '�'�T T T Tr --�
09L—>M in C%4 --�
06£�
o
o�
0 000 X08
v E-0 L
X06 t
6Uo.�}sUuy OK -,XJ IT T T �' --�
OL£�
o �
0
0
0
r0i °° N
�--- I .L .� 1� DoE L
UOISV 05 Lam, IT T T r --�
oz --t
0L£
c�
0
U
C
N
i
«i
m
O'
E --
E-- o 0 0 X009 L
WI � X050 L
� CC --->
II!H Pa?! OSc ' I' IT T T T r >
> o 0 0 �
OE8� N T- N
OEE-�
L
LL
cv.
Co L
l 0
y of
OZ,
011 �T
co
y
0
OLS
�
N d' v
y � yyy
0
\
7TTTr
`'
TT
� �
c
C
O
O V
�o
�05E
�-OZS
o
N
E--089
E --ONION
N C
E -OVZ
+ 0ue�i U01,Cf)-�
08Z
E-- �• •�
�-
�OZZ
oti w-.0
OEi�Z
�
��T T �
o
OSv�
--�
o O O
r I` N
OVOZ--)
ch t- ch
09
0
00 0
N N HOZ
x-05
TTT�
�
00
0 00
2
CL
I
CD
L
it
ti
0
N O
t4oue'd wIsnB
00 �O
4"Ov
0l
Op1
09
0
OpCl
p
03
o
y
0%
�cv
0
014 r--
0 0
N Cf)
G
G
O
o v
0 0 08E
c `t) 08ZZ
u 01
09Z
06
e, --06Z
O o
o0
N
TT
�06Z
�
BOOS
E--
09
0 0
-->
r- M N
OE6�
N M N
OS£ -y
0
N O
t4oue'd wIsnB
00 �O
4"Ov
0l
Op1
09
0
OpCl
p
03
o
y
0%
�cv
0
014 r--
0 0
N Cf)
G
G
O
o v
0 0 08E
c `t) 08ZZ
u 01
09Z
06
e, --06Z
O o
o0
N
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY'
LEGACY PARK PARTNERS, LLC
NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Table of Contenis
I. Executive Summary
A. Intent & Purpose of the Implementation Strategy
......................................................1
B. Scope of Strategy........................................................................................................2
1. Geographical Scope...........................................................................................2
2. Fixed Items.........................................................................................................4
3. Variable Items....................................................................................................4
C. Phasing and Implementation Schedule......................................................................A
1. Conveyance 1 (Phase 1)....................................................................................4
2. Conveyance 2 (Phase 2)......................................................................................5
H. Guiding Principles, Goals and Objectives
A. Guiding Principles......................................................................................................7
B. Goals...........................................................................................................................7
III. Ownership and Leadership
A. Development Entity Ownership..................................................................................9
B. Land Valuation far Master Block Commercial........................................................11
C. Stabilized Ownership................................................................................................12
D. Key Leadership Roles...............................................................................................12
IV. Land Use
A. Master Block Land Use Program (Fixed).................................................................13
B. Master Block Product Plans (Variable)....................................................................18
C. Master Block Parking Plan.......................................................................................20
V. Ownership, Responsibility, and Phasing of Improvements
A. Infrastructure Improvement Responsibility..............................................................21
1. Master Block....................................................................................................21
2. Remainder of the Community Core.................................................................21
B. Building Improvements............................................................................................23
1. Master Block....................................................................................................23
2. Community Core Outside Master Block/Single Use Components..................24
C. Infrastructure Improvements Phasing.......................................................................24
D. Building Improvements Phasing...............................................................................24
VI. Marketing and Positioning Plan
A.
Office — "The Work Environment"..........................................................................25
1. Competition......................................................................................................25
a. Opportunities........................................................................................25
b. Threats..................................................................................................25
2. Anticipated Capture Rate.................................................................................27
B.
Street Retail, Restaurant, and Entertainment — "The
Street Environment" .............27
1. Competition......................................................................................................27
a. The District..........................................................................................27
b. South Coast Metro...............................................................................29
c. Market Place........................................................................................29
d. Spectrum..............................................................................................30
e. Park Place.............................................................................................30
iFashion Island......................................................................................30
g. Main Place Mall ...................................................................................30
h. The Block at Orange............................................................................3Q
i. Beach Streets........................................................................................31
2. Anticipated Capture Rate.................................................................................31
C.
Marketing Strategy — Non-Residential....................................................................31
1. Product Description.........................................................................................31
2. Strategy of Delivery.........................................................................................32
3. Method of Delivery ..........................................................................................33
4. Positioning and Mechanics..............................................................................34
5. Product Pricing.................................................................................................36
6. Target Customer...............................................................................................36
7. Product Promotion...........................................................................................36
D.
Residential Community ...........................................................................................37
1. Competition......................................................................................................38
a. Opportunities........................................................................................38
b. Threats..................................................................................................38
2. Anticipated Capture/Absorption Rate..............................................................38
E.
Marketing Strategy - Residential..............................................................................39
1. Product Description.........................................................................................39
2. Strategy of Delivery.........................................................................................39
3. Positioning and Mechanics..............................................................................39
4. Target Resident................................................................................................41
5. Product Promotion...........................................................................................41
VII. Financing Plan
A. Infrastructure............................................................................................................42
B. Master Block/Vertical Mixed Use...........................................................................42
C. Remainder of the Community Core.........................................................................42
VIII. Monitoring of Implementation Strategy
A. Purpose..............................................................................................................
.......43
B. Success Metrics........................................................................................................43
( 1. Target Goals.....................................................................................................43
2. Strategies for Change or Course Correction....................................................43
a. Weekly/Bi-Weekly ..............................................................................43
ib. Monthly................................................................................................44
c. Quarterly..............................................................................................44
C. Annual Reporting......................................................................................................45
Maps and Figures
Exhibit I Community Core Parcel Map............................................................................3
Exhibit2 Community Core Land Use Program..............................................................15
Exhibit 3 Street OwnershipMap......................................................................................22
Exhibit 4 Work Environment Competition......................................................................26
Exhibit 5 Street Environment Competition.......................................................................28
Tables
Table1 Land Use Program...........................................................................................16
Table 2 Nonresidential Product Plan...........................................................................18
Table 3 Residential Product Plan.................................................................................19
Table 4 Assumed Shared Parking Plan.........................................................................20
Appendices
A. Detailed Land Use Program Table
B. Parking Tables
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
The purpose of this Implementation Strategy is to provide a written strategy
for the implementation of Legacy Park's Master Block, and to a lesser
extent, the adjacent portions of the Community Core south of Warner
Avenue. The Implementation Strategy is a requirement of the DDA
executed between the City of Tustin and Tustin Legacy Community
Partners, LLC.
The Master Block includes the vertical mixed-use component of the
Community Core, and is to act as the development catalyst for the Core. The
portion of the Community Core that contains the Master Block is
surrounded by the backbone streets of the Legacy Park development
(Warner Avenue to the north, Tustin Ranch Road to the east, Armstrong
Road to the west, and the South Loop to the south with Barranca Parkway
forming the southern edge of the Community Core as a whole).
Development of this backbone infrastructure by Tustin Legacy Community
Partners will provide the access and infrastructure to support the Master
Block and larger Community Core and provide linkages to the adjacent
residential and business planning areas as well as the linear park that spans
the entire Legacy Park community.
This Implementation Plan provides a clear description of the ownership
entities for the Community Core and Master Block, their experience with
mixed-use development projects, qualifications, and financial capability;
their construction responsibilities for backbone and local infrastructure; and
the Master Block development strategy. Its intended purpose is to allow the
City of Tustin to:
♦ Understand the ownership and development responsibilities for the
Master Block;
Ensure development of adequate infrastructure in compliance with the
DDA; Business Plan assumptions, and EDC;
♦ Confirm consistency with the Master Block program identified in the
DDA Attachment 28, Exhibit E.
This document is intended to be flexible and market -responsive.
Communication between the developer and City leadership teams is key; a
program of reporting is provided in Section VIII, Monitoring of
Implementation Strategy.
SUBMITTAL DATE. NovEmji H 21, 2006 PAGE 1 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
}3, SCOPE OF STRATEGY
I. GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE
This Implementation Strategy applies to the Master Block portion of the
Community Core, which serves as the Core's high density, vertical
mixed-use component. Although the Community Core includes Planning
Areas 8, 13, and 14, the Master Block is located wholly within Planning
Area 13, and adjacent to Planning Area 14. Planning Area 8 is separated
from the Master Block by Warner Avenue. The boundaries of the Master
Block defined by this Implementation Strategy are shown on Exhibit 1,
Community Core Parcel Map, These boundaries differ from Exhibit E
of DDA Attachment 28. However, it is the program identified in Table 1
of Exhibit E of the DDA that defines the Master Block.
For informational purposes and to provide context for the development
implementation program of the Master Block, primarily single -use
development within those portions of Planning Areas 13 and 14 outside
of the Master Block are also included in this Implementation Strategy.
For purposes of this document, general references to the Community
Core include only those areas south of Warner Avenue (Planning Areas
13 and 14 of the Specific Plan).
As identified in Section 1.3.4 of the DDA, a key City objective for the
development of Legacy Park (Tustin Legacy) is to establish a new center
of urban activity in the City and region and create a unique sense of
place. To accomplish this, the City requires the development of a mixed-
use Community Core, and within the Core, a vertical mixed-use Master
Block. There are a number of principles and working assumptions that
will govern development of the Master Block, which is the focus of this
Implementation Strategy. The following is an excerpt of Section 1.6 of
DDA Attachment 28:
a) It is explicitly acknowledged that there needs to be a Master
Block Mixed-use Concept, along the lines of that illustrated by
the Field Paoli diagram and the Master Block Mixed-use
Program, both of which are included as Exhibit E to this
Attachment.
b) The mixed portion of the Community Core should be developed
on a grid, generally along the lines of the exhibits included in
Exhibit E to this Attachment.
c) The total development program for the Community Core will
govern (as shown in Exhibit E of this Attachment).
SOBMMAL DATE. Novi-Ifl11;11 21. 2006 PAGE 2 OF 45
14725 ALT( PAWWAY
• • • IPVINE C<LIFC NIA WM5 IM7
CONSULTING s48a7x3WsFAx.9a4vz¢m •.ww.eeFcam
r D-3 : / D Community Core Boundary (PA13 and 14)
BOAC (/
Master Block Boundary
0 Conveyance Boundary
I D -32+D-33
0 Conveyance 1
■ n u Ac D-34
I OAAC .
■ Conveyance 2
I�C Note: Early Conveyance 2 (Subject to City Approval)
IBARRANCA PARKWAY I■ �\
I I EXHIBIT 1
COMMUNITY CORE PARCEL MAP
City of Tustin, California
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
2. FIXED ITEMS
This Implementation Strategy identifies the placement, scheduling,
phasing, ownership, and other aspects of several `fixed items' within the
Master Block and the remaining Community Core outside of the Master
Block, including general land uses, streets and levels of service, block
locations and dimensions, and ownership.
3. VARIABLE ITEMS
This Implementation Strategy also makes best estimates of several
`variable items' — components of the development plan that may change
as development progresses, including general product types and their
location.
C. PHASING AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
The following schedule and its summary below establish the phasing of the
Master Block and Community Core. DDA Attachment 17 establishes
performance thresholds/schedule for the Master Block, Community Core
and larger project. This attachment is currently being evaluated by the City
and TLCP in accordance with the provisions of Article 3.1.4(c) of the DDA.
The attached schedule represents TLCP's recommended schedule of
performance.
As a point of clarification, the term "Conveyance I " is synonymous with
"Phase l" as defined in the DDA. The section of Attachment 28 that
addresses the Master Block refers to "Conveyances" rather than "Phases ".
The first conveyance includes all of the Master Block plus a portion of the
Community Core outside the Master Block. "Phases" as used in this
Implementation Strategy refers to vertical phases.
1. CONVEYANCE 1
Implementation Steps. The Master Block consists of the mixed-use
component of the Community Core as defined on Exhibit 1, Community
Core Parcel Map, The Master Block Development and the development
of the Conveyance 1 area of the Community Core outside the Master
Block (Planning Areas 13 and 14 only) will be implemented in a step-
wise fashion generally as follows (see Schedule for greater detail):
♦ Sector "A" map recordation and first Conveyance for Phase 1
("Conveyance 1") as defined in the DDA, by September 15, 2006
or a later date based on required DDA pre -conditions.
SUBMITTAL DATE. NoNTtmBER 21.2006 PAGE 4 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
♦ City approval of Implementation Strategy, fifteen days prior to the
close of escrow.
• TLCP submittal and City approval of Concept Plan and Sector `B"
Map for the Community Core including the Master Block
(Specific Plan Planning Areas 13 and 14)
♦ TLCP2 partnership Formed
Mass Grading Plans/Permits
♦ Affordable Housing Plan prepared by TLCP1 and approved by
City prior to Sector `B" Final Map approval.
♦ Recordation of Sector "B" final map for the Community Core
including the Master Block and Master Association documents
♦ Backbone infrastructure plans and construction (TLCP1)
♦ Local Infrastructure plans and construction (TLCP1 and TLCP2)
♦ TLCP1/TLCP2/Vertical Builder submittal and City approval of
Sector "C" maps and Site Plans/Design Review for Master Block
(by August, 2007)
♦ Recordation of Sector "C" final maps for the Master Block
♦ Notice of Sale pursuant to DDA Section 7.9
♦ Property conveyance from TLC -PI to TLCP2 and approval of any
required assignment and assumption agreements.
♦ Building Permits
♦ Vertical Construction
Phase 1 Minimum Phase (July 1, 2013)
Schedule for Horizontal Improvements (Infrastructure). Horizontal
Improvements/Infrastructure consist of Backbone and Local
improvements, including subsurface (underground water, sewer,
drainage, etc) and surface improvements (streets, grading, landscaping).
Responsibility for these improvements is set forth in Section V,
Ownership, Responsibility and Phasing of Improvements.
Schedule for Vertical Improvements. TLCP2 and third party builders
approved by the City will implement vertical improvements for vertical
improvements within the Master Block. See Schedule.
2. CONVEYANCE 2
Implementation Steps. These Conveyance 2 portions of the Community
Core, south of Warner and outside of the Master Block, consist of
portions of Specific Plan Planning Areas 13 and 14 as shown on Exhibit
1, Community Core Parcel Map. The remainder of the Community Core
SUBMITTAL DATE: NOYEMEER 21, 2006 PAGE 5 of 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
within Conveyance 2 will be implemented using the same steps as the
Master Block. Development will be implemented in a step -wise fashion
generally as follows:
♦ Conveyance 2/Phase 2 Close of Escrow (September 2009)
♦ TLCP finalizes Master Association documents for Conveyance 2
♦ TLCP1 submittal and City approval of Concept Plan and Sector
"B Map for the Community Core including the Master Block
(Specific Plan Planning Areas 13 and 14) (completed as part of
Conveyance/Phase 1, updated as necessary to account for market
changes)
♦ Recordation of Sector `B" final map for the remainder of the
Community Core and Master Association documents
♦ Mass Grading Plans/Permits
Backbone infrastructure plans and construction (TLCP1)
♦ Local Infrastructure plans and construction (TLCP1)
♦ TLCP1Nertical Builder submittal and City approval of Sector "C"
maps and Site Plans/Design Review for remainder of Community
Core, and approval of any required assignment and assumption
agreements.
♦ Building Permits
♦ Vertical Construction
Schedule for Horizontal -Improvements (infrastructure) - TLCPI
Demolition and Mass Grading Plan Approval
Community Core Mass Grading Plan approval
Community Core Mass grading operations
Backbone Infrastructure; Community Core. Plan
approval by City
Backbone Infrastructure, streets, utilities
Construction
Local Infrastructure Community Core plan
approval by City
Local Infrastructure Community Core
construction
Completed with Phase 1
Completed with Phase 1
Completed with Phase 1
Completed with Phase 1
Completed with Phase 1
Completed with Phase 1
Completed with Phase 1
Schedule for Vertical Improvements. TLCPI and third party builders
approved by the City will implement vertical improvements for the
remainder of the Community Core, consisting of stand-alone office and
commercial.
