HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 PROSPECT VILLAGE 05-17-04
8-
'... cZ
.','
AGENDA REPORT
Agenda Item
Reviewed: ~
City Manager
Finance Director f~'
2
MEETING DATE:
MAY 17, 2004
FROM:
WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF AND
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF
TO:
SUBJECT:
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE TUSTIN CITY COUNCIL AND TUSTIN
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGARDING IMPLEMENTION
ACTIONS AND ENTITLEMENTS FOR THE PROSPECT VILLAGE PROJECT
LOCATED IN OLD TOWN TUSTIN IN THE TOWN CENTER REDEVLOPMENT
AREA PROJECT
SUMMARY
The City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") are being
requested to conduct a joint public hearing to consider the Prospect Village Project (the
"Project"), which includes the demolition of existing buildings and construction of a
9,300 square foot commercial building and twelve (12) live/work units at the northwest
corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue (the "Site") (Attachment A - Location Map),
The Citv Council is being asked to adopt the resolutions approving a General Plan
Conformity Finding for disposition of the site, Zone Change 03-002, Tentative Tract Map
16481, Design Review 03-012, Conditional Use Permit 03-012, and the sale of property
acquired by the Agency using tax increment funds. The Redevelopment Aaencv is
being asked to adopt the resolution approving the Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) with Prospect Village LP. All actions requested are considered part
of the Project. To approve the project, the City Council would need to take action to
certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and adopt Findings of Fact,
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring Program,
RECOMMEDATION
1.
Staff recommends that the City Council and Agency take the following actions:
a)
Hear staff reports from Community Development and Redevelopment
Agency staff,
b)
Open and conduct a joint public hearing on the proposed Prospect Village
Project.
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 2
2.
3.
c)
Close the public hearing and ask staff to prepare responses to questions
and issues.
d)
Discuss and take actions (City Council first).
That the City Council take the following actions:
a)
Adopt Resolution No. 04-45 certifying the Prospect Village Project Final
Environmental Impact Report as complete and adequate pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act and adopting Findings of Fact, a
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the Project.
b)
Adopt Resolution No. 04-46 determining that location, purpose, and extent
of the proposed DDA for disposition of property at the northwest corner of
Main Street and Prospect Avenue conforms with the Tustin General Plan.
c)
Introduce Ordinance No. 1284 adopting Zone Change 03-002 to change
the zoning on the Site from Central Commercial and Parking Overlay (C2-
P) to Planned Community (P-C) and establish Planned Community District
Regulations and set for second reading at its regular meeting on June 7,
2004.
d)
Adopt Resolution No. 04-47 approving Tentative Tract Map 16481 to
subdivide the Site into thirteen (13) numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot
for the purpose of developing a commercial building and twelve (12) live-
work units within a planned unit development.
e)
Adopt Resolution No. 04-48 approving Design Review 03-012 for
development of the Site.
f)
Adopt Resolution No. 04-49 approving Conditional Use Permit 03-012 for
establishment of a future restaurant with alcoholic beverage sales in a
tenant space up to 3,000 square feet with 112 seats in the commercial
building on Lot 1 ofTentative Tract Map 16481.
g)
Adopt Resolution No. 04-41 approving the sale of Agency-owned property
located at 191 and 193-195 East Main Street.
That the Redevelopment Agency take the following actions:
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 3
a)
Adopt Resolution No. RDA 04-01 accepting the Prospect Village Project
Final Environmental Impact Report as certified by the City Council
complete and adequate pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act and adopting Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Disposition and
Development Agreement (the "DDA") between the Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, LP.
b)
Adopt Resolution No. RDA 04-02 approving the DDA 04-1 between the
Agency and Prospect Village, LP, and authorize the Executive Director to
take such actions and execute such documents and instruments, with
such minor changes, additions, or deletions as may be approved by the
City Attorney, as deemed necessary or desirable for implementation of the
DDA.
FISCAL IMPACT
The associated applications were initiated by the applicant and all applicable fees have
been paid the applicant. A fiscal analysis of the proposed DDA is provided in the report
prepared pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33433 and attached as Exhibit A
to Resolution No. 04-41. There will be no fiscal impact to the Agency for the
construction of private improvements pursuant to the DDA (Attachment B - Disposition
and Development Agreement 04-1). However, the DDA provides that the Developer will
construct certain public improvements to be reimbursed by the City. The public
improvement funds have been appropriated in the City's Capital Improvement Project
(CIP) budget and would be expended independently to make the improvements that are
associated with the overall streetscape improvement program for Old Town, as follows:
.
.
$330,000 for the East Alley Improvements between Main Street and Third Street
(CIP Project No. 7176); and,
$550,000 for the Prospect Avenue Improvements between Main Street and Third
Street (CIP Project No. 7177).
BACKGROUND
The proposed Prospect Village Project includes the development of a 1.036-acre site
(the former location of the Utt Juice Company) at the northwest corner of Main Street
and Prospect Avenue. The Site is owned by the Tustin Community Redevelopment
Agency which acquired the property in 1998 through eminent domain for redevelopment
purposes and the elimination of blight pursuant to a Resolution of Necessity adopted by
the Agency in December 1997 (Resolution No. RDA 97-7).
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 4
Since February 1998, Agency staff has marketed the Site through an extensive
developer outreach and solicitation process. Throughout the solicitation process,
prospective developers were informed of the City's desire to enhance the existing
improvement on the site, particularly the facades of the buildings, if feasible, while
providing for the construction of additional buildings on the property to achieve its
highest and best use. During this six-year period Agency staff was unable to reach
agreement with four separate developers, none of which would have preserved any
portion of the existing buildings and all of which would have required substantial public
subsidies.
In June 2002, Pelican Center LLC (now Prospect Village, LP, a California Limited
Partnership (the "Developer") submitted a development proposal to the Agency to
construct an approximately 13,000 square foot retail commercial building and 12 live-
work residential units. Subsequent to entering exclusive negotiations and additional
design refinements, a revised development plan and project pro forma reflecting an
approximately 9,300 square foot retail commercial building (with 8,589 leaseable square
feet) and 12 live-work units was submitted. The revised proposal is reflected in the
applications related to Zone Change 03-002, Tentative Tract Map 16481, Design
Review 03-012, and the proposed DDA.
Site and Surrounding Properties
The Site is owned by the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and is bounded by
Main Street on the south, Prospect Avenue on the east, Third Street on the north, and a
public alley to the west. There are two existing buildings on the Site, located at 191 and
193-195 East Main Street, which have been largely vacant and in a dilapidated
condition since the Utt Juice Company ceased operations in 1973.
The two buildings are identified as being historically significant. The 193-195 building
appears eligible for separate listing on the National Register of Historic Places and
would by virtue of its separate eligibility be automatically eligible for listing on the
California Register of Historical Resources. The 191 Main Street building would not be
eligible for separate listing on the National Register but is presumed eligible for listing
on the California Register due to its association with historically important persons and
as a contributor to the Tustin Cultural Resources District. The remaining portions of the
site are generally vacant, with the exception of two concrete pads, where previously
demolished structures were located, and other miscellaneous debris.
The Site is surrounded on three sides by other development, including the City's Main
Street Water Facility to the east and office and retail uses across the alley to the west
and across Main Street to the south. An existing vacant L-shaped lot is located across
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 5
Third Street to the north that currently accommodates a Farmers Market that operates
one (1) day per week (Wednesday) between 9:30 a.m. and 1 :00 p.m.
Development Process and Public Noticing
In late 2003, the development application was deemed substantially complete and a Draft
Environmental Impact Report was prepared and circulated for public review from January
9, 2004, to February 23, 2004. A number of comments were received. Responses to all
comments are contained in Volume 2 of the Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact
Report, which was made available for review on April 16, 2004, ten (10) days prior to the
Planning Commission public hearing.
Public notices for the public hearings by the Planning Commission and City Council were
published in the Tustin News on April 15, 2004, and posted on the property on April 15,
2004, Revised public notices for the joint public hearing of the Tustin City Council and
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency were published in the Tustin News on April 29,
2004, and May 6, 2004, and posted on the property on April 29, 2004. Public hearing
notices were mailed to approximately 212 property owners within 300 feet of the project
site and individuals on an interest list.
Planning Commission Public Hearing and Actions
On April 26, 2004, at the regularly scheduled meeting of the Tustin Planning
Commission, the Commission conducted a public hearing and took public testimony and
accepted one written comment letter regarding the proposed Prospect Village Project.
Some speakers noted support for the project and some were desirous of adoption of
some alternative with preservation of the buildings, particularly at 193 and 195 E. Main
Street or at least preservation of the building façades. Some speakers noted Alternative
3 and Alternative 5 of the FEIR as the more favorable alternatives (Attachment C -
Planning Commission Minutes and Comment Letter). Comments made at the Planning
Commission meeting were addressed in Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) or
focused on recommendations for a course of action (i.e., selection of an alternative). A
few comments that required clarification at the meeting are noted and discussed below,
One of the speakers questioned use of off-site parking to accommodate on-site parking
requirements for the project. Staff responded that this option has been available since
1988 and utilized by a number of current business owners in Old Town Tustin such as
businesses located at 425 EI Camino Real, 215 EI Camino Real, 335 South C Street,
301-307 EI Camino Real, 333 and 339 EL Camino Real, and 100 W. Main Street.
Public parking spaces under license by the City are made available for the non-
exclusive use by the business owners and visitors in the area.
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 6
There was also a comment regarding a $355,000 public subsidy that is noted on Page
127 of Volume 2 of FEIR (Reponses to Public Comments), which refers to an amount
originally requested by the developer. Staff had indicated in the written Response to
Comments that the development pro forma was revised subsequently to increase the
purchase price for the property as identified in the DDA. At the meeting, staff identified
that the financial terms in the DDA require no public subsidy.
Another comment was that the City had allowed the existing buildings to decline from an
average to poor condition. As noted by staff at the Planning Commission meeting, the
buildings have been vacant since 1973 and the previous owner had allowed the
buildings to deteriorate significantly. Prior to the City's acquisition of the property, the
buildings had numerous health, safety, and building code violations and nuisance
conditions, which the property owner did not remedy. The City obtained a court order to
seismically retrofit the buildings to secure the building to a basic standard of safety. The
structural engineer's report prepared by Curry Price Court (Attachment D - Adaptive
Reuse Study-Structural Engineering Report) identifies the condition of the structures to
be relatively deteriorated.
Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission approved the following:
1.
Adopted (5-0 vote) Resolution No, 3910 certifying the Prospect Village Project
Final Environmental Impact Report as complete and adequate pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act and adopting a Statement of Overriding
Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Zone Change 03-002,
Design Review 03-012, Tentative Tract Map 16481, and Conditional Use Permit
03-012;
2.
Adopted (5-0 vote) Resolution No. 3912 recommending that the City Council
approve Zone Change 03-002 to change the zoning on the Site from Central
Commercial and Parking Overlay (C2-P) to Planned Community (P-C) and
recommending adoption of the Planned Community District Regulations for the
Prospect Village Project;
3.
Adopted (5-0 vote) Resolution No. 3912 recommending that the City Council
approve Tentative Tract Map 16481 to subdivide the Site into thirteen (13)
numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot for the purpose of developing a
commercial building and twelve (12) live-work units within a planned unit
development;
4.
Adopted (4-1 vote) Resolution No. 3913 approving Design Review 03-012 for
development of the Site with an approximately 9,300 square foot (8,589 square
feet of leasable area) two-story commercial building and twelve (12) three-story
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 7
live-work units, with a reduction of off-street parking requirements and the
provision of off-site parking, and alcoholic beverage sales in conjunction with a
future restaurant;
5.
Adopted (5-0 vote) Resolution No. 3914 approving Conditional Use Permit 03-
012 for establishment of a future restaurant with alcoholic beverage sales in
tenant space up to 3,000 square feet with 112 seats in the commercial building
on Lot 1 of Tentative Tract Map 16481; and
6.
Adopted (5-0 vote) Resolution No. 3915 finding the disposition of property by the
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency for the Prospect Village Project is in
conformance with the Tustin General Plan.
On May 3, 2004, at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting, the Final Actions of the
Planning Commission were appealed to the City Council. In addition, three comments
letters were submitted following the Planning Commission meeting (Attachment E -
Comment Letters) that indicate support or opposition to the project or provide information
about what other jurisdictions have done in their Old Town areas; none of the letters raise
any new issues that have not been addressed.
DISCUSSION
Project Objectives
The project site is located near the center of the Old Town commercial area. The
Agency's goal for the Old Town commercial area is to create a sustainable and
competitive 24-hour district that will serve a broad segment of the City's business and
residential population. Development of a compact eight-block commercial-retail core at
the heart of the Old Town commercial area would serve as the primary specialty retail
area for the City, The project objectives are consistent with the recommendations in the
"Visions of Old Town," a planning study that was prepared in 1991 and coordinated by
the Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) through the American Institute
of Architects (AlA), As described in the R/UDAT study, the commercial-retail core
needs to be filled with new restaurants, retail stores, and offices that will introduce a mix
of commercial activities which will be competitive with the surrounding strip commercial
centers located along Newport Avenue. It is important to long-term economic viability
of the Old Town commercial area to re-establish the area in the near future as the "town
center" for the City of Tustin by intensifying private commercial retail development and
providing a viable alternative to the traditional neighborhood strip centers and
community shopping centers found on nearby Newport Avenue and other areas of the
City. The project objectives were further defined as follows:
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 8
.
To develop the vacant and underutilized site within the next 2 to 3 years to
capitalize on the current favorable private development financing conditions for
mixed-use projects;
To eliminate delay and uncertainties regarding future development of the site;
To stimulate private investment and demonstrate economic viability in the Old
Town commercial area.
To increase the amount of specialty retailing and commercial development in the
core of the Old Town commercial area in order to enhance its urban character
and bolster the commercial area's revitalization and long-term economic viability;
To expand the niche market character of the Old Town commercial area by
providing a balanced and complementary mix of new retail and commercial uses;
To increase the number of residential units in the Town Center Redevelopment
Project Area, while reflecting a high-quality urban character;
To develop ground floor specialty retailing configurations consistent with current
market condition requirements;
To provide a minimum 3,000 square foot high-quality restaurant along with
outdoor patio dining to enliven the pedestrian environment along Main Street in
the Old Town commercial area;
To create a financially viable commercial mixed-used development with minimum
public subsidy;
To create construction jobs and permanent jobs in the Town Center
Redevelopment Project Area;
To increase the property tax increment and sales tax revenues in the Project
Area, which will be earmarked for ongoing economic development activities in
the Old Town commercial area including business retention and outreach
programs, façade improvement programs, and community facility projects; and,
To achieve the Old Town commercial area redevelopment goals and objectives
of the City's General Plan and the Town Center Redevelopment Plan.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Project Description
The proposed project is a 40,581 square foot mixed use development, which has been
designed to enliven the pedestrian environment along Main Street by providing a
balanced and complementary mix of specialty retailing and offices to accommodate a
high level of commercial activity and urban vitality at the easterly gateway to the
downtown area. To achieve this, the project includes construction of a new two-story,
9,300 square-foot commercial building with entrances off East Main Street ("Main Street
Building") and access to three (3) on-site parking spaces from the public alley to the
west. The first floor of the Main Street Building would accommodate up to a 3,000
square foot restaurant(s) with 112 seats and 593 square feet of outdoor dining space,
and approximately 773 square feet of retail uses. The second floor would
accommodate approximately 4,816 square feet of retail, service commercial, and office
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 9
space. The Main Street Building would have a zero setback along Main Street and
Prospect Avenue, a four foot setback on the public alley to the west of the site or
Prospect Lane, and a 13 foot and four inch separation between the building and
live/work units to the north.
The project also includes development of twelve (12), three story (approximately 40 feet
tall) detached live/work residential units with retail uses on the ground floor to assist in
achieving the goal of creating a downtown specialty retail core in the Old Town
commercial area. Six (6) of the twelve (12) units would face Prospect Avenue and six
(6) units would face the east alley or Prospect Lane. Each of the Prospect Avenue units
would have 913 square feet of ground floor retail space and a 2,126 square-foot two-
story residence with two-bedrooms, two-bathrooms, and a two-car garage. The other
six (6) three-story units facing the public alley to the west would have 431 square feet of
ground floor retail or office space with a two-story, two-bedroom, two-bath, 1,862
square-foot residential unit above. The live/work units would be located on two sides of
an interior auto court that provides vehicular access from the public alley to the garages
tucked under each of the units.
The live/work units would be privately owned and operated; however, a homeowners
association would be responsible for landscape and common area maintenance
including the automobile entry gate, private drive/interior auto court, and guest parking
spaces. To ensure that the units are proprietor owner-occupied, the developer would
be required to record individual deed restrictions for a minimum of ten (10) of the twelve
(12) live/work units upon the initial sale of the units to prevent the sale of the ground
floor retail or office uses separate from the residential living units above. In addition, a
minimum of ten (10) of the twelve (12) live/work units would be restricted to
owner/proprietor occupancy of the ground floor space based on the number of parking
spaces available to serve the project. In other words, the resident would also be the
operator of the business below unless additional parking can be provided within close
proximity to the live/work unit.
CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS
The project site is located within the City's General Plan "Old Town Commercial" land use
designation, Central Commercial and Parking Overlay (C-2P) zoning district, Cultural
Resources Overlay districts, and Town Center Redevelopment Project Area. The
following entitlements are required by City Council actions (and are discussed in more
detail below):
Certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report: The entitlement actions identified
herein require environmental review under CEQA, the City of Tustin is the lead agency in
the preparation of the EIR, and the City Council is the decision-making body for the
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 10
entitlement actions and for certifying the Final EIR as complete and adequate under CEOA
and adopting Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, if deemed
necessary, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program,
General Plan Conformity Findina: The DDA for disposition of property owned by the Tustin
Community Redevelopment Agency would need to be found to be in conformance with the
General Plan.
Adoption of a Zone Chanae and Planned Communitv District: To support the proposed
project, the project site would need to be rezoned to a Planned Community District. The
City Council is the decision-making body regarding the zone change.
Subdivision of Land: To accommodate the proposed buildings and separate ownerships,
the project site would need to be subdivided. The City Council is the decision-making
body regarding the subdivision map.
Approval of Site and Buildina Desian, Reduced Parkina. and Provision of Off-Site Parkina:
To obtain building permits, approval of the site and building design would be required. As
part of the Design Approval, the applicant is requesting approval for reduced parking
based upon a shared parking analysis and a license for off-site parking at the Main Street
Water Facility. If reduced parking is approved, the applicant would be required to secure a
license for off-site parking at the City's Main Street Water Facility prior to issuance of any
permits.
Conditional Use Permit: The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit
to establish alcoholic beverage sales in conjunction with a future restaurant tenant. The
Planning Commission is the decision-making body for this request.
Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness: Since the project site is located within the
Cultural Resources District, a Certificate of Appropriateness would be required for
demolition of the existing historic buildings and new construction. If the project is
approved, the Director of Community Development would issue a Certificate of
Appropriateness concurrently with the building permits.
Approval of Sale of Aaencv Owned Propertv: Pursuant to Section 33433 of the California
Redevelopment Law the City Council, after a public hearing, is required to approve an
Agency sale of property acquired in whole or in part from tax increment monies.
General Plan Conformity
Since the site is located in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area and owned by
the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency, a Disposition and Development
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 11
Agreement (DDA) will be considered by the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency.
However, prior to adoption of the DDA, Section 65402(c) of the Government Code
requires the local planning agency to find that disposition of property is in conformance
with the General Plan. Since the Planning Commission's action on the general plan
conformity finding was appealed, the City Council will need to consider this finding.
Resolution No. 04-46 (Attachment H) contains findings to support a General Plan
Conformity Finding.
Zone Change
The Tustin General Plan provides for residential uses to be permitted in the Old Town
Commercial land use designation at the discretion of the City Council. To address the
location, land use type, density, and building intensity standards for the proposed uses, a
Planned Community zoning district may be adopted. As such, the site would be rezoned
from "Central Commercial - Parking Overlay (C2-P)" to "Planned Community (PC)";
however, the site would continue to be located within and subject to the Cultural
Resources Overlay District.
In addition, specific zoning provisions would be adopted in conjunction with the zone
change to be known as the "Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations"
(Attachment I - Ordinance No. 1284). In general, the Planned Community District
Regulations would establish two planning areas to delineate the commercial area along
Main Street and the live/work area to the north. In Planning Area A (the commercial
area along Main Street), retail and restaurant uses would be permitted on the ground
floor and retail and office uses would be permitted on the second floor. In Planning
Area B (the residential area), single family residential uses would be permitted on the
upper floors of the live/work units. The ground floor of live/work units facing Prospect
Avenue would be permitted to have retail and service commercial uses whereas the
ground floor of the live/work units that face the alley would be permitted to have retail,
service commercial, or office uses, Although office uses are not permitted on the
ground floor in the Old Town commercial core area, the lack of street frontage of the six
units that face the alley may discourage retail uses. To ensure viability of the live/work
concept, allowing a variety of retail, service, and office uses in these units would be
appropriate. The district regulations also discuss the proposed development standards
for both Planning Areas. Ordinance No. 1284 contains findings to support the zone
change and shows the proposed change to the City's zoning map and contains the
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations.
Subdivision
Tentative Tract Map 16481 would subdivide a 1.036 acre site into thirteen (13)
numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot for the purpose of developing the commercial
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 12
building and twelve (12) live/work units within a Planned Unit Development (Attachment
F - Tentative Tract Map 16481).
Lot 1 would accommodate the Main Street commercial building and building
setbacks.
Lots 2 through 13 would accommodate the building footprints of the live/work
units.
Lot A would accommodate common open space area, drive aisle, and open
parking spaces supporting the live/work units.
The developer will be responsible for construction of off-site improvements, which have
been programmed in the City's CIP budget using Community Development Block Grant
funds, including enhanced paving and landscape improvements in the public alley and
half-width street improvements (paving, curbs and gutters) on Prospect Avenue
between Main Street and Third Street. In addition, the developer will construct
sidewalks on Prospect Avenue and Third Street with enriched paving and pedestrian
bump-outs at Main Street and Third Street and landscaping consistent with the recently
installed streetscape improvements in the Old Town commercial district. The developer
will also be required to construct a new sidewalk on Main Street that is consistent with
the Americans with Disabilities Act, which is needed to support pedestrian access to
and from the new commercial building. In addition, an approximately 4,900 square foot
portion of the alley to the west, which is currently an easement, will be granted in fee
title to the City,
To ensure operational standards that are consistent with the intent of the community,
Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and homebuyer notifications would
be required.
Resolution No. 04-47 (Attachment J) includes findings to support approval of the map
and conditions to ensure compliance with the Prospect Village Planned Community
District Regulations, the FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program, the Subdivision Map Act,
and the City's Subdivision Ordinance.
Design Review
The project would provide a strong and consistent urban theme that is compatible with
the surrounding buildings and would retain a pedestrian scale along the storefronts
(Attachment F - Submitted Development Plans). The building improvements and
tenant spaces would respond to the practical considerations of current retail, restaurant,
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 13
and office market requirements. As noted above, a number of public improvements
would be required to complete the Old Town streetscape.
Arch itectu fe/La ndscapi ng
The Main Street Building would be approximately 34 feet in height with brick clad on
three sides and stucco on the rear. This height is generally consistent with other two-
story buildings in the immediate vicinity. The building's design would include articulated
cornices, divided pane windows, brick banding, and tile friezes to be compatible with
adjacent buildings in the Old Town commercial area.
The live/work units would range from thirty-six to thirty-nine feet in height and are
designed to complement the adjacent buildings and the overall character of the Old
Town Commercial area. The live-work units reflect an urban style with brick and stucco
clad exteriors, varied roof lines, articulated cornices, and exterior banding. The ground
floors would be characteristic of other retail store fronts in the area and would include
plate glass windows and entries. The upper floors would be residential in architectural
character with divided pane windows, balconies, and decks that are compatible with the
surrounding buildings in Old Town.
Specifications for the lighting fixtures and illumination throughout the project site would be
reviewed at plan check and, as conditioned, would require that all lighting be directed
downward to avoid light and glare on adjacent properties.
Site Amenities
Many of the buildings would have limited setbacks with limited landscaping, similar to other
buildings within Old Town. Tenants would have the opportunity to set pots or planters in
front of the buildings to provide greenery. In addition, the developer would be required to
install street trees along the project perimeter.
The refuse area for the Main Street commercial building would be located at the southwest
corner of the building and accessible from the public alley, The live/work units would have
individual trash service and would have approximately 100 square feet of storage area in
the garages for both trash and general storage.
An access gate would be installed near the intersection of the private drive and the public
alley to limit entry into the private live/work area. A condition of approval would require the
developer to submit detailed plans so that the Public Works Department can review the
proposed stacking distance to ensure there will no impacts to circulation in the public alley.
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 14
Parking
Based on the proposed project land uses, ninety-two (92) parking spaces would be
required if the requirements of the "Parking Overlay District (P)" were applied. This
parking overlay district applies to most of the Old Town commercial area. However,
since a comprehensive Planned Community District with unique operational
characteristics is proposed to be established, a parking demand analysis was prepared
to assess the actual parking needs for the project.
The City retained Sasaki Transportation Services to evaluate the project's peak parking
demand. As outlined in Appendix F of the Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact
Report (Exhibit A of Attachment G), the Shared Parking Evaluation found the following:
.
The twenty-four (24) garage spaces and three (3) open off-street parking spaces
would be adequate to serve the residential portions of the live/work units. This
amount of parking is consistent with Tustin City Code requirements for multiple
family residential projects.
.
The proposed mix of commercial uses (retail, office, and restaurant) would be
conducive to a shared parking arrangement. According to the study, the peak
parking demands for office, retail, and restaurant uses occur at different times of the
day. For example, the office parking peaks occur during the day on week days,
while the retail peak is on the weekend. Restaurants are typically busy on Friday
and Saturday evenings when retail and office uses are not at their peaks.
According to the Parking Study, the shared parking demand for the commercial
portion of the Project was sixty-two (62) spaces, which would be satisfied by the
use of fifty-nine (59) spaces at the City of Tustin Main Street Water facility ("Water
Facility") parking lot and three (3) on-site spaces. The three (3) parking spaces
provided on-site are immediately west of and adjacent to the E. Main Street
building.
To satisfy the shared use requirements, the developer must enter into an agreement with
the City of Tustin for the non-exclusive use of fifty-nine (59) parking spaces in the public
parking lot adjacent to the Main Street Water Facility. These parking facilities were
constructed to provide public parking and support development in the area. A condition
of approval would require the developer to obtain an Off-Site Parking Agreement from
the City for the provision of fifty-nine (59) public parking spaces or an off-site equivalent
prior to issuance of any permits.
Resolution No. 04-48 (Attachment K) includes conditions to ensure compliance with the
submitted plans, design review criteria, Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations, and the FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program.
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 15
Conditional Use Permit
The developer is requesting approval of alcoholic beverage sales in conjunction with a
future restaurant tenant. The restaurant would be up to 3,000 square feet and include the
outdoor patio in the Main Street commercial building. Resolution No. 04-49 (Attachment
L) contains standard conditions of approval for alcoholic beverage sales. Once a tenant is
selected, the applicant would be required to submit information demonstrating compliance
with the conditional use permit or request a modification.
Approval of Sale of Agency-Owned Property
Since the site is located in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area and owned by
the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency, a Disposition and Development
Agreement will be considered by the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency as a
separate item. Health and Safety Code Section 33433 requires the legislative body (the
Tustin City Council), after a public hearing, to approve an Agency sale of property that was
acquired in whole or in part with tax increment moneys. Resolution No. 04-41 (Attachment
M) includes findings pursuant to Section 33433 for consideration by the City Council.
Environmental Analysis
A Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated for public review from January
9, 2004, to February 23, 2004. The DEIR and responses to all comments are contained
in Volumes 1 and 2 of the Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report (Exhibit A
of Attachment G), which was made available for review on April 16, 2004.
The FEIR evaluated seven environmental issue areas including: aesthetics, air quality,
cultural resources, hazards, land use, noise, and traffic. No significant impacts were found
in the areas of aesthetics, air quality, or noise. Other potential impact categories related to
hazards, short-term traffic impacts, and parking were found to be less than significant with
the implementation of mitigation measures shown in Table ES-1 of the FEIR.
Due to the proposed demolition of the existing historic buildings, which were built in 1914
and 1922, the project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to cultural
resources and land use. Although the following mitigation measure is proposed to lessen
the impact of demolition, it will not reduce the impacts of demolition to a less than
significant level:
.
Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, documentation of the buildings to be
removed shall be undertaken by the developer to be approved by the City utilizing
the standards of the Historic American Building Survey (HABS), including photo-
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 16
documentation and measured drawings of the East Main and Prospect Avenue
elevations. These items, together with the Historical Resource Technical Report,
shall be added to the Tustin Area Historical Society Museum.
The FEIR also discusses alternatives to the project as required by CEQA and provides
independent analyses of the project alternatives based on technical studies regarding the
existing condition of the buildings and their potential for adaptive reuse. However, it
should be noted that the developer has not indicated that any of the alternatives would be
feasible from a business perspective and the Disposition and Development Agreement
focuses solely on the proposed project. In addition to a "No Project Alternative," these
alternatives are as follows:
1.
Full Reuse Alternative: The Full Reuse Alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse
of the existing Utt Juice buildings in accordance with the Secretary's Standards
for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving,
Rehabílítating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, 1995, Weeks
and Grimmer ("Secretary's Standards and Guidelines"). This Alternative also
entails new construction of a retail building addition on the vacant pad area
immediately west of the 191 Main Street building ("191 Building"). The remaining
northerly portion of the site would be developed with ten (10) live/work units.
2.
Partial Reuse Alternative: This Alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the 191
Building and partially rehabilitate and reuse the 193, 195 Building (to a depth of
sixty) in accordance with the Secretary's Standards and Guide/ines. This
Alternative also entails construction of a new two-story building to a depth on the
pad area immediately west of the 191 Building. The remaining northerly portion
of the site would be developed as ten (10) residential live/work units.
3.
Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only) Alternative: This Alternative would
partially rehabilitate and reuse the front forty-five feet of the 193, 195 Buildings in
accordance with the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines. The 191 Building
would be demolished. This Alternative also entails construction of a new two-
story retail building on the remaining pad area west of the 193, 195 Building.
Similar to the proposed project, the remaining northerly portion of the site would
be developed with twelve (12) live/work units.
4.
Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative: The Full Reuse Under Existing Zoning
Alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the existing structures in accordance
with the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines. The alternative also entails
construction of a new abutting 2,200 square foot single-story retail building on the
vacant site immediately west of the 191 Building. The remaining northerly
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 17
portion of the site would be developed with a two-story retail and professional
office building.
5.
Façade Reuse Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse of all
or a portion of the façade of the 193, 195 Building as may be technically feasible,
which would be incorporated into a new two-story Main Street Building. All other
project components would be similar to the proposed project.
If the City Council is inclined to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
purpose of approving the proposed project, Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program will need to be adopted. The
Statement of Overriding Considerations must identify the economic, legal, social, or
technological benefits of the project that outweigh the project's significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts. Resolution No. 04-45 (Attachment G) contains
required CEQA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the City Council's consideration.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTIONS
As identified above, the project site is located within the City's General Plan "Old Town
Commercial" land use designation, Central Commercial and Parking Overlay (C-2P)
zoning district, Cultural Resources Overlay districts, and Town Center Redevelopment
Project Area. The following are required Redevelopment Agency actions:
Acceptance of Final Environmental Impact Report: The proposed DDA is a "project" as
defined under CEQA subject to environmental review and certification by Redevelopment
Agency as a responsible agency. The Redevelopment Agency may rely on the FEIR
certified by the City Council in approving the DDA. The Agency's CEQA Findings and
Statement of Overriding Considerations for its actions will be approved, if deemed
necessary.
Disposition and Development Aareement: Since the site is located in the Town Center
Redevelopment Project Area and owned by the Tustin Community Redevelopment
Agency, a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) will be considered by the
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency.
Disposition and Development Agreement
Redevelopment Agency Staff have negotiated the terms and conditions of a proposed
Disposition and Development Agreement 04-1 between the Redevelopment Agency
and Prospect Village LP, which requires the development of the Site in accordance with
the land use approvals identified above. The proposed DDA provides for the payment
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 18
of a purchase price of $855,000 by the Developer to the Agency. The purchase price to
be paid is greater than the appraised fair market value and the reuse value of the land
and is equal to the Agency's cost of acquiring the property, thus not requiring any public
subsidy for the construction of the private improvements on the Site.
The proposed DDA requires the developer to convey a dedication in fee for the east
public alley and to construct certain public improvements for the east public alley
between Main Street and Third Street and for Prospect Avenue between Main Street
and Third Street. The public improvements would be reimbursed by the City in an
amount not to exceed $330,000 for the cost of the east alley improvements and
$550,000 for the Prospect Avenue improvements as identified in the DDA. Any costs
incurred by the developer in excess of the above amounts will be borne by the
developer. The public improvement funding amounts have been appropriated in the FY
03-04 Capital Improvement Program for CIP Project Nos. 7176 and 7177 respectively.
The DDA requires the Developer to secure all required land use entitlement from the
Tustin Planning Commission and City Council. The site improvements will be constructed
in compliance with all provisions of the DDA and with all "Conditions of Approval"
stipulated by the Tustin Planning Commission, the City Council, and other applicable
governmental agencies having jurisdiction.
Except for the City's reimbursement for the public improvements discussed above, the
DDA requires the Developer to obtain private funds necessary for all project costs,
including but not limited to, the acquisition of the site, construction of all on-site
improvements and all related private improvements as identified in the DDA related to
developing the site. RDA Resolution No. 04-02 (Attachment 0) contains required findings
for the DDA for the Agency's consideration,
Environmental Analysis
A Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated for public review from January
9, 2004, to February 23, 2004, and is discussed in the City Council Actions section above.
Responses to all comments are contained in Volume 2 of the Prospect Village Final
Environmental Impact Report, which was made available for review on April 16, 2004.
If the Agency is inclined to accept the Final Environmental Impact Report certified by the
City Council for the purpose of approving the proposed DDA, Findings, a Statement of
Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program will need to be adopted.
The Statement of Overriding Considerations must identify the economic, legal, social, or
technological benefits of the project that outweigh the project's significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts. Resolution No. RDA 04-01 (Attachment N)
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 19
contains required CEOA findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a
Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Agency's consideration.
CONCLUSION
The proposed project is consistent with the Implementation Plan's five year plan for
redevelopment activities in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area. The proposed
project will remove a blighting influence and contribute to economic revitalization in the
Project Area by removing vacant deteriorating buildings and developing a mixed-use retail,
office and live-work project consisting of a 9,300 square foot commercial building and 12
live-work residential units.
Attached are the proposed Disposition and Development Agreement, the Section 33433
Summary Report, and the proposed resolutions and ordinances. By adopting the
proposed resolutions and ordinances, the City Council and Agency will approve the
proposed Prospect Village Project.
Attachments: A:
B:
C:
J <. tlM,L....P~f .t~Þ-
W-Elizabeth A. Binsack
V Director of Community Development
D:
E:
F:
G:
Location Map
Disposition and Development Agreement
Minutes of April 26, 2004, Planning Commission Meeting and
Submitted Comment Letter
Adaptive Reuse Study - Structural Engineering Report
Comment Letters Submitted after Planning Commission Meeting
Tentative Tract Map 16481 and Development Plans
Resolution No. 04-45
Exhibit A: Final Environmental Impact Report
Exhibit B: Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding
Considerations
Exhibit C: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Resolution No. 04-46
Ordinance No. 1284
Exhibit A: Zoning Map Amendment
Exhibit B: Planned Community District Regulations
Resolution No. 04-47
Resolution No. 04-48
Resolution No. 04-49
H:
I:
J:
K:
L:
Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Report
Joint Public Hearing Prospect Village Project & DDA
May 17, 2004
Page 20
M:
Resolution No. 04-41
Exhibit A: Fair Reuse Analysis and Summary Report
RDA Resolution No. RDA 04-01
Exhibit A: Final Environmental Impact Report
Exhibit B: Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding
Considerations
Exhibit C: Mitigation Monitoring Program
RDA Resolution No. RDA 04-02
N:
0:
CCreport\May 17 2004 Joint Pub Hrg,doc
ATTACHMENT A
Location Map
-----
PROJECT NO.
ADDRESS
191, 193 & 195 E M . S
. am treet
Project Location
I
~~,
ATTACHMENT B
Disposition and Development Agreement
(DDA 04-1)
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(DDA 04-1)
by and between the
TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
and
PROSPECT VILLAGE LP, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
DATED:
1.
2.
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
3.
4.
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
5.
5.1
5.2
6.
7.
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
8.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6.
1.7
Page
SUBJECT AND PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT; PARTIES; APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS. ............................1
BACKGROUND REGARDING lliE PROJECT. .....................................................................................................................1
PURPOSE OFlliE AGREEMENT........................................................................................................................................1
SCOPE OF AGREEMENT...................................................................................................................................................1
PARTIES TOlliE AGREEMENT.........................................................................................................................................2
LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO AGREEMENT........................................................................3
NOT ADEVEWPMENT AGREEMENT...............................................................................................................................3
DEFINITIONS; ATIACHMENTS. ................................... ...................................................................................................3
PROHIBITION AGAINST CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP. MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF DEVELOPER 3
IMPORTANCEOFDEVEWPER QUALIPICATIONS. ............................................................................................................3
OWNERSHIP TRANSFER OR ASSIGNMENT. ......................................................................................................................4
CHANGE IN MANAGEMENT OR CONTROL...................... ......,.............................. ........................................................6
ASSIGNMENT BY OPERATION OF LAW. ...........................................................................................................................7
NON-APPLICABILITY OF OWNERSHIP TRANSFER PROVISIONS. ...........................................................................,........... 7
REMEDIES FOR IMPROPER TRANSFERS..........................................................................................................................8
MEMORANDUM OFDDA;PERMITIED MORTGAGEEPROTECfION. ........................................................................... ..8
REPRESENTATIONS AND W ARRANTIES................................................................................................................17
3.1
3.2
3.3
DEVEWPER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND W ARRANTIES. .................................................................................................17
AGENCY REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES. .........................................................................................................19
SURVIVAL. ...................................................................................................................................................................20
CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY/ALLEY DEDICA TION. ........................................................................................20
THE PROPERTY TO BE CONVEYED................................................................. ................................................ . ...20
PURCHASE PRICE....................................................... ...................................................................................................21
AGENCY ASSISTANCE FOR PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. .........................................................................................................21
ESCROW. ............................................................................................................................................................... .....21
INVESTIGATION; PROPERTY SOLD "As-Is".................................................. ....................................................... ..22
6.1
6.2
6.3
INDEMNITY. NO FINANCING CONTINGENCY. .....................................................................................................25
INDEMNITY......................................... ..................................................................26
No FINANCING CONTINGENCY........... ..............................................................26
TITLE: SURVEY..............................................................................................................................................................26
SURVEY........................................................................................................................................................................26
PERMITIED EXCEPTIONS. .............................................................................................................................................26
ALTAPOLICY: ENDORSEMENTS..................................................................................................................................27
CLOSING. .........................................................................................................................................................................27
TIMEANDPLACEOFCWSING................................................................ ....................................................27
DEVEWPER'S CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO CLOSING ............... ..................... .........................................................27
THE AGENCY'S CONDITIONS PRECEDENT................................ . .....................................................28
ADDITIONAL CWSING CONDITIONS.............................................................................................................................30
PROCEDURES FOR CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY FROM AGENCY TO DEVEWPER..........................................................30
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT. .........................................................................................................................33
8.1 SCOPEOFDEVEWPMENT.................................................... ............................. ................................ ..33
ii
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
8.8
8.9
8.10
8.11
9.
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7
10.
TIMING AND CONDITIONS OF PROJECT DEVELOPMENT. ...............................................................................................34
LAND USE MATTERS. ...................................................................................................................................................35
FINANCIAL STATUS. .....................................................................................................................................................36
DESIGN APPROVAL.......................................................................................................................................................37
CONSTRUCTION COVENANTS. ......................................................................................................................................39
AGENCY RIGHTS OF ACCESS. .......................................................................................................................................40
DISCLAIMER OF REsPONSIBILITY BY AGENCY..............................................................................................................40
CC&Rs........................................................................................................................................................................40
LOCAL. STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS. ...........................................................................................................................40
TAXES, ASSESSMENTS, ENCUMBRANCES AND LIENS. ..................................................................................................41
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE. .............................................................................................................................41
COMPLETION: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. ........................................................................................................... ..41
IsSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE. ...............................................................................................................41
CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION. ........................................................................................................................................41
RELEASE OF BONDs. ....................................................................................................................................................42
NOTEvIDENCE.............................................................................................................................................................42
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE. .................................................................42
AGENCY OBLIGATIONS ..................................................... ................................................................... ..42
INDEMNIFICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROVISIONS. .............................................................................43
10.1 DEVELOPER'S INDEMNIFICATION..................................................................................................................................43
10.2 ENVIRONMENTAL INDEMNITY. .....................................................................................................................................43
10.3 DURATION OF INDEMNITIES. ........................................................................................................................................44
10.4 CLAIM RESPONSE. ........................................................................................................................................................44
10.5 RELEASE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDIAL ACTIONS .......... .......................................................................................44
11. INSURANCE.....................................................................................................................................................................45
11.1 REQUJREDINSURANCE. ........................................................................................................:.......................................45
11.2 GENERAL INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ........................... ............................................................................................46
12. COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS. ..........................................................................................................................47
12.1 USE COVENANT................................................. ...........................................................................................................47
12.2 MAINTENANCE COVENANT. .........................................................................................................................................47
12.3 NONDISCRIMINATION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. .......................................................................................................48
12.4 DEED RESTRICTIONS/COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE LAND.... .............................................................................49
13. DEED RESTRICTION FOR LIVE-WORK UNITS. ....................................................................................................49
14. POTENTIAL AND MATERIAL DEFAULTS...............................................................................................................50
14.1 POTENTIAL DEFAULTS. ................................................................................................................................................50
14.2 MATERIAL DEFAULTS. .................................................................................................................................................50
14.3 FAILURE OR DELAY IN NOTICE.....................................................................................................................................53
14.4 DEVELOPER INFORMATION AND PRODUCTS. ................................................................................................................53
14.5 FAILURE TO TIMELY PAY AMOUNTS DUE. ......................... .........................................................................................53
15.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
NONOCCURRENCE OF A CLOSING CONDITION. ................................................................................................54
15.1
15.2
15.3
15.4
FAILURE OF A CLOSING CONDITION TO OCCUR ABSENT A MATERIAL DEFAULT. ........................................................54
FAILURE TO CLOSE; MATERIAL DEFAULT OF DEVELOPER... ............................................................55
FAILURE TO CLOSE MATERIAL DEFAULT OF AGENCY. ... .................... ...............................................56
MATERIAL DEFAULT BY BOTH PARTIES................ .......................... ............................ ...........57
iii
16. RIGHT OF REVERSION. ...............................................................................................................................................58
16.1 RIGHT OF REVERSION........................................ ................................................ ..........................................................58
16.2 PRIORITY OF THE AGENCY'S RIGHT OFREVERSION.. ...................... ............................................... ......................60
17. GENERAL PROVISIONS. ..............................................................................................................................................62
17.1 CONSENT TO JURISDICTION. .........................................................................................................................................62
17.2 LEGAL FEES AND COSTS. .................................... ......................................................................................................62
17.3 MODIFICATIONS OR AMENDMENTS.... .. ............................ .........................................................................63
17.4 APPLICABLELAW...................................................... .. ..................................................................63
17.5 fuRTHER AsSURANCES. ...............................................................................................................................................63
17.6 RIGHTS AND REMEDIES ARE CUMULATIVE................................................... ................................................................63
17.7 NOTICES, DEMANDS AND COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN TIlE PARTIES. ................ .......................................... ...........63
17.8 FoRCE MAJEURE DELAY........................................... . .. .. . ............64
17.9 CONFLICT OF INTEREST................................................. .................................................................66
17.10 NON-LIABILITY OF AGENCY OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES..................................................................................... .......66
17.11 INSPECTION OF BOOKS AND RECORDS. ........................... .................... ..................................................................67
17.12 APPROVALS.................................................................................................... .........................................................67
17.13 REALEsTATECOMMISSIONS........................................................................................................................................67
17.14 DATEANDDELIVERYOpAGREEMENT........ ........ .........................................................................67
17.15 SURVIVALOFCOVENANTS........................................................ .................................................................................67
17.16 CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT. ............................................ .................................68
17.17 TIMEOFEsSENCE.........................................................................................................................................................69
17.18 FEES AND OTIlERExpENSES. .......................................................................................................................................69
17.19 No PARTNERSHIP.................................................. ......................................................................................................69
17.20 COMPLIANCE WITH LAW....... ...................................................................................................69
17.21 BINDING EFFECT. .............."...............................................""'"...................................................................................69
17.22 No THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. ......... ................................................................................................................69
17.23 COUNTERPARTS. ................. .......................................................................................................................69
17.24 AUTHORITY OF SIGNATORIES TO AGREEMENT............ ............................................................ 70
17.25 ENTIRE AGREEMENT, WAIVERS AND AMENDMENTS.................. ............................................... .. ........70
17.26 ApPROVAL PROCEDURES............................. ............................. .........................................................................70
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
iv
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT NO.1
ATTACHMENT NO.2
ATTACHMENT NO.3
ATTACHMENT NO.4
ATTACHMENT NO.5
ATTACHMENT NO.6
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVELOPER PARCEL
GLOSSARY OF DEFINED TERMS
MEMORANDUM OF DDA
GRANT DEED TO DEVELOPER
PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
ATTACHMENT NO.8
ATTACHMENT NO. 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 10
SCOPE OF DEVELOPMENT
METHOD OF FINANCING
FORM OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
v
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
TIDS DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into as of
, 2004 (the "Effective Date") by and between the TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (as defined in Section 1.4.1. "Agency") and PROSPECT VILLAGE LP, a
California limited Partnership (as defined in Section 1.4.2 the "Developer"). The Agency and the
Developer are sometimes referred to herein individually as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." The
Parties agree as follows:
1.
Subject and Purpose of Agreement: Parties: Applicable ReQuirements.
1.1
Background Regarding the Project.
1.1.1 The real property that is the primary subject of this Agreement is located at i9i, i93
- i95 East Main Street in Tustin, California and currently consists of approximately 1.04 gross acres with
6,i20 square feet of improvements (the "Developer Parcel"). In i998, the Agency acquired the Developer
Parcel for redevelopment purposes pursuant to a proceeding in eminent domain. The Agency still owns the
Developer Parcel as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. A legal description of the Developer Parcel is
attached hereto as Attachment No. 1. The Project also includes the construction of Public hnprovements
adjacent to the Developer Parcel, including the dedication in fee to the City of Tustin and improvement of a
portion of the existing Developer Parcel ("Alley Dedication Area"). The Public hnprovements are more
full described in Section 1.3.i(b). The Developer Parcel is located within the Town Center Redevelopment
Project area.
1.1.2 On July 8, 2002, the Agency entered into an Exclusive Agreement to
Negotiate ("EAN") with Pelican Center LLC, a predecessor in interest to the Developer. The ENA
provided that the Agency desires to negotiate a Disposition and Development Agreement ("DDA") to have
the Developer construct a mixed commercial retail, office and residential live-work project on the
Developer Parcel.
i.i.3 The Agency desires to effectuate the redevelopment of the Developer Parcel and the
Project in furtherance of the Agency's economic revitalization efforts in the Town Center Redevelopment
Project Area.
i.2 Purpose of the Agreement. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for the disposition
of the Developer Parcel to the Developer, in order to develop and construct the Project. The fulfillment of
this Agreement is in the vital and best interests of the Tustin community and the health, safety, and welfare
of its residents, and is in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable federal, state, and
local laws and requirements.
1.3
Scope of Agreement.
1.3.i This Agreement provides for the disposition by the Agency to the Developer of the
Developer Parcel. Subject to approval of Entitlements, Developer shall be required to develop and
l70039.21
M,y 10.2004
construct the Project. As part of the development process, Developer shall decticate in fee to the City of
Tustin and improve a portion of the Developer Parcel known as the Alley Dedication Area. The Alley
Dedication Area is shown in Attachment No.1. Upon the dedication and acceptance of the Alley
Dedication Area, the term "Developer Parcel" shall exclude the Alley Dedication Area. This Agreement
further provides for the Project to consist of construction and installation of the following Improvements,
all of which collectively constitute the Project.
(a) Private Improvements. The demolition and clearance of existing
improvements, inclucting the structures, at 191 and 193 - 195 Main Street and remaining concrete and
asphalt paved surfaces, and the construction of an approximately 40,581 square feet mixed-use restaurant,
retail commercial, office and residential project. The Private Improvements are more specifically described
in the Scope of Development attached hereto as Attachment No.7.
(b) Public Improvements. The construction of the East Alley Improvements,
including but not limited to, paving, landscaping and street furnishings, undergrounding of utilities, half-
width improvements to Prospect Avenue, and additional improvements within the public right-of-way
around the Developer Parcel, inclucting but not limited to sidewalks, enriched paving and pedestrian bump-
outs at the comers of Main Street and Prospect A venue and 3rd Street and Prospect A venue, and all as
further described on the Scope of Development, attached hereto as Attachment No.7.
1.4
Parties to the Ae:reement.
1.4.1 Agencv. The Agency is a state agency organized for local purposes (Health and
Safety Code Sections 33000 et. seq.). It is a public body, corporate and politic. The City Council of the
City of Tustin ("City") serves as the legislative body ofthe Agency. The principal office of the Agency
and mailing address is: 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California, 92780.
1.4.2 Developer. The Developer is Prospect Village LP, a California limited partnership,
located at: 15272 Bolsa Chica Road, Huntington Beach, California, 92649. It's General and Managing
Partner is Pelican - Tustin LLC, a California Limited Liability company, whose managing members are
John H. Tillotson, Jr. and Daniel Howse. Whenever the term "Developer" is used herein, such term shall
be limited to Prospect Village LP which is the Developer as of the Effective Date, or, following an
Ownership Transfer pursuant to a Permitted Transfer approved by the Agency, to any assignee of or
successor to the Developer's rights, powers and responsibilities permitted by this Agreement.
1.4.3 Relationship of Agencv to Developer.
(a) It is hereby acknowledged that the relationship of the Agency to the
Developer is neither that of a partnership nor that of a joint venturer and that the Agency shall not be
deemed or construed for any purpose to be the agent of the Developer, nor shall the Developer be deemed
or construed to be the agent of the Agency.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, the Developer is not, and
shall not be deemed to be, the agent of the Agency for any purpose, and shall not have the power or the
authority to bind the Agency to any contractual or other obligation. Until Close of Escrow has occurred, the
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
2
Developer may characterize itself to third parties as the prospective purchaser and developer of the
Developer Parcel. The Developer shall not at any time hold itself out to the Agency or to any other third
party as an agent of the Agency, and shall not, by any act or omission, mislead any third party into
believing, or allow any third party to continue in the mistaken belief, that the Developer is an agent of the
Agency or has the power or authority to bind the Agency to any contractual or other obligation.
1.5 Local Governmental Requirements Applicable to Aereement. This Agreement is
subject to all Governmental Regulations, including the General Plan, the Tustin City Code and ordinances,
and the Town Center Redevelopment Plan, as Amended.
1.6. Not a Development Aereement. This Agreement is not a Development Agreement as
provided in California Government Code Section 65864 and, is not a grant of any Entitlements, in favor of
the Developer. The Agency shall cooperate in good faith, within applicable legal constraints and consistent
with applicable Agency policies, and take such actions as may be necessary or appropriate to effectuate and
carry out this Agreement in a timely and commercially reasonable manner.
1.7
Definitions: Attachments.
Capitalized tenus used herein, including in the Attachments attached hereto, unless
otherwise defined herein, shall have the respective meanings set forth herein/or as specified in the
Glossary of Defined Tenus attached hereto as Attachment No.2. Unless otherwise indicated, references in
this Agreement to sections, paragraphs, clauses, exhibits, attachments and schedules are to the same that
are contained within or attached to this Agreement and all attachments and schedules referenced herein are
incorporated herein by this reference as through fully set forth herein.
2.
Prohibition Aeainst Chanee in Ownership, Manaeement and Control of Developer.
2.1 Importance of Developer Qualifications, The Developer represents and agrees that its
undertakings pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of development of the Project and not for
speculation in land holding. The Developer further recognizes that the qualifications and identity of the
Developer are of particular concern to the Agency and community in light of the following:
(a) The importance of the development of the Project to the fulfillment of the Town
Center Redevelopment Plan and the general welfare of the community;
(b) The fact that a change in ownership or control of the Developer or of its members, or
any other act or transaction involving or resulting a significant change in ownership control of the
Developer or the degree of control thereof as described in Sections 2.2 and ~is for practical purposes a
transfer or disposition of the property then owned by the Developer.
(c) That it is because of the qualifications and identity of the Developer and its key
personnel that the Agency is entering into the Agreement with the Developer.
170039.21
May 10, 2004
2.2
Ownership Transfer or Assimment.
2.2.1 Restrictions on Rights and Powers under Agreement. For the reasons set forth in
Section 2.1, the Developer acknowledges and agrees that no voluntary or involuntary successor in interest
of the Developer shall acquire any rights or powers under this Agreement except as set forth in this Section
2.2.
2.2.2 Restrictions on Ownership Transfers and Assignments. For the reasons set forth in
Section 2.1, the Developer represents and agrees for itself, its members and all voluntary and involuntary
successors-in-interest of itself and each member of Developer, that the Developer shall not effect any total
or partial Ownership Transfer of the Developer Parcel, except as provided in Section 2.5, or the
Developer's interest in this Agreement, or any interest therein, whether voluntary or involuntary, nor shall
there be a Transfer of Control of the Developer (as described below in Section 2.3) unless such Ownership
Transfer or Transfer of Control is a Pennitted Transfer. In order for an Ownership Transfer to be a
Permitted Transfer, the following conditions shall be met by Developer:
(a) where required, the prior written consent of the Agency is obtained, subject
to the standards for such consent set forth in Sections 2.2.4 and 2.2.5;
(b) the Developer shall have provided to the Agency at least twenty (20)
Business Days prior to the date of any proposed Ownership Transfer: (i) the name of the proposed
Ownership Transferee, (ii) all of the material terms of the transfer, (iii) current audited financial statements
of the proposed transferee, (iv) the names of all Persons who own, directly or indirectly, a five percent
(5%) or more interest in the proposed Ownership Transferee, (v) a statement describing other real estate
projects developed by, or sold by the proposed Ownership Transferee in California over the preceding five
(5) year period, and the dates of involvement by the proposed Ownership Transferee with such projects and
the success of the projects, which statement shall by made under penalty of peIjury by the manager,
president or other person with appropriate authority from the proposed Ownership Transferee to do so, (vi)
all relevant instruments and other legal documents proposed to effect any such transfer, and (vii) such other
relevant information that the Agency may reasonably request; and
(c) The Ownership Transferee shall execute a written assumption ofthis
Agreement in accordance with Section 2.2.8, and shall be approved by the Agency.
2.2.3 Condition to Release of Developer from Obligations Under this Agreement. In the
absence of (a) an express written assumption by an Ownership Transferee in accordance with Section 2.2.8
of the obligations of the Developer, which assumption shall be approved by the Agency, (b) specific prior
written agreement by the Agency to an Ownership Transfer requiring Agency consent, pursuant to which
the Agency expressly releases the Developer, or (c) execution by the Agency and recordation in the
Official Records of a Certificate of Compliance, no Ownership Transfer, including any Ownership Transfer
of any Live-Work Unit, or the Main Street Building or the Space within, shall constitute a release of the
Developer from any of its obligations under this Agreement.
170039.21
May 10. 2004
4
2.2.4 Prior to Recordation of Certificate of Compliance.
(a) Except as set forth in Sections 2.2.4 (b), 2.5 and 2.7, prior to the recordation
of a Certificate of Compliance, an Ownership Transfer shall require the approval of the Agency in its sole
discretion and the Agency may withhold its consent to any proposed Ownership Transfer for any reason
whatsoever.
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2.2.4(a) or any provision ofthis
Agreement, foreclosure of any Permitted Mortgage, or any sale thereunder, shall not require the consent of
the Agency or constitute a breach of any provision of or a Material Default under this Agreement.
(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2.2.4(a) or any provision of this
Agreement, a sale or conveyance by any Permitted Mortgagee or its wholly-owned designee who acquired
title to the Developer Parcel by an Ownership Transfer shall not require the consent of the Agency or
constitute a breach of or a Material Default under this Agreement, provided that the transferee: (i) has a
reputation as a quality mixed use builder licensed to do business in the State of California; (ii) has a
reputation for fair and honest business dealings with persons or entities generally; (iii) has a sufficient net
worth to undertake the obligations to be perfonned by Developer; (iv) has successfully developed and
managed a mixed use development in the State of California; and (v) assumes the obligations of Developer
under this Agreement in accordance with Section 2.2.8.
2.2.5 Following Recordation of a Certificate of Compliance. Subsequent to the recordation
of a Certificate of Compliance, a proposed Ownership Transfer shall not require the consent of the Agency.
2.2.6 Restriction on Permitted Transfers. Any purported Ownership Transfer that does not
comply with the provisions of this Section 2.2 shall not be a Permitted Transfer under this Agreement.
2.2.7 Assignment of Rights to Permitted Mortgagee. Subject to the provisions of Section
2.2 and Section 2.7.2, nothing contained in this Agreement shall restrict the right of Developer to
conditionally or unconditionally assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement to the holder of a
Permitted Mortgage as required to obtain financing for development of the Project on the Developer Parcel.
2.2.8 Written Assumption Agreement Required. Except as provided in Section 2.5 or for
an Ownership Transfer after recordation of the Certificate of Compliance, any Ownership Transfer, other
than an Ownership Transfer of all or any portion of the Developer Parcel pursuant to foreclosure or deed in
lieu of foreclosure to a Permitted Mortgagee or its wholly-owned designee, regardless of whether such
Ownership Transfer is a Permitted Transfer hereunder, shall be null and void unless the Ownership
Transferee shall, at the time of transfer, expressly assumes by written instrument that is satisfactory to the
Agency and in a fonn that is recordable in the Official Records, for itself and its successors and assigns,
and for the benefit of the Agency, all the obligations of the Developer under this Agreement and agrees to
be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Developer is subject by reason of this
Agreement (the "Assumption Agreement"). The obligation of an Ownership Tranferee to enter into an
170039.21
M.y 10.2004
Assumption Agreement pursuant to this Section 2.2.8 shall cease upon recordation of the Certificate of
Compliance for the Project.
2.2.9 Assignment to a Single Member Entitv. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Section 2, the Developer may freely assign its interests in the Developer Parcel and in this Agreement to a
single member entity, provided that the Developer is the sole member of the entity and the single member
entity complies with the provisions of Section 2.2.8. Such an assignment shall not relieve the Developer of
any of its obligations under this Agreement, and the Agency shall look to the Developer to fully comply
with this Agreement, and to cause the single member entity to comply with this Agreement, as though there
had not been an assignment.
2.3
Chanl!e in Manal!ement or Control.
2.3.1 The Developer represents and warrants to the Agency that the Developer is a
California limited partnership, that the Developer is managed and controlled by Pelican - Tustin LLC, a
California limited liability company, whose managing members are John HoO Tillotson, Jr. and Daniel
Howse
2.3.2 Transfer of Control. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, until
execution by the Agency of a Certificate of Compliance and recordation of such instrument in the Official
Records, there shall be no Transfer of Control of the Developer, unless otherwise approved by the Agency
in its sole discretion, which approval may be withheld for any reason whatsoever. "Transfer of Control"
shall include anyone or more of the following, whether made directly or through an intennediary, and
whether made in one transaction or in more than one transaction during the Tenn and whether occurring as
a single event or a series of events which result, on a cumulative basis, in a change in forty-nine percent
(49%) or more of the general partners of the Developer or a change of control of its General Partner which
reduces or adversely impacts the managerial powers of such General Partner.
2.3.3 The Developer shall make prompt and full disclosure to the Agency of any changes
to the Developer's General Partner or any changes to Developer's organizational jurisdiction or structure,
and all other material infonnation concerning the Developer and its partners as related to the Project.
2.3.4 The Developer shall promptly notify the Agency of any and all changes whatsoever
in the identity of the Developer's General Partner identified in Section 1.4.2 who will be directly involved
in the development of the Project, and (b) members in control of the General Partner or the degree thereof,
of which it or any of its managing members have been notified or otherwise have knowledge or
infonnation.
2.3.5 The Developer shall make full disclosure to the Agency of all other material
infonnation concerning the Developer and its partners and consultants related to the Project. The Developer
agrees to substitute any of its consultants and professionals working on the Project as reasonably requested
by the Agency.
170039.21
May 10. 2004
6
2.4 Assignment bv Operation of Law. Neither this Agreement nor any interest therein shall
be assignable by operation of law (including the transfer of this Agreement by testacy or intestacy). Any
involuntary assignment shall constitute a Material Default by the Developer. In such event, this Agreement
shall not be treated as an asset of the Developer. The following is a nonexclusive list of acts which shall be
considered an involuntary assignment:
(a) If the Developer is or becomes bankrupt or insolvent or if any involuntary
proceeding is brought against the Developer (unless, in the case of a petition filed against the Developer,
the same is dismissed within ninety (90) days), or the Developer makes an assignment for the benefit of
creditors, or institutes a proceeding under or otherwise seeks the protection of federal or State bankruptcy
or insolvency laws, including the filing of a petition for voluntary bankruptcy or instituting a proceeding
for reorganization or arrangement;
(b) If a writ of attachment or execution is levied on this Agreement or on the Developer
Parcel, or on any portion thereof, where such writ is not discharged within ninety (90) days; or
(c) If, in any proceeding or action in which the Developer is a party, a receiver is
appointed with authority to take possession of the Developer Parcel, or any portion thereof, where
possession is not restored to the Developer within ninety (90) days.
2.5
Non-applicabilitv of Ownership Transfer Provisions.
2.5.1 To Live-Work Units. Recognizing that the Developer Parcel will be developed with
the intent to sell certain individual Live-Work Units, the general prohibition against Ownership Transfer
described in Section 2.2.2 shall not be applicable to (a) the sale of individual Live-Work Units, (b) to the
transfer of Common Area or Common Area Improvements to the non-profit corporation to be established
pursuant to the laws and regulations of the State of California for the management of the common area
("Common Area Manager") or (c) the grant or dedication of fee portions of or easements over the
Developer Parcel to Governmental Authorities or to utilities, as reasonably required in connection with the
development of the Project by the Developer; provided, however, that sale or transfer of any Live-Work
Unit shall not be permitted unless and until (i) such Live-Work Unit is authorized for sale pursuant to State
law, including regulations promulgated by the State Department of Real Estate ("DRE"), and (ii) the
Agency has approved the Deed. No Live-Work Unit may be occupied until after issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
2.5.2 To the Main Street Commercial Building and the Space Within. Recognizing that
the Developer Parcel may be subdivided in furtherance of the intent to lease individual parcels, or retail
office space to tenants, the general prohibition against Ownership Transfer described in Section 2.2.2 shall
not be applicable to, (a) leasing of office or retail space to tenants in the Main Street Commercial Building,
provided that the Agency approves the Retail Restaurant Lease(s), as set forth in the Scope of
Development, Attachment No.7, (b) the sale of the Main Street Commercial Building, provided that no
occupancy shall be permitted until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued by the City, and (c) the grant
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
7
or dedication in fee of portions of, or easements in the Developer Parcel to Governmental Authorities or to
utilities, as reasonable required in connection with the Development of the Project by Developer.
2.5.3 The Sale or Leasing pennitted in this Section 2.5 shall not relieve Developer of its
obligation under this Agreement, including but not limited to, to completing the Project Improvements.
2.6 Remedies For Improper Transfers. Any purported Ownership Transfer that is not a
Permitted Transfer shall, at the election of the Agency, be null and void. If there is any Ownership Transfer
that is not a Permitted Transfer such Ownership Transfer shall be a Material Default under this Agreement
as of the date of the transfer, which date shall not be extended by Force Majeure Delay. In the event of (a) a
failure by Developer to comply with the requirements of this Section 2 with respect to any Ownership
Transfer or (b) a failure of any Ownership Transferee to execute the assumption agreement required by
Section 2.2.8, the Agency shall have all remedies available to it at law and in equity, including the right to
exercise the Right of Reversion contained in Section 17.
2.7
Memorandum of DDA: Permitted Mortl!al!ee Protection.
2.7.1 Recordation of Memorandum of this Agreement. The Developer shall record a
memorandum of this Agreement in substantially the fonn and substance of the Memorandum attached
hereto as Attachment No.3 (the "Memorandum ofDDA") against the Developer Parcel.
2.7.2 Right To Encumber. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the
contrary, upon conveyance of the Developer Parcel by the Agency to the Developer, the Developer shall
have the right to encumber the fee title to all or portions of the Developer Parcel owned by it with a
Permitted Mortgage subject to compliance with the tenns, conditions and limitations set forth in this
Section 2.7 (Mortgages complying with the following tenns and entered into by Developer with Permitted
Mortgagees shall be deemed to be "Permitted Mortgages"); provided, however that all Mortgages shall be
subject and subordinate to the lien of this Agreement, and the Memorandum of DDA.
2.7.3 Encumbrance Prior to Certificate of Compliance. Until recordation of the Certificate
of Compliance in the Official Records, the following shall apply to every Mortgage with respect to the
Developer Parcel or any portion thereof:
(a) The Developer shall not encumber the Developer Parcel with any Mortgage
without the prior written consent of the Agency in its sole discretion.
(b) The Developer's right to execute and deliver Mortgage(s) shall be limited to a
first trust deed Mortgage executed and delivered to obtain financing necessary to pay costs for developing
and constructing the Private Improvement.
(c) This Agreement and the Developer Parcel shall not be cross-collateralized to
serve as additional security for any other loan by a Mortgagee, which is also secured by real property other
than the Developer Parcel, the Private Improvements thereon, any portion thereof or any interest therein,
without the Agency's consent in its sole discretion; provided, however, that a Permitted Mortgagee which
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
has made more than one loan to Developer secured by all or any portion of the Developer Parcel and by no
off Developer Parcel property may cross-collateralize those loans.
(d) At least thirty (30) days prior to entering into any Mortgage with any
Mortgagee, the Developer shall deliver to the Agency a proposed Mortgagee's loan documents and such
other infonnation, including the name and CUITent audited financiaJ statements of the proposed Mortgagee,
as may be reasonably necessary for the Agency to confinn the matters described in this Section 2.7.3 and
the Agency shall have the right to review the loan documents to ascertain that they comply with the
following provisions:
(i) For all such Mortgages, that the Mortgagee is or is not an Institutional
Lender and, if the proposed Mortgagee is not an Institutional Lender, the Developer shaJl provide the
Agency with the following additional infonnation: (i) the names of all Persons who own, directly or
indirectly, a five percent (5%) or more interest in the proposed Mortgagee, (ii) a statement describing other
real estate projects for which financing has been provided by the proposed Mortgagee in CaJifomia over
the preceding five (5) year period, the dates of involvement by the proposed Mortgagee with such projects
and the success of the projects, which statement shall by made under penalty of perjury by the manager,
president or other person with appropriate authority from the proposed Mortgagee to do so and (iii) such
other relevant infonnation that the Agency may reasonably request.
(ii) The loan documents shaJl include a subordination and consent
agreement in fonn satisfactory to the Agency in its reasonable discretion ("Subordination and Consent")
executed by the Permitted Mortgagee in favor of the Agency acknowledging subordination of the Permitted
Mortgage to this Agreement and the applicability of the Right of Reversion and Right of Purchase, in
accordance with Sections 17.2 and 15.2.2 respectively to the Permitted Mortgage following: (A) a Material
Default by the Developer as specified in Section 15.2 and (B) expiration of any relevant Permitted
Mortgagee's cure rights provided in this Agreement and to the New Agreement provisions set forth in
Sections 2.7.24, 2.7.25 and 2.7.26.
(iii) The loan documents shall include a provision requiring (A) the
Mortgagee to provide notice to the Agency concuITently with the provision of any notice to the Developer
of any event which has occuITed which is a default under the loan documents or which would trigger the
commencement of any cure periods under the loan documents, and (B) providing the Agency with a right
to cure any such default up to one week before the completion of any foreclosure in accordance with
Section 2.7.12;
(iv) For construction Mortgages for the original construction of the
Private Improvements, the Agency shaJI have determined in accordance with the Method of Financing,
Attachment No.8, that the amount of the construction loans provided for in the loan documents, together
with the equity to be committed by the Developer for the construction of the Project, shall be sufficient to
pay for the costs of constructing the Project in accordance with the construction budget, including
appropriate construction contingencies reflected in such loan documents.
(f) There shall be recorded in the Official Records at the time of closing of the
Mortgage the Subordination and Consent executed and acknowledged by the Mortgagee;
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
9
(g) Mortgages meeting the above requirements and (i) made with Mortgagees
detennined by the Agency, in its reasonable discretion, to be Institutional Lenders shall be deemed to be
Pennitted Mortgages (and the Mortgagees thereof Pennitted Mortgagees) without further consent of the
Agency, and (ii) made with Mortgagees detennined by the Agency, in its reasonable discretion, to be
Non-Institutional Lenders, shall be deemed to be Pennitted Mortgages (and the Mortgagees thereof
Pennitted Mortgagees) only with the consent of the Agency in its sole discretion.
(h) No Mortgage shall be a Pennitted Mortgage and no Mortgagee shall be a
Pennitted Mortgagee or be entitled to the protections provided to Pennitted Mortgagees under this
Agreement unless such proposed Mortgagee and its Mortgage has been reviewed and, if required,
consented to, by the Agency pursuant to this Section 2.7.3.
2.7.4 Right to Encumber Following Recordation of Certificate of Compliance. Following
recordation of the Certificate of Compliance in the Official Records, there shall be no restriction on the
right of the Developer to encumber fee title to the portions of the Developer Parcel owned by it with any
Mortgage, and Agency consent to such Mortgage shall not be required. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
each Affordable Housing Unit shall remain subject to all provisions of this Agreement until it has been sold
to an Owner-Occupier, and the applicable Affordable Housing Covenant, Affordable Housing Trust Deed
and Affordable Housing Option Agreement have been recorded against the Unit.
2.7.5 The Agencv's Acknowledgment of Pennitted Mortgagee. Within thirty (30) days
following the Developer's delivery of the loan documents and infonnation required under Section 2.7.3, the
Agency shall acknowledge receipt of the name and address of any Mortgagee (or proposed Mortgagee),
and either (a) confinn to the Developer and such Mortgagee that such Mortgagee is (or would be, upon
closing of its loan) a Pennitted Mortgagee and has (or would have) all the rights of a Pennitted Mortgagee
under this Agreement and is (or would be) an Institutional Lender, if applicable, or (b) ifthe Agency
detennines that any proposed Mortgagee does not or would not qualify as such or as an Institutional Lender
or meet the other criteria set forth in Section 2.7.3 give notice of such detennination to the Developer and
the proposed Mortgagee, which notice shall specify the basis for such detennination.
2.7.6 Change in Loan Documents. Once the Agency has approved loan documents and the
Subordination and Consent as satisfying the requirements of Section 2.7.3, the Developer shall not modify
or agree to modify those loan documents in a manner affecting the requirements of Section 2.7.3 without
the prior written approval of the Agency in its sole discretion.
2.7.7 Initial Notice. If the Developer enters into any Mortgage(s) reviewed and, if
required, consented to, by the Agency pursuant to Section 2.7.3, then the Mortgagee(s) thereunder, if
confinned by the Agency as Pennitted Mortgagee(s) pursuant to Section 2.7.3 shall be entitled to the
Pennitted Mortgagee protections provided for under this Agreement from and after such time as the
Developer or such Pennitted Mortgagee has provided the Agency notice, in accordance with the provisions
of Section 17.7, of the name and address of such Mortgagee, accompanied by a copy of the executed
Mortgage.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
10
2.7.8 Effect of a Mortgage. The Developer's recordation of a Mortgage shall not constitute
an assignment or transfer of the Developer Parcel, nor shall any Mortgagee, as such, or in the exercise of its
rights under its Mortgage or this Agreement, be deemed to be an assignee or transferee or mortgagee in
possession of the Developer Parcel so as to require such Mortgagee to assume or otherwise be obligated to
perform any of the Developer's obligations under this Agreement.
2.7.9 Foreclosure Without the Agency's Consent. Neither the foreclosure of any Permitted
Mortgage (or any sale thereunder), whether by judicial proceedings or by virtue of any power contained in
any such Permitted Mortgage, nor any conveyance of the Developer Parcel and/or Improvements from
Developer to any Permitted Mortgagee or its designee through, or in lieu of, foreclosure or other
appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof, shall require the consent of the Agency or constitute a breach
of any provision of, or a Potential Default or a Material Default under, this Agreement. If a Permitted
Mortgagee or its wholly-owned designee does acquire the portion of the Developer Parcel being foreclosed
upon, the provisions of Section 2.7.11 shall govern such acquisition and the rights and obligations ofthe
Permitted Mortgagee or designee. If a Permitted Mortgagee or its wholly-owned designee does not acquire
the portion of the Developer Parcel being foreclosed upon, or if it does acquire such portion of the
Developer Parcel but then subsequently sells or conveys all or any portion of the Developer Parcel acquired
by such Permitted Mortgagee or designee by foreclosure or deed in lieu thereof, then upon such
foreclosure, sale or conveyance, (a) all of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon
and benefit the Person who acquires title to all or any portion of the Developer Parcel and (b) the Agency
shall recognize the purchaser or other transferee in connection therewith as the Developer under this
Agreement; provided that such Person shall, as a condition of such recognition, assume the obligations of
the Developer under this Agreement in accordance with Section 2.2.8.
2.7.10 Rights and Obligations of Permitted Mortgagee Acquiring Title.
(a) Except as set forth in Section 2.7.9, a Permitted Mortgagee or its wholly
owned designee obtaining title to all or any portion of the Developer Parcel as a result of a default by the
Developer under a Permitted Mortgage shall not be obligated to perform any of the Developer's obligations
under this Agreement, including without limitation to construct or complete the Improvements or to
guarantee such construction or completion thereof; provided, however, that except as set forth in this
Section 2.7.10Cd), with respect to protective activities or preservation or protection of existing Project
Improvements, nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to permit or authorize any
Permitted Mortgagee or its designee to devote the Developer Parcel or any part thereof to any uses, or to
construct any improvements thereon, other than those uses and or Improvements provided for or authorized
by this Agreement and (ii) any and all construction of improvements on the Developer Parcel by the
Permitted Mortgagee or its designee shall be carried out in accordance with all the terns and conditions of
this Agreement, including without limitation, Section 2.7.1O(b).
(b) No Permitted Mortgagee or its designee shall be permitted or authorized to
undertake the construction of the Private Improvements without first having expressly assumed the
obligations of Developer for the portion of the Developer Parcel in which the Permitted Mortgagee or its
designee has an interest, by written agreement reasonably satisfactory to the Agency provided, however,
the Permitted Mortgage shall be entitled at all times to take such actions necessary to preserve or protect
170039.2]
May JO. 2004
11
existing Project Improvements, but such shall not include the right to undertake new construction except as
necessary to protect exposed elements of such previously constructed Project Improvements. Upon such
assumption, the Pennitted Mortgagee or its wholly-owned designee, in that event, must agree to complete,
in the manner provided in this Agreement, the Improvements to which the lien or title of such Pennitted
Mortgagee relates. Any such Pennitted Mortgagee or designee properly Completing such Improvements
and satisfying all other conditions precedent thereto, shall be entitled, upon written request made to the
Agency, to a Certificate of Compliance from the Agency for such Improvements.
(c) In the event that a Pennitted Mortgagee, or it's wholly-owned designee, is in
possession and/or control of such portion of the Developer Parcel in which the Pennitted Mortgagee has an
interest, and the Pennitted Mortgagee assumes the obligation of Developer under this Agreement, such
Pennitted Mortgagee shall only be bound to perfonn Developer's obligations hereunder to the extent of its
interest in the portion of the Developer Parcel and the Improvements thereon.
(d) Upon obtaining title to the Developer Parcel or any portion thereof, and
notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, each Pennitted Mortgagee, or its
wholly-owned designee, as the case may be, shall, even if it does not assume the obligation of Developer
under this Agreement, be obligated to perfonn the following with respect to the portion of the Developer
Parcel owned by it:
(i)
keep the real property taxes current;
(ii) abate weeds and other hazards and nuisances on the Developer Parcel,
in a commercially reasonable manner;
(iii)
maintain liability insurance in commercially reasonable amounts;
(iv)
erect and maintain barricades and fencing as reasonably necessary to
protect the public; and
(v)
maintain erosion control in a commercially reasonable manner.
2.7.11 No Impact on Lien. Except with respect to the Right of Reversion provisions
contained in Section 16.2 and the Right of Purchase provisions contained in Section 14.2.2, breach of any
of the covenants, conditions, restrictions, or reservations contained in this Agreement shall not defeat or
render invalid the lien of any Pennitted Mortgage made in good faith and for value as to the Developer
Parcel or any portion of the Developer Parce] or interest therein. Unless otherwise herein provided, the
tenns, conditions, covenants, restrictions and reservations of this Agreement shall be binding and effective
against the Pennitted Mortgagee and any owner of the Developer Parcel, or any portion of the Developer
Parcel, whose title thereto is acquired by foreclosure, trustee's sale, or otherwise.
2.7.12 Right of The Agencv to Cure Mortgage; Other Convevance for Financing Default. In
the event of an uncured event of default by the Developer under a Pennitted Mortgage for financing of the
Developer Parcel or the Project prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance, and so long as the
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
12
Permitted Mortgagee has not exercised its option to assume the obligations hereunder and complete the
Improvements, the Agency may, at it option, but shall not be obligated to, cure the default at any time, up
to one week (5 business days) prior to completion of any foreclosure. In such event, the Agency shall be
entitled to reimbursement by Developer of all direct and actual costs and expenses incurred by Agency in
curing the default.
2.7.13 Notice to Mortgagees. A Permitted Mortgagee under any Permitted Mortgage
affecting a portion of the Developer Parcel shall be entitled to receive concurrent notice of any default by
any party hereunder provided that such Permitted Mortgagee shall have delivered a written request for such
notice of default to the Party from whom the Permitted Mortgagee wishes to receive notice of a default,
specifying both the Pennitted Mortgagee's name and address and the name of the Party as to whose default
the Permitted Mortgagee wishes to receive such notice of. Failure of a Party to deliver a concurrent copy
of such notice of default to the Pennitted Mortgagee shall not affect in any way the validity of the notice of
default as it relates to the defaulting Party, but in any subsequent proceeding arising from the notice of
default without the requested concurrent notice to the Pennitted Mortgagee, the interest of the Permitted
Mortgagee and its lien upon the affected Parcel shall not be affected in any way until such time as it has
received proper notice and all cure periods with respect thereto have expired. Any such notice to a
Permitted Mortgagee shall be given in the same manner as provided in Section 18.7. The giving of any
notice of default or the failure to deliver a copy to any Permitted Mortgagee shall in no event create any
liability on the part of the Person so declaring a default.
2.7.14 Right of Permitted Mortgagee to Cure. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary
contained in this Agreement, if the Developer Parcel is encumbered by a Permitted Mortgages) and if the
Permitted Mortgagees) of such Permitted Mortgage(s) shall send to the Agency a true copy thereof,
together with written notice specifying the name and address of the Mortgagee(s) and the pertinent
recording data with respect to such Mortgage(s), the Agency agrees that, subject to its Right of Reversion
and Right of Purchase contained in this Agreement, so long as any such Pennitted Mortgages) shall remain
unsatisfied of record or until written notice of satisfaction is given by the Permitted Mortgagees) to the
Agency each Permitted Mortgagee the following provisions shall apply:
(a) Each Permitted Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, at any
time prior to tennination of this Agreement and without payment of any penalty, to cure or remedy such
Potential Default or Material Default, to effect any insurance, to pay any amounts due to the Agency, to
make any repairs or improvements, to do any other act or thing required of Developer under this
Agreement, and to do any act or thing which may be necessary and proper to be done in the perfonnance
and observance of this Agreement to prevent tennination of this Agreement. To carry out the foregoing, the
Developer hereby agrees that each Pennitted Mortgagee and its agents and contractors shall have full
access to the Developer Parcel for purposes of accomplishing any of the foregoing. Any of the foregoing
done by any Pennitted Mortgagee shall be as effective to prevent a termination of this Agreement as the
same would have been if done by Developer.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, if any
Potential Default or Material Default shall occur which, pursuant to any provision of this Agreement,
entitles the Agency to tenninate this Agreement or to exercise its Right of Reversion, the Agency shall not
170039.21
May 10. 2004
13
be entitled to terminate this Agreement or to revest any portion of the Developer Parcel as to any Permitted
Mortgagee, unless (i) the Agency, following the expiration of any periods of time given Developer in this
Agreement to cure such Potential Default or Material Default, shall have given written notice to such
Permitted Mortgagee stating the Agency's intent to terminate this Agreement, and (ii) within ninety (90)
days after delivery of such notice, such Permitted Mortgagee shall fail to either:
(i) cure the Potential Default or Material Default if the same consists of
the nonperformance by Developer of any covenant or condition of this Agreement requiring the payment of
money by Developer to the Agency; or
(ii) if the Potential Default or Material Default does not involve a
covenant or condition of this Agreement requiring the payment of money by the Developer to the Agency,
either, in Permitted Mortgagee's sole discretion, (a) cure such Potential Default or Material Default, or
(b)(i) commence, or cause any trustee under the Permitted Mortgage to commence, within ninety (90) days
after the provision of written notice by the Agency to the Permitted Mortgagee as provided above, and
thereafter to diligently pursue to completion steps and proceedings to foreclose on the interests covered by
the Permitted Mortgage, and (ii) perform or cause the performance of all of the covenants and conditions of
this Agreement requiring the payment of money by the Developer to the Agency, until such time as the
Developer Parcel and/or Improvements shall be sold upon foreclosure pursuant to the Permitted Mortgage
or shall be transfelTed upon judicial foreclosure or by deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure. Any
Potential Default or Material Default which does not involve a covenant or condition of this Agreement
requiring the payment of money by the Developer to the Agency shall be deemed cured if any Permitted
Mortgagee shall diligently pursue to completion steps and proceedings to foreclose under the Permitted
Mortgage as provided above and shall, upon acquiring title to all or any portion of the Developer Parcel,
thereafter undertake its obligations with respect to the portion of the Developer Parcel owned by it pursuant
to Section 2.7.10.
(c) If any Permitted Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or prosecuting
foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof by any process or injunction issued by
any court or by reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency
proceeding involving Developer, the times specified in Section 2.7.l4(b) above, for commencing or
prosecuting foreclosure or other proceedings shall be extended for the period of the prohibition; provided
that the Permitted Mortgagee shall have fully cured any Potential Default or Material Default required by
Section 2.7.14(b) above and shall continue to perform and/or cure all such obligations as and when the
same fall due.
(d) No Permitted Mortgagee shall have the right to use the failure of the Agency
to provide notice to any other Permitted Mortgagee as a claim, defense or estoppel to application of these
provisions with respect to its Mortgage.
2.7.15 Failure of Permitted Mortgagee to Complete Improvements. If, after all cure periods
of Developer have expired following Material Default by Developer in Completion of construction of the
Improvements on the Developer Parcel under this Agreement, and the notice required by Section 2.7.14 to
a Permitted Mortgagee was properly given, and such Permitted Mortgagee has not cured or commenced to
170039.21
M,y 10, 2004
14
cure as required by Section 2.7.14, the Agency may, at its option, upon thirty (30) days' written notice to
the Developer and such Pennitted Mortgagee either: (a) purchase the Pennitted Mortgage by payment to
the Pennitted Mortgagee of the amount of the unpaid debt plus accrued but unpaid interest and other
advances and amounts secured by the security interest; (b) exercise its Right to Purchase the Developer
Parcel pursuant to Section 14.2.2, or (c) if all Revesting Conditions have occurred with respect to the
Developer Parcel or any portion thereof, exercise its Right of Reversion with respect to the applicable
portions of the Developer Parcel pursuant to Section 16.
2.7.16 Amendment: Tennination. No amendment or modification to this Agreement made
without the consent of any Pennitted Mortgagee of any Parcel shall be binding upon such Pennitted
Mortgagee or its successors in interest. Developer shall not tenninate this Agreement as to any portion of
the Developer Parcel which is subject to any Permitted Mortgage without first obtaining the prior written
consent of all Pennitted Mortgagees whose Pennitted Mortgages encumber that portion of the Developer
Parcel.
2.7.17 Condemnation or Insurance Proceeds. Except as otherwise expressly set forth in this
Agreement, the rights of any Pennitted Mortgagee, pursuant to its Pennitted Mortgage, to receive
condemnation or insurance proceeds which are otherwise payable to such Permitted Mortgagee or to a
Party which is its mortgagor shall not be impaired.
2.7.18 Loss Pavable Endorsement to Insurance Policv. The Agency agrees that the name of
the senior most Permitted Mortgagee may be added as the primary loss payee to the "Loss Payable
Endorsement" attached to any and all insurance policies required to be carried by Developer under this
Agreement.
2.7.19 Modification of Article: Conflicts. Following the Close of Escrow, no Party shall
unreasonably withhold its consent to such modifications of this Agreement as are reasonably requested by a
Pennitted Mortgagee, provided that the rights of any such Party will not be materially impaired,
diminished, limited or delayed, nor the obligations of such Party increased in any material respect as a
result of such modifications. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Developer and the Agency hereby agree
that the Agency shall have no obligation to make any modifications to this Agreement pursuant to this
Section prior or as a condition to Close of Escrow.
2.7.20 No Subordination. This Agreement shall not be subordinated to any Mortgage,
ground lease or other instrument without the express written consent of the Parties hereto and all
Mortgagees of the Parties, each in its sole discretion.
2.7.21 Constructive Notice and Acceptance. Until such time as a Certificate of Compliance
is recorded in the Official Records with respect to the Developer Parcel, all of the provisions contained in
this Agreement shall be binding upon and benefit any Person who acquires title to a portion of the
Developer Parcel by voluntary or involuntary transfer, foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure
or otherwise under a Mortgage and each successor and assign of such Person acquiring an interest in any
portion of the Developer Parcel. Upon acquisition of title to a portion of the Developer Parcel by a Person
acquiring title through foreclosure, trustee's sale or deed in lieu of foreclosure or through sale, transfer or
170039.Z1
M,y 10. Z004
15
conveyance by any Permitted Mortgagee or its wholly-owned designee following its acquisition of title
through foreclosure, trustee's sale or deed in lieu of foreclosure, the acquiring Person and the Agency shall
meet and confer in good faith to revise the Schedule of Perfonnance as reasonably necessary to provide
adequate time for such Person to satisfy the obligations of the Developer hereunder.
2.7.22 Bankruptcv Affecting the Developer. If the Developer, as debtor in possession, or a
trustee in bankruptcy for the Developer rejects this Agreement in connection with any proceeding
involving the Developer under the United States Bankruptcy Code or any similar state or federal statute for
the relief of debtors (a "Bankruptcy Proceeding"), then the Agency agrees for the benefit of each and
every Permitted Mortgagee that such rejection shall be deemed the Developer's assignment of the
Agreement and the Developer Parcel to the Developer's Permitted Mortgagee(s) in the nature of an
assignment in lieu of foreclosure. Upon such deemed assignment, this Agreement shall not terminate and
each Permitted Mortgagee shall, subject to compliance with Section 2.2.8, become the Developer
hereunder as if the Bankruptcy Proceeding had not occurred, unless such Pennitted Mortgagee(s) shall
reject such deemed assignment by written notice to the Agency within thirty (30) calendar days after
receiving notice of the Developer's rejection of this Agreement in Bankruptcy Proceedings.
2.7.23 New Agreement with Permitted Mortgagee.
(a) In the event of termination of this Agreement for any reason (including by
reason of any Material Default by Developer or by reason of the disaffinnance thereof by Developer, as a
debtor-in-possession, or by a receiver, liquidator or trustee for Developer or its property), the Agency, if
requested by the most senior Permitted Mortgagee (or by the next most senior Pennitted Mortgagee if
Permitted Mortgagees with more senior priority do not so request) will enter into a new Agreement with
the Permitted Mortgagee or the party requesting a new Agreement upon the same tenus, provisions,
covenants and agreements set forth herein and commencing as of the date of termination of this Agreement
("New Agreement"), subject to the following:
(i) such Permitted Mortgagee or the requesting party shall have provided
written notice to the Agency requesting the New Agreement within thirty (30) days after the date of
termination of this Agreement;
(ii) such Permitted Mortgagee or the requesting party shall pay to the
Agency at the time of the execution and delivery of the New Agreement the sums specified in Section
2.7.14(b)(i) which would, at the time of the execution and delivery thereof be due and unpaid pursuant to
this Agreement but for its tennination, and in addition thereto any expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees,
to which the Agency shall have been subjected by reason of Developer's Material Default; and
(b) In the event of termination of this Agreement for any reason (including by
reason of any Material Default by Developer or by reason of the disaffinnance thereof by Developer, as a
debtor-in-possession, or by a receiver, liquidator or trustee for Developer or its property) the most senior
Permitted Mortgagee, if requested by the Agency, and provide that such Permitted Mortgagee is the then
owner of the Developer Parcel, will enter into a new Agreement with the Agency requesting a new
Agreement upon the same tenus, provisions, covenants and agreements set forth herein and commencing as
170039.21
May 10. 2004
16
of the date of termination of this Agreement ("New Agreement"), subject to the Agency having provided
written notice to the party requesting the New Agreement within thirty (30) days after the date of
termination of this Agreement.
2.7.24 Priority of New Agreement. Any New Agreement shall be prior to any Mortgage or
other lien, charge, or encumbrance on the Developer Parcel and each Mortgagee shall execute such
additional consents and/or subordination agreements as may reasonably requested by the Agency or the
new Developer to evidence the priority of the New Agreement to all Mortgages, whether recorded prior or
subsequent to execution of the New Agreement.
3.
Representations and Warranties.
3.1
Developer's Representations and Warranties.
As an inducement to the Agency to enter into this Agreement and to perform its obligations
hereunder, the Developer represents and walTants to the Agency as follows:
(a) The Developer has the necessary expertise, experience, qualifications and legal
status necessary to perform as the Developer pursuant to this Agreement and to construct and complete the
Project;
(b) The Developer's acquisition of the Developer Parcel and its other undertakings
pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of timely redevelopment of the Developer Parcel in
accordance with the Schedule of Performance attached to this Agreement and not for speculation or land
holding;
(c) The Developer is a limited Partnership, duly organized, qualified, and validly
existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California, is duly qualified to do business and
in good standing under the laws of each other jurisdiction where the operation of its business or its
ownership of property make such qualification necessary;
(d) The Developer has all requisite power and authority required to enter into this
Agreement and the instruments referenced herein, to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby and
to take any steps contemplated thereby or hereby, and to perform its obligations hereunder and thereunder.
No consent of any additional partner, individual, corporation, shareholder, creditor, investor, judicial or
administrative body, authority or other party is required in connection with any of the foregoing.
(e) All requisite action has been taken by the Developer and the Developer has obtained
all requisite consents in connection with entering into this Agreement and the instruments and documents
referenced herein to which the Developer is a party and the consummation of the transactions contemplated
hereby.
170039.21
M,y 10.2004
17
(f) The individuals executing this Agreement and the instruments referenced herein on
behalf of the Developer have the legal power, right and actual authority to bind the Developer to the terms
and conditions hereof and thereof.
(g) This Agreement has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by the Developer
and all documents required herein to be executed by the Developer pursuant to this Agreement shall be, at
such time as they are required to be executed by the Developer, duly authorized, executed and delivered by
the Developer and are or shall be, at such time as the same are required to be executed hereunder, valid,
legally binding obligations of and enforceable against the Developer in accordance with their terms. The
Developer has duly authorized, executed and delivered any and all other agreements and documents
required to be executed and delivered in order to carry out, give effect to, and consummate the transactions
contemplated by this Agreement.
(h) Neither the execution or delivery of this Agreement and the documents referenced
herein, nor the incurring of the obligations set forth herein, nor the consummation of the transactions herein
contemplated, nor compliance with the terms of this Agreement and the documents referenced herein, will
violate any provision of law, any order of any court or other government entity or conflict with or result in
the breach of any terms, conditions, or provisions of, or constitute a default under any bond, note, or other
evidence of indebtedness or any contract, indenture, mortgage, deed of trust, loan partnership agreement,
lease or other agreements or instruments to which the Developer or any of its members are a party or which
affect the Developer Parcel.
(i) No attachments, execution proceedings, assignments of benefit to creditors,
bankruptcy, reorganization or other proceedings are pending or, to the best of Developer's knowledge,
threatened against the Developer or its members.
G) The Developer is relying solely upon its own inspections and investigations in
proceeding with this Agreement, and is not relying on the accuracy or reliability of any information
provided to it by the Agency, on any oral or written representation or on the nondisclosure of any facts or
conclusions of law made by the Agency, or any of its elected and appointed officials, officials, employees,
agents, attorneys or representatives made in connection with this Agreement. In making such investigation
and assessment, the Developer has been provided access to any persons, records or other sources of
information which it has deemed appropriate to review.
(k) Without limiting the generality of the foregoing provisions, the Developer
acknowledges that the Agency has not made and will not make any representations or warranties
concerning compliance or non-compliance of the Developer Parcel with Environmental Laws or the
existence or non-existence of Hazardous Materials to the Developer Parcel or otherwise.
(1) There are no adverse conditions or circumstances, pending or, to the best of the
Developer's knowledge, threatened litigation, governmental action, or other condition which could prevent
or materially impair the Developer's ability to develop the Developer Parcel and the Project as
contemplated by the terms of this Agreement, assuming that the Closing Conditions described in Section 7
are satisfied.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
18
(m) The Developer has not paid or given, and will not payor give, any third person any
money or other consideration for obtaining this Agreement, other than the normal cost of conducting
business and cost of professional services such as architects, engineers and attorneys.
(n) To the best of the Developer's knowledge, all reports, documents, instruments,
information and forms of evidence delivered by the Developer to the Agency concerning or related to this
Agreement are accurate, COITect and sufficiently complete to give the Agency true and accurate knowledge
of the subject matter, and do not contain any misrepresentation or omission.
(0) The Developer has sufficient equity, capital and firm binding financing
commitments to (i) pay all costs of development, construction, marketing and sale of all the Improvements
as defined in the Scope of Development; and (ii) enable the Developer to perform and satisfy all the
covenants of the Developer contained in this Agreement. The Developer has not and shall not undertake
such additional projects as could reasonably be expected to jeopardize the sufficiency of such equity,
capital and firm and binding commitments for the purposes expressed in the preceding sentence.
(p) The Developer does not have any contingent obligations or any other contracts
which could affect the ability of the Developer to carry out its obligations hereunder.
(q) There are no legal proceedings either pending or, to the best of the Developer's
knowledge, threatened, to which the Developer is or may be made a party, or to which any of the
Developer's property, including the Developer Parcel, is or may become subject, which has not been fully
disclosed in the documents submitted to the Agency and which could materially affect the ability of the
Developer to carry out its obligations hereunder.
As used in this Section 3.1. "to the best of the Developer's knowledge" means the best
knowledge of the Managing Members of the Developer's General Partner identified in Section 1.4.2 after
conducting commercially reasonable inquiry.
3.2
Ae:encv Representations and Warranties.
As an inducement to the Developer to enter into this Agreement and perform its obligations
hereunder, the Agency represents and warrants to the Developer as follows:
(a)
The Agency is a redevelopment authority existing pursuant to the laws of the State
of California.
(b) The Agency has all requisite power and authority required to enter into this
Agreement and the instruments referenced herein, to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby and
to take any steps contemplated thereby or hereby, and to perform its obligations hereunder and thereunder.
No consent of any additional individual, official, board, division, judicial or administrative body, authority
or other party is required in connection with any of the foregoing.
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
19
(c) All requisite action has been taken by the Agency and the Agency has obtained all
requisite consents in connection with entering into this Agreement and the instruments and documents
referenced herein to which the Agency is a party and the consummation of the transactions contemplated
hereby.
(d) The individual executing this Agreement and the instruments referenced herein on behalf
of the Agency has the legal power, right and actual authority to bind the Agency to the tenus and
conditions hereof and thereof.
(e) This Agreement is duly authorized, executed and delivered by the Agency and all
documents required herein to be executed by the Agency pursuant to this Agreement shall be, at such time
as they are required to be executed by the Agency, duly authorized, executed and delivered by the Agency
and are or shall be, at such time as the same are required to be executed hereunder, valid, legally binding
obligations of and enforceable against the Agency in accordance with their tenus.
(f) There are no legal proceedings either pending or, to the actual knowledge of the
Assistant Executive Director or Agency Legal Counsel, threatened, to which the Agency is or may be made
a party, or to which any of the Agency's property, including the Developer Parcel, is or may become
subject, which has not been fully disclosed in the documents submitted to the Developer and which could
reasonably affect the ability of the Agency to carry out its obligations hereunder.
3.3 Survival. Each of the items in Sections 3.1 and 3.2 in its entirety is deemed to be an
ongoing representation and warranty and shall survive the Closing and the tennination of this Agreement
and shall not be merged into the Grant Deed. The Developer, or Agency, shall each promptly advise the
other party in writing if there is any change pertaining to any matters set forth or referenced in Sections 3.1
and 3.2.
4.
Conveyance of Property/Alley Dedication.
4.1
The Property To Be Conveyed.
4.1.1 Propertv. Subject to the tenus and conditions set forth herein, including the
satisfaction of the Closing Conditions set forth in Section 7, the Agency agrees to sell to the Developer and
the Developer agrees to purchase from the Agency the Developer Parcel, together with all existing
improvements, presently located on the Developer Parcel, subject to all Pennitted Exceptions (defined
below) and such other title exceptions as may be applicable to the Developer Parcel.
4.1.2 Allev Dedication. Developer shall dedicate in fee to the City of Tustin the Alley
Dedication Area, which is described in Attachment No.1. Such dedication in fee shall be accomplished
through Developer's compliance with the City's subdivision ordinance at no cost to the City.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
20
4.2
Purchase Price.
4.2.1 Purchase Price. As consideration for the sale of the Property by the Agency to the
Developer, the Developer shall pay to the Agency the sum of eight hundred fifty-five thousand dollars
($855,000.00) (the "Purchase Price").
4.2.2 Purchase Price. The Purchase Price for the Property shall consist of the following:
(a) EAN Deposit. The Developer has paid to the Agency a $10,000.00 deposit in
connection with the execution of the Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate (the "EAN Deposit"). The Agency
agrees that the EAN Deposit shall be applied toward the Purchase Price. The Agency agrees to transfer the
EAN Deposit to Escrow Holder promptly after the "Opening of Escrow" (as defined in Section 4.3). Upon
receipt by Escrow Holder, the EAN Deposit shall for all purposes be considered the Initial Deposit.
(b) Supplemental Deposit. Two (2) Business Days prior to close of escrow, the
Developer shall deposit into Escrow an additional amount so that the total Purchase Price Deposit equals
eight hundred fifty-five thousand dollars ($855,000.00). The Purchase Price shall be deposited by Escrow
Holder into an interest bearing account, and such deposit, plus interest earned thereon, shall be released by
the Escrow Holder to Agency at Close of Escrow. The Purchase Price shall be nonrefundable except as
otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.
(c) Closing Costs. The Developer shall also deposit into Escrow sufficient funds
to (a) cover all closing costs to be paid by the Developer pursuant to Section 7.5.l(b), (b) allow Escrow
Holder to disburse to the Agency an amount equal to the Purchase Price, as adjusted for any net credits or
debits to the Agency for closing costs and/or prorations in accordance with Sections 7.5.4 and 7.5.5.
(d) Payments in Immediatelv Available Funds. Funds delivered to Escrow
Holder under this Agreement shall be in the fonn of cash, wire transfer (to such account as Escrow Holder
notifies the Developer in writing) or by cashier's check drawn on good and sufficient funds on a federally
insured bank in the State of California and made payable to the order of Escrow Holder.
4.3 Agencv Assistance. Agency Assistance shall be provided to Developer in the maximum
amount of eight hundred eighty thousand dollars ($880,000.00) to fund or assist in funding the construction
of the Public Improvements which shall be considered a "public work" pursuant to California Labor Code
Section 1720(c)(2). Disbursement of the Public Improvement Funding shall be made in accordance with
Attachment 8, "Method of Financing".
4.4 ~ Not later than one (1) business day after the execution of this Agreement by the
Developer and the Agency, the Developer and the Agency shall each deliver an executed original
counterpart of this Agreement to Escrow Holder. For purposes of this Agreement, the "Opening of Escrow"
shall be the date that Escrow Holder receives an executed original counterpart to this Agreement signed by
the Developer and the Agency. Upon the written acceptance of this Agreement by Escrow Holder, this
Agreement shall constitute the joint escrow instructions of the Developer and the Agency to Escrow Holder
to open an escrow (the "Escrow"). Upon Escrow Holder's receipt of the Initial Deposit and Escrow Holder's
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
21
written acceptance of this Agreement, Escrow Holder is authorized to act in accordance with the terms of
this Agreement. The Developer and the Agency shall execute Escrow Holder's general escrow instructions
upon request, with such modifications thereto as the Developer and the Agency may reasonably require;
provided, however, that, if there is any conflict or inconsistency between such general escrow instructions
and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control. Escrow Holder shall not prepare any further escrow
instruction restating or amending this Agreement unless specifically so instructed by the Agency and the
Developer in writing. Any supplemental escrow instructions must be in writing and signed by the Agency
and the Developer and accepted by the Escrow Holder to be effective.
4.5
Investieation: Property Sold" As-Is".
4.5.1
Investigation.
(a) The Developer has conducted, or will have conducted prior to execution of
this Agreement, the Developer's own investigation of the Developer Parcel and all matters related to the
Developer Parcel including the state of title, including easements, covenants, conditions and/or restrictions
affecting the Developer Parcel, if any, the physical condition thereof, the accessibility and location of
utilities, the physical condition of all structures located on the Developer Parcel, as applicable, and all
mechanical, plumbing, sewage, and electrical systems located therein, suitability of soils, environmental
and other Developer Parcel investigations. The Developer has reviewed, or will have reviewed prior to
execution of this Agreement, all items that in the Developer's sole judgment affect or influence the
Developer's purchase and use of the Property and the Developer's willingness to consummate this
Agreement.
(b) The Developer acknowledges and agrees that having been given the
opportunity to inspect the Developer Parcel and review the information and documentation affecting the
property, the Developer is relying solely on its own investigation of the Developer Parcel and review of
such information and documentation in determining the physical, economic and legal condition of the
property, and not on any information provided or to be provided by the Agency or the agents of the
Agency. The Developer further acknowledges and agrees that any information provided to the Developer
by or on behalf of the Agency with respect to the Developer Parcel was obtained from a variety of sources
and that the Agency has not made any independent investigation or verification of such information and
makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of such information. The Developer
acknowledges and agrees that it shall perform its own assessment of the environmental condition of the
Developer Parcel, the presence of Hazardous Materials on the property, and the suitability of the soil for
improvements to be constructed.