SUBMITTAL DATE: NOVEMIiifl 21, 2006 PAGE 6 of 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
II. GUIDING PRINCIPLES, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
A. GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The guiding principles identified for the Legacy Park area as a whole
including the Community Core and Master Block include:
♦ Linear Park — a Tustin landmark, the project's identity and the plans
dominant organizing element;
Connectivity - all roads lead to the park, all districts connect to the
park;
♦ The Grid Pattern — A primary organizing street element, emphasizing
pedestrian friendly, walkable blocks;
♦ Community Core — A vibrant mixed-use district with a variety of land
use that will be market responsive,-
0
esponsive;♦ Open Community Plan — No gates, minimal barriers, community
amenities accessible to all of Tustin; and
♦ No Change — In overall Specific Plan capacity limits and overall EIR
capacity limits.
B. GOALS
This Implementation Strategy provides a roadmap to reaching the goals of the
Legacy Park Master Block, which are to:
♦ Establish a new center of urban activity in the City of Tustin and the
region (DDA, Section 1.3.4);
♦ Create anew sense ofplace (DDA, Section 1.3.4);
♦ Provide an urban center that is a key attribute in the branding of Tustin
Legacy; and
♦ Develop a mixed use community core (DDA, Section 1.3.4).
The design, implementation, and marketing strategy of the Master Block are
guided by the following principles:
♦ Use the street and the Linear Park, as two primary organizing elements
of the frameworkplan;
♦ Use a grid pattern of the streets to emphasize pedestrian friendly and
walk -able blocks;
Sunmi AL DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 2006 PAGE 7 of 45
I
I
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
♦ Create a district with a variety of uses and tenancies;
♦ Provide a critical mass of uses in the initial phase; and
♦ Provide a framework plan that is both flexible and market responsive.
SUBMITTAL DATE: Novrmnm 21, 2006 PAGE 8 of 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
III. OWNERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP
The master development entity Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC (TLCP)
has demonstrated experience and qualifications as part of the Developer selection
process. The team of Centex Homes, Shea Homes and Shea Properties includes
sufficient depth and breadth of experience in the development of master
infrastructure to implement the horizontal improvements required by the DDA for
the Community Core and the Master Block.
Shea Properties is the managing partner of a second partnership, TLCP2, the
development entity that will implement development within the Community Core
and Master Block. Third party builders are anticipated for certain uses in the
Master Block and greater Community Core (see discussion below).
A. DEVELOPMENT ENTITY OWNERSHIP
Tustin Legacy Community Partners (TLCP) is the master development entity
for the Master Developer footprint as defined in the Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA). TLCP1 will convey the Master Block to a
second entity as described below under the terms of a Purchase and Sale
Agreement or Transfer Agreement which will be submitted to the City for
review under the terms of the DDA.
The Master Block will be managed and implemented by a second entity,
Tustin Legacy Community Partners 2 (TLCP2), formed prior to recordation of
a Sector `B" level Final Map for any portion of that portion of the Community
Core south of Warner (defined by Planning Areas 13 and 14). Shea Properties
shall be the managing partner of the Master Block development entity,
"TLCP2", which will be a Limited Liability Company (LLC) composed of:
♦ Shea Properties (25%);
♦ Shea Homes (25%); and
♦ Centex Homes (50%).
TLCP2 shall be the vertical builder for the Master Block, the central mixed-
use component of the Community Core south of Warner Avenue.
Third party builders may develop single -use components of the Community
Core, which includes residential -only, office -only, and hotel -only uses. For
the. Master Block program, anticipated vertical development by third party
builders will be the residential, hotel, theater, grocery and health club uses.
DDA Attachment 5, Glossary of Defined Terms includes specific language for
pre -approved vertical builders, which are vertical builders that TLCP1 has
SUBMITTAL DATE: NOWNBER 21, 2006 PAGE 9 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
certified in writing to the City, in fort and substance satisfactory to the City
on a variety of criteria based upon the type of development. Generally, the
criteria for Residential For -Sale, Mixed-use/Community Core, Non -Profit
Affordable Residential Income Property Including Senior Housing And
Apartments; Non -Profit Affordable Residential For -Sale include (see DDA
Attachment 5 for a glossary of terms and definitions and criteria related to
pre -approved vertical builders):
♦ Core competency in developing the specific product type;
♦ Stability and strength for specific time periods specified in the DDA,:
♦ High quality decision-making and operational organization;
♦ Capacity to devote necessary resources to the project;
♦ Preferred consideration given to national and regional entities;
♦ Prior projects are successful and of high quality;
♦ Key team leader has specific prior experience working with proposed
product types;
Product/community quality recognized by industry peers for design and
construction;
♦ Favorable references;
♦ Positive historical performance in working within master planned
communities and with the Developer's representatives;
♦ High quality real estate portfolio;
♦ Favorable credit ratings;
♦ Net worth meeting DDA criteria and healthy financial statements and
balance sheets;
♦ Financial commitments sufficient for current development pipeline;
♦ Acceptable access to debt;
♦ Able and willing to provide corporate guarantees or equivalent;
♦ Able to provide evidence of a line of surety bonding in accordance with
the limits identified in the DDA;
♦ No history of adverse actions by finance institutions;
♦ Past or current bankruptcies must be disclosed; and
♦ Proof of insurance from leading carriers adequate for future claims in
the amount stipulated by the DDA.
SUBMITTAL DATE: NOVEMBER 31, 2006 PAGE 10 of 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
TUSTIN LEGACY COMMUNITY PARTNERS (TLCPD
Managing Partnership for Legacy Park
B. LAND VALUATION FOR MASTER BLOCK COMMERCIAL
In accordance with Attachment 14A of the DDA, land value is determined
through an income approach to value to be calculated at the time the land is
sold or transferred for development.
The income approach to value estimates the stabilized year net operating
income (NOI) and the development cost. The estimated stabilized year NOI is
capitalized utilizing the agreed upon 9.5% cap rate to determine the supported
investment. The estimated development costs are then subtracted from the
supported investment to determine the residual land value. If development
costs exceed the supported investment, the amount by which the costs exceed
the supported represents a land value offset against (i.e. subtracted from) the
value of other parcels sold to date.
In addition, Attachment 16 of the DDA outlines a fair share methodology for
determination of lot prices for developer affiliates as well as non -developer
affiliates by product type. The methodology provides the basis for calculation
of revenues and cost, resulting in a residual blue -top lot value.
SUBMITTAL DATE: NupworR21, 2006
PAGE 11 of 45
I
1
i
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
C. STABILIZED OWNERSHIP
Once construction of the Master Block of the Community Core is completed,
the partnership of Shea Properties, Shea Homes, and Centex Homes (TLCP2)
may decide to sell portions of the development. Even in this case, TLCP2 will
continue to be responsible For the completion and construction of the vertical
mixed-use Master Block.
D. KEY LEADERSHIP ROLES
A Leadership Team built from Shea Properties, Shea Homes, Centex Homes,
and the City of Tustin shall work to execute this- Implementation Strategy,
This Team consists of the following key leaders:
TLCPI
♦ Mr. Simon Whitmey, General Manager, TLCPI
♦ Mr. Phil Rafton, Centex Homes
♦ Mr. Robert Shujman, Centex Homes, CFO TLCPI
♦ Mr. Richard Douglass, AICP, President, Centex Homes
♦ Mr. Colm Macken, President and CEO, Shea Properties
♦ Mr. Les Thomas, President, Shea Homes
♦ Ms. Elizabeth Cobb, TLCPI
♦ Mr. Dave Placek, TLCP1
TLCP2
♦ General Manager, TLCP2 (to be named)
♦ Mr, Colm Macken, President and CEO, Shea Properties
♦ Mr. Les Thomas, President, Shea Homes
♦ Mr. Richard Douglass, AICP, President, Centex Homes
♦ Mr. Simon Whitmey, General Manager, TLCPI
City of Tustin
SUBMITTAL
Ms. Christine Shingleton, Assistant City Manager, City of Tustin
Mr. John Buchanan, Redevelopment Program Manager, City of Tustin
TE: NOWNIRER 21.2006
PACE 12 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
IV. LAND USE
A. MASTER BLOCK LAND USE PROGRAM (FIXED)
The Master Block consists of the central vertical mixed-use component of the
Community Core. All of Blocks D18, D19, D20, D21, D24, D25, D26, and
D27 form the Master Block (see Exhibits 1 and 2). All of the Master Block is
located within Conveyance 1 except for D24, which is presently identified as
a Conveyance 2 parcel by the DDA but is desired to be included as part of the
Master Block, subject to City approval and a more defined analysis of the
DDA Business Plan. Inclusion of D24 within the Master Block would allow
for completion of both sides of Main Street to create a symmetrical block. The
Land Use Program is graphically depicted in Exhibit 2, Community Core Land
Use Program, and within Table 1, Land Use Program.
While this Implementation Strategy focuses on the development program for
the Master Block, identification of the land uses within the remainder of the
Community Core south of Warner (PA13 and PA14) are identified here to
provide an appropriate context for the Master Block.
The DDA outlines a proposed development program for Planning Areas 13 &
14, which encompass the Community Core south of Warner. There are four
elements of the DDA which address the uses and program for non-residential
and residential uses in PA13 and PA14:
♦ The DDA proforma;
♦ DDA, Attachment 28, Exhibit A;
♦ DDA, Attachment 28, Exhibit C; and
♦ DDA, Attachment 28, Exhibit E.
Provisions of Attachment 28 are used in defining the required Scope of
Development, analyzed to further refinement as required by the DDA,
Attachment 28, or entitlements and governmental requirements.
Specific Plan
The zoning document which prescribes the maximum development of the
Community Core is the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan.
Subject to the DDA and any changes in requirements to the Scope of
Development per the DDA, the assumed mix of non-residential uses is also
currently subject to the land use trip budget assumptions contained in Section
SUBMITTAL DATE: Novcm R 21, 2006 PAGE 13 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
3.2.4 of the Specific Plan. A proposed development plan may deviate from the
land use mix in the Specific Plan subject to the following:
♦ Approval by the City per the DDA of any modifications to the Scope of
Development in the DDA.
♦ There is sufficient ADT capacity to serve the project and remainder of an
entire neighborhood.
j ♦ Approval of Trip/Land Use Budget modifications by the Public Works
Department and Community Development Department.
I
SUBMITTAL DATE; NOVDIRER 21. 2006 PAGE 14 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK
TABLE 1, LAND USE PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
NET ACRES
BLOCKNUMBER
(AC)
•
RESIDENTIAL
��
GENERAL
GENERAL OFFICE NEIGH.
OFFICE PARK COMMERCIAL
(SF) (SF) (SF)
Comm.
COMMERCIAL
(SF) (SF)
HOTEL
(SF/Rnls)
HEALTH
CLUB
(SF)
. ®'•'
®'
� Ire —�
•Ire
'I III l
1161
---
•
• / • ®
i e --
.III ---
• • �®'
'
I 11 --
I11
—I III I
I I I I
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
BLOcKNiMBER AcRFs
CONVEYANCE 2
NET
REsIDENTIAL
GENERAL
OFFICE NEIGH.
COMMERCIAL
COMMERCIAL
Comm.
THEATER
HOTEL HEALTH
CLUB
MASTER BLACK PHASE 1
--9T-
D24 1
3.6
MASTER BLOCK PHASE 2
MASTER
D24
--
178,000
REMAINDER CONVEYANCE 2
_
D l 1
2.8
39,030
9,757
D12
3.1
127,680
D13B
1.4
26
D17
1.3.
100,000
-
7,000
D23
4.4
125,000
190,000/250
D31
6.0
181.181
D32&33.
11.8
37,400
321,450
8,000
D34
0.4
CONY. 2 TOTAL:
34.2
35
607,110
502,631
9,757
33,000
28,000.
190,000/250
TOTAL MASTER
BLOCK:
25.6
372
816,200
0
0
197,000
28,000
190,000/250 20,000
TOTAL CONV. 1 & 2:
94.1
891
1,622,410
502,631
9,757
218,000
28,000380,000/500
20,000
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
B. MASTER BLOCK PRODUCT PLANS (VARIABLE)
Further detail for the Master Block Land Use Program includes the placement
of residential, commercial and office products within each block. The exact
placement of each product, and thus the resultant FAR of each block may
change as development progresses and as the site plan for the Community
Core is finalized.
Products proposed within the Master Block are described in Table 2,
Nonresidential Product Plan.
TABLE 2, NONRESIDENTIAL PRODUCT PLAN
NONRESIDENTIAL
LAND USE
PIZODUCTTYPE/NUMBER
The in-line retail mix shall include service retail, specialty retail,
restaurant and food services, entertainment, and
storefront/customer oriented offices uses. The design of the
Community Commercial
Master Block allows for both flexibility in size and phasing. The
total building area associated with these uses will range from
80,000 to 165,000 SF. The initial programming envisioned during
the DDA process was approximately 102,700 SF, which included
the grocery use.
Entertainment uses including music, live performance, recreation
Entertainment
or game themed, are envisioned as being integrated with the retail
and restaurant component of the Master Block street
The programming for the Master Block envisions the opportunity
Restaurant
to include 4 to 5 full service restaurants that may range in size
from 4,500 to 8,000 SF each, and totaling 30,000 SF.
The DDA Field Paoli plan envisioned a 25,000 SF grocery use to
Grocery Store
serve the requirement of the mixed-use community. The goal
remains to secure this type of use that will be compatible with the
Whole Foods Market located within The District.
Health Club
Square footage assumed by DDA: 30,000.
Current Proposed Program: 20,000 SF.
Proposed square footage assumed by DDA: 25,000.
Theater
Current Proposed Program: 28,000 SF. The goal is to secure a
performance or an "art theater" concept to support the street
commercial uses.
The initial Master Block Plan proposed 90,000 SF of office in the
Office
initial phase. The current strategy has concentrated approximately
444,000 SF within the parcels noted as Master Block Parcels.
Number of Rooms (total): 500
Hotel
Number of Hotels (minimum): 2, with one including a minimum
of 10,000 SF of conference facilities. Square footage assumed by
ro m: 2 190,000 SF = 380,000 SF
SUBMITTAL DATE: NOVDIRE11 21. 2006 PAGE IS of 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
The Residential Product Plan for the Master Block includes for -sale
townhouse, flats, and live/work units. As with the land use program, the
residential products proposed outside of the Master Block, but within the
Community Core south of Warner, are also included to provide a context to
the Master Block development.
The Implementation Strategy Residential Product Plan is consistent with the
Specific Plan, which allocates a total of 891 dwelling units within the
Community Core south of Warner Avenue, including a maximum of 123
apartments. The Implementation Strategy Residential Product Plan is also
consistent with the DDA, which identifies 891 dwelling units within Planning
Areas 13 and 14, and 372 units within the Master Block.
Table 3, Residential Product Plan identifies the proposed residential program
for the Master Block, Remainder of Conveyance 1, and Conveyance 2 of
PA13 and PA14.
TABLE 3, RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT PLAN
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING
PRODUCT TYPE UNITS
MASTER BLOCK
Townhouses
82
Flats
264
Live/Work
26
Apartments
0
Master Block Total
372
CONVEYANCE 1 — OUTSIDE MASTER BLOCK
Townhouses
177
Flats
193
Live/Work
0
Apartments
123
Conveyance I Total
856
CONVEYANCE 2
Townhouses
26
Flats
9
Live/Work
0
Apartments
0
Conveyance 2 Total
35
Total Residential Units
891
1. Conveyance 1 total does not include 9 units within
the Master Block. Units in Master Block parcel D24 are
included in the Conveyance 2 total.
SUBMITTAL DATE,: Nov n rR 21. 2006 PAGE 19 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
C. MASTER BLOCK PARKING PLAN
The Master Block is the mixed use portion of the Community Core, which has
been previously described herein. Parking for the Master Block will comply
with Section 3,13 of the Specific Plan that permits shared parking, and
requires the establishment of a parking program that defines parking use,
demand and distribution. Therefore, a shared parking study will be prepared at
time of the Neighborhood D Concept Plan submittal so as to determine the
estimated Phase 1 parking requirement of the planned mix of non-residential
uses. Shared parking validation for subsequent site plan approvals will be
established as part of the shared parking program.