4.5.2 AS-IS: WHERE-IS.
(a) No Representations or Warranties. The Developer recognizes that the
Agency would not sell the Developer Parcel except on an "AS, IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS"
basis, and the Developer acknowledges that the Agency has made no representations or warranties of any
kind whatsoever, either express or implied in connection with any matters with respect to the Developer
Parcel or any portion thereof. The Developer acknowledges that the Developer has examined the Developer
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
22
Parcel and is buying the Developer Parcel in an "AS IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS" condition, in
its present state and condition and with all faults, if any. The Developer further acknowledges and agrees
that, except as otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, the Agency has not made and does not
make and specifically negates and disclaims any representations, warranties, promises, agreements or
guaranties of any kind or character, whether express or implied, oral or written, past, present or future,
whether by the Agency or any of its agents, elected or appointed officials, representatives or employees, of
concerning or with respect to:
(i)
the value of the Developer Parcel or the income to be derived from
the Developer Parcel;
(ii) the existence or nonexistence of any liens, easements, covenants,
conditions, restrictions, claims or encumbrances affecting the Developer Parcel;
(iii) the suitability of the Developer Parcel for any and all future
development, uses and activities which the Developer may conduct thereon, including the development of
the Project described herein;
(iv)
the habitability, merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose of
the Developer Parcel;
(v)
the manner, quality, state of repair or lack of repair of the Developer
Parcel;
(vi)
the nature, quality or condition of the Developer Parcel including
water, soil and geology;
(vii) the compliance of or by the Developer Parcel or its operation with
any Governmental Requirement, including the National Environmental Policy Act, CEQA and the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990;
(viii) the manner or quality of the construction or materials, if any,
incorporated into the Developer Parcel;
(ix)
adjacent to the Developer Parcel;
the presence or absence of Hazardous Materials, at, on, under, or
(x) the content, completeness or accuracy of the information,
documentation, studies, reports, surveys and other materials, delivered to the Developer in connection with
the review of the Developer Parcel and the transactions contemplated herein;
(xi) the conformity of the existing improvements on the Developer Parcel,
if any; to any plans or specifications for the Developer Parcel;
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
23
(xii) compliance of the Developer Parcel with past, current or future
statutes, laws, codes, ordinances, regulations or Governmental Requirements relating to zoning,
subdivision, planning, building, fire, safety, health or environmental matters and/or covenants, conditions,
restrictions or deed restrictions;
(xiii) the deficiency of any undershoring or of any drainage;
(xiv) the fact that all or a portion of the Developer Parcel may be located
on or near an earthquake fault line or falls within an earthquake fault zone established under the
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zone Act, California Public Resources Code Sections 262 1-2630 or within a
seismic hazard zone established under the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, California Public Resources
Code, Sections 2690-2699.6 and Sections 3720-3725;
(xv) the existence or lack of vested land use, zoning or building
entitlement affecting the Developer Parcel;
(xvi)
with respect to any other matters.
(b) No Unauthorized Representations. No person acting on behalf of the Agency
is authorized to make, and by execution hereof, the Developer acknowledges that no person has made, any
representation, agreement, statement, warranty, guarantee or promise regarding the Developer Parcel or the
transaction contemplated herein or the past, present or future zoning, land use entitlements, construction,
physical condition or other status of the Developer Parcel except as may be expressly set forth in this
Agreement. No representation, warranty, agreement, statement, guarantee or promise, if any, made by any
person acting on behalf of the Agency that is not contained in this Agreement will be valid or binding on
the Agency.
(c) Release. Save and except for the covenants, representations and warranties of
the Agency and any other "Released Party" (as defined below in this Section) under this Agreement, the
Developer and any Person claiming by, through or under the Developer, including all voluntary and
involuntary successors of the Developer owning all or any portion of the Developer Parcel ("Releasing
Party"), hereby waives, as of the date of execution of this Agreement and as of the Closing Date, its right
to recover from, and fully and iITevocably releases, the Agency and City of Tustin and their respective
officials, employees, agents, attorneys, affiliates, representatives, contractors, successors and assigns
(individually, a "Released Party", collectively, the "Released Parties") from any and all Claims that the
Developer may now have or hereafter suffer or acquire for any costs, losses, liabilities, damages, expenses,
demands, actions or causes of action: (a) arising from any infonnation or documentation supplied by any of
the Released Parties ("Due Diligence Information"); (b) arising from any condition of the Developer
Parcel, known or unknown by any Releasing Party or any Released Party; (c) arising from any construction
defects, eITors, omissions or other conditions, latent or otherwise, including environmental matters, as well
as economic and legal conditions on or affecting the Developer Parcel, or any portion thereof; (d) arising
from the existence, Release, threatened Release, presence, storage, treatment, transportation or disposal of
any Hazardous Materials at any time on, in, under, from, about or adjacent to the Developer Parcel or any
portion thereof; (e) by any Governmental Authority or any other third party arising from or related to any
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
24
actual, threatened, or suspected Release of a Hazardous Material on, in, under, from, about, or adjacent to
the Developer Parcel, or any portion thereof, including any Investigation or Remediation at or about the
Developer Parcel; provided, however, that the foregoing release by tbe Releasing Parties shall not apply to
the extent that any Claim is the result of the willful misconduct or fraud of the Agency or their respective
officials, employees, representatives, agents or consultants arising after the Close of Escrow. This release
includes Claims of which the Developer is presently unaware or which the Developer does not presently
suspect to exist which, if known by the Developer, would materially affect the Developer's release to the
Released Parties. The Developer specifically waives the provision of California Civil Code Section 1542,
which provides as follows:
"A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH
THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS
FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF
KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS
SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR."
In this connection and to the extent pennitted by law, the Developer hereby agrees, represents and
warrants, which representation and warranty shall survive the Close of Escrow and the tennination of this
Agreement and not be merged with the Grant Deed, that the Developer realizes and acknowledges that
factual matters now unknown to it may have given or may hereafter give rise to Claims or controversies
which are presently unknown, unanticipated and unsuspected, and the Developer further agrees, represents
and warrants, which representation and warranty shall survive tbe Close of Escrow and the tennination of
this Agreement and not be merged with the Grant Deed, that the waivers and releases herein nave been
negotiated and agreed upon in light of that realization and that tbe Developer, on behalf of itself and the
other Releasing Parties, nevertheless hereby intends to release, discharge and acquit the Released Parties
from any such unknown Claims and controversies which might in any way be included as a material
portion of the consideration given to tbe Agency by the Developer in exchange for the Agency's
perfonnance hereunder.
BY INITIALIZING BELOW, DEVELOPER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT
(A) IT HAS READ AND FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE PROVISIONS
THAT THIS SECTION, (B) IT HAS HAD THE CHANCE TO ASK
QUESTIONS OF ITS COUNSEL ABOUT ITS MEANING AND
SIGNIFICANCE, AND (C) IT HAS ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO
THE TERMS SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION.
AGENCY'S INITIALS
DEVELOPER'S INITIALS
This release shall run willi the land as an equitable servitude for tbe benefit of the Agency and, shall be
included in its entirety in the Grant Deed.
5.
Indemnitv. No Financinl! Continl!encv.
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
25
5.1 Indemnitv. The Developer hereby agrees to protect, indemnify, defend and hold the
Agency and the City of Tustin and their respective officials, employees, agents, attorneys, representatives,
contractors, successors and assigns free and harmless from and against any and all Claims arising from or
related to entry onto the Developer Parcel by the Developer or the activities or work on or use by the
Developer or the Developer's officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives and/or contractors of
the Developer Parcel, including canied out by the Developer on or adjacent to the Developer Parcel;
provided, however, that the foregoing indemnity shall not apply to any diminution in the value of the
Developer Parcel resulting solely from Developer's discovery of any pre-existing condition, pre-existing
circumstance or pre-existing Hazardous Material on the Developer Parcel. The Developer shall keep the
Developer Parcel free and clear of any mechanics' liens or materialmen's liens related to the Developer's
Inspection of the Developer Parcel. The indemnification by the Developer set forth in this Section 5.4 shall
survive the Close of Escrow and the tennination of this Agreement and shall not be merged with the Grant
Deed.
5.2 No Financinl! Continl!encv. The Developer acknowledges that it has examined its ability
to purchase the Developer Parcel and to develop the Project, including the Developer's ability to obtain
financing there for. As a condition precedent to entering into this Agreement, the Developer has provided
evidence, satisfactory to the Agency, of the Developer's ability to obtain such financing. The Developer
acknowledges and agrees that the Developer's purchase of the Developer Parcel is subject to no financing
contingency whatsoever with respect to either private or public financing.
6.
Title: Survey.
6.1 Survey. A proposed survey of the Developer Parcel ("Survey") has been prepared by
Developer. Prior to Close of Escrow the Survey shall be certified by the Surveyor to the Agency, the
Developer and the Title Company and coITections made, if necessary. The Survey identifies all Pennitted
Exceptions, as hereinafter defined, by reference to the recording information applicable to the documents
creating them and also states whether any portion of the Developer Parcel lies within a flood hazard area.
The Developer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the Agency and its respective officials, employees,
agents, attorneys, representatives, contractors and successors and assigns free and harmless from any and
all Claims which the Developer shall incur or sustain as a result of inaccuracy in the legal description for
the Developer Parcel. The indemnification by the Developer set forth in this Section 6.1 shall survive the
Close of Escrow and the tennination of this Agreement and shall not be merged with the Grant Deed.
6.2 Permitted Exceptions. Attached hereto as Attachment No.6 is a preliminary title report
issued to the Agency by the Title Company with respect to the Developer Parcel ("Preliminary Title
Report"). Within ten (10) days following the Effective Date, the Developer may, at the Developer's sole
expense, cause the Title Company to prepare and deliver to the Developer a preliminary title commitment
from Title Company ("Title Commitment") committing to issue to the Developer a California Land Title
Association Owner's Policy for the Developer Parcel (the "CL T A Policy") together with true and complete
copies of all instruments refeITed to therein. The Developer acknowledges and agrees that it has reviewed
the Preliminary Title Report and the other relevant documents referenced below and that it shall take title to
the Developer Parcel subject to the following (collectively refeITed to herein as the "Permitted
Exceptions"): (a) all covenants, restrictions and encumbrances, liens, exceptions, leases, restrictions, deed
17DOJ9.21
May 10.2004
26
restrictions and qualifications set forth in or pennitted or contemplated by this Agreement, (b) all
exceptions indicated in the Preliminary Title Report, and (c) unless removed from title in accordance with
Section 6.3, any and all further title exceptions as may be found in any subsequent update of title.
6.3 ALTA Policv: Endorsements. It shall be a condition precedent to the Developer's
obligation to close escrow that the Title Company issue the CLTA Policy with policy amount as requested
by the Developer, not to exceed the Purchase Price. It shall not be a condition precedent to the Developer's
obligation to close that the CLTA Policy show only exceptions to fee title that are Permitted Exceptions;
the Developer Parcel is being sold by the Agency" as is." The Developer shall have the right, at its sole
expense, to request and obtain an ALTA extended coverage owner's policy of insurance (the "ALTA
Policy") and any additional title endorsements ("Developer's Title Endorsements") as the Developer
deems necessary; provided that the issuance of the AL T A Policy and the Developer's Title Endorsements
shall not delay the Close of Escrow and shall not be a condition precedent to the Close of Escrow. The
Agency shall pay for the cost of the CLTA Policy. Developer shall pay for the cost of any ALTA Policy
requested by Developer and the cost of Developer's Title Endorsements. The title policy obtained by the
Developer is referred to herein as "Developer's Title Policy." Developer's failure or inability to obtain the
ALT A Policy or any or all of Developer's Title Endorsements by Close of Escrow shall not be a condition
precedent to or result in any delay in the Close of Escrow.
7.
Closinl!.
7.1 Time and Place of Closinl!. For purposes of this Agreement, the tenn "Closing Date" shall
mean five (5) working days after satisfaction of Developer's Closing Conditions and Agency's Closing
Conditions. The Close of Escrow shall take place on the Closing Date at: Stewart Title Company; [name of
Escrow Officer](the "Title Company or Escrow Officer"). The Closing Date may be extended upon
mutual written agreement of the Parties.
7.2 Developer's Conditions Precedent to Closinl!. The Developer's obligation to purchase the
Property and to close Escrow is subject to and conditioned upon the Developer's satisfaction or the
Developer's written waiver, in its sole discretion, as to each of the following conditions to Close of Escrow
("Developer's Closing Conditions") on or before the Closing Date:
7.2.1 The Agencv's Document Deliveries. The Agency's execution and delivery to Escrow
Holder of the following documents, which documents the Agency shall deliver to Escrow not later than one
(1) day prior to the Close of Escrow:
(a)
the Grant Deed, executed by the Agency, acknowledged and in recordable
fonn;
(b) a federal "FIRPTA" Affidavit executed by the Agency in fonn reasonably
acceptable to the Developer, certifying that the Agency is not a "foreign person" under the Foreign
Investment in Real Property Tax Act;
(c)
California's Real Estate Withholding Exemption Certificate Fonn 597-W;
170039.21
May 10. 2004
27
(d) such proof of the Agency's authority and authorization to enter into this
Agreement and consummate the transactions contemplated hereby, and such proof of the power and
authority of the individual(s) executing and/or delivering any instruments, documents or certificates on
behalf of the Agency to act for and/or bind the Agency as may be reasonably required by Title Company
and/or the Developer; and
(e) such other documents or instruments as Escrow Holder may reasonably
request to consummate the transaction contemplated herein.
7.2.2 Title Policv. The Title Company shall be in a position to convert the Title
Commitment to the CLTA Policy and issue same to the Developer.
7.2.3 Leases and Contracts. Except as approved by the Developer in writing or
constituting a Permitted Exception, there shall exist no leases, contracts or rights of occupancy with respect
to the Developer Parcel that shall survive the Close of Escrow.
7.2.4 Tentative Tract Map. The City Council shall have approved the Tentative Tract Map
for the Developer Parcel, and the appeal period for Design Review shall have expired with no appeal, or an
appeal has been heard and the City Council has approved the Design Review.
7.2.5 Thirty-one (31) days shall have passed since City's and Agency's filing of Notices of
Detennination under CEQA for the Project, and no temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, or
alternative writ has been issued by a court which sets aside the City's Project approval or temporarily
prevents City's or Developer's timely perfonnance ofthis Agreement.
7.3 The Aeencv's Conditions Precedent. The Agency's obligation to sell the Developer
Parcel and to close Escrow is subject to and conditioned upon the Agency's satisfaction or the Agency's
written waiver, in its sole discretion, as to each of the following conditions to Close of Escrow ("Agency
Closing Conditions") on or before the Closing Date:
7 .3.1 Documents to be Delivered Upon Execution of this Agreement. Prior to or
concurrently with the execution of this Agreement by the Developer, the following shall have occurred:
The Developer shall have delivered to the Agency (i) a declaration certified by the
General Partner of Developer, that the following documentation submitted by the Developer to the Agency
prior to the Effective Date is true and correct as of Close of Escrow: (aa) documentation relating to the
Developer's limited partnership and its General Partner, including, as applicable: the Limited Partnership
Agreement; (bb) copies of all resolutions or other necessary actions taken by such entity to authorize the
execution ofthis Agreement and any other documents or instruments required by this Agreement; (cc) a
certificate of status issued by the California Secretary of State; and (dd) a copy of any Fictitious Business
Name Statement if any, as published and filed with the Clerk of Orange County; (ii) a certification by the
Developer that the final Project Budget (Exhibit "A" to Method of Financing, Attachment No.9) prior to
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
28
the Effective Date remains a reasonable budget; and (iii) a certificate of good standing of the Developer
and its General Partner issued by the California Secretary of State.
7.3.2 Developer's Deliverv of Purchase Price: Other Costs. Not later than two (2) days
prior to the Closing Date, the Developer shall deliver to Escrow (a) the Supplemental Deposit, as described
in Section 4.2.2(b) plus all other sums required to pay the Developer's closing costs, and other sums
required to be paid by the Developer as a condition to Close of Escrow, as described in Section 4.2 of this
Agreement.
7.3.3 Developer's Document Deliveries. The Developer's execution and delivery to
Escrow Holder of the following, which documents the Developer shall deliver to the Escrow not later than
three (3) days prior to the Closing Date:
(a)
the Memorandum of DDA executed by the Developer, acknowledged and in
recordable form;
(b) a reaffirmation of the Developer's representations and watTanties set forth in
Section 3.1 in form and substance acceptable to the Agency;
(c) a reaffirmation of the Release described in Section 4.4.2(e) in form and
substance acceptable to the Agency;
(d) such proof of the Developer's authority and authorization to enter into this
Agreement and consummate the transactions contemplated hereby, and such proof of the power and
authority of the individual(s) executing and/or delivering any instruments, documents or certificates on
behalf of the Developer to act for and/or bind the Developer as may be reasonably required by Title
Company and/or the Agency; and
(e) such other documents or instruments as Escrow Holder may reasonably
request to consummate the transaction contemplated herein.
7.3.4 Evidence of Financing. The Developer shall have submitted to the Agency the
following evidence of financing:
(a) Demonstration to the satisfaction of the Assistant Executive Director or
designee (i) the availability of funds sufficient to pay all costs relating to acquisition of the Developer
Parcel and development of the Project including sufficient equity capital, bonding capacity and
commitment for funding of the Improvements in writing from a Pemritted Mortgagee(s) and (ii) no
material adverse change in the financial capacity or condition of Developer from that presented to the
Agency in Developer's response to RFP.
(b) A letter from a federally-insured Financial Institution to the effect that the
Developer has established a commercial account with such financial institution and a good and established
relationship with such financial institution.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
29
(c) Such other documents, as the Agency, in its sole discretion, determines will
assist in the evaluation of whether the Developer is able to acquire the Developer Parcel, construct the
Improvements and perform in a timely manner all of its other obligations and commitments set forth in this
Agreement.
7.3.5 Tentative Tract Map. The City shall have approved the Tentative Tract Map for the
Developer Parcel, and the appeal period for Design Review shall have expired with no appeal or an appeal
has been heard and the City Council has approved the Design Review.
7.3.6 Developer's Representations and Warranties. The Developer's representations and
warranties set forth in this Agreement shall be true and colTect as of the Closing Date.
7.3.7 Developer's Covenants. The Developer shall not be in default of any covenant or
agreement to be performed by the Developer under this Agreement.
7.3.8 Insurance Policies. The Developer shall have submitted to the Agency evidence of
insurance policies required to be obtained by the Developer pursuant to Section 11.
7.4 Additional Closinl! Conditions. In addition to the provisions of Sections 7.2 and 7.3, the
Close of Escrow shall be conditioned upon the following Closing Conditions, which shall be for the benefit
of each of the Agency and the Developer:
7.4.1 Closing Cost Statement. Escrow Holder shall have delivered at least two (2) business
days prior to the Closing Date a statement of costs to each of the Agency and the Developer.
7.4.2 Supplemental Escrow Instructions. The Agency and the Developer shall have
prepared and approved any supplemental Escrow instructions as may be needed.
7.4.3 Closing Certificate. The Agency and the Developer shall each submit to Escrow
Holder a certificate stating that all Closing Conditions for its benefit have been satisfied or waived.
7.5
Procedures for Conveyance of Property From Al!ency to Developer.
7.5.1 Costs and Expenses. The costs and expenses of the Closing shall be allocated as
follows:
(a) Agency's Costs. The Agency shall pay (a) the premium for a CLTA policy;
(b) all documentary transfer taxes; (c) one-half (112) of all escrow fees and costs; and (d) the Agency's
share of prorations, if any. Except as provided herein, the Agency shall pay the fees of all consultants
(including lawyers, environmental, engineering and land use consultants) engaged by it.
(b) Developer's Costs. The Developer shall pay for (a) the premium for the
Developer's Title Policy, it may request the costs of Developer's Title Endorsements; (b) the cost, if any,
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
30
of any title insurance policy required by any Mortgagee; (c) document recording charges for the Grant
Deed, the Memorandum of DDA and other documents recorded at Closing; (d) one-half (1/2) of all Escrow
fees and costs; and (e) the Developer's share of prorations. The Developer shall pay the fees of all
consultants and employees (including lawyers, environmental, engineering and land use consultants)
engaged by it.
(c) Other Costs. All costs and expenses related to the Closing and the transfer of
the Developer Parcel to the Developer not otherwise allocated herein shall be allocated between the
Developer and the Agency in accordance with the customary practice in Orange County, California.
7.5.2 Possession. The Agency shall deliver the Grant Deed to the Developer Parcel and
possession of the Developer Parcel at the Close of Escrow.
7.5.3 Deliveries to Developer Upon Closing. The Agency agrees to deliver to the
Developer, on or prior to the Closing Date, outside of Escrow, the following items:
(a) Records and Plans. To the extent in the Agency's possession, originals or
copies of records and plans that will affect the Developer Parcel after the Closing.
(b) Licenses and Pennits. To the extent in the Agency's possession, originals or
copies of all licenses and pennits affecting the Developer Parcel.
7.5.4 Prorations.
(a) Taxes. The Developer shall be responsible for all taxes, fees and charges
imposed by any Governmental Authority from and after the Close of Escrow. If, after the Closing, any real
property taxes are assessed against the Developer Parcel pertaining to the period prior to the Closing, the
Agency agrees to contact the applicable taxing authority and seek recognition and enforcement of its tax
exemption. The provisions of this Section 7.5.4 shall survive the tennination of this Agreement and the
Closing and shall not merge into the Grant Deed.
(b) Contracts and Leases. The Developer has agreed to maintain the Developer
Parcel from the Effective Date to and through the Closing Date. Accordingly, amounts payable under
Contracts and Leases and any other expenses relating to the Developer Parcel (excluding real property
taxes or other taxes) shall be prorated on an accrual basis as of the Effective Date (and not the Closing
Date). The Agency shall pay all amounts due thereunder which accrue prior to the Effective Date, and,
unless previously paid by the Developer, the Developer shall pay all amounts accruing on the Effective
Date and thereafter.
(c) Method of Proration. All prorations shall be made in accordance with
customary practice in Orange County, except as otherwise expressly provided herein. The Developer and
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
31
the Agency agree to cause a schedule of prorations to be prepared prior to the Closing Date. Such
prorations, if and to the extent known and agreed upon as of the Closing Date, shan be paid by the
Developer to the Agency (if the prorations result in a net credit to the Agency) or by the Agency to the
Developer (if the prorations result in a net credit to the Developer) by increasing or reducing the cash to be
paid by the Developer at the Closing. Any such prorations not determined or not agreed upon as of the
Closing shall be paid by the Developer to the Agency, or by the Agency to the Developer, as the case may
be, in cash as soon as practicable following the Closing. A copy of the schedule of prorations as agreed
upon by the Developer and the Agency shall be delivered to Escrow Holder at least three (3) business days
prior to the Closing Date. All prorations provided for in this Section shall be on an "actual day" basis and a
three hundred sixty-five (365) day year. If the Developer Parcel is part of a larger tax parcel ("Assessment
Parcel"), which as of the Close of Escrow remains unsegregated on the County Tax Assessor's Roll for the
coming fiscal year, Escrow Holder shall charge the Developer and credit the Agency for taxes and
assessments allocated to the Developer Parcel on an acreage basis compared to the acreage for the entire
Assessment Parcel, which acreage figures for allocation purposes shall be fairly and equitably determined
and supplied to Escrow Holder by the Parties. The Parties shall cooperate in good faith to cause the
Developer Parcel to be separately assessed and segregated in Developer's name on the current tax roll at the
earliest possible time.
7.5.5 Disbursements and Other Actions by Escrow Holder. At the Close of Escrow and
subject to the satisfaction or waiyer by the benefited party of the Closing Conditions described in Sections
7.2.7.3 and 7.4, Escrow Holder shall promptly undertake all of the following in the manner indicated
below:
7.5.6 Funds. Debit or credit all matters addressed in Section 7.5.1 and prorate all matters
addressed in Section 7.5.4 and disburse to the Agency the Purchase Price (as adjusted by the foregoing
debits, credits and prorations) deposited with Escrow Holder by the Developer.
7.5.7 Recording. Cause the Grant Deed; the Memorandum ofDDA and any other
documents which the Developer and the Agency may mutually direct, or which may be required to be
recorded by the terms of this Agreement to be recorded in the Official Records, obtain conformed copies
thereof and distribute same to the Developer and the Agency.
7.5.8 Title Policy. Direct the Title Company to issue the CLTA policy to the Developer,
concurrent with the issuance of the Insurance Policy the Title Company shall provide such endorsements as
may be requested by the Developer.
7.5.9 Deliverv of Documents to Developer and Agencv. Deliver to the Developer and the
Agency original counterparts (and conformed copies, if applicable) of the Grant Deed, the Memorandum of
DDA, the FIRPTA Certificate, the California Form 597-W and any other documents (or copies thereof)
deposited into Escrow by the Developer or the Agency pursuant hereto, and deliver to the Developer and
the Agency a certified copy of their respective Escrow closing statements.
7.5.10 Other Actions. Take such other actions as the Developer and the Agency direct
pursuant to mutually executed supplemental Escrow instructions.
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
32
7.5.11 Notice. All communications from the Escrow Holder shall be directed to the
addresses and in the manner established in Section 17.8 of this Agreement for notices, demands and
communications between the Parties.
8.
Development of the Project.
8.1
Scope of Development.
8.1.1 Requirement to Develop the Project. The Scope of Development attached to this
Agreement as Attachment No.7 sets forth the overall plan for the Project and development of the
Developer Parcel, including the Common Areas. The Developer shall improve the Developer Parcel and
construct the Public Improvements identified in Attachment No.7, in the manner described in the Scope of
Development and in accordance with the Schedule of Perfonnance and the Approved Project Plans, all as
further described below.
8.1.2 Responsibilitv for Project Development. The Developer shall have responsibility for
the design and layout of the Private Improvements (including height, shape and location, size of floor
plans, and special landscaping and art features), the Public Improvements and for the special uses to be
incorporated therein, subject to the approval of the Agency, (consistent with the Federal Requirements,
described in Attachment No. 10) and the City, pursuant to its governmental authority as entitling agency,
and subject to the provisions of this Agreement, including the design review and approval provisions for
the benefit of the Agency set forth in this Agreement which are undertaken by the Agency in its proprietary
capacity.
8.1.3 Project Development Costs. Within the time set forth in the Schedule of Perfonnance
and subject to Force Majeure, the Developer shall design and construct the Project at the Developer's sole
cost and expense and without public subsidy of any kind, except as provided herein, unless otherwise
agreed in writing by the Agency in its sole discretion. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the
Developer hereby agrees that all costs associated with planning, designing and constructing the Project,
preparing the Developer Parcel and constructing all Improvements thereon including all hard costs, soft
costs, the cost of services, fees, exactions, dedications, cost overruns, profit, overhead, consultants' fees,
legal fees, wages required to be paid to any person employed by the Developer, any Assignee, contractor or
subcontractor, Quimby Act Fees ("Development Costs"), shall be the responsibility of the Developer
without any cost or liability to the Agency, except as provided in Section 4.3 and in Attachment No.8.
8.1.4 Compliance with Governmental Requirements and Other Reauirements. The Project
shall be consistent with the Scope of Development and shall be developed and maintained in accordance
with this Agreement and all Governmental Requirements, including the Approved Project Plans.
8.1.5
Construction of Specific Project Components.
(a) Project Improvements. The Developer shall promptly begin and thereafter
diligently prosecute to Completion in accordance with the Schedule of Perfonnance and subject to Force
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
33
Majeure, all Project Improvements when and as required by the Agency and pursuant to all Governmental
Requirements, State and Federal Law. The construction of the Public Improvements shall be publicly bid
to the lowest responsible bidder and shall comply with all applicable State Law and with the Federal
Requirements.
(b) Ouimbv Fees. The Developer shall be responsible at its sole cost and
expense for compliance with the Quimby Act, California Government Code Section 66477 and shall pay in
lieu fees in compliance with Tustin City Code Section 9931(d).
8.2
Timin!! and Conditions of Proiect Development.
8.2.1 Schedule of Perfonnance. Attached hereto as Attachment No.6 is a Schedule of
Perfonnance which sets forth the schedule for submissions, approvals and actions, including the design and
construction of the Improvements. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the Agency is entering into this
Agreement with the expectation that subject to Force Majeure, the projections in the Schedule of
Perfonnance will be met. Following conveyance of the Developer Parcel to the Developer, the Developer
shall promptly begin and thereafter diligently prosecute to completion all steps required by the Schedule of
Perfonnance including design, construction and development of the Improvements within the time
specified in the Schedule of Perfonnance. The Agency may, in its sole discretion and upon written request
from the Developer, extend the time specified in the Schedule of Perfonnance; provided, however, that the
Agency shall not withhold its consent to reasonable extensions to deadlines in the Schedule of Perfonnance
requested by the Developer so long as the Developer is proceeding in good faith and in a commercially
reasonable matter, as determined by the Agency in its sole discretion, to comply with the requirements of
the Schedule of Perfonnance and there are no circumstances applicable to or causing the delay suffered by
the Developer that would not apply to other developers attempting to complete similar residential projects
in Orange County. Any such agreed upon changes shall be within the limitations of the Entitlements. Any
such extensions shall not be deemed as amendments to this Agreement. Any such extensions shall be
evidenced by written notice from the Assistant Executive Director or designee.
8.2.2 Conditions Relating to Timing and Sequencing of the Development of the Project.
The following are express conditions precedent to the right of the Developer to proceed with development
of the Project.
(a) Prior to issuance of the first grading permit (other than stockpiling) for the
Project, the Developer shall provide a Perfonnance Bond in an amount and fonn acceptable to the City
Engineer securing its obligations to construct the Public Improvements.
(b) Prior to issuance of the first grading permit for the Project, the Developer
shall provide a Perfonnance Bond in the amount of [ ] and in a fonn acceptable to
the Executive Director, or designee, that secures its obligations to construct the Private Improvements, and
its other obligations under this Agreement.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
34
(c) School Impact Fees. The Developer acknowledges and agrees that the
Developer Parcel is subject to imposition of developer school impact fees by the Tustin Unified School
District. Such fees shall be paid by Developer in accordance with law, prior to issuance of Building
pennits for the Private Improvement, and evidence of such payment provided to City.
8.3
Land Use Matters.
8.3.1 Entitlements and Development Permits. It is the responsibility of the Developer,
without cost to the Agency: (a) to obtain all land use approvals and entitlements legally required by the
City or any other Govemmental Authority as a condition to development of the Developer Parcel and
construction of the Improvements shown in the Scope of Development and the Preliminary Plan as the
same may be modified from time to time with the approval of the Agency ("Entitlements"); (b) to obtain
all grading, demolition, and building permits; and (c) to assure that the design, construction, use, operation,
maintenance, repair and replacement of the Improvements is carried out in accordance with the provisions
of this Agreement, and is pennitted by zoning and all applicable City requirements. Nothing contained
herein shall be deemed to entitle the Developer to any Entitlement or grading, demolition, and building
permit or other City approval necessary for the development of the Developer Parcel, or to the waiver of
any applicable Agency requirements relating thereto and the failure of the City to issue or approve any
Entitlement described in this Agreement, including any Subdivision Map, Concept Plan, Design Review or
Specific Plan, or to issue any grading, demolition, and building permit shall not be a default of the Agency
under this Agreement.
8.3.2 Agreement Does Not Grant Entitlements. This Agreement does not (a) grant any
land use entitlement to the Developer, (b) supersede, nullify or amend any condition which may be
imposed by the City in connection with approval of the Project, (c) guarantee to the Developer or any other
party any profits from the development of the Developer Parcel, or (d) amend any City laws, codes or rules.
8.3.3 Required Entitlements. This Agreement and the development of the Project shall be
subject to the following Entitlement review processes of the City all of which are Closing Conditions: (a)
Subdivision Map Act approval; (b) Zone Change approval and Design Review approval; (c) conditional
use pennit approval. Without limiting the foregoing, in developing and constructing the Project, the
Developer shall ensure that the Project complies with all applicable development standards in the
Redevelopment Plan, the City Code, and with all building codes, landscaping, signage and parking
requirements, except as may be permitted through variances and modified plans.
8.3.4 Development Permits and Dedications. The Developer shall process, secure, or cause
to be secured any and all permits, certificates and approvals which may be required by the Agency or any
other Governmental Authority to subdivide the Developer Parcel for mixed use development and to
construct the Improvements (collectively, "Development Permits"). The Subdivision Map shall
incorporate all required dedications described in this Agreement or otherwise required or approved by the
Agency.
8.3.5 Agencv Review of Land Use Applications. Consistent with this Agreement, the
Agency agrees, without cost to the Agency, to support the Developer's efforts to obtain the Entitlements
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
35
and grading, demolition, and building permits required for the full implementation of this Agreement. The
Agency will seek to expedite review of entitlement applications where reasonably required in order to meet
the deadlines set forth in the Schedule of Perfonnance. Without limiting any other provision of this
Agreement, the Developer shall pay all permit fees and other fees and costs nonnally charged by the
Agency in connection with application for and review and approval of Entitlements and grading,
demolition, and building permits.
8.3.6 CEOA Requirements. The Parties acknowledge and agree that CEQA is applicable
to the development of the Project. The Agency shall be responsible, at its own cost and expense, for
obtaining CEQA approvals and certifications, if any, required by the Agency and any other Governmental
Authority for development of the Project. The Developer agrees to cooperate with the Agency in òbtaining
infonnation to determine the environmental impact of the Project, if any.
8.3.7 Subdivision Map. The Developer acknowledges and agrees that the Agency shall
require certain satisfaction of conditions and dedication of certain property, as detennined by the Agency in
its sole discretion, in connection with its approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the Final Tract Map.
Such conditions shall include the obligation of the Developer to dedicate in fee, the Alley Dedication Area
to the City of Tustin.
8.4
Financial Status.
8.4.1 Financial Capabilitv. Until issuance of the Certificate of Compliance, the Developer
shall continue to be responsible for demonstrating to the Agency the financial capacity and capability to
perfonn its obligations under this Agreement. The Developer shall submit any additional financial
infonnation of Developer and its members or managing member as requested by the City within thirty (30)
days of a request by the Agency pursuant to this Agreement. The Developer shall identify with specificity
the documents which the Developer wants the Agency to maintain as confidential documents and a
statement as to why the request is consistent and complies with the provisions of the Public Records Act of
the State of California. If confidentiality is requested and if nondisclosure under the Public Records Act is
allowed, the documents shall be delivered to and maintained by the Agency and copies shall not be
disseminated. Otherwise, Developer agrees to make such information available to Agency at its offices. To
the extent pennitted by law, the City shall not make public disclosure of confidential documents. The City's
agents, negotiators and consultants may review the documents as necessary as long as such parties agree to
maintain the confidentiality of such documents.
8.4.2 Additional Infonnation. The Developer understands and agrees that the Agency
reserves the right at any time to reasonably request from the Developer additional infonnati<;m, including
infonnation, data and commitments to ascertain the depth of the Developer's capability and desire to
develop the Developer Parcel expeditiously.
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
36
8.5
Deshm Approval.
8.5.1 Design Review. It is understood and agreed to by the Developer that the quality,
character and uses proposed for the Project are of particular importance to the Agency and that the City,
acting in its governmental capacity, shall require Concept Plan and Design Review approval as part of the
Entitlements. In addition, in its proprietary capacity as seller of the real property that is the subject of this
Agreement, the Agency will require plan review and approval for the Developer Parcel as further set forth
in this Section 8.5.
8.5.2 Plan Development and Cost. All plans and specifications for the Project shall be
prepared by the Developer at the Developer's sole cost and expense and subject to the requirements set
forth in this Section 8.5.
8.5.3 Preliminarv Plans and Development of Further Design Stages. The Developer has
previously submitted to the City and Agency a preliminary Developer Parcel plan (the "Preliminary
Plan"), which is on file with the Community Development Department, graphically depicting the overall
plan for development of the Improvements on the Developer Parcel. Within the timeframe shown in the
Schedule of Performance, Developer shall submit for approval by the Agency and City, final design
drawings and related documents conforming to the requirements of the conditions of approval and the
Tustin City Code.
8.5.4 Coordination. The Developer and the Project Architect shall meet with
representatives of the Agency to review and come to a clear understanding of the planning and design
criteria required by the Agency. During the preparation of all Design Documents, staff of the Agency and
the Developer shall hold regular progress meetings to coordinate the preparation of, submission to, and
review of the Design Documents. The staff of the Agency and the Developer shall communicate and
consult as frequently as necessary to facilitate prompt and speedy consideration of the Developer's
submittals.
8.5.5 Proprietarv Review. The Agency shall have the right of reasonable architectural
review of all plans and submissions, including any proposed changes thereto, regarding exterior elevations,
exterior materials (including selections and colors) and the size, bulk and scale for all buildings. The
Developer acknowledges and agrees that the City's Community Development Department is responsible for
reviewing the working drawings and issuing the appropriate Development Permits. The exercise of the
Assistant Executive Directors office of its right to inspect or review the plans, drawings and related
documents for development of the Developer Parcel: (a) is an exercise of the Agency's proprietary function
and not the City's governmental function; (b) shall not constitute an approval by the Agency of any
Entitlements or Development Permits; (c) shall not constitute a determination by the Agency of the
engineering or structural design, sufficiency or integrity of the improvements contemplated by such plans,
drawings and related documents, and (d) shall not constitute a determination by the Agency of the
compliance of such plans, drawings and related documents with any applicable building codes, safety
features and standards. Any inspection or approval of plans, specifications and drawings made or granted
pursuant to this Agreement shall not constitute an inspection or approval of the quality, adequacy or
170039.21
M,y 10, 2004
37
suitability of such plans, specifications or drawings, nor of the labor, materials, services or equipment to be
furnished or supplied in connection therewith.
8.5.6 Process for Proprietarv Review. In order to comply with the provisions of Sections
8.5.5 at each of the schematic design, design development and construction document stages, the
Developer shall submit two sets of Design Documents for the Improvements to the City. All plans to be
submitted to the Agency shall be submitted in writing over the signature of the Developer or a
representative duly authorized by the Developer in writing. If the Agency approves such Design
Documents, the Agency shall endorse its approval on one set of submitted documents and return the same
to the Person from whom the documents were received. The Agency shall conclusively be deemed to have
given its approval to such Design Documents unless, within ten (10) business days after the Agency's
receipt of such Design Documents, the Agency gives written notice of disapproval to the Developer
specifying in reasonable detail each item that the Agency disapproves and the reasons for such disapproval.
In the event of disapproval by the Agency of such Design Documents for any Improvements, the Developer
shall make changes in response to the Agency's notice of disapproval and resubmit such Design Documents
to the Agency's review and approval in accordance with the provisions of this Section 8.5.6 (except that in
such case the Agency's review period shall be five (5) business days rather than ten (10) business days).
Submissions of plans by the Developer with respect to partial portions of the Project or the Developer
Parcel shall be pennitted provided that the same shall be sufficient to pennit review by the Agency for the
purposes set forth above. The Developer's final submittal to the Agency, when approved by the Agency in
its proprietary capacity, shall constitute the "Final Plans."
8.5.7 Later Stage Design and Construction. The Developer shall not commence or pennit
commencement of any work of construction in connection with any subsequent development or any
redevelopment on the Developer Parcel, other than Improvements constructed in accordance with the
Approved Project Plans, interior construction work, building facade replacements or building repair or
restoration on the same footprint following a casualty, without the written consent of the Agency. If the,
Developer contemplates any action not pennitted by the foregoing, the Developer shall submit the
applicable Design Documents to the Agency for approval in accordance with Sections 8.5.5 and 8.5.6 prior
to commencing any construction work. The Agency shall have the right to approve or disapprove any such
Design Documents in accordance with the standards and procedures for the Agency's review and approval
set forth in such sections.
8.5.8 Agencv's Governmental Review. The Parties acknowledge that the Agency shall
have the right to review all plans end submissions, including any changes therein, through its nonnal plan
review and Entitlement process and that the Agency may exercise its governmental discretion in review of
any of the plans and submissions. The Community Development Department is authorized to mutually
approve minor changes to building plans after approval by the Agency provided such changes do not
significantly reduce the quality of the development concept or the design and materials to be used in
enhancing the architecture and aesthetics of the Improvements.
8.5.9 Exculpation. The Agency shall not be liable in damages to the Developer or to any
owner, lessee, any licensee or other Person, on account of (a) any approvals by the Agency, including by
the Assistant Executive Director or designee whether made in the governmental of City or proprietary
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
38
capacity of the Agency, or any disapproval of any Design Document submittal, whether or not defective or
whether or not in compliance with applicable laws or ordinances; (b) any construction, performance or
nonperformance by the Developer or any owner, lessee, licensee or other Person of any work on the
Property, whether or not pursuant to approved Design Document submittals or whether or not in
compliance with applicable laws or ordinances; (c) any mistake in judgment, negligence, action or
omission in exercising its rights, powers and responsibilities hereunder; and/or (d) the enforcement or
failure to enforce any of these Restrictions. Every Person who makes Design Document submittals for
approval agrees by reason of such submittal, and the Developer and every subsequent owner of the
Developer Parcel or any portion thereof agrees by acquiring title thereto or an interest therein, not to bring
any suit or action against the Agency or City seeking to recover any such damages and expressly waives
any such claim or cause of action which it would otherwise be entitled to assert. The review of any Design
Document submittal shall not constitute the assumption of any responsibility by, or impose any liability
upon, the City or Agency as to the accuracy, efficacy, sufficiency or legality thereof nor decrease or
diminish any liability, duties, responsibilities, or obligations of the Developer under this Agreement.
8.5.10 No Supervision or Control. The Agency does not have any right and hereby
expressly disclaims any right, of supervision or control over the architects, designers, engineers or persons
responsible for drafting or formulating of the plans, drawings and related documents of the Developer.
8.5.11 Approved Proiect Plans. Upon approval by the City of the Entitlements and
subsequent approval by the Agency of the Final Plans in accordance with Section 8.5, the plans so
approved (the "Approved Project Plans"), shall govern development of the Improvements on the
Developer Parcel. To the extent of any inconsistencies between the plans identified in the Scope of
Development or the Preliminary Plans and the Approved Project Plans, the Approved Project Plans shall
govern and control as to the development of the Developer Parcel.
8.6
Construction Covenants.
With respect to construction of the Project, the Developer hereby covenants and agrees as follows:
8.6.1 The Developer shall maintain throughout the term of this Agreement, sufficient
equity, capital and binding commitments for financing necessary to (i) pay through Completion, all costs of
development, construction, marketing and sale of all the Improvements as defined in the Scope of
Development; and (ii) enable the Developer to perform and satisfy all the covenants of the Developer
contained in this Agreement. The Developer shall not undertake such additional projects as could
reasonably be expected to jeopardize the sufficiency of such equity, capital and firm and binding
commitments for the purposed expressed in the preceding sentence.
8.6.2 The development of the Project shall be done in a professional and competent
manner. The Developer shall perform all work required to complete the Project and related work in
accordance with all Governmental Requirements.
8.6.3 The Developer shall be responsible for the timeliness and quality of all work
performed and materials and equipment furnished in connection with the Project, whether the work,
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
39
materials and equipment are perfonned and furnished by the Developer or through subcontractors,
sub-subcontractors (of all tiers) and suppliers.
8.6.4 The Developer shall promptly cause to be removed (by way of release bonds, if
necessary) any and all mechanic's liens, stop notices and/or bonded stop notices that are recorded and/or
served by subcontractors, sub-subcontractors (of all tiers) and suppliers in connection with the Project.
8.6.5 The Developer shall commence the development of the Project promptly and shall
assure the completion of the development of the Project in accordance with the projections set forth in the
Schedule of Perfonnance, subject to Force Majeure.
8.7 Al!encv Ril!hts of Access. Representatives of the Agency shall have the reasonable right of
access to all portions of the Developer Parcel, without charges or fees, at nonnal construction hours during
the period of construction for the purposes of this Agreement, including the inspection of the work being
perfonned in constructing the Improvements. The Agency agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the
Developer harmless for any and all claims, liability and damages arising out of any inspection or other
activity on the Developer Parcel by the Agency, or their respective agents, employees or contractors
pennitted pursuant to this Section 8.8, except to the extent caused by the negligence or willful misconduct
of the Developer.
8.8 Disclaimer of Responsibility by Al!ency. The Agency neither undertakes nor assumes nor
will have any responsibility or duty to the Developer or to any Assignee or to any other third party to
review, inspect, supervise, pass judgment upon or infonn the Developer, Assignee or any third party of any
matter in connection with the development or construction of the Project Improvements, whether regarding
the quality, adequacy or suitability of the plans, any labor, service, equipment or material furnished to the
Developer Parcel, any person furnishing same, or otherwise. The Developer, any Assignee and all third
parties shall rely upon its or their own judgment regarding such matters, and any review, inspection,
supervision, exercise of judgment or infonnation supplied to the Developer, Assignee or to any third party
by the Agency in connection with such matter is for the public purpose of redeveloping the Developer
Parcel, and neither the Developer nor any Assignee nor any third party is entitled to rely thereon. The
Agency shall not be responsible for any of the work of construction, improvement or development of the
Developer Parcel.
8.9 CC&Rs. The conditions, covenants and restrictions ("CC&Rs") prepared by Developer for
recordation against the Developer Parcel shall be subject to review and approval by the Agency. The
CC&Rs shall include, at a minimum, the following provisions: (a) creation of only one maintenance
association for the Project; (b) a maintenance covenant for the benefit of the Agency as set forth in Section
12.2 or as otherwise agreed by the Agency in its sole discretion, (c) the release provisions set forth in
Section 4.4.2(e) and (d) all other requirements included in the conditions of approval for the Subdivision
Map for the Project.
8.10 Local. State and Federal Laws. The Developer shall carry out the construction of the
Project, including all Improvements, in confonnity with all applicable laws and Governmental
Requirements, including all applicable federal and State labor laws and requirements. The City shall not be
1700J9.2!
M,y 10. 2oo'
40.
responsible for any claims, including penalties assessed by Governmental Authorities, arising from or
related to Developer's construction of the Project, including compliance with the prevailing wage
requirements imposed by State law and by the Davis-Bacon Act requirements imposed by federal law.
8.11 Taxes. Assessments. Encumbrances and Liens. The Developer shall pay when due and
prior to delinquency all real property taxes and assessments assessed and levied on or against all portions of
the Developer Parcel subsequent to the conveyance of fee thereto by the Agency to the Developer. The
Developer shall not place, or allow to be placed, on its interests in the Developer Parcel, Parcel, Lot or
Unit, or any portion thereof, any Mortgage or encumbrance or lien not authorized by this Agreement. The
Developer shall remove, or shall have removed, any levy or attachment made on its interests in the
Property (or any portion thereof), or shall assure the satisfaction thereof within a reasonable time but in any
event prior to foreclosure sale. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to prohibit the Developer from
contesting the validity or amount of any tax, assessment, encumbrance or lien, nor to limit the remedies
available to the Developer in respect thereto.
9.
Certificate of ComDliance.
9.1 ComDletion: Schedule of Performance. Following the mutual execution and delivery of
this Agreement, the Developer shall proceed diligently and in good faith to complete the Entitlement
process, design and construct the Project and satisfy all Conditions Precedent relating to issuance of a
Certificate of Compliance when and as required by this Agreement in accordance with the Schedule of
Performance.
9.2 Issuance of Certificate of ComDliance. After Completion of all construction and
development required to be undertaken by the Developer in conformity with this Agreement and
satisfaction of the Conditions Precedent set forth below, to the satisfaction of the Agency in its sole
reasonable discretion, the Agency shall deliver to the Developer or Assignee, as the case may be, a
Certificate of Compliance, upon written request there for by the Developer. After the recordation of the
Certificate of Compliance, any Person then owning or thereafter purchasing, leasing, or otherwise
acquiring any interest therein shall not (because of such ownership, purchase, lease or acquisition) incur
any obligation or liability under this Agreement with respect to such Improvements, except that such Party
shall continue be bound by any covenants contained in Sections 10. 12, and 13 of this Agreement. Issuance
of the Certificate of Compliance shall not waive any rights or claim that the Agency may have against any
party for latent or patent defects in design, construction or similar matters under any applicable law, nor
shall it be evidence of satisfaction of any of the Developer's obligations to others, not a party to this
Agreement. The Certificate of Compliance shall be in such form as to permit it to be recorded in the
Official Records.
9.3 Conclusive PresumDtion. The Certificate of Compliance shall be, and shall so state,
conclusive determination of satisfactory completion of the obligations of the Developer pursuant to this
Agreement.
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
41
9.4 Release of Bonds. Upon issuance of the Certificate of Compliance, the Agency shall
release any Perfonnance Bond required by Section 8.2.2(b ).
9.5 Not Evidence. Issuance by the Agency of a Certificate of Compliance shall not constitute
evidence of compliance with or satisfaction of any obligation of the Developer to any insurer of a Mortgage
securing money loaned to finance the Improvements, nor any part thereof. Such Certificate of Compliance
is not a notice of completion as refeITed to in Section 3093 of the Califomia Civil Code.
9.6 Conditions Precedent to Issuance of Certificate of Compliance. The Agency shall not be
obligated to issue the Certificate of Compliance for the Project as a whole, unless and until each of the
following has occuITed (the "Conditions Precedent"):
(a) final inspection of the Developer Parcel and determination by the Agency
that the Project Improvements thereon and all improvements required in connection with the Improvements
have been Completed in confonnance with this Agreement and all Governmental Requirements;
(b) issuance of a certificate of substantial completion for the Project as
applicable, by the Project Architect;
(c) issuance of the final certificate of occupancy by the City for all building and
Live-Work Units within the Project;
(d) releases or waivers of all liens or rights to record liens having been obtained
from the general contractor and all subcontractors or the endorsements to their respective Mortgagee's title
insurance policies, and the statutory period for filing liens having expired;
(e) review and approval by the Agency of the fonn and substance ofthe CC&Rs
to be recorded against the Developer Parcel to govern use, maintenance and operation of the Developer
Parcel by the maintenance association and the owners of the Units on the Developer Parcel and recordation
of the CC&Rs in the Official Records with subordination thereto by all Mortgagees of record as of the date
of such recordation.
(f)
close of escrow for the initial purchasers of each Live-Work Unit.
9.7 Al!encv Oblil!ations. The Agency shall not unreasonably withhold or delay issuance of any
Certificate of Compliance. If the Agency refuses or fails to issue a Certificate of Compliance after written
request from the Developer, provided each of the conditions established in Section 9.6 have been satisfied,
the Agency shall within ten (10) business days of the written request, provide a written statement which
details the reasons the Agency refused or failed to issue the Certificate of Compliance. The statement shall
also contain a statement of the actions that the Developer must take to obtain a Certificate of Compliance.
Upon recordation of the Certificate of Compliance, this Agreement shall terminate and shall be of no
further force and effect, except that:
170039.21
May 10.2004
42
(a)
the provisions of Section 4.5.2, including the release set forth therein, shall
survive in perpetuity;
(b)
the covenants set forth in Section 12 shall survive in perpetuity;
(c) the environmental indemnity set forth in Section 10 shall remain in effect and
shall bind Developer and its personal successors and assigns but shall not be binding upon the original and
successor owners of the Live-Work Units.
(d)
the use restrictions set forth in Section 13 shall survive in perpetuity.
10.
Indemnification and Environmental Provisions.
10.1 Developer's Indemnification. As a material part of the consideration for this Agreement,
and to the maximum extent pennitted by law, the Developer shall indemnify, protect, defend, assume all
responsibility for and hold hannless the Agency and its officials, employees, contractors, representatives
and agents (collectively referred to as the "Indemnified Parties"), with counsel reasonably acceptable to
the Agency, from and against any and all Claims resulting or arising from or in any way connected with the
following, provided the Developer shall not be responsible for (and such indemnity shall not apply to) the
gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties:
(a)
The Developer's marketing, sale or use of the Developer Parcel in any way;
(b)
Any other activities of the Developer;
(c) Any plans or designs for Improvements prepared by or on behalf of the
Developer, including any errors or omissions with respect to such plans or designs;
(d) Any loss or damage to the Agency resulting from any inaccuracy in or breach
of any representation or warranty of the Developer, or resulting from any breach or default by the
Developer, under this Agreement; and
(e) Any development or construction of any Improvements by the Developer,
whether regarding the quality, adequacy or suitability of the plans, any labor, service, equipment or
material furnished to the Developer Parcel, any person furnishing the same, or otherwise.
10.2 Environmental Indemnitv. As a material part of the consideration for this Agreement, and
effective as to the Developer Parcel upon the Developer's acquisition of fee title the Developer shall, to the
maximum extent pennitted by law, indemnify, protect, defend, assume all responsibility for and hold
hannless the Indemnified Parties from and against any and all Claims resulting or arising from or in any
way connected with the existence, Release, threatened Release, presence, storage, treatment, transportation
and/or disposal of any Hazardous Materials at any time on, in, under, from, about or adjacent to any portion
or portions of said land, regardless whether any such condition is known or unknown now or upon
acquisition and regardless whether any such condition pre-exists acquisition or is subsequently caused,
170039.21
M., 10.2004
43
created or occurring, provided, however, that the Developer shall not be responsible for (and such
indemnity shall not apply to) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. This
environmental indemnity shall be included in any recorded memorandum of this Agreement against said
land and shall be binding upon successors and assigns of the Developer owning all or any part thereof in
accordance with Section 10.3.
10.3 Duration of Indemnities. The indemnities set forth in this Section 10 shall survive the
Close of Escrow and the termination of this Agreement and shall not merge into the Grant Deed; provided,
however that, such indemnities shall cease to run with respect to the sale of a live-work unit or upon
recordation of a Certificate of Compliance. Notwithstanding that such indemnities shall cease to run with
the Developer Parcel, they shall continue to be personally binding and in full force and effect in perpetuity
with respect to Developer and its successors in interest.
10.4 Claim Response. In the event that any Environmental Agency or other third party brings,
makes, alleges, or asserts a Claim against the Developer, arising from or related to any actual, threatened,
or suspected Release of Hazardous Materials on or about the Developer Parcel, including any Claim for
Investigation or Remediation on the Developer Parcel, or such Environmental Agency or other third party
orders, demands, or otherwise requires that any Investigation or Remediation be conducted on the
Developer Parcel, the Developer shall promptly notify the Agency in writing and shall promptly and
responsibly respond to such Claim. Further, upon receipt of such Claim, order, demand or requirement, the
Developer shall (a) take such reasonable measures, as necessary or appropriate, to reasonably dissuade
such Environmental Agency or other third party from bringing, making, alleging, or asserting any Claim
against the Agency arising from or related to any actual, threatened, or suspected Release of Hazardous
Material on or about the Developer Parcel, including any Claim for Investigation or Remediation on the
Developer Parcel, and (b) request that the Environmental Agency not issue any order, demand, or
requirement to the Agency under any of the Environmental Laws, or any other local, regional, State or
federal law, or seek penalties or take other punitive action against the Agency, in connection with, arising
from, or related to any actual, threatened, or suspected Release of Hazardous Material on or about the
Developer Parcel, including any Investigation or Remediation on or about the Developer Parcel
10.5 Release Notification and Remedial Actions. If any Release of a Hazardous Material is
discovered on the Developer Parcel and regardless of the cause, the Developer shall promptly (a) provide
written notice (or in the event of emergency, telephonic notice, followed by written notice) of any such
Release to the Agency and (b) at Developer's sole risk and expense and solely under the name of the
Developer (but without prejudice to the Developer's or the Agency's rights against any responsible party:
(i) remove, treat, and dispose of the released Hazardous Material on the Developer Parcel in compliance
with all applicable Environmental Laws, or if such removal is prohibited by any Environmental Laws, take
whatever action is required by any Environmental Law; (ii) take such other action as is necessary to have
the full use and benefit of the Developer Parcel as contemplated by this Agreement; and (iii) provide the
Agency with satisfactory evidence of the actions taken as required in this Section. The Developer shall
provide to the Agency, within thirty (30) days of the Agency's request there for, a bond, letter of credit or
other financial assurance evidencing to the Agency's satisfaction that all necessary funds are readily
available to pay the costs and expenses of the actions required by this Section and to discharge any
170039.21
","y 10. 2004
44
assessments or liens established against the Developer Parcel as a result of the presence of the Hazardous
Material release on the Developer Parcel.
11.
Insurance.
ILl ReQuired Insurance. Without limiting the Agency's rights to indemnification, the
Developer shall procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, and furnish or cause to be furnished to
the Agency, evidence of the following policies of insurance naming the Developer as insured and, except
for Workers' Compensation insurance, the Agency as additional insureds. All such insurance shall be kept
in force until issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
11.1.1 Liabilitv Insurance. Commencing upon conveyance of the Property to the Developer,
the Developer shall maintain or cause to be maintained commercial general liability insurance, to protect
against loss from liability imposed by law for damages on account of personal injury, including death there
from, suffered or alleged to be suffered by any person or persons whomsoever on or about the Developer
Parcel and the business of the Developer on the Developer Parcel, or in connection with the operation
thereof, resulting directly or indirectly from any acts or activities of the Developer or anyone directly or
indirectly employed or contracted with or acting for the Developer, or under its respective control or
direction, and also to protect against loss from liability imposed by law for damages to any property of any
person occurring on or about the Developer Parcel, or in connection with the operation thereof, caused
directly or indirectly by or from acts or activities of the Developer or any person acting for the Developer,
or under its control or direction. Such insurance shall also provide for and protect the Agency against
incurring any legal cost in defending claims for alleged loss. Such insurance shall be maintained in full
force and effect until issuance of a Certificate of Compliance and cover claims of damages suffered by
persons or property, resulting from any acts or omissions of the Developer, the Developer's employees,
agents, contractors, suppliers, or consultants as follows: commercial general liability in a general aggregate
amount of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per occulTence and in the aggregate. The
Developer shall deliver to the Agency a certificate of insurance countersigned by an authorized agent of the
insurance carrier and an Insurer endorsement evidencing such insurance coverage prior to commencement
of grading or demolition. The endorsement shall name the Agency, the City and their respective officials,
agents, representatives and employees as additional insureds under the policy. The endorsement shall
contain a statement of obligation on the part of the carrier to notify the Agency of any cancellation or
tennination of the coverage at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of any such
cancellation or tennination. The endorsement shall provide that coverage shall be primary to, and not
contribute with any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Agency, and the policy shall contain
such an endorsement. The Developer may substitute equivalent liability insurance of its contractors,
provided the insurance and endorsements meet the requirements of Section 11.
11.1.2 Workers' Compensation Insurance. Commencing upon conveyance of the Property
to the Developer shall maintain or cause to be maintained workers' compensation insurance issued by a
responsible carrier authorized under the laws of the State of California to insure employers against liability
for compensation under the workers' compensation laws now in force in California, or any laws hereafter
enacted as an amendment or supplement thereto or in lieu thereof. Such workers' compensation insurance
shall cover all persons employed by the Developer in connection with the Developer Parcel and shall cover
170039.21
M,y 10, 2004
45
liability within statutory limits for compensation under any such act aforesaid, based upon death or bodily
injury claims made by, for or on behalf of any person incUITing or suffering injury or death in connection
with the Developer Parcel or the operation thereof by the Developer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
Developer may, in compliance with the laws of the State of California and in lieu of maintaining such
insurance, self-insure for workers' compensation in which event the Developer shall deliver to the Agency
evidence that such self-insurance has been approved by the appropriate State authorities. The Developer
shall also furnished (or cause to be furnished) to the Agency evidence satisfactory to the Agency that any
contractor with whom it has contracted for perfonnance of work on the Developer Parcel or otherwise
pursuant to this Agreement caITies workers' compensation insurance required by law. The endorsement for
workers compensation shall contain a waiver of subrogation for the benefit of the Agency.
11.1.3 Propertv Insurance. Commencing upon conveyance of the Property to the Developer,
the Developer shall maintain or cause to be maintained for all buildings, a policy or policies of insurance
against loss or damage to the Developer Parcel and the Improvements thereon and all property of an
insurable nature located upon the Developer Parcel, resulting from fire, lightning, vandalism, malicious
mischief, riot and civil commotion, and such other perils ordinarily included in special clauses of property
loss coverage fonn policies for the full replacement value of the Improvements, including builder's risk
coverage meeting the foregoing requirements during the pendency of any construction on the Developer
Parcel. Such insurance shall be maintained in an amount not less than one hundred percent (100%) of the
Full Insurable Value of the Improvements on the Developer Parcel. As to each Unit, such insurance shall
be maintained until the close of escrow for the Developer's sale of the Unit, at which time such insurance
coverage may be terminated.
11.2
General Insurance ReQuirements.
11.2.1 The tenn "Full Insurable Value" as used in this Section 11 shall mean the cost
determined by mutual agreement of the Agency and the Developer (excluding the cost of excavation,
foundation and footings below the lowest floor and without deduction for depreciation) of providing
similar Improvements of equal size and providing the same habitability as the Improvements immediately
before such casualty or other loss, but using readily-available contemporary components, including the cost
of construction, architectural and engineering fees, and inspection and supervision.
11.2.2 All insurance provided under this Section 11 shall be for the benefit of the Developer
and the Agency. The Developer agrees to timely pay all premiums for such insurance and, at its sole cost
and expense, to comply and secure compliance with all insurance requirements necessary for the
maintenance of such insurance. All insurance herein provided for under this Section 11 shall be provided
by insurers authorized to do business in the State of California and with a Best's rating of A-X or better,
with the exception of workers compensation, where the City will accept insurers rated B or better or
coverage from the State Compensation Fund.
11.2.4 If the Developer fails or refuses to procure and maintain insurance as required by
this Agreement, the Agency shall have the right, at the Agency's election, and upon ten (10) days prior
notice to the Developer, to procure and maintain such insurance. The premiums paid by the Agency shall
be treated as a loan, due from the Developer, to be paid on the first day of the month following the date on
170039.21
M,y 10.2004
46
which the premiums were paid. The Agency shall give prompt notice of the payment of such premiums,
stating the amounts paid and the name of the insured(s).
12.
Covenants and Restrictions.
12.1 Use Covenant. The Developer covenants and agrees for itself, its successors, it assigns and
every successor in interest to the Developer Parcel or any part thereof, that the Developer, its successor and
assigns shall use the Developer Parcel only for those uses specified in this Agreement.
12.2
Maintenance Covenant.
12.2.1 Following Close of Escrow. After the date of acquisition by the Developer of the
Developer Parcel, the Developer and its successors and assigns shall maintain the Developer Parcel in the
same aesthetic and sound condition (or better) as the condition of the Property at the time of the transfer of
the Property to the Developer.
(a) From the date of commencement of construction until issuance of a
Certificate of Compliance, the Developer and its successors and assigns shall maintain the Improvements
on the portions of the Developer Parcel under construction consistent with best construction industry
practice.
(b) After completion of all or any portion of the Improvements, and in
perpetuity, the Developer, its successors and assigns shall maintain the Improvements on the Developer
Parcel in the same aesthetic and same condition or better as the condition of such Improvements at the time
the Agency issues a Certificate of Compliance, reasonable wear and tear excepted. The standard for the
quality of maintenance of the Improvements required by this Section 12.2.2 shall be met whether or not a
specific item of maintenance is listed below. However, representative items of maintenance shall include:
(i) maintenance, repair and replacement on a regular schedule, consistent with like developments in Orange
County, of private streets, roads, drives, bike paths, sidewalks, utilities (except to the extent owned or
controlled by a utility franchisee) common areas, landscaping, hardscaping and fountains; (ii) frequent and
regular inspection for graffiti or damage or deterioration or failure, and immediate repainting or repair or
replacement of all surfaces, fencing, walls, equipment, etc., as necessary; (iii) emptying of trash receptacles
and removal of litter; (iv) regular sweeping of roadways and sidewalks throughout the Developer Parcel;
(v) fertilizing and replacing vegetation as necessary; (vi) cleaning windows on a regular basis; (vi) painting
the buildings on a regular program and prior to the deterioration of the painted surfaces; (vii) conducting
roof inspections on a regular basis and maintaining roofs in a leak-free and weather-tight condition.
(c) In the event the Developer or its successors or assigns fails to maintain the
Improvements in accordance with the above-described standards for the maintenance, the Agency or its
designee shall have the right but not the obligation to enter the Developer Parcel upon reasonable notice to
the Developer or its successor or assigns, correct any violation, and hold the Developer, or such successors
or assigns, responsible for the cost thereof, and such cost, until paid, shall constitute a lien on the
Developer Parcel.
170039.21
M,y 10, 2004
47
(d) With Agency's written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld,
the Developer shall have the right to assign all of the maintenance responsibilities contained herein to
subsequent purchasers and/or to any maintenance association, upon which assignment the Developer shall
have no further liability under this Section.
12.3
Nondiscrimination and EQual Opportunity,
12.3.1 Obligation to Refrain from Discrimination. The Developer covenants and agrees for
itself, its successors, its assigns and every successor in interest to the Developer Parcel or any part thereof,
there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person, or group of persons, on account of
race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin or ancestry in the sale,
lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the Developer Parcel nor shall the
Developer itself or any person claiming under or through it establish or permit any such practice or
practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or
occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees of the Developer Parcel.
12.3.2 Form of Nondiscrimination Clauses. All deeds, leases or contracts shall contain or
be subject to substantially the following non-discrimination clauses:
(a) In deeds: "The grantee herein covenants by and for itself, its successors and
assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or
segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual
orientation, marital status, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy,
tenure or enjoyment of the land herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee itself or any person claiming under
or through it, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with
reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or
vendees in the land herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land."
(b) In leases: "The lessee herein covenants by and for itself, its successors and
assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, and this lease is made and accepted upon and
subject to the following conditions:
"That there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of
persons, on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status,
national origin or ancestry in the leasing, subleasing, renting, transferring, use,
occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the land herein leased, nor shall lessee itself, or any
person claiming under or through it, establish or permit such practice or practices of
discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or
occupancy of tenants, lessees, sublessees, subtenants or vendees in the land herein
leased."
(c) In contracts: "There shall be no discrimination against, or segregation of any
person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status,
national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
48
land, nor shall the transferee itself or any person claiming under or through it, establish or pennit any such
practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use
or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees of the land.
12.4
Deed Restrictions/Covenants Runninl!: with the Land.
12.4.1 The obligations of the Developer set forth in this Agreement are covenants running
with the land and equitable servitudes and shall be binding upon the Developer and all subsequent
Assignees and Ownership Transferees owning all or any portion of the Developer Parcel, for the benefit of
the Agency and the successors and assigns of the Agency. The Grant Deed shall provide that any future
transfer or conveyance of the Developer Parcel or any portion thereof shall, unless and until released by the
Agency in accordance with the provisions of Section 9.2, shall include notice of the covenants, conditions
and restrictions contained herein. The Grant Deed shall convey the Developer Parcel subject to
reservations, covenants and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement, the Pennitted Exceptions, and any
other matters specifically agreed to by the Developer in writing or which the Developer is deemed to have
accepted.
12.4.2 To effectuate this Section 12.4 and the provisions of Section 13 with respect to the
Developer Parcel, concurrently with and as a condition of the Closing, the Developer and the Agency shall
execute and cause the recordation of the Memorandum of DDA, which shall make specific reference to the
non-discrimination provisions set forth in this Section 12. Agency's Right of Reversion, set forth in Section
16. the release set forth in Section 4.5.2, the indemnities set forth in Section 10 and such other restrictions,
equitable servitudes or covenants running with the land set forth herein as the Agency may deem necessary
or appropriate to carry out this Agreement. This Agreement, the Memorandum of DDA and the Right of
Reversion shall be a lien of first priority with respect to the Property and shall be superior in priority to all
Mortgages.
13. Use Restrictions for Live-Work Units. The Deeds for individual Live-Work units shall contain
restrictions that: (a) limit the use of the ground floor to retail uses for units along Prospect Avenue; (b)
limit the use of ground floor to retail/professional office use for units along Prospect Lane; and (c) require
owner / retail proprietor occupancy of all floors of the unit for at least ten (10) units ("Restricted Units").
The unrestricted units shall be located on Prospect Avenue and shall be identified by Developer on the
Approved Plans at the time of execution of this Agreement by Developer. Owner/Occupiers of Restricted
Units may obtain Agency and City approval to lease the retail portion of the Live-Work Unit, providing the
unit owner secures additional parking within 300 feet of the unit, as required by the Tustin City Code based
on the size and use of the ground floor retail/office space, as applicable, and the additional parking is
secured by a recorded instrument approved by Agency Counsel that insures the availability of the parking
in a manner similar to other parking agreements approved by the City. These restrictions shall be binding
on the Purchaser and all subsequent Ownership Transferees, for the benefit of the Agency, it's successors
or assigns. The Agency shall approve the Deed for each Live-Work Unit prior to Close of Escrow for each
unit.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
49
14.
Potential and Material Defaults.
14.1 Potential Defaults. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, in the event either
Party (the "Defaulting Party") fails to perfonn, or delays in the perfonnance of, any obligation, in whole
or in part, required to be perfonned by the Defaulting Party as provided in this Agreement (a "Potential
Default"), the other Party (the "Injured Party") may give written notice of such Potential Default to the
Defaulting Party, which notice shall state the particulars of the Potential Default. The Agency and the
Developer agree to cooperate in good faith and meet and confer regarding such default.
14.2
Material Defaults.
14.2.1 A Potential Default (other than a Potential Default regarding the payment of money,
which is addressed in Section 14.3) shall become a "Material Default" in the event the Potential Default is
not cured, at the Defaulting Party's expense, (a) within twenty (20) Business Days after written notice of
such Potential Default from the Injured Party, or (b) if such cure cannot be reasonably accomplished within
such twenty (20) Business Day period, within ninety (90) days after receiving written notice of such
Potential Default, but only if the Defaulting Party has commenced such cure within such twenty (20)
Business Day period and diligently pursues such cure to completion, or (c) within such longer period of
time as may be expressly provided in this Agreement with respect to the Potential Default. The time
periods set forth above to cure a Potential Default may be extended by Force Majeure Delays. Following
written notice and failure to cure within the time periods set forth above, each Potential Default shall
become a Material Default that shall be deemed to have occurred upon the expiration of the applicable cure
period.
14.2.2 In the event the Developer is in Material Default, in addition to whatever other rights
the Agency may have in law or at equity, or as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Agency may do
any or all of the following:
(a) The Agency shall have the right (the "Right of Purchase"), from time to
time, at any time within three (3) years after the date that the Developer became in Material Default
(provided that upon Developer's cure of such Material Default, such right shall cease with respect to such
Material Default only), to purchase any, or all, Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) not sold by the Developer to an
Owner-Occupier as of the date of the election by the Agency to purchase said Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites)
(for the purposes hereof, "sold by the Developer" shall mean either to enter into a binding contract for the
sale of the Unit to an Owner-Occupier or to close escrow for the sale of such Unit to an Owner-Occupier).
The purchase price for such Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) shall be the greater of (i) seventy-five percent
(75%) of the Fair Market Value of said Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites), as the case may be, detennined in
accordance with Section 14.2.4 which Fair Market Value shall be that of each of the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or
Unites) in the condition it or they may be in (including the obligation, if applicable, to sell the Units as
Affordable Housing Units) as of the date of election to purchase, and (ii) an amount which provides
sufficient net sales proceeds to pay a Pennitted Mortgagee with a lien upon the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites)
being purchased the following amounts secured by such Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites): principal, accrued and
unpaid interest (including default interest), late charges, foreclosure costs, attorneys' fees and out-of-pocket
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
50
costs and expenses directly incurred by the Permitted Mortgagee in acquiring the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or
Unites), and out-of-pocket costs and expenses directly incurred by the Permitted Mortgagee in performing
the obligations specified in Section 2.7.1O(d) with respect to the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites). The Parties
agree that the amount of reduction in the Fair Market Value of the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites), as the case
may be, bears a reasonable relationship to the damages which the Parties estimate may be suffered by the
Agency as the result of the Developer's default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement,
which damages would be impractical or extremely difficult to quantify, that the deposit constitutes a
reasonable estimate of the Agency's damages in such event, and that the remedy provided for in this
Agreement is not a penalty or forfeiture, is necessitated by reason of the obligations of the Agency to
maintain the Affordable Housing Unit on the Developer Farce!, and is a reasonable limitation on the
Developer's potential liability as a result of such default. In the event the Agency exercises its right to
purchase any Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites), as provided in subsection, this Agreement shall terminate with
respect to such Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) as may be purchased.
(b) The Agency may sue for damages it may have incUiTed related to any
Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) that the Agency has not elected to purchase as provided in Section 15.2.2 above.
In the event the Agency institutes legal action to recover damages, the Agency's right to purchase the
Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites), as provided in above, for which suit is brought shall terminate and be of no
further force or effect.
(c)
The Agency may seek to specifically enforce the obligations of the
Developer.
(d)
of the Developer Parcel.
The Agency may terminate this Agreement with respect to all, or any portion
(e)
The Agency may exercise its Right of Reversion pursuant to Section 16.
14.2.3 If the Agency elects to repurchase any, or all, Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) pursuant to
Section 14.2.2(a), the Parties shall: (a) within five (5) Business Days after the date of either the Agency's
election to purchase, or the Developer's notice to exercise its right to cause the purchase (but in either event
no earlier than the first date on which the Agency either has the right to purchase), open an escrow with an
escrow agent designated by the Agency for the purchase and sale, and shall execute an escrow agreement
that shall provide that the Developer shall pay all costs of the escrow and shall include such usual and
ordinary terms as are reasonably required by the escrow agent and by the transaction; (b) no later than five
(5) Business Days after the opening of escrow (i) the Developer shall deposit into the escrow appropriate
grant deeds conveying fee title to the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) to the Agency free and clear of any and all
liens, claims and encumbrances other than: monetary liens which total less that the purchase price to be
paid by the Agency, encumbrances and claims other than monetary liens that were of title as of the date of
the Closing, and any liens, claims or encumbrances approved in writing by the Agency and (ii) the
Developer and the Agency shall commence the procedure specified in Section 14.2.4 to determine the Fair
Market Value of the affected Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites); and (c) no later than twenty (20) Business Days
after the "Fair Market Value" of such Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) has been determined as provided in
Section 14.2.4, the Agency shall deposit into the escrow the pm-chase price, less the amount of any
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
51
monetary liens against the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites). The escrow shaH close, and title shall be conveyed
to the Agency, no later than five (5) Business Days after the Agency has deposited into escrow the
appropriate portion of the purchase price. The Developer shall comply with its obligations under Section
14.2.7 and shall directly from escrow, pay to Pennitted Mortgagee all sums due to it. In no event shall the
Agency have any liability for the failure of Developer to pay to Permitted Mortgagee any sums due to it
under its loan documents with Developer.
14.2.4 Determination of Fair Market Value. The fair market value ("Fair Market Value")
of the Parcel(s), Lot(s) and/or Unites) that the Agency has elected to repurchase ("Repurchase Property")
shall be determined by one or more real estate appraisers selected as hereafter provided, all of whom shaH
be members of The Appraisal Institute and Certified General Appraisers in the State of California with not
less than ten (10) years experience in appraisal of residential master planned communities in Orange
County, California. Within five (5) Business Days after Developer's receipt of written notice of the City's
ejection to repurchase ("Selection Period") each Party shall select one (I) appraiser ("Appraiser") and
shall notify the other Party in writing of the Appraiser so selected. Each Appraiser shall deliver to both
Parties their written determinations of the fair market value of the Repurchase Property on the date that is
twenty (20) days after expiration of the Selection Period (the "Determination Date"). If the difference
between the fair market values detennined by the Appnùsers does not exceed ten percent (10%) of the
lesser of such appraised values, then the Fair Market Value shall be the average of the appraisals. If,
however, the difference between the appraisals shall exceed ten percent (10%) of the lesser of such
amounts, then the Appraisers shall, within five (5) Business Days foHowing the Detennination Date select
a third appraiser meeting the qualifications stated above ("Third Appraiser") who shall provide his or her
written detennine of the fair market value of the Repurchase Property within twenty (20) calendar days
after his or her selection. If there is a third appraisal, the Fair Market Value for the Repurchase Property
shall be the average of the two (2) appraisals nearest in value. The Parties shall each bear the cost of the
Appraiser they select and shall share equally the cost of the Third Appraiser. All such determinations of
Fair Market Value shall be final and binding upon the Parties.
14.2.5 In the event the Agency is to purchase any Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) by reason of
the exercise by the Agency of its election to do so upon a Material Default by the Developer, such purchase
shall not terminate or release any liability or obligations of the Developer with respect to said Parcel(s),
Lot(s) or Unites): to return any written Due Diligence Infonnation to the Agency as provided in Section
14.4 and to indemnify the Agency as provided in Sections 5.5.4 and 10. In the event the Agency purchases
any Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites), under no circumstances shall the Developer have any right or claim to, or
against, the purchased Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) or any portion thereof. In addition the Agency's right to
retain and enforce any Perfonnance Bonds delivered pursuant to this Agreement shall survive such
purchase, and the Agency shall have no obligation to reimburse the Developer for any Reimbursable Costs
or to release any Perfonnance Bonds. In addition, the Developer shall represent and warrant that all
construction of all Improvements on the purchased Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) as of the date of purchase
are in conformity with all applicable laws and Governmental Requirements. Notwithstanding the purchase
of any Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) by the Agency as provided in this Section, this Agreement shall remain
in full force and effect with respect to the portions of the Developer Parcel not purchased by the Agency.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
52
14.3 Failure or Delav in Notice. Failure or delay in giving notice of a Potential Default shall not
constitute a waiver of any default, nor shall it change the time of default. Except as otherwise expressly
provided in this Agreement, any failures or delays by either Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies
as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies. Delays by
either Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies shall not deprive either Party of its right to institute
and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such
rights or remedies.
14.4 Developer Information and Products. Upon full performance of this Agreement or the
termination thereof due to a Material Default by the Developer, the Developer shall provide the Agency,
without cost or expense to the Agency, copies of all plans, specifications, reports, studies or investigations,
including soil and geotechnical reports and Hazardous Materials investigations (collectively, "Reports")
prepared by or on behalf of the Developer with respect to the Developer Parcel and/or development of the
Project, which shall in each case be made for the use and benefit of the Developer and the Agency. If this
Agreement is terminated for any reason other than a Material Default hereunder by the Agency, the Agency
may request that the Developer, for consideration to be mutually agreed, transfer the Developer's rights to
any or all Reports identified by the Agency, but under no event shall the cost to the Agency exceed five
hundred dollars ($500.00). Upon such request, the Developer shall deliver to the Agency copies of all
Reports requested by the Agency, provided that the Developer makes no representations, warrantee or
guarantee regarding the completeness or accuracy of the Reports, the Developer shall have no liability in
connection with the use of the Reports by the Agency or any other person or entity and the Developer does
not covenant to convey the copyright or other ownership rights of third parties thereto. Such Reports shall
thereupon be free of all claims or interests of the Developer or any liens or encumbrances. Upon the
Agency's acquiring the Developer's rights to any or all of the Reports, the Agency shall be permitted to use,
grant, license or otherwise dispose of such Reports to any person or entity for development of the
Developer Parcel or any other purpose; provided, however, that the Developer shall have no liability
whatsoever to the Agency or any transferee or title to the Reports in connection with the use of the Reports.
The Agency shall, within ten (10) Business Days of the Effective Date and at no cost to the Developer,
provide the Developer with copies of all plans, reports, studies, investigations and other materials the
Agency may have that are pertinent to the Developer Parcel and/or development of the Project provided,
however, that the Agency makes no, representations, warrantee or guarantee regarding the completeness or
accuracy of such plans, reports, studies, investigations and other materials.
14.5 Failure to Timelv Pay Amounts Due. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Agreement, if a Party fails to pay timely any sum required to be paid pursuant to this Agreement, and the
Injured Party gives the Defaulting Party written notice of such nonpayment, such nonpayment shall be a
Potential Default. The Defaulting Party shall have a period of fifteen (15) calendar days after such notice is
received, or deemed to have been received, within which to cure the Potential Default by making the
required payment; the period to cure such Potential Default shall not be extended by Force Majeure Delays.
In the event a Potential Default for nonpayment is not cured within said fifteen (15) calendar day period,
the Potential Default shall become a Material Default that shall be deemed to have occurred upon the
expiration of the cure period. Notwithstanding the foregoing, and provided that notice of the Potential
Default is provided the Defaulting Party, if any payment (other than the payment of any portion of the
Purchase Price) is not received by the Injured Party with fifteen (15) calendar days following the notice of
170039.21
May 10. 2004
53
Potential Default, then in addition to any other remedies conferred upon the Injured Party pursuant to this
Agreement, a late charge of ten percent (10%) of the amount due and unpaid will be added to the
delinquent amount to compensate the Injured Party for the expense of handling the delinquency.
15.
Nonoccurrence of a Closine Condition.
15.1
Failure of a Closine Condition to Occur Absent a Material Default.
15.1.1 In the event the Closing Date is extended for any of the reasons set forth in this
Section 15.1 not caused by a Material Default by either Party, either Party shall have the right to terminate
this Agreement as hereinafter provided:
(a) In the event a final decision in any litigation brought by a third party results
in the inability of the Agency to convey the Property to the Developer, or of the Developer to perform its
material obligations hereunder, either Party shall have the right, upon ninety (90) days prior written notice
to the other Party, to terminate this Agreement.
(b) In the event litigation brought by a third party is pending for more than one
year after the date of this Agreement, and (i) such litigation has resulted in the inability of the Agency to
convey the Property to the Developer, or (ii) in the event the Assistant Executive Director or designee
reasonably determines that such litigation is the cause of the Developer or its Assignee's inability to
perform its material obligations hereunder despite the best efforts of such Party to do so, either Party shall
have the right, upon ninety (90) days prior written notice to the other Party, to terminate this Agreement.
(c) In the event of the passage of a referendum or initiative that results in the
inability of the Agency to convey the Property to the Developer or the inability of the Developer or any
Assignee to perform its material obligations hereunder, either Party shall have right, upon ninety (90) days
prior written notice to the other Party, to terminate this Agreement.
15.1.2 If this transaction does not close on or before 5:00 p.m., California Time, on the
Closing Date, because of (a) the inability of the Parties to agree on modifications to this Agreement
following good faith negotiations pursuant to Section 8.3.8 or (b) the failure to occur of a Closing
Condition for reasons other than (i) a Material Default solely by the Developer (which is governed by
Section 15.2); (ii) a Material Default solely by the Agency (which is governed by Section 15.3), or (iii) a
Material Default by both Parties (which is governed by Section 15.4), either Party may, by delivery of
written notice to the other and to the Escrow Holder, terminate this Agreement. In the event either the
Developer or the Agency are in Potential Default as of the Closing Date, the Party in Potential Default shall
not have the right to exercise the right to terminate the Agreement pursuant to this Section 15.1 until and
unless the Potential Default is cured prior to the time the Potential Default becomes a Material Default.
15.1.3 Upon any termination under Section 15.1.1, each Party shall pay one-half (112) of
Escrow Holder's normal cancellation charges and any Closing Costs. The Developer shall not be entitled to
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
54
a refund of the EAN Deposit and all interest accrued thereon. Developer shall be responsible for payment
of all of Agency's actual costs incUlTed (including legal fees, consultant fees and staff costs) in connection
with the negotiation of this Agreement, not to exceed $25,000. In' the event of a termination as provided in
this Section, the Developer shall return Information to the Agency as provided in Section 14.4 and shall
indemnify the Agency as provided in Sections 5.4 and 10. The termination of this Agreement pursuant to
this Section 15.1 shall constitute a waiver of any rights, claims, causes of action, or demands either Party
may have against the other or the Property, or any portion thereof, but shall not terminate or release any
liability or obligations of the Developer to return Due Diligence Information to the Agency as provided in
Section 14.4 and to indemnify the Agency as provided in Sections 5.4 and 10 or to pav Agencv's actual
costs incUlTed, not to exceed $25,000. In the event of a termination as provided in this Section, under no
circumstances shall the Developer have any right or claim to, or against, the Property or any portion
thereof.
15.2
Failure to Close: Material Default of Developer.
IF THIS TRANSACTION DOES NOT CLOSE ON OR BEFORE 5:00 P.M.,
CALIFORNIA TIME, ON THE CLOSING DATE, SOLELY AS A RESULT OF DEVELOPER'S
MATERIAL DEFAULT (INCLUDING FAILURE TO DELIVER SUFFICIENT FUNDS TO CAUSE
THE CLOSING TO OCCUR IN A TIMELY MANNER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS
OF SECTION 4.2.2), THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE BY INITIALING THIS
AGREEMENT IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW THAT:
(a) THE AGENCY'S ACTUAL COSTS, INCLUDING LEGAL COSTS AND
CONSULT ANT COSTS, INCURRED IN PREPARING AND NEGOTIATING THIS DDA AND
PREPARING THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION BEAR A REASONABLE
RELATIONSHIP TO THE DAMAGES WHICH THE PARTIES ESTIMATE MAYBE SUFFERED BY
THE AGENCY AS THE RESULT OF DEVELOPER'S DEFAULT IN THE PERFORMANCE OF ITS
OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. DEVELOPER SHALL PAY ALL OF AGENCY'S
ACTUAL COSTS INCURRED TO THE CLOSING DATE.
(b) DEVELOPER SHALL PAY THE FULL AMOUNT OF ESCROW
AGENT'S REASONABLE CHARGES AS A RESULT OF SUCH DEFAULT AND TERMINATION
AND ALL CLOSING COSTS, WHETHER OR NOT DEVELOPER CONTESTS SUCH
TERMINATION.
(c) WITHIN FIVE (5) DAYS FOLLOWING THE CITY'S NOTICE OF
TERMINATION, DEVELOPER SHALL RETURN TO THE CITY ALL INFORMATION DESCRffiED
IN SECTION 14.4.
(d) AS A RESULT OF DEVELOPER'S DEFAULT IN THE PERFORMANCE
OF ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS AGREEMENT AND FAILURE OF THE CLOSING TO OCCUR
ON OR BEFORE THE CLOSING DATE, THE CITY SHALL HAVE THE RIGlIT TO TERMINATE
THIS AGREEMENT AND THE ESCROW BY WRITTEN NOTICE TO ESCROW AGENT
WHEREUPON THE AGENCY SHALL BE RELEASED FROM ITS OBLIGATION HEREUNDER TO
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
55
SELL THE PROPERTY TO DEVELOPER OR DEVELOPER'S PERMITTED ASSIGNEE, AND THE
CITY SHALL RETAIN THE EAN DEPOSIT AND ALL ACCRUED INTEREST THEREON AND/OR
ESCROW AGENT SHALL RELEASE THE EAN DEPOSIT AND ALL ACCRUED INTEREST
THEREON TO THE AGENCY, TO THE EXTENT NOT ALREADY SO RELEASED, AS A DEPOSIT
ON PAYMENT BY DEVELOPER OF AGENCY'S ACTUAL COSTS. NOTHING HEREIN AFFECTS
THE AGENCY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES FOR A SEPARATE BREACH IF ANY, OF THE
CONFIDENTIALITY AND/OR INDEMNIFICATION PROVISIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND (c)
ABOVE GOVERNING THE RETURN OF INFORMATION TO THE AGENCY.
Initials of Agency
Initials of Developer
15.3
Failure to Close Material Default of Aeencv.
15.3.1 If this transaction does not close on or before 5:00 p.m., California time, on the
Closing Date, solely as a result of the Agency's Material Default in the performance of its obligations
under this agreement, than, so long as the Developer is not in Potential Default or Material Default, the
Developer shall have the right, by providing notice to the Agency, of its election to do so, either: (a) to
purchase the Property pursuant to the Agreement notwithstanding such default, whereupon such default
shall be deemed waived as against the Agency and all third parties; or (b) to terminate this Agreement and
to cancel Escrow.
15.3.2 In the event Agency receives timely notice of the Developer's election to purchase
the Property notwithstanding the Agency's Material Default, the Developer shall deliver Developer's
Supplemental Deposit into Escrow no later than ten (10) Business Days after the Agency's receipt of said
notice. Upon delivery of Developer's Supplemental Deposit and Closing Costs into Escrow and payment by
Escrow Holder of the Purchase Price to the Agency, the Agency shall convey title to the Property as
provided in this Agreement, and the Developer shall be deemed to have waived all Closing Conditions
other than the delivery of the Grant Deed into Escrow. In the event the Agency fails to deliver the Grant
Deed into Escrow within five (5) Business Days after the Developer has delivered the appropriate portion
of the Purchase Price into Escrow, the Developer shall have the right to bring an action in equity or
otherwise against the Agency or subsequent owners of the Property for specific performance of this
Agreement. In such event the Agency shall pay the full amount of Escrow Holder's reasonable charges and
Closing Costs.
15.3.3 In the event the Agency receives timely notice of the Developer's election to
terminate this Agreement:
(a) The Developer shall be entitled to a full refund of the EAN Deposit and the
Supplemental Deposit (if paid into escrow) and all interest accrued thereon. The Agency shall pay the full
amount of Escrow Holder's reasonable charges and all closing costs. The Developer shall comply with its
obligations under Section 14.4 Developer shall not be entitled to pursue an action against the Agency for
damages as a result of the Agency's default.
170039.21
May 10. 2004
56
(b) The tennination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section 15.3.3 shall not
tenninate or release any liability or obligations of the Developer: to return Due Diligence Information to
the Agency as provided in Section 14.4 and to indemnify the Agency as provided in Sections 5.4 and 10. In
the event of a tennination as provided in this Section, under no circumstances shall the Developer shall
have any right or claim to, or against, the Property or any portion thereof.
(c) The tennination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section 15.3.3 shall
constitute a waiver of any rights, claims, causes of action, or demands either Party may have against the
other, except as expressly provided above.
(d) In the event either (i) the Agency does not receive, within twenty (20)
Business Days after the Closing Date, notice of the Developer's election either to purchase the Property
pursuant to the Agreement notwithstanding such default or to terminate this Agreement, or (b) the
Developer has elected to purchase the Property but fails to deliver Developer's Supplemental Deposit into
Escrow no later than ten (10) Business Days after the Agency's receipt of said notice, then the Agency shall
have the right to tenninate this Agreement by providing written notice of its election to do so to the
Developer. In the event of a tennination as provided in this Section, the Developer shall return Due
Diligence Information to the Agency as provided in Section 14.4 and shall indemnify the Agency as
provided in Sections 5.4 and 10. The tennination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section 15.3.3 shall
constitute a waiver of any rights, claims, causes of action, or demands either Party may have against the
other, but shall not tenninate or release any liability or obligations of the Developer: to retum Due
Diligence Information to the Agency as provided in Section 14.4 and to indemnify the Agency as provided
in Sections 5.4 and 10. In the event of a tennination as provided in this Section, under no circumstances
shall the Developer shall have any right or claim to, or against, the Property or any portion thereof, and the
Agency shall have no obligation to reimburse the Developer for any Reimbursable Costs or to release any
Performance Bonds.
15.4
Material Default by Both Parties.
15.4.1 If this transaction does not close on or before 5:00 p.m., California time, on the
Closing Date as a result of the Material Default by both Parties in the performance of their respecti ve
obligations under this Agreement, the provisions of this Section 15.4 shall apply.
15.4.2 If the Developer is in Material Default of its obligation to deliver Developer's
Supplemental Deposit as described in Section 4.4.2(b ), or to provide the evidence of financing as provided
in Section 7.3.4, and the Agency has deposited into Escrow the Grant Deed as provided in Section 7.2.1,
the Agency shall have the right, notwithstanding any other defaults of the Agency, to tenninate this
Agreement as provided in Sections 15.1.2, 15.1.3 and 15.1.4.
15.4.3 If the Agency is in Material Default of its obligation to deposit into Escrow the Grant
Deed as provided in Section 7.2.1 and the Developer has delivered Supplemental Purchase Price Deposit
and funds for other costs as provided in Section 7.3.2, and has provided the evidence of financing as
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
57
provided in Section 7.3.4, the Developer shall have the right, notwithstanding any other defaults of the
Developer, to tenninate this Agreement as provided in Sections 15.1.2, 15.1.3 and 15.1.4.
15.4.4 Except as provided above in Sections 15.4.2 and 15.4.3, in the event both parties are
in Material Default, each Party may exercise any and all rights it may have to seek monetary damages from
the other Party. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event may either Party be entitled to specific
performance or other equitable relief, and in no event shall the Developer file a lis pendens against the
Property.
16.
Rieht of Reversion.
16.1 Rieht of Reversion. On the terms subject to the conditions set forth in this Section 16 the
Agency shall have the right (the "Right of Reversion"), (a) to tenninate this Agreement as to (i) the
Developer Parcel or Lot(s) or Unit(s), or any portions thereof, directly impacted by the Material Default,
and/or (i) any other portion of the Developer Parcel with respect to which the Developer has not
commenced construction of Improvements (as applicable, the "Reversion Area") and (b) thereafter to re-
enter the Reversion Area and revest in the Agency the title in the Reversion Area or any portions thereof.
16.1.1 Conditions to Exercise. The provisions of this Section 16.1.1 shall apply in the
event that after the Closing any of the events or omissions set forth in this Section 16.1.1 occur, which such
events and omissions shall each be a Potential Default:
(a) At no fault of Agency, the development of the Project is delayed such that the
occuuence of any event described in the Schedule of Performance does not occur on or before the date
projected for its occuueIice, as such date may be extended by Force Majeure Delay.
(b) The Developer abandons or substantially suspends construction of any
Improvements for a period of ninety (90) days, which 90-day period shall be subject to Force Majeure
Delay.
(c) The Developer, in violation of this Agreement, assigns this Agreement, or
any rights in this Agreement, or transfers, or suffers any involuntary transfer of the Developer Parcel or the
Developer's interest in the Developer Parcel, or any part thereof.
(d) Any voluntary or involuntary Ownership Transfer or Transfer of Control,
including any Foreclosure affecting all or any portion of the Developer Parcel by any Mortgagee takes
place without express assumption by the Ownership Transferee of the Developer's obligations under this
Agreement in accordance with Section 2.2.
16.1.2 Revesting Conditions. Notwithstanding that such portion of the Developer Parcel
may be encumbered by one or more Mortgages or Pennitted Mortgages, the Agency shall be entitled to
exercise its Right of Reversion with respect to all or any portion of the Developer Parcel in the event of the
following (the "Reversion Conditions"):
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
58
(a) the occurrence of any of the events or omissïons described ïn Sectïon 16.1.1
becoming a Material Default of the Developer and the provïsïon of written notice to the Developer and
each Pennitted Mortgagee as required in Section 2.7.14.
(b) provision by the Agency of notïce in accordance with Sectïons 2.7.15 and
17.7 to each Pennitted Mortgagee havïng a Pennitted Mortgage on the affected portion of the Developer
Parcel, of a Material Default by the Developer remaining uncured after passage of the tïme periods set forth
in this Agreement for cure thereof by the Developer
(c) failure of any Pennitted Mortgagee to cure such Material Default ïn
accordance wïth the provïsïons of Sectïon 2.7.15(b).
Notwïthstanding the foregoïng, if any Pennitted Mortgagee has commenced and diligently
prosecuted to completïon Foreclosure proceeding in accordance with Section 2.7.15, then (ï) the Agency's
right to exercise the Right of Reversion triggered by such Material Default shall be stayed for a period of
three (3) years from the date upon which the Pennitted Mortgagee, or wholly-owned designee, obtains title
to such portion of the Developer Parcel, and (ii) thereafter may only be exercised wïth respect to that
particular Material Default if such Pennitted Mortgagee, or wholly-owned designee, has not within such
three (3) year period (which period will not be extended by Force Majeure Delay) eïther: (A) assumed all
obligations of the Developer under thïs Agreement, including the obHgatïon to construct the Improvements
in accordance wïth a revised Schedule of Perfonnance agreed to by the Pennitted Mortgagee or wholly-
owned designee and the Agency, and, thus, to step into the role of Developer hereunder and commenced
and diHgently prosecuted the constructïon of the Improvements, or (B) sold the affected portion of the
Developer Parcel.
The satisfaction of the Reversion Condïtions with respect to each independent Material
Default serves to trigger (or re-trigger) the Agency's Right of Reversïon, subject in each case to the
potential stay set forth in the preceding paragraph.
16.1.3 Exercïse of Rïght of Reversion. So long as the Material Default triggering the
Right of Reversïon has not been cured as of the date of exercise of the Right of Reversion, the Agency may
exercise its Right of Reversion at anytime wïthin one (1) year after such Right of Reversion could first be
exercised wïth respect to such Material Default. The Agency may exercise such right by deHvery of notice
to (a) the Developer if no Foreclosure has occurred, and (b) all Pennitted Mortgages wïth respect to the
Reversion Area or any portion thereof, provided that the Agency shall not exercise the Agency's Right of
Reversion wïthout first providing the Developer, if appHcable, and all Pennitted Mortgagees holding
Pennitted Mortgages wïth respect to the Reversion Area or any portion thereof a reasonable opportunity to
address the Agency Board of Directors at a public meeting. In the event of such tenninatïon of this
Agreement, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect with respect to portions of the Developer
Parcel not so revested in the Agency, but the tenninatïon of this Agreement shall only be effective as of the
date title to the Reversion Areas is revested in the Agency.
170039.21
,",y 10. 2004
59
16.2
Prioritv of the Aeencv's IDeM of Reversion.
16.2.1 Right of Reversion Subordinate onlv to Senior Obligations. Prior to the later to
occur of (a) the initial funding of a loan for the construction of Private Improvements, the Agency's Right
of Reversion shall be senior in priority to any lien, including Pennitted Mortgages, except for Senior
Obligations as set forth in Section 16.2.2, encumbering the Developer Parcel or portion thereof, such that if
the Agency exercises its Right of Reversion, in accordance with the provisions of this Section 16, all such
liens and mortgages other than such Senior Obligations will be extinguished and the Agency will be
revested of title to the title to the Reversion Parcel free and clear of all such liens and mortgages, other than
Senior Obligations as provided below.
16.2.2 Right of Reversion Subordinate to Pennitted Mortgages for Private In1Provenients.
Concurrently with the later to occur of (a) the initial funding of a loan for the construction of Private
Improvements, the Agency's Right of Reversion shall become subordinate to, and the Agency shall execute
such written instruments for the subordination of its Right of Reversion as may reasonably be requested by
the holder of the lien of any Community Facilities District or other financing bonds issued with respect to
such Parcel and the lien of any Pennitted Mortgagee providing funding for Private Improvements
(collectively, a "Senior Obligation"). The subordination of the Right of Reversion and the Agency's
agreement to so subordinate its Right of Reversion is subject to agreement by the holder of any Senior
Obligation to which the Agency's Right of Reversion is to be subordinated, in writing, [providing the
Agency the following rights:]
(a) Upon the occurrence of a default under any of the Senior Obligation
documents, the holder of the Senior Obligation shall promptly notify the Agency of the occurrence of such
event of default, which notification shall be provided to the Agency contemporaneously with the delivery
to the Developer or its Assignee of any notice of default under any of the Senior Obligation documents;
(b) The Agency shall have the right, during the cure periods which apply to the
Developer or its Assignee pursuant to the Senior Obligation documents and any cure period which may
apply to the Agency under applicable law, to cure the Developer's or its Assignee's default relative to the
Senior Obligation; and
(c) After a default on any of the Senior Obligation documents but prior to a
Foreclosure, the Agency shall have the right to take title to the Reversion Area or any portion thereof and
cure the default relative to the Senior Obligation documents, without the holder of the Senior Obligation
exercising any right it might otherwise have to accelerate the Senior Obligation by reason of such title
transfer, so long as the Agency promptly cures any such default upon taking title. In the event that
additional uncured events of default under the Senior Obligation documents occur after the Agency has
taken title to the Reversion Area, all Pennitted Mortgagees will be able to foreclose under the Pennitted
Mortgages.
(d) Upon the reversion to the Agency of title to the Reversion Area, the Agency
shall use reasonable commercial efforts to resell the Reversion Area acquired by the Agency, as soon and
in such manner as the Agency shall find feasible and consistent with the approved Entitlements to a
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
60
qualified and responsible party or parties (as determined in the sole discretion of the Agency), who will
assume the obligation of making or completing the Improvements, or such other improvements approved
by the Agency with the uses specified in the approved Entitlements. Upon such resale of the Reversion
Area or any part thereof, the proceeds thereof, if any, shall be applied:
(i) First, but subject to the provisions of clause (ii) below if there exists
any Senior Obligation, to reimburse the Agency for all costs and expenses inculTed by the Agency,
including salaries of personnel engaged in such action, in connection with the recapture, management and
resale of the Reversion Area or any part thereof; all taxes, assessments and water and sewer charges with
respect to the Reversion Area or any part thereof; any payments made or necessary to be made to discharge
or prevent from attaching or being made any subsequent encumbrances or liens due to obligations inculTed
with respect to the making or completion of the agreed Improvements or any part thereof on the Reversion
Area, or any part thereof; and any amounts otherwise owing to the Agency by the Developer and its
successor or transferee;
(ii) Second, to reimburse the Developer, its successor or transferee, up to
the amount equal to: the portion of the Base Purchase Price allocated to the reversion property on a square
footage basis and the Reimbursable Costs inculTed by the Developer for the development of the Reversion
Area, or any part thereof, less the amounts paid on any Permitted Mortgage pursuant to clause (ii).
(iii)
by the Agency as its property.
Any balance remaining after such reimbursements shall be retained
16.2.3 Termination of Right of Reversion. In connection with every grant deed for a Live-
Work Unit or the Main Street Building, the Agency shall direct the escrow company to extinguish and
release the Agency's Right of Reversion as to such Unit or Building, upon the OCCUlTence of all of the
following:
(a)
Issuance by the Agency of a certificate of occupancy;
(b) Recordation of a Notice of Completion relating to the Unit or Building by the
Developer, its Assignee or such Party's contractor;
(c) Any mechanic's liens that have been recorded or stop notices that have been
delivered have been paid, settled or otherwise extinguished, discharged, released, waived, bonded around
or insured against;
(d)
Agency approval of the Deed for each such Unit; and,
(e)
Close of Escrow as to such Unit or Building.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
61
17.
General Provisions.
17.1 Consent to Jurisdiction. The Parties hereto agree that all actions or proceedings arising in
connection with this Agreement shall be tried and litigated exclusively in the Municipal or Superior Court
of the County of Orange, State of California, in any other appropriate court of that county, or in the United
States District Court for the Central District of California. This choice of venue is intended by the Parties to
be mandatory and not pennissive in nature, thereby precluding the possibility of litigation between or
among the Parties with respect to or arising out of this Agreement in any jurisdiction other than that
specified in this section. Each Party hereby waives any right that it may have to assert the doctrine forum
non conveniens or similar doctrine or to object to venue with respect to any proceeding brought in
accordance with this section, and stipulates that the state and federal courts located in the County of
Orange, State of California, shall have in personam jurisdiction and venue over each of them for the
purpose of litigating any dispute, controversy or proceeding arising out of this Agreement. Each Party
hereby authorizes and accepts service of process sufficient for personal jurisdiction in any action against it
as contemplated by this Section 17.1 by means of registered or certified mail, return receipt requested,
postage prepaid, to its address for the giving of notices as set forth in this Agreement, or in the manner set
forth in Section 17.7 of this Agreement pertaining to notice. Any final judgment rendered against a Party in
any action or proceeding shall be conclusive as to the subject of such final judgment and may be enforced
in other jurisdictions in any manner provided by law.
17.2 Lee:al Fees and Costs. If any Party to this Agreement institutes any action, suit,
counterclaim, appeal, arbitration or mediation for any relief against another Party, declaratory or otherwise
(collectively an "Action"), to enforce the tenus hereof or to declare rights hereunder or with respect to any
inaccuracies or material omissions in connection with any of the covenants, representations or warranties
on the part of the other Party to this Agreement, then the Prevailing Party in such Action, whether by
arbitration or final judgment, shall be entitled to have and recover of and from the other Party all costs and
expenses of the Action, including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs (at the Prevailing Party's attorneys'
then-prevailing rates as increased from time to time by the giving of advanced written notice by such
counsel to such Party) incurred in bringing and prosecuting such Action and/or enforcing any judgment,
order, ruling or award (collectively, a "Decision") granted therein, all of which shall be deemed to have
accrued on the commencement of such Action and shall be paid whether or not such Action is prosecuted
to a Decision. Any Decision entered in such Action shall contain a specific provision providing for the
recovery of attorneys' fees and costs incurred in enforcing such Decision. A court or arbitrator shall fix the
amount of reasonable attorneys' fees and costs upon the request of either Party. Any judgment or order
entered in any final judgment shall contain a specific provision providing for the recovery of all costs and
expenses of suit, including reasonable attorneys' fees and expert fees and costs (collectively "Costs")
incurred in enforcing, perfecting and executing such judgment. For the purposes of this paragraph, Costs
shall include in addition to Costs incurred in prosecution or defense of the underlying action, reasonable
attorneys' fees, costs, expenses and expert fees and costs incurred in the following: (a) post judgment
motions and collection actions; (b) contempt proceedings; (c) garnishment, levy, debtor and third party
examinations; (d) discovery; (e) bankruptcy litigation; and (f) appeals of any order or judgment.
"Prevailing Party" within the meaning of this Section 17.2 includes a Party who agrees to dismiss an
Action in consideration for the other Party's payment of the amounts allegedly due or perfonuance of the
covenants allegedly breached, or obtains substantially the relief sought by such Party.
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
62
17.3 Modifications or Amendments. No amendment, change, modification or supplement to
this Agreement shall be valid and binding on any of the Parties unless it is represented in writing and
signed by each of the Parties hereto.
17.4 Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by, interpreted under, construed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, irrespective of California's choice-of-law
principles.
17.5 Further Assurances. Each of the Parties hereto shall execute and deliver at their own cost
and expense, any and all additional papers, documents, or instruments, and shall do any and all acts and
things reasonably necessary or appropriate in connection with the performance of their respective
obligations hereunder in order to carry out the intent and purposes of this Agreement.
17.6 Ril!hts and Remedies are Cumulative. Except with respect to rights and remedies
expressly declared to be exclusive in this Agreement, the rights and remedies of the Parties are cumulative,
and the exercise by either Party of one or more such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it,
at the same or different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by
the other Party.
17.7 Notices. Demands and Communications between the Parties. All notices, demands,
consents, requests and other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall
be in writing and shall be deemed conclusively to have been duly given (a) when hand delivered to the
other Party; (b) three (3) Business Days after such notice has been sent by United States mail via certified
mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and addressed to the other Party as set forth below; (c) the
next Business Day after such notice has been deposited with a national overnight delivery service
reasonably approved by the Parties (Federal Express, United Parcel Service and u.S. Postal Service are
deemed approved by the Parties), postage prepaid, addressed to the Party to whom notice is being sent as
set forth below with next-business-day delivery guaranteed, provided that the sending Party receives a
confirmation of delivery from the delivery service provider; or (d) when received by the recipient Party
when sent by facsimile transmission or email at the number or email address set forth below (provided,
however, that notices given by facsimile or email shall not be effective unless either (i) a duplicate copy of
such notice is promptly sent by any method permitted under this Section 17.7 other than by facsimile or
email; or (ii) the receiving Party delivers a written confirmation of receipt for such notice either by
facsimile, email or any other method permitted under this Section. Any notice given by facsimile or email
shall be deemed received on the next business day if such notice is received after 5:00 p.m. (recipient's
time) or on a Saturday, Sunday or national holiday. Unless otherwise provided in writing, all notices
hereunder shall be addressed as follows:
170039.21
M,y 10, 2004
63
If to the Agency:
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Attention: Executive Director
and Assistant Executive Director
With a copy to:
City Attorney
City of Tustin
Woodruff Spradlin & Smart
701 S. Parker Street, Suite 8000
Orange, CA 92868-4760
Attention: Lois E. Jeffrey, Esq.
If to the Developer:
Prospect Village LP
c/o John H. Tillotson, Jr., and
Daniel Howse
Pelican-Tustin LLC, General Partner
15272 Bolsa Chica Road
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
Any Party may by written notice to the other Party in the manner specified herein change the address to
which notices to such Party shall be delivered.
17.8
Force Majeure Delav.
17.8.1 The term "Force Majeure Delay" shall mean the OCCUITence of anyone or more of
the following events (provided such event is beyond the control of a Party and beyond the control of such
Party's contractors and consultants and are not due to an act or omission of the Party claiming Force
Majeure Delay or any consultant, contractor or other Person for whom such Party may be contractually or
legally responsible) which directly, materially and adversely affect (a) the ability of the claiming Party to
meet its obligations under this Agreement, including the deadlines imposed by the Schedule of
Performance or (b) the ability of the Developer to Complete the Project, and which events (or the effect of
which events) could not have been avoided by due diligence and use of reasonable efforts by the Party
claiming Force Majeure Delay:
(a) An epidemic, blockade, rebellion, war, insUITection, strike, lock-out, riot, act
of sabotage, civil commotion, act of a public enemy, freight embargo, or lack of transportation;
(b)
Unusually severe weather;
(c) Reasonably unforeseeable Developer Parcel conditions including the
presence of Hazardous Materials;
170039.21
May 10. 2004
64
(d) Fire, or earthquake, or other casualty, in each case, causing material physical
destruction or damage on tbe Developer Parcel;
(e)
Potential Default or Material Default by the oilier Party;
(f) Issuance of a pennanent injunction or writ of mandate in a lawsuit seeking to
restrain, enjoin, challenge or delay construction of the Project, which restricts tbe ability of a Party to
perfonn its material obligations hereunder, or a temporary restraining order ("TRO"), preliminary
injunction, or alternative writ which prevents the Agency, City or Developer from meeting the Schedule of
Perfonnance. In the case of a TRO, preliminary injunction, or alternative writ, the deadlines in the
Schedule of Perfonnance shall be extended to be coterminus with the TRO, injunction, or alternative writ,
but shall in no event extend for more than one (1) year after the Effective Date;
(g) The passage of a referendum or initiative that results in tbe inability of any
Party to perfonn its material obligations hereunder
(h) Any change in Governmental Regulation or adoption of any new
Governmental Regulation which is materially inconsistent with Governmental Regulations in effect as of
the Effective Date (subject to the exclusion set forth in clause (ii) below.
17.8.2 The tenn "Force Majeure Delay" shall be limited to the matters listed above and
specifically excludes from its definition the following matters which might otberwise be considered Force
Majeure Delay:
(a) Due to acts or omissions of the Developer, tbe suspension, termination,
intelTUption, denial or failure to obtain or non-renewal of any Entitlement, permit, license, consent,
authorization or approval which is necessary for the development of the Project, except for any such matter
resulting from a lawsuit or referendum as described in subsections (f) or ~ above;
(b) Any change in a Government Regulation which was proposed or was
otherwise reasonably foreseeable at the Effective Date;
(c) Failure of tbe Developer to perfonn any obligation to be perfonned by the
Developer hereunder as the result of adverse changes in tbe financial condition of Developer;
(d) Failure of the Developer to provide any Perfonnance Bond required by this
Agreement when due or to submit evidence of financing of the Project or to perfonn any obligation to be
perfonned by the Developer hereunder as tbe result of adverse changes in the market conditions affecting
the development, sale or lease of any part of the Developer Parcel unless the Developer demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the Assistant Executive Director or designee in its sole discretion that (i) the Developer was
unable to obtain such Perfonnance Bonds and/or financing despite making best efforts to do so, and (ii)
such Perfonnance Bonds and financing are unavailable on tenus which are commercially feasible because
170039.21
May 10. 2004
65
of generally applicable economic conditions affecting the credit market which then exist and which are
materially worse than the conditions which prevail as of the Effective Date.
(e)
Failure to submit documentation as and when required by Sections 2.2, 2.3 or
2.7, as applicable;
(f) Failure to submit Design Documents for Improvements when required
pursuant to the Schedule of Performance;
(g)
required by Section 11;
Failure to acquire, maintain and submit evidence of insurance policies as
(h)
Failure to execute documents; and
(i) All other matters not caused by the other Party and not listed in subsections (a)
through (h) above.
17.8.3 If any Party (the "First Party") believes that an extension of time is due to it due to
Force Majeure Delay, it may apply to the other Party (the "Second Party") in writing within thirty (30)
calendar days from the date upon which the First Party becomes aware of Force Majeure Delay, describing
the event, its cause, when and how the First Party obtained knowledge, the date the event commenced and
the estimated delay resulting there from. The extension for Force Majeure Delay shall be granted or denied
in the Second Party's reasonable discretion. If the Second Party's decision with respect to such request is
disputed by the First Party, the matter shall be resolved in accordance with Section 17.1. An extension of
time for Force Majeure Delay shall be on a day for day basis for the period of the delay and shall
commence to run from the time of the commencement of the cause, if notice by the First Party is sent to the
Second Party in accordance with the provisions of this Section. If the First Party fails to notify the Second
Party in writing of its request for Force Majeure Delay within the thirty (30) calendar days specified above,
there shall be no extension for Force Majeure Delay.
17.9 Conflict of Interest. No appointed or elected official or employee of the Agency shall have
any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement nor shall any official or employee participate in
any decision relating to the Agreement which affects his interests or the interests of any corporation,
partnership, or association in which he is directly or indirectly interested. The Developer warrants that it
has not paid or given and will not payor give any third person any money or other consideration for
obtaining this Agreement. -
17.10 Non-liabilitv of Ae:encv Officials and Emplovees. No elected or appointed official,
representative, employee, agent, consultant, legal counselor employee of the Agency shall be personally
liable to the Developer, or any successor in interest in the event of any default or breach by the Agency for
any amount which may become due to the Developer or successor or on any obligation under the terms of
this Agreement.
110039.21
M.y 10. 2004
66
17.11 Inspection of Books and Records. The Agency shall have the right at all reasonable times,
upon ten (10) days written notice, to inspect the books and records of the Developer pertaining to the
Developer Parcel as pertinent to the purposes of this Agreement. The Developer shall also have the right at
all reasonable times to inspect the books and records of the Agency, upon ten (10) days written notice,
pertaining to the Developer Parcel as pertinent to the purposes of this Agreement.
17.12 Approvals.
(a) Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, approvals required of the
Agency or the Developer in this Agreement, including the Attachments hereto, shall not be unreasonably
withheld, conditioned or delayed.
(b) Any matter required by this Agreement to be submitted to the Agency shall be
deemed submitted upon the submittal to the Assistant Executive Director or designee.
(c) Except where the terms of this Agreement or State law expressly require the
approval of a matter or the taking of any action by the Agency, any matter to be approved by the Agency
shall be deemed approved, and any matter to be taken by the Agency shall be deemed taken, upon the
written approval by the Assistant Executive Director or designee.
17.13 Real Estate Commissions.
17.13.1 The Agency shall not be liable for any real estate commissions, brokerage
fees or finders' fees which may arise from this Agreement. The Developer represents that it has engaged no
broker, agent or finder in connection with this Agreement or the transactions identified herein. The
Developer hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the Agency and its elected and appointed officials,
employees and representatives harmless from any losses and liabilities arising from or in any way related to
any claim by any broker, agent, or finder retained by the Developer regarding this Agreement or
development of the Project or the transactions identified herein or the purchase or sale of other property at
the Developer Parcel, including the Adjacent Parcel.
17.13.2 The Agency represents that it has engaged no broker, agent, or finder in
connection with this Agreement or the transactions identified herein.
17.14 Date and Delivervof Al!:reement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in
this Agreement, the Parties intend that this Agreement shall be deemed effective, executed and delivered
for all purposes under this Agreement and for the calculation of any statutory time periods based on the
date an agreement between the Parties is effective, executed and/or delivered, as of the Effective Date.
17.15 Survival of Covenants. Representation and Warranties. The covenants,
representations and warranties specified in this Agreement shall survive any investigation made by any
Party hereto and the closing of the of the transactions contemplated hereby.
170039.21
May 10. 2004
67
17.16 Construction and Interpretation of Åereement.
(a) The language in all parts of this Agreement shall in all cases be construed simply, as
a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning and not strictly for or against any Party. The Parties hereto
acknowledge and agree that this Agreement has been prepared jointly by the Parties and has been the
subject of ann's length and careful negotiation over a considerable period of time, that each Party has been
given the opportunity to independently review this Agreement with legal counsel, and that each Party has
the requisite experience and sophistication to understand, interpret, and agree to the particular language of
the provisions hereof. Accordingly, in the event of an ambiguity in or dispute regarding the interpretation
of this Agreement, this Agreement shall not be interpreted or construed against the Party preparing it;
instead other rules of interpretation and construction shall be utilized. The provisions of California Civil
Code Section 1654 are specifically waived by each Party hereto.
(b) If any term or provision of this Agreement, the deletion of which would not
adversely affect the receipt of any material benefit by any Party hereunder, shall be held by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected
thereby and each other term and provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest
extent permitted by law. It is the intention of the Parties hereto that in lieu of each clause or provision of
this Agreement that is illegal, invalid, or unenforceable, there be added as a part of this Agreement an
enforceable clause or provision as similar in terms to such illegal, invalid, or unenforceable clause or
provision as may be possible.
(c) The inclusion in Section 1.1 of this Agreement of any matters or facts shall be
conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof.
(d) The captions of the sections and subsections herein are inserted solely for
convenience and under no circumstances are they or any of them to be treated or construed as part of this
instrument.
(e) References in this instrument and in the Attachments hereto to "this Agreement"
mean, refer to and include this instrument as well as any riders, exhibits, addenda and Attachments hereto
(which are hereby incorporated herein by this reference) and all other documents expressly incorporated by
reference in this instrument. Any references to any covenant, conditions, obligation and/or undertaking
"herein," "hereunder," or "pursuant hereto") (or language of like import) shall mean, refer to and include
the covenants, obligations and undertakings existing pursuant to this instrument and any riders, exhibits,
addenda and Attachments or other documents affixed to or expressly incorporated by reference in this
instrument.
(f) As used in this Agreement and as the context may require, the singular includes the
plural and vice versa and the masculine gender includes the feminine and vice versa.
170039.21
May 10.2004
68
(g) As used in this Agreement the words "include" and "including" mean respectively
"include, without limitation" and "including, without limitation".
17.17 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all provisions ofthis Agreement in
which a definite time for performance is specified; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not be
construed to limit or deprive a Party of the benefits of any grace period provided for in this Agreement.
17.18 Fees and Other Expenses. Except as otherwise provided herein, each of the Parties hereto
shall pay its own fees and expenses, including attorneys' fees and costs, in connection with negotiation and
preparation of this Agreement.
17.19 No Partnership. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to
create a partnership, joint venture or any other relationship between the Parties hereto other than purchaser
and seller and landlord and tenant according to the provisions contained herein, or cause the Agency to be
responsible in any way for the debts or obligations of the Developer.
17.20 Compliance with Law. The Developer agrees to comply with all the requirements now in
force, or which may thereafter be in force, of all municipal, county, state and federal authorities, pertaining
to the Developer Parcel and the Improvements as well as operations conducted thereon. The judgment of
any court of competent jurisdiction or the admission of the Developer in any action or proceeding against
it, whether the Agency is a party thereto or not, that the Developer has violated any such ordinance or
statute in the use of the Developer Parcel and/or the Improvements shall be conclusive of that fact as
between the Agency and the Developer.
17.21 Bindinl! Effect. This Agreement and the terms, provisions, promises, covenants and
conditions hereof shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their
respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns.
17.22 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement has been made and entered into solely for
the benefit of the Parties to this Agreement and their respective successors and permitted assigns. Nothing
in this Agreement is intended to confer any rights or remedies under or by reason of this Agreement on any
persons other than the Parties to it and their respective successors and permitted assigns. Nothing in this
Agreement is intended to relieve or discharge the obligation or liability of any third persons to any Parties
to this Agreement.
17.23 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more separate counterparts,
each of which, when so executed, shall be deemed to be an original. Such counterparts shall, together,
constitute and shall be one and the same instrument. This Agreement shall not be effective until the
execution and delivery by the Parties of at least one set of counterparts. The Parties agree to recognize
execution of this Agreement by facsimile signatures; provided, however, that such execution by facsimile
shall not be effective unless a manually executed copy of the signature page is promptly sent by United
States, postage prepaid, and such manually signed page is actually received by the other Party within ten
(10) days of its execution. The Parties hereby authorize each other to detach and combine original signature
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
69
pages and consolidate them into a single identical original. Anyone of such completely executed
counterparts shall be sufficient proof of this Agreement. .
17.24 Authority of Sil!natories to Al!reement. Each person executing this Agreement represents
and warrants that he or she is duly authorized and has legal capacity to execute and deliver this Agreement
on behalf of the Parties for which execution is made. Each Party represents and warrants to the other that
the execution of this Agreement and the performance of such Party's obligations hereunder have been duly
authorized and that the agreement is a valid and legal agreement binding on such Party and enforceable in
accordance with its terms.
17.25 Entire Al!reement. Waivers and Amendments.
(a)
to be an original.
This Agreement is executed in five (5) duplicate originals, each of which is deemed
(b) This Agreement, including the Attachments hereto, together with any related
documents refelTed to herein constitute the entire agreement between or among the Parties with respect to
the subject matter hereof. This Agreement supersedes and replaces any and all prior agreements, proposed
agreements, negotiations and communications, oral or written, and contains the entire agreement between
the Parties as to the subject matter hereof and any and all prior agreements, understandings or
representations are hereby terminated and canceled in their entirety. Each Party hereby acknowledges that
no other Party hereto, nor its agents or attorneys, have made any promises, representations or warranties
whatsoever, expressed or implied, not contained herein, to induce such Party to execute this Agreement,
and each Party acknowledges that it has not executed this Agreement in reliance on any such promise,
representation or walTanty not contained herein.
(c) No waiver of any provision or consent to any action under this Agreement shall
constitute a waiver of any other provision or consent to any other action, whether or not similar. No waiver
or consent shall constitute a continuing waiver or consent or commit a Party to provide a waiver in the
future except to the extent specifically set forth in writing. Any waiver given by a Party shall be null and
void if the Party requesting such waiver has not provided a full and complete disclosure of all material facts
relevant to the waiver requested. All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing and
signed by the appropriate authorities of the Agency or the Developer and all amendments hereto must be in
writing and signed by the appropriate authorities of the Agency and the Developer. Any amendment to the
Agreement shall require the approval of the Agency.
17.26 Approval Procedures. This Agreement, when executed by the Developer and delivered to
the Agency, will then be scheduled for a public hearing before the Agency's Board of Directors This
Agreement must be authorized, executed and delivered by the Agency within sixty (60) days after date of
signature by the Developer or the Developer shall have the authority to withdraw its offer to enter into this
Agreement upon written notice to the Agency. The Effective Date of this Agreement shall be the date when
this Agreement has been executed by the Agency and delivered to the Developer, which shall be the date
first set forth above.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
70
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency and the Developer have signed this Agreement as
of the date first set forth above.
AGENCY:
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
Dated:
By:
William A. Huston, Executive Director
Dated:
APPROVED AS TO FORM
WOODRUFF SPRADLIN & SMART
By:
Lois E. Jeffrey, Agency Counsel
DEVELOPER:
Prospect Village, LP, a California Limited Partnership
Pelican-Tustin, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company,
General and Managing Partner
Dated:
By:
John H. Tillotson, Jr., Member
By:
Daniel Howse, Member
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
71
ATTACHMENT NO.1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE
DEVELOPER PARCEL
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
ATIACHMENT NO. 1.1
DEVELOPER PARCEL
THIENES ENGINEERING INC.
16800 VALLEY VIEW A VENUE
LA MIRADA, CA 90638
March 1, 2004
J.N.2303
Sheet 1 Df 2
EXHIBIT "A "
Leqal Description of
Existinq Property
Being a portion of Block B of Tract No.3, in the City of Tustin, County of Orange, State of
California, as shown on map recorded in Book 9, Page 4 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of
the County Recorder of said county, described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Block B, said corner being on the westerly line of
Prospect Avenue, formerly known as "E" Street, (30.00 foot half-width) as shown on said Tract;
thence S 00040' 39" Wa/ong the easteriy line of said Block B, 300.36 feet to the southeriy line of
said Block B, also being thè northerly line of Main Street (40.00 foot half-width) as shown on said
Tract; thence N 89021' 47" Wa/ong said southerly line, 144.55 feet to the east line of the West
150.00 feet of said Block; thence N 00039' 22" E, 137.60 feet, thence N 89023'35" W, 10.39 feet;
thence N 00040' 39" E, 162.60 feet to a point on the northeriy line of said Block, also being the
southerly line of Third Street (33.00 foot half-width), said point being 155 feet westerly of the Point
of Beginning; thence S 89025' 22" E, 155.00 feet along last said northerly line to the Point of
Beginning.
Containing: 45,109 square feet, more or less.
--¡/.~-I
//¿¿ ( k: (;'¿v i
Robin R. Rush
LS. 6984
Expires 9/30/05
Date: "-. /.; 7,}, <1-
This description was prepared by me or under my direction.
L:\2303\ESM71Legal Of Exist Property.dDc
Last Update:
SCALE:1"= BO'
J
~
LEGEND:
ATIACHMENTNO.1.1
DEVELOPER PARCEL
EXHIBIT .B.
PLAT TV ACCOMPANY LEGAL. DFSCRIPTION FOR
EXISTING PROPERTY
"'¡I
~
It
~
~
Õ
¡d
MAIN
:1
INDICATES EXSTING PROPERTY. I
CONTAINS: 45,109 SO. FT. :I::
SURVEYOR:
I
I
PREBA8ED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
¡/k.!L !'J!'2.i :1/n/ð4
ROBIN R. RUSH ' DATE
LS. NO. 6984
REG. EXP.: 9/30/05
INDICATES EXSTING ALLEY
---
.. ll1ienes Engineedng, Inc.
'f//'J CIVIL ENGINffRING. LAND SURVEYING
[Z 16800 VALLEY VIEW AVENUE
LA MIRADA. CAliFORNIA 90638
'fi!3 PH.(714)521-4811 FAX(7/4)52/-4173
P. .B.
SHEET 2 OF 2
L
IUJ
~
~
~
h
@
I~
'0
Œ
La'" Update, 3/01/04
'-'\2303\ESI.fT\Ex""-pl.dw9
ATIACHMENTNO.1.2
ALLEY DEDICATION AREA
THIENES ENGINEERING INC.
16800 VALLEY VIEW A VENUE
LA MIRADA, CA 90638
March 1, 2004
J.N. 2303
Sheet1of2
EXHIBIT "A "
Ler¡al Description of
Proposed Alley
Being a portion of Biock B of Tract No.3, in the City of Tustin, County of Orange, State of
Caiifornia, as shown on map recorded in Book 9, Page 4 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of
the County Recorder of said county, described as follows:
Beginning at the Southeast corner of the West 150.00 feet of said Block B, said corner being on
the northerly iine of Main Street, (40.00 foot half-width) as shown on said Tract; thence S 89' 21'
47" E, aiong the southerly iine of said Block. 12.95 feet; thence NOD' 40' 39" E, 51.86 feet; thence
N 01' 34' 47" W, 85.92 feet; thence N 00'40' 25" E, 1-62.50 feet to the northerly line of said
Block; thence N 89' 25' 22" W along said northeriy iine, 20 feet to the westerly iine of the East
155.00 feet of said Block; thence S 00'40' 39" W, aiong said westerly line, 162.60 feet; thence S
89' 23' 35" E, 10.39 feet to the east iine of said West 150.00 feet of said Block; thence S 00' 39'
22" W, along said east iine, 137.60 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing: 4893 square feet, more or less.
I
This description was prepared by me or under my direction.
/?~/?~
Robin R. Rush
LS. 6984
Expires 9/30/05
Date: "$//7/n4
,
L:\2303\ESMTiProposed Alley.doc
Last Update:
ATTACHMENT NO. 1.2
ALLEY DEDICATION AREA
SCALE:1"= BO'
EXHIBIT .8.
SHEET 2 OF 2
J
PlAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR
PROPOSED ALLEY
€
1.15.00
20.00'
. N /1S"25'22" W
.J
~ BLOCK B ~ .:10'
IX: ~
~ ~CT NO, J ~
M,M, 9/4 ...
~ ¡1J
G ~
N 01'.14'47" W ~
oj 85.92' '"
N 00'40'39" £:
~ 51.86'
131.60'
.95' ~
N 89'21'47" W ~
€ MAIN A VENUE ~
~
LEGEND:
SURVEYOR:
INDICATES PROPOSED ALLEY I'
CONTAINS: 4,893 SQ. FT. :i:
~I
INDICATES EXSTING ALLEY
----
PREPARED UNDER THE: SUPERVISION OF: -J
///(-;[';/ I I
K~ J:. J.4' -Mjþ/n4
ROBIN R. RUSH
LS. NO. 6984
REG. EXPo: 9/30/05
71 Thienes Engineering. Inc,
'/771 CML ENGINEERING" lAND SURIÆYINC
¡¿¿¡ 16800 VALLEY V1£W A V£NUE
LA MlRADA. CAliFORNIA 90638
fØ PH.(lI4)521-f811 FAX(lI4)521-411J
ATTACHMENT 1.3
DEVELOPER PARCEL (After Alley Dedication)
THIENES ENGINEERING INC.
16800 VALLEY VIEW AVENUE
LA MIRADA, CA 90638
March 1, 2004
J.N. 2303
Sheet 1 of 2
EXHIBIT "A"
LeQal Description of
Proposed Propertv
Being a portion of Block B of Tract No.3, in the City of Tustin, County of Orange, State of
California, as shown on map recorded in Book 9, Page 4 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of
the County Recorder of said county, described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Block B, said corner being on the westerly line of
Prospect Avenue, formerly known as "E" Street, (30.00 foot half-width) as shown on said Tract;
thence S 00° 40' 39" W along the easter/ý line of said Block B, 300.36 feet to the southerly line of
said Biock B, also being the northerly line of Main Street (40.00 foot half-width) as shown on said
Tract; thence N 89° 21' 47" W along said southerly line, 131.60 feet; thence N 00°40' 39" E,
51.86 feet, thence N 01 ° 34' 47" W, 85.92 feet; thence N 00°40' 25" E, 162.50 feet to a point on
the northerly line of said Block, also being the southerly line of Third Street (33.00 foot half-width),
said point being 135 feet westeriy of the Point of Beginning; thence S 89° 25' 22" E, 135.00 feet
aiong iast said northerly line to the Point of Beginning.
Containing: 40,216 square feet, more or iess.
/7 L /? /2/
Robin R. Rush
loS. 6984
Expires 9/30/05
Date: '5//7/04
. /
This description was prepared by me or under my direction.
L:\2303IESMnLegal Of Proposed Property. doc
Last Update: .
ATIACHMENT 1.3
DEVELOPER PARCEL (After Alley Dedication)
SCALE:1"= 80'
EXHIBIT WSW
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY lEGAL DESCRIPT70N FOR
PROPOSED PROPERTY
J
THIRD STREEET
.J
~
rt
~
~
ð
~
150'
MAIN
---¡
LEGEND:
INDICATES PROPOSED PROPERTY I
CONTAINS: 40,216 SQ. FT. ~ .
:\
SURVEYOR:
INDICATES EXST7NG AllEY
----
. Thi~mes Engineedng, Inc.
ff7;7/ CIVIL ENGIN£ERlNG . LANO SURV£Y1NG
W 16800 VALLEY V/£W AVENUE
LA MIRAÐA, CAUFORNIA 90538
/ 'ß!!I PH.(714)521-oIIJ11 FAK(114)521-417J
SHEEr 2 OF 2
P.O.B
~
~
'I:(
h
@
~
~
SCALE:1"= 80'
J
~
LEGEND:
EXHIBIT -B-
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR
EXISTING PROPERTY '
~
~I
~
~
~
ð
~
...
~
~
~
""
N 89"23'35" W
10.39
MAIN
INDICATES EXSTING PROPERTY. I,
CONTAINS: 45,109 SQ. FT.:i: "
~
SURVEYOR:
INDICATES EXSTING ALLEY
---
P.O.B.
IUJ
~
~
<;(
...
@
I~
~
0:
SHEET 2 OF 2
L
~ Thienes Engineen'ng. Inc.
,fi71 CIVIL ENGlNEf:RING "LAND SURV£YING
¡¿;¿¡ 16800 VALLEY I.1EW A VENUE
LA MIRADA, CALIFORNIA 90638
fI:!j PH.(lU)521-#J11 FAX(114)52/-4IlJ
PRJEAßfD UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
/ d '? Q) /; Jð4
ROBIN R. RUSH ~ JÁTE
L.S. NO. 5984-
REG. EXP.: 9/30/05
Last Update:3/01/04
L:\2303\ESM1'\ExIet-DI.dwa
SCALE:1"= 80'
J
~
LEGEND:
..J
~
a:
~
~
()
rd
INDICATES PROPOSED PROPERTY
CONTAINS: 40,216 SQ. Fro :i:
INDICATES EXSTING ALLEY
EXHIBIT.S.
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR
PROPOSED PROPERTY
STRiEET
12'
150'
MAIN
A ViENUE
SURVEYOR:
----
~ TlJienes Engineedn~ Inc.
,£i7J CML ENGINEERING. lAND SURVEYING
r:z¡ 16800 VALLEY V1£W A VENUE
rlß1 LA MIRAIJA. CALIFORNIA 90638
l:24 PH.(714)521-#J11 FAX(714)S21-'('17J
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
/?J.t?'í2£ 3);7/04
ROBIN R. RUSH DATE
loS. NO. 6984
REG. EXP.: 9/30/05
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
SHEET 2 OF 2
SCALE:1"= 80'
J
---¡
LEGEND:
.J
~
a:
~
~
Õ
oj
~
INOICATES PROPOSEO ALLEY
CONTAINS: 4,893 SO, FT. :i:
INOICATES EXSTING ALLEY
EXHIBIT "B"
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL ÐESCRIPT70N FOR
PROPOSED ALLEY
<tZ
ISO'
<tZ
MAIN
A VENUE
<:.
...
SURVEYOR:
1J!j.00
20.00'
. N 89"25'22" W
155'
8LOCK 8
TRACT NO. J
M.M. 9/4
N 01'34'47" W
85,92'
N oo'40'J9" E:
51.86'
IJI.60'
.9 '
N 89"21'47" W '"
...
oJ
1!J
g
"\
...
111
~
g
""
~
~ TI1ienes £nglneen'ng. Inc.
,f/71 CIVIL E:NGINE:£RING "LAND SURVE:YlNG
l:Z/ 16800 VALLEY VIEW A VENUE:
LA MIRADA, CAUFORNIA 90638
ffïJJ PH.(714)521-4811 FAX(714)521-417J
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
/;:?~ if? W 3Jfff/~4
ROBIN R. RUSH l1A
LS. NO. 6984
REG. EXP.: 9/30/05
----
SHEET 2 OF 2
JO'
~
~.~~~:;(~Y..~ ..,-._u-
ATTACHMENT NO.2
GLOSSARY OF DEFINED TERMS
For purposes of this Agreement, the following capitalized terms shall have the following meanings:
"Affiliate" shall mean (1) any Person directly or indirectly Controlling, Controlled by or under
common Control with another Person; (2) any Person owning or Controlling fifty-one percent (51 %) or
more of the outstanding voting securities of such other Person; and (3) if that other Person is an officer,
director, member or partner, any company for which such Person acts in any such capacity.
"Agency" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.4.1.
"Agency Closing Conditions" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 7.3.
"Agency Title Policy" shall mean any title insurance policy obtained by the City from the Title
Company in connection with this Agreement.
"Alley Dedication Area" shall mean the portion of the Developer Parcel to be dedicated in fee to
the City of Tustin, as described in Section 4.1.2.
"ALTA " shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.1.1.
"Policy" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 6.4.
"Approved Project Plans" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 8.5.11.
"Assignee" shall mean any Person to whom or to which the Developer assigns its interests in this
Agreement the Developer Parcel, the Improvements thereon or any portion thereof.
"Assistant Executive Director" shall mean Ms. Christine Shingleton, or other designee of the
Executive Director of the Agency.
"Business Day(s)" shall mean any day on which Tustin City Hall is open for business and shall
specifically include Fridays when City Hall is officially closed, Saturday, Sunday or a legal holiday.
"CEQA" shall mean the California Environmental Quality Act and implementing regulations and
guidelines, contained in Cal. Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., and Cal. Code of Regulations,
title 14, Section 15000 et seq.
"Certificate of Compliance" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 9.1.
110039.2[
M,y [0, 2004
"Change in Ownership" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 2.3.3.
"City" shall mean the City of Tustin.
"City Code" shall mean the Tustin City Code for the City of Tustin, California, as the same may be
amended from time to time.
"City Hall" shall mean the seat of government for the City of Tustin and the Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agency, located at 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California.
"Claim" or "Claims" shall mean any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, orders, or
other means of seeking or recovering losses, damages, liabilities, costs, expenses (including attorneys' fees,
fees of expert witnesses, and consultants' and court and litigation costs), costs and expenses attributable to
compliance with judicial and regulatory orders and requirements, fines, penalties, liens, taxes, or any type
of compensation whatsoever, direct or indirect, known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen.
"Closing", "Close of Escrow" or "Escrow Closing" shall mean the point in time when the Agency
conveys fee title in the Property to the Developer, which shall be within five (5) working days after
Developer and Agency approval of the perfonnance of or occurrence of the Closing Conditions.
"Closing Conditions" shall mean the Developer Closing Conditions and the Agency Closing
Conditions.
"Closing Date" shall mean the meaning set forth in Section 7.1.
"CL TA Policy" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 6.2.
"Common Area Improvements" shall mean all amenities of the Project to be available for and
used in common by the owners of all Units and the Main Street Commercial Building on the Developer
Parcel.
"Common Areas" shall mean the Common Area Improvements and the land upon which such
improvements are located.
"Community Development Department" shall mean the Community Development Department of
the City of Tustin, California.
"Complete" and "Completion" shall mean, with respect to the Project, the point in time when all
of the following shall have occurred: (1) to the extent a certificate of occupancy is required with respect to
construction of the Improvements required under this Agreement, issuance of a certificate of occupancy by
the City; (2) recordation of a Notice of Completion by the Developer, its Assignee or such Party's
contractor; (3) certification by the Project Architect that the Improvements (with the exception of minor
"punch list" items) have been completed in a good and workmanlike manner and substantially in
accordance with the approved plans and specifications; (4) any mechanic's liens that have been recorded or
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
2
stop notices that have been delivered have been paid, settled or otherwise extinguished, discharged,
released, waived, bonded around or insured against; and (5) final inspection and acceptance by City
Engineer of the Public Improvements.
"Concept Plan and Design Review" shall mean the City's concept plan and design review
approvals as required by the City Code, which shall be part of the Entitlements.
, "Conditions Precedent" or "Condition Precedent" shall mean all conditions precedent to the
Agency's issuance of a Certificate of Compliance, as set forth in Section 9.6.
"Consumer Price Index" shall mean the Consumer Price Index - all Urban Consumers. Los
Angeles-Orange Countv. published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or such comparable index as may be
reasonably acceptable to the City.
"Control" "Controlled" or "Controlling", shall mean the power to direct the management. It shall
. be a presumption that control with respect to a corporation or limited Partnership is the right to exercise,
directly or indirectly, more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting rights attributable to the controlled
corporation or limited Partnership, and, with respect to any individual, partnership, trust, other entity or
association, control is the possession, indirectly or directly, of the power to direct or cause the direction of
the management or policies of the controlled entity.
"Control ofthe Premises" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 2.7.8.
"Defaulting Party" shall mean a Party to this Agreement who is either in Potential Default or in
Material Default.
"Design Documents" shall mean documents, plans and specifications at each stage of development
(schematics, design development and construction documents, or if design/build, schematic and
construction documents) for the Improvements which: (a) shall describe the proposed use and include plans
and renderings showing in reasonable detail the proposed size, land coverage, floor area, gross square
footage, shape, height, bulk, massing, location, exterior material, exterior color scheme and elevation of
such hnprovements; (b) shall include (i) a pedestrian and vehicular circulation and traffic plan showing all
ingress and egress to public streets or roads and including a statement of impact; (ii) utilities and service
connections plan; (iii) a landscape plan; (iv) a signage plan; (v) engineering, mechanical and electrical
plans and documents; and (vi) a grading, drainage and utility plan; and (c) shall be prepared and stamped
approved by an architect and/or engineer licensed to practice in the State of California.
"Developer" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.4.2.
"Developer's Closing Conditions" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 7.2.
"Developer Parcel" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 4.1.3.
"Developer's Title Endorsements" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 6.4.
170039,21
M,y 10. 2004
"Developer's Title Policy" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 6.4.
"Development Costs" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 8.1.4.
"Effective Date" shall have the meaning set forth in the introduction.
"EAN Deposit" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 4.2.2(b).
"Entitlements" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 8.3.1.
"Environmental Agency" shall mean the United States Environmental Protection Agency; the
California Environmental Protection Agency and all of its sub-entities, including any Regional Water
Quality Control Board, the State Water Resources Control Board, the Department of Toxic Substances
Control, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and the California Air Resources Board; the
City; any Fire Department or Health Department with jurisdiction over the Developer Property; and/or any
other federal, state, regional or local governmental agency or entity that has or asserts jurisdiction over
Hazardous Substance Releases or the presence, use, storage, transfer, manufacture, licensing, reporting,
pennitting, analysis, disposal or treatment of Hazardous Materials in, on, under, about, or affecting the
Project.
"Environmental Laws" shall mean any federal, state, regional or local laws, ordinances, rules,
regulations, requirements, orders, directives, guidelines, or pennit conditions, in existence as of the
Effective Date or as later enacted, promulgated, issued, modified or adopted, regulating or relating to
Hazardous Materials, and all applicable judicial, administrative and regulatory decrees, judgments and
orders and common law, including those relating to industrial hygiene, public safety, human health, or
protection of the environment, or the reporting, licensing, pennitting, use, presence, transfer, treatment,
analysis, generation, manufacture, storage, discharge, Release, disposal, transportation, Investigation or
Remediation of Hazardous Materials. Environmental Laws shall include the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (42 US.C. Section 9601, et seq.)
("CERCLA"); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended, (42 U.S. C. Section 6901 et
seq.) ("RCRA"); the federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 US.C. Section 1251 et seq.); the
Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended, (15 U.S.C. Section 2601 et seq.); the Hazardous Substances
Account Act (Chapter 6.8 of the California Health and Safety Code Section 25300 et seq.); Chapter 6.5
commencing with Section 25100 (Hazardous Waste Control) and Chapter 6.7 commencing with Section
25280 (Underground Storage of Hazardous Substances) of the California Health and Safety Code; and the
California Water Code, Sections 13000 et seq.
"Escrow" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 4.3.
"Escrow Holder" shall mean Stewart Title Insurance Company.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
4
"Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate" shall mean that certain Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate
dated July 8, 2002, by and between the Agency and Pelican Center LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company, as the same may be amended from time to time.
"Fair Market Value" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 14.3.3.
"Federal Requirements" shall mean the Federal Grant Requirements found in 24 CPR 85,36.
Such Requirements are summarized in Attachment No. 10.
"Final Map" or "Final Maps" shall mean a final tract map or final tract maps approved by the City
for the Developer Parcel in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Code.
"Final Plans" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 8.5.6.
"Force Majeure Delay" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 17.8.
"General Plan" shall mean the most current general plan for the City of Tustin.
"Governmental Authority" shall mean any and all federal, state, county, municipal and local
governmental and quasi-governmental bodies and authorities (including the United States of America, the
State of California and any political subdivision, public corporation, district, joint powers authority or other
political or public entity) or departments thereof having or exercising jurisdiction over the Parties, the
Project, or the Developer Parcel, as the context indicates.
"Governmental Requirements" shall mean all laws, statutes, codes, ordinances, rules, regulations,
standards, guidelines and other requirements issued by any Governmental Authority having jurisdiction
over the Parties, the Project, or the Developer Parcel, or any component thereof.
"Grant Deed" shall mean the Grant deed to be executed and delivered by the Agency at the Closing
to convey title to the Property to the Developer. The Grant Deed shall be in substantially the fonn attached
hereto as Attachment No.3, acknowledged and in recordable fonn.
"Hazardous Materials" shall mean and include the following:
(a) "Hazardous Substance", "Hazardous Material", "Hazardous Waste", or "Toxic
Substance" under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980,
42 U.S.C. subsection 9601, et sea., the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 US.c. subsection
5101, et sea., or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. subsection 6901, et seq.;
(b) An "Extremely Hazardous Waste", a "Hazardous Waste", or a "Restricted
Hazardous Waste", under subsections 25115, 25117, or 25122.7 of the California Health and Safety Code,
or is listed or identified pursuant to subsection 25140 or 44321 of the California Health and Safety Code;
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
5
(c) "Hazardous Material", "Hazardous Substance", "Hazardous Waste", "Toxic Air
Contaminant", or "Medical Waste" under subsections 25281, 25316, 25501, 25501.1,117690 or 39655
of the California Health and Safety Code;
(d) "Oil" or a "Hazardous Substance" listed or identified pursuant to Section 311 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. Section 1321, as well as any other hydro carbonic
substance or by-product;
(e) Listed or defined as a "Hazardous Waste", "Extremely Hazardous Waste", or an
"Acutely Hazardous Waste" pursuant to Chapter 11 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations;
f, (f) Listed by the State of California as a chemical known by the State to cause cancer or
reproductive toxicity pursuant to Section 25249.9(8) of the California Health and Safety Code;
(g) A material which due to its characteristics or interaction with one or more other
substances, chemical compounds, or mixtures damages or threatens to damage, health, safety, or the
environment, or is required by any law or public agency to be remediated, including remediation which
such law or public agency requires in order for the property to be put to any lawful purpose;
(h) Any material whose presence would require remediation pursuant to the guidelines
set forth in the State of California Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Field Manual, whether or not the
presence of such material resulted from a leaking underground fuel tank;
(i) Pesticides regulated under the Feral Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, 7
U.S.C. subsection 136 et sea.;
(j) Asbestos, PCBs and other substances regulated under the Toxic Substances Control
Act, 15 U.S.c. subsection 2601 et sea.;
(k) Any radioactive material including any "source material", "special nuclear material",
"by-product material", "low-level wastes", "high-level radioactive waste", "spent nuclear fuel" or
"transuranic waste", and any other radioactive materials or radioactive wastes, however produced,
regulated under the Atomic Energy Act, 42 U.S.C. subsection 2011 et sea., the Nuclear Waste Policy Act,
42 U.S.C. subsection 10101 et seq., or pursuant to the California Radiation Control Law, California Health
and Safety Code subsection 114960 et seq.;
(I) Regulated under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. subsection
651et seq., or the California Occupational Safety and Health Act, California Labor Code subsection 6300 et
seq.; and/or
(m) Regulated under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S. C. subsection 7401 et Leg. or pursuant
to Division 26 of the California Health and Safety Code.
"Homeowners' Association" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 2.5.
170039.21
M., to. 2004
6
"Household" shall mean all persons proposing to reside in a Unit.
"Indemnified Parties" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 10.1.
"Initial Deposit" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 4.2.
"Injured Party" shall mean the Party to this Agreement other than the Party which is in Potential
Default or in Material Default.
"Institutional Lender" shall mean a nationally recognized bank, savings and loan association,
investment bank, or other institutional lender which has a net worth of One Billion Dollars
($1,000,000,000) or more. The participation or securitization of a loan by an Institutional Lender shall not
give rise to any requirement that each lender participating in such participation or securitization itself be an
Institutional Lender, so long as (a) at the inception of the loan, the originating and agent lender is an
Institutional Lender, and (b) at the time of any subsequent assignment of the loan, the assignee and agent
lender is an Institutional Lender.
"Interest Payment" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 7.1.
"Investigation(s)" shall mean any observation, inquiry, examination, sampling, monitoring,
analysis, exploration, research, inspection, canvassing, questioning, and/or surveying of or concerning the
Property or any adjacent or affected properties, including the air, soil, surface water, and groundwater, and
the surrounding population or properties, or any of them, to characterize or evaluate the nature, extent or
impact of Hazardous Materials
"Lot(s)" shall mean the subdivided portions of the Developer Parcel that are conveyed with a Unit
or Parcel as reflected in an approved and recorded Final Map, that are conveyed and intended for sale.
"Material Default" shall mean the state a Party to this Agreement is in after proper notice is
provided of a Potential Default and the appropriate cure period, if any, has lapsed, all as provided in this
Agreement
"Memorandum of DDA" shall mean a Memorandum of this Agreement substantially in the form
and substance of the memorandum attached to the Agreement as Attachment No.3.
"Mortgage" shall mean any indenture of mortgage or deed of trust, bond, grant of taxable or tax
exempt funds from a governmental agency or other security interest and the documents governing a
sale-leaseback transaction, together with all loan documents related thereto.
"Mortgagee" shall means any mortgagee, beneficiary under any deed of trust, trustee of bonds,
governmental agency which is a grantor of funds, and, with respect to any Parcel which is the subject of a
sale-leaseback transaction, the Person acquiring fee title.
170039.Z1
M,y 10. ZOO4
7
"Mortgagor" shall mean the mortgagor or trustor under a Mortgage (or lessee, in the case of a
sale-leaseback transaction).
"Official Records" shall mean the records of the office of the County Recorder for Orange County,
California.
"Opening of Escrow" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 4.3.
"Ownership Transfer" shall mean the transfer, sale, assignment, ground lease, gift, hypothecation,
mortgage, pledge or encumbrance, or other similar conveyance of the Developer's interests in this
Agreement, the Developer Parcel or the Improvements thereon, or any portion thereof or interest therein,
whether voluntary, involuntary, by operation of law or otherwise, or any agreement to do so; the granting
of any Mortgage and/or the execution of any installment land sale contract or similar instrument affecting
all or a portion of the Developer Parcel or the Improvements thereon; and shall also include a Transfer of
Control of the Developer, or any conversion of the Developer to an entity form other than that of the
Developer at the time of execution of this Agreement.
"Ownership Transferee" shall mean any Person to which an Ownership Transfer is made,
including any Mortgagee or Permitted Mortgagee.
"Party" shall mean either of the Agency or the Developer, individually.
"Parties" shall mean Agency and the Developer, collectively.
"Performance Bonds" shall mean bonds issued by a surety company admitted in the State of
California and regulated by the State of California Department of Insurance, acceptable to the Assistant
Executive Director and Agency Legal Counsel in their sole discretion, in which the City is a named
obligee. The Performance Bonds shall guarantee payment for and faithful performance and completion
(within the respective times provided in this Agreement) of the Project Improvements, in accordance with
drawings or plans, as appropriate, that specifically describe the work to be performed in sufficient detail for
the issuance of such Performance Bonds.
"Permitted Exceptions" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 6.2.
"Permitted Mortgage" shall mean any indenture of mortgage or deed of trust, bonds, grant of
taxable or tax-exempt funds from a governmental agency or other conveyance of a security interest in a
Parcel(s), to a Permitted Mortgagee or the conveyance of such Parcel to the Permitted Mortgagee or its
assignee or purchaser in connection with a foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, which satisfies all of
the criteria set forth in Section 2.7.2 and 2.7.3 of this Agreement.
"Permitted Mortgagee" shall mean a Mortgagee meeting the criteria set forth in Sections 2.7.2 and
accordingly entitled to the Permitted Mortgagee protections provided by this Agreement.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
"Permitted Transfer" shall mean any Ownership Transfer that is pennitted or authorized by
Sections 2.2. 2.3 or 2.5.
"Person" shall mean an individual, partnership, limited partnership, trust, estate, association,
corporation, limited liability company, joint venture, firm, joint stock company, unincorporated
association, Governmental Authority, governmental agency or other entity, domestic or foreign.
"Potential Default" shall mean the state of being potentially in Material Default, as further defined
in Section 14.
"Preliminary Plan(s)" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 8.5.3.
"Preliminary Title Report" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 6.2.
"Private Improvements" shall mean all of the buildings, structures, landscaping and other
improvements, other than the Public Improvements, to be constructed or installed on the Developer Parcel,
consistent with the approved Project Plans, the Entitlements, demolition, grading and building permits.
"Proprietor, Owner-Occupier" shall mean a person or persons who will own in fee and occupy
for residential and commercial/ professional purposes, an individual Live-Work Unit.
"Project" shall have the meaning set forth in Sections 1.1- 1.3.
"Project Architect" shall mean the architect or engineer, as applicable, designated in writing by the
Developer for a particular product type or improvement.
"Project Improvements" shall mean all Private and Public Improvements, collectively.
"Public Improvements" shall mean the public infrastructure improvements and utilities required
to be constructed or installed on or in connection with the development of the Developer Parcel as further
described in Attachment No.7 to this Agreement including all public and private streets, roadways, drives,
alleyways, sidewalks.
"Purchase Price" is defined in Section 4.2.1.
"Release" (with respect to Hazardous Materials) shall mean any releasing, or threat of releasing,
spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting, escaping, leaching,
migrating, disposing, or dumping into the environment.
"Remediate" or "Remediation" shall mean any response or remedial action as defined under
Section 101(25) of CERCLA, and similar actions with respect to Hazardous Materials as defined under
comparable state and local laws, and any other cleanup, removal, containment, abatement, recycling,
transfer, monitoring, storage, treatment, disposal, closure, restoration or other mitigation or remediation of
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
9
Hazardous Materials or Releases required by any Environmental Agency or within the purview of any
Environmental Laws.
"Reports" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 13.2.7.
"Right of Reversion" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 16.1.
"Schedule of Performance" shall mean the document attached as Attachment No.6 to this
Agreement, setting forth the dates and time periods for submissions, approvals and actions, including the
construction of the Improvements.
"Scope of Development" shall mean the description of the Project attached as Attachment No.7.
"State" shall mean the State of California.
"Subdivision Map" shall mean any tentative or final map for the Developer Parcel approved by the
City in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Municipal Code.
"Subdivision Map Act" shall mean the California Subdivision Map Act as codified in Cal.
Government Code Section 66410 et seq.
"Subordination and Consent" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 2.7.3.
"Termination Notice" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 5.8.
"Title Commitment" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 6.2.
"Title Company" shall mean Stewart Title Insurance Company.
"Transfer of Control" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 2.3.1.
"Unit" or "Units" shall mean the live-work units which are required to be developed on the
Developer Parcel by the Developer.
170039.21
May 10. 2004
10
ATTACHMENT NO.3
MEMORANDUM OF DDA
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN
RECORDED MAIL TO:
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, California 92780
Attention: Christine A. Shingleton
No fee for recording requested pursuant to Government Code Sections 6103 and 27383
MEMORANDUM OF DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
TillS MEMORANDUM OF DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
("Memorandum ofDDA") is made as of ,2004 by and between the TUSTIN
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a State agency organized for local purposes (Health and
Safety Code Section 33000 et. seq.) (the "Agency"), and PROSPECT VILLAGE LP, a California limited
partnership (the "Developer") to confirm that the Agency and the Developer have entered into that certain
Disposition and Development Agreement dated as of , 2004 (the "DDA") affecting the
real property described below. The Agency and the Developer are sometimes referred to herein
individually as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." Initially capitalized terms used herein and not
otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the DDA.
1. Property Affected bv the DDA. The following described land is subject to the terms, covenants,
conditions and restrictions set forth in the DDA effective as to such land upon the date of acquisition
thereof by the Developer:
1.1 The "Developer Parcel" consisting as of the date hereof of that certain property of
approximately 1.04 acres with 6,120 square feet of improvements, located in the City of Tustin, County of
Orange, California.
1.2 This Memorandum of DDA has been executed and shall be recorded immediately following
the execution and recordation by the Agency and the Developer of the Grant Deed with respect to the
Developer Parcel and the DDA and this Memorandum of DDA shall each be binding upon the Developer
Parcel in accordance with its terms.
2. Effect of DDA. The DDA imposes certain obligations, agreements, covenants, conditions and
restrictions with respect to the Developer Parcel and Developer's acquisition, development, use, operation
and ultimate disposition thereof, that run with the land as further set forth below, including, without
limitation:
170039.21
May 10. 2004
(a) certain restrictions on transfer, conveyance and/or assignment of the DDA and/or the
Developer Parcel, whether voluntary or involuntary, contained in Section 2.2 of the DDA, that tenninate
upon execution and recordation by the Agency of the Certificate of Compliance;
(b) certain restrictions on Transfer of Control of the Developer, contained in Section 2.3 of the
DDA, that terminate upon execution and recordation by the Agency of the Certificate of Compliance;
(c) certain restrictions on Mortgages, contained in Section 2.7 of the DDA, that terminate upon
execution and recordation by the Agency of the Certificate of Compliance;
(d) the Release contained in Section 4.5.2(c) of the DDA (that is repeated in its entirety in the
Grant Deed) that remains in effect in perpetuity;
(e) the non-discrimination covenants contained in Sections 12.3 through 12.4 of the DDA (that
are repeated in their entirety in the Grant Deed) that remain in effect in perpetuity;
(f) the deed restrictions on Live-Work Units contained in Section 13 of the DDA (that is
repeated in its entirety in the Grant Deed) that remain in effect in perpetuity;
(g) the Right of Purchase in favor of the Agency, contained in Section 14.2.2 of the DDA
(copied verbatim below from the DDA), that terminates upon execution and recordation by the Agency of
the Certificate of Compliance or at such earlier time as is specified in the DDA; and
(h) the Right of Reversion contained in Section 16 of the DDA (copied verbatim below from the
DDA), that terminates upon execution and recordation by the Agency of the Certificate of Compliance or at
such earlier time as is specified in the DDA.
For ease of reference only, the following italicized Sections are copied verbatim from the DDA:
2.1
Indemnification and Environmental Provisions.
Sections 10.2 and 10.3 of the DDA provide as follows:
10.2 Environmental Indemnitv. As a material part of the consideration for this Agreement, and
effective as to the Developer Parcel, upon the Developer's acquisition of the title to all or any portion
thereof, the Developer shall, to the maximum extent permitted by law, indemnify, protect, defend, assume
all responsibility for and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against any and all Claims
resulting or arising from or in any way connected with the existence, Release, threatened Release,
presence, storage, treatment, transportation and/or disposal of any Hazardous Materials at any time on, in,
under, from, about or adjacent to any portion or portions of said lands, regardless whether any such
condition is known or unknown now or upon acquisition and regardless whether any such condition
pre-exists acquisition or is subsequently caused, created or occurring, provided, however, that the
Developer shall not be responsible for (and such indemnity shall not apply to) to the gross negligence or
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
2
willful misconduct o/the Indemnified Parties. This environmental indemnity shall be included in any
recorded memorandum of this Agreement against said lands and shall be binding upon successors and
assigns of the Developer owning all or any part thereof in accordance with Section 10.3.
IO.3 Duration of Indemnities. The indemnities set forth in this Section 10 shall survive the Close of
Escrow and the termination of this Agreement and shall not merge into the Grant Deed, provided, however
that, such indemnities shall cease to run with respect to the sale of a live-work unit or upon recordation of
a Certificate of Compliance. Notwithstanding that such indemnities shall cease to run with Developer
Parcel, they shall continue to be personally binding and in full force and effect in perpetuity with respect to
Developer and its successors in interest.
2.2
Ril!ht of Purchase.
Section 14.2.2 of the DDA provide asfollows:
I4.2.2 In the event the Developer is in Material Default, in addition to whatever other
rights the Agency may have in law or at equity, or as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Agency
may do any or all of the following:
(a) The Agency shall have the right (the "Right of Purchase"), from time to time,
at any time within three (3) years after the date that the Developer became in Material Default (provided
that upon Developer's cure of such Material Default, such right shall cease with respect to such Material
Default only), to purchase any, or all, Parcel( s), Lot( s) or Unite s) not sold by the Developer to an Owner
Occupier as of the date of the election by the Agency to purchase said Parcel( s), Lot( s) or Unite s) (jor the
purposes hereof, "sold by the Developer" shall mean either to enter into a binding contract for the sale of
the Unit to an Owner Occupier or to close escrow for the sale of such Unit to an Owner Occupier). The
purchase price for such Parcel(s), Lat(s) or Unites) shall be the greater of (i) seventy five percent (75%) of
the Fair Market Value of said Parcel(s), Lat(s) or Unites), as the case may be, determined in accordance
with Section I4.2.4 which Fair Market Value shall be that of each of the Parcel(s), Lat(s) or Unites) in the
condition it or they may be in (including the obligation, if applicable, to sell the Units as Affordable
Housing Units) as of the date of election to purchase, and (ii) an amount which provides sufficient net sales
proceeds to pay a Permitted Mortgagee with a lien upon the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) being purchased
the following amounts secured by such Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites): principal, accrued and unpaid interest
(including default interest), late charges,foreclosure costs, attorneys'fees and out of pocket costs and
expenses directly incurred by the Permitted Mortgagee in acquiring the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites), and
out of pocket costs and expenses directly incurred by the Permitted Mortgagee in performing the
obligations specified in Section 2.7.1O(d) with respect to the Parcel(s), Lat(s) or Unites). The Parties agree
that the amount of reduction in the Fair Market Value of the Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites), as the case may
be, bears a reasonable relationship to the damages which the Parties estimate may be suffered by the
Agency as the result of the Developer's default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement,
which damages would be impractical or extremely difficult to quantify, that the deposit constitutes a
reasonable estimate of the Agency's damages in such event, and that the remedy provided for in this
Agreement is not a penalty or forfeiture, is necessitated by reason of the obligations of the Agency to
maintain the Affordable Housing Unit on the Developer Parcel, and is a reasonable limitation on the
170039.21
May 10. 2004
Developer's potentia/liability as a result of such default. In the event the Agency exercises its right to
purchase any Parcel( s), Lot( s) or Unite s), as provided in subsection, this Agreement shall terminate with
respect to such Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) as may be purchased.
(b) The Agency may sue for damages it may have incurred related to any
Parcel(s), Lot(s) or Unites) that the Agency has not elected to purchase as provided in Section 15.2.2
above. In the event the Agency institutes legal action to recover damages, the Agency's right to purchase
the Parcel( s), Lot( s) or Unite s), as provided in above, for which suit is brought shall terminate and be of no
further force or effect.
(c)
The Agency may seek to specifically enforce the obligations of the Developer.
(d)
of the Developer Parcel.
The Agency may terminate this Agreement with respect to all, or any portion
2.3
(e) The Agency may exercise its Right of Reversion pursuant to Section 16.2.
Ril!:ht of Reversion.
Section 16 of the DDA provides as follows:
16.
Riftht of Reversion.
16.1 Riftht of Reversion. On the terms subject to the conditions set forth in this
Section 17 the Agency shall have the right (the "Right of Reversion "), (a) to terminate this Agreement
as to (i) the Developer Parcel or Lot( s) or Unite s), or any portions thereof, directly impacted by the
Material Default, and/or (i) any other portion of the Developer Parcel with respect to which the
Developer has not commenced construction of Improvements (as applicable, the "Reversion Area")
and (b) thereafter to re-enter the Reversion Area and revest in the Agency the title in the Reversion
Area or any portions thereof
16.1.1 Conditions to Exercise. The provisions of this Section 16.1.1 shall
apply in the event that after the Closing any of the events or omissions set forth in this Section 16.1.1
occur, which such events and omissions shall each be a Potential Default:
(a) At no fault of Agency, the development of the Project is delayed such that the
occurrence of any event described in the Schedule of Performance does not occur on or before the date
projected for its occurrence, as such date may be extended by Force Majeure Delay.
(b) The Developer abandons or substantially suspends construction of any
Improvements for a period of ninety (90) days, which 90-day period shall be subject to Force Majeure
Delay.
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
4
(c) The Developer, in violation of this Agreement, assigns this Agreement, or any
rights in this Agreement, or transfers, or suffers any involuntary transfer of the Developer Parcel or the
Developer's interest in the Developer Parcel, or any part thereof
(d) Any voluntary or involuntary Ownership Transfer or Transfer of Control,
including any Foreclosure affecting all or any portion of the Developer Parcel by any Mortgagee takes
place without express assumption by the Ownership Transferee of the Developer's obligations under
this Agreement in accordance with Section 2.2.
16.1.2 Revestim! Conditions. Notwithstanding that such portion of the Developer
Parcel may be encumbered by one or more Mortgages or Permitted Mortgages, the Agency shall be
entitled to exercise its Right of Reversion with respect to all or any portion of the Developer Parcel in
the event of the following (the "Reversion Conditions"):
(a) the occurrence of any of the events or omissions described in Section
16.1.1 becoming a Material Default of the Developer and the provision of written notice to the
Developer and each Permitted Mortgagee as required in Section 2.7.14.
(b) provision by the Agency of notice in accordance with Sections 2.7.15
and 17.7 to each Permitted Mortgagee having a Permitted Mortgage on the affected portion of the
Developer Parcel, of a Material Default by the Developer remaining uncured after passage of the time
periods set forth in this Agreement for cure thereof by the Developer
(c) failure of any Permitted Mortgagee to cure such Material Default in
accordance with the provisions of Section 2. 7. 15(b).
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any Permitted Mortgagee has commenced and diligently
prosecuted to completion Foreclosure proceeding in accordance with Section 2.7.15. then (i) the
Agency's right to exercise the Right of Reversion triggered by such Material Default shall be stayedfor
a period of three (3) years from the date upon which the Permitted Mortgagee, or wholly-owned
designee, obtains title to such portion of the Developer Parcel, and (ii) thereafter may only be
exercised with respect to that particular Material Default if such Permitted Mortgagee, or wholly-
owned designee, has not within such three (3) year period (which period will not be extended by Force
Majeure Delay) either: (A) assumed all obligations of the Developer under this Agreement, including
the obligation to construct the Improvements in accordance with a revised Schedule of Performance
agreed to by the Permitted Mortgagee or wholly-owned designee and the Agency, and, thus, to step into
the role of Developer hereunder and commenced and diligently prosecuted the construction of the
Improvements, or (B) sold the affected portion of the Developer Parcel. The Parties agree that time is
of the essence with respect to the Reversion Conditions and that the Reversion Conditions shall not be
subject to extension for Force Majeure Delay.
The satisfaction of the Reversion Conditions with respect to each independent Material Default
serves to trigger (or re-trigger) the Agency's Right of Reversion, subject in each case to the potential
stay set forth in the preceding paragraph.
16.1.3 Exercise of Riftht of Reversion. So long as the Material Default
triggering the Right of Reversion has not been cured as of the date of exercise of the Right of
170039.21
M.y 10. 2004
Reversion, the Agency may exercise its Right of Reversion at anytime within one (1) year after such
Right of Reversion could first be exercised with respect to such Material Default. The Agency may
exercise such right by delivery of notice to (a) the Developer ifno Foreclosure has occurred, and (b)
all Permitted Mortgages with respect to the Reversion Area or any portion thereof, provided that the
Agency shall not exercise the Agency's Right of Reversion without first providing the Developer, if
applicable, and all Permitted Mortgagees holding Permitted Mortgages with respect to the Reversion
Area or any portion thereof a reasonable opportunity to address the Agency Board of Directors at a
public meeting. In the event of such termination of this Agreement, this Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect with respect to portions of the Developer Parcel not so revested in the Agency, but the
termination of this Agreement shall only be effective as of the date title to the Reversion Areas is
revested in the Agency.
16.2
Prioritv of the A.l'encv's Ri.l'ht of Reversion.
16.2.1 Ri.l'ht of Reversion Subordinate onlv to Senior Obli.l'ations. Prior to the later
to occur of (a) the initial funding of a loan for the construction of Private 1mprovements, the Agency's
Right of Reversion shall be senior in priority to any lien, including Permitted Mortgages, except for
Senior Obligations as set forth in Section 16.2.2. encumbering the Developer Parcel or portion thereof,
such that if the Agency exercises its Right of Reversion, in accordance with the provisions of this
Section 16. all such liens and mortgages other than such Senior Obligations will be extinguished and
the Agency will be revested of title to the title to the Reversion Parcel free and clear of all such liens
and mortgages, other than Senior Obligations as provided below.
16.2.2 Ri.l'ht of Reversion Subordinate to Permitted Mort.l'aI!es for Private
1mprovements. Concurrently with the later to occur of (a) the initial funding of a loan for the
construction of Private Improvements, the Agency's Right of Reversion shall become subordinate to,
and the Agency shall execute such written instruments for the subordination of its Right of Reversion as
may reasonably be requested by the holder of the lien of any Community Facilities District or other
financing bonds issued with respect to such Parcel and the lien of any Permitted Mortgagee providing
funding for Private 1mprovements (collectively, a "Senior Obligation"). The subordination of the Right
of Reversion and the Agency's agreement to so subordinate its Right of Reversion is subject to
agreement by the holder of any Senior Obligation to which the Agency's Right of Reversion is to be
subordinated, in writing, [providing the Agency the following rights:]
(a) Upon the occurrence of a default under any of the Senior Obligation
documents, the holder of the Senior Obligation shall promptly notify the Agency of the occurrence of
such event of default, which notification shall be provided to the Agency contemporaneously with the
delivery to the Developer or its Assignee of any notice of default under any of the Senior Obligation
dacuments;
(b) The Agency shall have the right, during the cure periods which apply
to the Developer or its Assignee pursuant to the Senior Obligation documents and any cure period
which may apply to the Agency under applicable law, to cure the Developer's or its Assignee's default
relative to the Senior Obligation; and
(c) After a default on any of the Senior Obligation documents but prior to
a Foreclosure, the Agency shall have the right to take title to the Reversion Area or any portion thereof
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
6
and cure the default relative to the Senior Obligation documents, without the holder of the Senior
Obligation exercising any right it might otherwise have to accelerate the Senior Obligation by reason
of such title transfer, so long as the Agency promptly cures any such default upon taking title. In the
event that additional uncured events of default under the Senior Obligation documents occur after the
Agency has taken title to the Reversion Area, all Permitted Mortgagees will be able to foreclose under
the Permitted Mortgages.
(d) Upon the reversion to the Agency of title to the Reversion Area, the
Agency shall use reasonable commercial efforts to resell the Reversion Area acquired by the Agency,
as soon and in such manner as the Agency shall find feasible and consistent with the approved
Entitlements to a qualified and responsible party or parties (as determined in the sole discretion of the
Agency), who will assume the obligation of making or completing the Improvements, or such other
improvements approved by the Agency with the uses specified in the approved Entitlements. Upon such
resale of the Reversion Area or any part thereof, the proceeds thereof, if any, shall be applied:
(i) First, but subject to the provisions of clause (ii) below if there
exists any Senior Obligation, to reimburse the Agency for all costs and expenses incurred by the
Agency, including salaries of personnel engaged in such action, in connection with the recapture,
management and resale of the Reversion Area or any part thereof.' all taxes, assessments and water and
sewer charges with respect to the Reversion Area or any part thereof; any payments made or necessary
to be made to discharge or prevent from attaching or being made any subsequent encumbrances or
liens due to obligations incurred with respect to the making or completion of the agreed Improvements
or any part thereof on the Reversion Area, or any part thereof; and any amounts otherwise owing to
the Agency by the Developer and its successor or transferee;
(ii) Second, to reimburse the Developer, its successor or
transferee, up to the amount equal to: the portion of the Base Purchase Price allocated to the reversion
property on a square footage basis and the Reimbursable Costs incurred by the Developer for the
development of the Reversion Area, or any part thereof, less the amounts paid on any Permitted
Mortgage pursuant to clause (ii).
(iii)
retained by the Agency as its property.
Any balance remaining after such reimbursements shall be
16.2.3 Termination of Rif!ht of Reversion. In connection with every grant deed for a
Live- Work Unit or the Main Street Building, the Agency shall direct the escrow company to extinguish
and release the Agency's Right of Reversion as to such Unit or Building, upon the occurrence of all of
the following:
(a)
1ssuance by the Agency of a certificate of occupancy;
(b) Recordation of a Notice of Completion relating to the Unit or
Building by the Developer, its Assignee or such Party's contractor, and;
(c) Any mechanic's liens that have been recorded or stop notices that
have been delivered have been paid, settled or otherwise extinguished, discharged, released, waived,
bonded around or insured against;
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
7
Agency approval of the Deed for each such Unit; and,
(d)
(e)
Close of Escrow as to such Unit or Building.
3.
Effect on Mortl!al!es: Ril!ht To Encumber.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the DDA, the Developer shall have the right to encumber
the fee title to portions of the Developer Parcel owned by it with a Pennitted Mortgage made by a
Pennitted Mortgagee subject to compliance with the tenns, conditions and limitations set forth in Section
'blof the DDA and Mortgages complying with the tenns of said section and entered into by Developer
with Pennitted Mortgagees shall be deemed to be "Permitted Mortgages"; provided, however that all
Mortgages shall be subject and subordinate to the DDA.
4.
Certificate of Compliance.
Upon the Developer's satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 9.6 of the DDA with
respect to a Certificate of Compliance, the Agency shall furnish the Developer with the appropriate
Certificate of Compliance in recordable fonn upon written request there for by the Developer. Such
Certificate of Compliance shall be binding upon the parties to this Memorandum of DDA, their successors
and assigns, and shall be deemed the Agency's conclusive detennination of satisfactory Completion of the
Improvements covered by such Certificate of Compliance and compliance with all other conditions
required by the DDA, subject only to such continuing tenns of the DDA and/or obligations of the
Developer as are set forth therein.
5.
DDA and Memorandum of DDA Run With the Land.
Except as otherwise provided herein or in the DDA, the DDA and this Memorandum of DDA,
including, without limitation, the provisions recited and set forth above, and all other obligations,
agreements, covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth in the DDA and this Memorandum of DDA, are
hereby agreed by the Developer and the Agency to be covenants running with the land and enforceable as
equitable servitudes against the Developer Parcel, and are hereby declared to be and shall be binding upon
the Developer Parcel and the Developer and the successors and assigns of the Developer owning all or
any portion of the Developer Parcel for the benefit of the Agency and the successors and assigns of the
Agency.
6.
Acknowledgement and Assumption by Developer.
By acceptance of the Grant Deed the Developer hereby acknowledges and assumes all
responsibilities placed upon the Developer under the tenns of the Grant Deed and DDA.
170039.21
M,y 10.2004
7.
Public Documents.
The documents constituting the DDA are public documents and may be reviewed at the official
offices of the Agency.
8.
Interpretation; Notice.
This Memorandum of DDA is prepared for recordation and notice purposes only and in no way
modifies the tenns, conditions, provisions and covenants of the DDA. In the event of any inconsistency
between the tenns, conditions, provisions and covenants of this Memorandum of DDA and the DDA, the
tenns, conditions, provisions and covenants of the DDA shall prevail.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency and the Developer have signed this Memorandum of DDA
as of the date first set forth above.
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
Dated:
By:
William A. Huston, Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Legal Counsel for the Agency
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART
By:
Lois E. Jeffrey
Prospect Village, 12, a California Limited Partnership
Pelican-Tustin, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company,
General and Managing Partner
Dated:
By:
John H. Tillotson, Jr.
Member
By:
Daniel Howse
Member
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
9
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me,
Public in and for said state, personally appeared
, a Notary
, personally known to me (or proved
to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same in hislber authorized capacity, and that
by hislber signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person action,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
(SEAL)
170039.21
May 10. 2004
10
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
GRANT DEED
1700J9.21
M,y 10. 2004
Recording requested by and
when recorded mail to:
TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, California 92780
Attention: Assistant Executive Director
Space Above This Line Reserved for Recorder's Use
GRANT DEED
This GRANT DEED is made this - day of , 2004, by the TUSTIN
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the
laws of the State of California (the "GRANTOR"), in favor of PROSPECT VILLAGE LP, a California
limited partnership (the "GRANTEE").
RECITALS:
WHEREAS,
A. GRANTOR and GRANTEE entered into the Disposition and Development Agreement,
dated as of , 2004 ("DDA"), for the sale and development of the Grantor Property a
memorandum of which, entitled the "Memorandum of Disposition and Development Agreement" has been
executed by GRANTOR AND GRANTEE and recorded in the Official Records of the County of Orange,
California of even date with the recordation of this Grant Deed (the "Memorandum of DDA").
B. GRANTOR desires to convey and GRANTEE desires to acquire Grantor Property to
facilitate economic redevelopment in accordance with the Town Center Redevelopment Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantor, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release and forever Grant to the
GRANTEE, all of GRANTOR's right, title and interest in and to that certain real property, described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Developer Parcel").
1.
Parcel.
TOGETHER WITH all existing improvements, if any, presently located on the Developer
170039.21
May 10. 2004
2. SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING NOTICES, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS,
AND CONDITIONS, which shall be binding upon and enforceable against the Property and GRANTEE,
and its successors and assigns, in perpetuity:
2.1 The GRANTEE agrees to accept conveyance of the Property subject to all
covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, rights-of-way, reservations, rights, agreements and
encumbrances of record, including, without limitation, the DDA and the Memorandum of DDA.
2.2. As further set forth in the DDA, GRANTEE acknowledges that GRANTEE has
examined the Property and is buying the Property from GRANTOR in an "AS IS, WHERE IS, WITH
ALL FAULTS" condition, in its present state and condition and with all faults, which provisions shall
survive the close of escrow related to this transaction and do not merge with this Grant Deed.
2.3. The DDA imposes certain covenants, conditions and restrictions on the Developer
and the Property, including, without limitation, the Release contained in Section 4.5.2(c) of the DDA, and
certain non-discrimination covenants contained in Sections 12.3 and 12.4 of the DDA, and Section 13, Use
Restrictions for Live-Work Units, each of which is set forth verbatim below in italics and each of which is
hereby declared to be a covenant running with the land in perpetuity. Within the italicized language that
follows, certain tenns shall have the following meanings: the tenn "Developer" shall mean "GRANTEE";
the tenn "Agency" shall mean "GRANTOR"; the tenn "Closing Date" shall mean the date first set forth
above on this Grant Deed.
2.3.1
Release. Section 4.5.2( c) of the DDA provides as follows:
"(c) Release. Save and except for the covenants, representations and warranties of the
Agency and any other "Released Party" (as defined below in this Section) under this
Agreement, the Developer and any Person claiming by, through or under the Developer,
including all voluntary and involuntary successors of the Developer owning all or any
portion of the Developer Parcel ("Releasing Party"), hereby waives, as of the date of
execution of this Agreement and as of the Closing Date, its right to recover from, and
fully and irrevocably releases, the Agency and City of Tustin and their respective
officials, employees, agents, attorneys, affiliates, representatives, contractors, successors
and assigns (individually, a "Released Party", collectively, the "Released Parties ")from
any and all Claims that the Developer may now have or hereafter suffer or acquire for
any costs, losses, liabilities, damages, expenses, demands, actions or causes of action: (a)
arising from any information or documentation supplied by any of the Released Parties
("Due Diligence Information"); (b) arising from any condition of the Developer Parcel,
known or unknown by any Releasing Party or any Released Party; (c) arising from any
construction defects, errors, omissions or other conditions, latent or otherwise, including
environmental matters, as well as economic and legal conditions on or affecting the
Developer Parcel, or any portion thereof; (d) arising from the existence, Release,
threatened Release, presence, storage, treatment, transportation or disposal of any
Hazardous Materials at any time on, in, under, from, about or adjacent to the Developer
Parcel or any portion thereof; (e) by any Governmental Authority or any other third
170039.21
May 10. 2004
2
party arising from or related to any actual, threatened, or suspected Release of a
Hazardous Material on, in, under, from, about, or adjacent to the Developer Parcel, or
any portion thereof, including any Investigation or Remediation at or about the
Developer Parcel; provided, however, that the foregoing release by the Releasing Parties
shall not apply to the extent that any Claim is the result of the willful misconduct or fraud
of the Agency or their respective officials, employees, representatives, agents or
consultants arising after the Close of Escrow. This release includes Claims of which the
Developer is presently unaware or which the Developer does not presently suspect to
exist which, if known by the Developer, would materially affect the Developer's release
to the Released Parties. The Developer specifically waives the provision of California
Civil Code Section 1542, which provides as follows:
"A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO ClAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR
DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS FA VOR AT THE TIME OF
EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE
MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS SETfLEMENI WITH THE DEBTOR. "
In this connection and to the extent permitted by law, the Developer hereby agrees,
represents and warrants, which representation and warranty shall survive the Close of
Escrow and the termination of this Agreement and not be merged with the Grant Deed,
that the Developer realizes and acknowledges that factual matters now unknown to it
may have given or may hereafter give rise to Claims or controversies which are presently
unknown, unanticipated and unsuspected, and the Developer further agrees, represents
and warrants, which representation and warranty shall survive the Close of Escrow and
the termination of this Agreement and not be merged with the Grant Deed, that the
waivers and releases herein have been negotiated and agreed upon in light of that
realization and that the Developer, on behalf of itself and the other Releasing Parties,
nevertheless hereby intends to release, discharge and acquit the Released Parties from
any such unknown Claims and controversies which might in any way be included as a
material portion of the consideration given to the Agency by the Developer in exchange
for the Agency's peiformance hereunder.
BY INITIALIZING BELOW, DEVELOPER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT (A) IT HAS READ
AND FULLY UNDERSTANDS THE PROVISIONS THAT THIS SECTION, (B) IT HAS
HAD THE CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF ITS COUNSEL ABOUT ITS MEANING
AND SIGNIFICANCE, AND (C) IT HAS ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO THE TERMS
SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION.
AGENCY'S INITIALS
DEVELOPER'S INITIALS
This release shall run with the land as an equitable servitude and the Agency and all
owners and successor owners owning all or any portion of the Agency Benefited Property
and burdening the Developer Parcel and the owners and successor owners thereof and,
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
to further evidence its effectiveness with respect to successor owners of the Developer
Parcel, shall be included in its entirety in the Grant Deed. "
2.3.2 Definitions of Initiallv Capitalized Terms in Release Provisions. The DDA,
including Attachment No.2 thereto, sets forth the following definitions for the defined tenns contained in
the above Release:
"Claim" or "Claims" shall mean any and all claims, actions, causes of
action, demands, orders, or other means of seeking or recovering losses, damages,
liabilities, costs, expenses (including attorneys' fees, fees of expert witnesses, and
consultants' and court and litigation costs), costs and expenses attributable to
compliance with judicial and regulatory orders and requirements, fines, penalties, liens,
taxes, or any type of compensation whatsoever, direct or indirect, known or unknown,
foreseen or unforeseen.
"Closing" or "Close of Escrow" shall mean the point in time when the
Agency conveys fee title in the Developer Parcel to the Developer.
"Environmental Agency" shall mean the United States Environmental
Protection Agency; the California Environmental Protection Agency and all of its
sub-entities, including any Regional Water Quality Control Board, the State Water
Resources Control Board, the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the South Coast
Air Quality Management District, and the California Air Resources Board; the Agency;
any Fire Department or Health Department with jurisdiction over the Developer
Property; and/or any other federal, state, regional or local governmental agency or
entity that has or asserts jurisdiction over Hazardous Substance Releases or the
presence, use, storage, transfer, manufacture, licensing, reporting, permitting, analysis,
disposal or treatment of Hazardous Materials in, on, under, about, or affecting the
Project.
"Governmental Authority" shall mean any and all federal, state, county,
municipal and local governmental and quasi-governmental bodies and authorities
(including the United States of America, the State of California and any political
subdivision, public corporation, district, joint powers authority or other political or
public entity) or departments thereof having or exercising jurisdiction over the Parties,
the Project, the Developer Parcel, the Agency Dedication Parcels or such portions
thereof as the context indicates.
"Hazardous Substance ", "Hazardous Material", "Hazardous Waste ",.or "Toxic
Substance" under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act of 1980,42 U.S.c. subsection 9601, et sea., the Hazardous
MaterialsTransportation Act, 49 US. C subsection 5101, et seQ., or the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U. S.C. subsection 6901, et seQ.; an "Extremely
Hazardous Waste", a "Hazardous Waste", or a "Restricted Hazardous Waste", under
170039.2]
M.y 10. 2004
4
subsections 25115,25117, or 25122. 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, or is
listed or identified pursuant to subsection 25140 or 44321 of the California Health and
Safety Code; "Hazardous Material ", "Hazardous Substance ", "Hazardous Waste
", "Toxic Air Contaminant", or "Medical Waste" under subsections 25281,25316,25501,
25501.1, 117690 or 39655 of the California Health and Safety Code; "Oil" or a
"Hazardous Substance" listed or identified pursuant to Section 311 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.c. Section 1321, as well as any other hydrocarbonic
substance or byproduct; listed or defined as a "Hazardous Waste ", "Extremely
Hazardous Waste ", or an "Acutely Hazardous Waste" pursuant to Chapter 11 of Title
22 of the California Code of Regulations; listed by the State of California as a chemical
known by the State to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity pursuant to Section
25249.9(a) of the California Health and Safety Code; a material which due to its
characteristics or interaction with one or more other substances, chemical compounds,
or mixtures damages or threatens to damage, health, safety, or the environment, or is
required by any law or public agency to be remediated, including remediation which
such law or public agency requires in order for the property to be put to any lawful
purpose; any material whose presence would require remediation pursuant to the
guidelines set forth in the State of California Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Field
Manual, whether or not the presence of such material resulted from a leaking
underground fuel tank; pesticides regulated under the Feral Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.c. subsection 136 et sea.; asbestos, PCBs and other substances
regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 u.S.c. subsection 2601 et seq.; any
radioactive material including any "source material", "special nuclear material ", "by
product material ", "low-level wastes ", "high-level radioactive waste ", "spent nuclear
fuel" or "transuranic waste ", and any other radioactive materials or radioactive wastes,
however produced, regulated under the Atomic Energy Act, 42 U. S. C. subsection 2011
et sea., the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, 42 U. u.S.c. subsection 10101 et sea., or pursuant
to the California Radiation Control Law, California Health and Safety Code subsection
114960 et sea.; regulated under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S.C.
subsection 651 et sea., or the California Occupational Safety and Health Act, California
Labor Code subsection 6300 et sea.; and/or regulated under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.c.
subsection 7401 et sea. or pursuant to Division 26 of the California Health and Safety
Code.
"Investigation(s) " shall mean any observation, inquiry, examination, sampling
monitoring, analysis, exploration, research, inspection, canvassing, questioning, and/or
surveying of or concerning the Property or any adjacent or affected properties, including
the air, soil, surface water, and groundwater, and the surrounding population or
properties, or any of them, to characterize or evaluate the nature, extent or impact of
Hazardous Materials.
"Person" shall mean an individual, partnership, limited partnership, trust,
estate, association, corporation, limited liability company, joint venture, firm, joint stock
170039.2\
M,y 10. 2004
company, unincorporated association, Governmental Authority, governmental agency or
other entity, domestic or foreign.
"Release" (with respect to Hazardous Materials) shall mean any releasing, or
threat of releasing, spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging,
injecting, escaping, leaching, migrating, disposing, or dumping into the environment.
"Remediate" or "Remediation" shall mean any response or remedial action as
defined under Section 101(25) ofCERCLA, and similar actions with respect to
Hazardous Materials as defined under comparable state and local laws, and any other
cleanup, removal, containment, abatement, recycling, transfer, monitoring, storage,
treatment, disposal, closure, restoration or other mitigation or remediation of Hazardous
Materials or Releases required by any Environmental Agency or within the purview of
any Environmental Laws.
2.3.3 Non-Discrimination ReQuirements. Sections 12.3 and 12.4 of the DDA provide as
follows:
"12.3 Nondiscrimination and Equal ODDortunitv.
12.3.1 Obliflation to Refrain from Discrimination. The Developer covenants and
agrees for itself, its successors, its assigns and every successor in interest to the Developer Parcel
or any part thereof, there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person, or group
of persons, on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status,
national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use,. occupancy, tenure or
enjoyment of the Developer Parcel nor shall the Developer itself or any person claiming under or
through it establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with
reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants,
sublessees or vendees of the Developer Parcel.
12.3.2 Form of Nondiscrimination Clauses. All deeds, leases or
contracts shall contain or be subject to substantially the following non-discrimination
clauses:
(a) In deeds: "The grantee herein covenants by andfor itself, its
successors and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall
be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on
account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national
origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or
enjoyment of the land herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee itself or any person
claiming under or through it, establish or permit any such practice or practices of
discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or
occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sub lessees or vendees in the land herein
conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land. "
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
6
(b) In leases: "The lessee herein covenants by and for itself, its
successors and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, and this lease is
made and accepted upon and subject to the following conditions:
"That there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or
group of persons, on account rifrace, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation,
marital status, national origin or ancestry in the leasing, subleasing, renting,
transferring, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment rifthe land herein leased nor
shall lessee itself, or any person claiming under or through it, establish or permit
such practice or practices rif discrimination or segregation with reference to the
selection, location, number, use or occupancy riftenants, lessees, sublessees,
subtenants or vendees in the land herein leased. "
(c) In contracts: "There shall be no discrimination against or
segregation of any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion,
sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease,
sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the land, nor shall the
transferee itself or any person claiming under or through it,establish or permit any such
practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection,
location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sub lessees or
vendees of the land. "
2.3.4 Use Restrictions for Live-Work Units. Section 13 of the DDA provides as follows:
"13. Use Restriction for Live- Work Units. The Deeds for individual Live- Work
units shall contain restrictions that: (a) limit the use of the ground floor to retail uses for
units along Prospect Avenue; (b) limit the use of ground floor to retail/professional office
use for units along Prospect Lane; and (c) require owner / retail proprietor occupancy of all
floors of the unit for at least ten (10) units ("Restricted Units"). The unrestricted units shall
be located on Prospect Avenue and shall be identified by Developer on the Approved Plans
at the time of execution of this Agreement by Developer. Owners of Restricted Units may
obtain Agency and City approval to lease the retail portion of the Live- Work Unit, providing
the unit owner secures additional parking within 300 feet of the unit, as required by the
Tustin City Code based on the size and use of the ground floor retail/office space, as
applicable, and the additional parking is secured by a recorded instrument approved by
Agency Counsel that insures the availability of the parking in a manner similar to other
parking agreements approved by the City. These restrictions shall be binding on the
Purchaser and all subsequent Ownership Transferees, for the benefit of the Agency, it's
successors or assigns. The Agency shall approve the Deed for each Live- Work Unit prior to
Close of Escrow for each unit.
170039.21
May 10. 2004
7
3. The terms of this GRANT DEED, are hereby declared by GRANTEE and
GRANTOR to be covenants running with the land and enforceable as restrictions and equitable servitudes
against the Developer Parcel, and are hereby declared to be and shall be binding upon the Developer
Parcel and GRANTEE and the successors and assigns of GRANTEE owning all or any portion of the
Developer Parcel for the benefit of the GRANTOR and the successors and assigns of GRANTOR.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR, authorized officials of the TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY caused this Grant Deed to be executed on the day first above written.
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
Dated:
By:
William A. Huston, Executive Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Legal Counsel for the Agency
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART
By:
Lois E. Jeffrey
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF GRANTEE'S COVENANTS
TO INDICATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE of this Grant Deed and the
covenants and agreements contained in this Grant Deed, GRANTEE as executed this document on the
date written below.
Prospect Village, LP, a California Limited Partnership
Pelican-Tustin, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company,
General and Managing Partner
Dated:
By:
John H. Tillotson, Jr.
Member
By:
Daniel Howse
Member
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
STATE OF CALlFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me,
Public in and for said state, personally appeared
, a Notary
, personally known to me (or proved
to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same in his/her authorized capacity, and that
by his/her signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person action,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said State
(SEAL)
170039.21
M>y 10. 2004
9
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
<"'~ "
-w "
'u..' "
ste,^,art
~ title.of california
180 N. RIVERViEW DRIVE. SUITE 100 ANAHEIM CA 92808
TEL (714) 685-2320 FAX (714)685-2327
MEMBER CALIFORNIA LAND rmE ASSOCIATION
PRELIMINARY REPORT
PELICAN CENTER LLC
15272 Bolsa Chica Road
Huntington Beach CA 92649
Attn: Daniel Howse
Title Order No: 86-168696
Property Address: 191-195 E. Main Street, Tustin
In response to the above referenced application for a policy of title insurance. Stewart Title of California, Inc. hereby
reports that it IS prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a Stewart Title Guaranty Company
policy or policies of title insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring
against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an
exception below or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed schedules, conditIOns and stipulations of saId
policy forms.
The printed exceptions and exclusions from the coverage of said policy or policies are set forth in Exhibit A attached.
Copies of the policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report.
Please read the exceptions shown or referred to below and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Exhibit A
of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which
are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered.
It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title
and may not list all liens, defects, and encumbrances affecting title to the land.
This report (and any supplements or amendments thereto) IS issued solely for the purpose offac¡litating the issuance
of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the
issuance of a policy of title insurance, a binder or conunitment should be requested.
Dated as of March 3, 2004 at 7:30 a.m.
/7~~
( ~J.NO
Senior Title Officer
Direct Tel: (714) 685-2403
Fax: (714) 242-9914
ORDER NO. 86-168696
TITLE OFFICER: NANCY J. NOONAN
PRELIMINARY REPORT
The form of Policy of Title Insurance contemplated by this report is:
American Land Title Association Loan Policy
SCHEDULE A
The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred
to covered by this report is:
A fee
Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in:
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency,
a public body, corporate and politic
Continued on next page
-1-
ORDER NO: 86-168696
TITLE OFFICER: NANCY 1. NOONAN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The land referred to herein is situated in the State of California,
County of Orange, described as follows:
Parcell:
The East 155.00 feet of the North 162.50 feet of Block B of
Tract No.3, in the City of Tustin, County of Orange, State of
California, as shown on a map recorded in Book 9, Page 4, of
miscellaneous maps, records of Orange County, California.
Parcel 2:
The East 145.00 feet of the South 137.50 feet of Block B of
Tract No.3, as shown on a map recorded in Book 9, Page 4 of
miscellaneous maps, records of Orange County, California.
End of Legal Description
Continued on next page
-2-
ORDER NO. 86-168696
TITLE OFFICEK NANCY J. NOONAN
SCHEDULE B
At the date hereof, exceptions to coverage in addition to the
printed exceptions and exclusions contained in said policy or
policies would be as follows:
A. General and special City and/or County taxes for the fiscal year
2004-2005, a lien not yet payable.
B. General and Special City and/or County Taxes for the fiscal
year 2003-2004 have been paid. Amounts for pro-ration are:
1st installment $61.74, Paid
2nd installment $61.74, Paid
Code Area 13-049
Assessment No. 401-585-01
C. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to
the provisions of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 75) of
the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California.
1.
INTENTIONALLY DELETED
2. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights
incidental thereto as set forth in a document:
Purpose I conduits
Recorded in book 1450, page 130,
official records
Affects over Parcell and 2
(The specific location of said easement is not disclosed of
record) .
3. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights
incidental thereto as set forth in a document:
Purpose I public alley
Recorded October 4, 1962 in book 6272, page 871,
official records
Affects portion of Parcels 1 and 2
4. The matters
Entitled
upon the terms
Recorded
contained in an instrument:
I "Statement for a Redevelopment Project"
and conditions and covenants therein provided.
I November 29, 1976 in book 11976, page 35,
official records
5.
The matters contained in an instrument:
Continued on next page
-3-
ORDER NO. 86-168696
TITLE OFFICER: NANCY J. NOONAN
Entitled
I "Notice of Potentially Earthquake Hazardous
Building Is) "
and conditions and covenants therein provided.
I December 12, 1991
91-682975, official records
upon the terms
Recorded
Instrument No.
6. The matters
Entitled
upon the terms
Recorded
Instrument No.
contained in an instrument:
I "Certificate of Dangerous Building"
and conditions and covenants therein provided.
I November 30, 1992
92-816557, official records
7. prior to the issuance of any policy of title insurance, the
Company will require the following with respect to Pelican
Center, LLC, A California Limited Liability Company:
1. A copy of its operating agreement and any amendments
thereto must be submitted to the Company for review.
2. A certified copy of its articles of organization (LLC-1) ,
any certificate of correction ILLC-11) , certificate of
amendment ILLC-2) , or restatement of articles of
organization ILLC-10) must be submitted to the Company for
review.
3. With respect to any deed, deed of trust, lease, subordination
agreement or other document or instrument executed by such
limited liability company and presented to the Company for
recording or upon which the Company is asked to rely, such
document or instrument must be executed in accordance with
the following:
la) If the limited liability company properly operates through
officers appointed or elected pursuant to the terms of the
written operating agreement, such document or instrument
must be executed by at least two duly elected or appointed
officers as follows: the chairman of the board, the
president, vice president, and any secretary, assistant
secretary, the chief financial officer or any assistant
treasurer.
Ib) If the limited liability company properly operates through
a manager or managers identified in the articles of
organization and/or duly elected pursuant to the terms of a
written operating agreement, such document or instrument
must be executed by at least two such managers or by one
manager if the limited liability company properly operates
with the existence of only one manager.
4. Other requirements which the Company may impose
Continued on next page
-4-
ORDER NO. 86-168696
TITLE OFFICER: NANCY.T. NOONAN
following its review of the material required herein and
other information which the Company may require.
8. An inspection of this property will be made prior to
recording the trust deed to be insured. If such an inspection
discloses any evidence of commencement of a work of
improvement, either on-site or off-site, the coverage for
mechanic's lien insurance will be deleted from the policy,
unless all the necessary documentation for indemnification has
been formally approved by the Company, prior to the recording
of the Deed of Trust.
END OF EXCEPTIONS
Continued on next page
-5-
ORDER NO. 86-168696
TITLE OFFICER NANCY J. NOONAN
NOTES
1.
Basic Rate.
2. Title of the vestee shown herein was acquired by deed
recorded prior to six months from the date hereof.
3. An inspection of this property will be made prior to
recording the trust deed to be insured. If such an inspection
discloses any evidence of commencement of a work of
improvement, either on-site or off-site, the coverage for
mechanic's lien insurance will be deleted from the policy,
unless all the necessary documentation for indemnification has
been formally approved by the Company, prior to the recording
of the Deed of Trust.
4. Please be aware many lenders are now requiring any request
for up-dated information, confirmation of figures and the
pay-off check be from the title company to which the demand was
sent or which was noted on the demand as the title company in
the transaction. Therefor, this company will require any demands
for existing liens be directed to "Stewart Title of California,
Inc." or at least noted thereon as the title company that will
be insuring the proposed transaction. Please be sure such
demands also reference our order number as well as your escrow
number.
CC:
Tustin Community Redevelopment
3000 Centennial Way
Tustin CA 92780
ATTN: James Draughon
REF:
Continued on next page
-6-
ORDER NO. 86-168696
TITLE OFFICER, NANCY J. NOONAN
CALIFORNIA "GOOD FUNDS" LAW
California Insurance Code Section 12413.1 regulates the disbursement
of escrow and sub-escrow funds by title companies. The law requires
that funds be deposited in the title company escrow account and
available prior to disbursement. Funds received by Stewart Title of
California, Inc. (Stewart Title) via wire transfer may be disbursed
upon receipt. Funds received via cashier's checks or teller checks
drawn on a California Bank may be disbursed on the next business day
after the day of deposit. If funds are received by any other means,
recording and/or disbursement may be delayed, and you should contact
your title or escrow officer. All escrow and sub-escrow funds
received will be deposited with other escrow funds in one or more
non-interest bearing escrow accounts in a financial institution
selected by Stewart Title. Stewart Title may recieve certain direct
or indirect benefits from the financial institution by reason of the
deposit of such funds or the maintenance of such accounts with the
financial institution, and Stewart Title shall have no obligation to
account to the depositing party in any manner for the value of, or
pay to such party, any benefit received by Stewart Title. Such
benefits shall be deemed additional compensation to Stewart Title
for its services in connection with the escrow or sub-escrow.
-7-
:
~
~
THIS MAP IS FURNISHED AS A MATTER OF
ACCOMODATION ONLY, AND NO LlA81LI1Y IS
ASSUMED BY ITS AïTACHMENT TO THE
POLICY OF TfTI.E INSURANCE OF STEWART
TI1LE GUARANlY COMPANY.
53
)
, F11/ST
". '-"'~}
--------- --------
@ 0
--------- --------
..
--i
"'::
>¡¡;
~I~
~~~
:E!!r-
::¡:;:!~
::I:mm
~~~
)ii '"
~j~
~~~
"'o¡;;
" ."
m
'"
- '°!i1
~~hi
~~~
~ð~
z:Ecn
GJzm
~~~
~~¡:~
~ ¡!! ~~
n '" 0'
¡:¡~~
. ~t~
:iE-!:;
~~~
~;:.;
.."""
'" ,,~
;;;"'g
'" ~
h
¡!¡
i
@
@ ~~..
@
0
~@
-T-:; ;-..--~----~
~ ~ , >:::I
~ e < ':6-' =-;------
.... . n.'
r ' SEGCW
e"
@
e~
e À ..
(;)
e
'" ..'
~ !1 0+).
?<
to:¡
< - CID¡
G. ..
e -
~ ~ !
'" ~ ."
..
'"
-..¡
"
.
"
, 71ÐRD
",to.
e"""
ff¡¡~
-< '"
-<...'"
'i::~
SJ~~
,. ".
Ii"'"
"'¡¡;
~
"'j"
L ..2- UAU;
0
I
esc:ripti.oz;:: Dra..~ge, CA Assessor Map
rde::-: lôB595 Comment:
STIIEIT ~
~
~
l
14
~.t ~
: ~--B--~-'
T
0
e
STREõr
,-
- ~ ~ 1
------_.!..= "----'-- =,
L_§J__~y ._-----~ ~~ ~
'¡¡¡~"',0~""'¡
~.. Ì'< I!._-~- -~ ~
@¡:;,.~.& ~~[~
---- _J-
0~ ~',. < >:.
".~- --;:;-H ..
e ~ ð,
r. e
m.. "
e
~ n'
("¡ '"
.... ~
~
CID
IZI
?<
À
!8
n
~
~
~
STREU ,-1
, I ~~~IG
. I. I.
'"',
: ô~ i <:! ,
I I ~
lei ~
. IJ;!.", ~
:¡; '" I~"" ¡~
~1"' I
~" I
I 1"81
I Iô I
I I I
I I I
. " ,
1 I
"8' .
I '::,";. i. .
~ . ~
::¡
-L
\...1
)
.TRüT
401.5B Page: 1 of ~
(J¡
Ie
~
~
I~
ATTACHMENT NO.6
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
[PROSPECT VILLAGE PROJECT]
NOTE: References herein to "the Agreement" and "the DDA" mean the
Disposition and Development Agreement of which this Attachment No.6 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.
Action
1. Execution of A1!reement
A. Developer delivers executed DDA
and Attachments to Escrow.
B. Agency Executes DDA, "Effective
Date" ofDDA.
C. Agency delivers appropriate DDA
Attachments to Escrow for recordation.
2. AcQuisition of Site
A. Developer delivers evidence of
Developer's equity contribution funding
and ability to obtain financing pursuant to
Section 7.3.4 of the DDA.
B. Agency approves or disapproves
Developer's equity contribution funding
and financing commitments.
170039.21
Timing
Within 5 working days following action by
Agency on the DDA.
Within 3 working days following Developer's
execution of the DDA and Agency's approval
of Developer's evidence of equity funding and
ability to obtain construction financing.
Within 3 working days following execution by
Agency of the DDA.
Within 15 working days following execution by
Agency of the DDA.
Within 15 working days following Developer's
submission of evidence. of equity contribution
and financing commitments.
2
M,y 10. 2004
C. Developer obtains Title Insurance
Commitment.
D. Developer delivers signed Escrow
Instructions and deposits all funds
necessary to purchase the Site in Escrow.
E. Developer submits to Agency for
review and approval evidence of
satisfaction of conditions precedent
pursuant to of the DDA.
F. Agency approves or c1isapproves
Developer's submission of evidence of
satisfaction of conc1itions precedent
pursuant to of the DDA.
G. Escrow Closing Date
3. Citv Entitlement Approvals
A. Developer submits complete
Tentative Tract Map No. 16482, Concept
Design Plans and Rezone application with
related drawings and documents to the City
of Tustin.
B. City considers and approves
Tentative Tract Map No. 16482, Concept
Design Plans and Rezone application.
Within 15 working days following execution of
DDA by Agency.
Within 15 working dàys following action by
Agency on the DDA.
Within 30 working days following action by
Agency on the DDA.
Within 10 working days following Developer's
submission of evidence of satisfaction of
conditions precedent pursuant to Section 7.3 of
the DDA.
Within 5 working days after satisfaction of
Developer's and Agency's Closing Conditions.
Completed.
Prior to Close of Escrow.
C. City considers and approves issuance Prior to Close of Escrow.
of a Certificate of Appropriateness
pursuant to the Cultural Resources District
Regulations.
D. Developer submits complete Final
Tract Map application with related
drawings and documents to the City.
170039.21
Within 90 working days following Close of
Escrow.
2
M.y 10. 2004
E. City approves Final Tract Map.
F. Developer causes the recordation of
the Final Tract Map.
4. Buildinl! Permits for Project
Improvements
A. Developer submits construction
plans and related documents for Private
Improvements to City for issuance of
Building Permits.
B. Developer obtains building permits
for Private Improvements consistent with
any approved conditions.
C. Developer submits application for
demolition and clearance of the Site.
D. City issues permits for demolition
and clearance of the Site.
With 30 working days follow the later of (a)
Developer's complete submission and
completion of all City and County requested
corrections, (b) satisfaction by Developer of all
conditions to approval of the Final Map to the
satisfaction of City in its sole discretion.
Within 10 working days following approval of
the Final Tract Map by City.
Within 3 months following the execution of the
DDA.
Within 10 working days following Community
Development Department approval of
construction plans and related documents for
Private Improvements, and Developer's
payment of all applicable fees and satisfaction
of all required Performance Bonds.
Within 1 working day following issuance of
building permits for the Private Improvements.
With 3 working days following Developer
submission of application for demolition and
clearance ofthe Site and City's issuance of
Certificate of Appropriateness pursuant to the
Cultural Resources District Regulations.
E. Developer submits construction plans Within 4 month following the execution of the
and related documents for Public DDA.
Improvements to City for issuance of
Building Permits.
170039.21
May 10. 2004
F. Developer obtains building permits
for Public Improvements consistent with
any approved conditions.
5. Construction of Project
Imnrovements
A: Developer commences demolition
and clearance of the Site.
B. Developer completes demolition and
clearance of the Site.
C. Developer commences construction
of Private Improvements on the Project.
D. Developer completes construction of
Private Improvements on the Project.
E. Developer commences construction
of Public Improvements on the Project.
F. Developer completes construction of
Project Improvements.
170039.21
Within 10 working days following Engineering
Department approval of construction plans and
related documents for Private Improvements,
and Developer's payment of all applicable fees
and satisfaction of all required Performance
Bonds.
The later of 5 working days following issuance
of Demolition Permits by City, or 15 working
days following Close of Escrow.
Within 30 working days following issuance of
demolition permits by City.
Within 30 working days following issuance of
Building Permits and Related Approvals by the
City.
Within 18 months following issuance of
Building Permits and Related Approvals by the
City.
Within 8 months following issuance of Building
Permits and Related Approvals by the City.
Within twenty-four (24) months following the
issuance of Building Permits and Related
Approvals by the City.
4
M,y 10. 2004
6. Certificate of CoIDDliance.
A. Developer submits request for
issuance of a Certificate of Compliance by
Agency.
B. The Agency approves or disapproves
the request for issuance of a Certificate of
Compliance.
C. The Agency shall cause the
recordation of the Certificate of
Compliance in the Office of the County
Recorder of Orange County.
7. Release of Al!ency Retention
A. Developer shall submit a request for
disbursement of Agency Retention for the
Public Improvements pursuant to Section
4.4 of the Method of Financing
(Attachment 8).
B. Agency shall disburse theAgency
Retention amounts to Developer.
170039.21
Upon completion of all Project Improvements
and satisfaction of all conditions precedent set
forth in the DDA.
Within 10 working days following submission
of request for Certificate of Compliance and
satisfaction of all conditions precedent set forth
in the DDA.
Within 5 working days following issuance of
Certificate of Compliance by Agency.
With 10 working days following final
inspection of Public Improvements by City.
Within 35 working day following recordation of
a Notice of Completion by City.
5
M.y 10. 2004
ATTACHMENT NO.7
SCOPE OF DEVELOPMENT
[PROSPECT VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT]
NOTE References herein to "the Agreement" and "the DDA" mean the
Disposition and Development Agreement of which this Attachment No.7 is a
part; references to "Attachments" mean the Attachments to the DDA unless
otherwise specified. Except as otherwise noted, all capitalized tenns defined
within the DDA and the Attachments shall retain the meanings as defined in
the Disposition and Development Agreement.
1.0
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The existing Developer Parcel is located at 191 and 193-195 W. Main Street and is described in
Attachment No.1 of this DDA. The Developer Parcel is approximately 1.04 gross acres of which
approximately 4,891 square feet shall be dedicated in fee for right-of-way to the City of Tustin for the
public alley (the "Alley Dedication Area") situated along the westerly boundary of the Site leaving a net
site area of approximately 40,217 square feet (0.92 acres). The Developer Parcel shall be subdivided into
14 lots in accordance with the Developer's application for Tentative Tract Map No. 16481 and with
conditions approved by the Planning Commission and City Council.