For purpose of the Implementation Plan, shared parking has been assumed for
the Master Block portion at a discount rate of 20 -percent. This assumption
recognizes that the required parking for the Master Block will need to be
confirmed as part of the Concept Plan shared parking study, which could
result in either more or less parking from what is assumed herein. Residential
parking within the Master Block will be provided consistent with Section 3.13
of the Specific Plan, which requires resident parking to be provided on-site.
Shared parking of resident parking spaces is not permitted. The assumed
parking program using the 20% reduction for non-residential uses is identified
in Table 4, Assumed Shared Parking Plan. The actual shared parking plan to
be implemented will be dependent on the outcomes of an updated shared
parking study currently in progress.
As established by the Specific Plan, base parking rates for both non-residential
and residential uses are provided in Appendix B of this Implementation Plan.
TABLE 4, ASSUMED SHARED PARKING PLAN
REQUIRED
MASTER REMAINDER
BLOCK CONVEYANCE
CONVEYANCE1
CONVEYANCE
TOTAL TOTAL
2
TOTAL
PA13114
Residential
837
1109
1946
59
2,010
Non -Residential
;420
3021
6441
3861
10,326
Required Total
4,2571
4,130 1
8,3871
3,920
12,336_
PROVIDED
Surface
18
244
262
0
262
Structure
3,771
3,993
7,764
3,714
11,478
On -Street
450
200
650
Provided Total
3,789
4,687
8,476
3,914
12,390
SUBMITTAL DATE: NovFwBm 21.2006 PACE 20 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
V. OWNERSHIP, RESPONSIBILITY AND PHASING OF
IMPROVEMENTS
The Master Block and remainder of the Community Core will be owned and
improved in a number of ways. Exhibit 1, Community Core Parcel Map shows
the boundaries of the Master Block and the extent of public and private roads
within the Master Block and surrounding Community Core. Public roads and
infrastructure will be owned by the City of Tustin or the respective utility agency.
Private roads will be owned by an association(s), or in the case of in -tract
improvements such as driveways, by the private property owner/builder. The
proposed street ownership plan is graphically presented in Exhibit 3, Street
Ownership.
A. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT RESPONSIBILITY
i The Community Core and Master Block include Backbone Infrastructure and
Local infrastructure. Backbone improvements consist of those in Armstrong
Road, Warner Avenue, and South Loop Road.
I. MASTER BLOCK
Subsurface Infrastructure. Within the Master Block, mass grading,
underground improvements, including sewer, water, reclaimed water, dry
utilities, etc. are the responsibility of TLCP. These include local
improvements:
♦ Backbone: None in Master Block
Local Backbone: All local grid streets within the Master Block, both
public and private.
Surface Improvements. Surface improvements within the Master Block,
including streets, landscaping, streetscape amenities, etc. are the
responsibility of TLCP2. These include local improvements:
♦ Backbone: None in Master Block
Local Streets: All local grid streets within the Master Block, both
public and private.
♦ Intract and site improvements, including street furniture and amenities.
2. REMAINDER OF COMMUNITY CORE
In all portions of the Community Core outside of the boundaries of the
Master Block, all underground and surface backbone and local
improvements are the responsibility of TLCP. Infract and site
improvements shall be the responsibility of the vertical builders.
ITTAL DATE: Now,'m R 21, 2006 PAGE 21 OF
NN�No . �s,sw . eeNfi,��er,aN
Pu 197H ALMN PARK Y
i1MNF CN wtP 92'l M27
CONSULTING 90472OS -FAX 04Q z&97d•VfxW RBFccm
•--- Community Core Boundary (PA 13 and 14)
�— Master Block Boundary
D Conveyance Boundary
0 Public Streets
— Private Streets
Note: Early Conveyance 2 (Subject to City Approval)
v 1 I � EXHIBIT 3
STREET OWNERSHIP MAP -CITY RECOMMENDED
City of Tustin, California
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
B. BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS
1. MASTER BLOCK
It is anticipated that within the Master Block, buildings with mixed-use
residential components will be constructed by the residential vertical
builder, Shea Homes or Centex Homes as a shell. TLCP2 will purchase
the shell building from the residential homebuilder, and then construct
tenant improvements. All plans, construction documents and contracts will
be mutually approved.
Buildings within the Master Block that do not include residential
components will be constructed in full by TLCP2 or an approved third
party vertical builder. Anticipated responsibility by Block is outlined
below:
Block #
Anticipated Use
Vertical Builder
Master Block Mixed-use
D21
1) 121 Residential units
1) Residential Builder (shell)* and/or TLCP2
2) Retail
2) TLCP2
D20
Open Space
TLCP2
Master Block Mixed-use
D19
1) 102 Residential units
1) Residential Builder (shell)* and/or TLCP2
2) Retail
2) TLCP2
3) Parking Structure
3) TLCP2
Master Block Mixed-use
D18
1) 104 Residential units
1) Residential Builder (shell)* and/or TLCP2
2) Retail
2) TLCP2
3) Parking Structure
3) TLCP2
Master Block Mixed-use
1) Office
1) TLCP2
D24**
2) Retail
2) TLCP2
3) Theater
3) Third party builder or TLCP2
4) Parking Structure
4) TLCP2
Master Block Mixed-use
1) Office
1) TLCP2
D25
2) Retail
2) TLCP2
3) Grocery and Health Club
3) Third Party builder or TLCP2
4) Parking Structure
4) TLCP2
D26
Hotel
Third Parry Builder
Master Block Mixed-use
1) 84 Residential units
1) Residential Builder (shell)* and/or TLCP2
D27
2) Office
2) TLCP2
3) Retail
3) TLCP2
4) Parking Structure
4) TLCP2
* Residential builder will only construct the shell in the case of vertical mixed-
use with residential component.
** Anticipated Early Conveyance 2 parcel, subject to City approval
SUBMITTAL DATE: Novi'mini 21. 2006 PAGE 23 Or 45
LEGACY PARD MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
2. COMMUNITY CORE OUTSIDE MASTER BLOCK/SINGLE USE COMPONENTS
Single use component building improvements within the Community
Core, including residential, office, and health/hospitality and
entertainment uses, will be constructed by third party vertical builders,
including Shea Properties, Shea Homes or Centex Homes.
C. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PHASING
All infrastructure within the Master Block and larger Community Core is in
the first phase of infrastructure in accordance with the DDA except for a
minor.
D. BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS PHASING
Construction sequencing in the Master Block is anticipated to be as follows:
Vertical Construction Phase I
1. Nonresidential mixed-use parking structures in blocks D24, D25, and D27
constructed by TLCP2
2. Residential mixed-use parking structures in Blocks D18, D19, D21, D22,
constructed by Residential Vertical Builder;
Vertical Construction Phase 2
3. Residential mixed-use shell by Residential Vertical Builder
4. Non residential mixed-use shell by TLCP2
Vertical Construction Phase 3
5. Stand-alone residential by Residential Vertical Builder
6. Stand-alone nonresidential by TLCP2 and third party Nonresidential
Vertical Builder
SUBMITTAL DATE: Novr%NfnrR 21. 2006 PAGE 24 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK . IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
VI. MARKETING AND POSITIONING PLAN
A. OFFICE — "THE WORK ENVIRONMENT
The Work Environment of the Community Core includes multiple and flexible
product types, including: storefront/creative office, loft -mezzanine office,
low-rise office campus, mid- to high-rise office, and live/work office spaces.
The delivery strategy is to simultaneously deliver all of the product types in
three delivery methods, speculative office building, land sales to users, and
build -to -suit.
The Work Environment is environmentally advanced, and includes LEED
certified buildings and transportation services. Connectivity and wireless
accessibility are also key attributes of the Community Core Work
Environment.
The Work Environment includes a variety of employee amenities, such as
restaurants, retail, entertainment, health and fitness services, medical uses,
recreation and leisure opportunities, and day care.
1. COMPETITION
Competition for the office uses, or "Work Environment", includes South
Coast Metro, Spectrum -Pacifica, Park Place, Fashion Island, Irvine
Concourse, Irvine Towers, Jamboree Plaza, and the "Airport Top 5". The
location of office competition is depicted in Work Environment
Competition.
a. OPPORTUNITIES
The competitive work environment for the Community Core has been
designed principally as a singular stand-alone use. With the exception
of South Coast Metro, and potentially Park Place, the amenities for
employees and customers that is planned within the Community Core
does not exist in the marketplace. Additionally, the availability of
transportation, including the nearby airport, provides a strong
positioning opportunity.
b. THREATS
Office uses within the Community Core could be threatened by
oversupply, and a downward pressure on rents, Office uses will be
competing with The Irvine Company, and while this could be viewed
as an opportunity, The Irvine Company is a great competitor.
SUBMITTAL DATE: NoimM 3RR 21, 2006 PAGE 25 OF
W725 9LTON PARKWAY
rPN�C LIFCRNIA 92.8-P097
CONSULTING 9094:29915 • FAX 949472 73 • wrvw PPFr�m
- South Coast Metro
- Spectrum - Pacifica
- Park Place
- Fashion Island
- Irvine Concourse
- Irvine Towers
- Airport Top 5
- Atrium
- Hines
- MacArthur Court
- Lake Shore Towers
- Bay View
EXHIBIT 4
WORK ENVIRONMENT COMPETITION
City of Tustin, California
LEGACY PARK MASTER. BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
2. ANTICIPATED CAPTURE RATE
Based on The Concord Group report dated November 17, 2004, Legacy
Park is project to capture 20% of demand for office and business park use
in the area. With a 20%n capture, Legacy Park has a market opportunity to
absorb 390,000 square feet of office and business park space per year,
With a more conservative capture rate of 15%, Legacy Park is projected to
absorb 300,000 square feet of office and business park space per year.
The anticipated capture rate includes land sales to users, build -to -suit, and
speculative development, for both office and business park.
B. STREET RETAIL, RESTAURANT, AND ENTERTAINMENT — "TRE STREET
ENVIRONMENT
The Community Core's "Street Environment" is composed of its street retail,
restaurant, and entertainment uses, and will be positioned by its grid street
pattern, a Main Street and park block, and its vibrant mix of uses and
tenancies.
"The Street" is currently anticipated to be a street, dominated by restaurants,
entertainment, and social environments. The specialty and lifestyle retail uses
shall be tenants that are typically compatible with these uses, or discretionary
purchases. In addition the retail tenants will include uses that provide goods
and services required in the course of business, to both the companies and the
employees of the companies located in Legacy Park.
I. COMPETITION
Competition for retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses, or "The Street
Environment", includes The District, South Coast Metro, Main Place
Mall, The Block at Orange, Market Place, Spectrum, Park Place; Fashion
Island, and beach street areas along the coast. The location of retail,
restaurant and entertainment use competition is depicted in Street
Environment Competition.
a. THE DISTRICT
Opportunities: The District is a "power center" and entertainment
venue providing indirect exposure to the mature segment of the
customer family, while the Legacy Park Community Core is directly
marketing to the mature consumer. Marketing for The District has
raised the level of awareness throughout the retail community, and
there is a significant size niche of retailers and restaurateurs who
would prefer not to be in a "power center" environment.
SUBMITTAL DATE! Nowmm 21.2006 PAGE 27 or 45
• • • 14)25 ALTON PARrc.FY
IRNNECGL RNI<Y2G1R-20:]
CONSULTING w9n2Zw5 . FAX 9494""' . xwx.FLT'..
- The District
- South Coast Metro
- Market Place
- Spectrum
- Park Place
- Fashion Island
- The Block
- Beach Streets
EXHIBIT 5
STREET ENVIRONMENT COMPETITION
City of Tustin, California
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
;.� Threats: If not properly and aggressively branded and positioned
distinctively different from The District, the Community Core may
experience a risk of association.
b. SOUTH COAST METRO
Opportunities: The South Coast Metro area was Orange County's
serious overture into creating a mixed-use business environment that
includes office, restaurant, entertainment, retail and residential. It has
validated the success of the concept as it continues to grow.
Threats: South Coast Metro will be able to compete for some of the
available tenancies, but most opportunities will be small scale infill
developments. The impact on residential sales and marketing is the
largest potential threat from South Coast Metro.
,. MARKET PLACE
Opportunity: The Tustin Market Plan has created a significant brand
for the City of Tustin as a retail community. The opportunity may be
to take a retail segment that does not currently do well in a "power
center" environment and relocate it to a "Street" environment.
Threats: Similar to the threats presented by The District, if not
properly and aggressively branded and positioned distinctively
different from the Market Place, the Community Core may experience
a risk of association. A location and separation of more than 2 miles to
the east and on the far side of I-5 assist in overcoming this threat.
d. SPECTRUM
Opportunity: The Spectrum operates as a more singular mix of uses,
not a mixed-use environment. The retail center essentially operates as
an open air regional mall. There are examples of Spectrum tenants
who may have better sales outside of the mall environment.
Threats: The Irvine Company and the Segrestroms have radius
restricted a significant percentage of the national and regional retailers
from operating a business within Tustin Legacy. In addition, even
` without a restriction both of these companies have significant strength
in influencing potential tenants' leasing decisions.
SUBMITTAL DATE: Nommnm 21, 2006 PAGE 29 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
e. PARR PLACE
Opportunity: As with South Coast Metro, Park Place is growing into a
mixed-use community, helping to validate this type 'of living
environment.
Threats: Maguire has the capability and reputation of radical planning
and development. The entitlement exists for Maguire to re -plan and
refocus this site into a very competitive street retail and mixed-use
environment. While the timing of Park Place may lag Legacy Park,
this is our greatest threat.
i. FASHION ISLAND
Opportunity: Fashion Island, like the Spectrum, is more singular in use
and function as an open air regional mall, without the strong
entertainment component that exists at the Spectrum. Observing
potential restaurant operations and trends may be the best opportunity
Fashion Island Fashion Island provides.
Threats: Similar to the Spectrum, radius restrictions may exist for
Fashion Island's national and regional retailers, however Fashion
Island is 8 miles away from Tustin Legacy.
9. MAIN PLACE MALL
Opportunity: The Main Place Mall, located in the City of Santa Ana,
seven and a half miles north of Tustin Park, will be going through a
transition period, as they implement the re -tenanting of the center
required by the merger of Robinson -May and Macy's. Currently J.C.
Penney is planning to open in the former Robinsons May Women's
store, and Macy's Home/Men's Store is opening in the former
Robinson's -May Men's/Furniture location. Most of the tenants within
the center are traditional mall tenants and will not seek to relocate to a
street environment, but this potential should be monitored.
Threat: Due to its traditional indoor mall characteristics, and
Westfield's ownership characteristics, Main Place Mall should not be a
direct competitor to the retail street environment.
L. THE BLOCK AT ORANGE
Opportunity: The Block of Orange is located in the City of Orange,
nine miles north of Tustin Park. The Mall is owned by the Mills
Corporation. The Block at Orange features manufacturers and retail
'� SUBMITTAL DATE: NOVNI)ER 21. 2006 PAGE 30 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
outlets including Old Navy, Ann Taylor Factory Store, Off 5th Saks
1 Fifth Avenue Outlet as well as entertainment venues including AMC
1 30 Theatres, Dave & Buster's and Lucky Strike Lanes and various
themed restaurants. Upon opening, Vans Skate Park was the largest
skate park in the world. This created a significant brand for the center.
The AMC theatre is one of their most successful locations. The
opportunity will be to find those tenants that might prefer to be in a
street location targeted a customer different than the Block's or the
District's core customer.
I
Threat. The Mills Corporation has previously attempted to re -entitle
portions of the site to high density residential. This effort has been
rejected by the City of Orange. In the event they do achieve an
entitlement for a mixed-use environment, they may be able to compete
for this customer.
i. BEACH STREETS
Opportunity: There are four or five beach communities from Laguna
Beach to the south, to Seal Beach to the north, that have been great
incubators of non-traditional retailers and restaurateurs. These Beach
street environments will be an outstanding source of tenants for Tustin
Legacy.
Threats: Not a significant threat, unless the vision is not delivered
upon.