2.0
DEVELOPER IMPROVEMENTS
2.1 Definition of Project Imvrovements. The Developer shall design and construct or cause to
be constructed on the Site all of the Project Improvements, including the Private Improvements and Public
Improvements set forth in this Scope of Development as approved by the Agency, Planning Commission,
and City Council. The Project Improvements shall consist of the following:
2.1.1 Private Imvrovements. Private Improvements located within the Developer Parcel
consisting of the demolition and clearance of existing site improvements including the structures at 191 and
193-195 Main Street and remaining concrete and asphalt paved suIfaces, and construction of a mixed-use
development to include restaurant, retail commercial, office and residential uses. Private Improvements
shall include, but not be limited to, buildings, architectural amenities, parking, landscape, hardscape,
utilities and infrastructure including all site grading, on-site private drives and walkways, on-site utilities
and connections to utilities in the public right-of-way including sewer, domestic water, electric, gas,
telephone, cable T.V., and telecommunications. The Private Improvements shall contain a two story
commercial building fronting on Main Street ("Main Street Commercial Building") of approximately
9,887 square feet (gross building area) and twelve detached live-work residential units. The Private
Improvements are more specifically comprised of the following:
(a). A 8,589 square-foot (leasable area) two story commercial building fronting
along Main Street between Prospect A venue on the east and a public alley on the west having a minimum
170039.21
May 10. 2004
3.000 square-foot of restaurant use reflecting a quality food and fine dinning establishment plus an
approximately 593 square-foot out door dining patio, approximately 773 square feet of additional ground
floor retail (or restaurant space) and approximately 4,816 square feet of second floor office uses;
(b). Twelve (12) detached owner-occupied live-work residential units (ten (10) of
which shall be restricted to owner-proprietor occupancy except as provided in Section 13 of the DDA),
with 6 units each having two levels of residential above 913 square feet of ground floor retail space facing
on Prospect A venue and 6 units each having two levels of residential above a 431 square feet of ground
floor retail or office space facing on Prospect Lane, and the all interior streets, drives, walkways and
common area improvements including, but not limited to, hardscape and landscape improvements for
interior courtyards, planting areas and common area walls, fences and gates; and,
(c). On-site parking for the Project to consist of two garage spaces per each live
work unit and three additional guest parking for the live work units located off a private drive/auto court to
be accessed from Prospect Lane, and three on-site parking spaces to serve the Main Street commercial
building along with fifty-nine (59) off-site parking spaces which are to be provided at the adjacent Tustin
Water yard under a non-exclusive parking license agreement between the Developer and the City of Tustin.
2.1.2 Public Improvements. Public Improvements located adjacent to the Developer Parcel
(after dedication in fee of the Alley Dedication Area to the City) within the public right-of-way and public
alley around the Developer Parcel perimeter to be constructed of a quality consistent with the Project's
design and construction requirements shall include the following:
(a). Construction of full improvements to the public alley to the west of the
Developer Parcel, including within the Alley Dedication Area, decorative pavement, lighting, pedestrian
amenities and drainage improvements.
(b). Construction of full widening and improvements to west side of Prospect
Avenue between Main Street and Third Street including enriched sidewalk paving, intersection
enhancements and enhanced paving at pedestrian bump-outs at the Prospect Avenue intersections at Main
Street and Third Street.
(c). Additional improvements within the public right-of-way immediately
abutting the Developer Parcel along Main Street and Third Street and as delineated in Exhibit A - Project
Plans attached hereto.
(d). Undergrounding on the Developer Parcel, the Alley Dedication Area, and
within public right-of-way adjacent to the Developer Parcel of all overhead utility poles and lines.
(e). The scope of work for design and construction shall include all surveying,
rough and precise grading, export/import of dirt as required, asphalt paving including any necessary
overlays, driveways, concrete sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and traffic control striping and signage, or light
pole relocations, and other work to construct improvements in accordance with Tustin City Standards.
170039.21
2
Mav 10 2004
. 2.1.3 Land Use entitlement approvals for the Project Improvements as delineated in the
Project Plans (Exhibit A) shall be obtained within the time periods established in the Schedule of
Perfonnance (Attachment No.6), and pursuant to Agency approval, and City of Tustin approvals through
the Tustin Planning Commission and Tustin City Council.
2.1.4 Compliance with all "Conditions of Approval" in a resolution or resolutions by an
applicable governmental agency having jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, the Planning
Commission and City Council approvals identified above.
2.1.5 Compliance with all provisions of the Agreement.
2.2 Schedule of Performance. The Developer shall commence and complete the Project
Improvements by the respective deadlines established in the Schedule of Perfonnance (Attachment No.6).
3.0
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
3.1
Approval of Plans
3.1.1 The Project Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the
Project Plans (Exhibit "A") attached hereto, as they may be approved or modified by the Planning
Commission, City Council, and Agency so that the commercial buildings and live-work residential building
will have a first-class architectural quality and character, both individually and in the context of the
surrounding Tustin Old Town commercial area. All public spaces and parking areas shall be designed,
landscaped and developed with the same degree of quality. Particular attention shall be paid to enhancing
pedestrian activities, including the provision of an outdoor patio dining area for the restaurant, minimizing
mass, scale and bulk, and to the selection of color and materials. The Agency and the Developer will
cooperate and direct their consultants, architects and/or engineers to cooperate so as to ensure the
continuity and coordination necessary for the proper and timely completion of all Project Improvements.
3.1.2 All of the Project Improvements shall confonn to all applicable federal, state, county
and city codes and regulations including, the requirements of the Town Center Redevelopment Plan, the
Tustin City Code, and the conditions of City Council and Planning Commission resolutions.
3.1.3 The Developer acknowledges the responsibility to obtain any approvals required by
any governmental agency, utility or other agency, including the City, which has jurisdiction over all or any
portion of the Project Improvements. All "Conditions of Approval" stipulated by an applicable
jurisdiction shall be incorporated into the final design and noted in the construction documents by the
architects, engineers and other consultants. The Developer or Developer's contractor shall make all
necessary applications by such time(s) as will be consistent with the timely commencement and completion
of various portions of the Project Improvements by the respective times established therefore by the
Schedule ofPerfonnance (Attachment No.6).
3.2
Approval of Retail Leases
3.2.1 The Retail Restaurant Lease for a specific Retail Restaurant Tenant shall require the
prior written consent of the Agency. The Developer shall submit to the Agency all documentation, as well
170039.21
May 10 2004
as all other materials necessary for the Agency's review of such proposed Retail Restaurant Lease(s) (such
materials to include the Retail Lease agreement(s) and all ancillary documents thereto, including any
guaranties, work letters, subleases, option agreements and the like, as well as current financial statements
or similar infonnation for the proposed Tenant). The Agency shall have a period of ten (10) working days
from the date of its receipt from Developer of all the foregoing materials in which to approve or
disapprove, the Agency's sole discretion, such Retail Restaurant Lease(s), provided however, that the
Agency shall not unreasonably withhold its consent if the following condition are met:
(a). All of the documents and materials required by this Section 3.2.1 are
provided in fonn and substance required by Section 3.2.1;
(b). The proposed Retail Restaurant Lease(s) provides for the improvement and
operation of a minimum three thousand (3,000) square feet restaurant use which is/are high quality
restaurant(s) as identified in this Scope of Development, and the Tenant(s) has sufficient financial
creditworthiness, restaurant experience and market strength to operate properly such proposed high quality
restaurant use and maintain its Retail Restaurant space(s) and pay for its share of common area
maintenance costs;
(c). The Developer has previously delivered to the Agency preliminary building
improvement plans and elevations satisfactory to the Agency, with respect to the intended exterior and
interior improvements for the Retail Restaurant(s) and evidence of financing for such construction of the
improvement in accordance with the tenns of the DDA.
3.2.2 If the Agency has not approved or disapproved a Retail Restaurant Lease(s), meeting
the requirements of the foregoing clauses (a.) through (c.) within the ten (10) working day period,
Developer may send notice to the Agency requesting the Agency's action, and if the Agency has not
approved or disapproved such Retail Restaurant Lease(s), with five (5) working days of its receipt of
Developer's notice, the Retail Restaurant Lease(s) shall be deemed to be approved by the Agency. The
foregoing deemed approval provisions do not apply to any Retail Restaurant Lease(s), which does not meet
each of the requirements set forth in clauses (a.) through (c.).
4.0
CHANGES TO APPROVED PROJECT PLANS
If the Developer desires to make any changes to the Project Plans approved by the Agency,
Planning Commission and the City Council, the Developer shall submit the proposed change(s) to the
Agency and City for approval. Such changes shall be reviewed in the context of the purpose of the DDA
and applicable provisions of the Tustin City Code, and shall be approved or disapproved by the Agency
and City.
170039.21
4
May 10 2004
EXHffiIT A
PROJECT PLANS
1700'9 "
',m"" 19 2004
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
METHOD OF FINANCING
[PROSPECT VILLAGE PROJECT]
NOTE: References herein to "the Agreement" and "the DDA" mean the
Disposition and Development Agreement of which this Attachment No.8 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.
1.0
PROJECT BUDGET AND FINANCING SOURCES AND DEFINITIONS
1.1 In General. The acquisition of the Developer Parcel from the Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agency by the Developer, and construction of the Project Improvements is intended to be
financed as provided in this Method of Financing. (The acquisition of the Developer Parcel and the
construction of the Private Improvements and Public Improvements are collectively referred to herein as
"the Project.") The "Project Budget", which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, estimates the Total Project
Costs (as defined in Section 1.2 below), to be Nine Million, Six Hundred Forty-One Thousand Two
Hundred Seventy-Five Dollars ($9,641,275), which includes: (a) Eight Million Seven Hundred Sixty-One
Thousand Two Hundred Seventy-Five Dollars ($8,761,275) for Private Improvements; and (b) Eight
Hundred Eighty Thousand Dollars ($880,000) for Public Improvements as described in the Scope of
Development, Attachment 7. Funding of the Total Project Costs will be generally as follows:
1.1.1 "Conventional Construction Loan" (as defined in Section 1.2.4 below) in an
approximate amount of Six Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($6,500,000);
1.1.2 "Developer Equity" (as defined in Sections 2.1 and 2.2 herein) in an amount not
less than One Million, Two Hundred Fifty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty-Five Dollars ($1,255,825);
1.1.3 "Agency Assistance" (as defined in Section 1.2.1 below) in an amount to be paid by
Agency for the actual costs of construction of the Public Improvements up to Eight Hundred Eighty
Thousand Dollars ($880,000).
1.2
Definitions
1.2.1 "Agency Assistance" shall mean the amount to be funded by the Agency to assist
Developer in constructing the Public Improvements for the Project.
1700,.11
J,"",~ '0 7004
1.2.2 "Conventional Construction Loan" shall mean a construction loan made by a
Permitted Mortgagee ("Permitted Mortgage") to finance Project Costs as more particularly described in
Section 2.3 below.
1.2.3 "Developer Equity" shall mean all cash equity made available by the Developer to
fund Project Costs consisting of the Developer's Cash Equity Contribution, and any costs overruns,
excluding any proceeds from a Permitted Mortgage.
1.2.4 "Total Project Costs" shall mean all reasonable and necessary cost and expenses for
Project Improvements (consisting of the Private Improvements and the Public Improvements) incurred by
Developer prior to issuance of a Certificate of Compliance and solely in connection with the acquisition,
planning, design, construction, improvement, development and equipping of the Project, which costs are
enumerated in Exhibit "A" - Project Budget.
1.2.5 "Private Improvement Cost" shall be defined to include all costs incuITed in
connection with the construction of the Private Improvements located on the Developer Parcel, including
such Project Costs enumerated in Exhibit "A" which are reasonably allocated to the restaurant, retail
commercial, office and residential live-work units building construction work.
1.2.6 "Public Improvement Cost" shall mean be defined to include all actual costs
incuITed in connection with the construction of the Public Improvements located outside the Developer
Parcel within the public right-of-way, as delineated on the Project Plans (Exhibit A to Scope of
Development (Attachment 7)), including the Alley Dedication Area (prospect Lane) improvements, the
half-width improvements to Prospect A venue and the enriched paving for the sidewalks around the Project,
as more particularly described in Section 3.2 below.
2.0
DEVELOPER FUNDING
2.1 Developer's Cash EQuitv Contribution. "Developer's Cash Equity Contribution" shall
be in an amount not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000). Developer's Cash Equity Contribution
shall be used to fund Project Costs. On or before the date set forth in the Schedule of Perfonnance
(Attachment No.6), Developer shall establish a separate bank account or third-party escrow account
approved by Agency. The account shall contain the Developer's Cash Equity Contribution (Developer's
Equity Account). The Developer's Equity Account shall remain under the control of the Developer, who
shall earn all interest on the Developer's Cash Equity Contribution. The Developer may finance the
Developer's Cash Equity Contribution and shall be permitted to accrue interest at a rate not to exceed 9.0%
per year simple interest, less any interest eamed thereon, on the financed amount remaining unpaid through
the sale of the individual live-work housing units. The Developer's Cash Equity Contribution and such
financing thereof shall not in any manner be an encumbrance on the Developer Parcel. The Developer
shall provide the Agency with a regular accounting through the draw down process showing the amount of
money drawn from the Developer's Equity Account, the purpose for which it was spent and the date on
which it was spent.
The maximum 9.0% simple interest accruals on Developer's Cash Equity Contribution and on any
additional cash equity contributions made by Developer's partners, shall be counted as Finance Costs for
the purposes of Exhibit "A" - Project Budget.
170"" "
2
',m"" 19 2004
2.2 Developer's Deferred EQuitv. "Developer's Deferred Equity" shall be an amount not to
exceed the greater of: (i) 3.25% of Total Project Costs, or (ii) Two Hundred Fifty-Five Thousand Eight
Hundred Twenty-Five Dollars ($255,825) for General and Administrative Overhead costs identified as a
portion of the Project Costs.
2.3 Conventional Construction Loan. Developer shall obtain a Conventional Construction
Loan from a Pennitted Mortgagee in an approximate amount Six Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
($6,500,000). The Conventional Construction Loan shall be funded and disbursed as provided in the
construction loan agreement between the Developer and the Peanitted Mortgagee.
3.0
AGENCY ASSISTANCE
3.1 Amount of Assistance. Subject to the satisfaction of conditions precedent as described in
Section 7.3 of the DDA, the Agency shall provide up to Eight Hundred Eighty Thousand Dollars
($880,000) to assist Developer in the construction of Public hnprovements to be disbursed in accordance
with the following:
3.2. $330,000 Disbursal. Agency shall disburse up to Three Hundred Thirty Thousand Dollars
($330,000) in the following increments: an amount equal to ninety percent (90%) of each draw request
approved by the Agency and City Engineer for actual costs incurred in connection with the construction of
the public alley improvements ("Prospect Lane") between Main Street and Third Street and the other
improvements within the public right-of way around the Site (as more particularly described in the Scope
of Development (Attachment No.7), retaining a 10% amount for Agency Retention as described in Section
4.2 below to secure completion. Payment requests will come from the Developer and be in the foan
described in Section 4 below.
3.3 $550,000 Disbursal, Agency shall disburse up to Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars
($550,000) in the following increments: an amount equal to ninety percent (90%) of each construction
draw approved by the City Engineer for the actual construction costs incuITed in the construction of the
Prospect Avenue half-width improvements between Main Street and Third Street (as more particularly
described in the Scope of Development (Attachment No.7), retaining a 10% amount for Agency Retention
as described Section 4.2 below to secure completion. Payment requests will come from the Developer and
be in the foan described in Section 4 below.
4.0
DISBURSEMENT PROVISIONS
4.1 Pavment Requests. Developer shall submit to the Agency, not more frequently than every
thirty (30) days, a request for payment ("Payment Request") for the actual costs incuITed for construction
of the Public hnprovements, which request shall be accompanied by a "Certified Pay Roll" in a foan
approved by the City Engineer, materials and contractor lien releases for the Public hnprovements work
component completed, and other supporting documentation reasonably requested to evidence costs and
expenses incuITed by or on behalf of the Developer in connection with the Project for the immediately
preceding Payment Request period and which costs the Agency has a funding obligation pursuant to the
DDA. Developer's request shall not include a request for payment of any retention amounts that are to be
withheld by Developer from contractors.
"no" 11
¡"","', " 2004
4.2 Al!ency Retention. The Agency will withhold ten percent (10%) from each request for
disbursement from the Agency's Public Improvement Funding under Section 3.0 above ("Agency
Retention") until aU of the Public Improvements on the Project have been completed and the Certificate of
Compliance has been issued in accordance with Section 9.6 of the DDA.
4.3 Al!ency Review and Disbursements. The Agency and City Engineer shall review each
Payment Request to determine whether the items for which payment is requested are consistent with the
DDA and may request additional supporting documentation, including receipts, invoices or purchase
orders, if reasonably necessary to substantiate the Payment Request. The Agency shall provide to the
Developer the Agency's approval or disapproval of such Payment Request within ten (10) working days
following the submission thereof by the Developer. In the event the Agency either fails to grant approval
or indicate disapproval of such Payment Request within said ten-day period, the Agency shall be deemed to
have approved the Payment Request in its entirety. The Agency shall have the right to disapprove only
such portions of the Payment Request which are inconsistent with Agency funding obligations under the
Agreement, or if as part of the Payment Request submitted to the Agency, the Developer has failed to
fumish documentation evidencing that payments are due for disbursement. If the Agency disapproves of
all or any portion of the Payment Request, the Agency shall provide the Developer with a written notice of
disapproval within said ten-day period, said written notice shall specify those items disapproved by the
Agency. If the Agency disapproves all or any portion of the Payment Request, the parties shall, within two
working days following Developer's receipt of such written disapproval, meet and confer in food faith in
order to resolve any disputed items. Within 30 calendar days following approval or deemed approval of
the Payment Request by the Agency, the Agency shall disburse to Developer funds in the amount of the
Payment Request, less such portion of the Payment Request disapproved by the Agency as provided herein
above.
4.4 Retention Disbursement. The Developer shall submit a written request to the Agency
requesting the disbursement of the Agency Retention upon issuance of the Certificate of Acceptance for the
Public Improvements by the City. Within thirty (30) working days of approval of such request, the Agency
shall disburse such retention amount to Developer.
5.0
GENERAL TERMS OF FINANCING DEVELOPMENT
The Developer acknowledges that the Total Project Costs may exceed the amounts set forth in
Exhibit "A" - Project Budget. Accordingly, Developer shall bear all costs in excess of the subtotal amounts
for Private Improvements and for Public Improvements set forth in Exhibit "A". Notwithstanding the
foregoing, however, to the extent that any of the Project Costs shown on Exhibit "A" - Project Budget,
other than the General Administrative and Overhead Costs which are capped at higher of 3.25% of Total
Project Costs or $316,000, exceed the respective amount shown on Exhibit "A" - Project Budget, such
excess shall be taken into account in determining Developer's profit under Section 5.0 above, and in
determining any Agency profit-sharing pursuant to that Section.
]700" "
4
],mmN 19 2004
EXHffiIT - "A"
to
METHOD OF FINANCING
PROJECT BUDGET
Private Improvement Cost
Land Acquisition Cost
$
855,000
Land Development Cost
Residential Unit Construction Cost
$ 748,291
$ 5,189,700
Indirect Construction Cost:
Marketing and Sales
Finance Costs
General Administrative
$ 532,370
$ 730,089
$ 450,000
$ 255,825
Subtotal Private Improvement Cost
$ 8,761,275
Public Improvement Cost
Subtotal Public Improvement Cost
$ 880,000
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
$ 9,641,275
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
ATTACHMENT NO.9
FORM OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
300 CENTENNIAL WAY
TUSTIN, CA 92780-3767
A'ITENTION: ASSIST ANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
No fee for recording requested pursuant to
Government Code Sections 6103 and 27383
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
[For Prospect Village Project]
THIS CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ("Certificate of Compliance") is made as of
, 200- by the TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("Agency"), in
favor of PROSPECT VILLAGE LP, a California limited partnership (the "Developer"), with reference to the
following matters:
A. The Agency and the Developer have entered into that certain Disposition and Development
Agreement dated as of ,2004 (the "DDA"), which is incorporated herein by reference, as
evidenced by that certain Memorandum of Disposition and Development Agreement ("Memorandum of DDA"),
dated for reference as of ,2004, and recorded in the official records of Orange County,
Califomia. AIl initially capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to them in
the DDA.
B. Pursuant to the DDA, the Developer agreed to develop and construct certain Improvements
comprising the Project, as defined in the DDA, on that certain real property (the "Developer Parcel") described on
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
C. Pursuant to Section 9 of the DDA, the Agency agreed to furnish to the Developer, upon request
there for by the Developer, a Certificate of Completion in recordable form upon satisfaction of the Conditions
Precedent to issuance of a Certificate of Compliance set forth in Section 9.6 of the DDA relating to all of the
Improvements for the Project (including, without limitation, completion of all Improvements for the Project in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the DDA).
D. The Agency has determined that the Developer has satisfied the Conditions Precedent set forth in
Section 9.6.2 of the DDA for the Agency's issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Agency certifies as follows:
I. This Certificate of Compliance covers and applies to the entirety of the Improvements and Project as
defined above, (the "Certified Improvements").
170039.21
'M,yI0.2004
2. This Certificate of Compliance shall be deemed conclusive evidence of the Agency's determination
that the Developer has satisfactorily Completed all construction and development with respect to the Project and
performed all of the Developer's obligations set forth in Section 9.6 of the DDA for issuance of this
Certificate.
3. Upon recordation of this Certificate, the DDA shall terminate and shall be of no further force and
effect as to, and only as to, the Certified Improvements (including that portion of the Developer Parcel upon which
the Certified hnprovements are constructed), except that the following provisions of the DDA, which, except for
those documents listed in Section 3(c) below, are set forth in detail in the Grant Deed and/or the Memorandum of
DDA, shall survive the termination thereof and shall not merge with any deed on any transfer of any portion of the
Developer Parcel, and shall survive the issuance of this Certificate of Compliance and all future Certificates of
Compliance in perpetuity:
(a) the provisions of Section 4.5.2, including the Release set forth in Section 4.5.2(c) of the DDA;
(b) the covenants set forth in Sections 12.3 through 12.4 of the DDA;
(c) the environmental indemnity set forth in Section 10.2 of the DDA which shall remain in effect
and shall bind the Developer and its personal successors and assigns but shall not be binding upon Owner-Occupiers
of Live-Work Units; and
(d) the use restrictions set forth in Section 13 of the DDA.
4. This Certificate of Compliance shall not constitute evidence of compliance with or satisfaction of
any obligation of the Developer to any holder of a mortgage, or deed of trust or any insurer of a mortgage, or deed of
trust securing money loaned to finance the hnprovements or any part thereof.
5.
Section 3093.
This Certificate of Compliance is not a Notice of Completion as referred to in California Civil Code
6. Except as stated herein, nothing contained in this instrument shall modify in any way any other
provisions of the DDA or any other provisions of the documents incorporated herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency has caused this Certificate of Compliance to be duly executed by
its officer duly authorized as of the date first above written.
TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Dated:
By:
Name:
Title:
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me,
Public in and for said state, personally appeared
, a Notary
,personally known to me (or proved
to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same in hislher authorized capacity, and that
by hislher signature on the instrument, the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person action,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(SEAL)
170039.21
M,y 10. 2004
EXHIBIT "Au
DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPER PARCEL
[TO BE ATTACHED]
170039.21
May 10. 2004
ATTACHMENT NO. 10
FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS
Federal Grant Requirements
The following is a summary of relevant federal grant requirements found in 24CFR85.36. For a full and
complete description of the requirements please refer to the latest version of 24CFR85.36.
1.
The work shall be procured bv a sealed bid (formal advertising)
Bids are publicly solicited and a firm-fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the
responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for
bids, is the lowest in price.
The following requirements apply:
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)
The invitation for bids will be publicly advertised and bids shall be solicited from an
adequate number of known suppliers, providing them sufficient time prior to the date set for
opening the bids;
The invitation for bids, which will include any specifications and pertinent attachments,
shall define the items or services in order for the bidder to properly respond;
All bids will be publicly opened at the time and place prescribed in the invitation for bids;
A firm fixed-price contract award will be made in writing to the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder. Where specified in bidding documents, factors such as discounts,
transportation cost, and life cycle costs shall be considered in determining which bid is
lowest. Payment discounts will only be used to determine the low bid when prior experience
indicates that such discounts are usually taken advantage of; and
Any or all bids may be rejected if there is a sound documented reason.
2.
The sub grantee will take all necessarv affirmative steps to assure that minoritv firms, women's
business enterprises. and labor surplus area firms are used when possible:
Affirmative steps shall include:
(A)
170039.21
Placing qualified small and minority businesses and women's business enterprises on
solicitation lists;
May 10. 2004
3.
4.
5.
110039.21
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)
(F)
Assuring that small and minority businesses, and women's business enterprises are solicited
whenever they are potential sources;
Dividing total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or quantities to
permit maximum participation by small and minority business, and women's business
enterprises;
Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirement permits, which encourage
participation by small and minority business, and women's business enterprises;
Using the services and assistance of the Small Business Administration, and the Minority
Business Development Agency of the Department of Commerce; and
Requiring the prime contractor, if subcontracts are to be let, to take the affirmative steps
listed in paragraphs (e)(2) (i) through (v) of this section.
An independent cost estimate before soliciting bids is reQuired.
Contract cost and price. (I) Grantees and subgrantees must perform a cost or price analysis in
connection with every procurement action including contract modifications. The method and
degree of analysis is dependent on the facts sUITounding the particular procurement situation, but as
a starting point, grantees must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals.
The Independent Cost Estimate and Invitations for Bid must be reviewed bv the Agencv; if
requested bv Agencv. when:
(A)
(B)
(C)
A grantee's or subgrantee's procurement procedures or operation fails to comply with the
procurement standards in this section; or
The proposed award is to be awarded to other than the apparent low bidder under a sealed
bid procurement; or
A proposed contract modification changes the scope of a contract or increases the contract
amount by more than $100,000.
Bonding Requirements:
(A)
A bid guarantee from each bidder equivalent to five percent of the bid price. The "bid
guarantee" shall consist of a firm commitment such as a bid bond, certified check, or other
negotiable instrument accompanying a bid as assurance that the bidder will, upon
acceptance of his bid, execute such contractual documents as may be required within the
time specified.
M,y 10. 2004
2
6.
170039.21
(B)
(C)
A perfonnance bond on the part of the contractor for 100 percent of the contract price. A
"perfonnance bond" is one executed in connection with a contract to secure fulfillment of
all the contractor's obligations under such contract.
A payment bond on the part of the contractor for 100 percent of the contract price. A
"payment bond" is one executed in connection with a contract to assure payment as
required by law of all persons supplying labor and material in the execution of the work
provided for in the contract.
Required Contract Provisions:
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)
(F)
(0)
(H)
Administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where contractors violate or
breach contract tenns, and provide for such sanctions and penalties as may be appropriate.
Tennination for cause and for convenience by the grantee or subgrantee including the
manner by which it will be effected and the basis for settlement. (All contracts in excess of
$10,000)
Compliance with Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, entitled "Equal
Employment Opportunity," as amended by Executive Order 11375 of October 13, 1967, and
as supplemented in Department of Labor regulations (41 CFR chapter 60). (All construction
contracts awarded in excess of $10,000 by grantees and their contractors or subgrantees)
Compliance with the Copeland "Anti-Kickback" Act (18 V.S.C. 874) as supplemented in
Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part 3). (All contracts and subgrants for
construction or repair)
Compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act (40 V.S.C. 276a to 276a- 7) as supplemented by
Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part 5). (Construction contracts in excess of
$2000 awarded by grantees and subgrantees when required by Federal grant program
legislation)
Compliance with Sections 103 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards
Act (40 US.C. 327-330) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part
5). (Construction contracts awarded by grantees and subgrantees in excess of $2000, and in
excess of $2500 for other contracts which involve the employment of mechanics or
laborers)
Notice of awarding agency requirements and regulations pertaining to reporting.
Notice of awarding agency requirements and regulations pertaining to patent rights with
respect to any discovery or invention which arises or is developed in the course of or under
such contract.
M,y 10. 2004
(I)
(J)
(K)
(L)
(M)
170039.21
A warding agency requirements and regulations pertaining to copyrights and rights in data.
Access by the grantee, the subgrantee, the Federal grantor agency, the Comptroller General
of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives to any books,
documents, papers, and records of the contractor which are directly pertinent to that specific
contract for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions.
Retention of all required records for three years after grantees or sub grantees make final
payments and all other pending matters are closed.
Compliance with all applicable standards, orders, or requirements issued under section 306
of the Clean Air Act (42 V.S.C. 1857(h», section 508 of the Clean Water Act (33 V.S.C.
1368), Executive Order 11738, and Environmental Protection Agency regulations (40 CPR
part 15). (Contracts, subcontracts, and sub grants of amounts in excess of $100,000).
Mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the
state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (Pub. L. 94-163, 89 Stat. 871).
May 10. 2004
4
ATTACHMENT C
Minutes of April 26, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting
and Submitted Comment Letters
ITEM #1
7:04 p.m.
MINUTES
TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 P.M.
APRIL 26, 2004
CALL TO ORDER
Given
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
All present
ROLL CALL
None
Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director
Christine A. Shingleton, Assistant City Manager
Lois E. Jeffrey, City Attorney
Jason Retterer, Deputy City Attorne
Jim Draughon, Redevelopment Pr
Doug Anderson, Senior Project
Steve Sasaki, Consultant
Minoo Ashabi, Associate
Eloise Harris, Recordin
Staff present
Plaque presented
to Linda Jennings
by Chair Amante
ks; and, stated her time on the
he most educational experiences
art was becoming friends with the various
m she served.
Approved
ROVAL OF MINUTES - APRIL 12, 2004, PLANNING
MMISSION MEETING.
It moved by Pontious, seconded by Menard, to approve the
Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Adopted
Resolution Nos.
3910,3911,3912,
3913,3914,3915
2.
ZONE CHANGE 03-002, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16481,
DESIGN REVIEW 03-012, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
03-012, AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY FINDING
FOR DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY REQUESTING: 1)
SUBDIVISION OF A 1.036 ACRE PARCEL INTO
THIRTEEN (13) NUMBERED LOTS AND ONE (1)
LETTERED LOT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A
COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND TWELVE (12)
RESIDENTIAL LlVEIWORK UNITS; 2) ZONE CHANGE
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 1
TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED COMMUNITY AND
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS; 3)
DEVELOPMENT OF AN APPROXIMATELY 9,300
SQUARE FOOT (8,589 SQUARE FEET LEASABLE
AREA) RESTAURANT, RETAIL, AND OFFICE BUILDING
AND TWELVE (12) MIXED USE (LlVEIWORK) UNITS
WITH RETAIL AND OFFICE USES ON THE GROUND
FLOOR AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES ON
THE UPPER FLOORS; 4) APPROVAL OF A REDUCTION
IN OFF-STREET PARKING IN ACCORDANCE WITH
TUSTIN CITY CODE SECTION 9271aa AND AN
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE OFF-SITE PARKING IN
ACCORDANCE WITH TUSTI CITY CODE SECTION
9252; AND, 5) AUTHORI N TO SELL ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES IN CON ON WITH A FUTURE
RESTAURANT USE I OMMERCIAL BUILDING
ON LOT 1 OF TE T MAP 167481 (ABC
LICENSE TYPE" . THIS PR CT IS LOCATED IN
THE CENTRAL IAL AN ARKING OVERLAY
DISTRICT (C-2 RAL RESOURCES OVERLAY
DISTRICT AN CENTER REDEVELOPMENT
PROJEC
3.
No. 3910 recommending that the City
uncil certify the Prospect Village Final
vironmental Impact Report (FEIR) and adopt a
atement of Overriding Considerations and
Mitigation Monitoring Program for Zone Change 03-
002 and Tentative Tract Map 16481 and certify the
Prospect Village FEIR and adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring
Program for Design Review 03-012, Conditional
Use Permit 03-012, and a General Plan Conformity
Finding for disposition of property.
Resolution No. 3911 recommending that the City
Council approve Zone Change 03-002 to establish a
Planned Community District and adopt the
"Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations."
Resolution No. 3912 recommending that the City
Council approve Tentative Tract Map 16481 for
subdivision of a 1.036 acre site into thirteen (13)
numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot for the
2.
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 2
7:09 p.m.
Amante
Ashabi
Director
Menard
Director
4.
purpose of developing a commercial building and
twelve (12) live/work units within a Planned Unit
Development.
Resolution No. 3913 approving Design Review 03-
012 for development of the site with an approximately
9,300 square foot (8,589 square feet of leasable
area) two-story commercial building and twelve (12)
three-story live/work units, with a reduction in off-
street parking requirements and the provision of off-
site parking, and alcoholic beverage sales in
conjunction with a future restaurant.
Resolution No. 3914 approving Conditional Use
Permit 03-012 for esta . ment of a future restaurant
with alcoholic bevera les in a tenant space up to
3,000 square fee 2 seats in the commercial
building on Lot 1 Tract Map 16481.
Resolution . g the disposition of
property b Tustin Co nity Redevelopment
Agency ospect age Project is in
conforma Tustin General Plan.
5.
6.
ß chosen for the various group or
people in attendance; and, pointed out
peaker is indicated by the lights on the
a the applicant is not the Tustin Redevelopment
ther it is Prospect Village LP; there is no public subsidy
the proposed project; the presentation highlighted the
it be found in the record; all materials, including files, etc.
are he complete record, and the public testimony received this
evening will become part of the full record; the revisions to Exhibit
B of Resolution No. 3910 placed at the dais were minor
modifications relating to grammatical or formatting errors;
members of the Redevelopment Agency and a representative of
KMA are available to answer any questions.
Asked if the resolutions that require no discussion or
modifications could be considered as one while others could be
considered and voted on separately.
Stated it would be necessary for the Commission to certify the
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 3
Amante
John Tillotson,
representing
Pelican Properties
Marisa Charette,
representing the
Tustin Chamber of
Commerce
Patti Eby,
representing the
Tustin Old Town
Association (TOT
Linda Jennings,
350 South B Street
William Collins,
430 West Main
Street
Environmental Impact Report prior to approving the remaining
resolutions.
Added that his understanding was that Resolution No. 3910
should be considered first and then determine whether to group
or take the other resolutions separately; and, invited the applicant
to the lectern.
Stated his group was contacted by staff a few years ago and was
made aware that Old Town is a special place that requires special
attention; indicated his group did a great deal of research and
preparation in order to prepare a project that would complement
Tustin's commitment to preserving its istory; noted his group met
with David Bryant who gave him t ok Tustin, A City of Trees
which he read cover to cover to about the City; stated that
he met with various citizens, sed, who took the time to
visit his project in Huntingt romised that his group
is committed to doing th k in Tustin.
Indicated the Tustin C
since its inceptio . the
and visitors t
businesses at a
com mer .
been in support of this project
lIage project will bring residents
stin, benefiting the existing
rea is building momentum for
vor of the development; retail business is
in the area in which this project is to be
there now that would bring the public into
to the poor lighting and lack of pedestrian traffic
exists on this property, some business owners
ith graffiti and property damage.
repared statement regarding the dilemma of saving the
0 bringing in the new; and, as a homeowner in Old Town,
sta d that homeowners welcome the. development and the
energy it will bring to Old Town, but asked the Planning
Commission and Mr. Tillotson to at least consider a compromise
that would preserve a part of yesterday by saving the façade of
the Utt Juice Building within the context of the proposed project.
Indicated that during his fifteen years as an Old Town
homeowner, he has had to abide by the City's rules and
regulations governing historic structures and is amazed that the
City has seen fit to approve demolition of these two buildings
which are a significant part of Tustin history; he is opposed to the
destruction of the Utt Juice Building; the City has owned the
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 4
Lucy Burch, 610
West Third Street
Brent Ferdig, 140
South Myrtle
Avenue
April Pollock, 138
North B Street
Julia Faith Orr,
355 West 6th St
buildings for a numbE1r of years and has not taken care of them;
and, he is not opposed to redevelopment, but the buildings are a
part of history that should be preserved.
Presented a video prepared by the City, "Old Town Tustin,"
stating that this portion of the video focuses on the historical
significance of the buildings in Old Town; and, noted that the UtI
Juice Building qualifies for State and national registry, and to
remain eligible partial reuse would be necessary
Referred to the historic district created by the City in 1988 to
protect and enhance the existing historic character and culturally
significant structures within the dist . t; the Utt Juice Buildings
received the highest rating aw ; the consultants who
prepared the EIR agreed with rvey in determining the
buildings were potentially eli isting on the California
Register of Historical Reso s; the' gs should not be held
responsible for the co ey are in to the City's lack of
maintenance that red . ndition m average to poor;
he opposes the full these historical buildings; the
Commission sho Id c f the alternatives that preserves
an important pa age.
Orange County and the second
icated she always dreamed of living in
to find a home on B Street; noted this
her; and, presented a video supporting
dings.
Town should include old buildings, especially the
Ings.
this project has many positive features which he could
s wholeheartedly if it were being proposed for vacant land;
the site is not vacant and is home to two of the most historically
and architecturally significant buildings in Old Town; no one
wants to see the buildings remain in their present condition; the
fact the buildings have been vacant for 30 years makes it easy to
advocate demolition; he would like to see Alternative No.3
implemented because it poses the fewest number of negative
impacts to the developer's project.
Joyce Miller, 11189 Stated she is a North Tustin resident who was born in Old Town
Newport Avenue and lived most of her life there; she spent the weekend visiting
small towns (Placentia, Yorba Linda, Brea, etc.), was sad to see
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 5
Jeff Thompson, 415
West 6th Street
redevelopment in those old town areas, and hopes Tustin does
not follow that pattern; the proposed project does not speak to the
hearts of the people who built Tustin and who visit Tustin to shop
and eat.
Stated he, his wife, and four children live in Tustin and also own a
commercial office building at 100 West Main Street; the lack of
historic preservation contained within this proposal is a concern; a
double standard exists where the City enforces compliance of
historic preservation standards but now believes there is an
opportunity to be relieved of them; the Cultural Resources
Advisory Committee has traditionally required business owners
and residents to comply with design tandards without regard to
the cost or difficulty in finding an itect to perform the work;
throughout the responses in nal EIR, there was no
additional financial informatio to justify the cost; if cost
of the historic preservati an in ntal addition ($300 to
$500,000) on a 7-10 mil' dollar proj is is a small fraction
of the cost of the pr EIR sta in Volume 2 that
"neither the City nor t is in a position to control the
overall feasibili of t or to provide financial subsidy
required by the in the Draft EIR"; this is not a
justifiable reason irement that is otherwise levied
on every or resident in the City; the City
shoul ndard for historic preservation; the City
has of the business parking needs to the
de jacent property; the City appears to have
ing while not obtaining the importance of
historic preservation; as a correction to the
ent earlier, the FEIR says on page 127 that there
idy of $355,000; no information was provided on
ableness of City requirements each time the previous
were terminated; there should be consideration to have
istoric preservation in this development.
Allan Browning,
1131 East Main
Street; Chair of
the Tustin Business
and Economic
Development
Council (BEDC)
Read a prepared statement supporting the proposed
development; the BEDC weighed many factors in reaching this
decision, including other opportunities that have been proposed
for this location, three of which were presented and turned down,
and future opportunities which may yet be proposed, the Old
Town business environment, City revenue from the project (taxes
and fees), historic preservation and significance, the overall
Tustin business economy, and the development of Tustin Legacy;
the BEDC supports preserving the façade of the building; that
support extends only to the point that it is economically viable for
the project to move forward; with no State help likely, it is
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 6
Ken Ezell, 356
West 6th Street
AI Corfield, 17642
Miller Drive
Amante
Llyn Smith, 540
West 3rd Third
Tom Orr, 355
West 6th Street
important that the City expand its business tax base which the
Prospect Village project will do by providing taxes and fees from
the project and increasing traffic in Old Town, thus increasing tax
revenues; timing for the project is critical since no money will
come out of Tustin Legacy for at least five years and probably 10
years; it is important to develop Old Town before the entire focus
moves to Tustin Legacy; none of the alternatives has a developer
willing to move forward.
Stated he has been in the process of restoring the Ruth Roland
home for the past 13 years; and, asked the developer to be the
hero in this project and do what is right to preserve the front of the
Utt Juice Building as part of Old Town'.s legacy.
own and has no business
. for 28 years near the
; one e reasons he moved to
own; whe rst moved to Tustin,
as not eveloped yet and
; he's been waiting 28 years to
ve been minor improvements,
d project; it would be a shame
roject from going forward; the
an eyesore; while there may be
the site, the proposed project could be
to the area and to the retail people in the
Indicated he does not live in
interests there but has lived
Columbus Tustin Middle
Tustin was the charm of
residents indicated
promised nice things f
see that happe . whi
nothing on the
if anything hap
Utt Juice
hist .
the
peakers that it would be appreciated if they refrain
comments; and, asked that only new material be
e lives down the street from a modern Victorian; it is
v asy to see the difference; the project looks wonderful
except that it could just as easily be in Irvine, because every
roofline is the same; Old Town Tustin homes offer a wide variety
of distinctive residential designs; it is this difference that makes
Old Town special; the façade and a variety of rooflines should be
incorporated in this project.
Indicated he attended the Planning Commission meeting that
involved the Armstrong Nursery project; one of the topics involved
saving an avocado tree that was slated to be removed; that same
wisdom should be employed in saving the façade of these
buildings.
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 7
Ted Heumann, 145
Pacific
Art Masaoka,
18030 Brookhurst,
#311, Fountain
Valley
Amante
Mr. Masaoka
"Tad" Tadlock,
135 Myrtle Stre
David Bryant, 1331
Bryan Avenue
Agreed with the other speakers regarding the alternatives; there
are a number of places in Orange where the front part of an older
building added an historically accurate building on the back; this
type of thing has also taken place in Santa Ana; people do not go
to old town districts for the stores but for the atmosphere.
Asked his wife to stand and be recognized in the audience,
pointing out that she owned a property at 140 South A Street;
compared to where he once lived in Los Angeles, there are
comparatively few older houses in Orange County; he and his
wife selected a house in Old Town because they wanted the
charming atmosphere of a 1900-era home with the historical
values and artifacts associated wi the neighborhood; the
placards on the streets regarding emolition of the Utt Juice
Buildings were the reason he at the Planning Commission
meeting; in the past, the Cit d that his wife's house
had no foundation and maj tructura age.
Asked Mr. Masaoka t
evening's agenda.
the project on this
Continued his
engineers who
which'
the n
the
Utt
'ng the City hired unlicensed
use; a new house was built
tural defects before demolishing
II recent history without consideration of
house; the City should not demolish the
ut considering the options in preserving
uildings.
ain Street homeowner in Old Town; he moved to
and is still referred to as a newcomer; he served
s on the City Council and as Police Commissioner and
t years on the Planning Commission; he is a registered
p ional archeologist and has done over 100 environmental
impact reports in Orange County, including historical reports; the
City of Tustin should in some way preserve one of its most
important and unique historical structures.
Stated he is a third generation native of California; he moved into
his historic home in Old Town in 1970; in the thirty years since
then, he has taken out four or five building permits to enhance,
enlarge, add to, and modify his home; he did most of the work
himself and is familiar with what it takes to maintain an original
home built in 1919; when he drives by the Utt Juice property, he
sees a vacant, deteriorating warehouse that has been sitting
there bringing no revenue to this City since 1973; there have
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 8
been potential developers, but the City is still not getting a dime;
the answer is so simple; this City needs exactly what Prospect
Village is proposing; as the past president of the Historical
Society, he believes a three-bay warehouse is not an important
building in Tustin.
Stated she is an Old Town Tustin resident; earlier applicants were
interested in converting the building to a restaurant or retail use
which seems to be Alternative No.1; noted the City has been in
exclusive negotiations with Mr. Tillotson during this time,
preventing any opportunity for others to come forward who might
have come up with a plan or cost structure for selling the
residences that would change the bo om line; and, stated she is
in favor of taking a closer look at ative Nos. 3 or 5 because
those seem financially feasibl ould still qualify for the
National Register.
Sharon Jones, 520
West Main Street
8:30 p.m.
Amante
Director
submitted to the
reference.
. d the following points from the public
arding the façade and whether or not they are
ition versus average condition and how those
in various documents before the Commission this
appraiser gave a general comment about the exterior of
e building rather than conducting an engineering analysis.
The Curry Price report is a structural and civil engineering
analysis, was referenced in the KCM report. This report is
what the appraiser used on the report identifying the buildings
as relatively deteriorated.
2. Comments regarding the merits of Alternative Nos. 3 and 5
which were included for consideration in the EIR as
acceptable alternatives:
All alternatives are available for the Planning Commission's
consideration and that is why they were included in the EIR.
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 9
However, the project objectives were clearly outlined. Neither
of these alternatives meets the project objectives as noted in
the Redevelopment Project Plan. There were no developers
available to implement those alternatives.
Alternative No.3 included only 15,044 square feet of retail
office in comparison with over 16,000 square feet associated
with the preferred project alternative; there would only be 10
live-work units versus 12; it would result in an odd building
configuration with 60-foot bays and no outdoor dining area; the
supporting land value of $112,000 requiring a $738,000 public
subsidy would be required; and, would create approximately
17 percent fewer permanent jobs than the proposed project.
As with Alternative No.5, thi
an insignificant level.
Id not reduce the impacts to
The Planning Comm'
process of adoptin
of Fact, and adop
because th
environment.
$198,000 req
the EI
en
f
would stil d to go through the
an EIR, nsider the Findings
t of Overriding Considerations,
e significant impact on the
e a supportive land value of
ublic subsidy. This is noted in
It in a significant impact on the
the EIR indicates that this is
negative impact on some of the more
t are identified in the historical resource.
dential parking to meet that demand is being
d on-site and complies with the City's standards as
exist today. What is being proposed as a
mmendation to the City Council would be providing the
commercial parking off-site. This project is within a parking
overlay district. Other commercial proprietors have been able
to take advantage of the fact that they are in the commercial
and parking overlay district. Some projects that have taken
this advantage include: the Helms' building, the Black Sheep
Bistro, Cox commercial marketplace, the McCharles House;
the Rangel office building; and the Thompson commercial
building; all these enjoyed several commercial benefits to
intensify their uses within the Old Town area and have been
able to use parking that is sometimes farther away from their
developments than proposed in this project.
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 10
Draughon
Pontious
Nielsen
The goal is to create a parking demand in Old Town in order to
attract people. The City is not creating a special condition for
this developer that has not been done for other commercial
properties in Old Town.
4. Comments regarding mixed use development
Because the project is in the overlay district, individuals have
had the ability to submit various mixed use developments on
the site and could have requested a planned community under
the current zoning. Such a plan was submitted by Tolkin
Development, which also proposed demolition of the buildings.
Stated that mixed use proposal
Tolkin proposal suggested mix
and demolition of the buildi
regarding the comment r
no public subsidy requir
the fair market value
acquire this property.
'th the City and the Old Town
rly days on the Planning
nd of being very supportive of
trying to keep Old Town special; one of
for years in Old Town has been the
opment going; in the early days of the
ing the Utt Juice Building, the previous
ted to the deterioration and did nothing for the
h as she believes it is important for a community
ch of its historic assets as possible, the situation in
is unique, and the need for more retail and more
n the downtown area overrides the concerns for
p ation; this is not an easy decision to make and goes
against her basic nature and feelings; having been involved with
the situation for so long, there does not seem to be any other way
to go; the City has been through a long and detailed process to
make this project work; the City is to be commended for those
efforts; what is being proposed will be a tremendous addition; the
architecture and layout will provide needed positive retail for the
City and the Old Town merchants; based on all the above, she
supports all of staff's recommendations and looks forward to the
project moving forward.
Stated she has
residents going
Commisso .
histori
the
d'
Agreed that this is a difficult decision for him; he grew up in a
Victorian home built in the 1870s; the Utt Juice Building is
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 11
Menard
Floyd
historic; it appears there will be minor parking issues with the new
project; however, the City staff have tried to get a development
into this location where the building could be preserved and
utilized (five previous to this since 1998); all those fell through; all
wanted some form of public money to help preserve the building;
it's been sitting vacant for nearly 30 years; he came to this
meeting with an open mind and listened to people on both sides
of the issues; the end result is what is going to be best for Old
Town and the general area of Tustin; this project will help
revitalize the area and will create jobs, more residential uses,
bring more traffic in the area, both economically and generally; in
looking at the information, it appears that any sort of trying to
save these buildings is infeasible; staff has done a commendable
job in trying to find some way to a project into this building
and save it but is at the end of ad; he supports the project;
Mr. Tillotson has done a good nting a project that will
be viable for the communit
a great; the project is very
re and he enjoyed looking at
e project; he is in support of
e Old Town and catapult the
rested; he has a passion for
cture; he lives in Old Town, so it
oving these buildings; he is in favor of
ard but would like to see one of the
ferably Alternative No.5 and saving the
s, integrating them with the existing project
s strong concerns about the parking; the Director
nput on what is currently used and how these
handled in the past; those issues should be set
ow and, as the Director mentioned, create a demand
ng in Old Town; he would like the project to move
, but implementing Alternative No.5.
Stated that Mr. Tillots
nice; his background
this project and oin
mixed use whit
City into getting
architect
is di
the
alt
Indicated he believes the City needs a course of action; Old Town
Tustin was one of the factors that brought him to Tustin; he likes
the mixed use aspect of the project; he moved from Hollywood
Hills where at one point the old homes from the 20s and 30s were
torn down and "McMansions" put up in their places; since he's
lived here, he has noticed the Utt Juice Buildings and been
troubled by the fact that they have been vacant for 30 years; he
was troubled by some of the comments, stating that the City has
not taken care of these buildings; he is not sure to what extent
those comments are factual; perhaps staff could elaborate
regarding how the City and the previous owner handled the care
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 12
Amante
Director
Draughon
Amante
Mr. Tillotson
of the property; this project will benefit the merchants who have
been asking for development for years; when he ran for City
Council, he ran on revitalizing Old Town Tustin; there are many
people who want mixed use development; he is troubled when he
comes to Old Town on the weekends in the evenings, and there
is nothing to see or do; the project will provide tax revenue; it will
be exciting to see what types of businesses are brought in to the
retail portion of the buildings; perhaps Mr. Tillotson could provide
his vision on what some of the businesses will be; he would
prefer one of the alternatives that would save the façade; if that is
not feasible, he is prepared to vote for the project.
Asked staff to respond to Comrpissioner Floyd's concern
regarding the maintenance of the p perty, specifically referring to
what the City has done since it p the property in 1998.
Stated the building has b
dozen or more health
there were several nui
actions associated wit
order for the pr erty
facility to a basi
secured.
joined the City in 1997 the project has
RFP solicitation forward; when the City
as seriously dilapidated; the City began
et the property to the development
felt the City was just around the corner with each
City relied on the developer to tell the City what
done and what the developer was willing and able
City hopes to get around the corner this time.
ted that Mr. Tillotson return to the lectern to respond the
questions from the Commission, specifically Commissioner
Floyd's question about the expected tenants.
Stated that it is his company's intention to retain the property; a
fine restaurant of at least 3,000 feet is planned; the other tenants
are not known at this time; his company has tenants in other
centers that would like to be in the project; the residential units on
Prospect would be uses such as a book store, tea room, etc.; five
of the six will be full retail use; Prospect Lane would be conducive
to an architect's office, photographic studio, engineer's office or
studio; the specifics are still evolving and will fulfill the demands
of the homeowners association and the CC&Rs.
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 13
Pontious
Amante
Pointed out deed restrictions will also be recorded.
Addressed the audience and applauded their passion and
eloquence in their preparation and comments; one of his
concerns as a Commissioner and Tustin resident is that there be
balance in the development of the community from an economic
and residential perspective; there is no question that Orange
County has a jobs/housing imbalance; when areas can be
developed in the Redevelopment Agency in intelligent ways that
keep true to the theme and feel of the City as this project does
and bring some vitality to Old Town, which has been
underutilized, and at the same time have new development at
Tustin Legacy, that provides a balance; it is important that the
City not focus only on the Legac rid have The Market Place
and Old Town suffer; Old To vital area to the history of
Tustin and its roots; the fact t n Laing Homes going up
at the Legacy have a Cr a ungalow feel to them,
providing a link to histo pers' g attention to those
types of things as Mr. doing this project makes
sense; as one of the entioned, the redevelopment of
Old Town need to on what it does in terms of
generating tax . everyone on the Planning
Commission pa to the history of Tustin and
cares a orical roots; it is difficult when
looki buildings of noted historical value to do
that ask if the proposed development brings
m f Old Town and more to the citizens of
is being given up; buildings should not be
ings sake; staff provided an enormous amount
rial of which the EIR was just a part; he supports
was presented.
that the Commission consider the first alone resolution
b it is the critical linchpin; and, asked for a motion on
Resolution No. 3910.
It was moved by Pontious, seconded by Nielsen, to adopt
Resolution No. 3910. Motion carried 5-0.
Asked for the Commission's pleasure regarding Resolution Nos.
3911-3915.
No one commented.
Pontious moved the balance of the items.
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 14
Menard verified that Resolution No. 3914 is the Design Review
and should be considered separately.
Pontious moved Resolution Nos. 3912, 3913, 3915, and 3916.
Amante asked staff if the Design Review could be called out and
pass the other resolutions.
The Director replied in the affirmative.
Commissioner Pontious restated her motion, seconded by
Menard. Motion carried 5-0.
Commissioner Menard stated that there should not be a price tag
placed on history; historical buildings should not be demolished,
never to be seen again except in graphs; saving the façade
should be considered, using Alt No.5.
Floyd
3.
Menard voted No
None
Director reported
ction on the Community Development
action plan; staff will be forwarding the
n to HUD for the dollar amounts.
e hopes there is not a perception that the City
inately demolishes historical buildings in the City.
Indicated he is very proud of this project.
Pontious
Noted the City has a 20-year history of making important efforts,
including the Overlay District, to preserve history.
Pointed out that the City of Tustin is mentioned on page 16 of
Elizabeth George's most recent novel.
Nielsen
Noted that the Armstrong project looks good so far.
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 15
Nielsen continued
Stated that tonight's decision was very difficult since he empathizes
with the residents who want to preserve the Utt Juice building; he
looked hard for some feasible way to make that happen; none was
apparent.
Indicated he looks forward to the new project going forward.
Menard
Agreed that tonight's approval was a difficult decision.
Thanked everyone on staff for their work.
Reminded everyone that the Promenade is coming soon; and,
encouraged everyone to tour some of City's historical buildings.
Amante
Stated that staff did an extrao
Commission understand this pr
for doing a good job
mind that during these difficult
to remain vigilant regarding
ment purview to prevent
x, residential property taxes, etc.;
I government not to be reaching into the
bsidize that which private industry can do
those things that should be privatized.
for trying to work with the developer and not allow
.hich has been fallow for so long, to remain fallow;
ht thing for Tustin, despite the difficult choices
he façade that has historical value.
I he attended Karaoke Night (or "Tustin Idol") and was very
entertained; the proceeds will benefit the Seniors in Tustin.
9:39 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled
for Monday, May 24, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber at
300 Centennial Way.
Minutes - Planning Commission 4-26-04 - Page 16
Carol Fox
170 N. A St.
Tustin, CA 92780
April 26, 2004
Planning Commission
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Attn: Planning Commisioners
1 regret being unable to attend tonight's meeting to express my views. It is my hope that this
letter could be read into the record.
I believe the portions of the Uttjuice building known as 193 and 195 that ITont on Main Street
should be preserved. Sections 5.3, 6.5 and 5.5 of the Tustin General Plan speak to preservation of
our old buildings. The General Plan states:
"Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of properties eligible for inclusion on the
National Register of Historic Places.."
City Staff has responded to this comment by claiming that "while each project is reviewed on an
individual basis for consistency with the General Plan, not all General Plan goals, policies or
programs are necessarily implemented through each individual project."
Let me ask you, commissioners, what project in Tustin would this goal be applied to if not this
one? If this goal is not applied to this building, truly one of the most significant buildings left in
town, and one that is owned by us, the citizens of Tustin, why do we even have it in the General
Plan?
There are many other goals of the General Plan that are admirably incorporated into this project.
But those goals can be incorporated on any new proposal for one of many vacant parcels in town
in the future.
We have a nnique opportunity here to show other owners of historic buildings an example of
what we expect with regards to preservation in our Old Town. Ifwe are lenient on this one, how
can we press our case on future development projects on such properties?
Thank you for your consideration of my comments.
Sincerely,
Carol Fox, Architect
ATTACHMENT D
Adaptive Reuse Study - Structural Engineering Report
6 CURRY P~CE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
Pete,S. Cuny, CE, SE
H. john P,ice, CEo SE
Anthony B. Cou", CE, SE
July 25, 2003 (revised)
¡,mes B. Slengec, CE, SE
Michael j. King CEo SE
j,mesAMillec,CE.SE
Ian C. Mellm. CE
Paul R. McCullough. CE
KCM Group
P.O. Box 7309
San Diego, CA 92167
A C,lifomi, Cmpmation
Established 1969
Attention:
Mr. Gordon Kovtun
Subject:
Utt Juice Buildings - Adaptive Reuse Study
- Structural Engineering Report
191, 193, 195 East Main Street, Tustin
Dear Mr. Kovtun,
Per your request, we have undertaken a limited structural investigation for an adaptive reuse of
the subject buildings. This study consisted of the following scope of services:
1. Review 1995 Retrofit Drawings and the "(Draft) Historic Resources Technical Report: Utt
Juice Redevelopment Project" by The Building Biographer Tim Gregory, dated May 5,
2003.
2. Site visit and preliminary visual investigation to verify the general configuration, layout and
condition of the existing building.
3. Evaluation of the structural feasibility of two alternatives (first, adapting the existing
building(s) to retail usage and, second, preserving the facades only for incorporation into a
proposed re-development at the site) and preparation of a preliminary scope of structural
work for each of these two alternatives.
4. Preparation of this brief report, including a narrative description of the preliminary scope of
structurai work for each alternative.
This scope of services excluded intrusive investigations, comprehensive structural analysis, and
preparation of construction documents.
Project Description:
The existing buildings comprise two contiguous structures, encompassing three currently
interconnected but separable addresses or "lease spaces". The 193-195 E. Main Street portion
consists of a concrete walled building with wood framed storefronts and roof structures. The
191 E. Main Street portion consists of an unreinforced masonry bearing wall structure with a
wood framed roof structure. Both structures have concrete siabs-on-grade combined with large
areas of wood flooring overlayments.
The structures were reportedly retrofitted in 1995 to improve their seismic resistance, in general
accordance with Division 88 of the City of Los Angeles Building Code. The retrofit included
addition of steel moment frames at the storefronts, addition of wall anchors and parapet
bracing, addition of roof plywood and drag ties and masonry infill of several openings at the
back of the buildings. The retrofit work visibie at the time of our site visit appeared to be in
general conformance with the 1995 retrofit drawings.
444 Camino del Rio South> Suite 201 > San Diego, CA 921 08
(619) 291-28001el >(619)291-0613 lax
Email: cpc@cpceng.com > www.cpceng.com
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
July 25, 2003
Utt Juice Buildings
Page 2 of 9
Structural Condition:
The condition of the structures is relatively deteriorated. The roof structure at 195 E. Main sags
dramatically, particulariy at the rear portion of the building, despite repairs reportedly
implemented during the 1995 retrofit. The front masonry wall of the 191 E. Main structure was
severely damaged by foundation settiement, reportedly during the 1995 retrofit. The center
portion of the wall appears to have settled on the order of one half inch to one inch, resulting
in major cracking and displacement of the brick masonry. The floor, wall and ceiling finishes
and, to a lesser extent, structures are deteriorated due to water intrusion and neglect. The
exterior brick at the back and side of 191 E. Main and the masonry infiil at door and window
openings is significantly eroded by water intrusion.
As previousiy reported verbally, the glass block spandrel at 195 E. Main was at the time of our
site visit in a potentially dangerous condition. The glass block band above the storefront glass
was reportedly installed during the 1995 retrofit to replicate the historical leaded giass
appearance. However, it did not appear to us that any structure was provided to support the
giass block. Consequently, it appeared that the glass block weight of several thousand pounds
was being supported by the plate glass windows below. This condition should immediately
be, if it has not already been, investigated and demonstrated safe or should be mitigated by
removing the glass block or by shoring it in place, as appropriate.
Scope of Structural Rehabilitation Work of Adaptive Reuses:
Two reuse scenarios were considered for adaptive reuse of the existing structures. Scenario A
entails salvaging the entire existing building, repairing and upgrading the structures as
necessary and returning them to use as retail spaces, similar to their historic uses. Scenario B
entails salvaging the storefronts and approximately 60 feet of the east elevation of 195 E. Main.
For Scenario A, salvaging and rehabilitating the entire building, we would recommend that
allowance be made for several major structural repairs and upgrades, as outlined in the
attached Preiiminary Scope of Structural Rehabilitation Work. In general, this work would
include removal and replacement of the aforementioned glass block, demoiition and
reconstruction of the back portion of the roof structure at 195 E. Main, repair of the various
damaged and deteriorated masonry walls, releveling or replacement of the existing floor slabs,
and rebracing of some of the parapets. This parapet bracing work would include bracing of the
tall, slender east parapet at 195 E. Main and re-bracing of the parapets at 191 E. Main where
the current bracing penetrates through the roofing at numerous points causing potential leaks
and maintenance problems.
For the second scenario, salvaging and rehabilitating the facades only, we would recommend
that allowance be made for various repairs and stabilization measures as outiined in the
attached Preliminary Scope of Structural Rehabilitation Work. In general this work would
include removal and repiacement of the giass block spandrel, reconstruction or major repair of
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
July 25, 2003
Utt Juice Buildings
Page 3 of 9
the damaged brick wall at 191 E. Main, permanent shoring and stabilization of the storefronts,
plus additional allowances for designing and working around the shored storefronts during the
proposed new construction.
More detailed summaries of these scopes of structural rehabilitations and selected photographs
are attached to this letter report. These scopes of work are intended only for use in your
construction cost budgeting. Additional investigation, anaiysis and design will be required
before any rehabilitation work is commenced.
limitations:
8e advised that the opinions and recommendations made in this report are based only on our
limited visual investigation performed at this time period, on our experience with similar types
of structures, and on our knowledg~ and professional judgment. We have not performed a
comprehensive structural analysis of the subject building nor undertaken any testing. We have
performed our professionai services in accordance with the generally accepted local structural
engineering practices for structurai investigation projects of this type and no warranty is either
expressed or implied. Before any repairs are initiated, the services of a qualified construction
and/or design professional should be obtained to develop appropriate construction procedures,
recommendations and details.
If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance on this matter, please do not
hesitate to call. As always, the opportunity to be of service is appreciated.
Sincerely,
~~~:;'J ~.
Principal
~~.ir
ABC/ac/lgl03515
Attachments:
Scope of Structural Rehabilitation for Adaptive Re-uses
Photographs
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
July 25, 2003
UtI Juice Buildings
Page 4 of 9
Scope of Structural Rehabilitation Work for Adaptive Re-use
Scenario A: Salvage/Rehab Buildings
195 Main Street
1. Demo giass block spandrel glass at front; replace with leaded glass or equivalent.
2. Demo sagging roof structure at back half of building; replace with new structure.
3. Re-anchor walls to new roof structure.
4. Brace tall south parapet (90 linear feet +/-) with continuous cricket and two rows of
wall anchors.
5. Remove/replace floor slab and flooring or repair slab with topping and replace flooring.
6. Repair concrete wall cracks with epoxy injection.
193 Main Street
1. Repair holes in sheet metai cornice, frieze and architrave.
2. Remove/replace floor slab and flooring or repair slab with topping and repiace flooring.
3. Repair and re-point existing brick masonry at rear wall opening infills.
4. Repair concrete wall cracks with epoxy injection.
191 Main Street
1. Repair brick wall at street front, damaged in 1995 retrofit
a. remove/repiace with new foundation, or,
b. epoxy inject cracks and repoint (retaining vertical displacements and irregularities)
2. Re-brace all parapets with conceaied bracing (below roof plane) and reroof to mitigate
numerous existing roof penetrations and roofing maintenance conditions created by
1995 retrofit.
3. Remove/replace floor slab and flooring or repair slab with topping and replace flooring.
5. Repair and re-point existing brick masonry at side and rear walls. Rework drainage at
downspouts and splash zone to protect masonry in future.
Scenario B: Salvage/Rehab Facades on Iv
195 Main Street
1. Demo glass block spandrel glass at front; replace with leaded glass or equivalent.
2. Install permanent bracing behind existing wall to be salvaged. Such bracing is likely to
consist of steel strong back systems at all salvaged walls, waterproofed, and anchored
back to new structures.
3. Demo roof structure and all walls not to be salvaged.
4. Shore existing retained storefront walls and foundations to stabiiized during new
proposed construction work.
5. Anchor walls with permanent shoring systems to new roof structure at new building.
6. Repair concrete wall cracks with epoxy injection.
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
July 25, 2003
Uti Juice Buildings
Page 5 of 9
193 Main Street
1. Repair holes in sheet metal cornice, frieze and architrave.
2. Install permanent bracing behind existing wall to be salvaged.
3. Demo roof structure and all walls not to be salvaged. See item 2 above.
4. Shore existing retained storefront walls and foundations to stabilize during proposed
new construction work
5. Anchor walls and permanent shoring systems to new roof structure and new building.
191 Main Street
1. Repair brick wall at street front, damaged in 1995 retrofit
a. remove/replace with new foundation, or,
b. epoxy inject and repoint (retaining vertical dispiacements and irregularities).
2. Install permanent bracing behind existing wall to be salvaged.
3. Demo roof structure and all walls not to be salvaged.
4. Shore existing retained storefront walls and foundations to stabilize during proposed
new construction work
5. Anchor walls and permanent shoring systems to new roof structure and new building.
.. CURRY PRICE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
July 25, 2003
Utt Juice Buildings
Page 6 of 9
t
1 j'l
~
Photo 1:
\¡ ¡",-
Photo 2: Brick wall in area of foundation settlement at 191 E. Main.
6 CURRY PRJCE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
July 25, 2003
UtI Juice Buildings
Page 7 of 9
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
July 25, 2003
UtI Juice Buildings
Page B of 9
Deteriorated ceiling and sagging roof structure at 195 E. Main.
Photo 6: Tall unbraced parapet (upper left) at east side of 195 E. Main.
.. CURRY PRICE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
July 25,2003
UtI Juice Buildings
Page 9 of 9
Photo 7: Deteriorated masonry at back of 191 E. Main.
Photo 8: Parapet bracing interrupting roofing and drainage at 191 E. Main.
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
~ Structural & Civil Engineers
Firm Profile
CURRY PRICE COURT is a full service structural, seismic and civil engineering firm based in San Diego,
California. We have dedicated our firm to the practice of quality consulting engineering and project
management since 1969 with the goal of providing professional, responsive and cost-effective service to
our clients. We seek project opportunities to apply state-of-the-art engineering techniques and
technologies to develop innovative design solutions, sensitive to both our clients' design objectives and
budgetary targets.
We have the in-house experience and personnel to design and manage a wide range of project types,
sizes and scopes. Our work includes design of new buildings and specialty structures, investigations,
studies and evaluations of existing and Historical structures, and seismic retrofit design for existing and
Historical buildings. We have successfully completed major projects throughout southern California and
the southwestern United States with clients including Federal, State and local governments, school
districts, universities, hospitals, insurance companies, property managers and homeowners associations
as well as numerous outstanding architects and other private clients. The following are examples of the
project types that CURRY PRICE COURT has successfully completed and for which we provide in-house
expertise:
. SEISMIC EVALUATION, LOSS ESTIMATION & RETROFIT: State of the art seismic evaluation, and
retrofit design of Historical buildings, URM, non-ductile concrete and infill frame structures for
private, hospital, university and government clients. Risk analysis and probable maximum loss (PMl)
estimations for individual buildings and groups of buildings for institutional and governmental clients.
. COMMERCIAL: Office Buildings (One-Story to High Rise), Hotels, Retail Shopping Centers, Parking
Structures, Multi-Use Structures, Restaurants, Seismic Retrofit Projects.
. INDUSTRIAL: Co-Generation, Plant Design, Equipment Anchorage Design, Specialized Equipment
Design, Towers and Chimneys, Materials Handling, Mining, Reservoirs and Tanks.
. MARINE: Piers, Wharfs, Quaywalls, Breakwaters, Marinas, Berthing and Mooring Design, Floating
Docks, Fender Systems, Dredging, Underwater Investigation by In-House Personnel
. INVESTIGATION AND STUDIES: Buildings, Marine Structures, Dredging, Waterfront Facilities,
Reports of Structural Surveys, Water Tanks, Insurance Claim Investigation.
. HEALTH CARE, SCHOOLS AND INSTITUTIONAL: Hospitals, Public & Private Schools &
University Buildings, Auditoriums and Halls, Seismic Studies, Equipment Anchorage Design.
. DEFENSE AND SECURITY SENSITIVE STRUCTURES: Missile Magazines, Flammable and
Hazardous Material Storage Installations, Computer and Control Centers, Training Facilities,
Communication Facilities.
. FORENSIC ENGINEERING: Investigation, consulting and expert witness services for litigation
involving wood, concrete, masonry, and steel structures, residential building design and construction,
concrete slabs, framing, swimming pools, piers, structural design.
Our technical engineering capabilities include applications of emerging state-of-the-art analysis
procedures and design technologies plus fully integrated use of computer aided analysis and drafting, in-
house plotting, digitizing, networking systems and electronic file transfer protocols.
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
~ Structural & Civil Engineers
Our dedication to quality finished products is demonstrated in each of our projects through our Quality
Assurance program in which all of our reports, drawings, specifications and cost estimates are checked
at each stage of a project. Our QA program involves direct redlille checking of all documents by a
Principal of our firm, independent of the Principal responsible for day-to-day project management.
Awards: The quality of our work is rated on our customer service, technical service, professionalism,
innovation, communication, and adherence to budgets and schedules. CURRY PRICE COURT has
received numerous awards and commendations in recognition of the superior quality of our work.
These citations include:
. 2001 "Excellence in Structural Engineering Award" from the Structural Engineers Association of San
Diego and the Structural Engineers Association of California for the Rodeo Arena.
. 2000 "Excellence in Structural Engineering Award" from the Structural Engineers Association of San
Diego and the Structural Engineers Association of California for the Historic William Penn Hotel.
. 2000 "Excellence in Structural Engineering Award" from the Structural Engineers Association of San
Diego for the P-283 Swim Tank Training Facility, MCRD, San Diego, CA.
. 1999 "Excellence in Structural Engineering Award" from the Structural Engineers Association of San
Diego for Preserving the Balboa Theatre, San Diego, CA
. 1998 "Best Special Project" from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations for Fiber
Reinforced Plastic Model Range Arch
. 1998 "Historic Restoration Award", from the California Preservation Foundation for the House of
Hospitality, San Diego, CA
. 1997 "Excellence in Structural Engineering Award", from SEAOSD for House of Hospitality,
San Diego, CA
. 1997 "Historic Preservation Award", from the California Preservation Foundation for Christ Episcopal
Church
. 1996 "Excellence in Seismic Retrofit Award" from SEAOSD for Christ Episcopal Church, Coronado,
CA
. 1995 "National Award of Excellence" from Society of Plastics Institute, Model Range Arch, NCCOSC,
San Diego, CA
. 1994 "First Place Award" at the International Ideas Competition for Concept Design of a Liquefaction
Resistant Bridge, London, England
. 1994 AlA "Citation of Recognition" for Pioneer Warehouse Residential Lofts
. 1992 Navy "Commendation for Innovative Design" of Long Span Fiberglass Arch Structure
. 1992 ACI Award for "Innovation in Concrete", Broadway Pier Structural Repairs
. 1988 ACI Award for "Concrete Engineering", Repairs to Pier J-K, NAS North Island
CURRY PRICE COURT is a small business enterprise.
Employees: 15 total employees; 6 Registered Structural Engineers, 2 Registered Civil Engineers,
1 Junior Engineer, 2 CAD Drafters, and 4 Clerical Staff supported by part-time, temporary and contract
personnel as required by fluctuating workload.
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
. Structural & Civil Engineers
ANTHONY B. COURT
Vice-President - Seismic Engineering
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION
Structural Engin""r, California - SE 2709
Civil Engineer, California - C32930
PE Civil/Structural Engineer, Washington - 36628
ACADEMIC AND EMPLOYMENT
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering - San Diego State University - 1979
Structural Preservation of Architectural Heritage - IABSE, Rome - 1993
1977 - 1980
1980-1981
1981 - 1988
1988 - Present
Flores & Stedman - Design Engineer
Stedman & Dyson - Project Engineer
George R. Saunders Associates - Project Manager & Structural Engineer
CURRY PRICE COURT - Vice President - Seismic Engineering
PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES / PUBLIC SERVICE
Structural Engineers Association of San Diego (SEAOSD)
President, 1992-1993; Various Other Board Positions, 1985-1994
SEAOSD Ad Hoc Committee on Seismic Zonation for San Diego
SEAOSD Ad Hoc Committee for Review of San Diego County Seismic Safety Element
Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC) - Director, 1993-1996
Existing Buildings Committee, 1989 - Present
Vision 2000 Project - Development of Performance Based Seismic Guidelines
Performance Based Seismic Engineering ADHOC Committee - Vice Chair - Lead Guideline Writer
International Building Code - Performance Code Committee, 2000-2001
City of San Diego Board of Appeals and Advisors, 1989-1994
City Manager's Committee on Seismic Retrofit - URM Ordinance, 1990-1992
Save our Heritage Organization, Historic Facade Easements Structural Surveys, 1986-1988
National Science Foundation - Advisory Panel for Seismic Code Development Research
ASCE Standards Committee - FEMA 356 Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings
DSA Seismic Review Board for State Seismic Retrofit Projects, 1998-2002
Applied Technology Council, Board of Directors, 2001-2003
PRO/ECTS
. North Park Theatre - Seismic Study and Retrofit Design, San Diego, CA
. Balboa Theatre - Seismic Study and Retrofit Design, San Diego, CA
. Spreckels Theatre Building - Preliminary Seismic Rehabilitation Design, San Diego, CA
. Hotel Stockton - Seismic Rehabilitation of 6-story non-ductile concrete building, San Diego, CA
. Mapes Hotel - Seismic Evaluation & Retrofit Design, 14-story infill frame, Reno, NV
. Christ Episcopal Church - Seismic Study and Retrofit Design, Coronado, CA
. MCRD Building 5 - Seismic Study & Retrofit of Historic 2-story Building, San Diego, CA
. Pacific Bell - Seismic Study and Retrofit Design 6-story infill frame, San Diego, CA
. House of Hospitality - Reconstruction of 3-story steel framed Balboa Park facility
. Pioneer Warehouse - Structural rehabilitation for 6-story concrete frame historic building
. Walker Scott Building - Seismic Evaluation of 8-story Historic Structure, San Diego, CA
. George Marston House, Hebbard and Gill, Architects - Structural survey & retrofit
. OSHPD/SB 19S3 Seismic Evaluation Guidelines for Hospitals
. DSA Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit Guidelines Review Panel
. FEMA 273/A TC 33 Seismic Case Study for development of Federal Retrofit Guidelines
. CURRY PRICE COURT
~ Structural & Civil Engineers
HISTORIC BUILDING
PROJECTS
Balboa Theatre
. North Park Theatre, San Diego, CA - 2001-2002: Structural engineering and prime consultant services
for the seismic investigation, evaluation and retrofit design for a concrete and steel theatre facility
combined with a two-story unreinforced masonry mixed use commercial facility, constructed in 1928.
. NTC Arts and Culture Center, San Diego, CA - 2002: Seismic and structural engineering for the
investigation, evaluation and preliminary retrofit design for 26 building Historic District and San
Diego's Naval Training Center. Project involves rehabilitation of the 1920's vintage building complex
of concrete frame and hollow clay tile infill buildings, unreinforced masonry, timber and concrete
buildings for adaptive reuse as a public Arts and Culture Center.
. Maryland Hotel, Gaslamp Quarter, San Diego, CA - 2002: Structural engineering for the evaluation,
planning, seismic retrofit, and structural rehabilitation for a major renovation of a six-story unreinforced
masonry, steel and timber structure. Retrofit utilized a combination of steel moment frames, braced
frames and shotcrete shear walls to brace a soft first story structure and to upgrade the upper five-story
hotel facility.
. Hotel Stockton, Stockton, CA - 2001: Structural engineering for $18 million rehabilitation and seismic
retrofit of landmark 6-story concrete framed hotel structure on the Stockton riverfront. Seismic analysis
entailed extensive investigation and testing and employed FEMA 356 non-linear static analysis
procedures with site specific response spectra. Retrofit utilized discretely placed concrete shear piers
designed to supplement the existing structural capacity and mitigate the soft first story while preserving
the historical layout and fabric and maintaining the continuous open storefronts.
. House of Hospitality, Balboa Park, San Diego, CA - 1992: Structural and civil engineering of
$14 million historic reconstruction of a 77,000 s.f. three-story, mixed public use facility in Balboa Parle
Project utilized a modern steel and concrete structure to replicate a 1914 vintage wood-framed
Spanish Colonial style landmark building and to re-house and support over 2,000 restored elements of
the original historic fabric while providing restaurant and kitchen spaces, auditorium space, meeting
rooms, rehearsal rooms and offices.
. Balboa Theatre, San Diego, CA - 199&-199B: Seismic study and preliminary retrofit design of Historic
theatre facility in downtown San Diego using COLA Division 95 approach; new retrofit design of 5-
story non-ductile concrete frame structure with hollow clay tile infill afforded 60% cost savings over
1 984 retrofit with nearly complete preservation of historic fabric.
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
~ Structural & Civil Engineers
.
Spreckels Theatre Building, San Diego, CA - 1999: Structural engineering for the preliminary
seismic evaluation and retrofit design for a &-story, 2&0,000 sf, cast-in-place concrete,
historical building for a preservation and rehabilitation project to convert the existing upper
floor office spaces to a new hotel occupancy. Preliminary design of a retrofit using a
FEMA273 approach to utilize the existing concrete frame and shear wall system in
combination with new concrete shear walls.
San Diego County Administration Building, San Diego, CA - 1999: Structural engineering for
the preliminary seismic evaluation and development of a performance based seismic
engineering Master Plan document for the historical, 1938 vintage, lO-story concrete framed
County Administration landmark building; structural design for remodel of the lO-story central
office tower.
William Penn Hotel, Gaslamp Quarter, San Diego - 1997-1998: Seismic evaluation and
retrofit of &-story Historic unreinforced masonry structure. Retrofit combined ductile concrete
frames and shear walls to strengthen an irregular URM with weak-story storefronts.
MCRD Building 5, Seismic Retrofit, San Diego, CA - 1997-1998: Seismic evaluation, concept
study and retrofit design for a Historic 2-story non-ductile concrete frame building with clay
tile infill; retrofit included concrete shear walls to control drift and protect non-ductile frame
and clay tile infill.
Riverside Hotel, Reno, Nevada - 1997: Structural engineering for seismic evaluation and
preliminary retrofit design of Historic &-story non-ductile concrete frame building with brick
masonry infill, using COLA Division 95 approach; retrofit included addition of concrete shear
walls to control drift and protect non-ductile frame and brick masonry infill.
Mapes Hotel, Reno, Nevada, 1997: Seismic evaluation and preliminary retrofit design of
Historic 12-story non-ductile concrete frame building with hollow-clay tile infill, using COLA
Division 95 approach for irregular building retrofit; retrofit included selective additions of
concrete shear walls to protect non-ductile frame and clay tile infill.
San Diego Trust & Savings Building, San Diego, CA - 1997: Structural engineering for seismic
evaluation and preliminary retrofit design of 14-story steel frame building with masonry infill;
analysis and design using COLA Div. 95 methodology to preserve masonry and terracotta
finishes in 1928 vintage Historic facility.
Walker Scott Building, San Diego, CA - 1995-1996: Structural engineering for seismic study
and preliminary retrofit and rehabilitation design for 8-story concrete frame Historic building;
evaluation and retrofit design using COLA Div. 95 to preserve and protect clay tile infill.
Christ Episcopal Church, San Diego, CA - 1994-1996: Seismic study and retrofit design of
Historic stone church using center core strengthening technique. Seismic study and retrofit
design for 5 related church building.
Marston House Museum, San Diego, CA - 1992-1993: Feasibility study, seismic/structural
survey and construction documents for conversion of Historic Structure to House Museum, on
the edge of Balboa Park.
6 CURRY PRICE COURT
~ Structural & Civil Engineers
SEISMIC I NVESTIGA TION
& RETROFIT PROJECTS
Champagne Towers
Champagne Towers, Santa Monica, CA: Seismic study and structural rehabilitation and renovation
of 16-story, 1970 concrete frame building severely damaged in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake.
East County Regional Center, EI Cajon, CA: Structural engineering for the seismic evaluation of the
1980 vintage,lO-story, steel framed administration building, using non-linear pushover analysis
techniques to evaluate the ductility demands on the pre-North ridge welded steel frames; structural
design for jail conversion remodel project for the upper four floors of the facility.
Pioneer Warehouse, San Diego, CA: Seismic study and structural rehabilitation of 6-story, 120,000
s. f. concrete structure in the Gaslamp Historic District of San Diego.
Headquarters Building, MCB Camp Pendleton, Oceanside, CA: Structural engineering for seismic
evaluation and preliminary retrofit design of two & one-half story non-ductile concrete frame
building with precast concrete cladding walls; 40,000 s.f. structure, built in 1998 was evaluated
using FEMA 178 and 1994 UBC; retrofit designed to resist 1994 UBC seismic demands.
BEQ 775, 364 and BOQ 572, Naval Air Station North Island, Coronado, CA: Seismic
investigation, evaluation, retrofit and architectural renovation of a 3-story non-ductile concrete frame
structure, a four-story concrete masonry structure and eight single-story wood framed structures;
evaluation and retrofit in accordance with Federal standards to provide substantial life safety.
McClintock Plaza, San Diego, CA: Seismic Study and structural rehabilitation of 1929 6-story,
60,000 s.f. concrete structure plus addition of 6-story parking structure.
FEMA Case Study, Pomerene Hall, Presidio of Monterey: Structural engineering services for FEMA
273 Case Study of 3-story 50,000 s.f. non-ductile concrete frame building constructed in 1955. The
structure was comparatively evaluated in accordance with 1994 UBC, FEMA 310 and FEMA 273.
Shear wall retrofits were designed in accordance with each 1994 UBC and FEMA 273 guidelines.
Probable Maximum Loss (PML) Studies:
earthquakes in Southern California.
PML studies of various buildings for defined scenario
ATTACHMENT E
Comment Letters Submitted after Planning Commission
Meeting
Packet of information about the "Utt Juice Company property"
Prepared by David W. Bryant
On April 26, 2004 I attended the meeting of the Planning Commission and received a copy of the "Report to
the Planning Commission". That report required 100 sheets of paper printed on both sides. 20 pages were
title pages and 180 pages were information and pictures. The report contained six resolutions numbered
3910,3911,3912,3913,3914 and 3915. I have been involved in the discussion about the future use of the
Utt property for over a year. Please find included in this packet some additional information.
1. Letter to the City Council from David Bryant dated 12-24-02.
2. A 3 page Utt Juice Development Chronology.
3. Portions of an e-mail that I sent to Jill Leach of the Orange County Register.
4. Additional information.
I plan to attend the meeting on Monday May 17, 2004. If you have questions before that date I can be
reached by telephone, (714) 838-6751 or bye-mail, bh.dwbryant@juno.com.
12-24-02
Page I of2
To: Tustin City Council
From: Dave Bryant
Subject: Should part of or all of the Utt Juice Co. building at the comer orE. Main St and/
Prospect be preserved as an architecturally important building in old town?
It has come to my attention that a petition is being circulated trying to stop the proposed removal
of the Uti Juice Co. building. Here are some of the facts about that building obtained from
Historical Society records and my measurements of the building and the UtI property.
The original building was built in 1907. I believe the brick faced western one third of the
building width was added at a later date.
The Utts owned a ISO acre vineyard on Lemon Heights and about 1920 they started using the
property at Main and Prospect to produce grape juice. Soon most of the production took place in
the tall metal buildings that once occupied the property between the remaining building and
Third St. Eventually they were producing at least 27 different juices, jellies, jams or preserves,
as well as hot cake and punch syrups. These products could be purchased retail from the subject
building.
In 1973 the business was terminated and for the last 30 years the building has been sitting with
essentially zero maintenance. Several years ago the tall metal buildings were removed leaving
only the asphalt and concrete base materials and three driveways.
The UtI property is bounded by E. Main St, Third St, Prospect and the alley that is about half
way between Prospect and El Camino Real. That property is 300 feet long and 140 feet wide.
If the subject building sat on a piece of property that was surrounded by other historic buildings
that were also being preserved that could be a valid reason for preserving the UtI building.
However, if it is preserved it will soon have new two story buildings joined to it on the north and
the west. It already has all new structures facing it on the east. The UtI Juice building is one
story and it stands about 18 feet high on the Main St. side.
It is my understanding that the current plans (which I have not seen) for the site have assumed
that the UtI building, which has deteriorated beyond reasonable repair, would be removed so that
the whole half block would be of uniform design. The new two story structure would be shops
and restaurants on the first floor and housing on the second floor. A second floor could not be
added on top of the UtI building. The interior walls are narrow wood lath and plaster. On both
ceilings and walls wood lath is exposed in areas where moisture damage has caused the plaster
to fall to the floor.
Only the design of the top elements of the facade on the front of the original two bays can be
considered unusual. In fact the front face ofMrs B's, once the Tustin Hardware, has nearly
identical treatment of the doors, windows and trim elements.
Page 2 of2
Keeping the above facts in mind, I am convinced that saving any part of the UtI juice Company
building would not be of benefit to old town or for preserving history. The history of the UtI
juice company is already well preserved at the Tustin Museum. A two and a half foot wide by
twenty foot long sign is permanently installed on the front wall of the museum above the entry
doors. One of the six display cases has a display of many of the juice company artifacts and
photos. Nine photos identifY the steps taken from the vineyard to the crates of bottles waiting
for delivery. Large to small bottles, labels, strainers and other tools are also on display. On one
of the picture display panels on the back wall of the museum Charles Edward Utt's picture has
next to it a long list of the community organizations where he served.
I have heard it suggested that the new complex of buildings should be identified as a memorial
to the Utts for the major impact that they had on the growth and improvement of the city of
Tustin. That is a proposal that I do support. .
These are my personal opinions and they do not represent a position taken by the Historical
Society. I will be out oftown until late January. If a decision is still pending at that time I will
be available to discuss my position in more detail. I hope the data contained in this report will
make it easier for people to see all sides of this issue.
Sincerely,
J2~A^-,.~f
Dave Bry~~sldent of the Tustin Area Historical Society
1331 BryanAve. Tustin, CA 92780
(714) 838-6751 E-mail: bh.dwbryant@juno.com
Alley
UtI Juice property
300 feet by 140 feet
rrJ
~
e.
::I
~
pi
ä:
U>
,....
Original bldg.
Original bldg.
Prospect
February L 1998
2/23/98
3/16/98
4/6/98
8/3/98
March 15. 1999
7/21/99
3/7/00
5/13/00
7/10/00
UTT nITCE DEVELOPMENT CHRONOLOGY
Initial Developer Request for Qualifications
Orange County Register and LA Times Ads
Direct Mailing to 88 Retail/Commercial Firms
Developer Pre-Submission Meeting
8 Development Firms in Attendance
Developer RFQ Submittals 2 Developer Response Received:
Sanderson J. Ray Development and The Ball Companies
Sanderson J. Ray selected by Agency to proceed with the Proposal
preparation process.
Agency terminates proposal solicitation due to Developer's
failure to perfonn.
Burge / Gallo Development submits written expression of interest
and developer qualifications.
Developer submits Development Proposal and Request for
Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate
(Utt Juice Building demolition proposed)
Developer Submits Draft Outline Business Tenns.
Agency Authorizes Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate with Burge/Gallo.
Developer changes directions and negotiations are tenninated.
September 16. 2000 SK Development submits written Developer Qualifications and
Proposal. (Utt Juice Building demolition proposed)
11/21/00
4/10/01
April 16.2001
June L 2001
Agency Authorizes Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate with SK
Development.
Developer and Agency tenninate negotiations unable to reach
satisfactory development tenns and conditions.
Back-up Developers investigating the site are infonned to submit
written Qualifications and Outline Development Proposals
(LelL'ion Pomeroy, Gorgino Development, Tolkin Group, ClM
Group, and Land Grant Development).
Tolkin Group and Georgino Development submit written
Qualifications and Development Proposals
(Utt Juice Building demolition proposed by each).
9/11101
5/30/02
June 14.2002
7/8/02
11/25/02
Agency Authorizes Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate with Tolkin Group.
Agency terminate negotiations due to developer's failure to perform and
inability to reach satisfactory development terms and conditions.
Pelican Center LLC / Tillotson submits written Developer Qualifications
and Proposal (Ut! Juice Building demolition proposed).
Agency Authorizes Exclusive Agreement to Negotiate.
Developer submitted revised conceptual architectural plans and
development program application; CEQA Initial Study started by City.
Uti Juice Property Redevelopment
Backup Developer List
Leason Pomeroy fir Jonathan Tolkin
LP3 Architecture ** Tolkin Group **
158 N. Glassell Street, Suite 201 (626) 535-0317
Orange, CA 92866 fax 535-0319
(714) 771-8400 tolkin(Q),earthlink.net
fax 771-8494 tolkingroup.eom
LP3ARCH@ao1.com (ref by: Lisa Kim, Orange CRA)
Contacted: 4/16/01 Contacted: 4/16/01
Vie Georgino John Givens
Georgino Development ** CIM Group
842 E. Grinnell Drive 6922 Hollywood Blvd., Suite 900
Burbank, CA 91501 Hollywood, CA 90029
(818) 845-3659 (323) 860-4975
fax 845-9609 mkurtz@cim.eom
georgino@lainetcom Contacted: 4/16/01
Contacted: 4/17/01
C. Samuel Marasco -
Land Grant Development
12625 High Bluff Dr., Suite 212
San Diego, CA 92130-2054
(858) 481-0094
fax 481-3108
Contacted: 4/17/01
** Expressed strong preliminary interest,folLow-up meetings scheduled week of 4/23/01.
Portion of e-mail that was sent to Jill Leach on Feb. 1,2003
Background on the Utt Juice Co. Old Town property.
Dear Editor:
My name appeared in the Jan. 23 Tustin News saying only, "Tustin Historical Society President
Dave Bryant wrote the city of his approval of demolishing the building", without giving any of
my reasons. I would like to make the record more complete. First, that letter expressed my
personal position, not that of the Society Board of Directors.
Historical Society records show the original building at 193 & 195 was built in 1907. They were
early 20th century warehouse construction, flat roofs, stucco exterior with narrow wood lath and
plaster interiors and a Victorian Italianate storefront. The building originally housed a dry goods
store. About 1920 c.E. Utt added a neo-classical brick faced addition at 191 East Main and
moved his juice making operation from his back porch into the building. By 1932 the juice and
jam making had been moved to three large metal sheds that had been built behind the subject
building and Utt sold the business to hcy Schellhous. The business closed its doors in 1973 and
the buildings have been vacant ever since. Only the metal, brick and glass elements of the
Victorian Italianate storefront can be salvaged. The rest of the building is beyond repair and
could only be replaced.
Item 4 on cover sheet
Additional information
In 1972 people were working at the Utt Juice company selling juice, jams and jellies. In 1973
the business shut down and the buildings have been vacant ever since. Several years later the
then owner added steel columns, tie rods and other steel members to help support the building.
During the installation of the steel colwnns the brick wall on the face of the third bay slwnped.
You can see where the gaps that opened between the bricks have been filled with grout. The
cost to the community from loss of revenue plus maintenance of the property has been several
thousand dollars each year. In the last seven years four development companies have failed in
their attempts to develop that property.
In 2002 Pelican Center LLC presented a proposal to build a restaurant and twelve shops with
living quarters on the second and third floors. The buildings were designed to be compatible
with other brick faced structures in Old Town. Their proposal, like the other four included
removing all of the existing structures.
Today Prospect Village, LP, a California Limited Partnership (formerly known as Pelican Center
LLC) is willing to carefully remove the facade elements and give them to those who are
clamoring for them to be saved. They are also planning to use some of the bricks ftom the
existing building in the new construction.
[];II Rosch"
DIRECTOR FOR
PRESERVATION ISSUES
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT
EXECUTIVE DrRECTOR,
WI,TTLES MANSION"
,JlFKTOR, THE SILE"" SOCIETY
DIRECTOR OF MEMBERSHIP
DEVELOPMENT
Amenc",' C;nemTlheq"
M;cheel y"" A,clor
7D,
ADtv¡INISìAA
MAY ìlON
03200;
RE:CE:IIIE:D
April 29,2004
The City Council, Tustin
Mayor Tony Kawashima, Mayor Pro-Tem Lou Bone
300 Centennial Way,
Tustin, CA 92780
RE:
Razing the Utt Juice Building
Dear Tustin City Council Members:
We implore you to use your leadership to bring to the table all interested parties in
this dispute and charge them with finding a solution that
. preserves the Utt Juice Building and
. brings in a development team with some innovative ideas for
adaptively re-using this structure in a way that will
. enhance the present Cultural District cityscape, provide outdoor
dining, bring in businesses compatible with those already in the
District (in both scale and consumer orientation) and
. provide a profit for investors in such a project.
Preservationists and developers can work together if they are all committed to
'thinking outside the box.' In the long run, preservation-based projects often
provide a developer a higher rate of return than 'throwaway' new buildings.
A project of this type fits the growing public interest in Cultural Tourism. As a
model I refer you to the accompanying story from the LA Times regarding Sierra
Madre's 'reinvention' of itself and their runaway commercial success amid their
'old junk.' Please consider that, with proper promotion, there are potentially
thousands of 'Old Town' buffs who may journey to Tustin to see its historic
Cultural District while only local residents will be drawn to patronize a new
Blockbuster or Rite-Aid. History has worked for Sierra Madre; it can work for you.
We would point out to David Bryant that once a piece of local history is gone, ifs
gone forever. It is tempting to believe that tearing down the old and replacing it
with the new-but-mundane will be a quick fix on encroaching downtown decay but
P.O. Box 2586,
www.hol
CA 90078, ) ß74-4005
. FAX: (323) 46.)-5993
it has been proven time and again that renewal without imagination does not
spark the hoped-for revival. Wlile Pasadena, Santa Monica and other historic
downtowns have revived dramatically, we here in Hollywood suffer daily INith
abandoned and under-performing new mega-projects that sucked up millions in
public money but turned their backs on the virtues of our historic district.
In addition to the Sierra Madre story, check out the current effort to restore
downtown Fullerton (LA TImes story attached). Since that article was written, their
City Council has agreed to match funds privately raised to restore the historic Fox
Fullerton. Or, look at the Monrovia 'Main Street' area. Or, for the best example,
look at Old Pasadena. Old Town, there, is a destination spot for people from
miles around who come to enjoy the restaurants, shops and theatres in that
setting of smaller scale, restored historic buildings. They are there for that
ambiance that grows out of a historic district.
Please don't waste energies duking it out over whose plan INiIi prevail. GET
TOGETHER and take possession of this resource that belongs to all who live
there and find a way to SHARE IT INith visitors.
If you don't build it, they INiIi come.
l;~r~ ^ I f\O /
(/ ~a~rn'£r~~
Immediate Past President
,(~J/I~
Robert W. Nudelman
Director for Preservation Issues
KT:ms
cc:Joyce Miller
David Bryant
Editor, LA TImes
" .. ~ ", - ,,' "~",,, "" , ,,- "
, -' " , DON ""'M.n",";,,""""'"
; A<..FRESCO: Once the California Hotel, the Villa Del Sol now houses shops and thepopulor Cellar R""taumntinFztllertnn. -" , ,
¡ F utl e rtOffS re invigorated core
By ,I 0',]' BAWDEN DAVIB
"IWC"""" """ """"
LEISURELY LUNCH: AweIl4",(Jum~ Ineal d;ni~,g spot ""ar th.
train station and dnivnlemiT/, FIlJ/erlon is FJerOf.'s Ca.~',
¡ Downtown Fullerton was a shellofits .
í original self just two decades ago, But after
, years of revitalization, the SO-acre residential
and nommercial core is the bustling heart of
th,is 11()-year~old city. The downtown ar'9a
soarn[ossJy combines century-old buildings arid
California bungâlòws with luxury apartments,
martini bars and¡iourmet coffee ,shops.
Drawin~ e.ard
[{¡¡ ,I1"" than tear down hiB"
I,ori,' hlliidings in disuse, city
plann"",: ,'h"'" to restore Fnller.
t,m": downtown, converting ex-
¡sting I,i"tm;c bulldings into
: nuxed.u"e spa,,". The hard work
"lid IIi,¡'cnLion to detail has re-
. slIlted in a self-contained com-
munity I;ch in history andfuU Of
modernconvenienccs.
daylight saving time, thç Farn}-
ern Market draws crowds' and
can cause gridlock.
middle Bchoo]s had a base seor
or 720,.QQt of 1,000, on the 200
Aeaderhiê.. Perfonnance inde,
At theþ)¡¡b school level, jtwa
678, "
Rot spoLs
popular eateries such as He-
rôès;the . .ocl<,;n' Taco Cantina
LInd St"nmN's Cafe, which has
live .I""" .¡:J1IInrive the area a vi-
hruJlt. urban feeL
80Co IlhearcosuulhofCom-
rnonwealth Aveuue. olf Harbor
Boulevard I is an nrtsy sectjon of
downtown with a number of res-
tRuran,s, as well as such buUd-
, jogs as the garage where Leo
, Feoder, creator of the Fender
1 guitar, ooened IúB l1rst shop in
, 1938. The Santa Fe Depot dates
~ 1.0 1888 and is on the National
I,! )legister ofBlstoric Places.
" 0.;00 n<'Ws. bad news
, Stockreport
Single-family hOmes are
sprinkled throughout down- Historical values
town. Many are three-bedroom, Single-Iamny detached"
one-bathroom California bunlJ'a. safes:"
Jows of about 1.000 square teet. Year.__.--_.__.MedianPric
There are 185 apartment units. 1990.....................................$180.00
I."A"""""'m,, Two luxury apariment co"",- 1995.....................................$150,00
plexes under constrncLion .are 2000 $210 00
haBundet;gODem¡JjQtr¡JnoylJtîon expected to provide nearly '1l1() 2002::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::$276;00
inrecentyel\I'8 and'thenightlife more units. 2003*.................................$320.00
~::~:~'ii"ea~:h:'~:~:on tbe market 'ye(lrto dal
borBo\l1evard has been aban In mid.September, tbe two Sources: DataQuiek
$~~~~ ~-:,;=4t~ =~.=::
~'L1mlteð,ParkingtsanØtberJs- ..- Michael Ritto, president of the
sue-downtown, especially during Repòrt card F'ltllcrtoj¡, J:jowntown Busines.,
the busy dinnet hour as custom. While there are no public Assn.;WinkelmannRealty,
erspatromzetbemore than 40, schools downtown. there ar" downtown Fullerton;
remaurants. onThurSdaYafierj.SE~¡~¡i.~~;i~ ~:~~i?iE~~
nos Augcltø &imtø
23 inches: 827 words
000132448
FAX pag.'1
MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2002, CALIFORNIA, PARTE, PAGE 3
COPYRIGH'f 2002 I LOS ANOELES'TIMES
Los Angeles
Sierra Madre
Looks to Past as It
Invests in
Downtown's
Future
8A $l-mil1ion renovation project
is getting rave reviews for
enhancing the city's quaint
çh3.lm. Free wrapping paper is a
hit with shoppers too.
By Cara ~ia DiMassa
Sierra Madre has always been con-
sidered a bit of a Southern California
anomaly - an old.fashioned town sur-
rounded by suburbia. a place devoid of
Stoplights and otber sign> of modemity.
There IS a Starbucks io town - but
here barristas £reet customers by name.
So wben the City Council con.
"deted how ID spruce up the civic center
and woo shoppers away from nearby
communiIies, Sierra Madre used hiStory
as its guidobùok. To prepare for its fu-
ture, Sierra Madre looked to its past.
A $1.mi1lion renovation to Sierra
Madre's downtown, centered on the in-
tersection of Sierra Madre Boulevard
and Baldwin Avenue, has been getting
rave reviews from business owners and
customers - in part because it reflects
the eit¡,'s personality.
"It was always quaint," said Karen
Keegan, owner of Savor the FJavor, a
specialty food store facing the intersec-
tion. "Now, it's channing and quaint. It
feels iiko going back in time, with class."
A million donars might not buy
much fol' most cilv centers. But in Sierra
Madre - aU 2.93 square mi)es of it -
tne transformation has been remarkabie.
Fifty uew traftie lamps along Sierra
Madre Boalevard. with their Doric
column bases, recall the lanterns tlult
muminaled the city in the 19108 and
'20s. Custom-designed bencbes and
trash cans, crafted of wood and wrought
iron. feawre a delicate pattm1 of leafs
and flowers.
The added "bow-outs" - concrete
planters butting out of the sidewaJks -
feature native plants and the .ame types
of pepper and sycamore treeS planted
ttJougbout Sierra Madre.
AJthougb an out,ider migbt suggest
that Sierra Madre exuded charm even
before its transformation, Mayor Doug
Hayes, a 30-year resident, said fuere had
been a worry thai the downtown district
lacked appeal.
"It was looking pretty stodgy," he
said. "Jt didn't have much personaJity to
it."
Tbe "beautification," Hayes said.
"has that old-timey feej, which is what
we were tIying to reach for."
Jt also has afforded Siena Madre a
chance to do something decidedly
modern: bring more tax doUars to tile
city by driving people into the stOres and
restaurants that line tbe civic center.
Sierra Madre. Hayes suggested,
offers a refuge from tbe chaos of maIl
shopping and the impersonaJity of onHne
buying.
"There's a real thrust 10 gO back and
to buy things from the community, espe-
cially to give to others as gjf't:;," he said.
"It makes it special when it's from ¡,our
hometown."
To build upon that homespun,
hometown appeai, the city designod a
special holiday wrapping paper and dis-
tributed it free to merchants. Tbe paper
- purple with wisteria flowers, the sym-
boi of Sierra Madre - was introduced at
a Dickensian holiday part)' that tbe city
threw in late November to coincide with
the completion of the downtown up-
grade.
And it has been a big hit.
"Even though it's purple, people are
coming in, aslOng for it," said Savor tbe
Flavor owner Keegan. "We have the red
and green, but nine times out of 10, they
want tbe one tlult says Sierra Madre."
The wrapping paper, combined with
the c¡vic improvements, have helped
create "a real sen,e of place," said City
Manager Tammy Gates. "It's made it
the kind of place where people could
park their cars, and get out and walk....
We see people utiJizing an the new
benches duriag the week and on the
weekends."
The only setback so far for the new
downtown has been the pepper tree con.
lrovcrsy: a small brouhaha over the
multi.trunlœd trees chosen for many of
the bow-outs. At a recent City Council
meeting, some merchants complained
that tree branches would hide signs
above local businesses. Local papers
carried stories about the trunks.
Hayes dismissed the hubbub as just
another aspect of srnaJl.town life in Sier-
ra Madre, population 10,000. "You can't
blow your nose here without having a
controversy," he sald. The city ba,
promised to trim the trees regularly to
avoid any problems.
Kim SperJing, an employ"" at
Leonora Moss. a florist and gift shop
aJong Baldwin Avenue, said she likes
tbe changes, pepper trees and a11.
"]t's definitely an improvement."
she said. "It lends itself to lingering in
tbe downtown."
But for Bruce Gill, a retired acting
teacher, the city's subtle changes were
perhaps a little too subtle. As he sipped a
Starbucks atop a newly added wooden
bench, he wondered what all the fuss
was about. "It hasn'l changed at an," he
said at first.
But wbat about the bench he was
sitting on, or the newly landscaped
bow.out nearby?
Gill acquiesced a bit. '"rhere are lit.
tie t!ùngs." he admitted.
What he appreciated most, Gill said.
was the fres!ùy painted crosswalk near-
by.
10S Angeles IDtmeS
. --..----------..--
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2003
Salvation
Books
a Room
. The resurrection of a
historic Southwest hotel
revives the declining city
of Winslow, Ariz., along
with the reputation of a
long-forgotten architect.
ByJ.R. MOEHRINOER
""'" S'affW"'"
WINSLOW, Ariz. - This city
was dead. Stores were boarded
up. residents were fleeing, down-
town was nothing but weeds and
ghosts. You could eat your lunch
in the middle of the main street.
the mayor says. without fear of
being run over.
Then, 10 years ago, some-
thing happened. Winslow set out
to save its one great building - a
1930s hotel where movie stars
and American icons once stayed
- and the building wound up
saving Winslow.
Restoration of the crumbling
La Posada triggered a chain re-
action of other restorations,
which remade Winslow's down-
town and revived its economy,
while spurring other less obvious
"restorations," from the legacy of
a brilliant Western architect to
the passion of an Orange County
peace activist.
Now, this historic city on
Route 66. with its smart new
public plaza and vogue new
cotreehouse. its crowded calen-
dar of art shows and poetry read-
ings, and its own international
film festival, is a ghost town no
longer. Residents are quick to
give credit for the sweeping
changes to several local boosters
and business leaders - but they
are most gra,teful to their re-
stored hotel. They speak of La
Posada as !fit were a person, and
describe the connection between
city and hotel as an intimate,
mutual debt:
Winslow filled the hotel with
guests. and the hotel rid Winslow
of ghosts.
The decline of Winslow began
more than 50 years ago, with the
decline of railroad travel. Wins-
low was founded in the 1880s as a
hub for the Santa Fe RaIlway
and a home for its workers. Jan-
ice GriJJith, director of the down-
town Old TraIls Museum, says
Winslow was once a city whose
heart and soul ran on ralls.
During World War II. 3,500
troops bound for combat in the
Pacific would stop each day in
Winslow to be fed. Some days.
residents would watch as trains
anived from the opposite direc-
tion, draped in black bunting,
laden with bodies of boys killed
in battle.
"The train would have 1.400
caskets and a three-man crew,"
Grimth says. "What this did was
create a sense of compassion
and support between towns-
people and all anivals. When
you're a travel town, you develop
that kind of relationship to peo-
ple coming through."
By the 1970s, however. fewer
Deoplc were coming through.
Cot'Y",;>" 100.1!CCt/IS6 PAG"
-u----
Winslow' sRevivalFollows His
[Winslow,from Page AI]
The decline ofrallroad travel was
followed by the opening ofInter-
state 40, which bypassed Wins-
low altogether. Overnight, Route
66 became a back road, Winslow
a backwater. Traffic vanished,
and with It went bars, cafes, gas
stations - life. The þopulatlon
swooned by 20%, to 8,000.
The starkest symbol' of the
city's demise was La Posada,
built by the Santa Fe in 1929 for
$2 million, a huge sum at the
start of the Depression. The ho-
tel, which closed, in 1957, stlll
dominated the main drag, but
was gutted and forlorn, a desti-
nation onJy for drunks trom
Winslow's roadhouses, who
passed out on its lawn. Although
the rallroad still owned La Po-
sada, the hotel's grounds were a
jungle and Its rooms used mainly
for omce space and storage.
StllI, a few stubborn Winslow
residents, led by Grimth, refused
to let La Posada go. They knew
that Albert Einstein, Clark Ga-
ble, Howard Hughes, Errol
Flynn, Will Rogers, Ha1Ty TrU-
man, Charles Lindbergh, Amella
Earhart and scores of other fa-
mous figures once snoozed in the
hotel's suites. They knew that
the 70-room hacienda-style
building was the masterwork of
Mary Colter, one of America's'
most important female' archi-
teets, a contemporary of Frank
LJoyd Wright.
They knew that someone out
there must care about saving
such an architectural treasure.
Colter had been the main
architect for the legendary Fred
Harvey CQ:, which built first-
class railroad hotels and restau-
rants throughout the West along
the santa Fe'S transcontinental
route. In 1928 ,she was tasked
with designing an oasis in the
wilds of northeastern ,Arizona
where people could spend a
night ofluxury before heading to
Los Angeles or Chicago, or visit-
ing one of the many nearby tour-
ist sights, like the Painted Desert
or the Petrified Forest.
Rather thaIl merely design
another swank hotel. however.
Colter created an 80,000-square-
foot, work of art, which chal-
lenged guests as much as It
cbanned them.
At 60 years old, Colter was at
the height of.fier pqwers when
she built La Posada, and the ho-
tel was a bold declaration of her
ideas, It tried to tell a story. It
uS!'<! '!Ü11ple materials that har-
monized,wlth the land It broke
with Euro¡>ean tradition by be-
ing I¡oth roughhewn and roman"
tic, like the American West Itself.
"When she was doing this, in
the earJy 1900s, it was new," says
Arnold Berke, author of "Mary
Colter. Architect of the South-
west." "She helped pioneer tlili;
style that someone later on
called 'NationaL Park Service
rustic.' "
Guests at La Posada stepped
directJy trom the train depot into
the, lobby, but Colter wanted
them to feel as If they were visit'
ing a wealthy family's ancestral
ranch in the SOuthwest of. the
19th century, so she Med the ho-
tel with common areas and cozy
libraries, Spanish arches and
long dark corridors. ,She ac-
centedthe infonnal atmosphere
with a hodgepodge of textures.
from embroidered silk to rusted
iron, and a dazzling array of fur-
niture: Here a pew 'trom an an-
cient Mexican church, there a
200-year-old wooden chest trom
a nearby farm.
The floors were equally eclec-
tic, made of stone, tile, brick, oak,
and in the hallways just outside
the guest rooms a mosaic of rub-
bery linoleum, extra soit, to muf-
fle the click of footsteps. Inside
the guest rooms'Colter covered
the oak floors with Navajo rugs,
which she, encouraged construc- .
tion Crews to trample as they
worked, to give them aweather-
"beaten look. ' ,
. When guests weren't adnûr-
ing her interior designs, they
could gaze through her many dIf-
ferent'sized windows, which,pro-
vided kaleidoscopic views of the
trains gliding Past 'all, day. If a'
train wasn't'", passing, guests
could look out at Colter's
grounds, a. stunning 20-acre
Eden in the high desert,wlth
sunken gardens, spurting foun-
tains, redolent flower beQs and a
genuine Hopi cornlield.
A stone wall with gun turrets
tronted one edge of the garden,
stage dressing that hinted at the
elaborate and historically accu-
rate back story Colter dreamed
up for her hotel: The wall was the
very kind of fortification that
would have been used to defend
a Mexican ranch on the fringe of
the trontier centuries ago.
Despite her achievement
with La Posada -, and other
well-known buildings, including
parts of Union Station in Los An-
geles, the ,La' Fonda hotel In
Santa Fe; and a hotel and other
strnctures at the Grand Canyon
- Colter's reputation faded soon
after her death In 1958. "She just
$ank Into obscurity: Berke says.
, "Any ~tory of American archi-
tecture did not mention her."
'FANTASY WORL'D': AllanA,jJeldt, outside La Posada's west
and centr(ll wings, tracked down Mary Colter's blueprints for the
80,OOO-square-foot hotel, butlt in 1929 by the Santa Fe Railway.
Famo,U3 pas( guest.! i1'lciudedHarry Truman and Amelia Earhart.
(When [Mary Colter J
was doing this, in the
early 1900s, it was
new. She helped
pioneer this style that
someone later on
, called ((NationalPark
, , Service rustic. " ,
Arnold Berke, author
L"",.,.,..l'Im..
, "'" ' "
La Posada, her tour de force. across the U.S., a massive trek of
might iÌave facled away too, If Citizens protesting the nuclear
GrifIi.~h and others' hadn't anns race. The march was fol-
pushed for It to be !i$ted on'the' lowed soon after by an even more
National,;':Re¡¡iSter '"of : Historic, ambitious walk across the Soviet
pJaces,tbAApubliclit)ditsp1ight. ,:Union.
"We ,JÏad.to get thè word out ':,", By the 1990s, however, Meldt
to the J;JåtiOn thJ\t we had a na,felt burned qut. He grew tired of
tiOnal hIštOiic -:JåIidÌriarkhere the peace ,movement's infight-
that was,' in jeopaidy,"GrifIlth ing; he says, and disillusioned by
says. ';To do that we had to avail the, nation's shiit to the right.
oW'SeIves of journalists. and "Looking for something to do,"
traveJwrlters across the country. he read about La Posada In 1994,
We had to get them to come here and drove here from Irvine to see
and see what we had. SO we of- It. "I didn't really plan to buy it,"
fered them every ounce of hospl-' says Meldt, 43. "I didn't drive
taJlty we could. Potlucks. Wine into Winslow thinking, 'Oh well,
toW'S. Free lodging:" I'll move here!' "
One of the' articles resulting, But La Posada seized his
trom this makeshiit media blItz imagJnJ¡.tion. He fell in iove with
caught the eyeofAl\Ím Meldt.A;,' the'notel's history and potential,
resident of Irvine-where heat-:' and believed that such'ajewel,
tended college ant! studied foil ,properJyrèstol'ed, could gener-
his doctorate In' cognitive sel. ",'ate enormôiIs publicity, attract
ence "':'Meld~, earned worldwide J>capltaJin\l~stment. renew civic
attention In the 1980sby helping \' ,pride, arid'ultimateJy lead a city-
organize the Great P~ace March ; \vide re~sance. Having falled
toric Hotel's
to save the world. he adnrits. he
saw in La Posada a chance to
save one dying city. "Though]
would never put it that way," he
says with a sly smile.
There was one hitch. La Po-
sada wasn.t for sale. "The rail.
road prefers to tear these buIld-
ings down," Affeldt says. "If they
sell them. they have to clean
them up. and this building was
full of oil. asbestos, lead pamt."
Affeldt persuaded Winslow to
let him represent the cIty in ne-
gotiations with the railroad. then
persuaded the railroad not to
knock La Posada down. For
three years he ran a gantlet of
railroad executives and local
politicians. until finally. in Janu-
ary 1997, he and his business
partner acquired La Posada for
$158.000. much of which he bor-
rowed from a mend.
Soon after. with his wife. Tina
Mion, an artist, Affeldt iaunched
the renovation. But he wanted to
do more than renovate; he
wanted to resurrect. And this
meant hunting up Colter's origi-
nal blueprints, which everyone
assumed were lost. "We found
them on nricrofilm in the rall-
road's engineering archives in
Topeka." he says. "They didn't
even know they had them."
Some of Affeldt's most eye-
opelling "research" entailed sim-
ply peeling away the layers of
plastic and vinyl and particle-
board the railroad had nailed
over Colter's turquoise and gold
sUlfaces.
While saving what could be
saved. Affeldt also went like a
bloodhound after what was
nrissing. Enonnous wooden
benches from the lobby. for in-
stance. had been spirtted away
to the tram station in FlagstaJr.
AITeldt asked Winslow's mayor
and several Winslow High
School football players to go "re-
claim" them.
Nine months into the renova-
tion. Affeldt checked in the ho-
tel's first guest in 40 years. Also
in 1997. Affeldt and Mion moved
into the hotel, making it then-
home. "We really live in this
80.000-square-foot Spanish haci-
enda," Affeldt says. "It.s kind of a
fantasyworld."
Affeldt.s business partner.
Dan Lutzick. lives just down the
block. in Winslow's abandoned
department store, whicb he
bought and turned into a 24.000-
square-foot lolt for himself and
his dog. He plans to convert part
of the space into another Wins-
low art gallery.
For $40.000 Affeldt also re-
cently bought Winslow's movie
theater. which had been dark for
years. The only movie theater in
all of northeastern Arizona, it
now shows new releases and last
year was the setting for the first
Winslow Fihn Festival. which Af-
feldt launched with the help of a
film dn-ector from Los Angeles.
The second annual festival is
scheduled for this October.
Such real estate bargams are
now hard to come by in Winslow.
"1 don.t think there's a single
building for sale in the down-
town historic district," AITeldt
says, stroihng past Standin' on a
Corner Park Built by Griffith.
the museum dn-ector. and other
residents a few years ago, the
park commemorates the Eagles
hit song "Take It Easy," which
celebrated Winslow. ("Standin'
on a corneriin Winslow, Arizona!
Suchafinesighttosee... ")
"Success begat success."
Winslow Mayor Jim Boles says of
La Posada. The population is on
the rise again. he says, and "traf-
fic in town has increased ten-
fold."
Unlike the old days, however.
people don.t always speed
through Winslow on their way
somewhere else. "] think people
drive through town." Boles says
with some wondennent. "just be-
cause they like it."
More than halfofLaPosada's
70 rooms have been completed.
the $12-million restoration proj-
ect funded with a mix of preser-
vation grants and hotel revenue.
Rooms range from $79 to $99.
and though much remams to be
done. especially io the gardens.
the hotel maiotaios an 800/0 occu-
pancy rate, drawing guests from
around the world.
Europeans come io great
numbers. Affeldt says. lured by
the genius of Colter, the legend
of Route 66, the music of the
Eagles - and particularly the ro-
mance of the railroad. Some 90
trams still go by La Posada each
day. and Amtrak's Southwest
Chief still stops dally at the hotel
depot.
Not every guest, however,
feels at home.
"This buildiog has a way of
weediog out certam people."
says Katy Reeder, a clerk at the
front desk. "They stay two min-
utes and come down to the front
desk and say. '1 can't stay here.
Too spooky. Too eerie.'"
It.s aimost as though Colter
finds certaIn pe01He unworthy.
Reeder says. and scares them o]j'.
WhIch means Wioslow may
still be a ghost town after all.
Except that now. the ghosts
have some civic pride.
14841 Del Amo Avenue
Tustin CA 92780-6132
May 7,2004
Tustin City Council
300 Centennial Way
Tustin CA 92780
RECEIVEL
MAY 0 2004
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENI
This is in regard to concerns about the redevelopment of the Vtt property.
As a result of the San Simeon earthquake many buildings in Paso Robles were rendered
uninhabitable. The citizens of Paso Robles have a strong concern for the town's heritage
and are worried about the "redevelopment" of the ruined, historical buildings.
Recently, the San Luis Obispo Tribune had a front page article about how an owner of
two of those historical buildings was approaching his redevelopment efforts. I have
enclosed a copy of the front page illustrations for your review.
This owner has done an extremely good job ofretaining the old while developing the
new. Perhaps the developer of the Vtt property could take this into consideration. A
similar type of redevelopment could mitigate animosity while improving the Tustin
downtown.
Regards,
~
cc:
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
Tustin Planning Commission
Tustin Chamber of Commerce
A TT A CHMENT F
Tentative Tract Map 16481 and Development Plans
alii i "
¡¡¡II :1
~ .", \".
i'," ,'I¡;
.,WI 'ill
i ! I
""'"Wt~11
~ ~¡ßI ;iil
f I ¡I,
¡"1:/I\\' I ii"
I pH "
~ ¡Ii,!, ¡ ¡~,!
, d ii"
I: III ~ Jill! ~ ¡Ii,
~~~=
.il!UiGlnl¡IIII~I¡,:~~S: '~II '
- ii, II! i! II! ¡~ 11'11 II¡~! !;I: lIi¡ il ¡¡Iii! ¡¡¡Ii ~
:""-~'¡'I: ;~;q;I~!'.I'. :'!, ~~!'~
!¡I! ¡i¡~iì!hl¡I¡I¡II¡¡!¡I¡LI¡i~!!l¡¡!¡ j~in I
I ¡I!III ¡Inli ¡iI~ ~¡m¡~~i!~I! 11!¡¡¡!iHml i ~~Ii~ II
. "., , '.
h ,
"'.".,...---;
~,'=....."..'-'8""'"
'","""""""""'-' "
JI- "I'~,'~I,~:::-=-'..-II! " -\"'m~.'" '- :,[~I!I'
';, "'-~..\'I~ Ii
. II ",i, 'I
. .. il't
-"-':-¥-_c':Cc'.~1;=;2c~j"Y-~ï=--~c="/'- '~J'i
I' " L:~
~~
~ ¡B
'it ~ ~~~ .J
(Q ~i~§ ~
.. §~~~ "
. ~ê' ~
0 ~;~! ~
~ h~, (¡
f.. ~,~s ~ ~
() m~ ~ ~
~ ~:d h ~
!oI. ~ ~" ~:¡
¡..: ~m a
8 ~~;; ~
!lJ ..h~ <!
~ -. a:
"-'~"I~
" !I
! co'il.
I!. 'T,-,-_-,-'~'-,-,,!"¡"
,.' I"
!Iil 'J -.t\c
:1" 1~"'1.
)!
~r '~~!',II¡
I~ ,I,
- "..m;~,¡.¡;¡
--'.,------. -- ,.~.
J .~-r----+:,¡:--,:, I
. I II '
, I
oliJ! 1\ I~ .~, ¡ 1 Ii-';
\ ! , !J¡.,,~ ~!:' J ," '"o\.I..-=~n
. i if .il:", 0 i¡, I I" I
!IJJlrjJ Ó I; ,II
Ii i¡ !~} J;~' l:l¡ ¡
~ I. I, h ,,-----.,,! '
""T', '--¡",l,; ~I! ~ hTTi" " '---'"., ';--, I. 111. II IT' ' '1, .",i: j'l .1
11'1""'1 "'."! 1',--'P~1ü
,'1',I.,'I,:."æ,T",-.,¡I,~";; 11J,~~f-¡,II!m;;II;"'."I¡I,:Ji,I,.,1 'il.""1,,.-I"',--,~,-,,-~,I,-,/,,'.i,~~h,
'1It1---,-,ii,JIII-~~"I¡f,~~""-,,,,!,!I;;~"J",'-~,,~~ 11',:,1 m,'::','"li~~~
~,Î ~ l111~"'I~~ Ir--r~ '11"i'~"~
,ij!¡I!",:.""", ,,'¡~kill::; i',~~'dl..:JÍ'J' i,
I I h-~;1. ~-,1~' II ~ '~I
"ill." "ii ',', a. : ~ .' ¡, IIl,"'~ a. - ---'it- I
--'¡'~I 'i "'"II Ili~.,
I' ~. 1 I!
~I
i "",1'1"
!,o I'i
111""":""
, ;~,
I ¡ ,
L¡,.. l
¡¡! " ,!
~
"11!I!i
~ ~h'i'
~ ~!!,
~
','
/
,__L-
'i'" '
'\"~
¡I-I.
(-I. .,
¡¡¡!!!:
I
I
I'
I¡
"
~ !I
~!,.
! ". Z
Î. ;- - ln~!
"
L_,
-- 1331::11 I. c' "" "
U- - ----.. ,-,_S"_,;N,I.V,,."',""."""""'.....!'.-'.'~,,;. ".' "~.'.','1.$".!','.',',"""',.'.-.-, ,- " ~.
. - "!Jt 1 - ,"I
1 ,'r"-' .~ ",
. . L ," " ',- ,--' ---,h"" ' I: ;
"7!1!;;,,i ¡"..' ; 1 ¡_u_,,~ i
;¡' Ii
II
I '
¡ II ¡~ I! ¡
I!!. I!i~¡¡~
ë ¡,c I"c
Jill; ¡ ,11
~
~.! .1'" .
~ ill; n ~
, llrol~-.G':.. ~. ;
,,~~..,
mLJ:¡h ~d r". [
¡ ! I ¡ ~ m~:( ,
r ï'~-L"-f-'c
!¡~..~r=¡;f[ ¡
í7II~~~
~.'~C~--l
,_crr
~ ~ ,;
'\?
~
'lS mJIH1
ZL.1J
:5lJ
~5
;)...J
8>
zf-
:5u
L.1J
D-.
V1
0
a:::
D-.
'~;f':'~";~
> .~ .-'
~r':'
,~" :
æ
!2J
g:
G~",
-
Mailbox detail
Main Street Elevation (South Elevation)
fi.j
Interior.View from courtyard looking towards commercial/office (North Elevation)
COMMERCIAL ELEVATIONS
PROSPECT VILLAGE
i';'
c-
.Q
iiJ
>
Q;
w
it
'::!.
<
"
"
I~i\',\,!,.",~","""
~ ",
~ ' --'
§
~w
Q()
1-«'
§..J
""-I
~>
1-1-
~U
OLU
°CL
3:l/1
0
Q::;
CL
c-
Q
iiJ
>
Q;
w
[
'0
Ii¡
ò
:;
0
u
E
0
.t:
Ej
ë
ClJ
'0
'~
Õ
3:
ClJ
:>
i",.,' \
æ
B
c
0
.~
>
( .J
üJ
~
:c
3
c
0
~
>
( .J
üJ
( .J
c
'"
....J
U
( .J
Q.
2
"-
c
0
.~
( .J
üJ
~w
is\.:)
~:s
G:;-I
~>
~~
Ow
oQ..
2"V1
0
0:::
Q..
~\
PROSPECT VILLAGE
Main Street & Prospect A venue
Planned Unit Development
ZONING DATA
~
~~~, H~'~-~
~,ro- ~,--
._~~,~
-~_..~--
~--,~'
~-='/_=
::~~,
~,¡-~"'
~~'/"""
æ.:~~'; -=~~i:;::::' ~"
~-_."-,-_.
.- " ~ "U ".-.
-~m ._~
~.'"
-.
,. ~ m~ ... ~ ".
;~::=)~~5ã
¡:¡%,=\T= "m;;, \\.
ffi~~.li:::. ~ ~~ ~_.J¡¡~,~.
"~.
~~""'-~!~E
""'-"""'"
._",
-~"~~=WM_'~=.
-'W~*,'»-'-'~
,-".,~,W_'~-"-,,
W ,- ~"..~
'WR>
M~"~~=W_-"'~=.
-'W~*,'~-'-'~-
._..~....=~-.,,-
._~.~-~
,.~-~_"....n.
-~-~-,.",~,n.
¡:¡~":"'::"..::"-,.m;;\\,
'"~,--~
--
m~
'.-~.n.
"...'~n,
u~~,n,
"'-"'"
~_~'..~n.-
~, '"U~. ". -~
~_"'.'N~n,=-'~
.......
æ¡:þ::~,.t~ ~~m ~ E
",00- .....n.
-_.~,.._.-~n
1:r"..~ ::'.::~~
~':::"'¡.:::~":"" - ~~.. ,~"-
'"'-""
~ "._--,-~
~'=,~-T~'¡f~" ~,
~,. ,,0-0" - -
~ ~ 5ft!,~:?! : ~.
¡¡¡:...-~-'¡¡¡~E
"'--~""_.-~'R""
. - ~ ~"-,
PROJECT TEAM
""-'-"""'"
~~".",n,
-~
.....~, n,
-.w~n.
"' ~n,
,. ~.n. ,-, -...'M. h~',,~' n,
-
~-~
=w-
-~...
-. . ov~
.._/~"-_o'
~-~~,
,-,=_._,
~,:r'.':'-;:',_.
"""""
~~~
'u..~~-
-_.'w,
;¡¡¡(:.:l;:~'-
:::':';':"'..i'W"
~
_~,,_~n.
,..-,,_'_n~"'.'"
m ,_"",~n.
~, . -".w ~ n.
m --".w,",n.
m ._"""m,"
~, ._"",m,n,
~, ,_,_m.n.
m .m,,'.m~n,
~, ._,....~n.
m".~'."m,n.
ffil¡.ê,j~îêË
......
.._~-
'w--
~:.':\";,::'-'
"'"""'-"'"
-~~
,...~-
~:.~';:"'"
~
::"I"m"'...:.."'~m.~
=-~=.-
(w)...~"m...
_m~...,"m,n.
..
~,
W,'
w,
""
'"
...
."
~"~::.::w,, ~~ .
~/'
:'1:'.. ";,,~ ""',¡,.,. m. n. - .
-
_~m_~~oo~
.,-~~,
BUILDING CODE
GENERAL NOTES
" ~~-~u__..o"
N" ~_WU~~_~m
~"'..":.:.".:~,~W~:J:'
~~::æ-.:='7'=:'f
. ~.~_.~-_.._._=.
- ~,.,_.-_._m-.~
-- ~. --~-,.-O"
~R- -~,
., ,~-_.~~ -~"""'""'.
~ -,--~W"".-
._=~~ -~
.. _._~.~.~-,-".
~ ,-_.__U~,,-
~.,-~ =.~~~
.. ~.ro~-~'" ~-
.~- -~~
" ---~~"'~-_.
~ -~--~,,~,
0, .._-,~~"-~-~~-
--- _N~~-,
.. U~---~~~~--
-~.-
",.~-,_ro._~~-
-- m_----"
_.~_W... "...~~.-
-..--.....- --
".~P~-"~~_"'_-_.'
- ---_W~~-~.~
m~~" H~_--~
.. ~~~~~~7~::F.-:;¡::~"
.. _m.'.~'~"Œ'~"~~"
, ~-~.~-~~
",-'Q-'""-""-~-~
~~-_...
ARCHITECTS
. ASSOCIATES. 'NC,
...::;:.';i".~~~
-"""'......
"""'I""'"
,_._._~
[f~'¡;.-;
¡r:;'E~.æ
'D:....~. _a~.-"" a "'""-.'
.
PROSPECT
VILLAGE
--.
-~.."~
N~,~
SHEET TITLE
TOI
~ ' ~ L33>il""'~ I' d"~- ~ Ë!
/rID)(1') /~) /œ') ~I~r ~ 0
" ," ,'-LU I:d- , -+-h' ¿f j +-p fig. . ~ 4
'::, I .n'~. '~ ,-
.II~ u~u è J ~ I¿;:, ,"_",ì
, ! ., ~ , L.':J ï"'~ ) i
.. III .Ii' gIll ~~I
I ¡ Ii! II ~ t:~' ~I
(j) ~
I " ':i., x' -JjÉ , CÞ::I% III Dc ~ "
, ~ ¡:;¡j x @ x' ~ !
Q- " (IP II ~ ~ ¡ ,
", r-! !.1 ¡'¡i!! Iv 12 ¡ 1,--1
I " " ,L! ¡ ,I I ~::¡ ~. .
I. .. ': ODD. 000 \¡ , g!.1i
Ii"., ~i>,. J l~ili!T r<'
;1. '? ~ ODD ~ ~J] j':>' ¡
III' " ~ ! ~ II§~,' . ~'3 ~ d¿~f . ~~ i.
';,:, >- I-i '~'f'\:!I¡-". Itl!~gii
I" Ii: ~ ~ . . OOD JU §Î " ~ ¡¡IIII I
:I,ò .. ~ '!I ~,¡.!o,
" ~ ,~ z.""
-, ~ :1'\" I .
¡.. L'- II'
h '~ II §¡ '" -m ~ / y; II ~ . lin!, ," , "
þ WI ;;;,,;,
~~o, @ II..,..¡ ~ ~ 'w ~@,@J III
ODD 'ono 11, g! @- ¡::: . J II mil I
Ii " ! .1 b 1..rnI; K:; T~ III~ !IIi¡,
I' ! ,hI' . ~J3 ~J] ~ ~ III!! ~II
j 0 ~ @@@@ ~
I . ~'" I/N,-' O'f° :' I !, .
\ .~ . é ,I I!jl
" ,'" - \.'" ¡.j ~ {') !¡II
, ' ,h!' fh, II @@oo
I;!f, mi ~ ODO:.m ~@ ! !! i
I ,.;I~, !@III:II
I..:, V'X\ ,,/ § ,I 1111
I! I; , ñ X ~ .k =1 .1 E on ;¡¡ f- ~@@@
;1: ~ \II.~ ~' r,..
<",'",
,
~@I ,,@ ~.\J
---
f +- !
Etr===
~
~
"""
I <ID Jil/
I
,
§¡I
.Ii
III I»
[0.
IV X
7' X
~~¥~
'Ii 1)1~
rn '!-t--I-tt I Ä \ ¡ m'-F -/ Œ "-
1il"1t 'if ~ 1\ m '1.: y
~ ,,/ ~ ~'N"" \!~
, .
i
I"
. ¡II ø
~~:~;~
. II
'II'
, i in ¡I!
¡ ; !i II ~i!1
§ 1.1 J iE!1
. ~ ee e rL ¡
~':III
is ~ ~
, 11:<' ~
~~ g
.~ g; ~
'--
¡¡r.o~j
-""~'
FIRST FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-1
t-~'~~'~~
~I :;: I ,.,.LJf.
PARTIAL FIRST FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-2
j-~~~
PARTIAL FIRST FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-3
,/,'.,'.,'
OD</BEDROOW
""""""
1
SECOND FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-1
-"'"
""'"
DE'"
""'MO" ""'IT,
""""MO" """',IT,
Jim\"""'" ,,:n~.¡¡
:¡¡~.a
~~
":':"'.',:;:. N' ,.-, ..,.J
PARTIAL SECOND FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-2
~--=-}
PARTIAL SECOND FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-3
,/,'.,'.,'
>1
--e-:J
;
PROSPECT
VILLAGE
~,,~,.
.,~"..'""'
""'-
m,"',"""""
"""",,,-,'
SHEET TITLE
AO2
~~ I!! 11¡~¡lt'I~:'
"'" 'I' III II,
~~i!i' I'rn't:!¡rril
-h I 0,11111,
.!~,D¡~~I~~~~jl. II. i.l: ...
N'
w'
~
...
Z
. ::J
~ Z
:; :'5
Do
It
0
0
..J
U.
0
Z
0
I. t>
. UJ
If)
: ~
~
S
~
s
~
~
-.'
.,,-,
. ~
. ¡ It
UJ
z
It
0
t>
~
...
Z
. ::J
. z
:'5
Do
! ~
0
..J
U.
...
¡ ~
u.
_.0
_.0
""¡""""
¡¡¡¡¡¡.. ¡¡¡.¡¡¡
2!, . "ii;;
.8 i
~~ -
~~ ~ ~~~
8. w-
~"., ~ .
U~ " t\t
i~~ ~ 0
." "'
~ '
!J
'"
h
----
ON""
¡Iii
=
=
, -,~
THIRD FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-1
~
.pARTIAL THIRD FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-2
~~~.~
PARTIAL THIRO FLOOR PLAN UNIT A-3 ~ .
~~
,e: ,..~ -
ARCHITECTS
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
..'::i.-::-.~~-
-"""'......
""'1 ""'"
~~~~
¡::.æ~-==
D:~~-,~"C- ...
: .-, -
,¡ R"i,ion"
"'=---
"'~
"IJIII~'.-
"'--
".---
"'m---
t:,=
ROOF PLAN UNIT A-1
~~'r~
J. '
PROSPECT
VILLAGE
~ ':::'~":,,
ru~.~.
PARTIAL ROOF PLAN UNIT A-2
~\~
I,
""'.11',",
"',~'":,o.:,,'
PARTIAL ROOF PLAN UNIT A-3
eno ! """1'111
~~¡! ~I !W¡i{t" I,..
~g ~j~ II!. ,,~:
1V~~iJìiI1l11:1'linl;:
.....«~i~IIr.JIIJ.~i
l
J
\
-.'
N'
,
!
!~
."-.
~. IN
...
~.
if--- I! ;;;;
~D
~ ~D
- ~ 0
~
ö ö
/l ~ ;
'.j ~
r-
Î
. U n
j J : ~ U
~~ §
..
r
.
!
f---
I
.'-.'
.-.,
. ."
."-.
'-þ
k."
0 '
!l
iIj
,
',) 0:
UJ
, ¡¡¡
0
()
.
,
.
,
.
g~ .~;
~3 ~ii
go> ii'
0:
UJ
Z
0:
0
()
:i
~
Z
:J
~
D-
u.
0
0
0:
~
I-
Z
:J
Z
:5
D-
o:
0
0
..J
U.
C
0:
:¡:
I-
!¡;¡i;fi,Ü'D j~~~W~~1
t:;~ ",
~~ II~i
::'> ! '
i! ~..:t'
i¡ i ~
~~
~~
ti~ ...
*j ~;~
æ5! !¡¡
.: ~rn~ -:
~~ ' Ë ..:t
~~ , t:; 0 ~
.~ ' ~ <{,
,.. ,
.
h
E3
CD
~
~~~ ~~
"
C[]
:' '
~
.
.
~~
f-
Z
::>
z
0
¡:: ,
~.
Wr
¡;j~
!::
z
..J
,eo"",
~,
"",'"
~,
"
1
'""""
""
~' '"
"
,.,.
mru<
j~~:ARIIlAL RIGHT ELÈ",. ,
UNIT "A-2" '1,.>-0
'"~""
,..
OJ
B
~:;¡"'"
RIGHT ELEVATION UNIT (TV!",)
UNIT "A-1"
'"~""
""
:: :::~ ".
8
[3
" ~
FT ELEVATION UNIT (TYP.)
UNIT "A-1"
::.:;t
"'--~ "
PARTIAL RIGHT 'L~~
UNIT "A-2" 'I'-'~
"""n
u",
"""n
u"
",-,.',
"
'.0. ,~"',.
Q ..,d
>f, ~,
PARTIAL LE
UNIT "A-3"
',."" lot
EiE~ ~
0/0""'-
'I' R"¡,i,n,,
, '" IIIf-"'-
, "'--"-
"'~
"'-
"'...-
"'----
6-
PROSPECT
VilLAGE
-~"
'1 ~~,~,
¡ ru~,~.
"""'.,-
,~~O~"
',-
SHEET TITLE
AO5
.liD j~~I~Wjl!
~
'
~ ~, ~ I"J:I ",_,[8J,ì"!~. ì!
~~
~f
I, ~
.~" 110 ~
c
z
c
'-'
~
II
~-
"-."
r'l
~ g
!
cò
f-
, Z
" \ :J
~
n.
0:
0
0
..J
, L1.
, C
z
~, ~
~!
U
. ~~
~~~ ~-l] I'
. -", '8
Ii
~
¡¡:
n
, cò
,. f-
'z
:J
z
! ~
0:
. 0
; 0
. ..J
L1.
[: i
" .
~I
B::¡ .~;
~3 !~i
æ> II'
!~~.~.~.-O.'.'. '.'"
u .: 0 '
i~ ::: <t
!;< i:i
, - ,
~"
~; "I:
¡ ~
'"
cò
f-
, Z
" , :J
'z
~
\ n.
. 0:
0
0
..J
, L1.
Z C
z
JL §
C/)
t't'~' t't't'
~~~ ~~~
!H 00"
d ~
;1 ~ ~h
~
, ~
'"
'1'
, OJ
¡ \ !::
'z
:J
Z
! ~
n.
0:
. 0
; 0
. ..J
L1.
J~ t;
0 0:
. ¡¡:
liD ¡~~~~~~jl '. 11 ¡Ii
;i
I~I'~"
I oN I~
~'T
;i
m
.t-
'Z
:J
~
11.
a::
0
.' 0
...J
U.
Q
a::
~
,
,
!:
.---J!
Q
m
t-
Z
:J
~
11.
U.
0
0
a::
'"
- m
011
'"
m
: ! ~
:J
Z
J :'S
. 11.
a::
J 8
. ...J
U.
Q
a::
, ~
'"
m
t-
z
:J
Z
:'S
11.
U.
0
0
a::
. .
"I
In
t-
Z
:J
~
11.
U.
0
~
I~I
.ìL
~
d;D ":!,~,I,~,IWl,~II,, n Ii;
, ." ,~~,<I.,~ <I ~.oJ <I .",... .
I~" I~ ž
0
f-
Z
. :;)
- c
z
w
III
I .".0
,1!
,
,
!~
¡¡
Q
,.
~
z
0
f-
Z
:;)
c
z
w
en
f-
Z
:;)
z
:5
a.
4 t
0
a;
en
:,. f-
z
:;)
z
. :5
a.
. a;
.' 0
0
....
LL
~ C
~ Q;;
:I:
f-
8"rn- :
ii;, Ë, "",,, ,
. 0 .
fh g ~
~. ~ ....
~~ ¡ ~"'ï~!I
ow'; ¡il ! 11111.1111
~ ,~I. .1 1111
!::~ <, I! III Ii';'."
5Hl'¡ ;. .t"I"n!
~!1i: ! I ,ß!¡HII.
~ !llll111111111
~""<!"HI<I<I
g~ äi,
:J;~ !'¡
~> II,
e~~.. ~ œ.
! : 0
II * 4
to . ~
b~ h ~ ~~
.¡¡
~"
*~
..
J
,
~
,
~
"~
~~
~~
J
~ .
~~
,0-."
'""'"
""
:~¡"'"
ni;"
,.,
"u,
_,m
~
~
æ æ DO
rn ill DO
DO
~~¡O""
:'!iJ¡"'"
"'- "
:'!iJ¡""" Þ"" . ~
rn rn
DO rn
'"""'"
U"
'","'",
""
LEFT ELEVATION UNIT CIY!'J.
UNIT "B-1"
"
"".
".
"'"
.,,¡,ion"
£Øt""-
A~
"A IIIIf""UL-
A~
¡¡"'.---
"""-
[:,=
PROSPECT
VILLAGE
__a,
~,-,
-...
""u....""
... ...,,'"
"..".",. u", ,.
SHEET TITLE
AO9
!3~ ¡ìÎ I~¡¡¡iim\l I 'd. .. ~1¡11Illllllll
W~I,i~ .dll¡l: , ¡ .
i~¡~i 1!~!i!~~¡:.ii¡I¡¡¡~¡!¡ ..... . , " j~.,~~~~~~
g~ ;L
~~ !~i
go> ¡~'
~~ 'j-:
¡¡z "()
~¡~ ; 0 .
~ ~<3:
¡;: . ~
¡~§ ~~ d
I
n
.~
~~
~§
..
~~
"~
~~
~~
"~ E;3 IE3J J
~ '
EI B
I.~'l .:~ 1~,I'T'-'
.r
- L-
!
;,¡ Ii
,~ ¡o
~h
~. ¡I
~
!
.
~~
~~
,
iii
C I
)
..~
~'f
~ ,
z
:S t'd
a. ci ci ci
~ ~ ~ ~
0 ..
~ ~. 0
Ii; 8"
Q; ~h
u.. _.0
0
4
~ :
~" "
~I '
.~
~ !
.
¡
¡
~i:! I'
~~ -I
PI
""",
'" ",.
1111
III,,!
1111
I I
H I"::: I
¡
E-
O"
~.
-I
~
.. 73-'
--==-" .
,
~
z
~
a.
II: tt
g g g
i 3"
!i i
8P
!IJ ~ ~
.~ -
i <i
¡
~i:j I-
~j
:g~ .;
g'> ¡!
. .'-,'
~ C\
i <i
¡
I . "
~ .
~
i~
gi
.~
! I
.
¡
I
~i:! I'
~~ .f
g:> !
~""~
;"..;.
1111
III;,!!
1111
I
.
¡ ,
z
0
~
¡¡;
..J
W
f0-
r¡¡
L1i
fo-
J:
CJ
¡¡:
~
,"
,~
II)
«
. '
I i
, I~ :
~~
"~
~
u !
.
~
~ !
~~ I,
~~ .f
Pi
;;;;;;!
""".
ATTAC~NT G
I
Resolutio No. 04-45
Exhibit A - Final nvironmental Report
Exhibit B - Findings of Fact/Stat ment of Overriding Considerations
Exhibit C - Mitigati1n Monitoring Program
I
I
I
RESOLUTIc )N NO. 04-45
A RESOLUTION OF THE CIl!Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, CERTIF!vING THE PROSPECT VILLAGE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IM~ACT REPORT AS COMPLETE
AND ADEQUATE PURsuANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY A~T FOR ZONE CHANGE 03-002,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16!481 , DESIGN REVIEW 03-012,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMll1 03-012, AND FINDING THE
DISPOSITION OF PROPERl1Y OWNED BY THE TUSTIN
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE
GENERAL PLAN
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hßreby resolve as follows:
I.
A.
The City Council finds and determines as follows:
That a proper application for Zone Change 03-002, Tentative Tract Map
16481, Design Review 03-0112, and Conditional Use Permit 03-012, was
submitted by Prospect Village LP, a California Limited Partnership (formerly
known as Pelican Center LLC), requesting approval to rezone the project
site from "Central Commerci¡:¡I-Parking Overlay" to "Planned Community"
and establish Planned Community District Regulations, subdivide a 1.036
acre parcel into thirteen (13) ~umbered lots and one (1) lettered lot for the
purpose of developing an approximately 9,300 square foot commercial
building and twelve (12) live/work units, and establish alcoholic beverage
sales in conjunction with ¡ ¡ future approximately 3,000 square foot
restaurant at the northwest Gomer of Main Street and Prospect Avenue.
In addition, a General Plan Conformity Finding is required for disposition of
property owned by the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency.
Together, these entitlements éjre known as the "project."
B.
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Calif. Public
Resources Code Sec. et. seq~ 21000) and the State Guidelines, the City of
Tustin has completed the fþllowing actions in preparing the Prospect
Village Final EnvironmentallrPpact Report (FEIR):
1.
An Initial Study was prepared to determine whether any aspect of
the project, either intJividually or cumulatively, would cause a
significant impact on the environment and to narrow the focus or
scope of the environmßntal analysis.
2.
On April 17, 2003, a N¡otice of Preparation was filed with the State
Clearinghouse in the, Office of Planning and Research, which
circulated the documeillt for review.
Resolution No. 04-45
Page 2
D.
3.
On April 22, 2003, a nqticed public scoping meeting was conducted
to seek public input r~garding the environmental issues raised by
the proposed project a~d the scope of the EIR.
4.
On January 9, 2004, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
was released for a 45~day public review and comment period. A
copy was also filed .yvith the State Clearinghouse. The DEIR
assessed the signifidant environmental impacts and set forth
mitigation measures tq lessen impacts associated with the project.
The comment period on the DEIR closed on February 23, 2004.
5.
A Final Environmentallimpact Report (FEIR), including responses
to written public comnjlents was prepared and made available for
public review on April 116, 2004.
On April 26, 2004, the ~Ianning Commission held a public hearing for
the project and recommended that the City Council certify the Final
Environmental Impact *eport as complete and adequate pursuant to
the California Envirormental Quality Act for the purpose of
recommending approv~1 of Zone Change 03-002 and Tentative Tract
Map 16481 and certifi~d the Prospect Village Final Environmental
Impact Report as com~lete and adequate pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality i Act for the purpose of approving Design
Review 03-012, Conditional Use Permit 03-012, and finding the
disposition of prop~rty owned by the Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agencjy in conformance with the Tustin General
Plan. .
6.
7.
On May 3, 2004, the City Council appealed the Planning
Commission's decision$ to the City Council.
On May 17, 2004, th$ City Council held a public hearing for the
project and consider~d public testimony prior to rendering a
decision on the project¡
8.
In accordance with Sectiom 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines,
Prospect Village Final Envi~onmental Report consists of the following
items, which are attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by
this reference:
1.
Volume 1 including t~e Draft EIR, including all appendices and
technical reports thereto; and,
Resolution No. 04-45
Page 3
2.
Volume 2 including a list of persons, agencies and organizations,
commenting on Draft ~IR; all comments received, responses of the
City to significant environmental points raised in received
comments; and errata.
The FEIR analyzes the potehtial environmental impacts associated with
the project. The FEIR evalu~tes the proposed project, which includes the
rezoning of a 1.036 acre pro~erty located at the northwest corner of Main
Street and Prospect Avenuei from "Central Commercial-Parking Overlay
(C2-P) to "Planned-Community (P-C)", subdivision of the property into
thirteen (13) numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot, and construction of an
approximately 9,300 square, foot commercial building and twelve (12)
live/work units. In addition to a "No Project Alternative", the FEIR also
evaluates a range of project alternatives, including the following:
E.
1.
Full Reuse Alternatiwe: The Full Reuse Alternative entails
rehabilitation and reuse of the existing Utt Juice buildings in
accordance with the Secretary's Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties wit¡, Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating,
Restoring, and Recon~tructing Historic Buildings, 1995, Weeks and
Grimmer ("Secretaryjs Standards and Guidelines"). This
Alternative also entail$ new construction of retail building addition
on the vacant pad arE¡a immediately west of the 191 Main Street
building ("191 Building!). The remaining northerly portion of the site
would be developed w~h ten (10) live/work units.
2.
Partial Reuse AlternatiVe: This Alternative would rehabilitate and
reuse the 191 Building and partially rehabilitate and reuse the 193,
195 Building (to a dep~h of sixty) in accordance with the Secretary's
Standards and Guidelines. This Alternative also entails
construction of a new two story building to a depth on the pad area
immediately west of the 191 Building. The remaining northerly
portion of the site would be developed ten (10) residential live/work
units.
3.
Partial Reuse (193, 1~ Building Only) Alternative: This Alternative
would partially rehabili~ate and reuse the front forty five feet of the
193, 195 Buildings in i accordance with the Secretary's Standards
and Guidelines. Thei 191 Building would be demolished. This
Alternative also enta~ls construction of a new two story retail
building on the remai~ing pad area west of the 193, 195 Building.
Similar to the propos~d project, the remaining northerly portion of
the site would be developed with twelve (12) live/work units.
Resolution No. 04-45
Page 4
H.
I.
J.
4.
Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative: The Full Reuse Under
Existing Zoning Alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the existing
structures in accordance with the Secretary's Standards and
Guidelines. The alternative also entails construction of a new
abutting 2,200 square 'feet single story retail building on the vacant
site immediately west of the 191 Building. The remaining northerly
portion of the site wOlilld be developed with a two-story retail and
professional office building.
5.
Façade Reuse Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation and
reuse of all or a portion of the façade of the 193, 195 Building as
may be technically feasible, which would be incorporated into a
new two story Main street building. All other project components
would be similar to the. proposed project.
Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15091 of the
State CEQA Guidelines require that the City Council make one or more of
the following findings prior to approving or carrying out a project for which an
EIR has been prepared identifying one or more significant effects of the
project, together with a statement of facts in support of each finding:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction
of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted
by that other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the
EIR.
State Guidelines Section 15093(b) require that, where the decision of the
City Council allows the occurl1ence of significant effects which are identified
in an EIR, but are not at least substantially mitigated, the City Council must
state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the FEIR or other
information in the record;
State Guidelines Section 15093(a) requires the City Council to balance, as
applicable, the economic, leg¡¡l, social, technological, or other benefits of a
proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining
whether to approve the project; and
Resolution No. 04-45
Page 5
II.
V.
VI.
VII.
K.
A lead agency that makes findings on significant effects in an EIR must also
adopt a program for reporting or monitoring mitigation measures that are
made conditions of project approval.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby find and determine that the
Prospect Village FEIR was reviewe(! and considered by the City Council before
considering approval of the Project and that the FEIR reflects its independent
judgment and analysis.
III.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby find that the project involves
no potential for any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife
resources and makes a De Minimis Impact Finding related to AB 3158, Chapter
1706, Statutes of 1990.
IV.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby find that changes have been
required in, or incorporated into, the project that will mitigate or avoid potentially
significant adverse effects related to hazards, short term construction traffic, and
parking identified in the FEIR and that all mitigation measures contained in the
FEIR are adopted and included as conditions of approval of the Project.
The City Council of the City of Tustin hereby finds that there will be significant
effects which, are identified in an EIR, which will not be substantially mitigated, and
sets forth the Findings of Fact, which includes the reasons to support its action
based on the FEIR or other information in the record, as attached as Exhibit B, and
incorporated herein by this reference;
The City Council of the City of Tustin hereby finds that the unavoidable significant
environmental effects of the project related to cultural resources and land use are
outweighed by the economic, social, technological, and other benefits of the
project, as set forth in the Statemant of Overriding Considerations attached as
Exhibit B, and incorporated herein by this reference.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby adopt a Mitigation Monitoring
Reporting Program is set forth in Exhibit C, incorporated herein by this reference,
which provides a checklist of mitigation measures identified in the FEIR to
monitor the progress of each measure. The following information is identified for
each measure listed in the checklist:
1.
The text of the measure is provided which contains the criteria for mitigation,
either in the form of adherence to certain adopted regulations or
identification of the steps to be taken as mitigation.
2.
The timing of the implementation of the mitigation measures is indicated.
Resolution No. 04-45
Page 6
3.
The table lists the appropriate responsible or supervising party or agency to
perform or enforce the mitigatibn measure or implementation measure.
VIII.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby find and certify that the Prospect
Village FEIR has been completed in compliance with the requirements of CEQA
and the State Guidelines and certifies the Prospect Village Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) as complete and adequate pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act for the purpose of approving Zone Change 03-002,
Tentative Tract Map 1648, Design Review 03-012, Conditional Use Permit 03-
012, and a General Plan Conformity Finding for the disposition of property.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of Tustin City Council held on
the 17h day of May, 2004.
TONY KAWASHIMA
Mayor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 04-45
SS
PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 04-45 was duly passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 1yth day of May,
2004, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
Resolution No. 04-45
Page 7
EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 04-45
PROSPECT VILLAGE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SEE VOLUMES 1 AND2 SEPARATELY BOUND
COUNTER COpy
VOLUME 1
PROSPECT VILLAGE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
191, 193, & 195 EAST MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: City of Tustin
April 2004
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
Prospect Village EIR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
VOLUME 1: FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .....................................................................................................ES-I
PROJECT OVERVIEW......................................................................................................ES-I
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTIONS...........................................................................ES-I
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES....................................................................................ES-I
ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED AND AREAS OF CONCERN............................................ES-3
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES....ES-3
1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ I-I
1.1 BACKGROUND, SCOPE AND CONTENT............................................................ I-I
1.2 PURPOSE AND LEGAL AUTHORITY.................................................................. 1-2
1.3 EIR ORGANIZATION..............................................................................................1-3
104 EIR PROCESS........................................................................................................... 1-4
1.5 AVAILABILITY OF THE DRAFT EIR................................................................... 1-4
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION & ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING.................................. 2-1
2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND .............................,....................................................... 2-1
2.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ..........................................................................................2-1
2.3 PROJECT LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS ..............................."......... 2-2
2.3.1 Location .........................................................................................................2-2
2.3.2 Physical Environmental Setting.....................................................................2-4
2.3.3 Project Site History ........................................................................................2-6
204 PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................................2- 7
2.4.1 Main Street Building...................................................................................... 2-7
2.4.2 LivefWork Units ............................................................................................2-9
2.4.3 Other Project Design Features ..................................................................... 2-10
2.404 Off Site Improvements.................................................................,............... 2-10
2.4.5 Construction Requirements and Schedule ................................................... 2-10
CUMULATIVE PROJECTS...................................................................................2-14
INTENDED USES OF THE ErR ............................................................................ 2-16
RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES ..................................,...............................................2-17
REVIEWING AGENCIES .............................................................................,........ 2-17
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS & MITIGATION MEASURES ................................3.1
3.1 AESTHETICS.........................................................................................................3.1-1
3.1.1 Introduction.................................................................................................3.1-1
3.1.2 Environmental Setting ................................................................................ 3.1-1
3.1.2.1 On-Site Visual Elements............................................................. 3.1-1
3.1.2.2 Surrounding Visual Elements ..................................................... 3.1-5
3.1.2.3 Existing Views of the Site........................................................... 3.1-8
3.1.204 Light and Glare ...........................................................................3.1-8
3.1.2.5 Applicable Regulations...............................................................3.1-8
Prospect ViUage EIR
'-----'-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
3.1.3 Impacts and Mitigation .......................................................................,..... 3.1-13
3.1.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance ...................................... 3.1-13
3.1.3.2 Project ..Impacts........................................................................ 3.1-13
3.1.3.3 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................. 3.1-16
3.2
AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................"....... 3.2-1
3.2.1 Introduction.................................................................................................3.2-1
3.2.2 Environmental Setting ................................................................................ 3.2-1
3.2.2.1 Climate and Meteorology ........................................................... 3.2-1
3.2.2.2 Existing Air Quality .................................................................... 3.2-2
3.2.2.3 Sensitive Receptors..................................................................... 3.2-5
3.2.2.4 Air Quality Management ............................................................ 3.2-6
3.2.3 Impacts and Mitigation ............................................................................... 3.2-8
3.2.3.1 Criteria for Deternrining Significance ................i....................... 3.2-8
3.2.3.2 Impacts........................................................................................ 3.2-8
3.2.3.3 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................. 3.2-10
3.3
CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................... 3.3-1
3.3.1 Introduction.................................................................................................3.3-1
3.3.2 Environmental Setting ................................................................................3.3-1
3.3.2.1 On Site Conditions...................................................................... 3.3-1
3.3.2.2 Archeological/Paleontological Resources ..................................3.2-3
3.3.2.3 Applicable Regulations...............................................................3.2-3
3.3.3 Impacts and Mitigation ............................................................................... 3.3-9
3.3.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance ........................................3.3-9
3.3.3.2 Impacts........................................................................................3.3-9
3.3.3.3 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................."... 3.3-11
304
HAZARDS .....................................................................................................304-1
3.4.1 Introduction.................................................................................................304-1
3.4.2 Environmental Setting ................................................................................304-1
3.4.2.1 Physical Site Characteristics ....................................................... 304-1
304.2.2 Current Use of the Property ........................................................3.4-2
304.2.3 Past uses of the Property .............................................................3.4-2
304.2.4 Current and Past Uses of Adjacent Properties ............................ 304-3
3.4.3 Impacts and Mitigation ............................................................................... 304-3
304.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance ........................................ 304-3
304.3.2 Impacts........................................................................................304-4
304.3.3 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................"...... 304-7
"'0"""-0-'-" ""------:-íi-::---'----"'-'--""""-----.""'"
Table of Contents
Prospect Village EIR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
~
3.5
LAND USE ..............................................................................................................
3.5.1 Introduction.................................................................................................3.5-1
3.5.2 Environmental Setting ................................................................................ 3.5-1
3.5.2.1 On Site Land Uses ......................................................................3.5-1
3.5.2.2 Surrounding Land Uses............................................................... 3.5-1
3.5.3 Applicable Land Use Plans and Zoning...................................................... 3.5-1
3.5.3.1 Tustin General Plan..................................................................... 3.5-1
3.5.3.2 Town Center Redevelopment Plan ............................................. 3.5-5
3.5.3.3 Zoning Ordinance ....................................................................... 3.5-7
3.5.304 Old Town Vision Document..................................................... 3.5-10
3.504 Impacts and Mitigation ............................................................................. 3.5-12
3.504.1 Criteria for Determining Significance ...................................... 3.5-12
3.504.2 Impacts......................................................................................3.5-12
3.5.4.3 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................. 3.5-15
3.6
NOISE ..................................................................................................... 3.6-1
3.6.1 Introduction.................................................................................................3.6-1
3.6.2 Environmental Setting ................................................................................ 3.6-1
3.6.2.1 Fundamentals of Environmental Acoustics ................................ 3.6-1
3.6.2.2 Noise Environment in the Project Area ...................................... 3.6-2
3.6.2.3 Sensitive Receptors in the Project Area...................................... 3.6-2
3.6.204 Applicable Standards .................................................................. 3.6-3
3.6.3 Impacts and Mitigation ............................................................................... 3.6-6
3.6.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance ........................................ 3.6-6
3.6.3.2 Project Impacts............................................................................ 3.6-6
3.6.3.3 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................... 3.6-9
3.7
TRAFFIC .....................................................................................................3.7-1
3.7.1 Introduction................................................................................................. 3.7-1
3.7.2 Environmental Setting ................................................................................ 3.7-1
3.7.2.1 Regional and Local Access......................................................... 3.7-1
3.7.2.2 Existing Traffic Conditions......................................................... 3.7-2
3.7.2.3 Existing Parking..........................................................................3.7-6
3.7.3 Impacts and Mitigation ............................................................................... 3.7-6
3.7.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance ..............................."....... 3.7-6
3.7.3.2 Impacts........................................................................................ 3.7-7
3.7.3.3 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................. 3.7-13
Table of Contents
Prospect Village EIR
,
--------...---
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
4.0 ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................4-1
4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................4-1
4.2 Alternatives Considered, But Eliminated From Further Consideration..................... 4-1
4.2.1 EI Camino Real/6th Street Site Alternative ..................................................4-1
4.2.2 W. First St. Site Alternative........................................................................... 4-2
4.2.3 Relocating The Utt Juice Buildings .........................................................""" 4-2
4.3
Reasoning for Selection of Alternatives ....................................................................4-3
404
Project Alternatives.................................................................................................... 4-3
4.4.1 No Project Alternatives.................................................................................. 4-5
4.4.1.1 Alternative Description.................................................................. 4-5
404.1.2 Comparison of Impacts.................................................................. 4-5
404.1.3 Consistency with Project Objectives ............................................. 4-5
4.4.2 Full Reuse Alternative ................................................................................... 4-6
404.2.1 Description of Alternative.............................................................. 4-6
404.2.2 Comparison of Impacts.................................................................. 4-6
404.2.3 Consistency with Project Objectives .............................................4-8
4.4.3 Partial Reuse Alternative ............................................................................... 4-9
404.3.1 Description of Alternative.............................................................. 4-9
4.4.3.2 Comparison of Impacts................................................................ 4-10
404.3.3 Consistency with Project Objectives ........................................... 4-12
40404 Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only) Alternative.................................... 4-13
40404.1 Description of Alternative............................................................ 4-13
404.4.2 Comparison of Impacts................................................................ 4-13
40404.3 Consistency with Project Objectives ...........................................4-15
404.5 Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative.................................................... 4-16
404.5.1 DescripTIon of Alternative............................................................ 4-16
404.5.2 Comparison of Impacts........................................................... .....4-16
404.5.3 Consistency with Project Objectives ........................................... 4-19
404.6 Façade Reuse Alternative ............................................................................4-19
404.6.1 Description of Alternative............................................................ 4-19
404.6.2 Comparison of Impacts ................................................................ 4-19
4.4.6.3 Consistency with Project Objectives ...........................................4-20
4.5
Economic Feasibility Analysis ................................................................................ 4-20
4.6
Summary Comparison of Project Alternatives ..............i......................................... 4-22
4.7
Environmentally Superior Alternative.....................................................................4-22
"""" - lV-:---'-"""'-"""'----""'" .
Table of Contents
Prospect Village EIR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
5.0 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................. 5-1
5.1
5.2
5.3
504
5.5
Introduction
........................................................................................................5-1
Effects Found Not To Be Significant......................................................................... 5-1
Irreversible Environmental Changes.......................................................................... 5-1
Growth Inducing Impact............................................................................................5-2
504.1 Direct Growth Inducing................................................................................. 5-2
504.2 Indirect Growth Inducing...............................................................................5-2
Significant Unavoidable Environmental Impacts ...................................................... 5-3
6.0 REFERENCES
........................................................................................................ 6-1
7.0 LIST OF EIR ..PREPARERS........................................................................................... 7-1
FIGURES
Figure I-I
Figure 2-1
Figure 2-2
Figure 2-3
Figure 2-4
Figure 2-5
Figure 2-6
Figure 3.1-1
Figure 3.1-2
Figure 3.1-3
Figure 3.1-4
Figure 3.1-5
Figure 3.1-6
Figure 3.1-7
Figure 3.7-1
Figure 3.7-2
Summary of the CEQA Process........................................................................... 1-6
Regional Location Map........................................................................................2-3
Old Town Commercial Map ................................................................................ 2-5
Prospect Village Site Plan.................................................................................... 2-8
Elevations...........................................................................................................2-11
Elevations........................................................................................................... 2-12
Elevations........................................................................................................... 2-13
Site Photos ........................................................................................................ 3.1-2
Site Photos ................................................................................................"...... 3.1-3
Site Photos ................................................................................................,....... 3.1-4
Surrounding Uses Photos..................................................................................3.1-6
Surrounding Uses Photos.................................................................................. 3.1- 7
Town Center Redevelopment Plan Project Area Map.................................... 3.1-10
CR Overlay District Map................................................................................ 3.1-12
Project Distribution & Assignment Percentages............................................... 3.7-9
Project Only Traffic Volumes......................................................................... 3.7-10
TECHNICAL APPENDICES
A.
B.
C.
Initial Study/ Notice ofPreparationi Scoping Meeting
Air Quality Calculations
Historic Resources Technical Report
-M""-"'-"'."
. .""'-""-""~--"'-"-'--"--::V-----'---""-"""-""'-"-"'-""--"
Table of Contents
Prospect ViUage EIR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
E.
F.
G.
H.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Parking Study
Traffic Study
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives Report
VOLUME 2: FINAL ENVIRONEMTNAL IMPACT REPORT
(BOUND SEPARATELY)
8.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
8.1
Introduction
....................................................................................................... 8-1
8.2
List of Persons, Agencies, and Organizations Commenting on the EIR ................... 8-2
8.3
Responses to Comments ......................................................................................... 8-3
8.4
Errata
.............................................................................................,..... 8-218
""_......,,"--" -"".
..,,-..---.- ._""~""..._----:v¡----_....._---~-_._........~--
Table of Contents
Prospect Village EIR
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The proposed Prospect Village Project (the "Project") is an infill, urban rnixed-use
redevelopment project comprised of restaurant, retail, office and residential uses on the edge
of the Old Town Tustin commercial area within the Town Center Redevelopment Project
Area in the City of Tustin. The approximately one-acre project site is bordered by Third
Street on the north, Prospect Avenue on the east, East Main Street on the south and an
existing public alley east of EI Camino Real (proposed to be renamed Prospect Lane) on the
west. The site is owned by the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Agency").
The Project would demolish the existing vacant structures on site and replace these
structures with an approximately 40,581 square. foot mixed use development. The Project
specifically entails construction of a new two story, 8,589 square-foot retail/office building
with entrances off of East Main Street (the "Main Street Building"). The first floor of the
Main Street Building would accommodate a 112 seat, an approximately 3,000 square foot
restaurant with an approximately 593 square-foot of outdoor dining space, and an
approximately 773 square feet of retail uses. The second floor would accommodate
approximately 4,816 square feet of office space.
The Project also includes construction of twelve (12) detached three-story live/work
units, which would be behind the proposed Main Street Building. The live/work units would
have exclusively retail uses on the ground floor of units facing Prospect A venue and retail or
office uses on the ground floor units facing Prospect Lane. Each live/work unit would have a
two story residential unit above the retail or office space. The live/work units would be
separated by an interior auto court that provides vehicular access ITom Prospect Lane to two-
car garages tucked under each of the units. Establishing retail uses on the ground floor
around the Project's perimeter would help achieve the ultimate goal of creating downtown
specialty retail core in the Old Town commercial area.
Finally, the Project entails construction of public improvements adjacent to the site.
These improvements include I) enhanced paving and landscape improvements in the public
alley, 2) half-width street improvements (paving, curbs and gutters) on Prospect Avenue
between Main Street and Third Street, 3) sidewalks on Main Street, Prospect Avenue and
Third Street with enriched paving and pedestrian bump-outs at Main Street and Third Street
and 4) landscaping, which is consistent with the recently installed streetscape improvements
in the Old Town commercial district.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTIONS
The applicant, Pelican Center, LLC, is requesting approval of a Development
Disposition Agreement (DDA) with the Agency to purchase and redevelop the site and
various City approvals to: rezone the site to Planned Community District (P-C); demolish the
existing buildings; and subdivide the site into fourteen new parcels; along with related
discretionary approvals and permits.
ES-l
Executive Summary
Prospect Village EIR
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
The EIR discusses and analyzes a total of six (6) project alternatives, including the
"No Project" alternative and five (5) alternatives that consist of varying levels of
rehabilitation and reuse of the existing structures. The EIR also briefly describes three (3)
alternatives, including two (2) off-site alternatives and one (I) alternative that would relocate
the existing structures. The Agency considered these three (3) alternatives, but rejected each
as infeasible during the scoping period; therefore, they are not considered in detail in the
EIR.
The "No Project" Alternative would continue all existing conditions onsite. Based on
the historical vacancy of the buildings since the closure of the Uti Juice operation in 1973, a
reasonably foreseeable consequence of the No Project Alternative is that the existing 6,120
square-foot buildings would remain vacant and continue to be posted for no occupancy due
to the need for building and safety improvements and no new development would occur on
the site.
A brief description of the other five (5) alternatives to the Project that are evaluated in
the EIR is provided below.
1.
Full Reuse Alternative
The Full Reuse Alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse of the existing Uti Juice
buildings in accordance with the Secretary's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties with Guidelines for Preserving. Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing
Historic Buildings, 1995, Weeks and Grimmer ("Secretary's Standards and Guidelines").
This Alternative also entails new construction of retail building addition on the vacant pad
area immediately west of the 191 Main Street building ("191 Building"). The remaining
northerly portion of the site would be developed with ten (10) live/work units.
2.
Partial Reuse Alternative
This Alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the 191 Building and partially
rehabilitate and reuse the 193, 195 Building (to a depth of sixty) in accordance with the
Secretary's Standards and Guidelines. This Alternative also entails construction of a new
two story building to a depth on the pad area immediately west of the 191 Building. The
remaining northerly portion of the site would be developed ten (10) residential live/work
units.
3.
Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only) Alternative
This Alternative would partially rehabilitate and reuse the front forty five feet of the
193, 195 Buildings in accordance with the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines. The 191
Building would be demolished. This Alternative also entails construction of a new two story
retail building on the remaining pad area west of the 193, 195 Building. Similar to the
ES-2
Execntive Summary
Prospect Village EIR
Project, the remaining northerly portion of the site would be developed with twelve (12)
live/work units.
4.
Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative
The Full Reuse Under Existing Zoning Alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the
existing structures in accordance with the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines. The
alternative also entails construction of a new abutting 2,200 square feet single story retail
building on the vacant site immediately west of the 191 Building. The remaining northerly
portion of the site would be developed with a two-story retail and professional office
building.
5.
Façade Reuse Alternative
This alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse of all or a portion of the façade of the
193, 195 Building as may be technically feasible, which would be incorporated into a new
two story Main Street Building. All other Project components would be similar to the
Project.
ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED AND AREAS OF CONCERN
The Agency received written and oral comments on the Notice of Preparation of an
EIR and Initial Study expressing various environmental concerns and issues that should be
explored in the EIR. These issues and areas of concern are as follows:
. Preservation of existing structures
. Adequacy of Project parking
. Project traffic impacts on local roadways and intersections
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Table ES-I summarizes the environmental impacts of the Project and identifies
recommended mitigation measures to reduce significant environmental impacts to a less than
significant level. As reflected in Table ES-I, some impacts, including impacts relating to
Cultural Resources and Air Quality could not be mitigated to a level of insignificance and are
considered significant and unavoidable.
ES-3
Executive Summary
Prospect Village EIR
Table ES-!
Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Aesthetics
Air Quality
Culttna!
Resources
The Project would alter the existing
visual character of the site.
The Project would create a new source
of light that could affect surrounding
uses
The Project would generate short tenn
construction emissions.
The Project would generale long term
operational emissions
The Project will cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of
an historical resource as defined in
§15064.5
Not required
Not required
Not required
Not required
CR-l:
Prior to issuance of a demolition pennit, documentation of the buildings
to be removed shall be undertaken by the developer to be approved by
the City utilizing the standards of the Historic American Bnilding Survey
(HABS), including pholo.documentation and measured drawings of the
East Main and Prospect Avenue elevations. These items, together with
the Historical Resource Technical Report, shall be added to the Tustin
Area Historical Society Museum.
Ifburied culttna! resources, snch as chipped or ground stone, hisloric
debris, bnilding foundations, or human remains are inadvertently
discovered during ground.disttnbing activities, work will stop in that area
and within 100 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist can assess the
significance of the find, and, if necessary, develop appropriaie treatment
measures. Treatment measures typically include development of
avoidance strategies, capping with fill material, or mitigation of impacts
through data recovery programs such as excavation or detailed
documentation.
The Project may disttnb unknown I CR-2:
buried culttnal resources on site
Less than
significant
Less than
significant
Less than
significant
Less than
significant
Significant and
Unavoidable
Less than
Significant
The construction contractor and lead contractor compliance inspector will
verify that work is halted until appropriate treatment measures are
implemented if culttnal resources' are discovered during construction
activities. Concurrence ftom the City on measures to be implemented
before resuming construction activities in the area of the find will be
ES.4
Executive Summary
Prospect Vú/age EIR
Hazards
The Project would consist of land uses
ihat would use routine non.hazardous
janilorial supplies and oilier cleaning
related materials
Project construction equipment would
require a limited amount of
combuslible materials
The Project would require ihe removal, I H-l:
transport. and disposal of asbestos
containing materials, lead based paint,
and an exisling inoperable clarifier
Not recommended
Less ihan
Significant
Less ihan
Significant
The applicant shall remove ihe clarifier on site in accordance wiih I Less ihan
applicable local, state and federal regulations prior to obtaining a grading Significant
permit
H-2:
Any unknown contaminated soils ihat could be encountered on the project
site dnring demolilion, site clearance, or construclion aclivilies shall be
removed fiom the project site and disposed of off.site. The removal and
disposal of lhese hazardous materials would be in accordance with
guidelines specified by the applicable local, state and federal resources
agencies, inclnding but not limited to ihe Department of Toxics Snbstances
Control and federal Environmental Proteclion Agency.
H-3:
If during any future demolition or remodeling aclivities additional suspect
materials are observed, bulk samples shall be collected of ihese materials
and analyzed for asbestos content All suspect materials at the Property are
Presumed Asbestos-containing Materials (PACMs) until the asbestos
content is confmned or denied by analytical testing.
H-4:
The Project wonld be inconsistent with
General Plan policies that promote
preservation and rehabilitation of
historic resources
The Project requires a rezone fiom "C-
2" or "Central Commercial" to
Land Use
Not required
Significant and
Unavoidable
Less than
Significant
ES-S
Executive Summary
Prospect Village EIR
Noise
"Planned Community" to
accommodate the residential
component ofthe proposed Live/Work
units.
The Project would generate short tenD
construction noise impacts
Traffic
Project operation would periodically
increase ambient noise levels during
outdoor patio dining and outdoor
entertaining on residential decks.
The Project would generate additional
traffic trips that would increase
ambient noise levels
Project construction activity would
generate short tenD traffic trips
Not recommended
Not recommended
Not recommended
T-l:
The developer shall prepare a construction staging and parkIDg plan for
review and approval by Cìty of Tustin Public Works prior to issuance of
demolition pennit. The developer or contractor shall monitor the
implemenlation and effectiveness of the construction staging and parkIDg
plan during the construction phase of the project. The plan shall include
one or more of the following potential types of traffic.related mitigation
measures to ensure that temporary disruptions to the adjacent uses and
circulation within the area are minimized:
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significanl
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Construction and Employee Parking: As part of the construction Slaging
and parking plan, the contractor would submit and oblain approval of a
construction parking program which reflects the schedule of construction
activities and location of construction-related parkIDg. Locations of
available parking would be identified.
Street Circulation and Parking Measures: The contraclor may request
and ob1ain a pennit for any temporary lane closures that may be required
for adjacent roadways. The contractor would utilize flagmen for traffic
control to minimize inconvenience and for safety of vehicles and
pedestrians.
Haul Truck Routes, Queue Areas, and Deliveries: The contractor would
provide an estimate of truck volume and schedule. Schedule adjustments
would be made to minimize the volume during peak traffic hours. Areas
ES.6
Executive Summary
Prospect Village EIR
Once operational. the Project would
generate approximately 600 traffic
trips that would distribnted to the
surrounding roadways and
intersections.
The Project would increase parking
demand in the area.
Not required
T.2
would be designated by the developer or contractor for stagjng of all
trucks. All earth-moving and reády-mix trucks would be equipped with
two-way radios. The trucks would follow a City.approved route to ihe
project site, withont unnecessary waiting.
Hours of Excavation Hauling: Heavy truck hauling associated with
excavation would be scheduled to minimize inlerference with daytime
activity in the area. The hours for excavation hauling would be determined
in conjunction with the City as part of the construction staging and parking
plan.
Pedestrian Safety Measures: The contractor would install a construction
fence around the perimeter, complying with City requirements before
excavation begins. A flagman would be available at all times and would
be utilized whenever trucks entering or leaving the project site may impede
the flow of traffic.
Ifthe City Council does not approve the Off.Site Parking Agreement, the
applicant must present an alternative shared use agreement to the City for
review and approval prior to issuance of a demolition permit. If the City
does not approve an alternative shared nse agreement, the Project shall not
mceed.
Less than
Significant
.
Less than
Significant
ES.7
Executive Snmmary
Prospect Village EIR
1.0
INTRODUCTION
This Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") evaluates the potential environmental
effects of the proposed Prospect Village Project ("Project"), which is located on an
approximately one-acre parcel in the City of Tustin, County of Orange. This EIR has
been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
(California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and State Guidelines for the
implementation of the CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et
seq.)
1.1
BACKGROUND, SCOPE AND CONTENT
The CEQA Guidelines provide that:
The EIR shall focus on the significant effects on the environment. The
significant effects should be discussed with emphasis in proportion to their
severity and probability of occurrence. Effects dismissed in an Initial
Study as clearly insignificant and unlikely to occur need not be discussed
further in the EIR unless the Lead Agency subsequently receives
information inconsistent with the finding in the Initial Study.'
In accordance with CEQA, the City of Tustin ("City") and the Redevelopment
Agency ("Agency") completed a multi-step process to determine the appropriate scope of
issues to be examined in the EIR. The City circulated a Notice of Preparation ("NOP")
and attached initial study to responsible agencies and interested parties, including the
State Clearinghouse, for a 30 day public review and comment period, which began on
April 17, 2003 and ended on May 18, 2003. A copy of the NOP and Initial Study and
comments received on the NOP are included in Appendix "A" of this document. The
Initial Study concluded that the Project may have potentially significant impacts relating
to cultural resources and land use, which are addressed in the EIR. The City identified
additional environmental issues relating to aesthetics, air quality, hazards and hazardous
materials, noise and traffic, which are also addressed in this EIR.
As documented in the Initial Study, the Project would not significantly impact the
following environmental resources and, as such, these resources are not comprehensively
addressed in the ErR:
Agricultural Resources;
Biological Resources;
Geology & Soils;
Hydrology and Water Quality;
Mineral Resources;
Population and Housing;
Public Services;
Utilities and Service Systems;
114 Cal Code Regs. §15143
I-I
Introduction
Prospect Village EIR
1.2
PURPOSE AND LEGAL AUTHORITY
The purpose of an EIR is to inform public agency decision makers and the public
of the potential significant environmental effects of a project, identify possible ways to
minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to the project.2
CEQA also provides guidance on the scope and contents of an EIR:
An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to
provide decision makers with information which intelligently takes an
account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the
environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive,
but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is
reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an
EIR inadequate, but the EIR would summarize the main points of
disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for
perfection; but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at
full disclosure.3
Consistent with CEQA's requirements, this EIR describes the technical, economic
and environmental characteristics of the Project, identifies the existing environmental
setting that will affected by the Project, analyzes the Project's potential environmental
impacts, and identifies feasible mitigation measures and project alternatives that could
alleviate the identified impacts.
. To gain the most value from this report, certain key points recommended in the
CEQAGuide1ines should be kept in mind:
The purpose of this EIR is to inform the reader of the possible environmental
consequences of the Project.
. A specific environmental impact is not necessarily irreversible or permanent.
Incorporating changes recommended in this report during the design and
construction phases of project development can wholly or partially mitigate most
impacts, particularly in urban, more developed areas.
As the public agency with the authority to approve or deny the project, the City
will consider the information in the EIR along with other information before taking any
action on the project. The conclusions of the EIR regarding potential environmental
impacts do not control the City's discretion to approve, deny or modify the project, but
instead are presented as information intended to aid the decision-making process.
214 Cal. Code Regs. §15121(a)
'14CalCodeRegs. §15151
1-2
lntrodnction
Prospect Village EIR
1.3
EIR ORGANIZATION
This Draft EIR is organized into eight chapters, which reflect the required content
of an EIR as described in Article 9 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs §15120
through §15131). To help the reader locate information of particular interest, the
following brief summary of the contents of each chapter of the EIR is provided.
Executive Summary: This section contains an overview of the scope of the EIR,
as well as a summary of environmental impacts, proposed mitigation, level of
significance after mitigation, and unavoidable impacts. Also contained within this
section is a summary description of project alternatives and potential growth-inducing
impacts.
1.0 Introduction: This section provides an overview of the purpose and use ofthe
EIR, the scope of this EIR, the environmental review process for the EIR and the
proposed project, and the general format of the document.
2.0 Project Description and Environmental Setting: This section defines the
project location, summarizes the proposed project, and outlines the project objectives and
the need for the Project.
3.0 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures: This section describes
and evaluates the environmental issue areas, including the existing environmental setting
and background, applicable environmental thresholds, environmental impacts (both short-
term and long-term), policy considerations related to the particular environmental issue
area under analysis, mitigation measures capable of minimizing environmental harm, and
a discussion of cumulative impacts. Where additional actions must be taken to ensure
consistency with environmental policies, recommendations are made, as appropriate. By
consolidating environmental impact assessment and site-specific policy directives within
each impact area, clear linkages between impact assessment and related policy
consistency can be established.
4.0 Alternatives Analysis: This section analyzes Project alternatives, including
the No Project Alternative and alternatives that explore varying levels of rehabilitation
and reuse of existing structures on site. This section also identifies Project alternatives
that were initially considered by the City, but rejected as infeasible and not analyzed
further in the EIR.
5.0 Other CEQA Considerations: This chapter provides a summary of the
proposed project's potential growth-inducing impacts; provides a list of proposed project
impacts that are significant and unavoidable by issue area; discusses the environmental
effects of the proposed project found not to be significant; and, identifies any irreversible
changes to the natural environment resulting from the proposed project.
6.0 References: This chapter identifies all references used and cited in the
preparation of this report.
7.0 Report Preparation: This chapter identifies the public and private agencies
and individuals contacted during the preparation of this report, and all individuals
responsible for the preparation of this report.
1-3
Introduction
Prospect Village EIR
Appendices: Data supporting the analysis or contents of this ErR are provided in
appendices to the document. Other reports referenced in the EIR are available for review
at the City of Tustin Community Development Department (300 Centennial Way, Tustin,
CA 92780).
1.4
EIR PROCESS
This EIR has been prepared to meet all of the substantive and procedural
requirements of CEQA, and the CEQA Guidelines. The City of Tustin is the Lead
Agency for the Project with the primary responsibility for conducting the environmental
review and approving or denying individual discretionary actions necessary to implement
the Project. Figure I-I, "Summary of ErR Process," illustrates the various steps in the
CEQA process.
An Initial Study ("IS") was first prepared to deternrine whether any aspect of the
project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the
environment and to narrow the focus or scope of the environmental analysis. After
completion of the IS, a NOP of an EIR was filed with the State Clearinghouse in the
Office of Planning and Research, which circulated the document to various state agencies
for a 30-day public review period, which began on April 17, 2003 and ended on May 18,
2003. One state agency provided a written response. The Department of Transportation
requested that an assessment of the traffic impact on State Route 55/Irvine Boulevard and
the Interstate 5/Newport Avenue intersections be evaluated in the Draft EIR. This letter
is included in Appendix A of this EIR.
A noticed public scoping meeting was conducted on April 22, 2003 at the City of
Tustin in the City Council Chambers to seek public input regarding the environmental
issues raised by the proposed project and the scope of the EIR. Most oral and written
comments related to the potential impact of demolition of the existing buildings are
identified in the Initial Study. Additional concerns were expressed about potential
parking impacts associated with the proposed off-site parking accommodation for the
project and the concern that the Project EIR address viable altematives to the proposed
project in order to eliminate any environmental impact associated with the proposed
demolition of the existing buildings on the site.
Based on the conclusions of the IS and the comments received during the 30 day
scoping period, a Draft EIR was prepared. Agencies or interested persons who did not
respond during the public review period of the IS/NOP will have an opportunity to
comment during the public review period of the Draft EIR, as well as at subsequent
public hearings on the project.
1.5 AVAILABILITY OF THE DRAFT EIR
This Draft EIR has been distributed to affected agencies, surrounding cities,
counties and interested parties for a 45-day review period in accordance with Section
15087 of the CEQA Guidelines. During the 45-day public review period, which
commences on January 9, 2004 and ends on February 23,2004, the Draft EIR is available
for general public review at the following locations:
1-4
Introduction
Prospect Village EIR
. City of Tustin, City Hall
Community Development Department
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
. Orange County Public Library-Tustin Branch
345 E. Main Street
Tustin, CA 92780
1-5
Introduction
Prospect Village EIR
Figure 1-1,
Summary of the CEQA Process
1-6
Inttoduction
Prospect Village EIR
2.1
2.0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION & ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Over the years, the Old Town Tustin commercial area has declined in economic
activity. Shoppers have found it more convenient to use retailers in neighborhood strip
centers located along major roadways or at regional shopping centers. The decline has lead
to unused or underutilized real property and a limited contribution to City sales tax in the Old
Town commercial area. The Project site has not been in active and consistent permanent
commercial use since 1973. (See Section 2.2, below for more detail on the local physical
environment). The area was included in the Town Center Redeveloprnent Project Area
because of economic deterioration and physical blight. While the Agency and City have
invested in adjacent inITastructure, landscaping, lighting, and parking improvements and
have provided assistance to an association of local business and property owners to facilitate
economic development, new private development in the area has been sparse. Only two new
single purpose buildings and one office building rehabilitation project have been constructed
by private investment in the Old Town commercial area during the past fifteen years even
with available sites and favorable construction financing conditions during the last several
years. And although the City has actively marketed the proposed project site since it was
acquired in 1998, a viable development plan for the site has not been achieved. The site lies
near the core of the Old Town commercial area.
2.2
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The objectives for the proposed Prospect Village Project (the "Project") are generally
based on those in the City of Tustin General Plan, Housing Element and Town Center
Redevelopment Plan as discussed in Section 4.2 of this EIR, and are as follows:
.
To develop the vacant and underutilized site within the next 2 to 3 years to capitalize
on the current favorable private development financing conditions for mixed-use
projects;
To eliminate delay and uncertainties regarding future development of the site;
To stimulate private investment and demonstrate economic viability in the Old Town
commercial area.
To increase the amount of specialty retailing and commercial development in the core
of the Old Town commercial area in order to enhance its urban character and bolster
the commercial area's revitalization and long-term economic viability;
To expand the niche market character of the Old Town commercial area by providing
a balanced and cornplementary mix of new retail and commercial uses;
To increase the number of residential units in the Town Center Redevelopment
Project Area, while reflecting a high-quality urban character;
To develop ground floor specialty retailing configurations consistent with current
market condition requirements;
To provide a minimum 3,000 square feet high-quality restaurant along with outdoor
patio dining to enliven the pedestrian environment along Main Street in the Old Town
commercial area;
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2.1
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
.
To create a fmancially viable commercial mixed-used development with minimum
public sub~idy;
To create construction jobs and permanent jobs in the Town Center Redevelopment
Project Area;
To increase the property tax increment and sales tax revenue~ in the Project Area,
which will be earmarked for ongoing economic development activities in the Old
Town commercial area including business retention and outreach programs, façade
improvement programs, and community facility projects; and,
To achieve the Old Town commercial area redevelopment goals and objectives of
City's General Plan and the Town Center Redevelopment Plan.
.
.
.
The City's ultimate goal for the Old Town commercial area is to create a 24-hour
district, which will serve a broad segment of the City's business and residential population in
order to create a sustainable and competitive commercial town center. The proposed increase
in residential units in Old Town serves to sub~tantially increase the project's economic
viability for the developer and minimize the public assistance, while responding to a highly
attractive current niche market demand. Development of a compact eight-block commercial-
retail core at the heart of the commercial area would serve as the primary specialty retail
area. This objective is consistent with the recommendations in the "Visions of Old Town", a
broad community-based planning study that was prepared in 1991 and coordinated by the
RegionallUrban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) through the American Institute of
Architects (AlA). As described in the R/UDAT study, the commercial-retail core needs to be
filled with new restaurants, retail stores and offices that will introduce a mix of commercial
activities which will be competitive with the surrounding strip commercial centers located
along Newport Avenue. It is important to long-term economic viability of the Old Town
commercial area to re-establish the area in the near-future as the "town center" for the City of
Tustin by intensifying private commercial retail development and providing a viable
alternative to the traditional neighborhood strip centers and community shopping centers
found on nearby Newport Avenue and other areas of the City.
2.3
PROJECT LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS
2.3.1 Location
The Project site is located in central Orange County in the City of Tustin at 191 and
193-195 E. Main Street and is depicted on Figure 2-1, Regional Location Map. The
approximately one-acre Project site is located along the north side of E. Main Street between
Prospect Avenue on the east and a public alley (to be renamed Prospect Lane) on the west
and extending to Third Street on the north side. Regional access to the site is prirnarily from
the Costa Mesa Freeway (State Route 55) at Fourth Street/Irvine Boulevard and the Santa.
Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) at Newport Avenue. Local access is generally from Newport
Avenue at Main Street or EI Camino Real, and fÌom First Street at EI Camino Real or
Prospect Avenue.
2-2
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
(Figure 2-1, Regional Location Map)
J" ".
-<
~
"
~
uo ~. '"
~:::
=
~
NO SCALE
¡C1L
".." "'",...
u..~ ¡§ "'-"
::: ~ :::
on
PROJECT
LOCATION
~n
n~
~ ~ .
"--,
u. :Ii ~.umm
=
... : Þ ...!õH.
- - oJ ...
"" ... w
"~,
SIXTH
ST
Rl'."D'/C
I ) ( I
"'""
'(~
2.3
Project Description & Environmental Setting
\
Prospect Village EIR
The Project site is located near the center of an older area of the City identified as the
Old Town Tustin commercial area, as shown on Figure 2-2, Old Town Commercial Area
Map. The Project site is surrounded by a variety of land uses including a mixture of retail
and offices to the west generally along El Camino Real, retail and service businesses to the
south along E. Main Street, the City of Tustin Main Street Water Facility/ public parking lot
to the east, a mobile horne park (Park Santiago) to the northeast generally along Prospect
Avenue, a senior assisted residential care facility (Tustin Hacienda) further east of the Water
Facility along Third Street, and vacant lots, small offices and residential bungalows to the
north across Third Street.
2.3.2 Physical Environmental Setting
The Project site is generally flat and currently accommodates two vacant adjoining
commercial buildings with entrances off East Main Street. As noted above, these buildings
were constructed in 1914 and 1922 respectively and are generally considered historical
resources based on their architectural styles and their association with important people.
The first commercial building was constructed in.1914 and consists of a one story, L-
shaped, 4,375 square foot structure of Victorian Italianate style with two identical entrances
off East Main Street (193-195 E. Main Street). This building extends sixty linear feet along
Main Street and ninety linear feet along Prospect.
The second commercial building abuts the west wall of the above building and was
constructed in 1922. This one story rectangular shaped 1,745 square foot, brick structure of
commercial vernacular style (191 E. Main Street) extends thirty linear feet along East Main
Street" and sixty linear feet north to south. The fÌont masonry wall of this structure was
severely damaged by foundation se~lement, reportedly during the 1995 seismic retrofit. 1 The
center portion of the wall appears to have settled on the order of one half inch to one inch,
resulting in major cracking and displacement. In addition, the exterior brick at the back and
side of the building and the masonry fill at the door and window openings are significantly
eroded by water intrusion.
The remaining portions of the parcel consist of two concrete pads where previously
demolished structured once stood. One of the pads is located along E. Main Street between
the 191 E. Main Street building and the alley that defines the site western boundary. The
other pad is located toward the rear of the site, adjacent to Third Street. Vegetation or
landscaping on site is minimal and includes two clusters of trees located in the middle of the
vacant rear portion of the site.
1 "City of Tustin, Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation Tustin. CA, Historic Rehabilitation Estimate Report," KCM
Group, July 25, 2003, p. 2
2-4
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect VIllage EIR
(Figure 2-2 Old T
ownC
ommercial Map)
2-5
Project Description & E .
, nvlronmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
2.3.3 Project Site History
The two existing buildings on the site were part of the Utt Juice Company operations
from 1920 to its closure in 1973. With the existing buildings at 191 and 193-195 E. Main
Street being largely vacant since 1973 and in disrepair, City of Tustin code enforcement
activity on the project site was active consistently since 1975. Notable code enforcement
activity at the site included:
.
Demolition in 1995 of metal shed structures located on the site at 189 and 189B Main
Street by the property owner to correct safety issues at the property.
.
Seismic retrofitting by the previous property owner in 1995 of the 191 and 193-195
Main Street building to conform to State mandated seismic safety standards and City
of Tustin standards related to un-reinforced masonry buildings. This was conducted
after a City-issued Notice and Order, and in response to a Preliminary Injunction filed
by the City.
. Building code violations and public safety issues in 1995 resulted in posting the 191
and 193-195 Main Street buildings for non-occupancy until such issues were
addressed including corrections to inadequate plumbing, heating, ventilation,
electrical and mechanical repairs were completed.
During the course of the code enforcement activities, the property owner resisted and
delayed corrective actions. With no activity by the property owner to renovate the existing
buildings, the Agency proceeded with acquisition of the property through eminent domain in
December 1997, receiving possession of the site in 1998 and eventually completing
acquisition of the property on April 27, 1999.
Upon obtaining possession of the site, the Agency actively marketed the project site
and issued a Request for Qualifications/Proposal (RFQ/P) for the site in February 1998. The
RFQ/P requested proposals that would address the historical issues pertaining to the site
including the potential for adaptive reuse of the existing buildings. Unfortunately, none of
the developers who responded to the RFQ/P or any other developer that has expressed
interest in redeveloping the Project site has proposed adaptive reuse or preservation of the
existing buildings. The prevailing view by the developers, which is consistent with the
Agency's frnancial feasibility study,2 was that adaptive reuse or preservation of the existing
buildings was neither financially feasible nor practical to serve today's market demand.
They concluded that the expenses associated with renovating the buildings to remedy the
dilapidated conditions and bring the building up to current codes and standards would be cost
prohibitive and not economically justified by the project return.
2 Evaluation ofCEQA Alternatives-Proposed Prospect Village, James Rabe and Kevin Engstrom, Keyser
Marston Associates Inc., October 28, 2003.
2-6
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
2.4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project entails demolition of existing buildings on site, and new construction and
ultimate use of various on site and offsite improvements. Overall, the Project would provide
approximately 16,600 square feet of new commercial uses, including a restaurant, retail, and
office uses, and twelve new residential units in Old Town Tustin. Each of the individual
project components are discussed in detail below and a summary of the proposed uses is
presented in Table 2-1, Summary of Proposed Uses. Figure 2-1, "Prospect Village Project
Site Plan" depicts the location of these improvements on the project site.
PrOject Land Use ummarv
Retail 1773 I
Restaurant T3,000 (plus 593 patio) I
Office 14,816 I
Residential 6 units - 2,126
6 units - 1,8622
Retail 6 units - 913
Office/Retail 6units-4312
Restaurant 3,000 (plus 593 patio)
Retail 6,251
Retail/Office 2;586
Office 4,816
Residential 23,928
I 40,581
,
Table 2-1
S
Prospect Ave. Units
2 Prospect Lane Units
2.4.1 Main Street Building
A new approximately 8,589 square-foot two-story retail commercial/office building
would replace the existing Utt Juice Buildings located along E. Main Street (the "Main Street
Building"). The first floor would accommodate an approximately 3,000 square-foot
restaurant plus an approximately 593 square-foot outdoor dining area and an approximately
773 square foot retail commercial use. The second floor would accommodate approximately
4,816 square feet of office space. The Main Street Building would be accessible from the
Main Street and Prospect Avenue sidewalks. The Main Street Building would have a zero
setback along Main Street and Prospect A venue and a four foot setback on the public alley to
the west of the site or Prospect Lane.
The Main Street Building would stand approximately 34 feet in height and clad in
brick on three sides with stucco on the rear. The building's design would include articulated
2-7
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
(Figure 2-3, Prospect Village Site Plan)
---~-
. ---.-------.-.. -.-.-----...-- ----- ---~-----
"1-- .."'~' '.
; ¡<j¡ :
PROSPECT AVENUE
-.
-.
:::;: '::=
-
..- - ..
iÐ . ~
"""
-
!i
,
C
It
""
...-..
.....--
..-
~
LANDSCAPE PLAN
- -'p~Q~.f'.ECT ~~Ll!"<:J1:: ..
2.8
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
cornices, divided pane windows, brick banding and tile friezes to be compatible with
adjacent buildings in the Old Town commercial area.
A total of sixty-two parking spaces would be provided to serve the Main Street
Building. This parking would be provided on site and off site. The building would have three
on-site parking spaces tucked under the second floor offices off Prospect Lane. However, the
majority of the parking spaces or fifty-nine (59) parking spaces would be provided off site
pursuant to a shared use agreement between the Project developer and the City in accordance
with the Tustin City Code for the Cultural Resources District section 9252.G)(3)(d).
2.4.2 Live/Work Units
The Project also entails development of twelve (12), three story (approximately 40
feet tall) new detached live/work residential units, which would be located approximately 17
feet behind the Main Street Building on the northerly portion of the site. As shown on Figure
2-3, six of twelve units would face Prospect Avenue and six units would face the east alley or
Prospect Lane. Each of the Prospect Avenue units would have 913 square feet of ground
floor retail space with a two story, two bedroom, two bath, 2,126 square-foot residential unit
above and a double car garage. The other six three-story units facing Prospect Lane would
have 431 square feet of ground floor retail or office space with a two story, two bedroom,
two bath, 1,862 square-foot residential unit above. Although the planned community
regulations allow both retail and office uses, due to the storefront locations along an
alley and lack of street exposure, the City expects that the ground floor spaces will be
used primarily as offices.
The live/work units have been designed to be compatible with the adjacent buildings
and the overall character of the Old Town Commercial area. The live-work units reflect an
urban style with brick and stucco clad exteriors, varied roof lines, articulated cornices, and
exterior banding. The ground floors would be characteristic of other retail store fronts in the
area and would include plate glass windows and entries. The upper floors would be
residential in architectural character with divided pane windows, balconies and decks that are
compatible with the surrounding buildings in Old Town.
Parking for the live/work units would be provided entirely on-site. Each of the
live/work unit would have a two.car garage tucked under at the ground level and three
additional open guest parking spaces, which would be accessed from "Prospect Lane" via a
gated interior automobile court. Pedestrians and residents would access the ground floor
retail office and residential unit from Prospect Avenue and proposed "Prospect Lane". The
live/work units would have varying setbacks ranging from a zero setback on Prospect
Avenue and approximately six (6) to eight (8) foot setbacks on Prospect Lane.
The live/work units would be privately owned and operated. A homeowner
association would be responsible for landscape and common area maintenance including the
automobile entry gate, private drive/interior auto court, and guest parking spaces. The
developer will be required to record individual deed restrictions upon the initial sale of the
live/work units to prevent the sale of the ground floor retail or office uses separate from the
2-9
Projecl Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
residential living units above. A minimum of ten (10) of the twelve (12) live/work units
would be restricted to owner/proprietor occupancy of the ground floor retail. In other words,
the resident would also be the owner and operator of the business below. In addition, the
developer rnust designate one live/work unit for sale to and occupancy by a moderate income
household, which will be enforced by a recorded deed restriction that will be effective for a
forty-five (45) year period.
2.4.3 Other Project Design Features
The Project has been designed to enliven the pedestrian environment along Main
Street by providing a balanced and complementary mix of specialty retailing and offices to
accommodate the high level of commercial activity and urban vitality at the easterly gateway
to the downtown area. The Project would provide a strong and consistent urban theme that is
compatible with the surrounding buildings and would retain a pedestrian scale along the
storefronts, The building improvements would respond to the practical considerations of
current retail, restaurant and office market requirements. As noted below, the Project also
entails a number of off site improvements that would complete the Old Town streetscape.
The preliminary design plans for the Prospect Village Project are reflected in Figures2-4 and
2-5.
2.4.4 Off Site Improvements
The Project would include construction of a number of public improvements adjacent
to the site. These improvements include enhanced paving and landscape improvements in
the public alley, half-width street improvements (paving, curbs and gutters) on Prospect
A venue between Main Street and Third Street, sidewalks on Main Street, Prospect Avenue
and Third Street with enriched paving and pedestrian bump-outs at Main Street and Third
Street and landscaping to be consistent with the recently installed streetscape improvements
in the Old Town commercial district.
2.4.5 Construction Requirements and Schedule3
The Project would be constructed in phases, beginning with demolition and grading,
then undergrounding utilities and laying concrete, and [mally framing the buildings. Under
the DDA, the Project is scheduled to be completed within two years following execution of
the DDA.4 Based on this time frame, Project occupancy is anticipated for spring or summer
2006.
Under the first phase, all buildings onsite would be demolished and cleared and any
asphalt or concrete would be removed during construction. The demolition process would
include surveying and removing any asbestos and lead onsite; demolishing buildings and
removing non-recyclable and demolition waste. Once demolition is complete, the site would
be graded to accommodate the building pads for the structures. Table 2-2 identifies the
3 This information is based on a memo from Miller Contracting Company re Prospect Village Construction
Equipment and Personnel Listing, November 20, 2003.
4 Development and Disposition Agreement, Attachment No.7, "Schedule of Performance."
2-10
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
(Figure 2-4, Elevations)
'-----.------....---- ------ -..--.-------.--.--- - ---.. ----....----..------
Main Street Eievation ¡South Eievation
interior-View from courtyard looking towards commercial/office (North Eievationl
GIti:!:
~
COMMERCIAL ELEVATIONS
PROSPEC1J/I..LLAGE
2.11
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
(Figure 2-5, Elevations)
"-----'-------
.4-."'~,,"'..
.",--
~ *1';
rrJi
I
Prospect Avenue Elevation_Unit A lEast Elev.tionj
View of UniCA residential from courtyard IWestElevatlon)
~~
-~
PROOUCTAELEVATIONS
PROSPECTVILl,AGE.
2-12
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
(Figure 2-6, Elevations)
Prospect Lane Elevation (West Elevatlonj
View of Uni,-S residential from courtyard lEast Eievation
-
PRODUCT" ELEVATIONS
PROSPECT VILLAGE
~"O
----
2-13
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
number and types of heavy equipment that will be used during this phase and the number of
construction workers that will be required. Under the proposed Development and
Disposition Agreement ("DDA"), the developer would commence this phase within five (5)
days of issuance of demolition permits and complete the phase within thirty (30) days of
permit issuance.5
Once demolition and grading is completed, utilities would be installed and concrete
slabs would be poured. This phase is expected to last between thirty (30) and forty (40) days
and would include excavatìon and trenching to install the utilities underground.6 Table 2-2
identifies the number and types of heavy equipment that will be used during this phase and
the number of construction workers that will be required.
The third and final phase entails building framing. Table 2-2 identifies the number
and types of heavy equipment that will be used during this phase and the number of
construction workers that will be required.
Table 2-2
Heavy Equipment to Be Used During Peak Construction Activities
Equipment Type Maximum Number
Demolition/Grading
Medium Excavator
Medium Dozer
Large Backhoe
Scraper (Grader)
Water Truck
Wheeled loader
Undergrounding Utilities/Paving
Backhoes
Laser Screed
Concrete Pump Rig
10 yard Concrete Trucks (4-6 days)
Building Construction
Lifts, Forklifts, High Reach lifts
Construction Workers
Demolition/Grading
Undergrounding Utilities/ Paving
Buìlding Construction
I
I
I
1
I
2
2
I
I
n/a
5
10-15
25
25-40
2.5
CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
CEQA provides that "an EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the
project's incremental effect is cumulatively considerable.'" CEQA further provides that
'Development and Disposition Agreement, Attachment No.7, "Schedule of Performance."
6 Memo from Miller Contracting Company re Prospect Village Construction Equipment and Personnel Listing,
November 20,2003
7 14 Cal. Code Regs § 15130(a)
2-14
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Village EIR
"cumulatively considerable" means the incremental effect of an individual 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."s The discussion of cumulative
impacts rnust reflect the severity of the impacts, as wen as the likelihood of their occurrence,
but need not provide as great of detail as the discussion of effects attributable to the project
alone.9 The discussion is guided by standards of practicality and reasonableness and should
focus on the cumulative impact top which the identified other projects contribute rather than
the attributes of other projects that do not contribute to the cumulative impact.
The discussion of the Project's cumulative impact is addressed in each subsection of
Section 3.0 under the applicable environmental issue area. Table 2-3 lists the related projects
that are considered in this cumulative environmental analysis. This list consists of
development projects within close proximity of the Project site that generate related
environmental effects. The list reflects projects that are located in the Old Town Commercial
area or just outside the boundaries of the Old Town Commercial area. Projects that are
located outside of this defined area are not expected to contribute to a cumulative
construction or operational impact due to their distance from the Project site. The concern is
with projects that are relatively close by that could generate similar impacts relating to, for
example, traffic, noise, and air quality.
The City of Tustin Community Development Department identified a list of nearby
projects that could create a cumulative effect. These projects are identified in Table 2-3.
Table 2-3
Related Project List
Location Project Title Description Status
171 E. Fanner Boys 2,983 sq. ft. restaurant, with a drive through lane and Under
FirstSt Restaurant outdoor dining area. A total of ninety-three (93) seats are Construction-
proposed for the indoor and exterior dining areas and the to be
proposed operating hours would be from 6:00 a.m. until completed
] 0:00 p.m. Sunday throngh Thursday and 6:00 a.m. to Feb./March
]2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday 2004
505 EI Armstrong Garden 6,400 s.f. building, 41,007 s.f. of outdoor sales area, and Approved.
Camino Center forty three (43) on site parking spaces. Begin
Real Construction
to begin
Jan./Feb 2004
to be
completed by
April/May
2004
345E. Tustin Library Replacement of the Tustin Branch Library with a new Approved.
Main St. 3 ],800 sq. ft. library facility with 125,000 volumes, seating Construction
for 563, and a community room that seats ]00. contingent on
state funding
8 ]4 Cal. Code Regs §]5065(c)
914 Cal. Code Regs §]5130(b)
2-15
Project Description & Environmental Setting
, Prospect Village EIR
and property
acqnisition.
Construction
expected to
commence in
2005 or 2006.
2.6
INTENDED USES OF THE EIR
This EIR will be used by the City of Tustin, including the Planning Commission, City
Council, and by the Agency in their respective review and consideration of the Project. The
required discretionary actions for the Project include the following:
A. Rezone Application for P-C Zone District to allow for the development of a mixed-
use retail, restaurant, offices and live-work residential project on the site, which will require
actions by the Planning Commission and City Council.
B. Tentative Tract Map No. 16481 Application to allow for subdividing the site, which
will require actions by the Planning Commission and City of Tustin Council.
C. Conditional Use Permit Application No. 03-012 to allow for outdoor dining and
ABC sales in conjunction with the restaurant and for the ground floor offices use for the live-
work units on "Prospect Lane", which will require action by the Planning Commission.
D. Health & Safety Code Section 33433 Resolution making certain required findings
in support of sale of the property by the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency.
E. General Plan Conformity Finding prior to the disposition of the Agency-owned real
property, which will require action by the Planning Commission.
F. Disposition and Development Agreement ("DDA") to define the terms and
conditions for the sale and redevelopment of the proposed project in accordance with
California Redevelopment Law, which will require action by the Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agency.
G. Off-Site Parking Agreement to satisfy the project's private off-site parking
accommodation under the Tustin City Code, which will require action by the City.
H. Certificate of Appropriateness to allow for the demolition of buildings constructed
prior to 1940 and construction of new buildings in the Cultural Resources District, which will
require action by the Community Development Director; and
I. Permits for Demolition, Grading, Building, and Off-site and On-site
Improvement, which will require action by the Community Development Department and
related City departments.
2.16
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect VIllage EIR
2.7
RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES
City of Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
2.8
REVIEWING AGENCIES
In addition, this EIR will provide environmental information for review by and
consultation with various local and regional agencies having discretionary review authority
or an interest in the project. These reviewing agencies include:
.
Orange County Fire Authority,
Orange County Sanitation District
State Historic Preservation Office
California Department of Transportation,
South Coast Air Quality Management District.
.
.
.
.
2-17
Project Description & Environmental Setting
Prospect Vülage EIR
3.0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS & MITIGATION MEASURES
In April 2003, the City prepared an Initial Study (IS) for the proposed project (see
Appendix A). Based on the findings of the IS, the City determined that an EIR would be
required for this project. The City used the IS, as well as public input received during the
30 day NOP comment period, which began on April 17, 2003 and the April 22, 2003,
scoping meeting, to determine the scope and content of the evaluation for the EIR.
The IS for this project identified cultural resources and land use planning as the
potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the construction and
operation of the Project. The other environmental issues were identified as either less
than significant or having no impact. The list of environmental issues considered in this
section was expanded to include issues identified as less than significant because of
technical reports and additional information received after the NOP/IS was released for
public review and comment. Therefore, the following seven (7) environmental issue areas
are evaluated in Section 3.0:
. Aesthetics
. Air Quality
. Cultural Resources
. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
. Land Use and Plarming
. Noise
. TransportationlTraffic
Each subsection of Section 3.0 identifies the environmental setting or "baseline"
conditions unique to each issue area, analyzes the Project's direct, indirect and
cumulative impacts, and identifies feasible mitigation measures that avoid, minimize,
and/or rectify any potentially significant impacts to a less.than-significant level.
ORGANIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
To assist the reader in assessing the Project's environmental impacts, each
subsection of Section 3.0 contains the following information:
. Introduction
. Environmental Setting
. Impacts and Mitigation
-Criteria for Determining Significance
-Project Impacts
-Cumulative Impacts
3.0.1
Pròspect Village EIR
TERMINOLOGY USED To DESCRIBE PROJECT IMPACTS
In each subsection of Section 3.0, the EIR identifies one or more thresholds of
significance and determines the significance of a potential environmental impact based
on its relationship to the threshold. CEQA provides that a threshold of significance is "an
identifiable quantitative, qualitative, or performance level of a particular environmental
effect, noncompliance with which means the effect will normally be deternrined to be
significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be
determined to be less than significant." 1 The EIR describes each impact's level of
significance as follows:
. No Impact. This designation applies to Project impacts that result in no
adverse change in the environment.
. Less-than-significant impact. This designation applies when the Project
will create some impact but the extent of the impact is below the identified
threshold of significance.
. Less than significant with mitigation. The designation applies to Project
impacts that exceed the identified threshold of significance, but feasible
mitigation measures exist that will reduce the impact to a less than significant
level.
. Significant unavoidable impact. This designation applies to Project
impacts that exceed the threshold of significance and no feasible mitigation
measures to reduce the impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, the
Project impact remains significant and unavoidable.
1 14Cal.CodeRegs. §15064.7(a)
3.0-2
Prospect Village EIR
3.1 AESTHETICS
3.1.1
INTRODUCTION
This section discusses the potential aesthetic (or visual resource) impacts associated with
the Project. A discussion is included of the qualitative aesthetic characteristics of the existing
environment that would be potentially impacted by the implementation of the Project and the
consistency of the Project with established visual resources policies relevant to the Project. An
analysis of potential lighting effects also is provided.
3.1.2
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The approximately one acre Project site is located at the corner of East Main Street and
Prospect Avenue along the eastern edge of the "Old Town Commercial" area, as described in the
City of Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element. 1 The "Old Town Commercial" area is
approximately seventy-two (72) acres2 and is generally located north of Interstate 5, East of
Newport Avenue, west of "C" Street and south of East I st Street. The area consists of a variety
ofland uses, including retail, office, institutional (e.g. churches and municipal uses) and limited
residential. This area is also the oldest area of the City and accommodates a group of historic
buildings located on Main Street and EI Camino Real which, in some cases, date back to the
1880s.3
The Project site is also located within the Town Center Redevelopment Plan Area.4
Pursuant to the State Redevelopment Law, the City is able to undertake community projects that
are designed to improve certain areas, including the Town Center Area, which have suffered
economic decline, deterioration of improvements, or which have been unable to attract and
promote new private investments to stimulate economic development and enhance the quality of
life in designated area.
3.1.2.1 On-Site Visual Elements5
The Project site boundaries are specifically defined by Third Street to the north, Prospect
A venue on the east, East Main Street on the south, and a public alley on the west. East Main
Street (immediately south of the site) is one of the primary arterials in the area and provides a
focus of development and transportation. The site currently accommodates two vacant adjoining
commercial buildings, with entrances fronting on East Main Street. Figures 3.1-1 through 3.1-3
are photographs of the site taken from various off site locations around the Project site.
The first commercial building was constructed in 1914 and consists of a one story, L-
shaped, 4,375 square foot structure of Victorian Italianate style with two identical entrances off
I City of Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element, "Land Use Policy Map"
2 City of Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element, "Table LU-4 Planned Land Use Composition."
3 http://www.tustinca.org/about/oldtown.htm
4 City of Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element, Figure LU.5, "Spec¡,il Management Areas"
5 The description of each of the existing structures is based on the "Historic Resources Technical Report: Utt Juice
Development Project 191-195 E. Main Street. Tustin CA," Thn Gregory, July 14,2003
3.1-1
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Figure 3.1-1, Site Photos
1 191 East Main Street (with brick facade)
2 193 East Main Street (between two trees)
3.1-2
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Figure 3.1-2, Site Photos
3 195 East Main Street (right of the tree)
4 Eastern edge of project site from parking lot east of Prospect Street
3.1-3
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Figure 3.1-3 Site Photos
5 Western edge of project site looking north along the public alley
6 View of project site looking south from Third Street
3.1-4
Aesthetics
Prospect Va/age EIR
East Main'Street (193-195 E. Main Street). This building extends sixty linear feet along Main
Street and ninety linear feet along Prospect. All but the entrance or front façade of the building,
which extends approximately six feet along Prospect Avenue, appears to be constructed of
poured-in-place concrete, although a layer of plaster has been applied over the east wall along
Prospect Avenue. The entrance or front façade of the building exhibits greater architectural
detail including an ornate metal cornice along the top of the building, which features large
brackets at each end of the building. The façade also consist of vertical panels, rows of dentil
work and molding and glass panels, and glass retail display windows. The doors and some of the
windows along the front portion of the building have been boarded up.
The second commercial building, which abuts the west wall of the above building, was
constructed in 1922 and consists of a one story rectangular shaped 1,745 square foot, brick
structure of commercial vernacular style (191 E. Main Street). This structure has a noticeably
different architectural style than the above building. The building extends thirty linear feet along
East Main Street and sixty linear feet north to south. The front masonry wall of this structure
was severely damaged by foundation settlement, reportedly during the 1995 seismic retrofit.6
The center portion of the wall appears to have settled on the order of one half inch to one inch,
resulting in major cracking and displacement. In addition, the exterior brick at the back and side
of the building and the masonry fill at the door and window openings are significantly eroded by
water intrusion.
The remaining portions of the parcel consist of two concrete pads where previously
demolished structures once stood. One of the pads is located along E. Main Street between the
191 E. Main Street building and the public alley that defines the site western boundary. The
other pad is located toward the rear of the site, adjacent to Third Street. Vegetation or
landscaping on site is minimal and includes two clusters of trees located in the middle of the
vacant rear portion of the site.
3.1.2.2 Surrounding Visual Elements
The Project site is located in the Old Town area of Tustin. The area is characterized by a
mixture of commercial and residential uses, as reflected on Figures 3.1-4 and 3.1-5, which depict
the adjacent uses and architectural feature. A number of historic buildings are located within the
Old Town area. Some of these buildings include the Knights of Pythia located at 395 EI Camino
Real (at Main Street); the Stevens House, a Queen Anne Victorian built in 1887; the Pankey
Residence, a Monterey California style home constructed in 1928; the Leihy House, a Craftsman
bungalow constructed in 1915; and Shop Buildings at 130-140 West Main Street, which date
back to 1914 when they housed the post office, drug store and barbershop.
The Project site is surrounded on three sides by other development, including the City's
Water Works Facility to the east, and office and retail uses across E. Main Street to the south and
across the alley to the west. An existing disturbed vacant L-shaped lot is located across Third
Street to the north and currently accommodates a Farmer's Market that operates one (1) day per
week (Wednesday) between 9:30 a.m. and I p.m. A row of tall shrubs separates the Fanners
6 "City of Tustin, UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Tustin, CA, Historic Rehabilitation Estimate Report," KCM
Group, July 25,2003, p. 2
3.1-5
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Figure 3.1-4, Surrounding Uses Photos
1 174 East Main Street (south of the project site)
2 160 East Main Street (south of the project site)
3.1.6
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Figùre 3.1-5, Surroundillg Uses Photos-
3 145, 155 East Main Street (west of the project site across the pubiic a¡iey)
4
130. 140, 150 East Main Street (southeast of the project)
3.1-7
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Market lot from an existing single family residence that fronts along the west side of Prospect
Avenue. Other single family homes are located north of the site along Prospect Avenue. A
mobile home park, which is shielded by a row of tall shrubs and trees, is located northwest of the
Project site at the corner of Prospect Avenue and Third 81. There are also two small public areas
with park benches at the north and south end of the City's Water Works facility located across
from the site along Prospect Avenue.
3.1.2.3 Existing Views ofthe Site
This section discusses existing view opportunities of the Project site and views of the
surrounding area from the Project site. As described above, the Project site is generally located
within a suburban area and is primarily surrounded by commercial retail and office uses with a
limited number of mixed residential uses to the north. Pedestrians, vehicular traffic and
surrounding land uses with windows facing the Project site have views of the site. The types of
views of the site vary depending on the location of the viewer. Views of the Project site from
residential areas to the north and northeast include a currently vacant fenced lot with scattered
vegetation and the deteriorated concrete and plaster rear of the commercial buildings. Views of
the Project site from the west are obstructed due to the proximity of the adjacent buildings on EI
Camino Real. Views from East Main Street currently include views of the facades of the
commercial buildings. Views of the Project site from the institutional use to the east include a
concrete wall of a vacant commercial building.
Views from the Project site to the east and south include a mixture of uses including
commercial, institutional, and parking uses. View opportunities to the west are obstructed by
intervening buildings immediately west of the Project site. Views to the north include various
residential uses, including a mobile home park, and other residential uses farther north along
Prospect Avenue, along with scattered vegetation and landscaping.
3.1.2.4 Light and Glare
The Project site currently produces no light and glare in the area because the buildings on
site are vacant. However, because the area is developed with other urban uses, ambient light is
present in the vicinity of the Project site. The major nighttime ambient light sources are from
street lights, area buildings, security lighting, and parking lot lighting.
3.1.2.5 Applicable Regulations
The City has adopted various goals, policies and regulations to enhance the visual quality
of the City. The overall regulatory framework includes the broader goals of the City's General
Plan, Town Center Redevelopment Plan, and the various mechanisrns the City has adopted to
implement these goals. Each of these policies, documents and regulations are discussed below.
3.1-8
Aesthetics
Prospect VIllage EIR
City of Tustin General Plan
The Land Use Element of the City's General Plan lists a series of broad land use
objectives to be implemented by specific goals and policies. The broad objectives relating to
. aesthetic and visual quality include the following:
. Ensure that compatible and complementary development occurs;
. Revitalize older commercial, industrial, and residential development
. Improve city-wide urban design
. Strengthen the development character and mixture of uses in the Old TownlFirst
St. area.7
The Land Use Element identifies the following specific goals and policies to implement
these broad objectives:
. Policy 1.2: Provide for and encourage the development of neighborhood-serving
commercial uses in the areas presently underserved by such uses. Encourage the
integration of retail or service commercial uses on the street level of office
projects.
. Goal 3: Encourage that new development is compatible with surrounding land
uses in the community, the City's circulation network, availability of public
facilities, existing development constraints and the City's unique characteristics
and resources.
. Goal 4: Assure a safe, healthy and aesthetically pleasing community for residents
and businesses.
. Policy 4.3: Where mixed uses are pernritted, ensure compatible integration of
adjacent uses and minimize conflict
. Goal 6: Improve urban design in Tustin to ensure development that is both
architecturally and functionally compatible, and to create unique and identifiable
neighborhoods, commercial, and business park districts.
Town Center Redevelopment Plan
The Project site is located within the plan area of the Town Center Redevelopment
Project ("Redevelopment Plan"), as shown on Figure 3.1-6, Town Center Redevelopment Plan
Project Area Map. The Redevelopment Plan provides a "design guide" provision, which
discusses design standards for redevelopment projects. According to "(Section 423) Design
Guide," the Executive Director of the Agency is generally required to review and approve
architectural, landscape, and site plans for any proposed improvement. (See Ordinance No. 1021,
Second Amendment to the Amended Redevelopment Plan for the Town Center Area
Redevelopment Project). This section further provides: "One of the objectives of this plan is to
create an attractive and pleasant environment in the Project area. Therefore such plans shall give
consideration to good design to enhance the aesthetic and architectural quality of the Project
area. The Agency shall not approve any plans that do not comply with this Plan."
7 City of Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element, p. II
3.1.9
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Figure 3.1-6, Town Center Redevelopment Plan Project Area Map
3.1-10
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Design Review
The City Council has adopted a design review process that applies to new development
throughout the City. The purpose of the design review process is to 1) provide for the review of
building design, site planning and site development in order to protect the increasing value,
standards and importance of land and development in the City due to urbanization of Orange
County; 2) to retain and strengthen the unity and order of the visual community; and 3) to ensure
that new uses and structures enhance their sites and are harmonious with the highest standards of
improvements in the surrounding area and total community.8
Prior to the issuance of any building permit for any new structure in the City, the City's
Community Development Director must approve the site plan, architectùral elevations, and
landscaping for such development.9 The Community Development Director shall only approve
plans if the location, size, architectural features and general appearance of the proposed
development will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or
future development therein, the occupancy thereof, or the community as a whole. to As part of
this deternrination, the Community Development Director must consider design features such as,
for example, the height, bulk and area of the structure, exterior materials and colors, landscaping,
and appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible
future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares. I 1
Cultural Resource District ("CR")
The City Council has also adopted a "Cultural Resource District"("CR"), which contains
various visual quality and design standards for new construction within the CR.!2 As shown on
Figure 3.1-7, the Project site is within the CR; therefore the Project is subject to the CR
regulations.
Prior to alteration, demolition or construction of improvements within the CR, the
Community Development Director must approve a "Certificate of Appropriateness"
("Certificate"). Similar to the design review process, the Community Development Director
must make three findings relating to the aesthetics and visual quality or a new construction
project before a Certificate is approved.13 First, the proposed project must conform to the
Municipal Code and design standards, which may be established from time to tirne by the
Cultural Resources Committee. Second, the project must not adversely affect the character of
the district or a "Designated Cultural Resource" within the district. Lastly, the project must be
harmonious with existing surroundings taking into account the materials, scale, size, height,
placement and use of the building or structure in relationship to existing buildings and structures.
8 TMC §9272(a)).
9 TMC §9272(b).
10 TMC §9272(c)
11 TMC §9272(c)
12 TMC §9252
" TMC §9252(b)(2).
3.1-11
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
Figure 3.1-7, CR Overlay District Map
ADOPTED CULTURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT
AND BOUNDARIES OF ORIGINAL. CITY
BOUNDARY OF ala TOWN CUl ruRAL RESOURCES OISTRICT
- - - - - - - - ORIGINAl CITY UMITS 1'9271
NarE, BOUNOARY OF AOOPlID CULTURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT ADJACENT TO 1-5 AND SR-55 FREEWAYS DENOTE
ULD-ATE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE. DISTRICT DOES NOT INCLUDE AREAS FOR FREEWAY EXPANSION.
3.1-12
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
3.1.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
3.1.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance
Aesthetics are highly subjective and difficult to quantitatively evaluate. This analysis
attempts to objectively assess the existing visual features on site and their importance as visual
resources. The analysis evaluates Project-related changes to the aesthetic character of the site and
surrounding area and qualitatively analyzes the modification of the physical conditions and its
impact on views of the Project site. A policy analysis is conducted to determine the Project's
consistency with relevant City planning regulations and general plan goals, objectives, and
policies.
The criteria used to determine the significance of an impact are based on the CEQA
Guidelines Initial Study Checklist, included as Exhibit G to the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code
Regs. 14000 et seq.). The Project may result in a significant impact if it would:
. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista or substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway;
. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings;
. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area.
3.1.3.2 Project Impacts
Impact: The Project would alter the existing visual character of the site.
The Project would demolish and replace the approximately 6,000 s.f. vacant retail
buildings on site with an approximately 41,000 s.f. new two and three story mixed use
development. Therefore, the Project would alter the existing visual character of the site. The
Project includes structures that are taller and larger than the existing buildings on site. While the
Project would increase the height and bulk the existing structures and would be taller than some
of the . surrounding structures, due to the proposed three story live/work units, these design
characteristic would not "degrade" the existing visual character of the site or its surroundings.
The surrounding area consists of structures that were built with a variety of building materials,
including brick, wood, metal and concrete. The intent of the Project design is to retain the
historic look and feel of the existing buildings with references to the unique Victorian/Main
Street architectural character that currently exists in the vicinity of the Project site.14 To ensure
that the Project compliments the surrounding area, the buildings would be characterized by
details and colors similar to the existing buildings at 191-195 East Main Street. These following
details include, but would not be limited to:
14 E.mail memo fi'om Ross Sutherland of the Planning Center Inc. to Minoo Ashabi. November 26, 2003.
3.]-13
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
.
Deep set storeuont windows
Brick colors and patterns that are similar to the existing adjacent structures
Fenestration patterns of single and double hung windows
Awnings
Cornice moldings with a modillion course
Corbelled eave uonts similar to 195 East Main Street
Use of transom fenestration above the storeuonts
.
.
.
.
.
.
. Bay windows'5
In addition, the proposed retail office building is two stories, which is generally
consistent with the height of the structure immediately west of the Project site on E. Main Street.
The taller, three-story live work units will be located behind the two-story retail office building.
Based on the Project design features, including building materials and architectural style, the
Project would have a less than significant impact on the existing visual quality of the site and its
surroundings. 16
The Project would also demolish and replace the historically significant uont façade of
one of the 193-195 E. Main Building with a new façade using similar building materials. As
discussed above, the Historical Resources Technical Report identified the two existing structures
as potentially eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources due, in part, to
the unique architectural features of the uont facades of one of the two buildings. However, other
than the uont facades, the remainder of the structures, including the side and rear walls, do not
exhibit any unique architectural features and are significantly deterioratedY In addition, there
are two unsightly remnant concrete pads on the Project site and a six foot chain link fence
surrounding the side and rear portions of the site. Due to the deteriorated conditions of the side
and rear walls of these structures and highly disturbed nature of the vacant portions of the site,
the visual character and quality of these features is low. The majority of the view opportunities
of this site, including pedestrian and vehicular views along Prospect Avenue and Third Street are
of this portion of the site. Replacing these portions of the site with a new carefully designed
mixed use project with distinctive architectural features and character would improve the visual
character and quality of these features of site.
The Project, however, will replace the historically significant uont façades of the two
buildings with new facades that will be visible uom E. Main Street. Currently, the entire uont
façade, except the upper portion of the façade, is boarded up of the 193-195 E. Main Street
building.18 Thus, pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles traveling along East Main Street, a main
arterial accessing the Old Town Commercial area, will no longer have views of the historically
IS E-mail memo fi'om Ross Sutherland of the Planning Center Inc. to Minoo Ashabi, November 26, 2003.
15 Ibid.
17 Utt Juice Building Adaptive Reuse Study, Structural Engineering Report, p. 2, Curry Price Court, July 25, 2003
18 A portion of the façade of the 193.195 Building has been boarded up since October 2003 for health and safety
reasons. The contemporary glass block in the transom, which weighs several thousand pounds, is being supported
only by the plate glass windows below it.
3.1-14
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
significant architectural features embodied in the ftont façades of these two structures. Instead,
pedestrians, bicyclists and passengers will have views of the new facades associated with the
new retail/office building. Despite the Project's impact on the front facades, the new commercial
building and residential units have been designed to complement the massing and architecture of
other older structures along E. Main Street in the Old Town Commercial area. Thus, the overall
appearance of the new structures will blend in with the existing surrounding structures. In
addition, the Project will be subject to the rigorous design review and Cultural Resource District
regulations that require the decision makers to make specific visual quality and aesthetics
findings to ensure that the Project will not be incompatible with the existing visual character of
its surroundings.
While the size and height of the proposed Project will be greater than the existing
structures, the Project will not obstruct any significant uninterrupted view opportunities of
surrounding natural resources or similar scenery. Moreover, the Project site is not adjacent to or
located anywhere near a state designated scenic highway.19 The Project site is located adjacent
to several local roadways that access various businesses and residential uses. Therefore, while
the Project would replace structures that have been deemed potentially historically significant,
these structures will not affect a scenic vista and are not located within the view shed of any
designated state scenic highway.
Mitigation Measures
The Project will either result in no impact or a less than significant aesthetic impact based
on the thresholds of significance. Therefore, no mitigation measures are recommended.
Residual Impacts
As discussed in detail above, the Project will result in no impact or a less than significant
impact on aesthetics.
Impact A-2: The Project would create a new source of light that could affect surrounding
uses.
Because the Project site is currently vacant and the buildings abandoned, no light is
currently generated on site. The Project would create a new source of light and glare in the
Project site area, including general nighttime building lighting, security lighting, landscape
lighting, and lighting from the second and third story residential units (e.g. windows and
balconies). Lighting from the Project site would add to the existing ambient light sources in the
area generated by street lights and other nearby retail, office, and institutional uses. The City
will require through its design review process that all lighting to be installed and directed in a
mamler that it does not impact the residential uses near the project site, including the mobile
home park to the northeast or the Tustin Hacienda senior residential care facility behind the
City's Water Works building to the east. While the Project would increase the ambient light in
19 The only officially designated state scenic highway in Orange County is a portion of Route 91, from State Route
55 to east of Anaheim city limits. (http;//www.dot.ca.gov/hgiLandArch/scenic/schwys.html)
3.1-15
Aesthetics
Prospect Village EIR
the area, the incremental increase in illumination would result in a less than significant impact on
surrounding sensitive uses.
Mitigation Measures
The Project would have a less than significant light and glare. Therefòre, no rnitigation
measures are recommended.
Residual Impacts
The Project will result in a less than significant light and glare impact.
3.1.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
The Project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable futJire
development projects will incrementally contribute to changes in the aesthetic quality of the Old
Town area. However, as noted above, these changes are considered less than significant due to
the specific design features which have been incorporated into the Project and compliance with
the City's stringent design and cultJiral resources review process. The City's Design Review
combined with the Control Resource Overlay District is a comprehensive land use scheme
designed to preserve the visual character and aesthetics of the Old Town commercial. In
addition, two of three projects identified on Table 2-3, the Farmer Boys Restaurant and Tustin
Library, are located outside the Old Town area and thus would not adversely effect the visual
character of Old Town. The other project, Armstrong Garden Center, is within Old Town.
However, the Therefore, any cumulative impacts on the project are considered less than
significant.
3.1-16
Aesthetics
Prospect Vülage EIR
3.2 AIR QUALITY
3.2.1 INTRODUCTION
The Air Quality section addresses potential Project impacts on ambient air quality
and the exposure of people, especially sensitive individuals, to unhealthful pollutant
concentrations. Air pollutants of concern include ozone, carbon monoxide, particulate
matter and oxides of nitrogen. This section analyzes the type and quantity of emissions
that the Project would generate during construction and ultimate occupancy of the site.
The information contained in this section is consistent with the 1993 South Coast Air
Quality Management District ("AQMD") CEQA Handbook for Air Quality Analysis.
The assumptions and air quality calculations prepared by the City of Tustin are provided
in Technical Appendix B of this EIR.
3.2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.2.2.1 Climate and Meteorology
The Project site is locatedwithin the South Coast Air Basin ("Basin"), a 6,600-
square mile area encompassing all of Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los
Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The Basin is defined by a coastal plain
with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the
southwest and by mountains of up to 11,000 feet around the remaining perimeter. To the
north of the Basin is the high desert and to the southeast are the low desert and San Diego
County.
The climate of the Basin is determined by latitude, proximity to the Pacific
Ocean, and topography. The climate in this region is generally dominated by the
Hawaiian subtropical high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific Ocean. The climate is
mild because of the cool sea breezes, but conditions such as wind speed, wind direction,
and air temperature gradients, along with local and regional topography, provide the links
between air pollutant emissions and air quality. The Basin generally has a limited
capability to disperse air contanJÌnants because of its low wind speeds and persistent
te~perature inversions.
In the Tustin area, the coolest months are November through March, with an
average temperature of 58.6°F. The warmest months are July through September, with an
average temperature of 70.1 of. The mean annual precipitation at the Project site is 11.4
inches. Ninety-nine percent of the annual precipitation occurs November through April.
Predominant daily winds consist of a morning onshore air flow frorn the
west/southwest and afternoon and evening offshore air flows from the north/northeast
with little variability between seasons, although summer wind speeds average slightly
higher than winter wind speeds. The typical wind condition is from the west/southwest at
less than about II miles per hour. The prevailing winds carry air contaminants east and
northward. On occasion, during fall and winter months, offshore winds, known as Santa
3.2-1
Air Quality
Prospect Vi1ùzge EIR
Ana winds, may develop as a result of a high-pressure system situated over the Mojave
and Colorado deserts and the Great Basin east of the SCAB. Santa Ana winds are usually
warm and dry and can reach speeds in excess of 50 miles per hour. Strong Santa Ana
winds produce some of the Basin's best air quality because they push poor air to the west
over the ocean.
One of the dominant meteorological conditions that influence air quality in the
Basin is the inversion layer. Cooler air from the ocean underlies air which has been
warmed by land surface contact, giving rise to a persistent capping inversion which
resists the transfer and dispersion of pollutants. This phenomenon occurs on almost
every day of the year, reaching heights above ground of perhaps 1,200 feet on some
summer afternoons and frequently remaining ground-based during the coldest months of
the year. The altitude of the cool air/warm air mixing height normally increases during
the day as the base of the inversion erodes because of surface heating. The average
occurrence of ground-based inversions is II days per month and ranges from two days in
June to 22 days in December and January. High inversions with heights less than 2,500
feet occur at an average of22 days each month.
In the Basin, the potential for adverse air pollution conditions is particularly high
during the period from June through September. Frequently, the light winds and shallow
vertical mixing fail to disperse the large quantities of pollutants generated in the basin. In
addition, the plentiful sunshine in the Basin provides the requisite energy to produce the
photochemical reasons which convert two air pollutants, reactive organic compounds
(ROC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), to ozone (03), commonly referred to as "smog." In
this reaction, ROC and NOx are called precursors."
3.2.2.2Existing Air Quality
Criteria Pollutants. Criteria air pollutants are defmed as those pollutants for
which the federal and state governments have established air quality standards, for
outdoor or ambient concentrations to protect public health. The national and state
ambient air quality standards have been set at levels to protect human health with an
adequate margin of safety. In general, the state air quality standards are more stringent
than the corresponding national standards. These standards are shown in Table 3.2-1.
Table 3.2-1
National and California Ambient Air Quali
Ozone
(0,)
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO,)
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO,)
8-hour
I-hour
8-hour
I-hour
Annual Arithmetic Mean
I.hour
Annual Arithmetic Mean
24-hour
3.2-2
Air Quality
Prospect Village EIR
24-hour
Annual Arithmetic Mean
Annual Geometric Mean
24-hour
Fine Particulate Matter Annual Arithmetic Mean
(PM,.,)' 24-hour
Notes: ppm=parts per million; :glm'; NS=no standard.
Source: AQMD, Air Quality Analysis Handbook (httn://www.aamd.2ov/ceaa/hdbk.httnl), Chapter
3
1.
Lead
(Pb)
Sulfates
SO,
Fine Particulate Matter
(pMtO)
25 uglm'
NS
30: m'
50: m'
NS
NS
NS
3.
California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (I-hour
and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, and PMtO are values that are not to be exceeded. If the
standard is for a I-hour, 8-hour, or 24-hour average, then some measurements may be
excluded. In particular, measurements are excluded that California Air Resources Board
determines would occur less than once per year on the average.
National standards other than for ozone and those based on annual averages or annual
arithmetic means are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The ozone standard is attained
if, during the most recent three-year period, the average number of days per year with
maximum hourly concentrations above the standard is equal to or less than one.
In 1997, EPA established an 8.hour standard for ozone, and annual and 24-hour standards for
very fine particulate matter (PM,_,). The EPA's new standards were challenged in court, and
as of April 2001, their status was uncertain.
2.
Criteria air pollutant concentrations are typically higher in the Basin than in any
other area of the country because of the region's climate, geographical setting, and high
concentrations of industry and motor vehicles. Although still high, pollutant
concentrations have declined sharply throughout the 1990s. Air quality in 1996 was the
best recorded since air pollution agencies began monitoring air pollution in this region
in the 1940s prior to the creation of the SCAQMD. Table 3.2-2 lists the primary
emission sources of the criteria pollutants and some of the harmful effects of the
pollutants.
Table 3.2-2
Summarv of Health Effects of the Maior Criteria Pollutants
. Eye irritation
Ozone . Respiratory and cardiopulmonary function impairment
. A2!!1'avation ofresniratorv and cardiovascular diseases
. Impairment of oxygen transport in the bloodstream, increase of
carboxyhemoglobin
. Aggravation of cardiovascular disease
Carbon . Impairment of central nervous system function
Monoxide . Fatigue, headache, confusion, dizziness
. Death at high levels of exposure
. Aggravation of some heart diseases (angina)
. A22ravation ofresniratorv diseases (asthma, emnhvsema)
3.2.3
Air Quality
Prospect Village EIR
Nitrogen . Risk of acute and chronic respiratory disease
Dioxide
. Increased risk of chronic respiratory disease and cardio respiratory disease
Suspended . Reduced lung function
Particulates . With S02, may produce acnte illness
. Particulate matter 10 microns or less in size (PM,,) may lodge in and/or irritate
the lun~s
Source: Source: AQMD, Air Quality Analysis Handbook !httD://www.aamd.20v/ceaa/hdbk.html),
Chapter 3
Attainment Status. CARB is required to designate areas of the state as being in
attainment, non-attainment, or unclassified for each state standard. An attainment
designation for an area signifies that pollution concentrations are not in violation of the
air quality standards for a particular pollutant in that area. A non-attainment designation
indicates that a pollutant concentration has violated the standard at least once excluding
those occasions when a violation was caused by an exceptional event. An unclassified
designation signifies that the air quality data do not support either attainment or non-
attainment status.
As shown on Table 3.2-3, the Basin is in non-attainment of the state and federal
ozone (03) and fine particulate matter (PMIO) standards. With regard to nitrogen oxide
(NOz), the EP A and CARB are currently in the process of changing the status ITom non-
attainment to attainment.
Table 3.2-3
Attainment Status of South Coast Air Basin
Local Air Quality. The closest air quality monitoring station to the Project site is
in the EI Toro/Saddleback Valley, which is located to the east of the Project site. The
results of the monitoring for 03, CO, and PMIO for 2000 and 2001 are shown in Table
3.2-4. NOz is not monitored at the EI Toro/Saddleback Valley air monitoring station.
For <;>ther nearby stations in Orange County, NOz levels have not exceeded the State
standard since at least 1990.
As shown in Table 3.2-4, neither the federal nor the state standards for CO were
exceeded at the Saddleback Valley air quality monitoring station in 2000 or 2001. For
PMIO at the EI Toro/Saddleback Valley rnonitoring station, the state 24-hour standard was
exceeded once in 2000 and three times in 2001, but the federal standard was not
3.2-4
Air Quality
Prospect Vùlage EIR
exceeded. For 03, both the state standard was exceeded on three (3) days in 2000 and ten
(10) days in 2001, while the federal standard was exceeded once in 2001.
Ozone continues to be the most severe pollutant concern in the Basin. Within the
Basin, the levels of pollution nearer to the coast, which includes the Project site, are
relatively low compared to inland areas. The distribution is similar for PMlO. Pollutant
concentrations increase with distance from the coast as a result of transport in the
prevailing winds and a higher density of pollutant sources in the inland areas. Therefore,
emissions from the coastal areas must be recognized as contributors to inland pollutant
concentrations. The roles are reversed occasionally during periods of offshore, or Santa
Ana, wind conditions.
OZONE (I-Hour) STANDARD
Maximum Concentration (ppm)
Days >CAAQS (0.09 ppm)
Days> NAAQS (0.12 ppm)
NO, (I-Hour) STANDARD'
Maximum Concentration (ppm)
Days> CAAQS (0.25 ppm)
0.13
3
NA
0.12
10
I
Not
measured
NA
Not measured
NA
PMIO (24-Hour) STANDARD
Maximum Concentration (:g/m')
Days> CAAQS (50 :g/m')
Days> NAAQS (ISO :g/m')
CO (S.Hour) STANDARD
Maximum Concentration (ppm)
Days> CAAQS (9.0 ppm)
Days> NAAQS (9.0 ppm)
Source: AQMD Air Data at www.aqmd.gov
Notes: ppm=parts per million; :g/m'=nricrograms per cubic meter;
No Federal (I-hour) NO, standard.
"Days" for PMIO are given as exceedenceslnumber of annual measurements. Exact
number of annual measurements is not available for 2000 data. However, measurements
are typically collected every six days or approximately 61 days a year.
60
1756
1/61
60
9/59
3/57
2.3
0
0
2.4
0
0
3.2.2.3Sensitive Receptors
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to
the types of population groups or activities involved. AQMD identifies residences,
schools, playgrounds, child care centers, convalescent homes, retirement homes,
rehabilitation centers, and athletic facilities as sensitive receptors. 1 Sensitive population
groups include children, the elderly, and the acutely and chronically ill, especially those
with cardio-respiratory diseases. Residential areas are considered sensitive to air
pollution because residents tend to be home for extended periods of time resulting in
sustained exposure to pollutants that may be present.
I AQMD, Air Quality Analysis Handbook (httD://www.aamd.eov/ceaa/hdbk.hnnD, Chapter 3
3.2-5
Air Quality
Prospect VUlage EIR
Sensitive receptors in the Project area include the Tustin Hacienda senior assisted
living facility to the east, adjacent to the City's Water Works facility, the residences to
the north along Prospect Avenue, and the mobile home park at the northeast corner of
Prospect Avenue and Third Street.
3.2.2.4 Air Quality Management
Local and Regional Air Quality Management
The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the
jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) and the
California Air Resources Board (CARB). The AQMD, by law, is required to achieve and
maintain health:fu1 air quality for its residents through a comprehensive program of
planning, regulation, compliance assistance, enforcement, monitoring, technology
advancement, and public education.2
The federal and state Clean Air Acts require that non-attainment basins that do
not meet federal or state clean air standards must prepare a plan for bringing the area into
compliance. AQMD prepares such a plan every three years. Each plan is an update of
the previous plan and has a 20-year horizon. The AQMD Governing Board adopted the
2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) on August I, 2003.3 The 2003 AQMP
updates the attainment demonstration for the federal standards for ozone and particulate
matter (PMIO); replaces the 1997 attainment demonstration for the federal carbon
monoxide (CO) standard and provides a basis for a maintenance plan for CO for the
future; and updates the maintenance plan for the federal nitrogen dioxide (N02) standard
that the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) has met since 1992.
This revision to the AQMP also addresses several state and federal plarming
requirements and incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the form of
updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes and
new air quality modeling tools. The 2003 AQMP is consistent with and builds upon the
approaches taken in the 1997 AQMP and the 1999 Amendments to the Ozone SIP for the
Basin for the attainment of the federal ozone air quality standard. However, this revision
points to the urgent need for additional emission reductions (beyond those incorporated in
the 1997/99 Plan) from all sources, specifically those under the jurisdiction of the
California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency which
account for approximately 80 percent of the ozone precursor emissions in the Basin.
Project emissions are subject to the rules and regulations of the AQMD. These
rules and regulations are promulgated to achieve defined air quality standards that are
protective of public health. To that end, they are designed to limit unhealthy emissions
through emission controls strategies for each emission source in order to ultimately attain
air quality standards.
, http://www.aqmd.gov/aqmdlintraqmd.html
3 http://www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/AQMDO3AQMP.html
3.2-6
Air Quality
Prospect Village EIR
State Air Quality Management
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) was signed into law on September 30,
1988. Through its many requirements, the CCAA serves as an important consideration in
attainment plarming efforts. California Air Resources Board (CARB), which became part
of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA) in 1991, is responsible for
ensuring implementation of the CCAA, responding to the CAA, and regulating emissions
from rnotor vehicles and consumer products. CARB's mission is to promote and protect
public health and welfare, as well as ecological resources, through the effective and
efficient reduction of air pollutants while recognizing and considering the effects on the
economy of the state.
CARB sets air quality standards for the state at levels to protect public health and
welfare wj.th an adequate margin of safety. The California Ambient Air Quality
Standards (CAAQS) describe adverse conditions--that is, pollution levels must be below
these standards before a Basin can attain the standard. Air quality is considered in
attainment if pollutant levels are continuously below or equal to the standards and violate
them no more than once each year. California standards are generally more stringent
than the national standards. CAAQS are also shown in Table 3B.3.
Local governments have the authority and responsibility to reduce air pollution
through their police power and land use decision-making authority. Specifically, local
goverriments are responsible for mitigating emissions resulting from land use decisions
and for implementing transportation control measures as outlined in the AQMP.
Federal Air Quality Management
The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) is the federal law passed in 1970 and last
amended in 1990 that forms the basis for the national air pollution control effort. Basic
elements of the Act include National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for rnajor
air pollutants, hazardous air pollutants standards, state attainment plans, motor vehicle
emissions standards, stationary source emissions standards and permits, acid rain control
measures, stratospheric ozone protection, and enforcement provisions.
The CAA requires that EP A establish NAAQS and reassess, at least every 5
years,. whether adopted standards are adequate to protect public health based on current
scientific evidence. The NAAQS describe acceptable air quality conditions designed to
protect the health and welfare of the nation's citizens. The NAAQS are shown in Table
3B-3.
In November 1990, Congress enacted a series of amendments to the CAA
intended to intensify air pollution control efforts across the nation. One of the primary
goals of the 1990 amendments to the CAA was an overhaul of the planning provisions for
those areas not currently meeting NAAQS. The CAA identifies specific emission
reduction goals, requires both a demonstration of reasonable further progress and
3.2-7
Air Quality
Prospect Village EIR
attainment, and incorporates more stringent sanctions for failure to attain the NAAQS or
to meet interim attainment milestones.
3.2.3
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
3.2.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance
For this analysis, the Project may also result in significant impacts if:
.
Project construction or ultimate operation generates air pollutant emissions that
exceed the AQMD regional emission thresholds described in Table 3.2-6.
75
100
150
55
55
150
.
The Project would be inconsistent with the AQMP
The Project would generate carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations at intersections
with unacceptable levels of service
.
3.2.3.2 Impacts
Impact: The Project would generate short term construction emissions.
The Project would generate pollutant emissions over the course of construction
activity, which would result in a short-term impact on air quality. Temporary
construction emissions would result directly from Project demolition, grading and site
preparation activities, asphalt paving, building placement activities and indirectly from
construction equipment emissions and construction worker commuting patterns.
Pollutant emissions will vary from day to day depending on the level of activity (e.g. type
and volume of heavy equipment being operated), the specific operations, and the
prevailing weather. It is anticipated that construction activities would continue for
approximately 24 months.
The process of calculating construction emissions involves subdividing the
construction activities into distinct phases such as demolition, site clearing, site
excavation, paving, and architectural coating activities. Emissions are then calculated
separately for each distinct activity as appropriate using the URBEMIS7G model.
4 AQMD, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Chapter 6, p. 6-2
3.2-8
Air Quality
Prospect Vülage EIR
Demolition would occur before any grading and site preparation activities.
Demolished materials would be exported off site to a nearby landfill. ActJia! construction
phase emissions would result from direct material handling and heavy equipment
operations. Due to the use of heavy construction equipment, and its associated dust-
generating potential, it is anticipated that the demolition and site preparation activities
will result in the highest daily contaminant generation. Construction emission estimates
for the Project are presented in Table 3-2-6.
Table 3.2-6
Estimated Maximum Dail Construction Emissions5
As shown in Table 3.2.5 above, all Project's estimated construction emissions,
would be below the AQMD's significance thresholds. Therefore, Project construction
activity would have a less than significant air quality impact.
Mitigation Measures
Project construction activity would have a less than significant air quality impact.
Therefore, no mitigation measures are recommended.
Residual Impacts
Project construction activity will result in a less than significant air quality
impact.
Impact: The Project would generate long term operational emissions.
Long-term air quality impacts are those associated with the change in permanent
usage of the Project site. Two types of air pollutant sources must be considered with
respect to the proposed project: stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources
include emissions from onsite activities and natural gas combustion for heating
requirements, as well as "emissions at the power plant generating electricity for the project
site.
The majority of Project emissions would come from mobile sources (e.g. cars,
trucks, etc.). Mobile source emissions result from residential, commercial and office
vehicle trips, including employees, and deliveries. Because the Project includes
live/work units whe~e the residence of the unit also operates the ground floor business,
S The specific emissions calculations and project assumptions are provided in Appendix B, Air Quality
Project Emission Calculations, and are based on the AQMD URBEMIS 2002 Model.
3.2-9
Air Quality
Prospect Village EIR
the number of residential commuter trips would be limited. Under worst-case conditions,
the Project is estimated to generate approximately 600 trips per day.6
The projected stationary and mobile source emissions associated with the Project
are shown in Table 3.2-7 and would not exceed the AQMD's significance thresholds.
Therefore, like Project construction emissions, Project operational emissions would be
less than significant.
In addition, while Project traffic would incrementally contribute CO levels at
nearby intersections, all of the intersections adjacent to the project site operate within
acceptable levels of service. Therefore, Project will not result in unacceptable project-
generated carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations. Therefore, there is a less-than-
significant impact to air quality.
Mitigation Measures
Project construction activity would have a less than significant air quality impact.
Therefore, no mitigation measures are recommended.
Residual Impacts
Project construction activity will result in a less than significant air quality
impact.
3.2.3.3
Cumulative Impacts
The Project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
future projects, would increase the overall amount of construction and operation related
emissions within the Basin. However, the Project construction will likely commence
after two of these projects are completed. The Farmer Boys project is scheduled to be
completed in either February or March 2004 before construction of the Project begins,
while the Armstrong Garden Center project would be completed by April or May 2004.
6 Prospect Village Traffic Analysis, Sasaki Transportation Services, December 12,2003.
7 The specific emissions calculations and project assumptions are provided in Appendix X, Air Quality
Project Emission Calculations, and are based on the AQMD URBEMIS 2002 Model. Calculations include
vehicular emissions and area source emissions including natural gas, landscaping and consumer product
emissions.
3.2-10
Air Quality
Prospect Village EIR
In addition, the City currently does not have financing or a timeframe for commencing
construction on the new Library, therefore, any attempt to determine the extent of a
cumulative air quality impact with this project would be speculative. Giving the timing
of each of the cumulative projects, Project construction emissions would not be
cumulatively significant.
From an operational standpoint, all three projects combined with the Project will
increase vehicular and stationary source emissions in the region. However, as described
above, Project operational emissions, which include vehicle emissions, are well below the
AQMD significance thresholds and this Project appears to be the largest and most intense
of all three projects. For example, Project CO emissions are one-fifth of the AQMD
threshold. The other Project operational emissions are similarly well below the AQMD
thresholds. Thus, the Project operational emissions combined with the other projects are
not considered cumulatively significant and no mitigation is required.
3.2-11
Air Quality
Prospect VüIage EIR
3.3
CULTURAL RESOURCES
3.3.1 INTRODUCTION
This section discusses the existing cultural resources on the project site and evaluates
whether the proposed project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of these
resources. The discussion and analysis contained in this section is based on the Historic
Resources Technical Report, Uti Juice Redeveloprnent Project (Appendix C), dated July 14,
2003 ("Resource Report"). The Resource Report evaluated the historical significance of the
existing buildings, assessed Project impacts on these buildings, and identified measures to avoid
or lessen the Project's impacts.
3.3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.3.2.1.
On Site Conditions
The Project site contains two structures located at 191 and 193-195 E. Main Street that
were built in 1922 and 1914, respectively. This section describes the Project site history and the
current condition of the structures on site, including any distinguishing architectural
characteristics of each of the structures. -
Project Site History
Charles Edward Uti constructed the two buildings that currently occupy the site in 1914
and 1922. Charles Edward Uti was a Tustin pioneer and contributed to the social, agricultural,
commercial, and civic affairs and development of Tustin. He was born in 1866 and came to
Tustin with his family in 1874. His father, Lysander Uti, ran a mercantile business at the
southwest corner of Main and D Street (now EI Camino Real). Upon his father's death, Charles
Edward Uti took over the business and began raising peanuts, cattle, and other crops. Along
with James Irvine and Sherman Stevens, he organized the San Joaquin Fruit Company, which
raised and packaged citrus, walnuts, avocados, and chilies. He was instrumental in the formation
of the Orange County Citrus Exchange, and was involved with other agricultural organizations
including the Irvine Citrus Association and the Frances Citrus Association. He served as
treasurer of the Haven Seed Company. Utt also bought and ran the Tustin Water Works to
ensure Tustin would have a reliable water supply and investigated using Colorado River water in
advance of the Metropolitan Water District. He also served on the Red Hill Water Company,
Lemon Heights Water Company, and the Frances Mutual Water Company. He served on the
board of Tustin's first bank, the Bank of Tustin, and its successor, the First National Bank of
Tustin, served as the board for the Commercial National Bank of Santa Ana, and was a director
of the Santa Ana Building and Loan Company. He also served on the board of the Tustin Union
High School District.
In 1913, Utt began raising California Concord and Isabella grapes and bottling home-
made grape juice. He began bottling the juice commercially at his home. However, in 1922, Utt
moved his grape juice production to the Main Street Building and added the building at 191 E.
Main Street. Over the succeeding years, sheds and other auxiliary buildings were added to the
3.3-1
Cultural Resources
Prospect Village EIR
rear of the property, which no longer exist. Arcy Lynn Schellhous became Utt's partner and, in
1931, became the sole proprietor of the Uti Juice Company. Under Schellhous's management,
the firm's product line expanded to include jams, jellies, marmalades and syrups. Grapes
remained the primary output, but apples, black cherries, boysenberries, pomegranates, and
raspberries were also processed.
The Uti Juice Company closed in 1973 and later sporadic short-term uses of the buildings
included a furniture store, a religious center, and contractor's office. After 1973, the buildings
were largely neglected and allowed to deteriorate and, in 1998, the City condemned the property.
193, 195 E. Main Street Building ("193, 195 E. Main Building")
In 1914, C.E. Uti constructed the 193, 195 E. Main Building as an investment property.
The Main Street Building is a 4,375 square foot, single-story building with a double storefront
that extends 60 linear feet along Main Street; each storefront is thirty feet wide. The portion of
the building at 193 E. Main extends 60 feet to the rear and the portion at 195 E. Main Street
extends an additional 30 feet, which appears to be a later addition. The roof is a flat composition
roof with a parapet. All but the main façade, which faces south, appears to be constructed of
concrete block or poured in place concrete, although a layer of plaster has been applied over the
east wall. The detailing exemplifies the Victorian-Italianate architectural style and features a
metal cornice on the front elevation featuring large brackets at each end and in the center, which
wraps around the southeast corner of the building and extends approximately six (6) feet along
the east wall. The cornice consists of elaborate brackets, dentil work, panels, and molding. The
193 transom is composed of small glass panels with three venting panels while the 195 transom
has been replaced with contemporary glass blocks. Below the transoms are glass show windows
and bulkheads, which have been boarded with plain wood panels. The eastern elevation (side
facing Prospect Avenue) has a doubled-molded cornice, a single large double-hung window, and
a barn-type sliding wood door. The rear elevation has a number of bricked up window and door
openings; a window and two doors remain on the rear of the building. The interior of the
building is vacant and no longer contains evidence of how the building was used; all juice-
making equipment and related items have been removed.
191 E. Main Street Building ("191 E. Main Building")
In 1922, Uti constructed the 191 Main Building. This building is a rectangular, 1,745
square foot, one-story brick building of vernacular commercial style with a gabled parapeted roof
that features a skylight. The building extends thirty feet along Main Street and sixty feet to the
rear and abuts the west wall of the 193, 195 E. Main Street Building. The front elevation
features light and dark gold brick with an unbroken parapet crowned with a decorative cornice of
brick. Below the cornice, there is a frieze of vents containing five vertical bricks and edged with
darker gold bricks. A row of white glazed brick runs across the entire front façade and down the
pilasters on each side. There are double wooden doors with center windows with a transorn, a
service door with a transom, a recessed double-hung window, and two screened vents on the
front elevation. The west and rear elevations have a number of bricked-up and boarded-over
recessed window and door openings; one window appears on the rear elevation. The interior of
the building is vacant.
3.3-2
Cultural Resources
Prospect Vülage EIR
Existing Physical Condition of Buildings
The Resources Report concluded that the "integrity" of both resources was "fair."
Although altered and suffering from seismic damage and neglect, the exteriors of the buildings
on the site (particularly along their Main Street and Prospect Street façade) have retained
sufficient integrity to convey "their original appearance and integrity. The building interiors,
however, are empty, deteriorated, much altered, and no longer have any tangible connection to
the prior Utt juice making process.
The City also prepared an Adaptive Reuse StJ.¡dy, dated June 12,2003, Curry Price Court
(Appendix D) which described the buildings as deteriorated. According to this study, the roof of
the 195 E. Main Street building sags dramatically and the contemporary glass block in the
transom, which weighs several thousand pounds, is being supported by the plate glass windows
below it. Due to the potentially dangerous condition this caused, the City needed to board over
the glass block in October 2003. The report also noted that the front masonry wall of the 191 E.
Main Street building was severely damaged during a 1995 seismic retrofitting project and
appears to have settled, resulting in major cracking and displacement of the brick masonry. The
interiors of the buildings show evidence of water damage, such as staining and collapsed
ceilings, and bricked up window openings. The seismic retrofitting left visible steel columns and
bracing throughout the interiors.
3.3.2.2 ArchaeologicallPaleontological Resources
The Project site has been repeatedly disturbed in the past with varying degrees of
development and excavation. No archaeological or paleontological resources have bee unearthed
during any of the prior development on site; therefore, no archaeological or paleontological
resources are expected to occur on site.
3.3.2.3 Applicable Regulations
National Register of Historic Places (National Register)
"The National Register is an authoritative guide to be used by Federal, State and local
governments, private groups and citizens to identify the nation's cultural resources and to
indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment"¡
As stated in National Register regulations contained in 36 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), Part 60, in order to be considered for listing in the National Register, a property must
meet the criteria for evaluation:
The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering
and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects that possess
integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association,
and:
36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §60.2.
3.3-3
Cultural Resources
Prospect Village EIR
(a)
(h)
(c)
(d)
that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of our history; or
that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic
values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose
components may lack individual distinction; or
that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or
history.2
The National Register includes only those properties that retain sufficient integrity to
accurately convey their physical and visual appearance during their identified period of
significance. Integrity is defined in the National Register program as a property's ability to
convey its significance. Evaluation of integrity may be somewhat a subjective judgment;
however it must be founded on "an understanding of a property's physical features and how they
relate to its significance.,,3
Relationship to Project - The subject property is not currently -listed in the National
Register. However, the City's 1990 Historic Resources Survey gave the 193, 195 E. Main
Building an "A" rating, which corresponds to a National Register significance code of 3S.4 Code
3S provides that the structure appears eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places. The 1990 Historic Resources Survey gave the 191 E. main Street Building a "B" rating,
which corresponds to National Register significance code of 5S1, which means this structure is
not eligible for listing but is listed or designated under an existing local ordinance.s
California Register of Historical Resources (California Register)
The California Register was established to serve as an authoritative guide to the state's
significant historical and archaeological resources.6 State law provides that in order for a
property to be considered eligible for listing in the California Register, it must be found by the
State Historical Resources Commission to be significant under any of the following four criteria
(which parallel National Register criteria):
2.
3.
1.
Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of California's history and cultural heritage.
Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.
Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type; period, region, or method of
construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual or
possesses high artistic values.
236 CFR §60A.
3 National Park Service, Department of the Interior, National Register Bulletin "How to Complete the National
Register Registration Form," 1990, revised 1998.
4 Resources Report at p. 12.
, Ibid.
6 California Public Resources Code (PRe) §5024.1.
3.3-4
Cultural Resources
Prospect ViUage EIR
4.
Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or
history.
California Register regulations contained in Title 14, Chapter 11.5 provide in §4852 (c)
that "it is possible that historical resources may not retain sufficient integrity to meet the criteria
for listing in the National Register, but they may still be eligible for listing in the California
Register." The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) has consistently interpreted this
to mean that a California Register-eligible property must retain "substantial" integrity.
The California Register also includes properties which: have been formally determined
eligible for listing in, or are listed in the National Register; are registered State Historical
Landmark Number 770, and all consecutively numbered landmarks above Number 770; points of
historical interest, which have been reviewed and recommended to the State Historical Resources
Commission for listing; and city and county-designated landmarks or districts (if criteria for
designation are determined by OHP to be consistent with California Register criteria). Public
Resources Code (PRC) §5024.l states:
(g) A resource identified as significant in an historical resource survey may be listed in
the California Register if the survey meets all of the following criteria:
(I)
(2)
(3)
(4)
The survey has been or will be included in the State Historical Resources
Inventory.
The survey and the survey documentation were prepared in accordance
with [OHP]... procedures and requirements.
The resource is evaluated and determined by the office to have a
significance rating of category 1-5 on DPR [Department of Parks and
Recreation] form 523.
If the survey is five or more years old at the time of its nomination for
inclusion in the California Register, the survey is updated to identify
historical resources which have become eligible or ineligible due to
changed circumstances or further documentation and those which have
been demolished or altered in a manner that substantially diminishes the
significance of the resource.
Relationship to Project - The subject property is not currently listed in the California
Register. However, the Uti Juice Buildings appear eligible for listing in the California Register
of Historical Resources under criteria: 1) association with significant event or trends; 2)
association with historically important people; and, 3) embodying distinctive characteristics or a
type or construction method.? As described in the Historic Resources Technical Report, the 193,
195 E. Main Building is historically significant for its association with Charles Edward Uti, due
to his pioneering efforts in founding one of the City's first and largest businesses, and for his
involvement in the development of Tustin. The 191 Main Building is also historically significant
for its association with Charles Edward Utt and may be considered a building of local
7 Resources Report at p. 11-12
3.3-5
Cultural Resources
Prospect Village ElK
significance under the following California Register criteria: I) association with significant event
or trends; and, 2) association with historically important people.8
In addition the façades of each building exhibit distinct architectural features, particularly
the façade of 193, 195 E. Main Street Building. This façade features the detailed metal cornice,
which is now rarely seen in Southern California. The façade of the 191 E. Main Street Building
is considered less architecturally significant, as other examples of this type of commercial
vernacular style are evident in Old Town Tustin. In addition, the location Of the buildings on a
prominent corner in Old Town and as the first of a series of historical buildings one encounters
when traveling west on Main Street adds to the significance of the buildings.9
Cultural Resource Overlay District
The Project site is located within the Cultural Resource Overlay District (Section 9252 of
the Tustin City Code). This District specifies the purpose of the overlay district, the role of the
Cultural Resource Advisory Committee, the process and criteria for designating cultural
resources, and procedures for altering, adding, or demolishing improvements within the overlay
district, design criteria and development standards for commercial and residential development,
and maintenance standards for Designated Cultural Resources. This section of the code complies
with the requirements of the State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) for the City of Tustin
to be a Certified Local Govemment (CLG).
Section 9252 subsection (f) of the Tustin City Code requires a Certificate of
Appropriateness to be issued prior to the issuance of pernrits for the alteration or demolition of a
Designated Cultural Resource or for any improvement within a designated Cultural Resource
District. The Tustin City Code does not preclude alteration or demolition of structures; specific
fmdings must be made by the Director of Community Development, or on appeal, by the City
Council. The fmdings for demolition, removal, or relocation of a designated structure or a
structure constructed prior to 1940 include one (I) or more of the following:
c.
The structure is a hazard to the public health or safety and repairs or stabilization
are not physically possible;
The site is required for public use which will be of more benefit to the public than
the cultural resource;
For Designated Cultural Resources only:
I. It is not feasible to preserve or restore the structure, taking into
consideration the economic feasibility of alternatives to the proposal.
The proposed replacement structure does not detract from the
neighborhood.
Reconstruction or restoration is not economically feasible or practical.
2.
a.
b.
d.
While the project site is located within the City's only Cultural Resource Overlay
District, no Designated Cultural Resources have been established. The project site is listed in the
City's Historical Resources Survey Report (Thirtieth Street Architects, July 1990), which is an
8 Resources Report at p. 12
9 Resources Report at p. 11
3.3-6
Cultural Resources
Prospect Village EIR
informational document that provides a list of properties of historic interest, including the project
site. The Historical Resources Survey Report is not a regulatory document and does not specify
Designated Cultural Resources nor deternrine which structures mayor may not be preserved,
altered, or demolished.
The findings for construction of improvements within a Cultural Resource District
include the following:
a.
The proposed work conforms to the Municipal Code and design standards that
may be established by the Cultural Resources Committee.
The proposed work does not adversely affect the character of the district or
Designated Cultural Resources within the district.
The proposed work is harmonious with existing surroundings. The extent of
harmony shall be evaluated in terms of appropriateness of materials, scale, size,
height, placement and use of a new building or structure in relationship to existing
buildings and structures and the surrounding setting.
b.
c.
In addition to Certificate of Appropriateness and permit procedures, Section 9252 of the
TCC provides maximum flexibility in design and development for various lot sizes, consistent
with the a concept of a village environment. For example, on-site parking requirements may be
waived upon the approval of a long-term lease agreement for off-site parking within 300 feet of
the proposed project. As discussed in Section 3.7 (Traffic), a portion of the required parking for
the project will be provided off-site at the City's Main Street Water Yard.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Under CEQA, an agency must consider a resource to be a historical resource for purposes
of CEQA if the resource is listed in the California Register or deemed eligible for listing in the
California Register.lo A resource will be considered a presumptive resource if it is either
(I) listed in a local register of historic resources as defined in PRC Section 5010.1, or (2)
identified in a local survey of historic resources meeting the criteria set forth in PRC section
5024.1.11 If a resource meets either of these criteria, the lead agency must treat the resource as
historically significant unless the preponderance of the evidence indicates that the resource is not
historically significant.
Although the property is not listed on the California Register, the City has determined
that the property is eligible for listing in the California Register. Thus, the property is considered
a historical resource under CEQA.
The California Environmental Quality Act provides guidance in evaluating potential
impacts to historical resources. Section 15064.5(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states "a project
with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical
resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment." Substaritial adverse
change in the significance of an historical resource under CEQA means "physical demolition,
IOPRC § 21084.1; § 15064.5(a)(l), (a)(2).
II PRC § 21084.1; 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(2)
3.3-7
Cultural Resources
Prospect Vülage EIR
destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the
significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired.,,12
According to the CEQA Guidelines, the significance of an historical resource is
materially impaired when a project:
(A) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical
characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and
that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of
Historical Resources; or
Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical
characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical
resources pursuant to §5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or its
identification in an historical resources survey meeting the requirernents of
§5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the public agency reviewing the
effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the
resource is not historically or cultJirally significant; or
Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical
characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and
that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical
Resources as deternrined by a lead agêncy for purposes ofCEQA.13
(B)
(C)
The CEQA Guidelines also provide that "generally" a project that follows the Secretary's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving,
Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, 1995, Weeks and Grimmer
("Secretary's Standards and Guidelines") "shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than
a significant impact on the historical resource." (§§ 15064.5(b)(3), 15126A(b).) Secretary's
Standards and Guidelines provide standards and advice relating to the preservation of cultJiral
resources listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. The
Secretary's Standards and Guidelines incorporate two documents, prepared at different times,
that both received substantial review from historic preservation experts. The 1992 "Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties," ("Treatment Standards") was
reviewed by a "broad cross-section' of government entities and private sector organizations."
The "Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic
Buildings" ("Building Guidelines") was developed in cooperation with the National Conference
of State Historic Preservation Officers, and was reviewed by individual State Historic
Preservation Offices nationwide.14 The Secretary is Standards and Guidelines are considered
regulatory for any project receiving federal funds, and are otherwise intended as general
guidelines for work on historic buildings.
12 CCR, Guidelines for California ElfVironmental Quality Act, Title 14, Chapter 3, §15064.5(4)(b)(i), amended
2001. Emphasis added.
13 CCR, Guidelines for California ElfVironmental Quality Act, Title 14, Chapter 3, §15064.5 (4)(b)(2), amended
2001.
14 Secretary's Standards and Guidelines at v.
3.3.8
Cultural Resources
Prospect- Vülage EIR
3.3.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
3.3.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, a Project impact would be considered significant if the
project would:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource as defined
in §15064.5, including:
-Demolition of a significant resource;
-Relocation that does not maintain the integrity and significance of a significant
resource;
-Conversion, rehabilitation, or alteration of a significant resource which does not
conform to the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines; or
-Construction that reduces the integrity or significance of important resources on
the site or in the vicinity."
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5;
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature; or
Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
3.3.3.2 Impacts
Impact: The Project wiD cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
historical resource as defined in §15064.5
The Project entails demolition of two buildings on site that were deternrined to be eligible
for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. As discussed above, the Resources
Report concluded that the 193, 195 E. Main Street Building is a resource of regional significance
under California Register of Historic Resources Criteria I (association with significant events or
trends), 2 (association with historically important people); and 3(embodying distinctive
characteristics of a type of construction method). The Resources Survey also concluded that the
191 E. Main Building is a resource of local significance under California Register of Historic
Resources Criteria I (association with significant events or trends), and 2 (association with
historically important people). Therefore, the proposed demolition of these buildings is
considered a significant environmental impact under CEQA.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures CR-I is recommended to reduce the Project's significant impact on
historic resources. However, due to the architectJiral features of the 193, 195 E. Main Street
Building and the historical importance of these both buildings on site to local history,
3.3-9
Cultural Resources
Prospect Village EIR
implementation of the mitigation measures will not reduce the Project's significant impact on
historic resources to a less than significant level. Therefore, Project impacts on historical
resources are considered significant and unavoidable impacts and the Tustin City Council must
adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations if it decides to proceed with the Project as
currently designed. Please note that Section 4.0 Alternatives identifies a range of Project
alternatives that provide for varying degrees of preservation of the two existing structures to
further avoid or substantially lessen Project impacts. An analysis of these alternatives and their
feasibility is comprehensively addressed in Section 4.0. .
CR-l Prior to issuance of a demolition pernrit, documentation of the buildings to be removed
shall be undertaken by the City of Tustin utilizing the standards of the Historic American
Building Survey (HABS), including photo-documentation and measured drawings of the
East Main and Prospect Avenue elevations. These items, together with the Historical
Resource Technical Report, shall be added to the Tustin Area Historical Society
Museum;
Residual Impacts
Despite implementation of mitigation measure CR-I, Project impacts on historical
resources would remain significant and unavoidable. IS
Impact: The Project may disturb unknown buried cultural resources on site.
The project site has experienced various levels of development, including excavation and
grading activity, since the early 1900s. The first structure was built in 1914 and others structures
were built thereafter. In addition, structures that used be located on site have been demolished as
reflected by the concrete building pads on site. Much of the site is currently paved with
exception of some limited patches of vegetation and trees. Because the project site has been
previously disturbed due to excavation, grading, paving and construction of buildings, the
probability of archaeological resources, paleontological resources, or Native American remains
being present is considered low. To avoid or reduce this potentially significant irnpact to a less-
than-significant level, implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-2 is recommended.
Mitigation Measures
CR-2: Ifburied cultural resources, such as chipped or ground stone, historic debris, building
foundations, or human remains are inadvertently discovered during ground-disturbing
activities, work will stop in that area and within 100 feet of the find until a qualified
archaeologist can assess the significance of the find, and, if necessary, develop
appropriate treatment measures. Treatment measures typically include developrnent of
avoidance strategies, capping with fill material, or mitigation of impacts through data
recovery programs such as excavation or detailed documentation.
"Historic Resources Technical Report, Utt Juke Redevelopment Project, July 14. 2003, p. 13
3.3-10
Cultural Resources
Prospect Village EIR
The construction contractor and lead contractor compliance inspector will verify that
work is halted until appropriate treatment measures are implemented if cultural resources
are discovered during construction activities. Concurrence from the City on measures to
be implernented before resuming construction activities in the area of the find will be
obtained.
3.3.3.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
This Project will have a significant and unavoidable direct impact on two historical
resources within the Old Town commercial area. However, none of the three cumulative
projects listed in Table 2-3 would have a similar impact on historical resources. With respect to
Armstrong Garden Center project and the Farmers Boys restaurant, the City of Tustin determined
that these projects were exempt from CEQA. The City adopted a negative declaration for the
Tustin Library project. None of the related projects had an adverse impact on historical
resources; therefore, the Project would not result in significant cumulative impact on historical
resources in the area. While there may be other projects with the Old Town commercial area at
some point in the future, no other projects are currently planned or proposed that would affect
any historical resources in Old Town.
3.3.11
Cultural Resources
Prospect Village EIR
3.4
HAZARDS
3.4.1 INTRODUCTION
Hazardous materials are generally substances which, by their nature and
reactivity, have the capacity of causing harm or a health hazard during normal exposure
or an accidental release or mishap, and are characterized as being toxic, corrosive,
flammable, reactive, an irritant or strong sensitizer. The term "hazardous substances"
encompasses chemicals regulated by both the United States Department of
Transportation's (DOT) "hazardous materials" regulations and the Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) "hazardous waste" regulations, including emergency
response. Hazardous wastes require special handling and disposal because of their
potential to damage public health and the environment. A designation of "acutely" or
"extremely" hazardous refers to specific listed chemicals and quantities.
Activities and operations that use or manage hazardous or potentially hazardous
substances could create a hazardous situation if release of these substances occurred.
Individual circumstances, including the type of substance, quantity used or managed, and
the nature of the activities and operations, affect the probable nequency and severity of
consequences nom a hazardous situation. Federal, state and local laws regulate the use
and management of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances.
Creation of human health hazards or exposure of people to existing sources of
potential health hazards, including asbestos-containing material (ACM), also is
considered in this section.
The analysis and conclusions contained in this section are based on the Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Report 191, 193 & 195 East Main Street, Tustin,
California 92680, dated June I, 1998, Converse Environmental West ("Phase I
Report")(Appendix E).
3.4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.4.2.1 Physical Site Characteristics
The Property is located in the U.S. Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) 7.5-Minute
Series Quadrangle Map for Tustin, California dated 1965, photorevised in 1981. The
Property is located at an approximate elevation of 125 feet above mean sea level (MSL).
The surface topography of the Property can be characterized as gently sloping nom the
north to south.
The subject region is located south of the Santa Ana Mountains within the Tustin
Plan of Orange County, Califomia. The Santa Ana Mountains, of late Eocene to Middle
Miocene in age, are composed of the Topanga Formation and undifferentiated Vaqueros
and Sespe Formations with andesite and breccia volcanic flows. The Topanga Formation
3.4-1
Hazards
Prospect Village EIR
consists of sandstone, conglomerate, and interbedded siltstone. The Vaqueros and Sespe
Formations also consist of sandstone and conglomerate.
The Property is located upon younger alluvium of recent age deposited from the
Santa Ana Mountains. The alluvium has been deposited by two major streams in the
area, the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek. The alluvium beneath the Property has
been primarily derived by Santiago Creek and consists of interbedded and unconsolidated
mud, sand, pebbly sànd, and gravel, however, mainly consists of clayey sand and silt on
the western and southern portion of the Tustin Plain.
Based on groundwater information from the Orange County Water District, two
groundwater production wells, T-MS2 and T-MS3, are located 500 feet east of the
Property. The wells reach a maximum depth of approximately 607 and 630 feet. When
last measured in January 1997, depth to groundwater in the wells was 151 feet (T-MS2)
and 95 feet (T-MS3). However, shallow, perched groundwater zones may exist within
the younger alluvium. Based on the Orange County Groundwater Contour Map dated
November 1996, groundwater was estimated to flow in a west-southwesterly direction in
the general area of the Property. Additionally, the Property is located within the 500-year
floodplain zone.
3.4.2.2 Current Use of the Property
The Property consists of two adjoining buildings which are currently unoccupied
with no business activity. The northern three-quarters of the Property is developed with
concrete and asphalt surfaces and two undeveloped areas.
3.4.2.3 Past Uses ofthe Property
The Phase I Report revealed that the Project Site was developed with a residential
dwelling from 1895 to at least 1906. The Utt Juice Company occupied the Property from
as early as 1920 to 1973, when the business closed. Building permits from the 1980's
indicate that the Property has been used for retail purposes and as a religious center.
The Phase I Report included an analysis of aerial photographs to determine the
types of uses that have historically been accommodated on the site. The Phase I Report
examined aerial photographs from 1938, 1955, 1964, 1970, 1980, 1985 and 1993. The
following is a chronological summary of the aerial photograph review.
.
1938: The south half of the Property was developed with the three current
buildings and by up to three smaller buildings on the northern half. Adjacent land
use to the south and east appeared as orange groves. Residential and commercial
development was evident north and west of the Property. Regionally, orange
grove development was evident in all directions.
.
1955: Significant changes were not observed with the Property with the
exception of an additional larger structure on the northern half. Land use to the
3.4-2
Hazards
Prospect Village EIR
south and east remained relatively unchanged; however, increased residential and
commercial development was evident north and west from the Property.
.
1964: The Property remained developed as discussed. Adjacent land use
developed from orange groves to the south and east to commercial use.
Regionally, increased development was evident in all directions.
.
1970: Significant changes were not observed with the Property or surrounding
adjacent land. Regional land use appeared primarily commercial with scattered
residential development in all directions with minor orange grove development to
the south.
.
1980-1985: The Property remained developed with the current buildings on the
south half with the various buildings on the north half demolished. Commercial
development was evident east, west, and south of the Property and residential
development was evident to the north. Regionally increased residential and
commercial development was evident in all directions.
1993: Significant changes were not observed with the Property, surrounding land
use or region from 1985.
3.4.2.4 Current and Past Uses of Adjacent Properties
The Project site is bordered by the following sites:
West:
Third Street, beyond which is vacant and undeveloped and residential
houses.
East Main Street, beyond which are retail and commercial buildings.
Prospect Avenue, beyond which is the City of Tustin Water Works
(treatment area and production wells).
Retail and commercial buildings and the Tustin Chamber of
Commerce.
North:
South:
East:
According to the Phase I, the property south and west of the Project site was
initially developed with scattered houses in 1895 and ultimately transitioned to "stores"
by 1963. The land uses have remained relatively similar with retail and commercial use
from 1963 to the present. The "Hotel Tustin" was located north of the Property from
1895 to some time prior to 1949 when land use changed to residential housing. The
Tustin Water Works was located east of the Property as early as 1949 until the present.
3.4.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
3.4.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance
The applicable criteria used to determine the significance of an impact are based
on the model initial study checklist in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The
proposed project may result in a significant impact if it would:
3.4.3
Hazards
Prospect ViUage EIR
.
Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through the routine
transport, storage, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;
.
Create a significant hazard to the public through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment;
.
Emit hazardous emissions or handles hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within Y4-mile of an existing or proposed school;
.
Be located on a site that is known to contain hazardous materials or is listed on a
site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and as a result
could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment; or,
.
Impair or interfere with the implementation of an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan.
3.4.3.2 IMPACTS
Impact: The Project would consist of land uses that would use routine non-
hazardous janitorial supplies and other cleaning related materials.
This Project entails a combination of commercial, office, restaurant and
residential uses, which do not involve the routine transport, storage, use or disposal of
hazardous materials. Typically, hazardous materials are associated with industrial
projects that require the use of hazardous materials has part of a manufacturing or
production process. Any hazardous materials used by future occupants of the proposed
uses would generally be limited to those associated with janitorial, maintenance, and
repair activities, such as commercial cleansers, lubricants, paints, etc. The transport,
storage, use and disposal of these materials would be subject to federal, state, and local
health and safety requirements.
Based on the anticipated nature and use of hazardous materials at the Project, as
described above, there are no reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions that
would create a significant hazard to the public due to the release of hazardous materials.
In the unlikely event of such an occurrence, state law requires prompt reporting to local
and state agencies to ensure the public health and safety would not be jeopardized. No
significant impacts related to release of hazardous materials from upset and accident
conditions are anticipated to occur.
Mitigation Measure
Project operation would not require the storage, use, or regular transportation and
disposal of significant quantities of hazardous materials or substances. Therefore, no
mitigation measures are recommended
3.4-4
Hazards
Prospect VIllage EIR
Residual Impacts
Project operation would have a less than significant impact relating to hazardous
substances or materials.
Impact: Project construction equipment would require a limited amount of
combustible materials.
Project grading and construction activities may involve the limited transport,
storage, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, such as in the fueling/servicing of heavy
construction equipment on-site. However, such activity would be short-term, in nature
and would be subject to federal, state, and local health and safety requirements relating to
storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials. No significant impacts related to this
issue area are expected to occur during project construction.
Mitigation Measure
Project construction would not require the storage, use, or regular transportation
and disposal of significant quantities of hazardous materials or substances. Therefore, no
mitigation measures are recommended
Residual Impacts
Project. construction would have a less than significant impact relating to
hazardous substances or materials.
Impact: The Project would require the removal, transport, and disposal of
asbestos containing materials, lead based paint, and an existing inoperable clarifier.
The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment revealed no evidence of recognized
environmental conditions in connection with the property, except for the presence of a
clarifier on site, the presence of asbestos containing material (ACM) and lead based paint
(LBD) which is typical of older structures. A clarifier is a tank that is used to treat water,
whereby solid particles suspended in the water agglomerate and settle at the bottom of the
tank. The solids resulting from the settling are removed as sludge.
The Phase I Report could not determine from the available information whether
the clarifier has been officially closed or abandoned. Information concerning the past use
and current status of the clarifier was similarly not available. In order to reduce the
potential for an unauthorized discharge and depending on the future use of the Property,
the clarifier would be abandoned or removed in accordance with applicable local, state
and federal regulations as required by mitigation measure H.I.
The Phase I Report also disclosed the presence of ACMs on site including the
following materials:
3.4.5
Hazards
Prospect Village EIR
Approximately 300 square feet of floor texture coat located in the 195
building. It was difficult to assess the material due to the large amount of
dust and debris on the floor.
.
Approximately 20 square feet of 9x9 green vinyl floor tile and mastic
exists in the 195 building.
The Phase I Report identified approximately 500 square feet of exterior stucco as
decorative inlays the following material as asbestos containing construction material
(ACCM). The ACCM should be handled as an ACM; however, disposal as asbestos
waste is not required.
The EPA and HUD have derIDed a LBP at 0.5 percent by weight. The Phase I
Report identified the following paints as containing greater than 0.5% lead:
Exterior white paint on the doors and door frames (approximately 300
square feet).
.
Interior white paint on the doors, door frames, windows and window
frames (approximately 300 square feet).
Interior cream paint on the walls, doors, and windows in the front portion
of the 191 building (approximately 600 square feet).
Interior red paint on the walls and doors in the rear portion of the 195
building (approximately 400 square feet).
Any potential hazards impacts resulting from the environmental conditions
described above can be reduced to a level of insignificance with implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures described below.
Mitigation Measure
H-I
H.2
H-3
The applicant shall remove the clarifier on site in accordance with applicable
local, state and federal regulations prior to obtaining a grading pernrit.
Any unknown contaminated soils that could be encountered on the project site
during demolition, site clearance, or construction activities shall be removed
from the project site and disposed of off-site. The removal and disposal of
these hazardous materials would be in accordance with guidelines specified by
the applicable local, state and federal resources agencies, including but not
limited to the Department of Toxics Substances Control and federal
Environmental Protection Agency.
If during any future demolition or . remodeling activities additional suspect
materials are observed, bulk samples shall be collected of these materials and
analyzed for asbestos content. All suspect materials at the Property are
3.4-6
Hazards
Prospect Village EIR
Presumed Asbestos-containing Materials (PACMs) until the asbestos content
is confirmed or denied by analytical testing.
H-4
The applicant shall retain a licensed abatement contractor to properly remove
and dispose of the damaged (peeling, flaking) lead-based paint prior to
obtaining a demolition pernrit.
Residual Impacts
Implementation of mitigation measures H-Ithrough H-4 will reduce Project
impacts relating to ACMs, LBP and the clarifier to a less than significant level.
3.4.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
As discussed above, the Project requires the limited transportation of demolition
materials that contain asbestos and lead based paint during construction activity. ÁB
noted above, all transportation and storage of these materials will be handled in
accordance with federal, state and local regulations. Therefore, Project impacts are
considered less than significant. Aside from this limited and common remediation
activity, the Project does not involve the storage, use or transport of any other hazardous
materials or other substances. Nor does any environmental condition exist on the Project
site that would be exacerbated by Project construction or operation. Therefore, even
assuming that there is currently a cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impact, the
Project does not create any impact that would be cumulatively considerable. Because the
project does not result in any hazards and hazardous materials impacts, the project would
not create any potential cumulative impact on the environment.
3.4-7
Hazards
Prospect Village EIR
3.5
LAND USE
3.5.1 INTRODUCTION
This section discusses existing and proposed land uses on the project site and in
the surrounding area and evaluates whether the Project will create any significant land
use impacts, including any inconsistencies with land use plans that have been adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating significant environmental effects.
3.5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.5.2.1 On Site Land Uses
As shown on Figures 3.1-1 through 3.1-3, the site currently accommodates two
vacant adjoining commercial buildings, with entrances fronting on East Main Street. As
discussed in detail in sections 3.1.2 (Aesthetics) and 3.3.2 (CultJiral Resources) these
structures were built in the early 1900s and have been deemed eligible for list in the
Resources Report prepared for the Project.
The remaining portions of the parcel consist of two concrete pads where
previously demolished structures once stood. One of the pads is located along E. Main
Street between the 191 E. Main Street building and the public alley that defrnes the site
western boundary. The other pad is located toward the rear of the site, adjacent to Third
Street. Vegetation or landscaping on site is minimal and includes two clusters of trees
located in the middle of the vacant rear portion of the site.
3.5.2.2 Surrounding Land Uses
The surrounding area consists of retail, office, institutional (e.g. churches and
municipal uses) and limited residential land uses. The Project site is adjacent to a two-
story building further west of the Project site across the public alley and along East Main
Street. This two.story building is known as the Knights of Pythia Building and is
occupied by the Tustin Chamber of Commerce and the Tustin Area Historical Museum.
Other buildings to the west of the project site along EI Camino Real include.... The
City's Main Street Water Facility is located immediately to the east of the project site
along Main Street. A two-story commercial office building is located to the south across
Main Street and a vacant lot is located to the north across Third Street, where a weekly
Farmer's Market is held.
3.5.3 APPLICABLE LAND USE PLANS AND ZONING
3.5.3.1 Tustin General Plan
California State law requires each City to adopt a comprehensive long-term
general plan for its own physical development and any land outside its boundaries which
bears a relationship to its planning activities. The City of Tustin adopted its first General
3.5"1
Land Use
Prospect Vúlage EIR
Plan in 1966. The Tustin General Plan addresses a planning area consisting of
approximately 17.2 square miles, including all the land within the City's incorporated
boundaries (11.02 square miles) and the area within the City's "sphere of influence"
located immediately adjacent to the City's northerly boundaries, which was identified and
approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission as Tustin's probable ultimate
boundaries and service area. The general plan serves as a blueprint for future growth and
development and as such must address many issues which are directly related to and
influence land use decisions. In addition to land use, State law requires that the general
plan address circulation, housing, conservation of natural resources, preservation of open
space, the noise environment and the protection of public safety.
The Tustin General Plan is organized into seven chapters to address the required
elements as follows:
. Land Use
. Housing
. Circulation
. Conservation/Open Space/Recreation
.. Public Safety
. Noise
. Growth Management
Each of the seven General Plan elements are structured to provide (a) an
introduction, (h) a summary of issues, needs, opportunities, and constraints, (c) a
statement of goals and policies, and (d) an implementation program. The General Plan is
not a zoning map, rather the text and policy maps are intended to provide general, broad
direction for long-range planning and should be used as a policy guide only.
Land Use Element
The Land Use Element establishes City policy which is reflected in all other
General Plan elements. The Tustin Land Use Element was last amended in January 2001
to reflect City policies, conform to changes in State law, and the changing characteristics
and growth of the community, specifically the closure of the Tustin Marine Corps Air
Station (MCAS). The proposed project site is designated "Old Town Commercial"
("OTC"). The OTC designation allows retail, professional office, and service-oriented
business activities serving Old Town and surrounding area, and may also include high
density residential. This designation allows for the most intensive commercial
development in the City, pernritting a maximum 1:1 floor area ratio. To ensure
compatibility of land uses permitted within the classification with the character of
surrounding development and within a development area itself, location, land use type,
density and building intensity, the Land Use Element provides that development
standards will be specifically governed by Planned Community District (P-C) provisions
or a Specific Plan. This includes the maximum densities for any residential uses
determined desirable by the Planning Commission or City Council.
3.5-2
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
Implernentation measures for land use policy are organized around the tools
available that bear a direct relationship to the realization of land use goals. These tools
include the Zoning Code, Subdivision and Grading ordinances, growth management
programs, code enforcement, specific plans, and capital irnprovement programs. The
principal method by which the City implements land use policy as it regulates the
location, type of use, and development character is the Zoning Ordinance which is
contained in the Tustin City Code.
The Land Use Element includes the City's goals and policies for the long-term
growth, development and revitalization of Tustin. Based on the summary of issues,
needs, opportunities and constraints described in the Tustin Land Use Element, ten goals
are identified which include the following:
I. Achieve balanced development.
2. Ensure that compatible and complementary development occurs.
3. Revitalize older commercial, industrial and residential development.
4. Improve city-wide urban design.
5. Promote economic expansion and diversification.
6. Coordinate development with provision of adequate public facilities and services.
7. Ensure that the development character of East Tustin is compatible with the
surrounding man-made and natural environment.
8. Strengthen the development character and mixture of uses in the Old Town/First
Street area.
9. Promote and integrated business park character for the Pacific Center East area.
10. Implement a reuse plan for MCAS Tustin which maximizes the appeal of the site
as a mixed-use, master planned development.
These goals establish the framework for policies related to allocation of land use
in the City. The policies reflect the direction and image the City seeks for the future. A
summary of the more specifically applicable policies identified in the Land Use Element
which serve to guide development of the proposed project site is provided below.
Applicable policies under the goal to achieve balanced development include:
.
Policy 1.2 - Provide for and encourage the development of neighborhood
serving commercial uses in areas underserved and encourage the integration
of retail or service commercial uses on the street level of office projects.
Policy 1.5 - Encourage compatible and complementary infill of previously
by-passed parcel in areas already predominately developed.
.
Applicable policies under the goal to ensure compatible and complementary
development include:
.
Policy 3.8 - Encourage consolidation of parking and reciprocal access
agreements among adjacent businesses.
3.5.3
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
.
Policy 4.3 - Where mixed uses are pernritted, ensure compatible integration of
adjacent uses to minimize conflicts.
Applicable policies under the goal to revitalize older commercial, industrial and
residential properties include:
.
Policy 5.1 - Encourage and continue the use of redevelopment activities,
including the provision of incentives for private development, public-private
partnerships, and public improvements, in the Town Center and South Central
redevelopment project areas.
Policy 5.2 - Provide development incentives to facilitate the consolidation of
individual parcels along the City's commercial corridors.
Policy 5.3 - Encourage the rehabilitation of existing commercial facades and
signage.
Policy 5.5.. Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of properties eligible
for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places according to the
rehabilitation guidelines and tax incentives of the National Trust for Historic
Preservation.
.
.
.
Applicable policies under the goal to improve city-wide urban design include:
.
Policy 6.2 - Encourage and promote high-quality design and physical
appearance in all development projects.
Policy 6.5 - Preserve historically significant structures and sites, and
encourage the conservation and rehabilitation of older buildings, sites and
neighborhoods that contribute to the City's historic character.
.
Applicable policies under the goal to promote economic expansion and
diversification include:
.
Policy 7.1 - Broaden the City's tax base by attracting businesses which will
contribute to the City's economic growth and employment opportunities while
ensuring cornpatibility with other General Plan goals and policies.
Policy 7.5 - Focus retail development into consolidated, economically viable
and attractive centers of adequate size and scale which offer a variety of retail
good and amenities.
.
Applicable policies under the goal to develop character in the Old Town/First
Street area include:
.
Policy 10.1 .. Improve the Old Town district's identity as the City's historical
and architectural focus and its contribution to the City's economic base.
Policy 10.2 - Review and consider the possible development of residential
uses in the Old Town area both as individual residential projects and
integrated above ground floor retail and office uses.
.
3.5-4
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
.
Policy 10.3 - Encourage outdoor pedestrian spaces, such as courtyards,
arcades and open landscape passages, to be integrated into new development.
Encourage high-quality pedestrian oriented building frontages which open
onto these pedestrian spaces and public sidewalks.
Policy 10.6 - Encourage the integration of retail or service commercial uses
on the street level of office projects the flexibility in site development
standards.
Policy 10.7 - Encourage the consolidation of individual parcels/consolidated
site planning and parking and access along First Street and in Old Town
through utilization of development incentives such as reduced parking, height
bonus, lot coverage relaxation, allowance for secondary uses, fee waivers,
and/or [mancial assistance in land acquisition and/or inftastructure
improvements.
.
.
The general goals and polices described above and in the Land Use Element are
related to and support subjects included within other General Plan elements, Land Use
Policy Maps are included to reflect the application of General Plan goals and policies to
the distribution and intensity of future land uses in the City. Seven major Land Use
designations (divided into fifteen categories) are included in the Land Use Element,
which indicate the type and nature of development that is allowed in a given location in
the City and describes the general pattern of development ofland uses.
3.5.3.2 Town Center Redevelopment Plan
The City Council adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Town Center
Redevelopment Project Area on November 22, 1976 by City of Tustin Ordinance No.
701, and subsequently amended by Ordinance No. 855 in September 1981; and
Ordinance No. 1021 in March 1989. The Project Area is located in central Tustin and
incorporates the "Old Town" area, the civic center, and a majority of the commercial
properties within the central portion of the Ci~ The Project Area is approximately 360
acres in size and comprised of primarily commercial uses (approximately 90% of the
Project Area land use). Relatively few residential uses exist in the Project Area. The
Redevelopment Plan expires in November 2016, while the last date to receive property
tax increment in the Project Area extends to November 2024.
The Redevelopment Plan list six goals and objectives for the Project Area as
follows:
I. To create a mixed-use town center that combines, commercial. office, residential
and public uses, which will serve the needs of the community, as well as
encourage the healthy growth of the area;
2. To encourage residential development by actively seeking private developrnent in
the redevelopment area;
3.5-5
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
3. To increase the level of capital improvements such as development of the
Columbus-Tustin Park, parking facilities, sidewalk and street landscaping, street
improvements, and related public improvement projects;
4. To improve controlled development of the area to aid in harmonious and efficient
development in the redevelopment area;
5. To improve traffic circulation and access to the Town Center area as a means of
reducing congestion, encouraging business development, attracting new
customers to the area, alleviating pass-through traffic congestion and conflict, and
improving safety; and
6. To revitalize and develop amenities in the Project Area, both publicly and
privately financed, as a means of aiding the revitalization of the El Camino Real
section of the Old Town district in particular.
The primary requirement of a Redevelopment Project is to address blight.
Physical and economic blight conditions under Califomia Redevelopment Law at the
time the Project was adopted included the following: ,
. Unsafe/dilapidated/deteriorated buildings.
. Physical conditions that limit the economic viability and use of lots and buildings.
. Incompatible land uses.
. Lots which are of irregular shape, inadequate size and multiple ownership.
. Inadequate public infrastructure/facilities.
. Depreciated or stagnant property values, impaired private investments.
. High business turnovers and vacancies, low lease rates, abandoned buildings,
vacant lots.
. Lack of commercial facilities.
. Residential overcrowding, excess bars, liquor stores, adult businesses.
. High crime rates.
Some of these blighting conditions continue to exist in the Town Center Project
Area, which are identified and addressed in the Second Five Year Implementation Plan
(FY 2000-2001 to 2004-2005) for the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area adopted
in March 2003. The Implementation Plan's purpose is to revisit the redevelopment plan
goals and objectives, and identify how proposed programs and expenditJires during the
forthcoming period will eliminate blight. The Implementation Plan identified that while
both Agency-assisted and private redevelopment activities have made major
contributions to an improvement in the building stock in the Project Area and to an
irnprovernent in the prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments and
economic maladjustment in the Project Area, conditions still remain to be addressed. The
major blighting characteristics found in the Project Area to be addressed during the
Implementation Plan period were identified as follows:
3.5.6
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
.
Deterioration, Age and Obsolescence. - Several buildings and shopping centers in
the Project Area remain characterized by deterioration, age and obsolescence.
These buildings. do not appear to meet the changing needs of the
commercial/retail sector and are no longer economically competitive in today's
market. "
.
Existence of Inadequate Public Improvements and Utilities. - Targeted areas in
need of public improvement upgrades or new construction remain in the Project
Area. Public parks serving the surrounding community are in need of upgrades
and renovation, while traffic control and circulation measures continue to be
needed.
.
Prevalence of Depreciated Values, Impaired Investments and Economic
Maladjustment. - Although conditions have slowly improved because of
redevelopment activity, problems such as the lack of parking, deteriorating
conditions, outdated building conditions, declining property values, and lack of
investment still remain.
The Implementation Plan describes projects, programs and expenditures designed
to achieve the goals and objectives of the Project Area and the elimination of blighting
conditions. The Implementation Plan cautioned that funding for the projects and
programs described is greatly influenced by economic conditions and the ability of the
private sector to respond to the Agency's initiatives. In addition, the Implementation
Plan identified that the Agency's financial resources of the Project Area would be
insufficient to complete implementation activities within the five-year time period.
3.5.3.3 Zoning Ordinance
The City's Zoning Ordinance implements the Land Use Element of the General
Plan and provides detailed regulations goveming the physical development of the City.
The Ordinance divides the City into districts and contains development standards and
criteria for property that is located within each district. District boundaries are shown on
the "Zoning Map of the City of Tustin," which is included in Chapter 2 of the Tustin
Municipal Code. The Project site is designated Central Commercial District ~C-2)1
within two overlay zoning districts; the Combining Parking District ("CPD") and
Cultural Resource District ("CRD").3 The requirements of underlying district may be
superseded by the provisions of the "P" District,4 while the requirements of the "CR"
district shall be considered in conjunction with the requirements of the underlying district
but, if a conflict exists, the provisions of the "CR" district shall apply. Each of these
Districts and their requirements are discussed below. In addition, the a new development
1 City of Tustin Mnnicipal Code C"TMC") § 9233 et seq.
1 TMC §9251
3 TMC §9252
4 TMC §9251 (b)Cl)
3.5-7
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
on the Project site is subject to the City of Tustin "design review" process, which is also
discussed below. 5
Central Commercial District ("C-2")
This District allows for a variety of commercial uses, including retail uses and
professional and general office uses provided certain requirements are satisfied. The
District also sets forth "development standards" including height restrictions, set back
and lot coverage restrictions.
Combining Parking District ("P")
This overlay zoning district contains specific off street parking requirements.6
These regulations discuss parking requirements for retail stores, office buildings, and
restaurants. For retail stores, the "P" district requires one parking space for each 200
square feet and one (1) loading space for each 1 0,000 square feet of store floor area. For
office buildings, the P District requires one (I) space for each 300 square feet of floor
area. Finally, restaurants are required to have one space for every three (3) seats.
"Cultural Resource District" ("CR")
The purpose of the CR is to:
I. Safeguard the heritage of the City by preserving neighborhoods, structures, sites
and features which reflect the elements of the City's cultural, architectural,
artistic, aesthetic, political, social, natural and engineering heritage.
2. Encourage public knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the City's past.
3. Strengthen civic and neighborhood pride and sense of identity based on
recognition and use of cultural resources.
4. Promote the private and public enjoyment, use and preservation of culturally
significant neighborhoods, structures and sites appropriate for the education and
recreation of the citizens of the Tustin and visitors to the City.
5. Enhance the visual and aesthetic character, diversity of architectural styles and
aesthetic appeal of the City.
6. Enhance property values and increase economic and financial benefits to the City
and its inhabitants.
7. Assure that new construction and subdivision of lots in the Cultural Resource
District are compatible with the character of the district.
8. Identify as early as possible and resolve conflicts between preservation of historic
and cultural resources and alternative land uses.
The CR establishes a Cultural Resource Advisory Committee ("CRAC"), which
functions as an advisory board to the City Council on matters affecting the district
5 TMC §9272
'TMC §9251(b)
3.5-8
Land Use
Prospect VIllage EIR
including designation of Cultural Resources. The CRAC also acts as a liaison between
property owners within the district and the City Council.
The Community Development Director must review and approve proposed I)
alterations to the exterior features of a building or site within the district, or alteration of a
Designated Cultural Resource, or construction of improvements within the district
requiring a City building permit, and 2) demolition or removal of any Designated
Cultural Resources or of any improvements in the district. Prior to engaging in these
activities, property owners or applicants must obtain a "Certificate of Appropriateness."
The decision of the Community Development Director may be appealed to the PI arming
Commission and any decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City
Council.
The Community Development Director rnust make specific findings and follow
additional pernrit procedures for demolition, removal or relocation of Designated Cultura1
Resources or structures constructed prior to 1940 located within the district. For
structures constructed prior to 1940 located within the district, the CDD must find that
one (I) or more of the following conditions exist:
I. The structure/site is a hazard to public health or safety, and repairs or stabilization
is not physically possible.
2. The site is required for a public use which will be of more benefit to the public
than the Cultural Resource, and there is no feasible alternative location.
3. Reconstruction or restoration is not economically feasible or practical.
Where a proposed project requires other discretionary approvals such as a
tentative map, the backgrourld information shall also be concurrently submitted to the
Community Development Department on each of these applications. No demolition
pernrit or relocation pernrit shall be issued for the demolition or relocation of a
Designated Cultural Resource or structure within the district built prior to 1940 urltil a
Certificate of Appropriateness and City building permit has been issued for a replacement
structure.
Design Review
The City Council adopted a rigorous design process that applies to new
development throughout the City. The purpose of the design review process is to I)
provide for the review of building design, site planning and site development in order to
protect the increasing value, standards and importance of land and development in the
City due to urbanization of Orange County; 2) to retain and strengthen the unity and
order of the visual community; and 3) to ensure that new uses and structures enhance
their sites and are harmonious with the highest standards of improvements in the
surrounding area and total community. 7
7 TMC §9272(a)
3.5-9
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
Prior to the issuance of any building permit for any new structure in the City, the
City's Community Development Director must aprrove the site plan, architectural
elevations, and landscaping for such development. The Community Development
Director shall only approve plans if the location, size, architectural features and general
appearance of the proposed development will not impair the orderly and harmonious
development of the area, the present or future development therein, the occupancy
thereof, or the community as a whole.9 As part of this determination, the Community
Development Director must consider fifteen criteria including, for example, the height,
bulk and area of the structure, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, and appearance
and design relationship of proposed structures to existinf structures and possible future
structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares. 1
3.5.3.4 Old Town Vision Document
As part of developing a revitalization plan for Tustin Old Town, the
Regiona1/Urban Design Assistance Team, coordinated through the Urban Design
Committee of the American Institute of Architects, accepted the City's invitation to
further derIDe and explore a vision for Old Town Tustin. As a result, the team developed
an "idea book" called "Tustin - Visions of Old Town," which was presented to the
Planning Commission and City Council on September 29, 1991, as an informational
document.
The document discusses the role of Old Town as the traditional center of the City
that should have its own economic niche and act as a gathering place for its residents.
Based upon this framework, suggestions were included for incorporating new uses and
structures into the existing development pattern and enhancing the pedestrian experience
through circulation, streetscape, and landscaping enhancements. While the existing
buildings on the project site were identified as buildings that should remain because they
contribute to Old Town's character, the analysis is not intended to prohibit new
development and provides several concepts for integrating new buildings.
By constructing a mixed use development that has storefronts along Main Street,
Prospect Avenue, and the public alley to the west, the proposed project would implement
the concept of a cornpact commercial-retail core at Main Street and El Camino Real and a
primary specialty retail area connected with improved alleys as pedestrian corridors
within the "Eight Block Core" bounded by Third Street on the north, Prospect Avenue on
the east, C Street on the west, and Sixth Street on the south.
Goals found within the Tustin Old Town Charette Summary Report 1991, Tustin
Old Town R/UDAT Study 1991, and Old Town Market Analysis 1991:
. Strengthen the Old Town commercial district's overall sense of place that is
distinguishable from surrounding community centers in the City.
8 TMC §9272(b)
9 TMC §9272(c))
10 Ibid.
3.5-10
Land Use
, Prospect Village EIR
.
Create a "village" atmosphere ~ promoting living, working, entertainment and
support facilities all in on place.
.
Preserve the local heritage and improve the commercial-retail business
activity.
.
Ensure that development and revitalization is not only economically viable,
but that it also involves broad community input to help implement a larger
vision for Old Town Tustin.
.
Establishment of a compact eight-block commercial-retail core at the heart of
the commercial district to serve as the primary specialty retail center in the
area.
.
Intensify development in the commercial district to ensure that commercial-
retail sites are used to their fullest economic potential consistent with other
downtown districts, which will increase financial feasibility and serve to
stimulate additional development and investment in the area.
.
New development within the core should bring new economic activity and a
greater population to support it, including new residents and business
employees to bolster the economic viability of existing and new retail
activities.
.
Development and revitalization to reflect the best of Old town's architectural
and landscape traditions, while accommodating those new uses and
combination of activities that reflect today's needs.
.
Maintain the district's character and "small lot concept" to respect and reflect
the area's historic small lot division patterns in terms of architectural
articulation and façade differentiation.
.
Encourage infill. development that tightens up the street wall by reducing the
importance of parking lots to improve the pedestrian and storefront window
edge and provide additional retail opportunities.
.
Create a pedestrian friendly environment with wider sidewalks to encourage
outdoor patios and sidewalk cafes.
. Improve alleys as pedestrian corridors and place new businesses to front on
these corridors to expand commercial-retail activities and enliven the
pedestrian experience in the district.
3.5-11
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
3.5.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
3.5.4.1 Criteria for Determining Significance
The Project would result in a significant land use impact if it would:
. Physically divides an established community; or
. 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.
3.5.4.2 Impacts
Impact: The Project would be inconsistent with General Plan policies that
promote preservation and rehabilitation of historic resources
The City's General Plan contains goals and objectives for the orderly
development of the City of Tustin. These General Plan contains specific goals and
objectives for the Old Town area, where this Project is located. While the Project is
consistent with the majority of the General Plan goals, objectives and policies relating to
development of the Old Town, the Project is inconsistent with three policies that promote
restoration and preservation of historically significant structures. The following policies
are described in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and are designed to avoid and
minimize a project's potentially significant impacts on historical resources:
.
Policy 5.3 - Encourage the rehabilitation of existing commercial facades and
signage. .
Policy 5.5 - Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of properties eligible
for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places according to the
rehabilitation guidelines and tax incentives of the National Trust for Historic
Preservation.
Policy 6.5 - Preserve historically significant structures and sites, and
encourage the conservation and rehabilitation of older buildings, sites and
neighborhoods that contribute to the City's historic character.
.
.
The Project will demolish two existing buildings on site that have been deemed
historical resources. Therefore, contrary to the above policies, the Project does not entail
restoration, rehabilitation or preservation of these historical resources. The mitigation
measures CR~I is intended to reduce Project impacts on these historical resources.
However, this mitigation measure will not reduce the impact to a less than significant
level. For purposes of the above policies, only restoration, rehabilitation or preservation
would reduce Project impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, similar to the
Project cultural resources impacts, the Project's inconsistency with these General Plan
3.5-12
Land Use
Prospect ViUage EIR
policies, which have been adopted to avoid and minimize Project impacts on historical
resources, is considered significant and unavoidable.
It should be noted, however, that the proposed rezone would not affect the Project
site's Cultural Resource District designation. The CR overlay zoning regulations would
continue to apply to the Project and to any future projects that trigger the regulations. As
discussed in detail above, the purpose of the regulations is to regulate the demolition or
alteration of structures within the CR District and to ensure that any new development
proposed within the district would not adversely affect the character of Old Town. As
part of the CR requirements, the Project developer will be required to obtain a Certificate
of Appropriateness from the City of Tustin Community Development Director prior to
demolition of the existing structures and Project construction. The Community
Development Director will be required to make specific findings prior to pernritting
demolition of structures or new development.
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation measure CR-I is recommended to reduce the Project's potentially
significant impact resulting from demolition of the existing historical structures on site
and its inconsistency with the restoration, rehabilitation and preservation policies of the
City's General Plan.
Residual Impacts
Despite implementation of the mitigation measure CR-I, Project impacts on
historical resources and the Project's inconsistency with the restoration, rehabilitation and
preservation policies of the City's General Plan will remain significant and unavoidable.
Impact: The Project requires a rezone from "C-2" or "Central Commercial"
to "Planned Community" to accommodate the residential component of the
proposed LivelWork units.
The approximately one-acre Project site is currently designated "Old Town
Commercial" in the City's General Plan and zoned "C-2" or "Central Commercial
District." The "C-2" designation allows primarily commercial uses, including retail uses,
and professional and general office uses provided certain requirements are satisfied.
Residential uses are not currently permitted or conditionally permitted within this zone.
Therefore, implementation of the Project requires a rezone to accommodate the twelve
(12) proposed live/work units behind the proposed commercial retail/office building. The
Project site would be rezoned from its underlying "C-2" zoning and overlay zones to
Planned Community ("P-C").
In conjunction with the proposed rezone, the City has prepared the "Prospect
Village Planned Community District Regulations." The proposed "Prospect Village
Planned Community District Regulations" divide the Project site into two planning areas.
Planning Area A is identified as "commercial" and includes an approximately 7,300
3.5-13
Land Use
Prospect Village EIR
square foot area of commercial and office related uses. An approximately 9,900 square
feet commercial retail/office building will be constructed in Planning Area A, which
includes a 3,000 square foot restaurant (plus 593 sqÙare foot outdoor dining patio), 773
square feet of ground floor retail, and 4,822 square feet of office space. While the Project
proposes specific uses for Planning Area, the Planned Community Regulations pernrit
approximately fifteen different retail uses and fifteen different service uses within this
area and conditionally permit approximately six different retail and service uses are
conditionally pernritted.
Planning Area B is approximately 32,900 square feet and is identified as
"Live/Work." As discussed in the Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations, the majority of this planning area will include residential uses, which are
currently prohibited under the Project site's current C-2 zoning. However, a considerable
amount of Planning Area B is reserved for ground floor commercial retail and office
space. Six of the twelve live/work units are planned to accommodate 913 square feet of
retail space for a total of 5,478 square feet of retail. The remaining six units are planned
to include 431 square feet of either commercial or retail uses for a total of 2,586 square
feet. Therefore, while the property will be rezoned "Planned Community" the Project
would retain approximately 17,000 square feet of commercial retail and office space.
Moreover, the pernritted and conditionally permitted uses in these spaces are either
identical to or similar to the uses allowed under the Project site's existing "C-2" zoning.
Therefore, while the Project includes a residential element, the Project also
includes a considerable amount of commercial retail and office uses that are identical or
similar to the uses contemplated under the existing C-2 zoning designation. The mixed
use nature of the Project would be consistent with the General Plan's vision for the Old
Town Commercial area. The City of Tustin General Plan specifically contemplates an
increase in residential uses in the Old Town area, thus acknowledging the compatibility
of such uses with other the existing uses on Old Town. Policy 10.2 of the Land Use
Element provides "review and consider the possible development of residential uses in
the Old Town area both as individual residential projects and integrated above ground
floor retail and office uses." This is precisely the type of the residential product
contemplated here. In addition, the General Plan's discussion of the "Old Town
Commercial" area specifically states that "uses (such as residential uses) which support
this land use may be permitted subject to the discretion of the City."l1 As documented in
this EIR, the Project would not, with the exception of its direct impact on cultural
resources, create any urJavoidable significant environmental impact.
From a land use compatibility standpoint, while the Project includes a residential
component, this component includes high density residences, which are cornmonly
located among commercial retail and office uses in urban, downtown environments.
Moreover, unlike a situation where a proposed use is incompatible with an adjacent use
in a manner that would create a potentially significant environmental impact (e.g.
locating a rock quarry in the middle of residential community would create noise and air
quality impacts), locating high density residential units among commercial, retail, office
II City of Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element, at p. 35
3.5-14
Land Use
Prospect VIllage EIR
and institutional uses does not. Any potential land use impact relating to the proposed
rezone is considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
The proposed rezone from "C-2" to "Planned Community" and ultimate build-out
of the site in accordance with the Prospect Village Planned Community Regulations is
consistent with the General Plan vision for this' area. While the residential component is
currently not permitted under the existing "C-2" zoning, this impact is considered less
than significant for the reasons stated above and no mitigation measures are
recommended.
Residual Impacts
Project impacts would be less than significant.
3.5.4.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Project would not result in any cumulative land use -impacts in conjunction
with the list of cumulative projects identified in Table 2-5. As discussed above, the only
potentially significant land use impact of the Project is its inconsistency with the
preservation policies of the City's General Plan. Neither of the projects listed in Table 2.
5 required the demolition or alteration of any historical resources. Therefore, there would
be no cumulative loss of historical resources or cumulative project inconsistency with the
historical resource preservation policies of the City's General Plan.