2. ANTICIPATED CAPTURE RATE
A "street" retail environment is a unique market and does not have a
capture rate that can be readily quantified. Capture rate analysis applies to
the office and industrial markets.
C. MARKETING STRATEGY - NONRESIDENTIAL
The following is an outline of the marketing strategy for nonresidential uses
within the Master Block and Community Core:
I. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
a. Retail
i. Street & neighborhood Retail
ii. Entertainment
iii. Lifestyle & specialty
iv. Service retail
SUBMITTAL DATE: NOVENIBER 21.2006 PAGE 31 of 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK
1
I b. Restaurant
i. Full service
ii. Delicatessens
1 iii. Quick service
iv. Vendors, kiosks, & carts
1
c. Entertainment
i. Theatre (film, performance)
ii. Live performance
iii. Night club
i iv. Lounge
v. Theme venues
d. Hospitality
l e. Office (Multi -tenant)
I i. High -Rise Office
ii. Mid -Rise Office
f. Corporate headquarters, sole -occupancy
i. Single building
ii, Campus
g. Health & Care
i. Fitness
ii. Medical office
Jiii. Medical services
iv. Day care
h. Institutional
i. Religious
ii. Community service
2. STRATEGY OF DELIVERRY
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
a. Maximize the value of the Master Block/mixed-use street district
b. Maximize the value of "Legacy Park"
c. Respond to the market/customer supply and demand conditions
d. Predication of future supply constraint or niches
e. Flexibility in the delivery of space in size & configuration
SUBMITTAL DATE. NOVEMRER 21, 2006 PAGE 32 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
f. Capture opportunities to "seed" and "validate"
3. METHOD OF DELIVERY
a. Speculative Building of Product Type
i. Office
1. High -Rise Office
2. Mid -Rise Office
ii. Retail
1. Street & neighborhood (grocery)
2, Lifestyle & specialty
3. Service retail
iii. Restaurant
1. Full service
2. Delicatessens
3. Quick service
4. Vendors, kiosks, & carts
iv. Entertainment
1. Theatre (film, performance)
2. Live performance
3. Night club
4. Lounge
5. Theme venues
v. Transitional uses
1. Office to retail
2. Service retail to street retail or restaurants
b. Build -to -suit
i.. Headquarters, sole -occupancy
1. Single building
2. Campus
ii. Hospitality
iii. Health & Care
1. Fitness
2. Medical office
3. Medical services
4. Daycare
c. Land Sales
i. Headquarters, sole -occupancy
1. Single building
SUBMITTAL DATE: Novrmnni 2I, 2006 PAGE 33 OF 45
J LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK
2. Campus
II ii, Hospitality
iii. Health & Care
1. Senior Housing
2. Fitness
3, Medical office
4. Medical services
5. Day care
iv. Institutional
1. Religious
2. Community Service
4. POSITIONING AND MECHANICS
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
a. Positioning on Product Features
i, The vision for the live -work -play community
1. Legacy Park
2. Walkable
3. Accessible
4. Leaming
5. Convenience and availability of goods and services
6. Quality of design & materials
7. Recreation
ii. Buildings & facilities
1. Systems
2. Technology
3. Convenience
4. Flexibility
5. Fundamentals, with an eye & ear on the "new or next"
generation
6. Quality of design & material
b. Positioning on Product Benefits
i, A more successful business center
1. Customer driven, based upon the wants and needs of the
present & future customer
2. A business community and product that has been created from
the "inside out'
3. Ease of doing business
4. Attract & retaining world class employees
. I SUBMITTAL DATE: NovumRr:n 21, 2006 PAGE 34 of 45
J
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
c. Positioning Based Upon the Product Attributes:
i. 20,000 daytime and evening employees located within a ten-
minute walk at build -out
ii. 1,750 residents within a five-minute walk
iii. 50,000 residents within a ten-minute drive
iv. 350,000 population within a five -mile trade area
v. $98,500 average household income within a five -mile trade area
vi. The following average daily traffic volumes (ADT) on adjacent
streets
♦ Red Hill Avenue — 48,000
♦ Jamboree Road — 78,400
♦ Tustin Ranch Road — 46,000
♦ Warner Avenue — 6 1,000
♦ Barranca Avenue — 31,500
♦ Edinger Avenue — 23,300
d. Positioning for a Specific Use or User
i. Your Legacy
1. A place you are proud of
2. A place your kids are proud of
3. Close to home, more time for families
ii. Create value
1. Cost savings
2. ROI or ROA
3. Ease of execution of the decision
e. Positioning Against Another Product or Competitor
i. You can have your park and airport too!
ii. Flexibility, the ability to adapt to unexpected needs
iii. The City of Tustin wants you!
1. Easy to do business
iv. Accessibility to the best labor force it the world
v. Accessibility to the best transpiration system
1. Roads
2. Commuter rail
3. Airport
4. Bikeways
ISUBMITTAL DATE: NOVEMBER 21. 2006 PAGE 35 OF
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
5, PRODUCT PRICING
a. If necessary, slight undercut of the primary competition to kick-off the
infancy absorption period
b. Pari-persu pricing during the validation period
c. Leading the market during the maturation period through the
recognition of the product's value, location & relationships
6. TARGET CUSTOMER
a. Who are they, customers who wants to be a Legacy Park customer for
life
i. New business concepts or start ups
ii. Existing businesses within a 50 mile radius
iii. Rey executives who live within 25 miles wishing to cut commute
iv. Corporate executives relocating or consolidating company
operations
v. Friends, associates, partners
b. Why they want to move:
i. New locations for additional market share
ii. Expansion of existing business in the area
iii. Expansion of existing business new to the area
iv. Consolidation or restructuring
v. Improved business environment
1. Financial
2, Employee attraction & retention
3. Image
4. Business relationship (supply/vendor/landlord)
7. PRODUCT PROMOTION
a. Exposure of the property to the highest number of customers in the
shortest period of time
b. Team
i. TLCP 1& 2 Senior Vice President of Office Leasing and
Marketing
ii. TLCP I & 2 Senior Vice President of Retail Leasing and
Marketing
SUBMITTAL DATE: Novrniini 21, 2006 PAGE 36 OF
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
iii. Real estate advisory services (Outside third party brokerage)
iv. City of Tustin
v. Existing customer base
c. Mediums or tools
i. Leverage existing relationships
ii. Industry groups
iii. Electronic, and print communications
iv. Advertising
v. Networking
vi. Public Relations
vii, Research and data collection (street)
D. RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
With its central location, the residential portion of the Master Block and
greater Community Core has the opportunity to be a vibrant sustainable
contrast to the traditional suburban form. As a central core to the Legacy Park
Development, the residential community will be bolder with more dramatic
forms. The residential community includes multiple product types with a
combination of flats, live work and town homes. The products are configured
such that they provide vaned experiences within the entire Community Core
relative to their integration with the main street retail, office district and linear
park.
Today, the physical form of Orange County is rapidly changing in response to
the growing multi -cultural and multi -generational demographics. In response,
the residential community of the Master Block and greater Community Core
includes a variety of residential amenities, such as close proximity to regional
transportation, restaurants, retail, entertainment, health and fitness services,
medical uses, educational opportunities, recreation and leisure opportunities,
and daycare.
Today the future of Orange County residential living is changing as the
availability of land for new planned communities and residential subdivisions
dwindles. While all sources continue to identify a strong demand for
residential development (particularly given the jobs/housing imbalance), the
provision of residential units will be provided more and more through higher
density redevelopment projects. It appears this new development will occur in
two basic categories: towers, or projects up to four stories. It is also important
to recognize that the OCTA has designated the MetroLink system as its transit
spine for the future, which makes the nearby Tustin Transit Station an
important factor in this project. The John Wayne Airport is also a
Jtransportation attraction that adds to the regional transportation system.
SUBMITTAI. DATE: NOvrmnm 21, 2006 PACE 37 OF 45
I LEGACY PARK MASTER. BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
1. COMPETITION
' Competition for the Legacy Park residential includes adjoining South
Coast Metro, Newport Center, Newport Airport Area, Irvine Spectrum,
Anaheim's Platinum Triangle, and Irvine Business Complex (IBC)
residential communities. In addition to these adjoining planned urban
residential developments, future developments such as Irvine's Heritage
Fields and the redevelopment area of Eastern Santa Ana.
A. OPPORTUNITIES
The residential environment for the Community Core has been
designed to provide relation to the adjacent retail and office uses. With
the exception of South Coast Metro, Central Park, and Park Place, the
amenities and resources available to the residents within the
Community Core do not exist in the Orange County marketplace. It
should also be recognized that the products provided in those areas are
primarily high-rise and therefore seem to attract a different market
segment. Additionally, the availability of transportation, recreation,
and airport provides a strong positioning opportunity.
B. THREATS
Residential uses within the Community Core could be threatened by
adjoining oversupply, and a downward pressure on for sale vertical
living. Residential units will be competing with IBC, the planned
Spectrum residential development and Newport residential
communities entitled and planned.
2. ANTICIPATED CAPTURE/ABSORPTION RATE
1 Based on The Concord Group report dated November 17, 2004, Legacy Park is
project to capture 20% of demand for residential, office and business park use in
f the area. With a 20% capture, the Tustin Park Community has a market
J opportunity to absorb 650 residential units per year.
`1 The potential market for the Master Block/Community Core residential product
1 types is moderate to strong. Based on square footage ranging from 1,300 and
1,900 square feet, the potential absorption of the market is about 150 units per
year. For this reason, marketing efforts will need to emphasize the unique
location and amenities Legacy Park provides.
SUBMITTAL DATE: NOVEMBF1121. 2006 PAGE 38 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
E. MARKETING STRATEGY - RESIDENTIAL
The following is an outline of the marketing strategy for residential uses
within the Master Block and Community Core:
1. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
a. Residential Master Block
i. Three Story Tuck Under Town Homes (1,700 SF Average)
ii. Live Work (1,500 SF average)
iii. Flats (2,200 SF average)
iv. Flats (1,400 SF average)
b. Residential Outside Master Block
i. Three Story Tuck Under/Surface Town Homes (1,800 SF average)
ii. Flats (1,700 SF average)
iii. Apartments (123 maximum)
2. STRATEGY OF DELIVERY
a. Maximize the value of central Orange County location.
b. Maximize value of the Master Block/mixed-use for live -work
community,
c. Maximize the value of a walkable community.
d. Maximize the value of recreational amenities.
e. Respond to residential market demand to maximize unit value.
f. Flexibility in the delivery of unit and improvements.
g. Timely provision of commercial uses necessary for the "vibrant
community".
3. POSITIONING AND MECHANICS
a, Positioning on Product Features
i. The vision for the live -work -play community
1. Legacy Park
2. Walkable
3. Accessible
4. Learning
5. Convenience and availability of goods and services
6. Quality of design & materials
7. Recreation
8. Accessibility to transit services and airport
SUBMITTAL. DATE: NovE fnm 21. 2006
PAGE 39 OF 45
1
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
i�
ii. Buildings & Facilities
1. Technology
2. Convenience
-� 3. Flexibility
4. Fundamentals, with an eye & ear on the "new or next"
generation
1 5. Quality of design & material
4 b. Positioning on Product Benefits
i. A more successful mixed-use residential community
1. Emphasis on wants and needs of a flexible living space.
2. A community created from the "inside out."
3. Attract and retain long-term residents.
c. Positioning Based Upon the Product Attributes:
i. Two new schools (K-8 and high school) and Education District
ii, New Community Center
iii. Linear Park with passive recreational amenities
iv. Location to retail
v. Location to office - 20,000 daytime and evening employees located
within a ten-minute walk at build -out
vi, Location to regional transportation network
d. Positioning for a Specific Use or User
i. Your Legacy
1. A place you are proud of
2. A place your kids are proud of
3. Close to home, more time for families
4. Live in the next generation of Orange County
ii. Create value
1. Cost savings
2. ROI or ROA
3. Ease of execution of the decision
4. Save gas; most needs are met without using a car
e. Positioning Against Another Product or Competitor
i. You can have your park and airport too!
ii. Flexibility, the ability to adapt to needs
iii. The City of Tustin wants you as part of their community
iv. Accessibility to the best transpiration system
SUBMITTAL DATE: Nomfli n 21, 2006 PAGE 40 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
1. Roads, both arterials and freeway access
2. Commuter rail
3. Airport
4. Bikeways
5. Proximity to Orange County's Transit Spine
6. Local shuttles
CSIaKFER-31=1 ROM
a. Who is the Legacy Park Resident? Residents seeking a better quality
of life, having more time to live and less time commuting.
i.First time home owner.
ii.Young Married couples.
iii.Young Professional.
iv.Move down.
v.Executive.
5. PRODUCT PROMOTION
a. Exposure of the property to the highest number of customers in the
shortest period of time.
b. Mediums or tools
i. Research and data collection (street)
ii. Industry groups
iii. Electronic, and print communications
iv. Advertising
v. Networking
vi, Public Relations
SUBMITTAL DATE: NovrMrtra.21, 2006 PAGE 41 OF 45
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
VII. FINANCING PLAN
A. INFRASTRUCTURE
A portion of the backbone infrastructure will be financed through CFD bonds.
The funding of the remainder of the infrastructure will be obtained from funds
identified by the Master Developer„ TLCP1.
TLCP1 may approach transportation agencies for funding to support
MetroLink Transit service, as well as other transit opportunities.
TLCPI will pursue other available funds that may enhance or support the
vision for the urban district.
B. MASTER BLOCK/VERTICAL MIXED-USE
In -tracts, site work, and vertical construction of the Master Block will be
conventionally funded by the vertical developer for the mixed-use component,
TLCP2 and individual vertical builders.
C. REMAINDER OF THE COMMUNITY CORE
In -tracts, site work, and vertical construction of those portions outside of the
Master Block will be funded by a third party builder approved by the City or a
member of the TLCP partnership: Shea Properties, Shea Homes or Centex
Homes.
SUBMITTAL DATE: NOHfDIRrR 21. 2006 PAGE 42 OF 45
i
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
VIII. MONITORING OF IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
A. PURPOSE
The purpose of monitoring is to identify issues associated with physical
construction progress, both horizontal and vertical; progress on achieving
the anticipated tenant mix and absorption for the Master Block; and to track
changes in the marketplace that will affect the success and timing of Master
Block build -out.
The following outlines a program of reporting, both internal (within
TLCP/TLCP2) and with City leadership and policy makers.
B. SUCCESS METRICS
1. TARGET GOALS
Target goals for the Master Block component of the Community Core
include:
♦ 100°% of the September 2009 construction goals.
♦ Achievement of a no less than a 5% negative variance of proforma
costs and revenues.
♦ 95% occupancy of Phase 1 street tenancies within 180 days of
completion.
♦ 95% occupancy of Phase 1 office building within 180 days of
completion.
♦ Secure a 100,000 square foot regionally recognizable office tenant.
Sell all residential units with no less than a 5% negative variance to
business plan.
2. STRATEGIES FOR CHANGE OR COURSE CORRECTION
A. WEEKLY/BI-WEEKLY
Internal. TLCP1 and TLCP2 maintain a schedule of weekly
operations committee meetings to review progress and assess the
current entitlement, plan approval, mitigation monitoring,
marketing/sales/leasing, and construction in accordance with an
overall project schedule. This internal process will continue through
construction.
JSUBMITTAL DATE: Novrmnrn 21 2006 PAGE 43 OF 45
l
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
�l
City Coordination. The TLCP1 General Manager and Assistant City
Manager will meet weekly or bi-weekly on all Legacy Park
implementation issues. This informal forum is the first
communication link between key leadership on routine and developing
issues of concern.
B. MONTHLY
Internal. The TLCP1/TLCP2 team will develop a reporting and
monitoring format to identify the status of:
♦ Infrastructure implementation
11 ♦ Construction management
Entitlement/plan approvals
j♦ Marketing, sales, and leasing
♦ Building starts
1 ♦ Tenant mix
1 ♦ Schedule, including DDA milestones per DDA Attachment 17.
City Coordination. The TLCP1 General Manager and Assistant City
Manager meet weekly on all Legacy Park implementation issues. This
informal forum is the first communication link between key leadership
on routine and developing issues of concern. The last meeting of the
month will include a briefing on schedule and implementation. Should
issues arise requiring changes to the Master Block program, they will
be identified.
C. QUARTERLY
Internal. The TLCP1/TLCP2 team will develop a reporting and
monitoring format to identify the status of:
♦ Infrastructure implementation, both City and 7LCP projects
♦ Construction management
♦ Entitlement/plan approvals
♦ Marketing, sales, and leasing
♦ Building and Construction activity
I
♦ Tenant mix
♦ Schedule, including DDA milestones per DDA Attachment 17.
SUBMITTAL DATE: NO VENBER 21, 2006 PAGE 44 OF 45
I
I
LEGACY PARK MASTER BLOCK IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
City Coordination. A summary table will be provided to the City
leadership team with issues highlighted if changes to the development
program are contemplated.
3. ANNQAL REPORTING
Report. On an annual basis, TLCPUTLCP2 will prepare a joint status
report that will provide information relative to:
♦ Summary report of conveyances and fiscal reporting per DDA and any
subsequent Development Agreement (DA)
♦ Construction Progress: subsurface infrastructure (TLCP1
responsibility)
♦ Construction Progress: surface improvements in the Master Block
(TLCP2 responsibility)
♦ Entitlements and plan approvals fox vertical starts
♦ Purchase Agreements in place
Land use mix compared to the anticipated program
♦ Market update to confirm program
Briefing. A report of progress to City from TLCP, and a subsequent joint
City management staff/TLCP/TLCP2 briefing is anticipated on a yearly
basis after approval of report by City staff, to inform policy makers of
progress on Master Block entitlement, construction, and occupancy.
, , SUaMITTAI. DATE: NovrMRaR 21, 2006 PAGE 45 or 45
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. DETAILED LAND USE PROGRAM TABLE
< I m
q
s
O
a
4Ol
GG
M
n
�
N
O
o
p
p
o
�
N
N
lll"'S55
6
G
0
a
o c
r
N
O
b C
o
'm
p
o
p
o
O
c
a
a
o
o
$
d
o
a
p
O
0
�
m
m
o
O O
o
N
g
o0
O
w
U
`
oQ.
�
d
0 R
f
1
P
O
n
a
ry
N
p
h
0
o
qqp
O O
p
O
e
m
a n
0
m
M
O
o
� b
N N
N Ntp
O
N
�
-LL��LL�LLF�LLI,I
311c
O
�
N
N
4
e
O
O
b�
K
n
7
rqi
J
N a
�
F
N
x d
m e
2
g v
p ffi
o
@ � c
i
Nh
NIM
N
G
a
R
o
y i
o
y ci m
U
6
aF
C
< I m
q
s
O
a
GG
M
n
�
N
H
a
o
�
N
G
a
�
r
N
n
N'
o
'm
p
o
p
o
O
c
O
O
d
p
O
0
�
m
m
N
N
g
O
w
U
`
oQ.
�
d
F
d
o
N
�L
Z
a
O
o
$
p
O
m
o
0
m
M
O
o
O
O
�
o
O
�
N
N
4
e
O
O
n
M
�
N
tD
r
n
�
N
H
e
o
O
G
a
O
n
N
o
'm
�
m
r
a
n
N
o
'm
A
d
d
T
U
t
N
o
0
�
m
m
F
O
w
U
`
oQ.
�
d
F
d
o
N
�L
Z
APPENDIX B. PARKING TABLES
NON-RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS WITHOUT SHARED
PARKING DISCOUNTING
(Table 3-6 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan)
Parking Spaces per Square Foot
use'rype
of Gross Floor Area
Auditoriums, theaters, sports arenas,
1 space/3 seats or 1 for every 35 square feet of gross floor area
stadiums
where there are no fixed seats
Auto Repair
1 space/400 square feet of gross floor area
Auto Sales
1 space/400 square feet of gross floor area
Auto Service Station
2 spaces plus 4 for each service bay
Auto washing and cleaning
2.5 spaces/washing stall
establishments, except self-service
Banks, commercial
1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area
Barbershops or beauty parlors
1 space/200 square feet
Bowling lanes and billiard halls
5 spaces/alley plus 2 for each billiard table plus required parking
for other use on the site
Churches, temples and other places of
1 space/3 fixed seats within the main auditorium or for every 35
assembly not specified elsewhere
square feet of seating area within the main auditorium where there
are no fixed seats; 18 lineal inches of bench shall be considered a
fixed seat
Clubs, lodge halls, union headquarters
1 space/75 square feet of gross floor area
Convalescent and nursing homes,
1 space/4 beds
homes for the aged, rest homes,
children's homes, sanitariums,
emergency shelter, group transitional
housing
Dance halls
1 space/7 square feet of dance floor area, plus 1 space/35 square
feet of additional gross floor area
Day nurseries, including pre-schools
1 space/employee and teacher plus 1 for each 5 children (12 for
and nursery schools
each 10 children if adequate drop-off facilities are rovided
Dry cleaners
1 s ace/250 square feet of gross floor area
Handball/racquetball/tennis facility
1.5 spaces/court plus the spaces required for additional uses on the
site
Health clubs and spas
1 space 1150 square feet of gross floor area. (For the purposes of
this subsection, swimming pool area shall be counted as floor area
Hotel/motel/extended stay hotel
1 space/guest unit, plus 2 spaces for resident manager or owner,
plus requirements for related commercial uses, plus 1 space for
each 50 square feet of gross floor area for assembly or conference
rooms.
Laundromats
1 space/3 machines or 1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area,
whichever is greater
Libraries
1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area
Lumber yards, retail nurseries
1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area for retail sales, plus 1
for each 1,000 square feet of open area devoted to display and
storage
Manufacturing, assembly
1 space/500 square feet of gross floor area, but not less than 2
spaces/3 employees. If there is more than 1 shift, the number of
employees on the largest shift shall be used.
RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS
(Table 3-4 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan)
Parking Spaces per Square
Use Tv e
of GrossFloor
1 space/500 square feet of gross enclosed area, plus the spaces
Swimming pools, commercial
required for additional uses on the site
Warehouses, storage buildings or
1 space/ 1,000 square feet of gross floor area for the first 20,000
structures used exclusively for storage
square feet. I space for each 2,000 square feet for the second
purposes
20,000 square feet. I space for each 4,000 square feet in excess of
40,000 square feet, plus space for other uses. If there is more than
Attached Single -Family
one shift, the number of employees on the largest shift shall be
used in determining parking requirements.
Wholesale establishments and
1 space/1,000 square feet of gross floor area, less that area devoted
warehouses not used exclusively for
to office or sales, plus 1 for each 250 square feet of sales area
storage
1.5
RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS
(Table 3-4 of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan)
Covered/AssignedSpaces
HousingTypeUnassigned
Spaces per Unit
SpacesRequired
Guest
Detached Single-F=y Single -F= 2.0
2 Gaza a
er unit
Attached Single -Family
Studio
1.0
1 Garage
per unit
1 Bedroom
1.5
1 Garage
:.25
per unit
2 Bedroom
2.0
2 Garage
5 per unit
3 Bedroom
2.0
2 Garage
5 per unit
4 Bedroom
2.5
2 Gara a
5 per unit
Condominium and Multiple -
Family Units
Studio
1.0
1 Garage or carport
.25 per unit
1 Bedroom
1.5
1 Garage or carport
.25 per unit
2 Bedroom
2.0
2 Garage or carport
.25 per unit
3 Bedroom
2.0
2 Garage or carport
.25 per unit
4 Bedroom
2.5
2 Gara a or ca ort
25 unit
25a
Patio Homes
2.0
2 Garage
0.5 er unit
50 percent of the guests ace required may be fulfilled with on -street
parking.
FIRST AMENDMENT TO
TUSTIN LEGACY
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(MASTER DEVELOPER)
This FIRST AMENDMENT TO TUSTIN LEGACY DISPOSITION AND
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MASTER DEVELOPER) ("Amendment') is
entered into as of March 1 2007 (the "Effective Date") by and between the CITY OF
TUSTIN (as more fully defined in Section 1.4.1 of the Original DDA (as defined below),
"City") and Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company (as defined in Section 1.4.2 of the Original DDA, the "Developer"). The City
and the Developer are sometimes referred to herein individually as a "Party" and
collectively as the "Parties."
RECITALS
A. City and the Developer entered into that certain Tustin Legacy Disposition and
Development Agreement (Master Developer) dated as of May 3, 2006 (the "Original
DDA") pursuant to which, among other things, the City agreed to sell and/or lease or
sublease, and the Developer agreed to purchase and/or lease or sublease, the Property (as
defined in the Original DDA) and the Parties agreed to a scope of development of the
Property. Initially capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the respective
meanings assigned to such terms in the Original DDA.
B. The Original DDA was memorialized in that certain Memorandum of Tustin
Legacy Disposition and Development Agreement, which was recorded May 8, 2006 as
Instrument No. 200600308658 of the Official Records of Orange County ("Official
Records").
C. City and the Developer each desire to amend the. Original DDA and adopt this
Amendment as set forth below. The Original DDA as amended by this Amendment is
referred to herein as the "Agreement".
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals, which are
hereby incorporated in the operative provisions of this Amendment by this reference and
other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the Parties further agree as follows:
1. Modification of Several Sections of the Original DDA as it relates to
Escrow Closing and Default provisions. The following sections of the Original DDA are
hereby amended as follows:
(a) Section 1.13.1(b) of the Original DDA is hereby amended and restated as
follows:
18403:6560186.5
"(c) Increased Deposit. If, for any reason other than a Material Default
of Tustin, the Developer (i) does not acquire the Phase 1 Conveyance Property on
the Phase 1 Closing Date, as such Closing Date may be extended in accordance
with Section 3.2.1 and Section 3.2.6, the Performance Deposit shall be increased
by $1,000 per day for the period commencing on the Phase 1 Closing Date, as
such date may be modified and ending on the date when the Developer acquires
the Phase 1 Conveyance Property. The amount of any increase in the
Performance Deposit pursuant to the preceding sentence shall not be applicable to
the purchase price for any Phase."
(b) Section 3.2.1 of the Original DDA is hereby amended and restated as
follows:
3.2.1 Phase I Closing Date. The "Phase I Closing Date"; shall mean
April 23, 2007 except that such date may be extended upon mutual written
agreement of the parties."
(c) Section 3.2 of the Original DDA is hereby amended to add the following
as a new Section 3.2.6:
"3.2.6 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Section
3.2, in the event that the Phase 1 Closing Date does not timely occur due to a
failure on the part of the Developer to satisfy each of the conditions set forth in
Section 3.2.5, except to the extent that the City has, in its sole and absolute
discretion, waived any of such conditions, and provided such failure is not as a
result of a Material Default on the part of the Developer, then, upon written notice
to the City the Developer shall be entitled to obtain up to two (2) successive
extensions of the Phase 1 Closing Date, each such extension to be a period not to
exceed six (6) months; provided, however, that each of the following conditions
precedent shall have been satisfied, in the judgment of the City, with respect to
each such extension:
(a) Such failure to satisfy such conditions is not due to the failure of
the Developer to diligently and in good faith make reasonable and substantial
progress to timely obtain the satisfaction of each of such conditions; and
(b) The Developer is not otherwise in Material Default."
(d) Section 3.3 of the Original DDA is hereby amended to add the following
as a new Section 3.3.6:
"3.3.6 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Section
3.3, in the event that the Phase 2 Closing Date does not timely occur due to a
failure on the part of the Developer to satisfy each of the conditions set forth in
Section 3.3.5(c), except to the extent that the City has, in its sole and absolute
discretion, waived any of such conditions, and provided such failure is not as a
result of a Material Default on the part of the Developer, then, upon written notice
to the City the Developer shall be entitled to obtain up to two (2) successive
18403x6560186.5
extensions of the Phase 2 Closing Date, each such extension to be a period not to
exceed six (6) months; provided, however, that each of the following conditions
precedent shall have been satisfied, in the judgment of the City, with respect to
each such extension:
(a) Such failure to satisfy such conditions is not due to the failure of
the Developer to diligently and in good faith make reasonable and substantial
progress to timely obtain the satisfaction of each of such conditions; and
(b) The Developer is not otherwise in Material Default.
Notwithstanding any such extension, for purposes of calculating pursuant
to Section 3.3.3 any increase in the Phase 2 Purchase Price as a result of such
delay, the Phase 2 Closing Date shall be deemed to be September 15, 2009."
(e) Section 3.4 of the Original DDA is hereby amended to add the following
as a new Section 3.4.6:
"3.4.6 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Section
3.4, in the event that the Phase 3 Closing Date does not timely occur due to a
failure on the part of the Developer to satisfy each of the conditions set forth in
Section 3.4.5(e), except to the extent that the City has, in its sole and absolute
discretion, waived any of such conditions, and provided such failure is not as a
result of a Material Default on the part of the Developer, then, upon written notice
to the City the Developer shall be entitled to obtain up to two (2) successive
extensions of the Phase 3 Closing Date, each such extension to be a period not to
exceed six (6) months; provided, however, that each of the following conditions
precedent shall have been satisfied, in the judgment of the City, with respect to
each such extension:
(a) Such failure to satisfy such conditions is not due to the failure of
the Developer to diligently and in good faith make reasonable and substantial
progress to timely obtain the satisfaction of each such conditions; and
(b) The Developer is not otherwise in Material Default.
Notwithstanding any such extension, for purposes of calculating, pursuant
to Section 3.4.3 any increase in the Phase 3 Purchase Price as a result of such
delay, the Phase 3 Closing Date shall be deemed to be July 1, 2011."
2. Modification of Attachment 10 entitled Description of Developer's
Backbone Infrastructure Work and Attachment I 1 entitled Description of Local
Infrastructure. Attachments 10 and 11 to the Original DDA are hereby amended as
follows:
(a) Item No. 86 on page 2 of Attachment 10 to the Original DDA is
hereby modified to delete language and reference to the "Sports Fields at".
18403:6560186.5
(b) Item No. 126 on page 3 of Attachment 10 to the Original DDA is
hereby modified as follows: (i) the term "Other Public -Owned Open Space Master
Developer Are" is hereby deleted and " Other Public -Owned Open Space -Tustin Legacy
Sports Park" is substituted in its place, (ii) the improvement shall be deemed as a Phase 2
improvement instead of a Phase 1 improvement, and (iii) the original reference to a total
cost of $4,322,697, with a portion of such costs identified and distributed over three years
beginning in 2006 with completion in 2009, shall hereafter de deemed to refer to a total
cost of $4,322,697, with a portion of such costs identified and distributed over three years
beginning in 2009 with completion in 2011.
(c) Item No 129 on page 3 of Attachment 10 to the Original DDA is
hereby modified to delete the reference to `Bridge Tustin Ranch Over Lineal
Park/Vehicular and" and to modify the reference to this improvement to read "Pedestrian
Bridge over Tustin Ranch Road connecting Neighborhood Park and Community Park".
Developer acknowledges and agrees that City's willingness to agree to such change is
contingent upon the conditions identified in subsection (d) below.
(d) Item No. 14 on page 8 of Attachment 1 I is hereby modified to
delete the reference to the improvement defined as "Arches". Developer acknowledges
and agrees that City's willingness to agree to such change shall be contingent upon
Developer's applying at least the minimum amount of $9,315,000 originally programmed
for the Arches towards an upgrade of the design of the pedestrian bridges identified in
Attachment 10 to the Original DDA as Item Nos. 127, 28, and 129 with arch features to
be incorporated into the bridge design as an iconic feature subject to design review
approval and compliance with all Governmental Requirements of the City. As a result of
this contingency, total costs of all three bridges shall not be less than $19,813,005 and
Developer shall be responsible for any and all cost escalations for said bridge
improvements.
(e) The timing for certain Phase 2 Tustin Legacy Backbone
Infrastructure and Local Infrastructure items identified on Attachments 10 and 11 to the
Original DDA shall be advanced to Phase 1 as shown on Schedule 1 to this Amendment.