3.5-15
Land Use
Prospect Vülage EIR
3.6 NOISE
3.6.1
INTRODUCTION
This section presents information on ambient noise conditions in the vicinity of the
project site, and identifies potential Project noise impacts from construction activity and ultimate
build-out of the Project site.
3.6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SE'ITlNG
3.6.2.1 Fundamentals of Environmental Acoustics
A brief background in acoustics is helpful in understanding how humans perceive various
sound levels. Some common acoustical definitions are:
Acoustics refers to the study of sound wave generation and transmission, both audible and
inaudible.
Sound is the physical oscillation or vibration of a medium, such as air, that can be perceived
by an instrument, such as the human ear or a microphone.
Noise, on the other hand, has commonly been categorized as loud, disruptive sounds that can
aI1noy or cause harm to people.
Background noise is the aggregation of all perceptible, but not necessarily identifiable, sound
sources (such as traffic, airplanes, and environmental sounds) that create a static ambient
noise baseline.
Noise is often referred to as "unwanted sound." . Noise interferes with human activities
that depend on audible communication. Noise distracts us from activities that require
concentration and interferes with sleep. At high levels, noise can be painful or can permanently
damage our hearing.
Sound is quantified by measuring the energy carried by pressure waves in the air. The
sound energy is converted to a numerical value by comparing it to the amoUIit of energy
produced by a reference pressure at the threshold of audibility, and the resulting ratio is
expressed as a sound level. Because of the wide range of sound energy that is audible to
humans, sound levels are expressed on a logarithmic scale of "decibels" (abbreviated as dB), in
which an increase of 10 units on the decibel scale reflects a 10.fold increase in sound energy. A
10-fold increase in sound energy roughly translates to a doubling of perceived loudness to
humans.
In evaluating human response to noise, acousticians compensate for the response of
people to varying frequency or "pitch" components of sound. The human ear is most sensitive to
sounds in the middle frequency range used for human speech and is less sensitive to lower and
higher-pitched sounds. The "A" weighting scale is used to account for this sensitivity; thus,
most community noise standards are expressed in dB on the "A"-weighted scale, abbreviated
dB(A). Zero on the dB scale is set roughly at the threshold of human hearing.
3.6-1
Noise
Prospect Village EIR
3.6.2.2 Noise Environment in the Project Area
The dominant noise source in the project area is surrounding street traffic. The heaviest
traveled street adjacent to the project site is East Main Street, which is a two-lane primary
arterial roadway.
Overhead air traffic approaching John Wayne Airport also contributes to ambient noise
levels. The over-flight traffic does not contribute significantly to ambient noise levels, but
nonetheless, over-flights do create noticeable and distinct noise events. The project site is outside
of the John Wayne Airport Planning Area and is outside of the 60 dB and 65 dB CNEL contours
for John Wayne Airport identified in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan. FAA regulations
defme the 65 CNEL contour as the limit of the "area surrounding an airport" (F.A.R. Part 150 §
150.21(d)(t)(g», which implies that areas outside of the 65 CNEL contour are not significantly
impacted by airport noise and are compatible with normal urban life. A general description of
some of the noise-producing land uses surrounding the project site is given in Table 3.6-1.
Third Street, a 2-lane street, immediately adjoins the site to the north. On the
north side of Third Street are vacant lots, small offices and single family
residences.
Main Street, a primary arterial, immediately adjoins the site to the south. Retail
and service businesses are located on the south side of East Main Street.
Prospect A venue, a 2-lane street, immediately adjoins the site to the east. On the
east side of Prospect A venue are the City of Tustin Main Street Water Facility and
public parking lot. Farther east is a senior assisted living facility (Hacienda
Villa e . A mobile home ark Park Santia 0 is located to the northeast.
To the west there is a mixture of retail businesses and offices along EI Camino
Real.
Overhead Flights approaching John Wayne Airport fly overhead. Infrequently, departing
fli hts fly overhead, but altitude is eater.
Source: Noise sources observed on October 28,2003 site visit
South
North
East
West
3.6.2.3 Sensitive Receptors in the Project Area
Sensitive noise receptors (e.g., schools, hospitals, places of worship, libraries, residences,
and recreational areas) in the general vicinity of the proposed project have been identified and
include: the senior assisted living facility on the other side of the City's water facility to the east,
single family residences to the north beyond the Farmer's Market, and the mobile home park on
the northeast corner of Third Street and Prospect.
3.6-2
Noise
Prospect Valage EIR
3.6.2.4 Applicable Standards
Federal Standards
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has developed guidelines on
recommended maximum noise levels to protect public health and welfare (EPA, 1974). The EPA
does not enforce these regulations, but rather offers them as a planning tool for state and local
agencies. Table 3.6-2 provides examples of protective noise levels recommended by EPA.
Hearine Loss L.,,(24)<70 dB All areas
Outdoors in residential areas and farms and other outdoors areas where
Outdoor Activity Ldn<55 dB people spend widely varying amounts of time and other places in
Interference and which auiet is a basis for use.
Annoyance L", (24)<55 dB Outdoor areas where people spend limited amounts of time, such as
school yards nlavgrounds, etc.
Indoor Activity Ldn<45 dB Indoor residential areas
Interference and L,q(24)<45 dB Other indoor areas with human activities such as schools, etc.
Annovance
Table 3.6-2
EP A Designated Noise Safety Levels
Source: EPA, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an
.. Adequate Margin of Safety, March 1974.
Notes:.. L,q (24) = Represents the sound energy averaged over a 24.honr period.
Ldn = Represents the Leq with a 10 dB nighttime weighting.
. The Federal Office of Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulates exposure to
occupational noise (29 CFR Section 1910.95) by limiting the interval of time a worker can be
exposed to certain noise levels. For example, a worker should not be exposed to average sound
levels of 90 dBA for over 8 hours. When noise exposure exceeds this, employers should reduce
exposure conditions with engineering or administrative methods. If exposure time cannot be
reduced, protective equipment is required to reduce noise levels to pernrissible levels.
State of California Standards
California standards for community noise use the Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL) in which the energy is averaged over a 24-hour day with a 5-dB penalty frorn 7:00 p.m.
to 10:00 p.m. and a lO-dB penalty from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The EPA uses the Day-Night
Noise Level (Ldn) measure, which is identical to the CNEL but without the evening noise
weighting. The EP A has found that the point where noise becomes a significant contributor to
what most people perceive as the environmental quality of their residential area is 55 dBs. At 65
dBs CNEL or Ldn, noise clearly has a significant adverse effect on environmental quality in
residential areas.
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code requires that residential structures, other
than detached single-family dwellings, be designed to prevent the intrusion of exterior noise so
that the interior CNEL with windows closed, attributable to exterior sources, shall not exceed 45
3.6.3
Noise
Prospect Vülage EIR
dB in any habitable roorn. For areas where exterior noise levels are above 60 dB CNEL, a noise
evaluation is required to determine if additional sound insulation is required to meet this
standard.
City of Tustin Standards
The City of Tustin noise standards are contained in the Tustin Municipal Code ("TMC")'
("Noise Ordinance") and the Noise Element of the City's General Plan. The Noise Ordinance
identifies exterior and interior noise standards for residential, commercial, industrial, special
(such as hospitals, convalescent homes, public and institutional schools, libraries, and churches),
and rnixed use properties. A mixed use property is defined as a parcel of property which is
developed and zoned either in part or in whole for residential and commercial and/or light
industrial purposes. The exterior and interior noise standards for mixed use properties are
identified on Table 3.6-3.
Table 3.6-3
Exterior and Interior Noise Standards-Mixed Use Property
I
I
Exterior Noise Standard
Interior Noise Standard resideotial Dortion)
i
I
60 dB(A)
55 dB(A)
45 dB!,\)
I
I
I
Anv time
7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m.
10:00 p.m. 7:00 a.m.
The Noise Ordinance also limits construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m.
and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays,
and never on Sundays or city-observed federal holidays.2 Construction activity conducted during
these time !Tames is exempt !Tom the noise standards described in Table 3.6-3. Noise sources
that are not otherwise exempt from the Noise Ordinance may not exceed the exterior noise
standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour or the interior
standard for a cumulative period of more than five (5) minutes in any hour.
The City of Tustin General Plan identifies standards for long-term vehicular noise
sources. The General Plan establishes the following interior and exterior noise standards:
Table 3.6-4
General Plan Noise Standards
Residential- Single family, multifamily,
du lex, mobile home
Residential - Transient lodging, hotels,
motels, nursin homes, hos itals
Private offices, church sanctuaries, libraries,
board rooms, conference rooms, theaters,
auditoriums, concern halls, meetin halls,
CNEL 45 dB
CNEL 65 dB
Leq(l2) 45 dB(A)
1 TMC §4611 et. seq.
2 TMC §4616 (2)
3.6-4
Noise
Prospect Vülage EIR
CNEL 65 dB
CNEL 70 dB'
NOTES
I. CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level.
Leq(12): The A-weighted equivalent sound level averaged over a 12.hour period (usually the hours of
operation)
2. Noise standard with windows closed. Mechanical ventilation shall be provided per UBC requirements to
provide a habitable environment.
3. Indoor environment excluding bathrooms, toilets, closets, and COlTidors.
4. Outdoor environment limited to rear yard of single family homes, multifamily patios and balconies (with a
depth of6' or more) and common recreation areas.
5. Outdoor environment limited to playground areas, picnic areas, and other areas of frequent human use.
RESIDENTIAL Single Family, Duplex,
Multi Ie Famil A A B C C D D
RESIDENTIAL Mobile Home A A B C C D D
COMMERCIAL Hotel, Motel, Transient
Re ional, District Lod'n A A B B C C D
COMMERCIAL Commercial Retail, Bank,
Regional, village Restaurant, Movie Theater A A A A B B C
District, s ecial
COMMERCIAL Office Building, Research
INDUSTRIAL and Development,
INSTITUTIONAL Professional Offices, City A A A B B C D
Office Buildin
COMMERCIAL Amphitheater, Concert
Recreation Hall B B C C D D D
INSTITUTIONAL
Civic Center Auditorium, Meetin Hall
COMMERCIAL Children's Amusement
Recreation Park, Miniature Golf
Course, A A A B B D D
Go-cart Track, Equestrian
Center, Sorts Club
COMMERCIAL Automobile Service
General, special Station,
INDUSTRIAL, Auto Dealership, A A A A B B B
INSTITUTIONAL Manufacturin ,
3.6-5
Noise
Prospect ViUage EIR
Warehouse,
Wholesale, Utilities
INSTITUTIONAL Hospital, Chllrch, Library,
General Schools' Classroom A A B C C D D
OPEN SPACE Parks A A A B C D D
OPEN SPACE GolfComse, Cemeteries,
Natw'e Centers, Wildlife A A A A B C C
Reserves, Wildlife Habitat
AGRICULTURE Agricnltw'e A A A A A A A
Notes:
A - Clearly Compatible: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved
are of normal conventional construction without any special noise insulation requirements
B - Normally Compatible: New construction or development should be undertaken only after detailed analysis of
the noise reduction requirements are made and needed noise insnlation featw'es in the design are determined.
Conventional construction, with closed windows and &esh air supply systems or air conditioning. will nonnally
suffice.
C - Normally Incompatible: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction
or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed
noise insulation featmes included in the design.
D - Clearly Incompatible: New construction or developments should generally not be undertaken.
Source: City of Tustin General Plan
3.6.3 Impacts and Mitigation
3.6.3.1 Criteria for Determining Significance
The applicable criteria used to deternrine the significance of an impact are based on the
model initial study checklist in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Project would
result in a significant impact if it would:
.
Generate substantial temporary or permanent noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies
.
Generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels
.
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, expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise levels
3.6.3.2 Project Impacts
Impact:
The Project would generate short term construction noise impacts
Short.term adverse noise levels may result from the demolition and construction phases
of the Project. On-site noise during demolition and construction would primarily occur from
heavy-duty diesel and gasoline-powered construction equipment. Table 3.6-6 provides a list of
some of the equipment assumed to be used during the demolition of the existing structures on
site, along with typical noise ranges for each piece of equipment.
3.6-6
Noise
Prospect Village EIR
T
Table 3.6-6
ui ment used for Demolition
Trucks leavin construction site 83-93
Backhoe 72-93
Loader 72-93
Note: Data are adapted from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency NTID 300.1, 1971, pg. 11
(levels are in dBA at a 50 foot reference distance). These values are based on a range of equipment
and operating conditions.
As described above, land uses near the Project site include primarily commercial and
institutional uses with some limited residential north of the Project site along Prospect Avenue,
at the northeast corner of Third Avenue and Prospect Avenue, and east of the Project Site along
Third Avenue. During construction, it is anticipated that land uses in the vicinity of the
construction area would be exposed to noise generated by various pieces of construction and
demolition equipment operating within the project site. Based on the information presented
above, temporary noise levels adjacent to the construction area could be 72 to 93 dBA depending
on the distance the receptor is from the source of noise. However, construction noise impacts
during the loudest construction phases, including demolition, grading and utilities installation
would be temporary, lasting only approximately two to three months. Due to the temporary
nature of the loudest phases of construction activity and the Noise Ordinance requirements which
restrict construction activity to the least noise sensitive daylight hours, Project construction noise
impacts are considered less than significant impacts.
Mitigation Measures
The temporary and periodic increase in ambient noise levels during Project construction
activity is considered less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures are recornmended.
Residual Impacts
Project impacts would be less than significant.
Impact: Project operation would periodically increase ambient noise levels during
outdoor patio dining and outdoor entertaining on residential decks.
The Project includes a 593 square feet outdoor dining area that will be located along East
Main Street. During the hours of restaurant operation people eating outdoors could periodically
increase ambient noise levels. However, any increase in noise levels would largely impact the
other non-noise sensitive uses, such as the commercial and office uses that currently exist on
either side of East Main Street. As discussed above, noise sensitive residential land uses are
located north and northeast of the Project site. However, these residential uses would be
unaffected by the outdoor dining area which faces E. MainStreet. The live/work units located
behind the new commercial retail office building would function as a noise buffer between the
restaurant and the residential uses located north and north east of the Project site. Therefore, any
potential increase in ambient noise levels from the restaurant would be less than significant.
3.6-7
Noise
Prospect Vülage EIR
In addition to the outdoor dining area, each of the twelve (12) proposed live/works unit
would have a small approximately 80 square foot outdoor deck overlooking either Prospect
Avenue or new Prospect Lane (currently a public alley). While a certain level of noise may be
generated by one or more people standing on these decks, due to the small size of the balcony,
the amount of people on the deck at any given time would be limited and any corresponding
noise level would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
The temporary and periodic increase in ambient noise levels from the outdoor dining area
and residential decks are considered less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures are
recommended.
Residual Impacts
Project impacts would be less than significant.
Impact: The Project would generate additional traffic trips that would increase
ambient noise levels.
The Project would generate approximately 600 traffic trips, which would be distributed
along various roadways that provide access to the Project site, including primarily Prospect
Avenue, which is adjacent to several nearby residential areas, and East Main Street3 As noted in
the Project traffic report, approximately 250 additional traffic trips would be distributed along
Prospect Avenue between First Street and E. Main Street4 However, these additional trips
would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above noise levels existing without the project. Currently, Prospect A venue (between
Main & First St.) experiences a daily traffic volume of approximately 4,100 trips per day, while
E. Main Street between Newport and El Camino Real experiences about 9,000 trips per day..5 A
six percent (6%) percent increase in traffic trips along Prospect Avenue is negligible and would
not substantially increase permanent ambient noise levels.
In addition, the Noise Element of the City of Tustin General Plan identifies "Future
(2010) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) Contours" and predicts that exterior noise
levels in the project area will range between 60 dB and 65 dBA CNEL.,,6 The General Plan
noise modeling is based on build-out of the City in accordance with the General Plan Land Use
Policy Map, which includes build-out of the Old Town Commercial area, including a certain
level of residential and commercial uses. The General Plan assumes that an additional 291
residential units would be developed within the Old Town Commercial area, which would
3 Prospect Village Traffic Impact ATlßlysis, Sasaki Transportation Services, December 12, 2003, Table 3. Trip
Generation
4lbid. Fignre 4, Project Only Traffic Volumes
5 ibid. Table I, Street Segment Analysis Summary
6 City of Tustin General Plan, Noise Element, Figure N-I (dated January 16, 2001), page 13.
3.6-8
Noise
Prospect Village EIR
include the twelve (12) proposed residentiaL? In addition, the commercial element of the Project
falls within the floor area ratios assigned to the Old Town Commercial area.
As shown on the future contours map, the noise levels along Prospect Avenue are
predicted to be within the 60 dB CNEL contour, while the noise levels along the busy streets,
including First Street and portions of East Main Street are predicted to be 65 dB CNEL. As
shown on Table 3.6-5, a noise level of 60 dB CNEL is considered an acceptable exterior
residential noise level. Therefore, while Project generated traffic would increase ambient noise
levels in the area, these increases fall within the acceptable range and are therefore considered
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Project traffic trips would not generate a substantial increase in ambient noise levels.
Any potential increase in ambient noise levels is considered less than significant; therefore no
mitigation measures are recommended.
Residual Impacts
Project impacts would be less than significant
3.6.3.3 Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
future projects is not expected to create a significant short-term cumulative construction noise
impact. Each of the three (3) projects identified in section 2.5 of the EIR are far enough from the
project site that cumulative construction noise levels would not be significant. In addition,
construction åctivity at each of the Project sites would be staggered. Two of three projects are
expected to be completed prior to commencing construction ofthe Project. Therefore, the Project
would not have a cumulatively significant construction noise impact.
The project is also not expected to result in cumulative operational noise impacts. The
Farmer Boys restaurant site is located approximately 0.5 mile north of the project and would be
served prirnarily by First Street. The Armstrong Gardens project is located several blocks south
of the Project site along EI CanJino Real and would be served primarily by EI Camino Real.
While each of these projects would contribute additional vehicle trips on the surrounding
roadways, the majority of these trips would be distributed away from sensitive noise receptors
and along roadways such as EI Camino Real and First Street, which serve primarily commercial
and office uses. Therefore, the Project would not have a cumulatively significant operational
noise impact.
7 City of Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element, Table LU-3, Future Land Use Density/Intensity and Population
Capacity of the Land Use Plan
3.6-9
Noise
Prospect Village EIR
,
3.7
TRAFFIC
3.7.1
INTRODUCTION
This section discusses whether the Project will generate traffic that adversely
affects the surrounding streets and intersections, change circulation patterns that create
safety risks or hazards, result in inadequate parking, or conflict with programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus, bicycle, etc.). The City of Tustin retained Sasaki
Transportation Services to conduct a comprehensive parking study of the areal and a
Traffic Impact Analysis.2 The Parking Study and Traffic Study are attached as
Appendices F and G respectively.
3.7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.7.2.1 Regional and Local Access
The Interstate 5 Freeway via the Irvine Boulevard off ramp and the State Route 55
via the Newport Avenue off ramp provide regional access to the project site. There are
several local roadways that serve the Project site. East Main Street provides primary
access to the Project site for vehicles traveling from the east and west. Other east/west
surface streets that could provide access to the Project site include First Street, Second
Street and Third Street, all of which intersect with Prospect Avenue. EI Camino Real and
Prospect A venue, and to a lesser extent, the public alley or future Prospect Lane, would
provide access to the Project site for vehicle traveling ITom the north and south.
The main roadways in the Project vicinity include the following:
. Prosnect Avenue has its southerly terminus at Main Street and is a two-lane
undivided roadway south of First Street. Prospect A venue is stop sign controlled at Main
Street and a traffic signal is provided at its intersection with First Street. North of First
Street this north-south roadway continues as a four-lane roadway to Seventeenth Street.
Prospect continues north of this location but has offset intersections at Seventeenth
Street. A speed limit of 25 miles per hour (MPH) is posted in the vicinity of the project
and on-street parking is allowed. The City's Arterial Highway Plan ("AHP") designation
for Prospect A venue, in the General Plan, is a Secondary Arterial roadway.
. Main Street is a two lane east-west arterial divided by a two.way left turn lane in
the vicinity of Prospect A venue. There are four through travel lanes ITom just west of
Newport Avenue and further east where Main Street merges to become Bryan Avenue.
To the west there are two divided through lanes provided throughout the Old Town area.
On-street parking is allowed in the vicinity of the project. Main Street is designated as a
Primary Arterial roadway in the AHP.
I Prospect Village Shared Parking Analysis, Sasaki Transportation Services, October 9, 2003
2 Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analyses. Sasaki Transportation Services, December 12,2003
3.7-1
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
,
. First Street is an east-west roadway with four-lanes divided by a raised median.
The intersections of First Street, with Prospect Avenue and El Camino Real ("ECR") are
both signalized. To the west First Street continues into the City of Santa Ana and there is
access and/or connection to the Interstate ("I") 5 Freeway. To the east, First Street
provides two through lanes east of Newport Avenue and forms a "T" intersection at Red
Hill Avenue. A speed limit of 3 0 MPH is posted in the study area and on-street parking
is generally allowed. The AHP designation for First Street between Tustin Avenue and
Newport Avenue in the City of Tustin is a Primary Arterial roadway.
. El Camino Real ("ECR") has two undivided travel lanes. A speed limit of 25
miles per hour (MPH) speed is posted in the Old Town area. The north end of ECR
forms a "T" intersection at First Street. This two-lane section of ECR (north of Sixth
Street) has a north-south alignment, but it curves to a southeast-northwest direction, south
of Sixth Street where four travel lanes are provided. ECR continues southeast of the
Newport Avenue intersection (that is signalized) and essentially parallels the 1-5
Freeway. The current designation for ECR is a Secondary Arterial roadway. However,
OCTA has approved a reduction in the road classification for the Old Town area and the
City is currently preparing a General Plan Amendment to reclassify ECR as a Local
Collector roadway. Angle parking is provided from Sixth Street at the south to First
Street at the north.
. NewDort Avenue is a northeast-southwest roadway that provides four-lane
divided travel lanes in the study area. There is a raised median provided on Newport
Avenue and a'posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour (MPH). South of the study area
there is 1-5 Freeway access to/from the north via a "half' diamond interchange. The
study section of Newport Avenue presently ends south of Sycamore Avenue, while to the
north Newport continues into County of Orange jurisdiction. This arterial roadway is
designated as an Augmented Primary in the City AHP for the section north of the 1-5
Freeway.
. Third Street is a two-lane roadway with a sidewalk on the south side of the street
and on-street parking and is a local street.
3.7.2.2 Existing Traffic Conditions
The Traffic Study describes existing roadway conditions and lane configurations.
The Traffic' Study evaluated street segment impacts based on daily traffic volumes and
intersections based on manual traffic counts during peak hour conditions. The Traffic
Study area identifies roadway segments and intersections that will be affected by vehicles
traveling to and from the Project site.
Roadway capacity is generally limited by the ability to move vehicles through
intersections. Level of Service (LOS) is a measure of "quality of flow," and as shown in
Table 3.7-1, there are six levels of service, A through F, which relate to traffic congestion
from best to worst, respectively. In general, Level A represents free-flow conditions with
3.7-2
Traffic
Prospec~ Village EIR
no congestion. Conversely, Level F represents severe congestion with stop-and-go
conditions. Levels E and F typically are considered to be unsatisfactory.
Corresponding to each level of service shown in Table 3.7-1 is a volume-to-
capacity (V/C) ratio. Generally speaking, this is the ratio of an intersection's traffic
volume (V) to its capacity (C), with capacity defined as the theoretical maximum number
of vehicles that can pass through the intersection during a specified period of time. With
this technique, an intersection's ICU value (i.e., a V/C ratio) is computed based upon the
intersection's traffic volumes and its traffic-carrying capacity.
i,t ~gest~d operations; all vehiCles, "il
, i clear In a single cycle. :
!I B i,." Uncongested o~erations; all ~ehicle. S, i,'1
: : clearin a sn:gle cycle. ,_...'
II C . Light congestion; occasional backups! 0.71.0.80
'_..,-~---_._J .o.n critical approaches.. . j ------.---.. ...
'0' Congestion on critical approacheS,io.81 - 0.90 ,
, ! but intersection functional. Vehicles: i
i~ E:~~ :~'=":oi ___I
'0' ¡Severe congestion with some long_¡c.9I.1.00 !
ì ¡ standing lines on critical approaches., !
, ¡ Blockage of intersection may occur if: '
¡ i traffic signal does not provide for: !
!I----- -F '.. "'.j i:::t::e::~:~~::e:~~=~d-g,O!,:1 - ,. l.ôJO~-i
: ..- -.... -- i operat~on~. -. ,.. j .. !
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board Number
212, January 1990
..i
0.61 - 0.70
Roadway Segments
The Traffic Study evaluated five (5) roadway segments, which are identified in
Table 3.7-2. The capacity of a given roadway segment is dictated by the number and
configuration of the current through traffic lanes. The capacity figures contained in Table
3.7-2 are representative of a Level of Service "E" condition, which is the LOS standard
established by the County of Orange in the Orange County Congestion Management
Program (CMP). The City of Tustin, however, uses a more stringent LOS "D" standard
as the maximum "acceptable" LOS. Thus, a Project within the City that reduces the LOS
to below LOS "Ð" would have a significant traffic impact.
3.7-3
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR ,
The CMP street segment capacities are based on the volume to capacity ratio
("V/C"). The City of Tustin has established an LOS range is "A" through "D" as an
"acceptable" operating condition. Current daily traffic volumes on the City's "2003
Average Daily Traffic Volumes" map were referenced and used in the analyses. It was
also noted that the current volumes are less than volumes contained in previous traffic
analyses conducted for the area (relative to the MasterPlan of Arterial Highway
("MP AH") changes for ECR). This indicates that the previous projections of future
conditions are representative of "worst case" analyses, based on the current traffic counts.
Table 3.7-2 provides a summary of the V/C street segment analyses and the resulting
LOS for the study locations. The study street segments for the Prospect Village project
are presently operating at L08 "A", which is well within the City of Tustin LOS "D"
maximum.
Table 3.7-2
Existinl! Roadwav Oneration
Main Street between
-El Camino Real & Prospect 15,000 9,000 0.60 A
-Prosoect & NeWDort 15,000 9,000 0.60 A
Prospect Ave.
-between Main and First 15,000 4,100 0.27 A
First Street between
-E1 Camino Real & Prospect 37,500 18,300 0.49 A
.Prosoect & NeWDort 37,500 15,300 0.41 A
1, - .. ..
VPD - VehIcles per day. CapacIties shown are for LOS E condltlOns consistent WIth the
County's CMP. Note, however, that the City has established LOS "D" as an acceptable
operating condition.
Intersections
The Traffic Study examines six (6) intersections in the project vicinity. These
intersections are most likely to be affected by the Project based on anticipated routes to
the Project site. The traffic consultant, in a separate report, analyzed Project impacts on
two fteeway ramps in response to written comments by Cal Trans during the Project
scoping period.3 The EIR analyzes the following the intersections:
Signalized
. Prospect Avenue/First St.
. E1 Camino ReallFirst 8t.
. EI Camino Real/Main St.
. El Camino Real/Newport Avenue
. Main 8treetfNewport Avenue
3.7.4
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
Two Wav Stop Controlled
. Main Street/Prospect Avenue
Freeway RamDs
.
SR 55 Freeway/Irvine Blvd
1-5 Freeway/Newport Avenue
.
Intersection. counts were conducted during the AM and PM peak periods for this
study. The traffic courit summary worksheets are provided in Appendix A of the Traffic
Study and the "peak hour" volumes are also highlighted on these summary sheets for the
six study intersections. The existing peak hour intersection volumes were evaluated in
conjunction with the current intersection approach lanes using accepted intersection
analysis methodologies.
The methodology used for the signalized intersections is the Intersection Capacity
Utilization (ICU) procedure. The ICU methodology is required under the Orange County
CMP and these evaluations are also widely utilized throughout the Southern California
area. Similar to the street segment analyses, the ICU values are based on volume to
capacity (V/C) ratios. The "critical" V/C ratios for each intersection plus other "lost"
time is considered, resulting in an ICU value for the study location during each peak
hour. The ICU value can then be translated to a LOS for each location.
At the intersection of Main Street & Prospect Avenue, Prospect Avenue is stop
sign controlled while Main Street is not required to stop. The Traffic Study evaluates this
type of intersection based on the Highway Capacity Manual published by the
Transportation Research Board ("TRB"). The calculations are expressed in terms of
"delay", but the end result is a deternrination of the intersection LOS, similar to the other
methodologies.
The ICU and delay valúes at the six study locations and the resulting LOS
conditions are presented in Table 3.7-3. The Levels of Service (LOS), which range from
"A" (the best) to "F" (the worst), are provided to document existing intersection
operations. The City General Plan policy is that LOS operations of "A" through "D" are
representative of acceptable traffic conditions, while LOS "E" and "F" are considered
over capacity. All of the existing intersections are shown to operate at LOS "c" or better
during both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection analyses worksheets can be
referenced in Appendix B of the Traffic study.
3.7-5
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
Main St./Prospect Ave.
-Northbound
-Southbound
11.9
14.6
B
B
13.9
17.6
B
C
3.7.2.3 Existing Parking
The Project site is currently vacant and the buildings on site are unoccupied.
There is currently no parking on site and a limited amount of off street parking adjacent
to the site along Main Street. The off street parking is currently used by other businesses
and uses in the vicinity of the Project site. The City of Tustin Water Works is located
across Prospect Avenue to the East of the Project site and currently contains XX off street
parking spaces. Off street parking spaces are also located across the alley, west of the
Project site and serve the businesses that are located off the alley and EI Camino Real.
3.7.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
3.7.3.1 Criteria fDr Determining Significance
The criteria used to determine the significance of an impact are based on the
model initial study checklist in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The
proposed project may result in significant impacts if it would:
.
Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system. For all roadways and intersections in the
project area, the City of Tustin has established level of service "D" as a threshold
standard to monitor capacity needs for both average daily traffic (ADT) link
volumes and peak hour intersection volumes.
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established
by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or
highways.
.
.
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses.
Result in inadequate parking capacity.
.
3.7-6
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
3.7.3.2 Impacts
Impact:
Project construction activity would generate short term traffic trips
Construction related traffic would be associated with workers arriving and leaving
the project site, and truck and construction vehicle traffic. Construction worker traffic is
not anticipated to create a significant impact on area-wide circulation. Potential
construction related impacts on local traffic and circulation would be short-term in
nature.
Project construction would be performed in stages. The first stage includes
demolition and grading, which will generate the most trips due to the amount of trucks
needed to dispose of the demolished building materials. However, this early stage is
expected to last between thirty and forty days. Project generated construction worker
trips and haul trips are potentially significant but would be reduced to a less than
significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measure T -I.
Mitigation Measures
T-l
The developer shall prepare a construction staging and parking plan for review
and approval by City of Tustin Public Works prior to issuance of demolition
permit. The developer or contractor shall monitor the implementation and
effectiveness of the construction staging and parking plan during the construction
phase of the project. The plan shall include one or more of the following potential
types of traffic-related rnitigation measures to ensure that temporary disruptions to
the adjacent uses and circulation within the area are minimized:
. Construction and Employee Parking: As part of the. construction staging and
parking plan, the contractor would submit and obtain approval of a construction
parking program which reflects the schedule of construction' activities and
location of construction-related parking. Locations of available parking would be
identified.
. Street Circulation and Parking Measures: The contractor may request and
obtain a permit for any temporary lane closures that may be required for adjacent
roadways. The contractor would utilize flagmen for traffic control to minimize
inconvenience and for safety of vehicles and pedestrians.
. Haul Truck Routes, Queue Areas, and Deliveries: The contractor would
provide an estimate of truck volume and schedule. Schedule adjustments would
be made to minimize the volume during peak traffic hours. Areas would be
designated by the developer or contractor for staging of all trucks. All earth-
moving and ready-mix trucks would be equipped with two.way radios. The
trucks would follow a City-approved route to the project site, without unnecessary
waiting.
. Hours of Excavation Hauling: Heavy truck hauling associated with excavation
would be scheduled to minimize interference with daytime activity in the area.
3.7-7
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
.
The hours for excavation hauling would be determined in conjunction with the
City as part of the construction staging and parking plan.
Pedestrian Safety Measures: The contractor would install a construction fence
around the perimeter, complying with City requirements before excavation
begins. A flagman would be available at all times and would be utilized
whenever trucks entering or leaving the project site may impede the flow of
traffic.
Residual Impacts:
Project construction trips would have a less than significant traffic impact.
Impact: Once operational, the Project would generate 600 traffic trips that
would be distributed to the surrounding roadways and intersections.
Once operational, the project would generate approximately 600 traffic trips per
day, including 23 inbound and 15 outbound trips during the A.M. peak hour and 24
inbound and 26 outbound in the P.M. peak. The traffic would be routed to the
surrounding street system. Project trip distribution and assignment percentages were
developed based on factors such as the types of proposed land uses, the locations of
potential trip attractors, the proxirnity of freeways to the site, orientation of roadways in
the study area, congestion factors, and access considerations. Figure 3.7-1 illustrates the
trip distribution and assignment percentages. The geographic distribution of project-
generated trips was determined based on the street network, surrounding land uses, and
the relative distribution of population. Figure 3.7-2 shows the projected amount of
Project traffic trips that will be distributed to the local roadways.
The Traffic study analyzed whether Project generated traffic would have a
significant impact on the roadways and intersections within the study area. As shown on
Table 3.7-5, the Project would not have a significant irnpact on roadway operation. With
the addition of Project traffic, each roadway in the study area would operate at an
acceptable LOS or LOS D or better.
Table 3.7-6
Roadway Operation With The Project
Main Street between
.EI Camino Real & Prospect 15,000 12,500 0.83 D
-ProsDect & NeWDort 15,000 12,700 0.85 D
Prospect Ave.
-between Main and First 15,000 6.200 0.41 A
First Street between
-EI Camino Real & Prospect 37,500 23,400 0.62 B
-ProsDect & Newnort 37,500 21,400 0.57 A
lvpD = Vehicles per day. Capacities shown are for LOS E conditions consistent with
the County's CMP. Note. however, that the City has established LOS "D" as an
acceptable operating condition.
3.7-8
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
(Fi¡¡ure 3.7-1, Project Distribution & Assignment Percentages)
t 110% I
4T.. ST,
MCFADDEN
~/,
~
f"
LEGEND
@i,] = ~~~~~~~2!fEr:'BUT'ON
r 10% = ~~~~~~~{~ê~NMENT
110%[ t
N
W.E
~ t 110'/0 I
0
w
9;
0
C<
a.
No g""
'"'
en
<!
[!J
'"
0
)-
BLVD,
RVNE
FiRST
<!
~
Project Distribution And
Assignment Percentages
3.7.9
Traffic
Prospect. Village EIR
Figure 3.7-2, Project Only Traffic Values
LEGEND
@Ð . DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
3/4 . AMI1'M PEAK
HOUR VOLUMES
:Ii
u.i
>
<{
N
W.E
S
<{
CD
D<
0
,...
>-
tJ
LU
fu
0
ft
No 50010
N
4T>-< ST.
I12Vß'Jf:
«
>-
<J)
0
tJ
Project Only Traffic Volumes
3.7-10
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
Project traffic would also have a less than significant impact on study area
intersections. Figure 3.7-2 shows the number of Project traffic trips that would occur at
each intersection during the AM and PM peak hour. As shown on Table 3.7-7, all six of
the study intersections maintain acceptable LOS values with the addition of the Project
traffic.
Main St./Prospect Ave.
-Northbound
.Southbonnd
13.4
17.5
B
C
15.6
23
c
c
In response to a letter fÌ'om Cal Trans commenting on the Notice of Preparation,
the traffic consultant also analyzed Project traffic impacts on the SR-55 Freeway/Irvine
Boulevard Ramps and at the 1-5 Freeway/Newport Avenue Ramps. According to the
Traffic Study, the Project would generate two (2) inbound and two (2) outbound traffic
trips during the AM peak hour at each of the ramps. The Project would generate three (3)
inbound and three (3) outbound trips during the PM peak hour at each ramp. Due to the
Project's nominal contribution of traffic at each of these ramps, the traffic study
concluded that Project impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Project generated traffic would have a less than significant impact on local
roadways and intersections; therefore no mitigation measures are recommended.
Residual Impacts
Project traffic impacts would be less than significant.
Impact:
The Project would increase parking demand in the area.
The Project site is within the "Combined Parking District" ("P"), which contains
specific off street parking requirements depending on the type of land use. According to
the "P" District, retail stores must have one parking space per 200 square feet, office
buildings must have one (I) space per 300 square feet, and restaurants must have one
space for each three seats. Based on the proposed Project land uses, the "P District
requires ninety-two (92) parking spaces.
3.7.11
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
However, the Tustin Municipal Code ("TMC") allows a reduction in the off street
parking requirements provided that certain criteria are satisfied.4 According the TMC,
parking facilities may be used jointly for non-residential uses with significantly different
peak hours of operation.5 Requests for joint use parking must meet all the following
requirements:
. A parking study prepared by a licensed traffic engineer shall be submitted
by the applicant demonstrating that no substantial conflict will exist in the
peak hours of parking demand for the uses for which joint-use is proposed.
The methodology to be used in preparing the study shall be that
promulgated by the Institute of Transportation Engineers
. The number of parking spaces which may be credited against the
requirements for the structures or uses involved shall not exceed the
number of spaces reasonably anticipated to be available during different
hours of operation;
. Parking spaces designated for joint use shall be located so that they will
adequately serve the uses for which they are intended; and,
. A written and recorded agreement shall be drawn to the satisfaction of the
City Attorney and Director of Community Development and executed by
all parties concerned assuring the continued availability of the number of
parking spaces designated for joint-use and availability of reciprocal
access easements. (Ord. No. 1206, Sec. 2, 9-21-98)
Pursuant to the rust criteria, the City retained Sasaki Transportation Services to
evaluate the Project's peak parking demand. The Parking Study first concluded that the
twenty-seven (27) off street parking spaces would be adequate to serve the residences and is
consistent with the City of Tustin parking code requirements.6 The Parking Study then
analyzed the shared use parking needs for the commercial component based on the different
peak hours of operation. The analysis was based on the ITE "Shared Parking Planning
Guidelines," which is consistent with the first criteria above.?
The study concluded that the Project's proposed mix of commercial uses (retail,
office and restaurant) would be conducive to a shared parking arrangement. According to
the study, the peak parking demands for office, retail, and restaurant uses occur at different
times of the day. For example, the office parking peaks occur during the day on week days,
while the retail peak are on the weekend. Restaurants are typically busy on Friday and
Saturday evenings when retail and office uses are not at their peaks.
According to the Parking Study, the shared parking demand for the commercial
portion of the Project was sixty-two (62) spaces, which would be satisfied by the use of
fifty-nine (59) spaces at the City of Tustin Main Street Water facility ("Water Facility")
parking lot and three (3) on site spaces. The Water facility parking lot is located across
4 TMC §9271 (aa)
S Ibid.
6 Prospect Village Shared Parking Analysis, Sasaki Transportation Services, October 9, 2003, p. 2
7 Ibid. at p. 3
3.7-12
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
Prospect Avenue, immediately east of the Project site. The three additional spaces are
provided on site, immediately west of and adjacent to the E. Main Street building.
In order to satisfy the shared use requirements the developer must enter into an
agreement with the City of Tustin to use the Water Facility parking lot. In conjunction
with consideration of proj ect entitlements, the City of Tustin City Council shall consider
an Off-Site Parking Agreement for the provision of fifty-nine (59) parking spaces at the
City's Main Street Water facility. If, for some reason, the City Council rejected such an
agreement, Project parking impacts would be significant unless the City authorized some
alternative arrangement. Mitigation measures T-2 is recommended to reduce this potential
impact to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures
T-2:
If the City Council does not approve the Off-Site Parking Agreement, the
applicant must present an alternative shared use agreement to the City for review
and approval prior to issuance of a demolition permit. If the City does not
approve an alternative shared use agreement, the Project shall not proceed.
3.7.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Traffic Study analyzed potential traffic impacts with and without the Project.
The Traffic Study first determined future traffic conditions without the Project, which
was based on cumulative traffic forecasts that were performed in conjunction with the
environmental studies for the MCAS Tustin Disposal and Reuse Plan.8 The Traffic Study
also added a one percent growth factor through the year 2020. Project traffic was then
added to the "without" project conditions and impacts were assessed accordingly. The
Traffic .Study concluded that Project traffic when combined when future traffic forecasts
for the area would not result in any significant impacts on intersections and roadways
within the study area.
The Project would also not create any significant cumulative parking impact in
conjunction with the other related projects identified in Table 2-5. With respect to each
of these projects, the City determined that the City's off-street parking requirements had
been satisfied.
8 Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analyses, Sasaki Transportation Services, December 12, 2003, p. 4
3.7-13
Traffic
Prospect Village EIR
4.0
ALTERNATIVÈS
4.1
INTRODUCTION
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the
proposed project, or to the location of the proposed project, which would feasibly attain
most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen the
significant effects of the proposed project! CEQA is clear that an EIR need not consider
every conceivable alternative to a project, but rather a reasonable range of potentially
feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation?
CEQA identifies several factors to consider when addressing 'the feasibility of
alternatives, including site suitability, economic viability, availability of inftastructure,
general plan consistency, regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and the project
proponent's ability to reasonably acquire, control, or have access to the alternative site?
This section considers, in detail, a range of six (6) Project alternatives, which
includes the "No Project" alternative and five (5) variations of the Project This section
also describes several alternatives that were rejected as infeasible during the scoping
period and are not evaluated further in the EIR.
4.2 ALTERNATIVES
CONSIDERATION
CONSIDERED,
BUT
ELIMINATED
FROM
FURTHER
CEQA provides that an EIR should identify any alternatives that the lead agency
considered but rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the
reasons underlying the lead agency's deternrination.4 Among the factors that may be
used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an ErR are: (I) failure to
meet rnost of the basic objectives, (2) infeasibility, or (3) inability to avoid significant
environmental effects.5 Consistent with this requirement, this section identifies three (3)
alternatives that the City of Tustin considered, but rejected as infeasible during, the
scoping process, and provides a brief explanation of the reasons for their exclusion.
4.2.1
EI Camino Real/6th Street Site Alternative
This alternative site is approximately 1.7-acres and is located in the Old Town
Commercial area at EI Camino Real and 6th Street The alternative site is a portion of a
larger 4-acre subdivision. Over the past five (5) years, the Agency has referred several
private developers, who expressed an interest in developing the site, to the property
owners.6 However, in each case, the property owners failed to engage the developers in
114 Cal. Code Regs §15126.6(a)
'Ibid.
'14Cal.CodeRegs§15126.6(f)(1)
414 Cal. Code Regs §15126.6(c)
, Ibid.
6 These developers included: Warmington Homes (developer of the 38 single family homes at Ambrose
Lane located across Sixth Street); the Olson Company (one of the nation's largest residential infill
4-1
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
any level of meaningful negotiations. Instead, the property owners sought to develop the
site in accordance with their own investment objectives. Because the Agency does not
own the alternative site and based on the historic recalcitrance of the property owners to
sell the site, the Agency has determined that it is not feasible to pursue redevelopment of
this site. Moreover, this alternative would not meet several of the most basic project
objectives including the need to develop a mixed use project within the next two to three
years and to eliminate delay and uncertainty regarding future development of the site.
Pursuing and ultimately developing this site against the wishes of the property owner
would take far longer than the two (2) to three (3) year redevelopment period and
substantially increase the uncertainty of a redevelopment project. The timing of the
project is critical in light of the favorable fmancing and market conditions, which could
worsen over time. Based of past experiences with the property owner, pursing this site
and negotiating an acceptable agreement would be difficult and time consuming.
4.2.2 W. First St. Site Alternative
This alternative site is approximately 1.2 acres and is located at 137 W. First
Street. This-alternative site is located outside the Old Town Commercial area and outside
the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area. Due to its location outside the Old Town
commercial area and the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area, the site would not
meet the most basic project objective, which is to revitalize Old Town with a mixed use
commercial/residential project. In addition, this alternative site is a less attractive
redevelopment option because the site has a limited amount of retail window frontage on
First Street. Thus, the ability to find viable retail tenants would be jeopardized. Finally,
the Agency would have to acquire this site from the current property owner, which, like
the above alternative site, would take far longer than the two (2) to three (3) year
development period identified in the project objectives.
4.2.3
Relocating the Utt Juice Buildings
The Agency also considered relocating the existing structures to an undeveloped
site in the Old Town Commercial Area. This alternative was rejected as infeasible for
several reasons. First, transporting the masonry structures, which are constructed on
concrete slab foundations, without significantly damaging the structures, would be
difficult. Second, assuming the structure were not significantly damaged during transit,
relocating the structures to another part of Old Town would not necessarily substantially
lessen or avoid the Project's significant impact on historic resources. The Historic
Resources Technical Report noted the historical significance of these structures at their
existing location:
"The UTI Juice Buildings also derive significance because of their
location at a prominent corner of Old Town Tustin. In fact, the Buildings
provide an "introduction" to Old Town as the first of its historic buildings
developers); CIM Group (a highly experienced retail/residential mixed-use infill developer); and Pacific
Gulf Development (a large.scale senior citizen and multifamily rental housing developer).
4-2
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
one encounters when traveling west on Main Street. Their
elimination. . . would significantly affect the visitor's initial historic view of
Old Town." 7
Therefore, relocating thè structure would not reduce the Project's significant and
unavoidable impact on historical resources.
4.3
REASONING FOR SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES
The City identified a range of alternatives that could potentially attain the project
objectives while avoiding or substantially lessening the significant effects of the proposed
project. As documented in the EIR, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable
direct impact on historical resources and would be inconsistent with General Plan policies
that promote rehabilitation and reuse of historical structures. Therefore, the City
developed a range of Proj ect alternatives that focus on varying levels of rehabilitation and
reuse of the existing strUctures in accordance with, the Secretary's Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating,
Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, 1995, Weeks and Grimmer
("Secretary's Standards and Guidelines"). The Secretary's Standards and Guidelines
provide, among other things, that construction of adjacent buildings or additions to the
existing structures should: (a) be limited in size and scale in relationship to the existing
structure, (h) be located at or on non-character-defining building elevations of the
existing structures, and (c) avoid roof-top additions which would not be set back from the
wall plane of the existing structures.
4.4
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
This section considers in detail a total of six (6) Project alternatives, including the
"No Project" alternative and the five (5) Project alternatives briefly summarized below.
The section also compares each alternative's environmental impacts with the Project,
describes each alternative's consistency with the Project objectives described in Section
2.2, and analyzes the economic feasibility of the alternatives, based on a report prepared
by a redevelopment consulting firm, Keyser Marston & Associates, Inc.
1. Full Reuse Alternative: This alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the existing
historic buildings, construct a new rètail structure on E. Main St., and construct ten (10)
live/work units;
2. Partial Reuse Alternative: This alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the
existing structures, except for the rear portion of the 193, 195 Building, which would be
demolished. This alternative also includes a new retail building on E. Main St., and ten
(10) live/work units;
7 Historic Resources Technical Report at p. 11
4-3
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
3. Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only) Alternative: This alternative entails
rehabilitation and reuse of a portion of the 193, 195 Building, demolition of the 191
building and construction of a new retail building on E. Main Street and twelve (12)
live/work units.
4. Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation
and reuse of the existing historic buildings and development of the remaining portions of
the site in accordance with the existing C-2 zoning designation.
5. Façade Reuse Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse of
only the façade of the 193, 195 Building, construction of a new two story retaiVoffice
building on E. Main Street and twelve (12) live/work units.
A summary comparison of the specific components of each of the five (5) Project
alternatives is provided in Table 4-1.
RetaH 1,940 1,600 1,640 2,200 773
4,565 5,478 10,800 5,478
9625 8,405 8118 16 120 6251
3,000 3,000 1,628 3,000 0
0 0 0 3,000
Office 0 1,600 2,712 0 4,816
Lane 2,155 2.155 2,586 9,000 2,586
2155 3755 5298 9,000 7402
12
23,928
84
4-4
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
4.4.1 No Project Alternative
The CEQA Guidelines provide that a specific alternative of "no project" must be
evaluated in the ElR. 8 The purpose of describing and analyzing the "no project"
alternative is to allow the decision-makers to compare the impacts of the Project with the
impacts of not approving the Project. The "no project" alternative must discuss the
existing conditions of the project site and what would reasonably be expected to occur in
the foreseeablefutJire if the project were not approved, based on current plans and
consistent with avajJable inITastructure and community services.9
4.4.1.1 Alternative Description
As discussed in more detail in Section 2.3, "Project Location & Site
Characteristics," there are currently two existing structures on the property. The
remaining portions of the site are primarily paved over.
Under the "no project" alternative, these conditions would remain unchanged.
The property would continue to be vacant and the buildings unused until such time a
viable redevelopment option is proposed. Based on the history of the Project site,
including its long-term vacancy and the inability of prior property owners to attract
private investment, it can be reasonably forecasted that the no project activity would
occur on the site in the foreseeable future, despite the developed natJire of the
surrouriding area.
4.4.1.2 Comparison ofImpacts
The "no project" alternative would not create any environmental effects. As noted
above, the Agency does not anticipate any other development plans for this site in the
foreseeable future. The property would remain in its current condition, unoccupied.
Therefore, none of the construction and operational environmental impacts that would
otherwise be created by the Project would occur.
4.4.1.3 Consistency with Project Objectives
The "no project" alternative would not meet the Project objectives identified in
Section 2.2 or most the objectives of Town Center Redevelopment Plan and General
Plan, as described in Section 2.2.3 and 3.5.2 of the EIR. Specifically, the "no project"
alternative would cause considerable delay and uncertainty for development of the site
and the condition of the existing buildings would continue to deteriorate. In addition, the
"no project' alternative would not provide any additional property tax increment in the
Redevelopment Project Area to assist in economic development activities in the Old
814 Cal. Code Regs §15126.6 (e)
914 Cal. Code Regs §15126.6 (e)(2)
4-5
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
Town commercial area, as compared to the $85,300 in estimated annual tax increment for
the proposed project plus $10,500 in estimated annual sales tax revenue. 10
4.4.2 Full Reuse Alternative
4.4.2.1 Description of Alternative
Under this alternative, the applicant would rehabilitate one-hundred percent
(100%) of the existing Uti Juice buildings in accordance with the Secretary's Standards
and Guidelines to accommodate future commercial retail and restaurant uses. In
addition, a new one story 1,940 square feet single story retail building addition would be
constructed immediately west of the 191 Main Street building. These uses would be
served by sixty (60) off-street parking spaces at the Water Facility parking lot.
The alternative would provide a reduced residential component. Ten (10)
detached live-work residential units would be constructed on the remaining northern
portion of the site with similar design features as the Project. Like the Project, onsite
parking for the live-work residential units would be provided in a two-car tuck-under
garage for each unit and three (3) additional guest parking spaces, all of which would be
accessed from a private drive and interior auto court via "Prospect Lane."
Combined, this alternative includes 9,625 square feet of ground floor retail
commercial use, a 3,000 square foot restaurant, 2,155 square feet of professional office
space, and ten (10) live/work residential units for a total of 34,720 square feet of
development. This alternative provides a total of eighty-three (83) off-street parking
spaces, including twenty.three (23) off street spaces on site and sixty (60) off-street
spaces at the City's Main Street Water facility.
4.4.2.2 Comparison of Impacts
Aesthetics
This alternative would preserve views of the historically significant architectural
features of the 193, 195 Building and the 191 Building. While this alternative includes
construction of a new commercial building adjacent to the 191 Building, this building
would be one story and consistent with the height and bulk of the adjacent Utt Juice
Buildings. Therefore, this alternative would be slightly less visually prominent than the
Project's larger two story structures along E. Main Street. This alternative would have a
similar visual and aesthetic impact with respect to the remaining northern portion of the
Project site because of the proposed three. story live/work units. Nonetheless, because
this alternative proposes smaller structures than the Project and would more closely
preserve the historical character along the East Main Street frontage, this alternative
would less aesthetic impacts than the Project.
10 James Rabe and Kevin Engstrom, Keyser Marston Associates, Evaluation ofCEQA Alternatives-
Prospect Village Project, October 28, 2003, p. 7.
4-6
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
Air Quality
Like the Project, this alternative would result in less than significant construction
and operational air quality impacts. Unlike the Project, however, this alternative would
not require demolition of the existing Utt Juice buildings and therefore would not
generate the associated pollutant emissions during that phase, including emissions from
heavy equipment on site or significant numbers of haul truck trips. Therefore, overall
construction emissions are expected to be slightly less than the Project.
From an operational standpoint, this alternative would nominally increase the
number of Project traffic trips by 30 from 600 to 630 due to the increase in overall
Commercial retail square footage.l! Therefore, this alternative would generate a slightly
greater volume of air pollutants relating to mobile source emissions. Because this
alternative would result in 30 more traffic trips than the Project, this alternative would
result in a slightly greater operational air quality impact.
Cultural Resources
This alternative would reduce potentially significant cultural resource impact to a
less than significant level by preserving and rehabilitating the existing buildings on the
site in accordance with the Secretary's Standards and GuidelinesY The rehabilitation
and reuse of the structures would include building upgrades to comply with current
building code and safety requirements, including installation of new plumbing, heating,
ventilation, electrical and mechanical systems. This alternative would avoid the Project's
significant impact on the historic Utt Juice Buildings.
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Like the Project, this alternative would result in a less than significant impact
relating to hazards and hazardous materials. This alternative proposes the same types of
land uses as the Project. The proposed land uses would not use, store or transport
hazardous materials as part of their regular operations. The only types of chemicals that
are expected to be used on site are cleaning products used for maintenance and upkeep.
This altemative would also require asbestos and lead paint remediation as part of the
rehabilitation effort. Like the Project, the City would condition this alternative on the
removal or abandonment of the clarifier to accommodate the ten (10) live/work urilts.
Land Use Planning
This Alternative would require the same development entitlements and permits as
the Project, including a zone change from "C-2" ("Central Commercial") to "P-C"
("Planned Community") to accommodate the ten (10) live/work residential units on site.
Unlike the Project, however, this Alternative would be consistent with the preservation
Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analyses, Sasaki Transportation Services, December 12, 2003, Table 3B
12 Historic Resources Technical Report at p. 13.
4-7
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
goals and policies contained in the General Plan and therefore would result in fewer land
use and planning impacts. Due to this alternative's consistency with preservation goals
and policies, this alternative would have less land use impacts than the Project.
Noise
Like the Project, this alternative would result in short term increases in ambient
noise levels during construction activity and long term ambient noise increases relating to
traffic trips. However, construction noise impacts may be less than the Project because
no demolition is proposed under this alternative; therefore, the heavy equipment that
would otherwise be on site during this phase would not be present. Moreover, only a
limited number of haul truck trips (instead of numerous haul truck trips to transport
demolition debris) would be required during this stage as part of any required
remediation activity. Project noise levels during demolition would be replaced with
lower noise levels typically heard during the building phases.
From an operational standpoint, this alternative would slightly increase traffic
trips and associated traffic noise levels. However, the addition of thirty (30) additional
traffic trips would likely not correspond to a noticeable increase in ambient noise levels
above and beyond Project traffic noïse levels. Therefore, this alternative would generate
similar long term operational noise impacts as the Project.
Traffic
This alternative would generate fewer haul truck trips during construction because
no demolition is proposed. However, this alternative would result in a slightly greater
number operational traffic trips due the slight increase in commercial retail square
footage from 6,251 to 9,625 square feet. Despite the nominal increase in traffic trips, this
alternative, like the Project, is expected to result in a less than significant impact on local
roadways and intersection.
This alternative would also result in a similar parking impact. Like the Project,
this alternative would require a reduced off street parking requirement pursuant to the
Tustin Municipal Code. However, this alternative would require slightly less or six fewer
parking spaces at the City's Main Street Water Facility than the Project, as reflected in
the Shared Parking Analysis. Therefore, the overall parking demand of this alternative
would be incrementally less.
'4.4.2.3 Consistency with Project Objectives
This alternative achieves the basic project objective of developing a mixed use
project with a residential component in Old town. However, this alternative falls short of
achieving many of the specific project objectives as discussed below:
.
The alternative would cause considerable delay and uncertainty in developing the
site due to the additional time needed to find a developer that is willing to rmance
4-8
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
and construct this alternative. Since 1998, the City has on five separate occasions
solicited development proposals that include adaptive reuse of the existing Uti
Juice buildings. None of the proposals included reuse of the Utt Juice buildings
as a viable option. Each developer opined that the expense of remodeling the
structures would be cost prohibitive and not economically justified. As discussed
below in section 4.5, the City's economic feasibility validates these concerns.
.
The rehabilitated buildings would accommodate a minimum 3,000 square-foot
restaurant but would not include an outdoor courtyard for patio dining, which is
considered essential to enliven the pedestrian environment along East Main
Street.
.
The alternative is not financially viable and wollid require a public subsidy to
attract some level of interest among the development conimunity. As discussed in
Section 4.5, the development costs of this alternative would exceed the projected
revenue of the alternative. The value of the preserved space would be less than
new spacel3 and two (2) less residential units would be constructed, which
significantly reduces the overall value of this alternative.
4.4.3
Partial Reuse Alternative
4.4.3.1 Description of Alternative
Under this alternative, the developer would rehabilitate and reuse approximately
eighty-five percent (85%) or 5,240 square feet of the Utt Juice buildings in accordance
with the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines. Only the rear 30 feet of the 193, 195
Building would be demolished. This alternative also éntails construction of a new
abutting two-story building immediately west of the 191. Building, which would
accommodate 1,600 square feet of ground floor retail and 1,600 square feet of second
story office use. These uses would be served by fifty-nine (59) off-street parking spaces
at the City's Main Street Water Facility parking lot.
Like the Full Reuse altemative, ten (10) live/work residential units would be
developed on the remaining northerly portion of the property. Onsite parking for the
live/work residential units would be provided in a two-car tuck under garage for each unit
and three additional guest parking spaces, all of which would be accessed from a private
dtive and interior auto court via "Prospect Lane".
Combined, this alternative is 8,405 square feet of ground floor retail commercial
use, a 3,000 square foot restaurant, 3,775 square feet of office space, and ten (10)
live/work residential units for a total of 35,100 square feet of development. This
I3 James Rabe and Kevin Engstrom, Keyser Marston Associates, Evaluation ofCEQA Alternatives-
Prospect Village Project, October 28, 2003, p. 4. (The preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space and would result in lower rents than retail space in a new building. Rents are projected at
$13.00/sq.ft. for preserved retail versus $15.00/sq.ft. for new retail and $15.00/sq.ft. for preserved
restaurant versns $21.00/sq.ft. for new restaurant.
4-9
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
alternative provides a total of eighty-two (82) off-street parking spaces, including twenty-
three (23) off street spaces on site and fifty-nine (59) off-street spaces at the City's Main
Street Water facility.
4.4.3.2 Comparison of Impacts
Aesthetics
This alternative would preserve views of the historically significant architectural
features of the 193, 195 Building and the 191 Building. However, this alternative also
includes a new two-story commercial building adjacent to the Utt Juice buildings, which
would disrupt the one. story frontage along E. Main Street. This alternative also entails
construction often (10) three-story live/work residential units on the northerly portion of
the site. While this alternative would preserve the unique architectural features of the
193, 195 Building and the one-story height of these existing structures along E. Main
Street, overall, the site will undergo significant visual alteration~, including buildings
with staggered heights along E. Main Street and taller three story residential structures on
the northern portions of the property. Therefore, this alternative would result in aesthetic
impacts that are similar to the Project.
Air Quality
Like the Project, this alternative would result in less than significant construction
and operational air quality impacts. However, this alternative only requires partial
demolition (less than 1,000 square feet) of the existing Utt Juice buildings; therefore the
demolition phase would be substantially shorter than the Project. Because the demolition
phase would be shorter, this alternative would require use of heavy equipment on site for
a shorter period and significantly fewer haul truck trips. Therefore, this alternative's
overall construction emissions would be less than Project emissions.
From a long-term, operational standpoint, this alternative would nominally
increase the number of traffic trips by ten (10) from 600 to 610 due to the increase in
retail square footage.14 Therefore, this alternative would generate negligible increase in
the volume of air pollutants relating to mobile source emissions. Because this alternative
would result in ten (10) additional traffic trips, this alternative would result in a slightly
greater operational air quality impact.
Cultural Resources
This alternative would substantially lessen the Project's significant impact on the
historic Utt Juice Buildings because it would rehabilitate and reuse 5,240 square feet of
the 6,120 square feet if structures. While this alternative would reuse approxirnately
eight-five percent (85%) the historic Utt Juice Buildings, the Historical Resources
Technical Report concluded that only full or 100% rehabilitation and reuse would reduce
14 Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analyses, Sasaki Transportation Services, December 12,2003. Table 3B
4-10
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
potential Project impacts to a less than significant level.l5 Therefore, despite this
alternative's proposed reuse of the majority of the existing structure, this alternative
would still have a significant and unavoidable impact on historical resources.
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
This Alternative would result in the same less than significant hazards and
hazardous materials impacts as the Project. Like the Project, this alternative would not
include land uses that require the use, storage or transportation of hazardous materials,
such as industrial uses, gas stations, etc. The only typès of chemicals that are expected to
be used on site are cleaning products used for maintenance and upkeep. This alternative
would also require a certain amount of asbestos and lead paint remediation during
rehabilitation and demolition of a portion of the 193, 195 Building. The alternative
would also require the removal and abandonment of the clarifier on site in accordance
with applicable laws
Land Use Planning
This Alternative would require the same development entitlements and permits as
the Project, including a zone change from "C-2" ("Central Commercial") to "P-C"
("Planned Community") to accommodate the ten (10) live/work residential units. This
alternative, however, would be more consistent with the preservation goals and policies
contained in the General Plan because it rehabilitates and reuses eighty-five percent
(85%) of the Utt Juice buildings. Therefore, this alternative would result in less land use
impacts than the Project.
Noise
The alternative would result in short term increases in ambient noise levels during
construction activity and long term ambient noise increases relating to traffic trips.
However, construction noise impacts would be less than the Project because only partial
demolition (less than 1,000 s.f.) is proposed under this alternative; therefore, the heavy
equipment that would otherwise be on site during the majority of this phase of the Project
would not be present. Moreover, a smaller number of haul truck trips would be required
during this stage to transport demolition debris off-site. Because the demolition period
will be shorter, and rehabilitation effort will involve less heavy equipment and haul truck
trips, this alternative would result in less construction noise impacts than the Project.
From an operational standpoint, this alternative results in a slight increase in
traffic trips. However, the addition often (10) traffic trips would likely not correspond to
a noticeable increase in ambient noise levels. Therefore, this alternative would generate
similar long term operational noise impacts as the Project.
15 Historic Resources Technical Report at p. 13.
4-11
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
Traffic
This alternative would generate fewer haul truck trips during construction because
only a small portion the existing structures will be demolished. The construction worker
trips that would otherwise be generated during a longer demolition period will be
replaced with worker trips needed to rehabilitate the Uti Juice Building. Therefore,
except for haul truck trips, this alternative's construction traffic impacts on roadways and
intersections would be sirnilar to the Project. This alternative would increase the number
of Project operational traffic trips (10 additional trips) due the increase in commercial
retail square footage from 6,251 to 8,430 square feet. However, due to the negligible
increase in traffic trips, this alternative is not expected to increase impacts on local
roadways and intersections.
Like the Project, this alternative would require a reduced off street parking
Jequirement pursuant to the Tustin Municipal Code. According to the Shared Policy
Analysis, this alternative would require seven (7) less parking spaces at the City's Main
Street water facility; therefore, this alternative's parking demand would be slightly less.
4.4.3.3 Consistency with Project Objectives
This alternative achieves the basic project objectives of developing a mixed use
project with a residential component in Old town. However, this alternative falls short of
achieving many of the specific project objectives as discussed below.
. The alternative would cause considerable delay and uncertainty in developing the
site due to the additional time needed to find a developer that is willing to finance
and construct the alternative site improvements. An explanation of the City's
difficultly in finding a developer willing to rehabilitate and reuse the Uti Juice
buildings as part of a redevelopment project on this site is explained above under
the Full Reuse alternative. Because this alternative proposes the reuse of 5,240
s.f. of the Utt Juice buildings, the City would face the same difficulties here as the
Reuse Alternative.
. The rehabilitated buildings would accommodate a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant but would not include an outdoor courtyard for patio dining, which is a
critical objective of the project to enliven the pedestrian environment along East
Main Street.
. The alternative is not fmancially viable and would require a public subsidy to
attract some level of interest among the development community. As discussed in
Section 4.5, the development costs of this alternative would exceed the projected
revenue of the alternative. The value of the preserved space would be less than
new space and two less residential units would be constructed, which significantly
reduces the overall value of this alternative.
4-12
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
4.4.4 Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only) Alternative
4.4.4.1 Description of Alternative
Under this alternative, the developer would rehabilitee and reuse forty percent
(40%) or 2,628 square feet of the 193, 195 Building in accordance with the Secretary's
Standards and Guidelines. The remaining portions of the 193, 195 Building and all of
the 191 Building would be demolished. The alternative entails new construction of an
abutting two story building on the pad area west of the 193, 195 Building, which would
accommodate 1,640 square feet of ground floor retail and 2,712 square feet of second
story office use. Three (3) onsite parking spaces would be tucked under the new
building. These uses would be served by three (3) off-street parking spaces on site and
fifty-four (54) spaces at the Water Facility parking lot.
Like the Project, this alternative entails twelve (12) detached live-work residential
units. Onsite parking for the live-work residential units would be provided in a two-car
tuck under garage for each unit and three additional guest parking spaces, all of which
would be accessed from a private drive and interior auto court via "Prospect Lane".
Combined, this alternative includes 8,118 square feet of ground floor retail
commercial use, a 1,628 square foot restaurant, 5,298 square feet of office space, and
twelve (12) live/work residential units for a total of 38,972 square feet of development.
This alternative provides a total of eighty-four (84) off-street parking spaces, including
thirty (30) off street spaces on site and fifty-four (54) off-street spaces at the City Main
Street Water facility.
4.4.4.2 Comparison of Impacts
Aesthetics
This alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the unique architectural features of
the 193,195 Building. However, this alternative would demolish the entire 191 Building
and replace it with a new two story retail commercial building. This alternative would
also construct twelve (12) three-story live/work units behind the Main Street structures.
Therefore, like the Project, this alternative would substantially alter existing views of the
site with the new commercial and residential structures. While this alternative would
preserve the unique architectural features of the 193, 195 Building, overall, the site will
undergo significant changes, including buildings with staggered heights along E. Main
Street and taller three story residential structures on the northern portions of the property.
Therefore, this alternative would result in aesthetic impacts that are similar to the Project.
Air Quality
This alternative would result in construction and operational air quality impacts
that are similar to the Project. Because this alternative would demolish approxirnately
sixty percent (60%) or 3,500 square feet of the existing buildings, the duration of
4-13
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
demolition actually would be less than half of the Project and would generate less air
pollutants from heavy equipment on site and haul truck trips. Therefore, air quality
impacts during construction would be less than the Project.
From an operational standpoint, this alternative would result in ten (10) fewer
traffic trips than the Project (590 trips compared to 600 trips) due to a reduction in office
space. 16 Therefore, this alternative would generate a slightly smaller volume of air
pollutants relating to mobile source emissions. Because this alternative would result in
ten (10) less traffic trips, this alternative would result in slightly less operational air
quality impacts than the Project.
Cultural Resources
This alternative would lessen but not avoid the Project's significant impacts on
historical resources because it would rehabilitate and reuse 2,682 square feet of the Utt
Juice buildings. While this alternative would reuse forty percent (40%) the historic Utt
Juice Buildings, the Historical Resources Technical Report concluded that only full or
100% rehabilitation and reuse would reduce potential Project impacts to a less than
significant levelY Therefore, despite this alternative's proposed reuse of the majority of
the existing structure, this alternative would still have a significant and unavoidable
impact on historical resources.
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
This Alternative would result in the same hazards and hazardous materials
impacts as the Project. Like the Project, this alternative would not include land uses that
require the use, storage or transportation of hazardous materials, such as industrial uses,
gas stations, etc. The only types of chemicals that are expected to be used on site are
cleaning products used for maintenance and upkeep. In addition, like the Project, this
alternative would require the disposal of asbestos containing materials and lead based
paint and would required removal of the clarifier on site in accordance with applicable
laws.
Land Use Planning
This alternative would require the same development entitlements and permits as
the Project, including a zone change from "C-2" ("Central Commercial") to "P-C"
("Planned Community") to accommodate the live/work residential units on the site. This
alternative would rehabilitate and reuse approximately sixty percent (60%) of the Utt
Juice building, including the unique architectural façade of the 193, 195 Building.
Therefore, this alternative is more consistent with the preservation goals and policies
contained in the General Plan and would result in fewer land use and planning irnpacts
than the Project.
J6 Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analyses, Sasaki Transportation Services, December ]2,2003. Table 3D
17 Historic Resources Technical Report at p. ]3.
4.]4
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
Noise
Like the Project, this alternative would result in short term increases in ambient
noise levels during construction activity and long term ambient noise increases relating to
traffic trips. However, construction noise impacts would be less than the Project because
only partial demolition (approximately 3,500 s.f.) is proposed under this alternative;
therefore, the heavy equipment that would otherwise be on site during the majority of this
phase of the Project would not be present. Moreover, a smaller number of haw truck
trips would be required during this stage to transport demolition debris off-site., Because
the demolition period will be shorter, and rehabilitation effort will involve less heavy
equipment and haul truck trips, this alternative would result in less construction noise
impacts than the Project.
From an operational standpoint, this Alternative would result in slightly fewer (10
less) traffic trips than the Project. However, ten (10) less traffic trips would likely not
correspond to a noticeable decrease in ambient noise levels. Thèrefore, this alternative
would generate similar long term operational noise impacts as the Project.
Traffic
This alternative would slightly less haul truck trips during construction because of
the reduced demolition activity and slightly less operational traffic trips due to a decrease
in office space from 7,402 to 5,298 square feet. This minor decrease of ten (10) traffic
trips is not expected to significantly affect or improve the level of service (LOS)
operation of local roadways and intersection. The ten (10) would be distributed to
various roadways and intersections throughout the study area. Therefore, this alternative
would have traffic impacts that are similar to the Project.
This alternative would also result in a similar parking impact. Like the Project,
this alternative would require a reduced off street parking requirement pursuant to the
Tustin Municipal Code. This alternative, however, would require five (5) less parking
spaces at the City's Main Street water facility. Therefore, this altemative would have a
slightly less parking impact than the Project.
4.4.4.3 Consistency with Project Objectives
This altemative achieves the basic project objectives of developing a mixed use
project with a residential component in Old town. However, this alternative falls short of
achieving many of the specific project objectives as discussed below.
. The alternative would cause considerable delay and uncertainty in developing the
site due to the additional time needed to find a developer that is willing to fmance
and construct the alternative site improvements. An explanation of the City's
difficultly in finding a developer willing to rehabilitate and reuse the Uti Juice
buildings as part of a redevelopment project on this site is explained above under
the Full Reuse alternative. Because this alternative proposes the reuse of 2,625
4-15
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
square feet of the Utt Juice buildings, the City would face the same difficulties
proceeding with this Project as the other reuse alternatives.
.
The rehabilitated buildings would accommodate a much smaller restaurant (1,628
square feet) than the Project (3,000 square feet) and no outdoor courtyard for
patio dining, which is a critical objective of the project to enliven the pedestrian
environment along East Main Street.
.
The alternative is not as fmancially viable as the Project as discussed in Section
4.5. As discussed in Section 4.5, while this alternative supports a positive land
value because development costs of this alternative would be less than the
projected revenue of the alternative, the supportable land value is $524,000 less
(or $11.60 per square feet) than the Project. The value of this Project is greater
than the other two reuse alternatives because the alternative proposes a sufficient
level of demolition to accommodate two (2) additional live/work units.
Nonetheless, the Project is far more economically viable and attractive than this
alternative.
4.4.5 Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative
4.4.5.1 Description of Alternative
This alternative consists of full or 100% rehabilitation and reuse of the existing
Utt Juice Buildings in accordance with the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines. This
alternative also includes new construction of an abutting one-story 2,200 square foot
retail building immediately west of the 191 Main Building. The remaining portions of
the site would be developed with commercial retail and office uses in accordance with the
underlying "C-2" zone. These uses would replace the live/work units proposed by the
Project and the other alternatives.
The northerly portion of the site, behind the E. Main Street buildings, would be
developed with an approximately 18,000 square foot two story building, which would
accommodate 10,800 square feet of ground floor retail and 9,000 square feet of second
story professional offices. Total development on the site would be comprised of 16,120
square feet of ground floor commercial retail use, a 3,000 square foot restaurant and
9,000 square feet of professional office for a total of 28,120 square feet of development.
The alternative would provide a total of 114 parking spaces, including fifty two (52) off-
street parking spaces on-site and sixty-two (62) off-street parking spaces at the City of
Tustin Main Street Water Facility parking lot.
4.4.5.2 Comparison of Impacts
Aesthetics
This alternative would preserve views of the historically significant architectural
features of the 193, 195 Building and the 191 Building. While this alternative includes
4-16
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
construction of a new commercial building adjacent to the 191 Building, this building
would be one story and consistent with the height and bulk of the adjacent Utt Juice
Buildings. Therefore, this alternative would be slightly less visually prominent than the
Project's larger two story structures along E. Main Street. This alternative would have a
similar visual and aesthetic impact with respect to the remaining northern portion of the
Project site because of the proposed 18,000 square foot commercial building, which
would consume the remaining portions of the site. Nonetheless, because this alternative
proposes smaller structures than the Project and would more closely preserve the
historical character along the East Main Street frontage, this alternative would less
aesthetic impacts than the Project.
Air Quality
Like the Project, this alternative would result in less than significant construction
and operational air quality impacts. Unlike the Project, however, this alternative would
not require demolition of the existing Utt Juice buildings and therefore would not
generate the associated pollutant emissions during that phase, including emissions from
heavy equipment on site or significant numbers of haul truck trips. Therefore, overall
construction emissions are expected to be slightly less than the Project.
From an operational standpoint, this alternative would increase the number of
Project traffic trips by 250 from 600 to 850 due to the significant increase in commercial
retail square footage.18 Therefore, this alternative would generate a greater volume of air
pollutants relating to mobile source emissions. Because this alternative would result in
250 more traffic trips than the Project, this alternative would result in a greater
operational air quality impact.
Cultural Resources
This alternative would reduce potentially significant cultural resource impact to a
less than significant level by preserving and rehabilitating the existing buildings on the
site in accordance with the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines.19 The rehabilitation
and reuse of the structures would include building upgrades to comply with current
building code and safety requirements, including installation of new plumbing, heating,
ventilation, electrical and mechanical systems. This alternative would avoid the Project's
significant impact on the historic Uti Juice Buildings.
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Like the Project, this altemative would result in a less than significant impact
relating to hazards and hazardous materials. This alternative proposes the same types of
land uses as the Project. The proposed land uses would not use, store or transport
hazardous materials as part of their regular operations. The only types of chemicals that
18 Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analyses, Sasaki Transportation Services;Oecember 12,2003. Table 3B
19 Historic Resources Technical Report at p. 13.
4.17
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
are expected to be used on site are cleaning products used for maintenance and upkeep.
This alternative would also require asbestos and lead paint remediation as part of the
rehabilitation effort. Like the Project, the City would condition this alternative on the
removal or abandonment of the clarifier to accommodate the 18,000 square foot
commercial retaiVoffice building.
Land Use Planning
This Alternative would not require a zone change from "C-2" ("Central
Commercial") to "P-C" ("Planned Community") because no residential component is
proposed. In addition, this alternative would be consistent with the preservation goals and
policies contained in the General Plan. Due to this alternative's consistency with the
underlying zoning and the preservation goals and policies of the General Plan, this
alternative would have substantially less land use impacts than the Project.
Noise
Like the Project, this alternative would result in short term increases in ambient
noise levels during construction activity and long term ambient noise increases relating to
traffic trips. However, construction noise impacts may be less than the Project because
no demolition is proposed under this alternative; therefore, the heavy equipment that
would otherwise be on site during this phase would not be present. Moreover, only a
limited number of haul truck trips (instead of numerous haul truck trips to transport
demolition debris) would be required during this stage as part of any required
remediation activity. Project noise levels during demolition would be replaced with
lower noise levels typically heard during the building phases.
From an operational standpoint, this alternative would generate 250 more traffic
trips than the Project and would therefore create greater ambient noise level increases
than the Project. Therefore, this alternative would generate greater long term operational
noise impacts than the Project.
Traffic
This alternative would generate fewer haul truck trips during construction because
no demolition is proposed. However, this alternative would result in 250 more
operational traffic trips due the increase in commercial retail square footage frorn 6,251
to 16,120. This increase in traffic trips would create a greater impact on local roadways
and intersection than the Project.
This alternative would have a slightly greater parking impact due to the increased
parking demand from the commercial retail and office components. A portion of the
demand would be accommodated on site by the 52 parking spaces. However, this
alternative would also require three (3) more off street spaces at the City's Main Street
Water Facility than the Project (62 versus 59), as reflected in the Shared Parking
4-18
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
Analysis. Therefore, the overall parking demand of this alternative would be
incrementally greater.
4.4.5.3 Consistency with Project Objectives
This alternative would not achieve the basic project objective of developing a
mixed use project with a residential component in Old town. In addition, this alternative
falls short of achieving many of the other specific project objectives as discussed below.
4.4.6
.
The alternative would cause considerable delay and uncertainty in developing the
site due to the additional time needed to find a developer that is willing to finance
and construct the alternative site improvements. An explanation of the City's
difficultly in finding a developer willing to rehabilitate and reuse the Utt Juice
buildings as part of a redevelopment project on this site is explained above under
the Full Reuse alternative. Because this alternative requires reuse of one hundred
percent (100%) of the Utt Juice buildings, the City would face the same
difficulties proceeding with this Project as the other reuse alternatives.
The rehabilitated buildings would accommodate a 3,000 square feet with no
outdoor courtyard for patio dining, which is a critical objective of the project to
enliven the pedestrian environment along East Main Street.
.
The alternative is not financially viable and would require a significant public
subsidy to attract some level of interest among the development community. As
discussed in Section 4.5, the development costs of this alternative would far
exceed the projected revenue of the alternative. This alternative results in a
feasibility gap of approximately $1.8 million due to the decæased value of the
preserved, as opposed to new, retail space20 and replacing the Project's twelve
(12) live/work units with a commercial retail/office component.
Façade Reuse Alternative
4.4.6.1 Description of Alternative
The only difference between this alternative and the Project is that this Alternative
requires rehabilitation and reuse of all or a portion of the front façade of 193, 195
Building as may be feasible. This alternative would include the same amount of
commercial retail, office, and residential space as the Project in the same location.
4.4.6.2 Comparison of Impacts
20 James Rabe and Kevin Engstrom, Keyser Marston Associates, Evaluation ofCEQA Alternatives-
Prospect Village Project, October 28, 2003, p. 4. (The preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space and would result in lower rents than retail space in a new building. Rents are projected at
$13.00/sq.ft. for preserved retail versus $15.00/sq.ft. for new retail and $15.00/sq.ft. for preserved
restaurant versus $2J.00/sq.ft. for new restaurant.
4-19
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
This alternative would result in all the same impacts as the Project, including
signjficantand unavoidable impacts on historical resources. As discussed in detail in the
Historic Resources Technical Report, this type of "façade-ectomy" will cause the Utt
Juice Buildings to be dropped from their potential eligibility in the National Register and
California Register.21 Moreover, any integration of the façade into a two story
commercial building would be ineffective unless there is substantial separation between
lower portion of the building and the second story offices.
4.4.6.3 Consistency with Project Objectives
But for the additional costs to protect and retain part of the existing façade, this
alternative would accomplish most of the project objectives identified in Section 2.1.
The relationship of this alternative to the project objectives would be essentially the same
as the Project except that this alternative would likely cause delay and uncertainty in
developing the site due to the time needed to find a qualified developer to finance and
construct the alternative site improvements. As noted previously, neither the current
developer nor any of its predecessor's have submitted proposals that include
rehabilitation or reuse of any portion of the existing Uti Juice Building for purposes of
redeveloping the site. Moreover, this alternative is not as financially viable as the
Project, as discussed in Section 4.5 below. The rehabilitation and reuses of the façade
adds approximately $450,000 to the development costs of the Project.
4.5
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
The Agency retained the real estate economic consulting firm Keyser Marston
Associates (KMA) to prepare an economic analysis to evaluate the fmancial feasibility of
each of the "build" project alternatives ("KMA Report,,)?2 The KMA Report evaluated
the development costs associated with each alternative, including rehabilitation costs, the
projected return on costs for the retail and office component of each alternative, and the
profit margin for the residential component of each alternative. The KMA Report is
attached as Appendix H.
The KMA Report incorporates the conclusions of the Kovturn Construction
Management Group Inc. ("KCM"), which estimated the costs or rehabilitating the the
structures to a shell condition.23 The KCM cost estimate is based, in part, upon the
information contained in the Historic Resources Technical Report, the Adaptive Reuse
Study,24 the Secretary's Standards and Guidelines, and the 1995 retrofit drawings for the
Utt Juice Buildings. The costs estimates reflect the cost to rehabilitate the existing
21 Historic Resources Technical Report at pp.s 13-14
22 Evaluation ofCEQA Alternatives- Prospect Village Project, James Rabe and Kevin Engstrom, Keyser
Marston Associates, October 28,2003.
23 City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation. Tustin CA Historic Rehabilitation Estimate Report,
Gordon Kovturn, KCM Group, Inc., October 10, 2003. This report is available for review at the City of
Tustin, City Hall, Community Development Department counter.
24 Utt Juice Building Adaptive Reuse Study-Structural Engineering Report 191, 193, 195 E. Main Street
Tustin. Anthony B. Court, CUlT)' Price Court, June 12, 2003 (revised July 25, 2003)
4.20
Alternatives
'Prospect Village EIR
structures to a "shell" condition for occupancy including building upgrades necessary to
comply with current code requirements for plumbing, heating, ventilation, electrical and
mechanical systems. The K.MA Report estimates exceed the KCM costs estimates
because the KCM Report estimates included rehabilitating the structures to a shell
condition and the necessary tenant improvements to support a business.
Table 4-2 provides a summary comparison of the economic feasibility of
implementing each of the five Project alternatives, based on the conclusions of the KMA
Report.25
Full Reuse
Partial reuse
Partial Reuse
(193, 195
Buildin
Full Reuse
(Existing
ZooiD
Fa ade Reuse 8,330 000 8,528,000
1 Parentheses indicate a negative value.
5,537,000
3,724,000
(1,813,000)
(40.00)
37,200
41,200
198,000
4.40
85300
10 500
As shown on Table 4-2, of the five Project alternatives, only the Partial Reuse
(193, 195 Building Only) and Façade Reuse alternatives support a positive land value,
which means the development costs are less than the estimated value of the alternative.
The other three alternatives support a negative land value of between minus $8.60 per
square foot to minus $40.00 per square foot. A negative land value occurs when the
development costs exceed the overall value of the project. For each of the alternatives
that create a negative land value, a public subsidy would be required for the developer to
undertake the project. The K.MA report concludes that the amount of the public subsidy
would be $390,000 for the "Full Reuse" alternative, $437,000 for the "Partial Reuse"
alternative and approximately $1.8 million for the "Full Reuse (Existing Zoning)"
alternative.
Therefore, despite the ability of two (2) of these three alternatives to reduce the
Project's significant impact on the historic Utt Juice buildings to a less than significant
,level,26 these alternatives would result in an economic loss to a developer unless the City
provided a significant pubic subsidy to make the alternative viable. Moreover, based on
past experiences with developers and their unwillingness to proceed with a project that
25 KMA Report at p. Table 2.
26 As noted above in the analysis of the "Partial Reuse" alternative, which proposes to reuse 85% of the Utt
Juice Buildings, only 100% reuse would reduce Project impacts to a less than significant level.
4.21
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
proposes of reuse the existing structures, it seems highly unlikely that one of these
alternatives would ultimately be irnplemented on the Project site.
The other two alternatives reflect a positive project value, including the Partial
Reuse (193,195 Building) alternative and the Façade Only alternative. However, these
alternatives reduce the overall Project value nom $14.00 per square feet to $2.50 and
$4040 per square feet respectively. Therefore, these alternatives are not as economically
viable as the Project.
4.6
SUMMARY COMPARISON OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The City selected this range of alternatives to reduce the Project's significant
impact on historic Uti Juice Buildings. Only the two Full Reuse alternatives mitigate
Project impacts to a less than significant level, the Full Reuse and Full Reuse (Existing
Zoning) alternatives. However, as described in section 4.5, each of these alternatives is
not economically viable without a substantial public subsidy. The other three alternatives
including the Partial Reuse, Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only), and the Façade
Reuse alternatives would reduce Project impacts on the Uti Juice Buildings, but not to an
insignificant level. Of these alternatives, the one that results in the greatest level of
preservation or the Partial Reuse is the most economically infeasible as discussed in
Section 4.5.
With respect to the other impact areas, each alternative, except for the Full Reuse
(Existing Zoning), results in slightly less or slightly greater environmental impacts than
the Project. The slight increase or decrease in environmental impacts is largely due to the
relatively similar mix of land uses proposed under each of the alternatives, except for the
Full Reuse (Existing Zoning). The Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) alternative would
generate 250 additional traffic trips due to the increased commercial retail component.
These significant traffic trips increases correspond to increases in long term operational
air quality, noise and traffic impacts, above and beyond that created by the Project.
The primary hurdle to implementing any of these alternatives is finding a
developer that is willing to adaptively reuse the Utt Juice buildings as part of a
redevelopment effort. Proceeding with either of these alternatives would increase the
uncertainty of proceeding. with a redevelopment project on the Project site and cause
further delays in ultimate economic revitalization of the Project site.
4.7
ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
CE~A provides that an EIR must identify the environmentally superior Project
alternative.2 If the "no project" alternative is the environmentally superior alternative,
then the EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative from among the
other alternatives.28 In this case, the "no project" would be the environmentally superior
27 14 Cal. Code Regs §15126.6(e)
28 14 Cal. Code Regs §15126.6(e)(2)
4-22
Alternatives
Prospect Village EIR
alternative because the "no project" alternative would not demolish or otherwise alter the
historic Utt Juice Buildings. In addition, none of the other construction and operational
impacts would occur under the "no project" alternatives. Because the "no project"
alternative is superior, the EIR must identify the environmentally superior alternative
among the other alternatives. Based on the comparison of each alternative's impacts with
the Projects impacts, the Full Reuse alternative would be the environmentally superior
alternative because it would avoid the Project's significant impact on historical resources.
While the Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative also includes reuse and rehabilitation
of the existing structures, this alternative would result in significantly more traffic trips
than the Full Reuse alternative. Therefore, the Full Reuse altemative is environmentally
superior to the Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) alternative.
4-23
Alternatives
Prospect 'Village EIR
5.0
OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS
5.1
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the evaluation of other CEQA considerations, which include
environmental effects found not to be significant, irreversible environmental changes,
growth-inducing impacts, and the adverse impacts that were determined to be significant
and unavoidable
5.2
EFFECTS FOUND NOT To BE SIGNIFICANT
Pursuant to Sections 15128 and 15063(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City
deternrined that the Project would not have a potentially significant impact on the
following environmental issues areas and therefore did not require further analysis in the
EIR:!
Agricultural Resources;
Biological Resources;
Geology & Soils;
Hydrology and Water Quality;
Mineral Resources;
Population and Housing;
Public Services; and,
Utilities and Service Systems
5.3
IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The environmental effects of the proposed project are discussed in Chapter 3 of
this document. The Project would require a long-term commitment of natJiral resources,
as discussed below.
The Project would require commitment of nonrenewable resources such as energy
supplies and other construction related resources. These energy resource demands relate
to construction, heating and cooling of buildings, transportation of people and goods to
and from the project site, heating and refrigeration for food preparation and water, as well
as lighting and other associated energy needs.
Nonrenewable resources would include fossil fuels, and would include fuel oil,
natural gas, and gasoline used by vehicles and equipment associated with the construction
of the Project would be required. The consumption of other nonrenewable or slowly
renewable resources would result from the development of the proposed project. These
resources would include, but necessarily be limited to, lumber and other forest products,
sand and gravel, asphalt, photochemical construction materials, steel, copper, lead, and
1 Please see the Initial Study/Notice of Preparation attached as Appendix A to the EIR for additional
explanations as to why the Project would not have a potentially significant impact on each of these
environmental issue areas.
5-1
Other CEQA Considerations
Prospect Village EIR '
water. Because alternative energy sources such as solar or wind energy are not currently
within widespread local use, it is unlikely that a real savings in nonrenewable energy
supplies (i.e., oil and gas) could be realized in the immediate future.
5.4
GROWTH INDUCING IMPACT
Pursuant to Section 15126.2( d) of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must
address whether a project will directly or indirectly foster growth. Section 15126.2(d)
reads as follows:
"[An EIR shall] discuss the ways in which the proposed project could
foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional
housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.
Included in this are projects, which would remove obstacles to population
growth (a major expansion of wastewater treatment plant, might, for
example, allow for more construction in service areas). Increases in the
population may further tax existing community service facilities so
consideration must be given to this impact. Also discuss the characteristic
of some projects, which may encourage and facilitate other activities that
could significantly affect the environment, either individually or
cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is
necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the
environment."
This section evaluates whether the Project will directly or indirectly induce
economic, population, or housing growth in the surrounding environment.
5.4.1
Direct Growth Inducing
A project would directly induce growth if it would remove barriers to population
growth, such changing to a jurisdiction's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, to allow
new residential development to occur. The Project will replace currently vacant
commercial retail uses with other commercial retail uses, general office uses and twelve
residential units that will nominally increase the City's population. To the extent that the
project adds twelve residential units, the project would be growth inducing. However, as
documented in the Initial Study, theses additional residences will have a less than
significant impact on public services and utilities. In addition, the City of Tustin General
Plan expressly contemplates high density residential uses with the Old ToWn Commercial
Area. Thus, the City has already planned for additional residential development and
growth within the Old Town Commercial area of Tustin.
5.4.2
Indirect Growth Inducing
A project would indirectly induce growth if it would increase the capacity of
existing infrastructure in an area in which the public service currently met demand.
Examples would be increasing the capacity of a sewer treatment plant, or a roadway
5-2
Other CEQA Considerations
Prospect Village EIR
beyond that needed to meet existing demand. The Project does not entail increasing the
capacity of any existing inftastructure in the area in a marmer that would growth in
surrounding areas. The Project consists prirnarily of a mixed use development on an
approximately one acre site. While a limited number of off-site improvements are
proposed (e.g.), these improvements do not increase the capacity of any existing utilities
to facilitate future growth.
5.4
SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Some impacts were determined to be significant and carmot be reduced to -a level
of insignificance, even with mitigation. Project impacts on cultural resources and land
use are significant and unavoidable due to the demolition of the historic Uti Juice
buildings.
5-3
Other CEQA Considerations
Prospect Village EIR
6.0
REFERENCES
The following reports and studies were relied upon by the City in preparing this EIR and
are either attached as technical appendices to this EIR or are available for review at the
City of Tustin, Community Development Department, located at 300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780.
2.0
Project Description
. American Institute of Architects, Visions of Old Town, Tustin Old Town
Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team Report, September 27-29, 1991.
("Visions of Old Town Report")
. KCM Group, City of Tustin, Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation Tustin, CA,
Historic Rehabilitation Estimate Report, July 25, 2003 ("KCM Report")
James Rabe and Kevin Engstrom, Keyser Marston Associates Inc., Evaluation of
CEQA Alternatives-Proposed Prospect Village, October 28, 2003. ("KMA
Report")
. Development and Disposition Agreement, Attachment No.7, "Schedule of
Performance. "
. Miller Contracting Company, Prospect Village Construction Equipment and
Personnel Listing, November 20,2003.
3.1
Aesthetics
. City of Tustin, City of Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element, January 16, 2001.
("Land Use Element")
. Tim Gregory, Historic Resources Technical Report: Utt Juice Development
Project 191-195 E. Main Street, Tustin CA, July 14, 2003 ("Historic Report")
.
http://www.tustinca.org/about/oidtown.htrn (City of Tustin)
. City of Tustin, Redevelopment Plan for the Town Center Redevelopment Project,
November 1976, as subsequently amended. ('Town Center Redevelopment Plan")
. Memo from Ross Sutherland of the Planning Center Inc. to Minoo Ashabi,
November 26, 2003
. Curry Price Court, Utt Juice Building Adaptive Reuse Study, Structural
Engineering Report, July 25, 2003 ("Reuse Study")
6-1
References
Prospect Village EIR
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
.
httD://www.dotca.gov/hg/LandArch/scenic/schwvs.html ("Cal Trans")
Air Quality
. AQMD, Air Quality Analysis Handbook (httD://www.aamd.gov/ceaalhdbk.htrnl),
Chapter 3
. httu://www.eua.gov/region09/air/maus/maus toP.htrnl (updated November 6,
2003) ("Environmental Protection Agency")
. httD://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htrn (updated May 29, 2003) ("California
Air Resources Board")
.
httD://www.aamd.gov/aamd/intraamd.htrnl ("California Air Resources Board")
.
Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), South Coast Air Quality Management
District, August 1,2003 (httD://www.aamd.gov/aamp/AOMD03AOMP.htrnl)
.
Sasaki Transportation Services, Prospect Village Traffic Analysis, December 12,
2003. ("Traffic Study")
Cultural Resources
. Historic Report
.
Reuse Study
. National Park Service, Department of the Interior, National Register Bulletin,
How to Complete the National Register Registration Form, 1990, revised 1998
. Weeks and Grimmer, Secretary's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and
Reconstructing Historic Buildings, 1995 ("Secretary's Standards and Guidelines")
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
.
Converse Environmental West, Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report
191. 193 & 195 East Main Street, Tustin, California 92680, June 1, 1998, ("Phase
I Report")
Land Use and Planning
. Town Center Redevelopment Plan
. Visions of Old Town Report
6-2
References
Prospect Village EIR
.
City of Tustin, Town Center Project Area, Second Five Year Implementation Plan
(FY 2000-2001 to 2004-2005), March 2003.
.
Land Use Element
.
Prospect Village Planned Community Regulations, City of Tustin
3.6
Noise
. EP A, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public
Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, March 1974
.
City of Tustin, City of Tustin General Plan, Noise Element, January 16,2001.
. Traffic Study
. Land Use Element
3.7 Traffic
.
Sasaki Transportation Services, Prospect Village Shared Parking Analysis,
October 9, 2003.
.
Traffic Study
4.0
Alternatives
. Historic Report
. KMA Report
. Secretary's Standards and Guidelines
. Traffic Study
. Reuse Study
. KCM Report
6-3
References
Prospect Va/age EIR
7.0
LIST OF EIR PREPARERS
CITY OF TUSTIN
James Draughon, Redevelopment Program Manager
Karen Peterson, Community Development Department
Minoo Ashabi, Community Development Department
Scott Reekstin, Community Development Department
Lois Jeffrey, Esq., City Attorney
Jason Retterer, Esq., City Attorney
CONSULTANTS
Sid Lindmark, AICP
Planning. Environmental. Policy
10 Aspen Creek Lane
Laguna Hills, California 92653
Timothy Gregory, RPH, RCA
Historic Resources Surveys
400 E. California Blvd. Suite #3
Pasadena, CA 91106
James Rabe
Keyser Marston Associates
500 S. Grand Aenue, Suite 1480
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Anthony B. Court, SE
Curry Price Court
444 Camino del Rio South, Suite 20 I
San Diego, CA 92108
Steven S. Sasaki, P.E., PTOE
Sasaki Transportation Services
P.O. Box 5159
Laguna Beach, CA 92652
Joseph Radonich, REA #05058
Henry B. Ames, RG #6304
Converse Environmental West
185 E. Paularino, Suite B
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
7-1
List of ErR Preparers
Prospect Village EIR
Gordon Kovturn
KCM Group
P.O. Box 7309
San Diego, CA 92167
7-2
List ofEIR Preparers
APPENDIX A
Initial Study
.
F Il E COpy
Community Redevelopment Agency
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Admiñistration 714.573.3107
Deveiopment 714.573.3121
Housing 714.573.3128
MCAS- Tustin 714.573.3116
714.573.3124
FAX 714.573.3113
TO:
Responsible and Concerned Agencies
FROM:
James Draughon
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, California 92780
SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report
-"'--'-"'~""""-
TheiCìty o{Tu'~ti~-is the Lead AlliWc~nd will prepare an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR)f0r1fïeproject idëñtifiëd'i)élow. We need to know the views of your agency as to the
scope and content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency's
statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to
use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your input for the project.
The project description, project iocation and the potential environmental effects are
described in the attached materials. A copy of an Initial Study is attached and identifies
Issues in the CEQA Environmental Checklist which will be addressed in the EIR.
Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest
possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice.
Please send your response to James Draughon, Redevelopment Program Manager at the
address above. We will also need the name for a contact person in your agency.
Project Title:
Prospect Village EIR
Project Applicant:
Pelican Center LLC
Huntington Beach, California
Date:
Signature:
Facsimile:
(714) 573-3121
(714) 573-3113
Telephone:
Nòtice of Complet.. n
Mail/o: Sum: Clearinghouse, 1400 Tenth Slrcel, Sacmmento, CA 95814 916/445.0613
Project Title: Prospect Vi 11 age
U"d,\c<n,'v: crr.y OF TUSTIN ConlaelPorson: Jim Drauqhon
. , êOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Phone; 714 573-3121
300 CENTENNIAL WAY Cuumy: Oranqe
----~~~~~~~~-----------------------------
Project location
County: Orange City{Nearest CommUlÙ'!y: Tùstin
CrossStreets:Main Street/Prospect Avenue; 191,193,& 19b E. Main St.
Assessor's Parcel No.
Scclion: '
Walerways:
Railways:
Wiiliin 2 Miles:
Slale Hwy #:
Airports:
Appenc.
F
I~"""
s.. NOTE b./uw
SCH'#
TolalAcres: 0.98
Twp. - Range: - Base:
NEPA:
DNa!
OEA
0 Draft EIS
0 FONS!
Schools:
Document Type
-----------------------------------------
CECA:
IXJNOP
0 Early Cons
ONegDee
0 Draft EIR
0 Supp¡ement/Subsequent
0 ElR (Prior SCH No.)
0 Oilier
Other:
0 loint Document
0 Final Document
0 Oilier
-----------------------------------------
Local Action Type
0 General Pion Upd",e
0 General Pion Amendment
0 General Plan Element
0 Community Plan
0 Specific Plan
0 Masler Plan
0 Planned Unit Development
/XJ Site Plan
119 Rezone
0 Prezone
~ Use Permi,
IX] Land Divi,ion (Subdivision.
Parcel Map, Trw:t Map. etc.)
0 AMoxaûon
~ Redevelopment
0 Coastal Permit
[X) Other Desiqn Review
-----------------------------------------
Development Type
r!!J Residemial: Unia 12 Acres
0 Office: SqjI.-==. Acres - Employas-
[X) Commereial:SqjI.9.320 Acres_Employees-
0 ¡ndustrial: SqjI.- Acres_Employees-
0 Educational
0 ReCTe,lional
0 W'ler FaciÍilies: Type
0 Transportation: Type
0 Mining: Mi"uol
. 0 Power. Type
0 Wasle Treaunenc Type
0 Hazardous WU5le:Type
0 Other.
MGD-
WOI"-
-----------------------------------------
Project Issues Discussed In Document
0 Aesthelic{Visuai
0 Agricultural Land
0 Air Quality
ŒJ Archeo!ogical/HislOrical
0 Coaslal Zone
0 Drainage/Absorption
0 Economic/Jobs
0 Fiscal
0 Flood Plain/Flooding
0 ForeSt Land/Fire Hazard
0 aeologic/SeisInic
0 Minerals
0 Noise
0 Popu!alion/Hoosing Balance
0 Public Services/Fw:ilities
0 ReCTeation/Perks
0 SchoolslUniversiLies
0 Septic SYSlems
0 Sewer Capacity
0 Soil Ero,ion/Campw:tion/Goading
0 Solid Waste
0 ToxiclHazerdous
0 Traffic/Cireulalion
0 Vegetalion
0 Waler Quality
0 Waler Supply/GroundwCler
0 WetlandIRiparian
0 Wildlife
0 Grawili Inducing
0 Landose
0 Cumulalive Effects
~ Other land Use
-----------------------------------------
Present land Use/Zoning/General Plan Use
Old Town Commercial/Central Commercial
Project Description
-----------------------------------------
See Attached NOP
NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign idenlifica1Ïon numbers for all new pTojects.lf a SCH nwnber already exi", for a project (c.g. from aNolice ofPreperotion
or pTevious draft document) please fill it in. Revi.<ed Dc/ab" /989
Re~i~wing Agencies CHecklist
_Resources Agency
~Boating & Waterways
_Coastal Commission
_Coastal Conservancy
_Colorado River Board
_Conservation
_Fish & Game
_Forestry
_Office of Historic Preservation
_Parks & Recreation
_Reclamation
'_S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission
_Water Resources (DWR)
Business, Transportation & Housing
_Aeronautics
_California Highway Patrol
.---:.CALTRANS District#~
_Depnnment of Transportation Planning (headquarters)
_Housing & Community Development
_Food & Agriculture
Health & Welfare
_Healili Services
State & Consumer Services'
_General Services
_OLA (Schools)
lOFL
KEY
S = Doc~ment seal by lead agency
X = Document sent by SCH
.,I = Suggested distribution
Environmental Affairs
-Air Resources Boord
_APCD/AQMD
_California Waslè Management Board
_SWRCB: Clean Water GrantS
_SWRCB: Delta UOIt
_SWRCB: Water Quality
_SWRCB: Water RightS
_Regional WQCB #~ (
Youth & Adult Corrections
_COITections
Independent Commissions & Offices
_Energy Commission
_Native American Herit:1ge Commission
_Public Utilities Commission
_Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy
_State Lands Commission
_Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
_Oilier
-----------------------------------------
Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency)
SLnrtingDate 4-17-03 EndingDme 5-18-03
~=~~~---~--~~~----------
Lead Agency..._-..--""
,-,."
CITY OF TUSTIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPM§N1
300 CENTENNIAL--W';Y
TUSTIN :"'c;'" 92680
Comact: Jim Draughon
Phone: ~ 573-3121
}
DEPARTMENT
Applicant: Pel i can Center
Address: 15272 Balsa Chica Road
\ Cily/St:1letZip: Hungti ngton Beach, CA
Phone: ~
92647
For SCH Use Onlv:
Date Received at SCH
Date Review S=
Date 10 Agencies
Date to SCH
Clearance Date
Noles:
I
Revi.red October 1989
Gray Davis
Governor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA fiLE coPy<§,
Governor's Office of Planning and Research \.~ .1
~...~
State Clearinghouse R E ..
CEIVED TalFinney
, Interim Director
Notice of Preparation
APR 28 2003
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
April 21, 2003
To:
Reviewing Agencies
Re:
Prospect Village
SCH# 2003041144
Attached for your review and comment is the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Prospect Village draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Responsible agencies must transmit their comments on the scope and content of the NOP. focusing on specific
information relaœd to their own statutory responsibility, within 30 davs of receiut of the NOP from the Lead A!!encv.
This is a courtesy notice provided by the State Clearinghouse with a reminder for you to comment in a timely
manner. We encourage other agencies to also respond to this notice and express their concerns early in the
environmental review process.
Please direct your comments to:
Jim Draughon
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
with a copy to the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Planning and Research. Please refer to the SCH number
noted above in all correspondence concerning this project.
If you have any questions about the environmental document review process. please call the State Clearinghouse at
(916) 445-0613. -
Attachments
cc: Lead Agency
]400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95812.3044
(916)445.0613 FAX(916)323.3018 www,opr.c'.gov
..,.,.
Document Details Report
State Clearinghouse Data Ba_.J
SCH# 2003041144
Project Title Prospect Village
Lead Agency Tustin. City of
Type
Description
NOP Notice of Preparation
The applicant, Pelican Center L.L.C. of Huntington Beach, California is requesting approval to
redevelop the site, demolish the existing bundlngs, enter a Deveiopment Disposition Agreement with
the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency and subdivide the parcel Into fourteen new parcels. The
proposed development includes construction of approxlmetely 9,320 square feet retail and office
bunding and twelve detached residential-retail 1 commercial mixed use units. (The mixed use units are
commonly known as live-work units, with retail 1 commercial use on the ground floor and a living unit
on the upper two levels).