3. Modification of Attachment 17. The Parties agree that Attachment 17 to
the Original DDA is hereby deleted in its entirety and a new Attachment 17(rev. 1) , in the
form attached hereto as Schedule 2 to this Amendment is substituted in its place.
4. Modifications to Attachment 28. The parties agree that Attachment 28 is
hereby amended as follows:
(a) Exhibit A of Attachment A to the Original DDA entitled the
"Refined Master Development Plan" is hereby modified as follows:
(i) The open space identified as aPhase 1 Sports
Park/Detcntion facility on the Refined Master Development Plan and originally proposed
at the southeast corner of Redhill and Edinger is relocated southeast of the lineal park
18403;6560186.5 d
open space and Carnegie in Phase 2 and replaced in its former Phase 1 location with
corporate/business uses.
(ii) The Congregate Care facility identified as Senior Housing
on the Refined Master Development Plan and originally proposed at the southeast corner
of Valencia and Tustin Ranch Road in Phase 1, shall be relocated to southwest of Legacy
Road and the North Loop Road in. Phase 2 and replaced in its former Phase 1 location
with residential uses, subject to any restrictions imposed pursuant to Section 8.3.8 (e) of
the Agreement.
(b) Line 2 of Section 1.4(b)(i) of Attachment 28 to the Original DDA
is hereby amended and restated to read as follows: "...a 9 acre sports field facility in
Neighborhood E; a 46 -acre..."
(c) The last sentence of Section 1.4(b)(ii) of Attachment 28 to the
Original DDA is hereby deleted in its entirety.
(d) Section 1.6(c) of Attachment 28 to the Original DDA is hereby
amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
"(c) Pursuant to Section 3.2.4 (e) of the Agreement, the City has approved
a specific written implementation strategy for the Master Block consistent with
the provisions of this Attachment. The total development program for the
Community Core will govern (as shown in the approved written implementation
strategy as though set forth in its entirety herein, and on file with the
Redevelopment Agency), except that there are a number of design issues that will
need to be addressed with the luxury brownstones and luxury flats as identified in
City correspondence dated August 31, 2005. Any share parking reductions that
would be reviewed and granted by the City pursuant to the provisions in the
Specific Plan related to the Master Block shall be based on the parking demand
analysis identified in the "Tustin Legacy Community Core Mixed Use
Development Phases I and 11 Shared Parking Study, dated January 2006, as
amended to reflect the adopted written implementation strategy."
(e) Section 1.7 (d) of Attachment 28 to the Original DDA is hereby
amended to add a new sentence to the end of the section to read as follows:
"Developer shall also comply with all contingency conditions contained in
Section 3 this Amendment as it relates to the design upgrades of such bridges."
(f) Section 1.9 (a) of Attachment 28 to the Original DDA is hereby
amended to delete "Very" in the second to the last paragraph
(g) Exhibit D of Attachment 28 to the Original DDA is hereby
amended to modify the acreage of the Sports Field from a total of 10.4 acres to 9 acres
and removal of the reference to a detention facility.
18403:6560186.5
(h) Exhibit E of Attachment 28 to the Original DDA is hereby deleted
in its entirety and a new Exhibit E (rev. 1), in the form attached hereto as Schedule 3 is
substituted in its place.
(i) Exhibit F of Attachment 28 to the Original DDA is hereby deleted
in its entirety and a new Exhibit F(rev.1) , in the form attached hereto as Schedule 4 is
substituted in its place.
5. Miscellaneous.
(a) Agreement Ratified. Except as specifically amended or modified
herein, each and every term, covenant and condition of the Original DDA as amended is
hereby ratified and shall remain in full force and effect.
(b) Binding Agreement. This Amendment shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their legal representatives, successors and
permitted assigns.
(e) Governing Law. This instrument shall be interpreted and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
(d) Exhibits. The Exhibits attached to this Amendment are hereby
incorporated by this reference into this Amendment as though fully set forth in this
Section.
[signature page follows]
18403:6560186.5 6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and the Developer have executed this
Amendment as of the date first set forth above.
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
William Huston, City Manager or
Christine Shingleton, Assistant City
Manager
"AUTHORITY"
TUSTIN PUBLIC FINANCING
AUTHORITY
By:
William Huston, Executive Director
or Christine Shingleton, Assistant
City Manager
ATTEST:
By:
Pamela Stoker
City Clerk
Dated:
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Special Counsel for the City
STEEFEL, LEVITT & WEISS
APROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
By:
Clayton B. Gantz
18403:6560186.5 7
"DEVELOPER"
TUSTIN LEGACY COMMUNITY
PARTNERS, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
By: Shea Properties, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability
company, Managing Member
By: —
Name:
Its:
By: —
Name:
Its:
ICEUXH1-11411:7*.,
By: Centex Homes,
a Nevada general partnership,
a Member
By: Centex Real Estate
Corporation, a Nevada
corporation,
Managing General Partner
By:
Name:
Its:
By: Shea Homes Limited Partnership,
a California limited partnership,
a Member
By: _
Name:
Its:
By: _
Name:
Its:
f[:Lf�X15T.iS9F:i#i
SCHEDULEI
Changes to Timing of
Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure and Local Infrastructure in
Attachments 10 & 11
18403:6560186.5 10
Disposition and Development Agreement (Master Developer
Infrastructure Improvements Moved from Phase 2 to Phase 1
Local Infrastructure Improvements (Attachment 11 in the DDA)
Item Reach Cost
Carnagie/Srreet "A"fi•onr Red$il/ to Armstrong
Storm Drain
694
1032
$59,288
35a
809
1048
$54,169
Sanitary Sewer
327
1032
$67,030
Newport/Edinger ATMS Fee Payment
326
1024
$77,177
67
822
1048
$60,751
$1,713,960
824
1064
$46,166
825
1070
$94,357
Potable Water
714
1032
$37,254
711
1024
$43,099
713
1030
$27,360
845
1048
$31,308
847
1064
$27,079
848
1070
$51.,152
Reclaimed Water
723
1032
$14,277
722
1024
$17,035
864
1070
$10,734
Street Improvements
750
1032
$175,960
747
1024
$248,669
749
1030
$128,216
904
1048
$153,677
906
1064
$147,467
907
1070
$266,093
Dry Utilities
733
1024
$135,786
736
1032
$113,814
880
1048
$100,197
882
1064
$66,203
883
1070
$157,315
Landscape
767
1032
$79,240
764
1024
$115,258
766
1030
$57,629
931
1948
$0
933
1064
$0
934
1070
$0
Linear Park- NE between Arnrstroag and Carnegie 773 612B $3,113,280
$5,786,040
Backbone Infrastructure (Attachment 10 in the DDA)
East Side Redhill - Valencia. Loop to 1000 it north
35
$1,182,063
East Side Redhill - Warner to N. Valencia loop
35a
$186,393
Redhill/Warner (Upgrade)
45
$171,396
Warner/Armstrong
48
$257,094
Newport/Edinger ATMS Fee Payment
66
$77,625
Redhill/Edinger ATMS Fee Payment
67
$77,625
Armstrong Pedestrian Bridge
128
$1,713,960
$6,366,621
Total brfrastrucntre Costs moved froar Phase 2 to Phase]: $12,152,661
SCHEDULE2
Attachment 17 (rev. 1)
18403:6560186.5 11
ATTACHMENT NO. 17
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
NOTE: References herein to "the Agreement" and "DDA" mean the Tustin Legacy
Disposition and Development Agreement (Master Developer) which this Attachment is a
part; references to "Attachments" mean the Attachments to the DDA unless otherwise
specified. Except as otherwise noted, all capitalized terms defined within the DDA and
the Attachments shall retain the meanings as defined in the Disposition and Development
Agreement. Reference to this Attachment is found in Section 8.2.1 of the DDA,
additional references to specific sections of the DDA may also be noted as they may apply
to any action or timing item. References to the defined terms City and Tustin, in the
Schedule of Performance, are interchangeable where appropriate.
Action
Timing and
Any Contingent Approvals
1) EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
a) Developer delivers executed DDA and
No later than 5 Business
Attachments and documents required [1.8]
Days prior to City Council
action on the Agreement
b) Developer delivers binder or certificate evidencing
Concurrently upon delivery
insurance requirement [1.8.1]
of Developer executed DDA
and Attachments to City.
c) Developer delivers entity documents [1.8.2]
Concurrently upon delivery
of Developer executed DDA
and Attachments to the City.
d) City executes DDA
Within 3 Business Days
following City Council
approval of DDA and
Attachments.
e) "Effective Date" of DDA
Date after execution by City
of DDA and Developer's
payment to City of all City
Transaction Expenses.
t) Developer delivers Performance Deposit [1.131
Within 5 Business Days
following City Council
approval of DDA and
Attachments.
-lof 28-
g) Delivery of Executed Agreement [ 1.10]
No later than 5 Business
Days after the execution of
DDA by Tustin, Tustin and
Developer shall each deliver
an executed original
counterpart of DDA to
Escrow Holder.
2) DEVELOPER ACQUISITION AND
SUBLEASING OF DEVELOPER FEE AND
DEVELOPER LEASE PARCELS
a) PHASE 1
i) Phase 1 - Developer's Conditions Precedent
to Close of Escrow [3.1.31
(1) City delivers to Escrow all document
No later than 1 Business
deliveries required [3.1.3(a)]
Day prior to the Close of
Escrow.
(2) Title Company issues to Developer Title
No later than 1 Business
Policy [3.1.3(b)]
Day prior to Close of
Escrow.
(3) City provides to Developer copies of all
No later than 5 Business
Contracts [3.1.3(c)]
Days prior to Close of
Escrow.
ii) Phase 1- City's Conditions Precedent to
Close of Escrow [3.1.4]
(1) Developer delivers to Escrow all document
No later than 1 Business
deliveries [3.1.4(b)]
Day prior to the Close of
Escrow.
(2) City confirms that Developer is in
No later than 1 Business
compliance with the Schedule of
Day prior to Close of
Performance [3.1.4(c)]
Escrow.
(3) Developer delivers to City evidence of
Within 7 Business Days
financing [3.1.4(d)]
prior to the Close of
Escrow.
-2of 28-
(4) Developer confirms in writing to City that
No later than 1 Business
Representations and Warranties set forth in
Day prior to the Close of
Agreement are correct as of the Closing
Escrow.
date [3.1.4(e)]
(5) Developer delivers to City evidence of
No later than 7 Business
Insurance Policies and binders [3.1.4(f)]
Days prior to Close of
Escrow.
(6) Escrow Holder delivers to City and
No later than 3 Business
Developer Closing Cost Statement
Days prior to the Close of
[3.1.4(g)]
Escrow.
iii) City and Developer submit to Escrow
No later than 1 Business
Holder a Closing Certificate [3.1.5]
Day prior to Close of
Escrow.
iv) Phase 1- Sector `A' Map [3.2.4 (b) and
3.2.5(c)]
(1) Developer submits a complete Sector `A'
No later than April 20,
Tentative Tract Map application to City
2006.
with related drawings and documents.
(2) Upon City determination that Developer
Within 60 Calendar Days.
has submitted a complete application and
completion of any necessary environmental
documentation, City takes action on the
Sector `A' Tentative Tract Map.
(3) Developer submits a complete Sector `A'
Within 15 Calendar Days
Final Map with related drawings and
following City Council
documents to City
approvals of the Sector `A'
Tentative Tract Map.
(4) City takes action on the Sector `A' Final
Within 30 days following
Map.
the later of (a) Developer's
completing all City, County,
and responsible agency
requested corrections or (b)
all conditions of approval of
the Sector `A' Tentative
Tract map.
-3of28-
(5) Developer causes the Recording of the
Within 15 Calendar Days
Sector `A' Final Map
following approval of the
Sector `A' Final Map by the
City and not less than 15
Calendar Days prior to the
Close of Escrow.
v) Phase 1— Hydrology Study(ies) [3.2.5(c)]
(1) Developer submits to City Preliminary
No later than June 15, 2006.
Draft Hydrology Study(ies) to City
[3.2.5(4)].
(2) City reviews Preliminary Draft Hydrology
Within 15 Calendar Days of
Study(ies) and provides comments back to
receipt by City of
Developer.
Preliminary Draft
Hydrology Study.
(3) Developer submits complete revised Draft
Within 15 Calendar Days
Hydrology Study(ies) to City and Orange
after receipt by City of
County Flood Control District
comments on Preliminary
concurrently.
Draft Hydrology Study.
(4) City and the Orange County Flood District
No later than 15 Calendar
consider and approve Hydrology
Days prior to the Close of
Study(ics), and Developer makes any
Escrow, unless otherwise
necessary additional corrections to the
waived per DDA Section
Hydrology Study as requested by the City
3.2.4.
or Orange County Flood Control District.
vi) Phase 1 - Implementation Strategy for
Master Development Block within the
Community Core [3.2.5(e)]
-4of 28-
(1) Developer submits a complete written
No later than May 22, 2006.
Implementation Strategy for the Master
Block, consistent with the Agreement
which shall include the following:
(a) Development Entity for Master
Development Block.
(b) Responsibilities for construction of
Local Infrastructure and Backbone
Infrastructure and installation of
amenities to strengthen Main Street
Concept for retail and pedestrian
activity
(c) Development Strategy
(2) City considers and either rejects, requests
Within 15 Calendar Days
changes to or approves the Implementation
following submittal to the
Strategy.
City of a complete
Implementation Strategy.
(3) Developer completes any modifications or
Within 15 Calendar Days
corrections to the Implementation Strategy
following Developer's
as City may Request.
receipt of City comments.
(4) City approves the Implementation Strategy
Prior to Close of Escrow.
vii)Phase 1 - Design Guidelines [3.2.5(f)]
(1) Developer submits complete Design
No later than June 15, 2006,
Guidelines with the exception of the
except the Chapter on the
Design Guideline Chapter that deals with
Master Block may be
the Master Block.
submitted no later than July
3, 2006.
(2) City considers and either rejects, requests
Within 30 Calendar Days
changes to or approves the Design
following submittal to the
Guidelines.
City of complete Design
Guidelines.
(3) Developer completes any modifications or
Within 30 Calendar Days
corrections to the Design Guidelines as
following Developer's
City may Request.
receipt of City comments.
(4) City approves the Design Guidelines
Prior to Close of Escrow.
-5of 28-
viii) Phase 1 - Closing Date [3.2.1]
No later than
April 23, 2007, except that
such date maybe extended
per DDA Section 3.2.1.
ix) Phase 1- Concept Plan and Sector B' Maps
[3.3.5(c)]
(1) Developer submits an initial Concept Plan
NE: June l9, 2006
application with related drawings and
NG: December 18, 2006
documents
ND: February 5, 2007
(2) Developer submits a complete Concept
NE: February 16, 2007
Plan application with related drawings and
NG: March 23, 2007
documents
ND: May 13, 2007
(3) Developer submits a preliminary Sector
NE: October 13, 2006
`B' Tentative Tract Map application
NG: March 23, 2007
ND: May 13, 2007
(4) Developer submits a complete Sector `B'
Within 30 days of following
Tentative Tract Map application with
the Developer's receipt of
related drawings, documents and
comments from the City on
information determined necessary by the
a preliminary Sector `B'
City including but not limited to Traffic
Tentative Map
Studies, Trip Budget data, Hydrology
studies, and other supporting information.
(5) Upon City determination that Developer
Within 60 Calendar Days.
has submitted a complete Concept Plan and
Sector `B' Tentative Tract Map
application, approved by the Navy as it
affects LIFOC Parcels and completion of
all environmental documentation, City
takes action on the Concept Plan and
Sector `B' Tentative Tract Map.
(6) Developer submits a complete Sector `B'
Within 75 Calendar Days
Final Map with related drawings and
following City Council
documents, including Master Association
approval of the Sector `B'
Documents to City.
Tentative Tract Map.
-6of 28-
(7) City takes action on the approval of Sector
Within 30 Calendar Days
`B' Final Map, and Master Association
following the later of (a)
Documents.
Developer's completing all
City, County, and
responsible agency
requested corrections, or (b)
all conditions of approval of
the Sector `B' Tentative
Tract Map.
(8) Developer causes the Recording of the
Within 90 Calendar Days
Sector `13' Final Map, and Master
following approval of the
Association Documents.
Sector `B' Final Map.
x) Phase 1 - Mass Grading, Demolition and
Interim Drainage Plans and Construction
(1) Developer submits complete mass grading,
No later than July 1,, 2006.
demolition, alterations to existing utility
systems and interim drainage plans for the
Property. Developer submission must
consider necessary permitting requirements
from other public agencies including, if
appropriate, 401, 404, and 1600 permits.
(2) City considers and either rejects, requests
Within 21 Calendar Days
changes to or approves the mass grading,
following submittal to City.
demolition, alterations to existing utility
systems and interim drainage plans.
(3) Developer shall complete any
Within 21 Calendar Days
modifications or corrections to the mass
following submittal to City.
grading, demolition, alterations to existing
utility systems and interim drainage plans
as City may Request.
(4) Upon approval of the plan submittals, the
Within 21 Calendar Days
City shall issue the mass grading,
following completion of all
demolition, alterations to existing utility
requested corrections and
systems and interim drainage permits.
approval of the plans by the
City and issue of any
necessary responsible
agency pernuts.
-7of 28-
(5) Developer commences grading,
Within 30 Calendar Days of
demolition, interim drainage, and
receiving approval from the
alterations of existing utility systems.
City.
xi) Phase 1— Developer's Backbone
Infrastructure Plans and Construction
(1) Developer submits initial Backbone
Initial submittals no later
Infrastructure Plans and documents (note:
than:
submittals will be in segments).
NE: August 31, , 2007,
NG: October 31, 2007
ND: September 30, 2007
Linear Park: October 31,
2007
(2) Developer submits complete Backbone
Infrastructure Plans, specifications and bid
NE: October3l, 2007
documents (note: submittals will be in
NG: December 31, 2007
segments.)
ND: October 31, 2007
Linear Park: December 31,
2007
Complete submittals are
contingent upon City
approval of applicable
Sector `B' Tentative Tract
Maps where such
improvements are to be
located, completion of
Hydrology Studies and any
Traffic Studies as are
determined necessary and as
approved by the City.
(3) City and other responsible agencies
Within 30 Calendar Days
consider and either reject, request changes
following submittal to City
to or approve the Backbone Infrastructure
of Plans within City
Plans, specifications and bid documents.
responsibility. Within
response time frames
defined by other responsible
agencies.
(4) Developer shall complete any
Within 30 Calendar Days
modifications or corrections to the
following submittal to
Backbone Infrastructure Plans,
Developer of requested
specifications and bid documents as City,
modifications or
other responsible agencies may request,
corrections.
and written approvals of Infrastructure
after consultation with the Navy on any
LIFOC Parcels or other areas impacted by
FOST or FOSL Navy institutional controls,
as may be required.
(5) Approval of Backbone Infrastructure Plans,
Within 30 Calendar Days
specifications and bid documents, and
following completion of all
issuance of necessary construction permits
City and responsible agency
or encroachments permits.
corrections or permits.
(6) Developer Advertises Request for Bids
Within normal time frames
for public bid
advertisements (if required
for CFD funded projects).
(7) Developer review Bid results with City
Within 30 days of receipt of
and upon City concurrence awards the Bid
Bids.
to the lowest responsible bidder.
(8) Developer commences construction of
Within 30 Calendar Days
Backbone Infrastructure improvements.
from notice to proceed.
(9) Developer completes Phase 1 Developer's
Prior to the conveyance of
Backbone Infrastructure Improvements.
Phase 2 or as the City's
Condition Precedent to
Close of Escrow on Phase 2
per DDA Section 3.3.5,
unless otherwise waived as
to individual improvements
per DDA Section 3.3.5
xii)Phase 1 - Local Infrastructure Plans and
Construction
-9of 28-
(1) Developer submits initial Local
Initial submittals no later
Infrastructure Plans and documents.
than:
NE: August 31, 2007
NG: December 31, , 2007
ND: October 31, 2007
(2) Developer submits complete Local
NE: November 30, 2007
Infrastructure Plans and documents.
NG: February 28, 2007
ND: December 31, 2007
Complete submittals are
contingent upon City
approval of applicable
Sector `B' Tentative Tract
Maps where such
improvements are to be
located, completion of
Hydrology Studies and any
Traffic Studies as are
determined to be necessary
by the City.
(3) City and other responsible agencies
Within 30 Calendar Days
consider and either reject, request changes
following submittal to City
to or approve the Local Infrastructure Plans
of Plans within City's
and written approvals from the Navy after
responsibility and within
consultation on LIFOC Parcels of other
review time frames defined
areas impacted by FOSL or FOST Navy
by other responsible
institutional controls, as may be required.
agencies.
(4) Developer shall complete any
Within 30 Calendar Days
modifications or corrections to the Local
following submittal to
Infrastructure Plans as City or other
Developer of modification
responsible agencies may Request.
or correction requests.
(5) Approval of Local Infiastructure a Plans
Within 30 Calendar Days
and issuance of construction permits or
following completion of al I
encroachment permits.
City and responsible agency
corrections City.
(6) Developer commences construction of
Within 60 Calendar Days
Local Infrastructure .
approval of Local Backbone
Plans.
-10 of 28-
(7) Developer shall have completed all Phase 1
Prior to the conveyance of
Local Infrastructure .
Phase 2 or as the City's
Condition Precedent to
Close of Escrow on Phase 2
Per DDA Section 3.3.5,
unless otherwise waived as
to individual improvements
per DDA Section 3.3.5
xiii) Phase 1— Vertical.Builder(s) and Sector
`C' Maps, Entitlements & Construction of
Improvements
(1) Vertical Builder(s) submits Preliminary
Within 120 Calendar Days
plans and pre -application submittals to the
following the conveyance
City for Sector C Map(s) (as applicable)
from Developer to Vertical
and design review approval, any other
Builder(s).
entitlement application requested, as
applicable
(2) Vertical Builder(s) submits complete
Within 90 Calendar Days
Sector C Map(s) and Design Review
following submittal to City
application, any other entitlement
of modification or
application requested, as applicable, with
correction requests
complete related drawings and documents
contingent upon the City
to City and any information determined
having approved a Sector
necessary by the City including but not
`B' Final Map for the
limited to Traffic Studies, Trip Budget
Neighborhood said site is
data, Hydrology studies, and other
located within.
supporting information. City reviews
concurrently reviews in its Governmental
Capacity and Proprietary Capacity.
(3) Upon a determination that the Developer
Within 21 Calendar Days
has submitted a complete application and
following submittal to City
completion of any environmental
of modification or
documentation, and written approvals from
correction requests
the Navy after consultation on LIFOC
Parcels, City in its Governmental Capacity
takes action on a Tentative Tract Map,
Concept Plan & Design Review.
(4) Vertical Builder(s) submits Final Tract
Within 90 Calendar Days of
Map with related drawings and documents
City Council approvals.
to City.
-11 of 28-
(5) City considers approval of Final Tract
Vertical Builder(s) shall be
Map(s).
responsible for completing
all City, County, and other
related agency(ies)
corrections and conditions
of approval of the Tentative
Tract Map.
(6) Vertical Builder(s) causes the Recording of
Within 15 Calendar Days
the Final Tract Map(s).
following approval of the
Final Tract Map(s) by City.
(7) Vertical Builder submits complete precise
Within 90 Calendar Days of
grading, and vertical and horizontal
Tentative Tract Map
improvement plans for plan check
approval.
including all necessary submittals and
documentation required for plan check.
(8) Vertical Builder(s) commences
Within 90 Calendar days
construction.
following issuance of
building permits for
Improvements on applicable
Vertical Builder
development sites.
(9) completion of construction of Vertical
Vertical Builder(s) shall
Builder Improvements.
complete constriction of
Improvements within 24
months of building permit
issuance.
xiv) Phase I - Completion of Minimum Phase
Phase 1 Minimum Phase
[14.4.1(a)
shall be completed no later
than July 1, 2014
xv) Phase 1 - Affordable Housing Purchaser
Selection and Criteria Plan
(1) Vertical Builder(s) submits Affordable
No marketing of Affordable
Housing Purchaser Selection and Criteria
Housing Units shall begin
Plan
until City approval of the
"Affordable Housing
Purchaser Selection and
Criteria Plan".
-12of28-
(2) City considers and either rejects, requests
Within 15 Calendar Days
changes to, or approves Affordable
following submittal to City.
Housing Purchaser Selection and Criteria
Plan.
(a) Vertical Builder(s) shall complete any
Within 15 Calendar Days
modifications or corrections to the
following submittal to City.
Affordable Housing Purchaser
Selection and Criteria Plan as City may
Request.
(b) City considers approval of the
Within 15 Calendar Days
Affordable Housing Purchaser
following submittal to City.
Selection and Criteria Plan for Vertical
Builder(s) project.
xvi) Rental Projects[
(1) Neighborhood G Apartments - Developer
No later than
shall complete construction of apartments.
December 31, 2010
(2) Neighborhood D Apartments — Developer
No later than
shall complete constriction of apartments.
December 31, 2011
b) PHASE 2
i) Phase 2 -Concept Plan and Sector `B' Maps
[3.3.4(c)[
(1) Developer submits a complete Concept
No later than October 6,
Plan and Sector `B' Tentative Tract Map
2008
application with related drawings and
documents
(2) Upon City determination that Developer
Within 60 Calendar Days
has submitted a complete application,
approved by the Navy as it affects LIFOC
Parcels and completion of all
environmental documentation, City takes
action on the Concept Plan and Sector `B'
Tentative Tract Map. .
-13 of 28-
(3) Developer submits a complete Sector `B'
Within 75 Calendar Days
Final Map with related drawings and
following City Council
documents, including Master Association
approval of the Sector `B'
Documents to City.
Tentative Tract Map.
(4) City takes action on the approval of Sector
Within 30 Calendar Days
`B' Final Map, and Master Association
following the later of (a)
Documents.
Developer's completing all
City, County, and
responsible agency
requested corrections, or (b)
all conditions of approval of
the Sector `B' Tentative
Tract Map.
(5) Developer causes the Recording of the
Within 90 Calendar Days
Sector `B' Final Map, and Master
following approval of the
Association Documents.
Sector `B' Final Map
ii) Phase 2 — Developer's Conditions Precedent
to Close of Escrow [3.3.41
(1) Developer confirms City has satisfied all
No later than 5 Business
General Conditions, or Developer in
Days prior to the Close of
writing waives such conditions [3.3.4(x) &
Escrow.
3.1.3]
(2) City delivers to Escrow of all documents
No later than 1 Business
deliveries [3.3.4(x) & 3.1]
Day prior to Close of
Escrow.
(3) Developer submits to City any
No later than 30 Business
Subordination consent requested on City
Days prior to Close of
form [3.3.4(b)]
Escrow.
iii) Phase 2 — City's Conditions Precedent to
Close of Escrow [3.3.51
(1) City confirms Developer has satisfied all
No later than 5 Business
General Conditions, or City in writing
Days prior to Close of
waives such conditions. [3.3.5(a) & 3.1.4]
Escrow.
- 14 of 28 -
(2) Developer delivers to Escrow all
No later than 1 Business
document deliveries [3.4.5(b) & 3. L4]
Day prior to Close of
Escrow.
(3) Developer delivers Phase 2 Closing
Not later than 1 Business
Payment [3.3.5(b)]
Day prior to Close of
Escrow.
(4) City considers and approves Subordination
No later than 5 Business
request [3.3.5(d)]
Days prior to Close of
Escrow.
(5) City Confinns Substantial Progress
No later than 10 Business
Towards Completion of Phase 1 [3.3.5(c)]
Days prior to Close of
Escrow.
iv) Phase 2 - Closing Date [3.3.1]
September 15, 2009
provided that escrow shall
not close until Developer
completion of all required
conditions precedent to
escrow closing in the DDA,
and the requirements of
DDA Section 3.3.3, except
that such. date may be
extended
per DDA Section 3.3.-1.
v) Phase 2 — Developer's Backbone
Infrastructure Plans and Construction
(1) Developer initial and last submittal of
Initial submittals no later
complete Backbone Infiastrneture Plans,
than October 1, 2009 and
specifications and bid documents (note:
last submittals no later than
submittals will be in segments).
October 1, 2010.
(2) City and other responsible agencies
Within 21 Calendar Days
consider and either reject, request changes
following submittal to City
to or approve the Backbone Infrastructure
of Plans within City
Plans, specifications and bid documents.
responsibility. Within
response time frames
defined by other responsible
agencies.
-15 of 28-
(3) Developer shall complete any
Witlun 21 Calendar Days
modifications or corrections to the
following submittal to
Backbone Infrastructure Plans,
Developer of requested
specifications and bid documents as City,
modifications or
other responsible agencies may request,
corrections,
and written approvals of Infrastructure
after consultation with the Navy on any
LIFOC Parcels or other areas impacted by
FOST or FOSL Navy institutional controls,
as may be required.
(4) Approval of Backbone In frastructure Plans,
Within 21 Calendar Days
specifications and bid documents, and
following completion of all
issuance of necessary construction permits
City and responsible agency
or encroachments permits.
corrections
(5) Developer Advertises Request for Bids
Within normal time frames
for public bid
advertisements.
(6) Developer review Bid results with City and
Within 30 Calendar Days of
upon City concurrence awards the Bid to
receipt of Bids.
the lowest responsible bidder.
(7) Developer commences construction of
Within 30 Calendar Days
Backbone Infrastructure.
from the later of (1) award
of Bid; or (2) approval of
all contractor performance
bonds, insurance and
contact documents award.
(8) Developer completes Phase 2 Backbone
Prior to the conveyance of
Infrastructure. re.
Phase 3 or as the City's
Condition Precedent to
Close of Escrow on Phase 3
per DDA Section 3.4.5,
unless otherwise waived as
to individual improvements
per DDA Section 3.4.5
vi) Phase 2 - Local Infrastructure Plans and
Construction
- 16 of 28 -
(1) Developer submits initial and last complete
Initial submittals no later
submittals of Local Infrastructure Plans
than December 1, 2009 and
and documents.
last submittals no later than
December 1, 2010.
(2) City and other responsible agencies
Within 21 Calendar Days
consider and either reject, request changes
following submittal to City
to or approve the Local Infrastructure Plans
of Plans within City's
and written approvals from the Navy after
responsibility and within
consultation on LIFOC Parcels of other
review time frames defined
areas impacted by FOSL or FOST Navy
by other responsible
institutional controls, as may required.
agencies.
(3) Developer shall complete any
Within 21 Calendar Days
modifications or corrections to the Local
following submittal to
Infrastructure Plans as City or other
Developer of modification
responsible agencies may Request.
or correction requests.
(4) Approval of Local infrastructure a Plans
Within 21 Calendar Days
and issuance of constniction permits or
following completion of all
encroachment permits.
City and responsible agency
corrections.
(5) Developer commences construction of
Within 60 Calendar Days
Local Infrastructure.
approval of Local Backbone
Plans.
(6) Developer shall have completed all Phase 2
Prior to the conveyance of
Local Infrastructure
Phase 3 oras the City's
Condition Precedent to
Close of Escrow on Phase 3
per DDA Section 3.4.5
vii) Phase 2 — Vertical Builder(s) and Sector `C'
Maps, Entitlements & Construction of
Improvements
(1) Vertical Builder(s) submits complete
Within 45 Calendar Days
Preliminary Plans
following the conveyance
from Developer to Vertical
Builder(s).
-17of28-
(2) Vertical Builder(s) submits complete
Within 21 Calendar Days
Tentative Vesting Tract Map and Design
following submittal to City
Review application, any other entitlement
of modification or
application requested, as applicable, with
correction requests
complete related drawings and documents
to City. City reviews concurrently reviews
in its Governmental Capacity and
Proprietary Capacity.
(3) Upon a determination that the Developer
Within 21 Calendar Days
has submitted a complete application and
following submittal to City
completion of any environmental
of modification or
documentation, and written approvals from
correction requests
the Navy after consultation on LIFOC
Parcels, City in its Governmental Capacity
takes action on a Tentative Vesting Tract
Map, Concept Plan & Design Review..
(4) Vertical Builder(s) submits Final Tract
Within 90 Calendar Days of
Map with related drawings and documents
City Council approvals.
to City.
(5) City considers approval of Final Tract
Vertical Builder(s) shall be
Map(s)
responsible for completing
all City, County, and other
related agency(ies)
corrections and conditions
of approval of the Tentative
Tract Map.
(6) Vertical Builder(s) causes the Recording of
Within 15 Calendar Days
the Final Tract Map(s)
following approval of the
Final Tract Map(s) by City.
(7) Vertical Builder submits complete precise
Within 30 Calendar Days of
grading, and vertical and horizontal
Tentative Tract Map
improvement plans for plan check
approval.
including all necessary submittals and
documentation required for plan check
(8) Vertical Builder(s) commences
Within 30 Calendar days
construction
following issuance of
building permits for
Improvements on
applicable Vertical Builder
development sites.
- 18 of 28 -
(9) Completion of construction of the
Vertical Builder(s) shall
Improvements
complete construction of
Improvements with 24
months of building permit
issuance.
viii) Phase 2 - Completion of Minimum Phase
Phase 2 Minimum Phase
114.4.1(a)l
shall be completed no later
than July 1, 2016.
ix) Phase 2 - Affordable Housing Purchaser
Selection and Criteria Plan
(1) Vertical Builder(s) submits Affordable
No marketing of said
Housing Purchaser Selection and Criteria
Affordable Housing Units
Plan
shall begin until City
approval of the Affordable
Housing Purchaser
Selection and Criteria Plan
(2) City considers and either rejects, requests
Within 15 Calendar Days
changes to, or approves Affordable
following submittal to City,
Housing Purchaser Selection and Criteria
Plan.
(a) Vertical Builder(s) shall complete any
Within 15 Calendar Days
modifications or corrections to the
following submittal. to City.
Affordable Housing Purchaser
Selection and Criteria Planus City may
Request.
(b) City shall consider approval of the
Within 15 Calendar Days
Affordable Housing Purchaser
following submittal to City.
Selection and Criteria Plan for Vertical
Brulder(s) project.
c) PHASE 3
i) Phase 3 -Concept Plan and Sector `B' Maps
[3.4.4(c) and 3.4.5(c)[
N•.IP472
(1) Developer submits a complete Concept
No later than September 1,
Plan and Sector `B' Tentative Tract Map
2010.
application with related drawings and
documents
(2) Upon City determination that Developer
Within 60 Calendar Days
has submitted a complete application,
approved by the Navy as it affects LIFOC
Parcels and completion of all
environmental documentation, City takes
action on the Concept Plan and Sector `B'
Tentative Tract Map. .
(3) Developer submits a complete Sector `B'
Within 75 Calendar Days
Final Map with related drawings and
following City Council
documents, including Master Association
approval of the Sector `B'
Documents to City.
Tentative Tract Map.
(4) City takes action on the approval of Sector
Within 30 Calendar Days
`B' Final Map, and Master Association
following the later of (a)
Documents
Developer's completing all
City, County, and
responsible agency
requested corrections, or (b)
all conditions of approval of
the Sector `B' Tentative
Tract Map.
(5) Developer causes the Recording of the
Within 90 Calendar Days
Sector `B' Final Map, and Master
following approval of the
Association Documents.
Sector `B' Final Map.
ii) Phase 3 — Developer's Conditions Precedent
to Close of Escrow [3.4.41
(1) Developer confirms City has satisfied all
No later than 5 Business
General Conditions, or Developer in
Days prior to the Close of
writing waives such conditions [3.4.4(a) &
Escrow.
3.1.3]
(2) City delivers to Escrow of all documents
No later than 1 Business
deliveries [3.4.4(a) & 3.1.3]
Day prior to Close of
Escrow.
-20 of 28-
(3) Developer submits to City any
No later than 30 Business
Subordination consent requested on City
Days prior to Close of
form [3.4.4(b)]
Escrow.
iii) Phase 3 - City's Conditions Precedent to
Close of Escrow [3.4.5]
(1) City confirms Developerhas satisfied all
No later than 5 Business
General Conditions, or City in writing
Days prior to the Close of
waives such conditions [3.4.5(a) & 3.1.4]
Escrow.
(2) Developer delivers to Escrow all document
No later than 1 Business
deliveries required [3.4.5(b) & 3.1.4]
Day prior to Close of
Escrow.
(3) Developer Delivers Phase 3 Closing
Not later than 1 Business
Payment [3.4.5(b)]
Day prior to the Phase 3
Close of Escrow.
(4) City considers approval of Subordination
No later than 5 Business
[3.4.5(d)]
Days prior to Close of
Escrow
(5) City confirms Substantial Progress towards
No later than 10 Business
Completion of Phase 1 and Phase 2.
Days prior to Close of
[3.4.5(e) and [3.4.5(f)]]
Escrow.
iv) Phase 3 - Closing Date [3.4.1]
July 1, 2011 or earlier per
DDA Section 3.4.1
provided that escrow shall
not close until Developer
completion of all required
conditions precedent to
escrow closing in the DDA
and compliance with
Section 3.4.3 of the DDA,
except that such date may
also be extended
per DDA Section 3.4.1
v) Phase 3 — Vertical Builder(s) and Sector `C'
Maps, Entitlements & Construction of
Improvements
- 21 of 28 -
(1) Vertical Builder(s) submits complete
Within 45 Calendar Days
Preliminary Plans
following the conveyance
from Developer to Vertical
Builder(s).
(2) Vertical Builder(s) submits complete
Within 21 Calendar Days
Tentative Vesting Tract Map and Design
following submittal to City
Review application, any other entitlement
of modification or
application requested, as applicable, with
correction requests
complete related drawings and documents
to City. City reviews concurrently reviews
in its Governmental Capacity and
Proprietary Capacity.
(3) Upon a determination that the Developer
Within 21 Calendar Days
has submitted a complete application and
following submittal to City
completion of any environmental
of modification or
documentation, and written approvals from
correction requests
the Navy after consultation on LIFOC
Parcels, City in its Governmental Capacity
takes action on a Tentative Vesting Tract
Map, Concept Plan & Design Review..
(4) Vertical Builder(s) submits Final Tract
Within 90 Calendar Days of
Map with related drawings and documents
City Council approvals.
to City.
(5) City considers approval of Final Tract
Vertical Builder(s) shall be
Map(s)
responsible for completing
all City, County, and other
related ageney(ies)
corrections and conditions
of approval of the Tentative
Tract Map to the
satisfaction of the City in its
sole discretion.
(6) Vertical Builder(s) causes the Recording of
Within 15 Calendar .Days
the Final Tract Map(s)
following approval of the
Final Tract Map(s) by City.
-22 of 28-
(7) Vertical Builder submits complete precise
Within 30 Calendar Days of
grading, and vertical and horizontal
Tentative Tract Map
improvement plans for plan check
approval.
including all necessary submittals and
documentation required for plan check.
(8) Vertical Builder(s) commences
Within 30 Calendar days
construction.
following issuance of
building permits for
Improvements on
applicable Vertical Builder
development sites.
(9) Completion of construction of the
Vertical Builder(s) shall
Improvements
complete construction of
Improvements with 24
months of building permit
issuance.
vi) Phase 3 - Completion of Minimum Phase
Phase 3 Minimum Phase
114.4.1(a)l
shall be completed no later
than July 1, 2019.
d) PHASE 4
i) Phase 4 - Developer's Conditions Precedent
to Close of Escrow [3.5.3]
(1) Developer obligated to close if City
Subject to provisions of the
determines that the Hangar 29 Parcel can
Memorandum of
be conveyed to the Developer, at its sole
Agreement between the
discretion. [3.5.3]
Federal Government, State
Office of Historic
Preservation and the City of
Tustin and Section 3.5.5(a)
of the Agreement.
(2) Developer confirms that City has satisfied
No later than 5 Business
all General Conditions, or Developer in
Days prior to the Close of
writing waives such conditions.
Escrow.
(3) Developer delivers to Escrow all document
No later than 1 Business
deliveries required [3.1.3]
Day prior to Close of
SCrOW.
- 23 of 28 -
(4) Developer submits to City any
No later than 30 Calendar
Subordination consent request on City
Days prior to Close of
form [3.5.3(b)]
Escrow.
ii) Phase 4 - City's Conditions Precedent to
Close of Escrow
(1) City has determined to convey the Hangar
To be determined subject to
29 Parcel to Developer.
the terms and conditions of
Section 3.5 of the
Agreement. \
No later than 5 Business
Days prior to Close of
Escrow.
(2) City confirms Developer has satisfied all
No later than l Business
General Conditions or City in writing
Day prior to Close of
waives such conditions [3.5.4 & 3.1.4]
Escrow.
(3) Developer delivers to Escrow all document
No later than 5 Business
deliveries, required [3.5.4 & 3.1.4]
Days prior to Close of
Escrow.
(4) City considers approval of Subordination
No later than 5 Business
request [3.5.4]
Days prior to Close of
Escrow.
(5) City completes a Farr Market Appraisal of
No later than 21 Business
the Hangar 29 Parcel based on Developer's
Days prior to Close of
declaration of the intended use of the
Escrow.
parcel as agreed to by the City and
developer [3.5.3]
iii) Developer delivers Phase 4 Closing Payment
No later than 1 Business
Day prior to Close of
Escrow
iv) Phase 4 Closing Date [3.5.1]
To be determined and
subject to the terms and
conditions in Section 3.5 of
the Agreement.
24 oC 28 -
v) Phase 4 - Completion of Minimum Phase
Within 3 years from the
114.4.1(a)I
Close of Escrow on Phase
4.
3) SUBSEQUENT CLOSINGS [3.9]
i) City notices Developer of acquisition Leases
No later than 30 Calendar
parcels subject to LIFOC [3.9.1]
Days after the City has
received a quitclaim deed
from the Federal
Government conveying to
the City the fee interest.
ii) Developer's Conditions Precedent to each
Subsequent Closing [39.2]
(1) Developer confirms that City has satisfied
No later than 5 Business
all General Conditions, or Developer in
Days prior to the Close of
writing waives such conditions.
Escrow.
iii) City's Conditions Precedent to each
Subsequent Closing [3.9.3]
(1) Developer confirms City has satisfied all
No later than 5 Business
General Conditions, or City in writing
Days prior to the Close of
waives such conditions
Escrow.
(2) Developer delivers to Escrow Closing
No later than 1 Business
Costs
Day prior to Close of
Escrow.
iv) Subsequent Closing - Closing Date [3.9.1]
City to establish Closing
Date upon notification to
Developer in accord with
Section 3.9 of this
Agreement.
4) PARTICIPATION (ARTICLE 71
i) Developer to make First Payment to City
60 days after the later, the
[7.2.1 ]
Developer sells the last
Parcel in Phase 1 to a
Vertical Builder(s) of July
1, 2011
-25 of 28-
ii) Developer to snake Second Payment to City
60 days after the First
[7.2.2]
Determination Date which
is 24 months after the First
Determination Date
iii) Developer to make Third Payment to City
60 days after the Second
[7.2.3]
Determination Date which
is 48 months after the First
Determination Date
iv) Developer to make Fourth Payment to City
60 days after the date that
[7.2,4]
the Developer has received
all revenues OR at the
option of the City, a date
specified by the City which
date shall be no later than
December 30, 2016.
5) CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE [ARTICLE 91
i) Certificates of Compliance
(1) Developer submits request for issuance of a
Upon completion of all
Certificate of Compliance by City [9.3. 1]
Improvements required by
the DDA [Section 9.31 and
satisfaction of all
Conditions Precedent set
forth in DDA for the
applicable Parcel(s) or
Phase of Development;
provided that no Certificate
of Compliance shall be
issued for any portion of the
Project until Completion of
the Minimum Project.
(2) The City approves or disapproves the
Within 10 Calendar Days
request for issuance of a Certificate of
following submission of
Compliance
request for Certificate of
Compliance and satisfaction
of all conditions precedent
set forth in DDA
-26 of 28-
ii) Final Certificate of Compliance as to entire
Project [9.3.3]
(1) Developer submits request for issuance of
Upon completion of all
the Final Certificate of Compliance for
Improvements required by
entire Project by City
the DDA and satisfaction of
all Conditions Precedent set
forth in DDA
(2) The City approves or disapproves the
Within 30 Calendar Days
request for issuance of the Final Certificate
following submission of
of Compliance for entire Project.
request for Certificate of
Compliance for entire
Project and satisfaction of
all conditions precedent set
firth' DDA
(3) The City shall cause the Recording the
Within 10 calendar days
Final Certificate of Compliance against all
following issuance of Final
Parcels
Certificate of Compliance
by City.
6) APPRAISAL PROCESS WITH RESPECT TO
SALES OF PROPERTY [7.9]
i) Submission of Notice of Sale by Developer
Not less than 30 days prior
[7.9.2]
to the contemplated close of
escrow for the sale of any
portion of the Property, the
Developer shall deliver a
Notice of Sale to City.
ii) The City shall responds to Developer's Notice
Within 30 days the City
of Sale [7.9.2]
shall respond to Developer
indicating whether it agrees
that Sales Price represents
the Fair Market Value of the
Property.
-27 of 28-
Hi) Appraisal Notice response by City [7.9.3]
If City determines that the
Fair Market Value of the
Property to be sold is
greater than the Sales Price,
the City may notify the
Developer, whereupon
Property will be appraised
in accord with Section 7.9.4
iv) City notifies Developer of selection of
Qualified Appraiser
Qualified Appraiser [7.9.4]
conducts Appraisal. If
Developer does not object
to the Fair Market Value as
determined by the First
Appraisal then this value
shall be the Fair Market
Value.
v) Developer notifies City of dispute of First
If Developer disputes First
Appraisal[7.9.4]
Appraisal, the Developer
notifies the City in 10
Business Days. The City
and Developer select a
second Qualified Appraiser
to conduct a second
Appraisal.
vi) Final and Binding Fair Market Value of
Fair Market Value of the
Property [7.9.4]
Property will be the average
of the two Appraisals.
-28 of 28-
SCHEDULE3
Exhibit E (rev. 1) to Attachment 28
18403:6560186.5 12
SCHEDULE4
Exhibit F (rev. 1) to Attachment 28
18403:65601865 13
Requirements for Substantial Progress Related to Closing Requirements by Phase
Phase 2 Closing Requirements Phase 1
Residential Completions
Estimated # Units Completed
866
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
Total Required Residential Units Completed
650
% of Total by Phase
58%
Residential Starts.
Estimated # Units Started
1,518
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
Total Required Residential Units Completed
1„139
Non Residential Completions
Estimated SF Completions (1)
972,114
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
Required SF for Substantial Progress
729,086
% of Total by Phase
39%
Master Block Non Residential Completions
Estimated SF Completions
433,931
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
Required SF for Substantial Progress
325,043
Non Residential Starts
Estimated SF Starts (1)
1,258,133
Substantial Progress % Required
7500%
Required SF for Substantial Progress
943,600
% of Total by Phase
51%
Master Block Non Residential Starts
Estimated SF Starts
668,331
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
Required SF for Substantial Progress
501,248
Phase 3 Closing Requirements
Phase 1
Phase 2
Residential Completions
Estimated # Units Completed
1,560
429
Substantial Progress % Required
90%
75%
Total Required Residential Units Completed
1,404
322
Residential Starts
Estimated # Units Completed
1,560
545
Substantial Progress % Required
95%
75%
Total Required Residential Units Completed
1,482
409
Non Residential Completions
Estimated SF Completions (1)
1,493,133
907,206
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
75%
Required SF for Substantial Progress
1,119,849
680,404
% of Total by Phase
60%
23%
Master Block Non Residential Completions
Estimated SF Completions
903,331
NA
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
Required SF for Substantial Progress
677,498
Non Residential Starts
Estimated SF Starts (1)
1,654,813
1,477,930
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
75%
Required SF for Substantial Progress
1,391,109
1,108,448
% of Total by Phase
75%
38%
Master Block Non Residential Starts
Estimated SF Starts
1,265,011
NA
Substantial Progress % Required
75%
Required SF for Substantial Progress
948,758
Includes Master Block