Lead Agency Contact
Name Jim Dr!'.y.gtlOfl
Agency -ç1!yc)fTustin
Phone 714.573.3121
emall
Address 300 Centennial Way
City Tustin
Fax
State CA
Zip 92680
Project Location
County Orange
City Tustin
Region
Cross Streets
Parcel No.
Township
Main Street 1 Prospect Avenue; 191,193, & 195 E. Main St.
Range
Section
Base
Proximity to:
Highways
Airports
Railways
Waterways
Schools
Land Use
Old Town Commercial 1 Central Commercial
Project Issues
Archaeologic-Historlc; Landuse
Reviewing Resources Agency; Office of Historic Preservation; Department of Parks and Recreation; Department
Agencies of. Fish and Game, Region 5; Native American Heritage Commission; State Lands Commission;
Caltrans, District 12; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8
Date Received 04/21/2003
Start' of Review 04/21/2003
End of Review 05/20/2003
Note: Blanks in data fields result from.insufficient information provided by iead agency.
lOP Distribution List
Fish and Game
esources AQengy
I Resources Agency
Nadell Gayou
] DepL of Boeling & WaterWays
Suzi Betzler
] California Coastal
Commission
Elizabeth A. Fuchs
] DepL nf Conservatinn
Roseanne Taylor
] Depl of Forestry & Are
Protection
Allen Robertson
~/-
, ce of Historic
..eservatlon
Hans Kreutzberg
. Dept of Parks & Recreation
B- Noah Tilghman
Environmental Siewanlship
Sadlon
J Reclamation Bnard
Lon Bufnrd
J S.F. Bay Conservation &
Devl. Comm.
Sieve McAdam
] Dap!. of Water Resources
ResourcBs Agency
Nadell Gayeu
m.
& Welfare
J Heallh & Welfare
Wa""" Hubbard
Depl. of HeallhlDrlnklng Water
:000 & A.,griGulture
:J Food & Agriculture
Steve Shaffer
Dept. of Food and Agriculture
0 Dapt. of Fish & Game
Scalt Alnt
Environmental Services Division
0 Dapl of Ash & Game 1
Dooald Koch
Regloo 1
0 DepL ofFish & Game 2
Banky Curtis
RegIon 2
0 Dept. of Ash & Game 3
Robert Floerke
Region 3
0 Dept. of Fish & Game 4
William Laudennllk
Region 4
" Dept. of Ash & Gama 5
Don Chadwick
Raglon 5, Hebltat Conservaltoo
Program
0 Dap!. of-FISh & Gama 6
GebOna Gatchel
Region 6, Habital COnservation
Program
0 Dapt. 01 Fish & Game 6 11M
Tammy Allan
Region 6. InyolMooo, Habitat
Conservalion Program
0 Dept. of Ash & Game M
Tom Napoli
Marine Regioo
Indel!""d!1nt Commissions
0 California Energy Commission
Environmental Dflica
. Native Amerlcen Herllage
Comm.
Debbie Treadway
0 Public Utilities Commission
Ken Lewis
. State !.ands Commission
Jean Serino
0 Govemofs Office 01 Planning
& Rasearch
Slata Claennghouse Planner
County: U>ti- /\ tz-'
0 Golorado River Board 0 Dep!. ofTransporiation 10
Gerald R. Zlmmennan Tom Dumas
Distncl10
0 Dept. ofTransportation 11
Bnl Figge
Dlsbict 11
II Dept. ofTransportelion 12
Bob Joseph
Dlslrlct 12
0 Tahoe Regional Planning
Agency (TRP AI
I.yn Barnatt
0 OffIce of Emergency Services
John Rowden. Manager
. 0 Delte Protection Commission
Debby Eddy
0 Santa Monica Mountains
Conservancy
Paul Edelman
Del!t. Qf If!!I1J1l!.oriatiOì1
0 Dept. of Transportation 1
MIke Eegan
Dlslrlct 1
0 Dept. ofTransportalion 2
Don Anderson
District 2
0 Dept. ofTransportation 3
Jell Pulvennan
Disbict 3
0 Dept. of Transportation 4
TIm Sable
OIshict4
0 Dept. ofTransportatlon 5
David Murray
Dlslrict 5
0 Dept. ofTransportation 6
Marc Blmbaum
Dlshicl 6
0 Dept. ofTransportation 7
Slephen J. Buswell
Dishicl7
0 Dep!. ofTransportatlon 8
Unda Grimes.
District 0
0 Dept. of TransporteDon 9
Geyle Rosander
DIslf1ct9
SCH#
BU§in!1§§, If!LI]§I!d:!ousillit
0 Housing & Communlly Development
Cathy Creswell
Housing Polley ~ivision
0 Callfans. DMslon of Aeronaullcs
Sandy Hesnard
0 CalIfornia Highway Patrol
1.1. Julie Page
Office of Speciat Projects
0 Dapl ofTransportalion
Ron Helgeson
Caltrans . Planning
0 nep!. of General Services
Robert Sleppy
Envlronmentat Services Section
Air Resources Board
0 Airport Projacts
Jim I.erner
0 TransporteDoo Projects
Kurt Karperos
0 Indusbial Projscts
Mike T ollstrup
0 Callfornlalntagrated Wasta
Managament Board
Sue O'l.eary
0 Stale Water Resources Control
Board
Jim Hockenbeny
Division 01 Rnanda! Assistance
~UU8U4;lJi¡I¡'j;;
0
Siale Water ResOllrces Control
Board
Sludent Inlem. 401 Water Quality
Certification Unit
Division of Water Quality
0 Stata Watar Resouces Control
Board
Mike Falkenstein
OMoion of Water Rights
0 Dep!. o!Toxlc Subslanees Control
CEOA Tracking Center
Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB)
0 RWQGB 1
Cathleen Hudson
North Coast Region (1)
0 RWQCB 2
Environmenlal Documenl
Coordinator
San Francisco Bay Region (2)
0 RWQCB 3
Centrat Coasl Region (3)
0 RWQCB 4
Jonathan Bishop
Los Angeles Region (4)
0 "RWQCB 55
Cenlral Valley Region (5)
0 RWQCB 5F
Centrat Valley Region (5)
Fresno Branch Office
0 RWQCB SR
Central Vallay Region (5)
Redding Branch Office
0 RWQCB 6
Lahontan Region (6)
0 RWQCB 6V
Lahontan Region (6)
Vlctorville Branch Office
0 RWQCB 7
Colorado Rlvar Basin Region (7)
rn RWQCB 8
ì Santa Ana Region (8)
0 RwQCB 9
San Diego Region (g)
CO~TYDEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780
(714) 573-3100
I NITIAL STUDY
Á.
BACKGROUND
Project Title:
Prospect Village Project
Lead Agency:
City ofTusoo'
:mo-eentennial Way
Tustin, California 92780
Lead Agency Contact Person:
Jim Draughon
Phone: (714) 573-3121
Project Location:
191, 193, and 195 E. Main Street
Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Pelican Center L.L.C.
15272 Bolsa Chica Road
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
General Plan Designation:
Old Town Commercial
Zoning Designation: Central Commercial (C-2)/Parking Overlay/Cultural Resource Overlay
Project Description: Demolition of existing buildings and construction of a 9,320 square foot retail,
restaurant, and office building and twelve (12) detached live-work units with commercial/retail uses on
the ground floor and residential uses on the upper floors.
Surrounding Uses:
North: Vacant site used for a weekly Farmers Market
East: Main Street Water Facility/Public Parking Lot
South: Commercial
West: Commercial
Other public agencies whose approval is required:
D
D
D
D
Orange County Fire Authority
Orange County Health Care Agency
South Coast Air Quality Management
District
Other
D
D
0
City of Irvine
City of Santa Ana
Orange County
EMA
EV ALUA TION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Less Than
~.e explaDations for each response in Attachment A. Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 l8! 0
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway? 0 0 0 l8!
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its sunoundings? 0 0 l8! 0
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 0 0 l8! 0
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
-~ Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
1ared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Jgram of the California Resources Agency. to non-
agricultural use? 0 0 0 r8J
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? 0 0 0 r8J
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? 0 0 0 r8J
ID. AIR OUALITY: 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? 0 0 I8J 0
b) Violate any air qnality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation? 0 0 0 r8J
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
nuantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 0 0 0 r8J
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? 0 0 0 r8J
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people? 0 0 0 r8J
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fanlt, 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. 0 0 0 [2J
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 ßJ 0
iii) Seismic.related ground failure, including liquefaction? 0 0 ßJ 0
iv) Landslides? 0 0 0 [2J
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 0 0 ßJ 0
c) Be located on a geologic ImÎt 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? 0 0 ßJ 0
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18.I-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994). creating substantial
risks to life or property? 0 0 [2J 0
e\ Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
:Ie tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where [2J
,ers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 0 0 0
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 0
hazardous materials? 0 ßJ 0
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? 0 0 0 ßJ
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, snbstances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school? 0 0 0 [2J
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? 0 0 0 [2J
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
,re such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
,lic airport or public use airport, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project [2J
area? 0 0 0
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing 0 '~
or working in the project area? 0 0
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zomng orWnance) adopted for the
ourpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? ~ 0 0 0
0) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
latura1 connnunity conservation plan? 0 0 0 lZJ
X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Wonld the project:
1) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the residents
')fthe state? 0 0 0 lZJ
0) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general
,Ian, specific plan or other land use plan? 0 0 0 lZJ
XI. NOISE -
.¡.¡ ould the project result in:
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
,ess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordirumce, or applicable standards of other agencies? 0 0 0 lZJ
» Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 0 0 0 lZJ
:) A snbstantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
n the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project? 0 0 0 lZJ
i) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
Jloise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? 0 0 ¡g¡ 0
,) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within tWo miles of a
,?ublic airport or public nse airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project axea to excessive
noise levels? 0 0 0 lZJ
f) For a project within the vicinity ofa private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in the
project axea to excess noise levels? 0 0 0 lZJ
Xli.POPULATION AND HOUSING- Would the project:
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
,ctly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)? 0 0 ¡g¡ 0
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? n n n I>J
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation. Significant
Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact
g) Conflict with adopted policies, p1Bns, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? 0 0 0 ~
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 0 0 ~ 0
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? 0 0 ~ 0
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 eovironmental
effects? 0 0 ~ 0
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
nroject from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
anded entitlements needed? 0 0 ~ 0
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? 0 0 ~ 0
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient pennitted capacity
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 0 0 ~ 0
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? 0 0 ~ 0
Xvll. 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 eliITÙnate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory? ~ 0 0 0
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project
considerable when viewed in connection witb the effects
.Jast projects, the effects of other current projects, and the ~
erfects of probable future projects)? 0 0 0
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either ~
directly or indirectly? 0 0 0
Attachment A
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Prospect Village at 191, 193, & 195 E. MaID Street
Page 2
This Initial Study is prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed project with respect to
the following categories:
I.
AESTHETICS
Items a. c. and d "Less than Sil!1lificant Impact": The project consists of the demolition of existing
buildings noted in the City's Historical Resources for the purpose of developing a commercial
building with retail, restaurant, and office uses and twelve (12) residential units with
conunerciaVretail uses on the ground level and residential uses on the upper levels. Although new
cons1ruction will change the aesthetic quality of the site, the new conunercial building and residential
units are designed to complement the massing and architecture in Old Town Tustin. Compliance
with the City's design review criteria will ensure that the project will enhance the existing visual
character of the site and surroundings. In addition, the project site will create a new source of light
during the nighttime; however, compliance with City requirements and design review criteria will
require all lighting to be focused within the project site.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Plans
Tustin City Code
Items b - "No Iml1act": The proposed project will include a conunercial building and a residential
live-work condominium development designed to complement the architectural character of Tustin
Old Town. The project is not located on a State scenic highway.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Plans
II.
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
Items a - c - "No Impact": The project site is currently developed with commercial buildings;
development will not convert fann1and, conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or cause
changes to the environment resulting in conversion offann1and to non-agricultural use.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Plans
ID.
AIR QUAUTY
Item a -Less Than SÌ1tnificant Iml1act": The proposed demolition and redevelopment project for
construction of a 9,320 square foot conunercial building and twelve (12) units of live-work
residentiaVretaii is below the threshold criteria for construction and operation impacts as defined in
Tables 6-2 and 6-3 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) All- Quality Handbook
published in 1993 by the South Coast All- Quality Management District.
Items b. Co d. and e - "No Impact": The proposed project will not violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, and it will not result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant or expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concen1rations or create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people.
Sources:
Field Verification
"
Attachment A
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Prospect Village at 191, 193, & 195 E. Maffi Street
Page 4
the project will provide twelve (12) housing units to accommodate the growing housing needs of the
community. The project can be supported by the following General Plan Land Use Policies and
Town Center Redevelopment Plan objectives:
General Plan Policy 1.8: Provide incentives to encourage Jot consolidation and parcel
assemblage to provide expanded opportunities for coordinated development and
redevelopment.
General Plan Policy 10.2: Review and consider the possible development of residential uses
in the Old Town area both as individual residential projects and integrated above ground
floor retail and office uses.
General Plan Policy 10.3 Encourage outdoor pedestrian spaces, such as courtyards, arcades,
and open landscape passages to be integrated into new development.
Section 301 of Town Center Redevelopment Plan: The Agency is authorized to eliminate
and prevent the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area by the acquisition of
certain real property to help expedite private development and the disposition of any
acquired property for uses in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan.
Section 314 of Town Center Redevelopment Plan: The Agency is authorized to demolish
and clear buildings, structures, and other improvements from any real property in the Project
Area as necessary to carry out the purpose of the Redevelopment Plan.
Section 410 of Town Center Redevelopment PJan: No new improvement shall be
constructed and no existing improvement shall be substantially modified, altered, repaired,
or rehabilitated except in accordance with architectural, landscape, and site plans submitted
to and approved by the Agency. One of the objectives of the plan is to create an attractive
and pleasant environment in the project area with consideration to good design, open space,
and other amenities to enhance the aesthetic quality of the project area.
Section 413 of Town Center Redevelopment Plan: Encourage a mixed-use design concept
in new cons1ruction which will strengthen the inteIrelationship of different land uses to the
benefit of all.
Section 424 of Town Center, Redevelopment Plan: Within the requirements, limits,
restrictions, and controls established in the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency is authorized to
establish building height and land coverage limitations and requirements such as setback,
design criteria, traffic circulations, access, and other development and design standards
necessary for proper development of specific areas within the proj ect.
Since the project may have significant adverse impacts on the existing buildings, an Environmental
Impact Report will be prepared that focuses on the potential cultural resources impacts discussed in
this section.
Sources:
FieJd Verification
Submitted Plans
Tustin City Code and General Plan
Attachment A
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Prospect Village at 191, 193, & 195 E. Main Street
Page 6
R8.2002-00 1 0), and Best Management Practices will ensure potential impacts are reduced to a level
of insignificance.
The site is located in an area designated as Zone X on the most current Flood Insurance Rate Map
prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. This zone is defined as "areas of a 2
percent flood chance, areas of one percent annual chance of flood with average depths of less than
one foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile, and areas protected by levees fÌ'om a one
percent annual change of flood." Compliance with current builcling codes will require the civil
engineer to design the building pads above potmtial flood levels.
Items b. h. and ¡-"No Impact": The project is located on an existing commercial site serviced by
Tustin Water Operations. The scale of the project does not have the potential to impact water
supplies, nor deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge or lower the local
ground water table level. The project would not redirect flood waters and the site is not within an
area that wolÙd expose people to seiche, tsunami, mud flow.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Plans
Tustin City Code
IX.
LAND USE & PLANNING
Items a. and c - "No Impact": The subject property is within the Old Town Commercial General
Plan Land Use designation and the Cen1ra1 Commercial (C-2) zoning district, Parking Overlay
Disttict, and Cultural Resources Overlay District. The proposed project will require approval of a
zone change to establish a planned cOImmmity for development of the commercial and residential
live.work project. The proposed zoning wolÙd be in compliance with the General Plan in that the
Old Town Commercial provides for commercial and residential development, and the proposed uses
are compatible with the adjacent commercial uses.
Items b - "Potentially Sirrnificant Impact": The project includes demolition of three adjoining
existing structures noted in the City's Historical Resources Survey (Exhibit A).
The City's ClÙtural Resources Overlay Disttict set forth the procedure for demolition of cultural
resources. A Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition for a resource may be approved if one or
more of the following conditions exist:
The structure/site is a hazard to public health or safety and repairs or stabilization are not
physically possible.
The site is required for a public use, which will be more beneficial to the public than the
Cultural Resource, and there is no feasible alternative location for the public use.
Reconstruction or restoration is not economically feasible or practical.
The proposed project will replace vacant historical structures with a new live-work project that will
enhance the economic base and vitality of Old Town Tustin. The project is designed to complement
the Cultural Resources Overlay District in mass, color, and design. In addition, the project will
provide twelve (12) housing units to accommodate the growing housing needs of the community.
The project can be supported by the following General Plan Land Use Policies and Town Center
Redevelopment Plan objectives:
Attachment A
Evaluation of EnvÎro=entaJ Impacts
Prospect Village at 191, 193, & 195 E. Main Street
Page 8
XII.
XIll.
XIV.
Items a, b. c. e. and f - " No Iml1act": The proposed project is not anticipated to expose persons to
or generate noise levels in excess of local standards of the General Plan or noise ordinance or expose
persons to excessive groundborne vibration. The project is not located within an airport land use plan
or a private airs1rip.
POPULATION & HOUSING
Item a-" Less than Sitrnificant Iml1act": The project will provide twelve (12) residential units that
will not substantially increase the population in the area.
Items band c - "No Iml1act": The proposed project wo1.Ùd provide twelve (12) detached residential
units designed as live-work with retail use and garages at the ground level. The project site is an
existing commercial site that will not displace any existing housing units.
Sources:
Submitted Plans
PUBliC SERVICES
Item a - "Less Than Sienificant Iml1act": Implementation of this project will result in a minor
increase in the demand for and utilization of public services, such as fire protection, police
protection, iIÚÌ1lStructure maintenance, and other governmental services, schools, parks, and
recreational facilities. However, the addition of a 9,320 square foot commercial development and
twelve (12) units to the neighborhood is not anticipated to create additional public services that
would result in substantial deterioration. As part of the subdivision process, the developer will be
required to satisfy parkland dedication required by the City's Subdivision Ordinance and Developer
School Impact fees adopted by the Tustin Unified School District, and the project will be routed to
all affected agencies for review and comment. With compliance with all agency requirements, any
potential impacts can be reduced to a level of insignificance.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Plans
Tustin City Code
RECREATION
Item a - "No Iml1act": The subject site is within Old Town Tustin. There are twelve (12)
residential units proposed with this project that will not significantly increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The project will require compliance
with the parkland dedication requirements in Tustin City Code Section 9331(d).
Sources:
Submitted Plans
Item b - "Less Than Sienificant Iml1act":
The project does not include open space other than en1ry courtyards. Subdivision of the site for
development of twelve (12) residential units would require compliance with the parkland dedication
requirements required in Tustin City Code Section 9331(d).
Attachment A
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Prospect Village at 191, 193, & 195 E. Main Street
Page 10
XVI.
parking lot. The planned community zoning will specifY the exact parking requirements for this
project and any potential impacts would be reduced to a level of insignificance through the
estabJishment of an off-site parking agreement with the Tustin Community R.éœvelopment Agency.
Sources:
Submitted P1ans
Tustin City Code
UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS
Items a-I? - "Less Than Sil?nificant Imuact": The project will result in a minor increase in the
demand for utilities. Water and sewer services and other utilities are available to the site since the
project is within an urbanized area and has been previously developed. Compliance with utility or
service provider and City requirements identified during project review will ensure any potential
impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance.
Sources:
Field Verification
Submitted Plans
xvn. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Items a-c - "Potentiallv Síl?níficant Imuact": The project, which includes the demolition of three
adjoining and potentially historic bui1dings, will have potentially significant impacts on cultural
resources and land use. An Environmental Impact Report will be prepared that focuses on evaluating
these impacts. No cumulatively considerable impacts or direct or indirect adverse environmental
effects on human beings are anticipated.
Sources:
Submitted Plans
Tustin City Code
S:\Cdd\MINOOllnÌtial StudyIProspectVillage-analysis.doc
¡!
~
~i
ìlll
A ".SS:
1. N ST(E.)
DATE:
1912
5TYLE:
VIcf. - rrALlANATE
>oURCE:
s
RATING:
A
II.LTERATIONS:
M
HISTORICAL DISTRICT:
YES
COMMENT:
UTI' JUICE CO.
DESCRIPTION:
1
Crowned with an ornate metal cornice featuring large omate brackets at each end and in the cenlCT. the singie-storied stcrefrnnt
shown ahnve ¡, sn unuaual example of Victorian Italisnate snd retains most of its original integrity. Rows of closely-spaced
brackets. a row of largo dentil work. a band of vertical psnels. a row of molding. a row of smaller dentil work, and several roWS of
molding above the trarisoms create the horizontal lines of the cornice. Tbe transoms consist of large luxor glass panels. The
" storefront design features centered recessed enlrances with diagonal sections leading to the double doors. The storefront on
i. It has plate glass panels facing front with a glass diagonal on west side while the east side has been altered with wood,
þ-.-", The original bulkhead, of both stores have been coveTCd with plam wood paneis. The western-most storefront has plate
glass store window, with matching diagonal window,. The east side is constructed of poured-in-place concrete while the we,t side
has a common wall with another commercial ,tore. A poured-in.place addition at the back ha, several blocked-up door' and
window space,. There IIIC several large corrugated metal sheds that were used to process fruit for the UtI Juice Company. A row of
three sheds faces ProspeeL Two of these buildings run from the alley on the west to Prospect Street on the easL Similar in size
and design. the buildings are topped with front-facing gabled roofs whicb are clad in screening at the gables. The roofs and sides
an: all clad in corrugated metal sheets. The storefront building, with its elaborate metal cornice and luxor glas, transoms. is
significsnt for its rare and pleasing design, while the juice processing sheds IIIC significant as the location of an induatry and
family that wss important to Tustin history.
SIGNIFICANCE:
This huilding, owned by E.E. UtI from 1908 to 1932. originally housed a dry good, store operated by Charles Sauers and Phillip
H. BergquisL Sauers ,erved on the elementary school board, was elected to the first Tuatin Union High Scbool Board of Trustees in
192.1. and served as the flISt clerk of the board. C.E. UtI moved his juice. making operation from his back porch at home into the
huilding about 1920. Utt was one of Tustin', major developers. buying land and preparing it for use. then selling iL Besides
founding the UII juice Company. UI! was a director in both the Bank of Tustin and the First national Bank of Tuatin. owner of the
Tustin Ws1er Works (1897), instrumental in forming the Tustin Union High School District (1920), developer of Lemon Heights.
rancher. and was a partner with Sherman Stevens and James Irvine in developing agriculture on the Irvine Ranch and establishing
the San Joaquin Fruit Company. His son. ¡ames "Jimmy" UI! served as Tustin's representative in congress during the 1930's and
40's. hey Schellhous. who helped establish the UtI Juice Compsny bought Utt out around 1932 and was the sole owner until his
death in 1970. The company closed its doors in 1973.
~
~
1iI"""""""_NIL.A""""""~~
"'f"ð""""""""""'"
_av""""'-
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIO..
DlSIIfcit 12
3337 MlclloIOOh DrMa, St.In. 380
vine, CA 92512-88$4
8"
J1Iøyøor_!
&"""11J'tifk:iI1M!
May 20, 2003
Mr. Jim Draughon
City of TU$tin
Community Radevelopment
300 Centennial Way
Tustin. CA 92680
FUe: IGRlCëQA
SCH#: 2003041144
Leg fl.: 1251
SR: 1-5, SR-55
Subject: NOP for PI'O8p8Gt Village (comment ...vislon)
Dear Mr. Draughon.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the NOP received May 13. 2003, for
Prospect VIllage. The project site is 19ç¡ßød MtMain end Pro-.pectStreets at 191, 19G & 195
East Main Str8et. The project consists of demolition of existing buildings and l1Id8vøloping
the land Into 9,320 !'õC It, cf retail and office buildings, and 12 d«sChed resiCIential
retail/commercial mixed-use units (retail on ground floor, residential on the upper floor). The
nearest state routes are Interstate 5 and SR-55.
Caltrans District 12 is a reviewing agency on this project and has the following comments:
1. Plea&8 provide assessment Of tie trafllc Impact on SR-551lrv1ne Boulevard Intersection
and the loS/Newport Avenue Intersection in the Draft EIR.
Please continue to keep us Informed of this project and other future developments, which
could potentially impact our IrIInsporiation facilitie&. If you have any quest¡Qns or need to
contact us, please do not hesitate to call Maureen EI Harake at (949) 724-208e.
Sincerely, '
'p-~Ee~~.~~
Robert JQseph, Chief í - - ¿;;::r . r -
IGRlCcm1munlty Planning Unit
c: Ron Helgeson, HQ IGRICEOA
Tllrry RQberts, CPR
Raouf Mauna, Traffic Operations South
"CoItrœø imJ"'G"'<> mabili¡y ."".... c,llfo",u,"
NOTICE OF COMMUNITY INFORMATION
AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SCOPING MEETING
SUBJECT: Prospect Village Project
LOCATION: 191,193 and 195 East Main Street, Tustin, California
PROJECT: The proposed mixed-use project includes demolition of two buildings onsite
included in the City's Historical Survey (e.g. Utt Juice Company), new construction of twelve
live-work detached units, and new construction of an approximately 9,320 square feet two-story
office/retail building on the approximately 0.98-acre site.
The iive work units include retaii and commercial use on the first floor and residential use on the
upper two floors. All live-work units have a two-vehicle garage. The project proposes a zone
change from the Central Commercial District (C-2 P) to Planned Community District (P-C) and
subdivision of the property into fourteen parcels. Parking is proposed to be provided onsite and
offsite at the City's Main Street Water Facility at 335 Prospect Avenue.
The existing buildings, totaling approximately 6,245 square feet, have been largely vacant since
1973, and are subject to a notice of non-occupancy because of inadequate seismic, electrical,
plumbing, heating and ventilation systems. The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
received possession of the properties in 1998, with a final court judgment in condemnation
taken on April 27, 1999.
PROJECT APPLICANT: PROSPECT CENTER L.L.C.
COMMUNITY INFORMATION.ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT SCOPING MEETING: A
community information-scoping meeting to present information on the project application and to
identify public concerns regarding the potential environmental impacts of the project will be held
at the following time and location:
Date:
Time:
Place:
Location:
Tuesday, April 22, 2003
6:00 pm
City Council Chambers, City Hall
300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California
CONTACT: For additional information concerning the project. please contact James Draughon,
Redevelopment Program Manager, City of Tustin, (714) 573-3121 during office hours. Written
comments concerning the project may also be sent to James Draughon, Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agency, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780. A Draft Environmental
Impact Report is anticipated to be available for public review in late June 2003.
Prospect Village CEQA Public Information - Scoping Meeting
April 22, 2003
Summary Oral Comments
I. Brent Ferdig - Stated his opposition to any demolition of the buildings due to the
historical significance of the Utt Juice family and the unique design of the Utt
Juice buildings; the buildings must be preserved in their original condition as
required by the City's Historical Survey Report. Stated that the City has required
all other properties in the Old Town area to be held to a higher level of
preservation and that the City is now choosing to ignore its own historic
preservation requirements.
2. Phil Cox - Stated his support of the proposed project including the demolition of
the existing building if needed to implement the project. Stated that it is the
Shellhouse family that has the rnost significant association with the Utt Juice
business and buildings, as they contributed more to the Utt Juice business'
success and owned the property for the longest period of time up to its closure.
Stateq his belief that the 919 Main Street building foundation and front elevation
was damaged beyond repair during the seismic retrofit. Stated that while it would
be desirable to be able to save certain elements of the building's façade (luxor
glass blocks, bricks) and incorporate them within the development or at another
location in Old Town, it is more important to the Old Town area to have new
development and businesses in the area.
3. Curt Lilly - Stated his opposition to any demolition of the existing building due to
their historical significance. Stated that the City owns the buildings and should
fund preservation of the buildings.
4. Carol Fox - Stated her opposition to any demolition of the existing building and
that as an architect she knows the buildings can be historically rehabilitated and
would be desirable for reuse by professional offices such as hers.
5. Leason Pomeroy - Stated that the proposed project was very attractive but
identified his concern that the off-site parking accommodation might not be
available to other Old Town property developments on an equal basis and should
be reviewed accordingly.
6. Jeff Thompson - Stated his opposition to any demolition of the existing buildings
due to their historical significance. Expressed his opinion that the City has a
douhle standard in that the City "put him through the ringer" when he was
improving his property at EI Camino & Main Street and now the City wants to
ignore its own requirements for preservation of historic buildings.
Tustin Redevelopment Agency Page I
7. Sharon Jones - Stated her opposition to any demolition of the existing buildings.
Stated that while she feels the proposed project is ve:ry nice and will provide much
needed additional re:tail shops in the: area, preserving the existing buildings is
more important to the area. She stated that the: buildings should not be rezoned but
should be developed to maintain their integrity.
8. Rick Fox -- Stated his opposition to any demolition of the existing buildings and
that there are a lot of developers who would be willing to preserve the buildings,
and that there are many, many ways to ensure financial success for the developer,
achieve economic prosperity for the area and create a viable downtown without
tearing down the existing buildings. He stated to the when the City purchased the
properties it vowed to preserve the buildings, and that the City had already
invested considerable moneys for the seismic retrofit. He stated that CEQA
requires the City to review the preservation of the buildings before considering
any other developments proposals for the site. (additional written comments
attached)
Note: Tape recorder failed to pickup audio.
Tustin Redevelopment Agency Page 2
COMMUNITY INFORMA TlON & SCOPING MEETING
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
April 22, 2003
PROSPECT VILLAGE PROJECT
Location: 191, 193, 195 E. Main Street
Applicant: Pelican Center LLC
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Thank you for attending the Community Information & Scoping Meeting for the proposed
Prospect Village. The purpose of the meeting is to describe the proposed project and identify
the environmental review process pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
You are encouraged to provide any written comments you have concerning the potential
adverse environmental impacts of the project. You may also provide oral comments, which are
being tape recorded, following the presentation of the project, by filling out a Speaker Card
(Each speaker will be limited to 3 minutes). Please include your written comments below and
provide your name, address and phone number.
comn;yn~s (use additional sheets if necessary):
. ~~(Q1d'E~~
~~-Pk~,~
--d.ir1(v~ ,JJ ,', ,J: . .
~Yk'~~J~~
~ ~ ~r ~d,~~.
;' d , t ~K- .:ttc
~t; c¡¿ ~ ~~).
Address
~~
rh.- .9 1-9 (. .~
Name
Day Phone
J!iJ 7~/ - Lf663
COMMUNITY INFORM A nON & SCOPING MEETING
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
April 22, 2003
PROSPECT VILLAGÉ PROJECT
Location: 191,193,195 E. Main Street
Applicant: Pelican Center LLC
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Thank you for attending the Community Information & Scoping Meeting for the proposed
Prospect Village. The purpose of the meeting is to describe the proposed project and identify
the environmental review process pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
You are encouraged to provide any written comments you have conceming the potential
adverse environmental impacts of the project. You may also provide oral comments, which are
being tape recorded, following the presentation of the project,. by filling out a Speaker Card
(Each speaker will be limited to 3 minutes). Please include your written comments below and
provide your name, address and phone number.
Comments (use additional sheets if necessary):
/ /I ¡:; t/ ¿;:: .d £.5.1 .&:: r<J ;; V ~ x [7 15; ~/ I.;", #-/J J:1I ¡;; ,It 27 Z? / 7/""/? ~...f /
I ;./ f) t/,? f'rI jJ ¿;.c, L Y G X,; /J( / ¡. / ;('/7 711 ~ /./?-7" 7c/fL 17./ ¥.f
//I/¿/(1r:;. 9# ,ovrJ ./7 (',~pA/£7Î.17F JP.zÇ'::;"l'""'D¡?-.¿Ç-Ì'-~ II
(J.¿:::j,d .o.J¿V Â'? ð2rÇ~o.//_T I ---rJ/-"c,d /':r gçCc/JJ¡;:::-~ ß
A/rill .iJ,J/i/j?)"j f /vCr AJ-J .¡ÇL.s'7Z?12/t"- .$;.I/L1J/;..(f /
Day Phone
:lJdt/I'J7 k/- ££Yj},Á/ I
/3.?J .f'¡e Y,f Jf A-t.lS'
/v,¿';/J--(, fA Q2--7Æ!o
C2l.L) ~ 3$ - ¡., 73:- /
Name
Address
COMMUNITY INFORM A TION & SCOPING MEETING
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
April 22, 2003
PROSPECT VILLAGE PROJECT
Location: 191,193,195 E. Main Street
Applicant: Pelican Center LLC
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Thank you for attending the Community Information & Scoping Meeting for the proposed
Prospect Village. The purpose of the meeting is to describe the proposed project and identify
the environmental review process pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CECA).
You are encouraged to provide any written comments you have concerning the potential
adverse environmental impacts of the project. You may also provide oral comments, which are
being tape recorded, following the presentation of the project, by filling out a Speaker Card
(Each speaker will be limited to 3 minutes). Please include your written comments below and
provide your name, address and phone number.
Comments (use additional sheets If necessary):
~~
kf'N.ta( £::0 .
Name It l c..-K ~
Address l'i.O ¡Vo1<-íff A- '?~
rUS{7¡(/
Day Phone C!...!1...J ( 3 I - +3£?:;.
April 22, 2003
PRESERVATION OF UTI JUICE
The top ten reasons Uti Juice (at the comer of Main and Prospect) and its adjacent companion
deserve our preservation efforts:
10.
9.
8.
Uti Juice is older than most of downtown;
Uti Juice is the last architectural remnant of a significant Tustin business owned and
operated by a prominent Tustin family;
The façade is vital to the pedestrian scale and character of downtown, especially Main
Street;
7.
The building's façade is an excellent example of tum-of-the-century small town commercial
architecture, in-spite of its present condition;
6.
The 1990 Tustin Historical survey gave the building an "A" rating;
5.
When city re-development purchased the property in 1997, city staff vowed it would save
and refurbish the building;
4.
After acquisition, substantial sums of money were expended on seismic retrofitting;
3.
A fair, impartial and balanced Environmental Impact Report as required by Califomia law
will more than likely require some degree of preservation anyway;
2.
If the property were owned by any party other than the city redevelopment agency, we
would not be having this discussion now, because there is little likelihood that city planning
staff would approve of demolition in the manner contemplated by this most recent proposal;
1.
There are many, many ways to ensure financial success for the developer, achieve
economic prosperity for neighboring merchants, and create a vital downtown that do not
require the demolition of Uti Juice.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rick Fox
Architect
Tustin Resident: 170 North A Street
F:\Wpdocs\rf\Rickpersonal\Save_Utt-juice-Breasons.O1.dOC '
-1-
RECEIVED
MAY - j 20D3
REDEVELOPMfNTAGENCY
THOMPSON PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
+
April 28, 2003
Jim Draughn
City of Tustin, Redevelopment Agency
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680Fax 714/668-2660
Re: Prospect Village Project at 191, 193, 195 E. Main Street Applied by Pelican Center
LLC - Public Comments
Dear Mr. Draughn,
Thank you for conducting the Community Information and Scoping Meeting on April 22,
2003. We own and operate the building at 100 W. Main Street and are a resident of Old
Town Tustin. While we are excited about the opportunity for redevelopment of the
referenced property, we have strong concerns about many of the specific features of the
proposed development. This letter is to provide written comments and concerns,
regarding the subject project and information that was presented at the Public meeting.
Concerns and Comments
1. Historical Preservation - Historical preservation standards have been established
by the City of Tustin, State Historic Preservation Office, and the National Park
Service. How are these standards being complied with?
2. Historical Sianmcance - The Uti Juice Building represents a historical landmark
for:
a.
b.
c.
Architectural significance
Historical use as an important local business
Ownership by family members that contributed historically to the City of
Tustin
d. Contribution to Orange County historical significance by providing
business to Knott's Berry Farm
It was indicated that some of the building parts will be included in the new
development, but this is not considered preservation. How will these important
P.o. Box 1224 . Tustin, California 92780 . (714) 544-4846 FAX & PHONE
Page 2
City of Tustin, Redevelopment Agency
Prospect Village Project Comments
features be preserved through the proposed development?
3. Public poliCY Commitment to Preserve - The City of Tustin Historical Resource
Survev Reoortand the American Institute of Architects'RIUDAT have indicated
that this building has high historical significance and it is a building to remain.
How can public policy change without a change prior to considering changes to
the policy?
4. Public Fund Investment- Since public funds have been invested to preserve and
redevelop the property, how can prior funding be abandoned?
5. Alternate Analvsis - The California Environmental Equality Act (CEQA) requires
that alternates be evaluated. Please present alternatives that have been
performed for the site that include preservation. Shouldn't alternatives include
preservation of the entire building, the west structure only, the east structure
only, and the facade only? Detailed cost estimates should be provided for each
of the alternatives to confirm viability.
6. Traffic Impacts - The City ofTustin recently completed hardscape improvements
to narrow main roadways (Main Street and EI Camino Real) to one lane and add
stop sign intersections. The proposed development appears to have high density
use with mixed use with three story structures. How will traffic be mitigated for
roadways and intersections that are now at minimum capacity?
7. Noise Impacts - The existing uses in the area (Water department, other business
uses, etc.) appear to have noise impacts on residential use proposed at the
project. Noise from these uses includes operating equipment, delivery trucks
(with back up belts), and people visiting sites during night time hours. How will
this be addressed for the future residents, 50 that they do not adversely
impact/have concern for existing operations?
8. Parkino Impacts - The existing use appears to have parking space demand that
will exceed that provided by the site. How will parking be accommodated
through the site and pubfic parking areas that will not i'mpact other businesses
(including the Farmers Market)?
Thank you for your time on this matter, should you have any questions, please do not
hesitate to contact us at 714/544-4846.
Sincerely,
Thompson Property Management
J~
Business Owner & Resident
P.O. Box 1224 . Tustin, California 92780 . (714) 544-4846 FAX & PHONE
APR-22-2003 0~:09 PM
FORTEL.ESCE
714e32~297
P.01
Fax Cover Sheet
Maro~ Aaron
Old Town Merchant
305 ¡!J Camino Flea'
Tustin, c.
714-832-5232
Recipient's Neme Jim Drlughon
OrganIZatIon Tullln RedeValopment Department
FIIX Number 714-673-3113
Telephone Number 714-573-3121
Dete April 22. 2002
Subject Prospect Village Project
Total Number of pag..:
W Urgent
D Reply ASAP
D PI... Commenl
D For Your RIlØDrdI
"
Comm.nt8:
I cannot IIItlnd the meeting tonight but wented to make sure my voice Is heard. I am
a merchant In Old Town end I cennot lell you how frUstrating It Is to hear that residents want to hold up
this project. Every one of the merchents In Old Town need this project to help bring more people
down to the area. Why do these people went to hold up progl'llss? The historic pert of tne Issue Is
ridiculous, Why should we put a projeCt on hold beOlUSe of some dilapidated buildln\ 5 that were once
a Juice factory? L.et's put up a monument Itone or aomlthlng and I.t future ".n.l'1I1lonl vilit the
museum to see what H once looked likef
Marolt Aaron
April 22, 2003
Mr. Jim Draughon
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
RE: East Main Street Prospect Village Project
Dear Jim,
I am sorry that I am unable to attend the meetin¡¡ tonight concerning the above-
mentioned project. I am the owner of the adjacent property located at 333 EI Camino
Real, and the president of the business located there, Rengel+Company, Architects.
I would like to express my enthusiastic support of the proposed project I look forward to
the implementation of the schematic site plan, floor plans and mixed-use concept as
presented in the preliminary plans. The project will provide an excellent opportunity for
restaurant, ratail, and residential occupancies, which can add vitality to the heart of Old
Town.
There are three items I hope the Agency would consider integrating into the Project:
1.
Utt Juice Facility: I have enclosed a few historical photographs of the old Utt
Juice factory and the previous General Store. They were unusual facilities
located at the center of the City, and the Utt family has importance within the
history of Tustin. Although it certainly does not seem reasonable to save the
existing structures, please consider the integration of the existing architecture
and ornamentation into the architecture of the new Project.
This integration can be a minor as the replication of the building at the comer of
Main and Prospect. A more challenging and ambitious scheme may be to
recreate the metal buildings of the "juice factory" as the material finish and detail
of the individual residential/retail units, similar to many historic 'cannery' projects.
I do not propose altering the floor plans as proposed, but only to change the
exterior detailing and finishes.
Within the center of our Historical Overlay Afea, we should not create the
impression of a historical structure that never existed by the continuation of the
adjacent gold-brick façade and architecture. Ideally, a person who had lived in
Tustin in the 1920's would be able to recognize the location of the General
Store/Juice Factory, even if it looked remodeled.
2.
Parking and Alley traffic círcuilltion: Although parking is not a major problem
within the Old Town center at this time (and the new Water Company parking lot
is open), we are concerned with the flow of traffic and parking along the alley as
the Old Town traffic increases. The parking configuration of the existing
buildings along the alley is unusual. Additional consideration should be given to
the design of the alley's dual use for vehicular traffic, pedestrian walkway, and
3.
existing parking configuration. We would encourage enhanced paving for the
entire alley.
Trash Collection: Although the new project will utilize trash enclosures, please
consider the integration ota trash enclosure for the older EI Camino buildings.
Currently, dumpsters and trash cans are exposed, since older buildings never
anticipated trash space or the improvements considered in your Project.
We look forward to the implementation of Prospect Village and hope you can consider
the items mentioned above. Please feel free to contact my office if you have any
questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Richard J. Rengel
Property Owner
President, Rengel+Company, Architects
333 EI Camino Real, Tustin, CA 92780
APPENDIX B
Air Quality Calculations
DEC-29-2003
11:48
WOODRUFF SPRADLIN SMART
714 835 7787
O~BEMIS 2002 Fot Windows
7.4.2
rUe Name: C: IhOgr... Fil.s\UlUltMIS 2002 For windows\Projeote2x2\PV EIII.. orb
Projeot Name: PV tIR
proj.ot LoCttion: South CosH Air BOBin (LOS Mg'l.s ueal
on-~otd "otor Vehicle Emissions Ba..d on EMFAC2002 version 2.2
SOlOO\~y REPORT
(Pounds/Day - Winter)
CONSTRUCTION tMISSION ESTlllATES
PIlla ""0 PMI0
... 2004'" !l.0G NOx CO s02 TOTAL EXHAUST DUST
TOTAI.S (lbo/day, unmi tigatedl 11. 33 .9.76 86.81 0.17 7.08 3.S. 3.20
Pill 0 PMIO PIIlO
... 2005 ... ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXHAUST OOST
TOTALS (lbs/day,nnmitigoted 8.56 61.S1 64.53 0.01 2.72 2.71 0.01
PIIIO Pilla PIIlO
... 2006 ... ROO NOK CO S02 TOTAL EXHAOST DUST
TOTALS Ilbs/day, unmitigated) 59.64 59.25 66.40 0.00 2.52 2.50 0.02
A!I.EA SOURCE EMUSION ESTIMATES
ROG NOx CO S02 PMIO
TOTALS (lb'/dey,=itigatedl 17.1S 0.S7 40.08 0.11 6.14
O.PERATIONAL I VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES
ROO NOK CO S02 PIlla
TOTAloS (lbs/day, unmitigated) 7.81 13.31 96.66 0.07 7.13
SUM OF AREA AND OPERATIONAl. EMISSION ESTIIlATES
ROO NOx CO S02 PMI0
TOTALS Ilbslday, unmitigated) 24.99 14.18 136.74 O.lS 13.27
P.03/08
DEC-29-2003
WOODRUFF SPRRDL I N SMRRT
714 835 7787
11:48
URBEMIS 2002 For Window.
7.4.2
Hie ~....: C: \Program Flleo\URBEMIS 2002 For w;.ndowa\Projects2k2\PV EIR.ur"
project ~....: PV ErR
project Looation: South Coa.t l\ir Buin 1"°' Angeles area)
On-Road Motor vehich _..ion. Ba..d on EMFAC2002 yerBion 2.2
SUMMARr REPORT
(Pound,/Oay - summer)
-CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTXfQTES
PM10 PIll 0 PH10
... 2004 ... ROG NOx co S02 TOTAL £XHJ>.UST t>tIST
TOT~LS (l"s/doy. umnitigaUdl 1l.33 89.76 96.81 0.17 7.08 3.S8 3.20
PMIO PMIO PM10
... 2005'" AOG NOx CO $02 TOTAL IOO\AUST PUST
TOTALS (lbo/day, unmitigAted) 8.56 61.61 64.53 0.01 2.72 2.71 0.01
P~lO PMIO PM10
... 2006 ... ROG NOx CO S02 rOTAL EXHAUST DUST
TOTALS IID./day, unmitigated) 59.64 59.25 66.40 0.00 2.52 2.50 0.02
\REA SOu~C~ EMISSTON ESTIMATE5
ROG NOx CO. 502 PM10
TOT>.LS (lDs/daY, unmit;,gahd) 0.93 0.25 2.43 0.00 0.01
JPEIUITIO.AL (VEHICLE! ",,""ION ESTIMATES
ROG NOx CO 502 PMIO
TOTALS 11Ds/day,uIUl1itigoted) 7.37 9.10 100.02 O.Os 7.13
¡UN or ~UA AND OPERATTOWAL ""ISSIeN ESTIMATES
ROG NOx CO S02 PM10
TOTALS Il"'/day.unmitigBtedl 8 .31 9.35 102.45 0.08 7 .14
P.02/Ø8
DEC-29-2003 11:48 WOODRUFF SPRADL I N SMART 714 835 7787 P. 04/08
URBEMI5 20O¡ For Windo... 7.4.2
File Name: C: \Program File.\OIUlEMIS 2002 For Win<1ow.\Project82k2\PV EIR.urb
Pro; oct Name: PV EIR
Project Loc.tion: South Coast AÜ O..;.n [LO. Angel.. a..al
On-Road Motor Vehicle Emi.s"on. Oa.ed on EMFAC2002 venion 2.2
OnAIL REPORT
(pO\1nd./oay - summer!
con.t..ctien Start Month .nd ~ear: May, 2004
Construction Duration: 24
Total Land Uu Area to be Pevelopod: 0 acres
Maxim... Acreage Disturbed Per Day: 0 aores
S.ingle Family UnHo: 0 Multi-FðII1.ily onit.. 12
Rotail/ofhce/In.ti tutie"al/ Indu...;..l Square Footage: H551
CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES UNMITIGATED Ilb./o\<Iyl
PM10 PMI0 PMIO
Source ROG NOx CO S02 TOTAL EXJ!AUST DUST
.., 2000'"
Phase 1 . Damolition Emi..ions
FugHivo Duot 3.15 3.15
O£f-Road Die.el 10.61 7~ .5~ 81.13 3.61 3.61 0.00
On-Read Diesel 0.60 10.99 2.25 0.17 0.31 0.27 0.04
Worker Trips 0.12 0.19 3.43 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
Maximum Ibs/day 11. 33 B9.76 95.81 0.17 7.09 3.88 3.20
Ph..e 2 - Site Grading Emi.SiMS
Fugitive ou.t 0.00 0.00
OU-Road Di..el 2.08 18.14 13.54 0.87 0.B7 0.00
On-Rood Diesol 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Werker Trips 0.01 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Maximum lbs/day 2.09 1~ .14 13.72 0.00 0.B7 0.87 0.00
Pha.e 3 . Ou;.lding CeMtruction
Bldg Conot Off-Road Diesel 8.34 63.50 62.39 2.95 2.95 0.00
E!ldg Co".t Worker Trips O.OB 0.04 0.91 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
ArOb coatings Off-G.. 0.00
Arob coaÜng. Wor.er Trip. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Asphalt Off-Gas 0.00
Asphalt Off-Road Pi..el 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. DO 0.00
A.phalt on-Roo<1 Di"81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
A.pholt Worker Trip. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Maximum lbo/day B.02 63.54 63.30 0.00 2.96 2.95 0.01
Max Ib./day all phase. 11. 33 89.76 85.61 0.17 7.08 3.88 3.20
ho 200S'"
Phase I - Demolition Entissions
""gitivo Du.t 0.00 0.00
Off-Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
On-Read Di.sel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
IOorker Trip. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Maximwu lbo/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ph... 2 - Site Grad1ng Enti..1on.
Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00
Off-Road oie.el 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
On-Road Die.el 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
~orke< Trip' 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Maximum lbO/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Pho.e 3 - Building Construction
E!ldg Const Off-Road 01e.ol B.34 51.32 63.63 2.70 2.70 0.00
B1dg Con.t worker Trip. 0.07 0.04 O.B~ 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
Arch Coatings O£f-Gas 0.00
Aroh Co.rings Werker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Asphalt Off-G.o 0.12
A.phalt Off-Roàd Die.el 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Asphal tOn-Road o;.e.el 0.03 0.46 0.11 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00
A.phalt "orker Trips 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ma"i= Iba/dsy 8.56 61.81 64.53 0.01 2.72 2.71 0.01
Max Ib,/day all pheo.. 8.56 51.Bl 64.53 0.01 2.72 2.71 0.01
.., 2005'"
DEC-29--2003 11:49 WOODRUFF SPRRDLIN SMRRT 714 835 7787 P. 05/08
pnase 1 - Demolitien _..1eO8
Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00
OH-Read Oi...l 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
on-Road Di..01 o.om 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Werker Trip. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
M..imum lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Pba.. 2 " Site Guding Emi.oioO8
FUgitive Du.t 0.00 0.00
Off-Road Pi...l 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D. DO
On"""od Pi...l 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Worker Trip. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mo.imUIII lbs/day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ph... 3 - Building Construction
Blog Conot off-Road pinel 8.34 59.17 64.82 2.50 2.50 0.00
Bldg Const WOrkor Trips 0.07 0.04 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
Arch CoaUng' Off-Ga. 51.16
II>:ch Ceotings Worker Trips 0.07 0.04 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
Asphalt Off-Ga. 0.00
Asphalt Off-Rood Die.el 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
AMphUt On-Road Diesel 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
A.pnalt Worker Trip. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mo.1m"" lbs/doy 59.64 59.25 66.40 0.00 2.52 2.50 0.02
Mo. lb./doy all ph.... 59.64 59.25 66.40 0.00 2.52 2.50 0.02
Phase 1 " OemoJ.;,Uon A.sumption.
Stert Month/Y... for Pho.. 1: MSy '04
Fha.. 1 DunUon: La menth.
Building Volume Total loubio feetl: 157500
"uildino Velume Doily Icubic foeti: 7500
On-Rood Truok Travel IVMT): 417
Off-Rood Equipment
No. Type
1 ,",oovaters
1 Graders
1 Rubber Tired Oo..r.
2 Rubber Tired Loeders
1 Tractor/Loeder./Becknoes
Fn... 2 - Site Grading "'5O_tiens
Stert Month/Year for Ph..e 2: Jun . D.
Pha.e 2 ou..tion: 1.2 menth.
On-Aood Truck Travel IVMTJ: 0
Off-R"ad Equipmant
Ne. Type
1 Other Equipment
Hor.epower
lBO
17'
352
165
79
Hor..power
150
Ph..s. 3 - Building conotruchon .ssumptiono
Start Month/Year for Phase 3: Jul '0'
phase 3 Duration: 21. 8 month.
Start Month/Y..r fer subph... Building: Jul' 04
SubPhase Building Ourotio", 20.B monthe
Off-Rood Equipment
Ne. Type Hor..pow.r
1 Otner Equipment UD
1 paving Equipment 111
5 Rough Terrain Forklift. 94
2 Tractor/Loaders/.ockhoe. 79
Start Month/r.ar for $ubPho.. Archi tectunl coatings: Mer
SubFha.. .rchitecturel Cootinge Duration: 1 month.
Start Momh/Y... for SubPh.se Asphalt, Apr '05
subPnas. 'sphalt Duration: 1 months
Acres te h. pa.ed: 1
Off-Road Equipment
Ne. Typ.
Horsepower
Load ractor
D.5Ba
0.575
0.590
0.465
0.405
Load Factor
0.620
Load Feetor
0.620
0.530
0.475
0.465
'06
Load Factor
HourS/Day
8.0
B.O
B.a
B.D
B.O
Hours/Cay
B.O
Houte/Day
B.D
B.O
8.0
8.0
Hcurs/oay
DEC-29-2003
11:49
WOODRUFF SPRRDLI N SMRRT
ARt.>. SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES {summer poonds per Cay. urunHiqaUdl
So~roe ROG "Ox CO S02
Nat""al Ga. 0.02 0.23 0.09
Wood Stoves - No summer emission.
Fireplaces - No summer _..leoo
LBOdscaping 0.33
consom"" Prdets 0.~9
TOTALS (lbs/day, onmitigaUdl 0.93
0.02
0.25
\.
2.34
2.43
0.00
0.00
714 835 7787
PI,"O
0.00
0.01
0.01
P.06/08
DEC-29-2003
11:49
WOODRUFF SPRADLIN SMART
UNIIIUG?UD OPERATION?. IIIIISSIONS
ReG NOx CO 602 PIIl0
Condo/townhou.. go..""l 0.B2 0.75 6.55 0.01 O.SS
Q>,>.lity ruturont 3.39 4.46 48.84 0.04 3,49
Strip maU 2.19 2.77 30.le 0.02 2.16
Gonoro.1 office building 0.97 1.11 12.46 0.01 0.89
TOTAL EMISS!ON8 (lbs/day) 7.37 9.10 100.02 o.OB 7.13
Don not include co...ction for pasSby trips.
Do.. not incluóe óouble counting aóju.tment for internal trip..
OPERATIONA¡' (Vehicle) EMISSION ESTIMArES
""oly">" Y..., 2004 T.mperature IF), SO
mFAe Vor.icn: EMFAe2002 (9/2002)
S=ry of Lan<l U.es:
unit Type
eonóoltownhouae general
Quality resturont
Strip maU
"enoral office builóing
Vohicle AS.W1Iptions:
rle.t Hix:
Vehicle Type
Light Auto
'~lght Truck < 3,750 lbs
_ight Truck 3,751- 5.750
'od Truck 5,751- B,500
Lite-Heavy 8,501-10,000
Lito-Heavy 10,001-14,000
'.d-H..vy 14,001-33,000
¡..."y-H.avy 33. 00l-60, 000
~in. Saul> 60.000 lb.
urban Bus
Motorcycle
;chool Bu.
'otor Home
Tra.".l Conditions
Home-
work
Jrban Trip Length (mile.) 11.5
Rur"l Trip Length (mil.s) 11.5
Trip spe.<ls (mphl 35.0
, of '1<ips - ""sidenti.1 20.0
S...on: Summer
Tr1p Rete
4.B6 trips I ówelling ùl\J.ts
130.34 trips I 1000 sq. ft.
40.67 trips I 1000 sq. ft.
11.01 trips I 1000 sq. ft.
Percent Typ.
56.10
15.10
15.60
6.9Ò
1.00
0.30
1. 00
O.BO
0.00
0.10
1.60
0.20
1.30
ResidentiU
Home-
Shop
4.9
4.~
40.0
37.0
~ of Trips - Comerc;.al (by land usel
QuaHty resturent
~trip mall
;eoeral offic. building
Non-Catalyst
2.70
4.60
2.60
2.90
0.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
B7.50
0.00
15.40
HOm.-
Oth.r
6.0
6.0
40.0
43.0
she
12.00
3.00
6.2'
7.40
Oata1yst
96.80
92.70
96..0
94.20
BO.OO
66.70
20.00
12.50
0.00
0.00
12.50
0.00
76.90
Oammer"i,l
Total Trips
59.32
391.02
254.23
81.47
Di...l
0.50
2.70
1.20
2.90
20.00
33.30
70.00
87.50
100.00
100.00
0.00
100.00
7.70
Commute Ncn-Work Customer
10.3 5.5 5.5
10.3 5.5 5.5
40.0 40.0 40.0
8.0
2.0
35.0
4.0
1.0
17.5
i6.0
97.0
47.5
714 835 7787
P.07/08
DEC-29-2ØØ3
11:49
WOODRUFF SPRADL I N SMART
714 835 7787
P.Ø8/Ø8
Chang.. made '0 .he default ".iuo. fo: ~and C.e Tdp pe:c.ntlge.
The p:1mlry Trip I fox Quality xe.tuxont ohlngod from 50 to ~O
The Diyened Trip' for Quality ruturont changed from 40 to 25
The pos.-Sy Trip I for QuoJo1ty xutuxont c.ango<l from 10 to 35
The Pr;.mary Trip I for Str;.p mall ohonged from 45 to 40
The n;.verte<l Tdp I fo: $tr;.p man chonged from 40 to 35
Th. Poss-Sy Tdp I for Strip ",..11 changed frCIIU 15 to 25
Chango. made to the <lehult valu.. for con.truction
The use: has cverri<lden 'he DetouJot Ph... L.ngths
.hng.. made to the default "a1ue' fox Are.
Chango. madl to the defauJot va1u.. for aperocione
The double count;.ng internal work trip hmit changed from to 1i..".
The double counting shopping trip limit ohange<l from to 21.5764.
TM double counting other trip lim1. changed from to 25.0776.
TOTl1L P. Ø8
APPENDIX C
Historic Resources Technical Report
--"'--..--------"-' -------
THE BUILDING
. Bioc;RAPHER- ------...-----" - -------- ------_..
TIM GREGORY
+ Builcting Histories
+ Cultural Resource Studies
+ Historic Resources Surveys
.:. Local. State, and National Landmarldng
.:. Historic Preservation and Archival Consulting
HISTORIC RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT:
UTT JUICE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
191-195 EAST MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
Sid Lindmark, AICP
10 Aspen Creek Lane
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
July 14, 2003
Tel/Fax: (626) 792-7465
E-rnail: timothygregory@earthlink.net
400 East California Boulevard, #3 .:. Pasadena, California 91106-3763
\
- ---..-......-....----..
..---...-------.-'------ .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Project Description..............:...............................................................................2
II. Identification of the Resource~............................................................................2
ill. The Historic Context...........................................................................................8
IV. Evaluation of the Historic Significance of the Resources................................10
V. Findings of Effect and Recommended Mitigation Measures........................... 12
VI. Sources.............................................................................................................15
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Appendix 8
The California Register and CEQA Requirements
(General Information)......................................................................19
Identification of Existing Resources and Their
Historic Context (Background)......................................................21
Evaluation of Historic Resources (Background)............................25
Findings of Effect and Recommended Mitigation
Measures (Background).................................................................29
Maps...............................................................................................32
Assessor's Records..........................................................................33
Historical Photographs and Documentation....................................34
Current Photographs.......................................................................35
DPR 523 Fòrms and Photograph............................................following Appendix 8
.-----..-.
-----.--
--------------------....-----...------- --... ---------.-..-------.......-
2
I. Project Description
This is a technical report on the historic resources found on an approximate .98-net-acre parcel
located at 191 and 193-195 East Main Street in the Old Town area of the City ofTustint. The
site is known historically as the Utt Juice Buildings. The client has requested an evaluation of
the historic resources and a summary of any alternatives which may be needed to reduce project
impacts on these resources ifthey are found to be significant.
The purpose of this report is to assist Sid Lindmark, AICP, and the City ofTustin in their
determination ofthe historical significance of the resources. Also to be determined: if any future
changes to the resources will constitute a significant environmental impact and, if so, what
mitigation measures may be necessary.
The five steps necessary in such a study are: 1) identification of the resources; 2) identification of
the resources' historic context; 3) evaluation of the historic significance of the resources;
4) determination (findings) of the proposed project's effect on any significant resources; and
5) recommendation of project alternatives or mitigation measures to minimize the project's
possible negative effects.
In surmnary, this technical report contains the synopsis of the consultant's cultural resources
identification and evaluation investigation. Sections of this report discuss the Identification of
the Resources, the Historic Context, Evaluation of Historic Resources, Findings of Effect and
Recommended Mitigation Measures, and Sources. California Historic Resources Inventory
(DPR 523) forms, prepared as a result of the investigation, are appended.
Please see Appendix I for a background discussion on the California Register of Historical
Resources and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
II. Identification of the Resources
(Please see Appendix 2 for a background discussion on the identification and historic context
phases.)
A field visit to the project site was carried out on April 16, 2003, during which the consultant
was accompanied by James Draughon, the City's Redevelopment Program Manager, and David
W. Bryant, President of the Tustin Area Historical Society. The buildings, structures and
amenities were observed, described, and photographed. Research was undertaken after the site
visit in order to further identifY the history ofthe resources and their context. The first step was
an investigation of the resources' age and degree of alteration through a search of property
1 The legal description of the site is the east 155 feet ofthe north 162.5 feet of Block B,
Lot 3 ofthe original Tustin City. The Orange County Assessor's Parcel Number is 401-585-01.
------ --
-----
.. --.----.------------. .-.-----.-.--.-....--------------..-----.--
3
records housed at the office of the Orange County Assessor and of map books located in the
Orange County Archives. Historical files were also consulted at the Tustin Area Historical
Society and Museum, the History Room of the Santa Ana Public Library and the central branch
ofthe Los Angeles Public Library (the oldest public library collection in Southern California).
The City of Tustin also supplied the consultant with copies of various reports on the site prepared
over the past years. In addition, a search was made in various on-line historical and biographical
databases available on the Internet. The focus of this research was to determine if the history of
the site had any cOlIDection to persons or events of national, state-wide, regional or local
significance during its period of use. As many documentary resources as possible within realistic
time and budget constraints were investigated and are listed under Sources (Section VI).
The research on the site is reported below and is also summarized on DPR 523 forms appended
at the end ofthis report. In completing the forms, the consultant followed the ;'Instructions For
Recording Historical Resources" issued by the California State Office of Historic Preservation
(SHPO) in March 1995 and subsequent updates.
The Utt Juice Buildings consist of two adjoining one. story masonry commercial structures. The
exteriors of all the resources, although suffering from earthquake damage and neglect, have
retained much of their historical integrity, but the long-vacant interiors evidence much
deterioration.
Historv: The storefronts at 193-195 East Main Street were built in 1914 as investment
properties by Tustin pioneer Charles Edward Utt. Ownership ofthe property was recorded in his
wife's name. (The Orange County Assessor shows that the first Utt-owned improvement on the
property, which then occupied the entire west half of Block B, appeared in tax year 1915 and had
a value of$750.) The first tenant of 195, in September 1914, was a grocery store (also selling
dry goods and shoes) owned by Charles E. Sauers, a native of Nebraska, and Phil H. Berquist.
Sauers was active in the Tustin school system, having served on the elementary school board and
the Tustin Union High School Board of Trustees, of which he was the first clerk.
Sauers and Berquist merged their store with two other similar establishments into the Tustin
Mercantile Company and moved elsewhere in 1918. A bakery, owned by Charles H. Eaton,
occupied 193 East Main Street.
Charles Utt (often referred to as C. E. or Ed Utt) was born in Auburn, California on March 23,
1866, the only child of Lysander ("San") and Arvilla (Platt) Utt. The senior Mr. Utt was a native
of Virginia who first came to California during the Gold Rush of 1849. It is there he married his
wife who had moved to California from New York as a child. It is said San Utt made and lost
several fortunes during the next few years, criss.crossing the country on the Santa Fe Trail. In
1874, he bought his family to Tustin following a one-month journey by covered wagon from
Placer County. At the time, Tustin was a "little cluster of half a dozen cottages"(Arrnor ) in the
middle of mustard fields. The economy of the area was largely based on cattle and sheep
grazing.
San Utt entered into the mercantile business, purchasing the stock and premises at the southwest
corner of Main and D Streets of Tustin's first store-owner H. H. Dickerman, who had recently
------- ----
----..--....-.-- -
......-.---------------.------- --..--
4
died. The new establishment was called the "L. Utt Pioneer Store." The Utt family lived above
the shop. Charles took over the business at the age of21, upon the death of his father. Arvilla
Utt (known as "Villi"), by then a widow, ran a boarding house in connection with the store. At
the same time, Charles Utt raised peanuts on several hundred acres of rented land, eaming him
the title of "peanut king." His "Double-Jointed Goober Peas," sold at five cents per bag, bècame
popular locally. Uti continued to run the family business until 1893 when he took up ranching.
AJ; well as cattle, he was said to have raised "practically every crop known to Orange County"
(Armor). In 1906, he was one of the organizers, with James Irvine and Sherman Stevens, of the
San Joaquin Fruit Company and was its first president. Specializing in the growing and
processing of citrus fu.¡its, walnuts, avocados, and chilies, the firm owned over 1,000 acres of
agricultural land on the Irvine Ranch and had three packing houses served by a spur of the Santa
Fe Railroad. The San Joaquin Fruit Company also developed several other ranches in Southern
California, including Mugu, Simi, and Lemon Heights in Tustin. Utt was instrumental in the
formation of the Orange County Citrus Exchange, of which he served as director for a number of
years.
In 1898, Utt bought the Tustin Water Works. Early recognizing the importance of water to
Southern California, Utt envisioned pumping water from low levels to more valuable land at
higher elevations. Despite having made many improvements, he ran the Water Works at a loss
for many years, continuing it only to ensure that Tustin would have a reliable water supply. He
wás later to assist in the investigation of using Colörado River water before the advent of the
Metropolitan Water District and forwarded efforts to build a dam at Prado. Utt also served as
president of the Red Hill Water Company and the Lemon Heights Mutual Water Company and
was on the board of the Frances Mutual Water Company. The Tustin Water Works was later
purchased by the City which renamed it Tustin Water Service.
Besides running his own business, Utt also served on the board of Tustin's first bank, the Bank
of Tustin, formed in 1888. When it was succeeded by the First National Bank of Tustin in 1911,
he continued on the board and later served as president. He also sat on the board of the
Commercial National Bank of Santa Ana and was a director of the Santa Ana Building and Loan
Company.
Utt was treasurer ofthe Haven Seed Company and was involved with other agricultural
organizations, such as the Orange County Fruit Exchange (mentioned above), the Irvine Citrus
Association, the Frances Citrus Association, and the Exchange Lemon Products Company. In
1930, he founded the Utt Development Company, headquartered in Oxnard. He served as a
board member of the Tustin School District and, in 1921, headed a citizen's committee to
organize the Tustin Union High School District to halt a movement by Santa Ana to annex Tustin
schools. He became the new District's first president. Utt was also part of a group that
subdivided Lemon Heights, where he was to build his ownhome in 1922, designed by Clifford
Truesdell, Jr.
- -------- ....
....- -............----..---.."""""'--"
5
In February 1894 in Monrovia, Utt had married Mary M. Sheldon, the daughter of an old pioneer
Tustin family. They were to have five children, four daughters and one son. (Their son, James
"Jimmy" B. Utt, became a well-known local politician, representing Orange COtiI)ty in the U. S.
Congress from 1953 to 1970). MaryUtt died in 1918. The Utt family attended the local
Presbyterian Church (although Charles Utt once characterized his faith as "Deist Christian") and
were strong Prohibitionists. Known for his conservative, free-enterprise views, Utt was an
independent Republican and wrote articles on political and economic issues of the day. He was
an active member of the Masons and listed his hobbies in 1942 as "work, hunting, fishing and
traveL"
"A man of much enterprise and force of character," Utt was said to have enjoyed the "confidence
and good will of the whole èommunity" (Armor). Charles Edward Utt died on February 5,1950
at the age of 83. He was survived by his second wife Margaret, his five children, and five step-
children. The City of Tustin named a street and a middle school after him.
Around 1913, Utt had leased two acres of barren hillside land in Peters Canyon in what is now
the Lemon Heights neighborhood. After providing irrigation, he planted California Concord and
Isabella grapes. The vines were so productive by 1917 that Utt needed to find a larger market for
them. Since his flavorful home-made grape juice had won popularity with family and friends, he
decided to bottle it commercially, the first 4,000 quarts produced using gas plates on his back
porch. Considered a pioneer inthe concept of producing grape juice commercially, Utt's
marketing attempts in the Santa Ana area were so successful that he planted thirty more acres of
vines; (The vineyards would eventually encompass 150 acres, at their height)
By 1922, Utt needed to expand his production facilities. In that year he moved his Utt Juice
Company into the buildings he owned at Main and Prospect in Tustin, outfitting them with the
required boilers, vats, and presses. To create more space, he constructed a brick building (191
East Main) adjacent to lheoriginal1914 buildings. Although documentation for it no longer
exists, it seems logical that the rear thirty feet of 195 East Main was added at that time as well.
Over the succeeding years, sheds and other auxiliary buildings, mostly of metal, were built at the.
rear of the property. Three of these auxiliary buildings still existed in 1990 and were described
as corrugated metal sheds facing Prospect Street, two of which ran westwards all the way to the
alley. Similar in design, they had front-facing gabled roofs, the gable-ends of which were
screened. 2
Utt took on a partner, Arcy Lynn Schellhous, and sent him east to study juice-making processes
and to purchase equipment. No longer claiming to be home-made, Utt Juice's products were
labeled with the "Queen Isabella" brand. By the early 1930s, the vines from Utt's original
2 Another 60-by-48- foot stucco- fronted Modeme-style structure, used for cold storage and
given the address 183 East Main Street, was built adjacent to the older buildings a number of
years later. It, along with all the other auxiliary buildings, was demolished in 1995. The City
had determined that they were fire hazards and had negative effects on public health and safety.
--------
6
plantings were losing productivity due to disease, so he purchased replacernent farmland in the
San Fernando Valley. In later years, grapes ITom the Ontario area were used.
Schellhous ran the daily operations of the company while Utt ran the financial side of things. At
its most active, the firm had a staff of 24, including a number of seasonal workers. In 1931,
Schellhous became the sole owner (assisted by his wife Mary), but kept the Utt Juice Cornpany
name. The firm's product line expanded to include jams, jellies, marmalades and syrups which
were produced not only under the Utt name but also for private labels of other companies,
including Knotts' Berry Farm and Iris. Although grape products remained the primary output of
Utt Juice, about half-a-dozen other fruits such as apples, black cherries, boysenberries,
pomegranates, and raspberries were also processed. Utt Juice marketed its output as far away as
Texas and the San Francisco Bay area. The company also sold some of its products in the ITont
part of the building at 195 East Main.
According to the Tustin Area Historical Society and Museum, the Utt company's process for
creating juice included the following steps;
I) After being washed and stemmed, the grapes were cooked. The pulp was then drained ITom
the kettles on the second floor into the press on the first floor. Pressure applied at 1,500 pounds
was required to squeeze out the juice which ran down into a large underground tank. (Note: the
"second floor" referred to was actually a mezzanine in the 195 East Main building, according to
Assessor's records.)
2) The press stack was wheeled outside to remove the press cloths and boards. The dry pulp was
then hauled away.
3) Meanwhile, the juice was piped up to kettles for cooking and bottles were brought ITom the
sterilizer to be filled.
4) Five-gallon bottles were filled with juice coming ITom the kettles on the second floor. The
juice was then stored for three to four months to let the cream of tartar settle.
5) After the storage period, the juice was re-cooked and blended with other grape juice varieties
so that the sweetness remained constant. No sugar was added. The juice then went to the
bottling machine where it was put into retail bottles.
The Utt Juice Company experienced difficulties after World War II due to the urbanization of
both Los Angeles and Orange Counties which greatly decreased nearby sources of fruit. The
firm also faced competition ITorn larger, more cost-efficient juice-makers. In addition, the state's
burgeoning wine industry was outbidding small firms for the grape supply. Arcy and Mary
Schellhous were killed in an automobile accident in 1970. Although some interior remodeling of
the plant had occurred in 1968, the Uti Juice Company found itself unable to finance more costly
modernization and expansion. It closed its doors for good in 1973, after 55 years as one of
.- ----.-.. -----
7
Tustin's oldest, most successful, and best-remembered businesses. It was estimated that the Utt
Company had produced over seven million gallons of juice since 1922.
Later short-term uses of 193 East Main included a furniture store, a religious center, and
contractor's offices. City business license records show no businesses operating at 191 East
Main. The buildings were increasingly neglected and became hazardous. Atone point, they
were said to constitute fourteen violations of the city codes. The owners of the property -
seismically reinforced the buildings in May 1995 to address pressing health and safety issues.
The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency condemned the structures in April 1998, the
final court judgment for which occurred on April 27, 1999.
Maps of the property can be found in Appendix 5. Copies of the Orange County Assessor's
bûilding records are in Appendix 6. Historic photographs are attached in Appendix 7.
Phvsical DescriDtion: As mentioned above, the site contains two adjacent one-story masonry
commercial structures. The building at 193-195 East Main Street has a double store-front along
its Main Street side, while 19LEast Main Street has only one entrance on its principal facade.
1. ]93-]95 East Main Street-This is an L-shaped, one-story, ~ 4,375-square-foot building of
Victorian Italianate style. It has a flat parapeted composition roof. The Assessor describes the
foundation as reinforced concrete. The building extends sixty linear feet along Main Street and
ninety linear feet along Prospect Street. The section behind 193 East Main is thirty feet shorter
than that behind 195 East Main. All but the south (main) facade of the building appears to be
constructed of poured-in-place concrete, although a layer of plaster has been applied over the east
(Prospect Street) wall. The building is crowned with an elaborate metal cornice featuring large
brackets at each end and in the center. It wraps around the southeast corner of the building
extending for about six feet along Prospect. The cornice consists of a row of closely-spaced
smaller brackets. Below it is a row of large dentil work, a band of vertical panels, a row of
molding, a row of smaller dentil work, and several rows of molding. The cornice ends just above
transoms which are composed of small glass panels. The easterly transom is newer, the old
panels having been replaced with beveled glass blocks. It has three regularly spaced venting
panels that can be opened. The double storefront design features centered entries recessed
diagonally into the wall. These entries, leading to double wood doors, have concrete floors and
molded wood ceilings in the centers of which are light fixture outlets. The doors have transom
spaces above them, the ones on the easterly door having been boarded over. Glass show
windows appear on each side of the recessed entries and along the diagonal walls leading to the
doors. The easterly show window on 195 and the westerly window on 193 have been boarded
over. The original bulkheads of both stores (said by the Assessor to be made of marble) have
been covered with plain wood panels. At least portions of the marble still remain underneath.
The east facade of 195 has a double-molded cornice, a single large double-hung window located
centrally, and a bam-type sliding wood door on its northerly end. The rear elevations display
evidence of many bricked-up window and door openings, some of them arched. Only two doors
and a single window now appear on the rear of the building.
. ~-~---_..
8
2. 191 East Main Street-Street-This is a rectangular, 1,745-square-foot, one-story building of
vernacular commercial style with a gabled parapeted roof that features a skylight on its southerly
end. The building extends thirty linear feet along Main Street and sixty linear feet nqrth-to- .
south. It is of brick construction, its east wall built immediately abutting the west wall of 193-
195 East Main. The ITont elevation features light and dark gold brick wIth an unbroken parapet
crowned with a decorative cornice of brick. Below the cornice, there is a meze of vents
containing five vertical bricks and edged with darker gold bricks. A row of white glazed brick
runs across the entire ITont facade and down the pilasters on each side. Double wooden doors are
recessed into the easterly end of the ITont facade. They are accented with a large window in the
center of each section and topped with a single transom. Immediately to the west is a single
service door (now replaced with plywood) with transom. At the westerly end of the ITont facade
is a recessed double-hung window with eight panes. Two screened vents appear in the lower
wall. Similar to 193-195, the west and rear elevations display evidence of a number of bricked-
up and boarded-over recessed window and door openings. Only one window now appears on the
easterly end of the rear facade.
The interiors of both buildings are connected through large openings in the wall§. All traces of
equipment used in the juice-making process have been removed. Floors are a mixture of
concrete and built-up wood. Holes in the walls reveal that plaster had been applied over the
original glazed-brick walls. The remains of a small office occupy the southerly end of 191 and a
cold-storage area is located at the northeast corner of 195. The only distinguishing feature is a
skylight located near the office in 191. The interiors are basically in poor shape with much
evidence öfwater damage, such as staining and collapsed ceilings, and bricked-up window
openings. The seismic strengthening that occurred in 1995 has left very visible steel columns
and bracing throughout the interiors. Cut electrical cables on both buildings indicate power
service originally was provided by poles along Main Street.
The remainder of the parcel is vacant. The former auxiliary buildings and the metal structure
once standing at 183 East Main are evidenced by concrete pads. Vegetation is minimal: several
trees, probably volunteers, of indeterminate age are scattered throughout the property.
Photographs of these historic resources can be found in Appendix 8 and on the DPR forms
following Appendix 8.
III. The Historic Context
As discussed in Appendix 2, in order to assess previously recorded and as yet unevaluated
cultural resources, a historic context must be developed, revolving around a theme, place, and
time. Then, it is possible to evaluate and study the identified cultural resources within the
research framework of the historic context.
....-.----
9
The modern era in the history of Tustin began in 1868 when Columbus Tustin, a carriage-maker
from Petaluma, in partnership with Nelson O. Stafford, purchased 1,359 acres of the Rancho
Santiago de Santa Ana when it was being partitioned. They paid $2,000 for the land. Mr. Tustin
established "Tustin City," as a real estate venture, on the eastern half of the acreage, making it
the third town founded in the County of Orange. By the end of 1872, Columbus Tustin had laid'
out the streets, established the Sycamore School District and founded a post office. Water first
reached the town by way of the Semi-Tropic Ditch, but the Santa Ana Valley Irrigation Company
was later organized to ensure a more reliable flow. Mr. Tustin started selling 50-by-l00-foot lots
in the 100 acres he had laid out in 300 square blocks. Later he had to give the lots away to try to
spur development. The only commercial buildings that lasted any length of time were a
blacksmith shop, three stores, a meat market, a tin shop, a saloon, and a grist-mill. By 1874, just
a dozen families had settled within the school district's boundaries.
By the time Columbus Tustin died in 1883, his dream city seemed to be a failure. Santa Ana
won out as the premier city of the region, especially when the Southern Pacific Railway chose it
as the location of its depot. Many Tustin residents moved to the bigger city and most Tustin
businesses closed. The later 1880s, however, was a boom period throughout Southern California
and eventually brought renewed life to the small community of Tustin. Under the auspices of the
Tustin Improvement Association, a hotel was built, a trolley-line started, and a bank was
established. The early one-room school had to be expanded. Former grazing lands became the
site of extensive citrus and walnut groves. Although there would be several more periods of
economic reversal, Tustin had become a permanent, established settlement by the 1890s. Early
residents seemed to enjoy their small-town status and gave up the fight to become a city the size
of Santa Ana.
Other historically significant events include the following: By 1888, the Southern Pacific had
established a station in Tustin from which two trains a day ran to Los Angeles. Telephone
service reached Tustin in 1903 and electricity was available by 1906. Except for commercial
thoroughfares, paved streets did not become a reality in Tustin until the 1930s. Agriculture was
the primary industry, but several long. term businesses were established near the turn-of-the-20th-
century, including the Tustin Lumber Company, Tustin Garage, Tustin Hardware, Piepers Feed
Store, the Utt Juice Company, and several large citrus association packinghouses. Social life
revolved around the Masons, the churches, the W.C.T.U., and the Farm Bureau. The city's life
was governed by two school boards, a volunteer fire department, a one-man police force, and a
City Council (after its incorporation in1927).
By 1927, Tustin's population had reached 900. Its boundaries at that time included about 196
acres which is a slightly larger area than that of the current Old Town Cultural Resources
District.
Tustin began to turn away from an agricultural economy in 1942, when the U.S. Navy built its
Lighter-Than-Air base on nearby bean fields. Two huge hangars, now on the National Register
of Historic Places, were constructed. In the 1950s, the skyrocketing population growth of the
-------
10
region caught up with Tustin and it suddenly found itself being regarded as a residential suburb.
Orange groves were replaced by new housing and freeways. The population jumped fTorn 2,000
in 1960 to 21,000 in 1970. (It had reached over 43,000 by the late 1980s.) The annexation of
Tustin Ranch brought the City's total acreage to 7,100.
Like many other communities throughout Southern California that experienced a renewed
interest in local history and historic buildings during the 1970s, Tustin citizens founded the
Tustin Area Historical Society in 1976. The Society subsequently opened a museum on EI
Camino Real near Main Street. A group called TRUST (Tustin Residents United to Save Tustin)
was organized in order to monitor zoning and development issues which might change the
character of Old Town. In the Spring of 1987, the Tustin City Council imposed a moratorium on
the issuance of permits and zoning and land use changes in the residential area of Old Town.
The Old Town area includes not only the commercial buildings in the vicinity ofEI Camino Real
and Main Street but a large residential area to the west. After a series of workshops and studies,
the City adopted an ordinance on June 20, 1988 which created a Cultural Resources Overlay
District. Also in 1988, the City contracted with Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. to undertake a
Historical Resources Survey, the report of which was published in July 1990. Soon after, the
City successfully applied to the State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) to become a
Certified Local Govemment (CLG). In order to become a CLG, a City must have established a
cultural resources ordinance and a historic preservation program meeting Federal and State
standards. A CLG is able to receive and distribute state grant funds, receive technical assistance
and training fTom SHPO, review nominations to the National and California Registers, and
generally localize the historic preservation process.
Themes of the Historic Context and Periods and Locations of Significance ofthe Resources:
Commerce/Trade, 1914-1973, Tustin
Resource Attributes: IIÌ.dustrial building; Commercial building
IV. Evaluation of the Historic Significance ofthe Resources
(Please see Appendix 3 for a background discussion on the evaluation phase.)
Using the criteria of the California Register of Historical Resources, the consultant must
determine the significance of identified resources on the project site.
The Utt Juice Buildings appear in the Historical Resources Survey conducted by Thirtieth Street
Architects for the City of Tustin in 1990. 193-195 East Main Street was given an "An rating on
the Survey which means it was found historically significant because of its architecture, integrity,
and/or association with prominent persons in the City's history. This double store-front was
pictured in the Survey and is described on page 25 as being specifically included in a style group
containing "some of the earliest and most elaborate non-residential buildings in the city." It was
...----.--..
. 11
deemed eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources, significant for
its rare and pleasing design and association with the Utt family. 191 East Main Street was given
a "B" rating on the Survey which means it is somewhat less unusual ôr distinctive in terms of age"
and not eligible for the California Register.
However, a "B"-rated building can be a contributor to a California Register-eligible historic
district, such as the Tustin Cultural Resources Overlay District.
Within the broad historic context of Orange County history, the Utt Juice Buildings are
significant for their association with ChàÌ'les Edward Utt, a Tustin pioneer since 1874. who, with
partners, was the first person to bring an organized agricultural industry to the Irvine Ranch. He
is credited with experimentation as to what crops were best suited to the County. Utt was also a
significant promoter of Orange County development due to his association with a number of
banks, savings and loan associations, and water companies. Within the context of Tustin local
history, Charles Utt is a significant figure due to his pioneering efforts in founding one of the
city's first large businesses (the Utt Juice Company), his real estate developments (including
Lemon Heights and the Utt Juice Buildings themselves), and his involvement with local banks,
water companies and the school district. As the headquarters of the Utt Juice Company from
1922 to 1973, the Utt Juice Buildings also have significance as reminders of an early Tustin
enterprise that helped make the city a center for agricultural products during the
pre-World Warllyears.
Architecturally, the Utt Juice Buildings are significant historical resources. However, all
architectural interest is centered in the elaborate Main Street facades; the other walls are
utilitarian in nature and much altered. Of particular interest is the double-storefront at 193-195
East Main Street. Its eye-catching metal cornice is significant not only for its elaborate design
but also because historic metal cornices are now a rarity in Southern California. The facade of
191 East Main Street is less significant, as other examples of this type ,of commercial vernacular
style are evident throughout Old Town Tustin. However, the commercial area of Old Town that
contains historic buildings is relatively small, so the loss of any of them would constitute more of
an impact than a similar action might in cities with larger historic commercial districts.
The Utt Juice Buildings also derive significance because of their location at a prominent corner
of Old Town Tustin. In fact, the Buildings provide an "introduction" to Old Town as the first of
its historic buildings one encounters when traveling west on Main Street. Their elimination and
replacement by new construction would significantly affect the visitor's initial historical view of
Old Town.
Summary of Significance:
193-195 East Main Street-A resource of regional significance under California Register
Criteria I (association with significant events or trends); 2 (association with historically
important people); and 3 (embodying distinctive characteristics of a type or construction
- --'--------
12
method). It is (liso a contributor to the Tustin Cultural Resources District, a designated local
historic district.
National Register Evaluation code: In the City's Historical Resources Survey, an "An rating
corresponds to a National Register significance code of3S (appears eligible for separate
listing on the National Register of Historic Places).
California Register Eligibility: According to the regulations of the California Register of
Historical Resources, any resource eligible for the National Register is also automatically eligible
for the listing on the California Register of Historical Resources.
191 East Main Street-A resource of local significance under California Register Criteria I
(association with signifiëant events or trends); and 2 (association with historically important
people). It is a1so a contributor to the Tustin Cultural Resources District.
National Register Evaluation code: In the City's Historical Resources Survey, a "Bn rating
corresponds to a National Register significance code of 5S1 (not eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places but is listed or designated under an existing local ordinance).
California Register Eligibility: According to the regulations of the California Register of
Historical Resources, any resource included on a local inventory with a code of 5 or higher is
presumed eligible for listing on the California Register unless there is substantial evidence to
prove otherwise.
Integrity of both resources: Fair. Although altered and suffering from seismic damage and
neglect, the exteriors of the buildings on the site (particularly along their Main Street and
Prospect Street facades) have retained sufficient integrity to convey their original appearance and
usages. The interiors, however, are empty, deteriorated, and much altered and no longer have any
tangible connection to the Utt J1.1ice-making process.
V. Findings of Effect and Recommended Mitigation Measures
(Please see Appendix 4 for a background discussion on this phase of the process.)
If the consultant determines that a proposed proj ect will have an adverse effect on any significant
resource situated on the project site, he must assess the extent of the effect and recommend
possible mitigation measures which could range from total preservation down to documentation
before demolition.
After acquiring the site, the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency on five prior occasions
has solicited development proposals for the property, dating back to 1998. Although the City in
solicitation documents for the site requested responses which would address the historical issues
13
pertaining to the site and the potential for adaptive reuse, none ofthe five prior developers
proposed retention of the Utt Juice Buildings, being of the opinion the expenses of remodeling
them would be prohibitive and not economically justified by their projected return.
The current developer, Pelican Center LLC/Tillotson, has likewise proposed to demolish the
buildings at 191 and 193-195 East Main Street, replacing them with "Prospect Village"-a new
development to include twelve detached live-work units and a two-story, 9,320-square-foot
office/retail building. However, the developer has indicated that various elements of the old
buildings, such as glass-brick and wall materials, could be integrated into the new structures,
The developer also stated that the project is designed to complement the Cultural Resources
Overlay District in design, mass, and color.
Citing the fact theUtt Juice Buildings have been largely unoccupied since 1973, the City has
determined that their seismic, electrical, plumbing, heating and ventilation systems are
inadequate and preclude occupancy. Additionally, earthquake damage has been detected,
especially along the Main Street fTontage. The City also feels that the storefTonts are in poor
condition and the interiors are heavily damaged by seismic stresses and water leakage.
Findings Of Effect: As discussed above, the consultant agrees with the City of Tustin's
Historical Resources Survey in determining that the Utt Juice Buildings are potentially eligible
for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. The project, as proposed, will
remove all the historic resources now on the site, creating a definite adverse effect.
Recommended Mitigation Measures and Project Alternatives:
1) Revise the project to retain all existing historic resources on the site, with re-use dictated by
what alterations and additions are possible under the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties. This is the only mitigation that will lower the impact of the
project to a level of insignificance. If the Redevelopment Agency deems retention of these
historic resources to be impossible, supportive findings as to why should be provided to the
ultimate local decision-making body, as required by the City's Cultural Resources Ordinance to
support demolition.
The following alternatives wi1llessen the impact of the proposed project but will not lower the
impact below a level of significance. They are listed in descending order of desirability:
2) Retain as many features of the historic resources as economically and practically possible on
the site. Since the architectural interest of both Utt buildings is centered in the Main Street
facades and the interiors no longer have historical significance, the facades alone could 'be
retained, with attention given to the new construction so that it complements the Cultural
Resources Overlay District in setback, design, mass, materials, and color. The State Office of
Historic Preservation also recommends that new construction adjacent to or inoorporating
historic elements not overwhelm those elements but allow them to be the focus of attention.
------__--.__m
14
However, such a "facade-ectomy" (a term often used by historic preservationists) will cause the
Utt Juice Buildings to be dropped from both the National Register and the California Register.
However, in their reduced state, these resources could still be considered as contributors to the
historic district.
3) If it is decided that all historic resources will be removed, further documentation of the
resources to be removed should be undertaken utilizing the standards of the Historic American
Building Survey (RABS), including photo-documentation and measured drawings of the
northerly and easterly elevations. The Tustin Area Historical Society and Museum would be a
logical location for a copy of these HABS recordations. Copies of these reports should be added
to a publicly accessible historical collection. The Tustin Area Historical Society and Museum
would be a logical location.
------
15
VI. Sources
General:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the National Park Service, Department ofthe
Interior
1986 Working with Section 106: 36 CFR Part 800: Protection of Historic Prooerties:
Regulations of the Advisorv Council on Historic Preservation Governing the Section 106
Review Process. The Council, Washington, D.C.
1988 Working with Section 106: Identification of Historic Prooerties: A Decisionmaking
Guide for Managers. Primary author, Thomas F. King. The Council, Washington, D.C.
American Association for State and Local History
1991 National Register of Historic Places: 1966-1991. The Association, Nashville.
Bean, Walton and James J. Rawls
1988 California: An Interoretive Historv. McGraw-Hill, San Francisco.
Beck, Warren and Ynez Haase
1974 Historical Atlas of California. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Boland, Beth Grosvenor
1991 Guidelines For Evaluating and Documenting Properties Associated With Significant
Persons. National Register Bulletin 32. National Park Service, Washington, D.C.
California Department of Parks and Recreation
1990 California Historical Landmarks. Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento.
1992 California Points of Historical Interest. Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento.
1998 The California Register Of Historical Resources: Regulations For the Nomination Of
Prooerties. Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento.
1995 Instructions For Recording Historical Resources. Office of Historic Preservation,
Sacramento.
1998 CEOA Guidelines Revisions: October 26. 1998
2001 California Environmental Oualitv Act (CEOA) and Historical Resources. (Technical
Assistance Series 1.) Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento.
16
2002 California State Law and Historic Preservation. (Technical Assistance Series 10.) Office
of Historic Preservation, Sacramento.
Gebhard, David and Robert Winter
1994 Los Angeles: An Architectural Guide. Gibbs-Smith, Salt Lake City.
Governor's Office, Office of PI arming and Research, State of California
1994 CEOA and Historical Resources. (CEQA Technical Advice Series). Sacramento.
Interagency Resources Division, National Park Service, Department of the Interior
1987 Contributions of Moved Buildings to Historic Districts. National Register Bulletin 4.
Washington, D.C.
1985 Guidelines for Counting Contributing and Non-contributing Resources for National
Register Documentation. National Register Bulletin 14. Washington, D.C.
1991 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.
National Register Bulletin 15. Washington, D.C.
1991 How to Complete the National Register Registration Form.
National Register Bulletin 16A. Washington, D.C.
1991 How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form.
National Register Bulletin 16B. Washington, D.c.
McAlester, Virginia and Lee McAlester
1984 A Field Guide to American Houses. Knopf, New York.
MacDougal, Bruce
1987 How To Establish Boundaries For National Register Properties. National Register
Bulletin 21. National Park Service, Washington, D.C.
O'Donnell, Eleanor
1992? Researching a Historic Property. National Register Bulletin 39. National Park Service,
Washington, D.C.
Parker, Patricia
1985 Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Plarming. National Register
Bulletin 24. National Park Service, Washington, D.C.
PI arming and Conservation League Foundation
2002 CommunitY Guide to the California Environmental Oualitv Act.
The League, Sacramento.
--
17
Rubens, Jack H. and William F. Delvac
1993 A Preservationist's Guide To the California Environmental Dualitv Act. California
Preservation Foundation, Oakland.
Sherfey, Marcella and W. Ray Luce
1979 Guidelines for Evaluating and Nominating Properties That Have Achieved Significance
within the Last Fifty Years. National Register Bulletin 22. National Park Service,
Washington, D.C.
Proiect-sDecific:
Armor, Samuel
1921 A Historv Of Orange County California. Historic Record Company, Los Angeles.
Guinn, J. M.
1902 Historical and Biographical Record Of Southern California. Chapman Publishing,
Chicago.
Hallan-Gibson, Pamela
1986 The Golden Promise: An Illustrated Historv Of Orange Countv. Windsor Publications,
Northridge.
Hardy, John
1974 Tustin TintVPes: A Pictorial Historv of Old Tustin. Irvine, Sunshine Graphics.
Jordan, Carol H.
1988 A Hundred Years ofYesterdavs: A Centennial Historv ofthe People of Orange CountY
and Their Communities. Santa Ana, Orange County Centennial, Inc.
1996 Tustin: A CitY of Trees. Encinitas, Heritage Media Corporation.
1975 Tustin Heritage Walk: A Walker's Guide to Olde Tustin. Rayline Printers
Meadows, Don
1966 Historic Place Names In Orange Countv. Paisano Press, Balboa Island.
Pleasants, Mrs. J. E.
1931 Historv Of Orange County California, Vol. 1. J. R. Finnell & Sons, Los Angeles.
Sorenson, John
2000 The Orange Blossoms: Fiftv Years Of Growth In Orange County. Heritage Media
Corporation, Carlsbad.
--------.
--------- -
J.8
Talbert, Thomas B.
1963 The Historical Volume and Reference Works, Vol. lli. Historical Publications, Whittier.
Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc.
1990 City of Tustin: Historical Resources Survey Reoort.
Walker, Doris
1989 Orange County: A Centennial Celebration. Pioneer Publications, Houston.
Works.:Progress Administration
1936 Cities and Towns: Orange County Series (Research Project #3105). Sponsored by Board
of Education, Santa Ana.
Periodicals:
"C. E. Utt Was Deeply Involved." Orange County Register. April 22, 2000.
"Freeze Frame: Utt Juice Building, Tustin." Santa Ana Register, March 10, 1987.
Grant, Gordon. "Taps for 100% Pure Fruit Juice Plant" Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1973,
Pt II, p. 1.
Lovret, Juanita. "Here's the Historical Lowdown on the Famous Utt Family." Tustin News,
April 16, 1998, p. 6.
Nicolosi, Michelle. "Building Owner Spars with Tustin Officials." Orange County Register,
November 8, 1990, p. 1.
Who's Who in California. 1942-43, p. 927.
-----
19
Appendix 1
The California Register and CEQA Requirements (General Information)
In the CEQA Guidelines Revisions, adopted October 26, 1998, the statement is made that "a
project with an effect that may caùse a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment"
[15064.5(b)].
The Guidelines define historical resources as any of the following: I) listed, or determined to be
eligible for listing, in the California Register of Historical Resources; 2) included in a local
register of historical resources or identified as significant in a historical resources survey, as
defined by the Public Resources Code [PRC §5020.I(k) and §5024.I(g)]; or 3) determined to be
significant by a lead agency provided the determination is supported by substantial evidence and
meets the criteria for listing on the Register [15064.5(a)(1-4)].
"The California Register is an authoritative guide in California used by state and local agencies,
private groups, and citizens to identify the state's significant historical resources and to indicate
what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse
change" [PRC §5024.1(a)]. Resources listed on the Register, or determined to be eligible for the
Register, are to be considered when there is a discretionary action subject to CEQA. The lead
agency on a project must determine not only if the resource is listed, but also ifit is eligible for
listing. Unlike the process for deternrining eligibility under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, the State Office of Historic Preservation has no authority to make consensus
determinations for the California Register for purposes of CEQA. The evaluation of resources
for eligibility is solely the responsibility of the lead agency. The agency may require the property
owner to furnish this eligibility information during the process of a project's environmental
review.
The Guidelines also provide processes for obtaining: a formal determination of eligibility for the
Califomia Register; clarification of eligibility and expedited review; and a non-binding informal
opinion of eligibility. A formal determination of eligibility for the California Register requires a
nomination for listing that will be granted when the property cannot be listed solely due to owner
objection. An informal or non-binding opinion may be obtained from the State Historic
Preservation Officer regarding whether or not a historical resource may be eligible for
nomination or potentially eligible for listing on the California Register. Such informal opinions,
however, will not be a substitute for a formal determination or listing and a formal nomination
must be submitted within 90 days or the informal opinion expires.
The State Office of Historic Preservation requires that all historic resources be recorded on DPR
523 forms for the sake of consistency and completeness and to better evaluate their eligibility for
the California Register.
----..---.- -- -.-
The following appendices discuss this consultant's evaluative process in determiriing the
eligibility of a historic resource for the California Register and in arriving at his conclusions
regarding project impact and possible mitigation measures.
20
21
Appendix 2
Identification of Existing Resources and Their Historic Context (Background)
Both federal and state guidelines require that the first step in the review process should be the
identification of cultural resources (i.e., historic properties). Various levels of preliminary
archival research and on-site survey investigations for cultural resources can be applied during
this step. This evaluator normally chooses a mid-range level of archival research in order to
facilitate the preparation of the "historic context" and eligibility evaluations for the California
Register, the next steps in the process. .
A research methodology is developed to comply with federal and state mandates and guidelines
for identifying cultural resources, be they in the form of buildings, sites, structures, objects, or
contributors to historic districts. A thorough field visit, including the preparation of a written and
photographic record, is the best foundation for identifying and later evaluating any cultural
resources found on the project site.
Historic research based on a sound methodology is crucial at this stage of the investigation.
Architectural history and analysis may be necessary for sites with extant buildings and structures.
Physical characteristics such as site structure, content, and integrity are crucial variables in later
evaluation of the resource's eligibility for the California Register.
Architectural components of extant or relic buildings, structures, and/or objects within the project
area should be sufficiently preserved to contain data for research and interpretation. Ideally, the
original design and subsequent alterations should be identifiable as discrete occupational
episodes associated with a temporally defined occupation. Architecture should represent
identifiable functional association. Archival materials should be available to reconstruct a partial
or complete history of the project area.
The National Park Service (NPS) stipulates that the significance of any historic property should
be made within the "historic context" developed for that area (Parker 1985; Interagency
Resources Division, Bulletin 16A, 1991). "Historic context" is defined as the sum of information
pertaining to an area, organized by theme, place, and tirne.
The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) suggests that "a theme is the equivalent of a
research problem, and an historic context is developed by placing the problem in an appropriate
setting in both time and space" (Interagency Resources Division, Bulletin 16A, 1991). For
instance, a broad historic context might be identified as "Western U.S. Expansion, Mid.19th
Through 20th Centuries." A more focused historic context might be "Early to Mid 20th Century
Agricultural Development of the (locality)."
A "historic context" is associated with identified cultural resources through the concept of
"resource attributes" (called "property types" by the NRHP). These attributes allow
geographically diverse historic properties that share physical and associative characteristics to be
linked together under a set of commonly agreed-upon descriptive terms and compared as to their
relative significance within the historic context. As an example, an appropriate resource attribute
---
22
for the sites associated with the contexts mentioned above, given the agricultural theme, might be
"Fann/Ranch. "
Major themes have evolved during the past two decades of cultural resources investigations at
various 19th and 20th century sites in southern California. Possible research themes and their
associated resource attributes, adapted fÌ'om the "Areas of Significance" and "Functions and
Uses" for eligibility evaluations for the NRHP, are listed on the following page:
---.
23
EXAMPLES OF POTENTIAL RESEARCH (HISTORIC CONTEXT) THEMES
Agriculturè
Archi tecture
Archaeology: Prehistoric
Aboriginal
Non-aboriginal
Exploration
Funerary
Government
Health/Medicine
Industry/processing/
Extraction
Irrigation
Land Use
Landscape Architecture
Law
Literature
Maritime History
Material Culture
Military
Performing Arts
Philosophy
Politics/Government
Religion
Residential
Science
Settlement Patterns
Social History
Subsistence
Technology
Tourism
Transportation
Other (e.g., Invention)
Art
Chronology
Commerce/Trade
Communications
community Planning and
Development
Conservation
Defense
Demography
Economics
Education
Engineering
En tert a inmen t / Re c rea t i on
Environmental Adaptation
Ethnic Heritage: Asian
Afro-American
European
Hispanic
Native-
American
Pacific Islander
EXAMPLES OF POTENTIAL ASSOCIATED RESOURCE ATTRIBUTES
Amusement Park
Ancillary Building
Bridge
Canal/Aqueduct
Cemetery
Civic Auditorium
Commercial Building, 1-3
stories
Commercial Building, over 3
stories
Community Center
Dam
Educational Building
Engineering Structure
Ethnic Minority Property
Farm/Ranch
Folk Art
Government Building
Highway/Trail
Hospi tal
Hotel/Motel
Industrial Building
Lake/River /Reservoir
Landscape Architecture
Lighthouse
Military Property
Mine
Monument/Mural/Gravestone
Multiple Family Property
New Deal Public Works Project
Public Utility Building
Railroad Depot
Religioùs Building
Rural Open Space
Ship
Single Family Property
Stadium/Sports Arena
Street Furniture
Theater
Train
Trees/Vegetation
Urban Open Space
Women's Property
'-----
24
More than one research theme might be applicable. Further research within and adjacent to the
project area could build on these themes and develop them into a historic context that
characterizes the cultural development of the entire community.
Many of the research themes are inter-related. The analysis of architectural, archival, and oral
history data for one therne will simultaneously address several other themes. For instance, the
study of historical material culture (i.e., artifacts) provides a wealth of information concerning
subsistence patterns, household composition (e.g., gender, adults, children, infants),
socioeconomic status, trade networks and commodity flows (local, regional, national, and
international), historical site use and activity, spatial inter-relationships offeatures and buildings,
site evolution, and other themes. The documentary record by itself rnay not contain sufficient
data to provide answers for all the research questions arrived at. Other data generated through
architectural, archaeological, oral history and specialized analysis may provide complementary
information which will provide answers to these and other research questions.
Research questions pertaining to the themes are developed prior to and during the course of
fieldwork. Other research questions arise during the subsequent analysis of -the field and historic -
research data.
A multi-disciplinary approach is used during the identification and historic context phase ofthe
cultural resource investigation project. Archival documents and cartographic sources, oral
history interviews, as well as field surveys are all used to locate, define, and provide
interpretations for the cultural resources within the project area. Furthermore, this data is
combined to reconstruct the most accurate picture of the project area. In turn, the research data is
useful in the construction of the historic context and in evaluating the significance of the sites
identified within and adjacent to the project area.
----------
25
Appendix 3
Evaluation of Historic Resources (Background)
Evaluation of sites is the second step in the review process. The first step, "Identification", has
been accomplished through research, development of an historic context, and a field survey of
cultural resources within the project area. In making an evaluation of a resource's significance,
the consultant refers to the following sources: the implementing regulations for the California
Register (California Public Resources Code, section 4852), California Environmental Oualitv
Act (CEOA) and Historical Resources published by the California State Office of Historic
Preservation, and National Register Bulletin 15: How to Applv the National Register Criteria for
Evaluation. (As mentioned below, the California Register criteria mirror those for the National
Register and this publication thoroughly addresses the evaluation process.)
CEQA mandates that a cultural resource's significance must be established before project
impacts to the resource can be assessed. All data gained fTom the field survey, architectural
analysis, research, and historic context will be assembled and interpreted with respect to each
site. In rurn, the multi-disciplinary data will be used to evaluate the individual site's potential
eligibility for the California Register.
In order to accomplish this, evaluative investigations must begin at the sites themselves. Field
investigations should document cultural features, site boundaries, and the nature and association
of site features within each parcel or property of the project area. The integrity of the cultural
resource (i.e., the state of intactness of its character-defining features fÌ'om the period of its
significance and the extent of alteration either deliberately made or the result of deterioration
over time) must also be addressed. Such changes will then be documented by historic research
and, where applicable, architectural analysis. (It should be noted that while interior
modifications of a historic property may affect its integrity, in most cases exterior integrity is
considered the foremost determinant of whether a property still retains enough its significance.)
During the evaluation phase of the investigations, the resources are assessed and evaluated for
their potential to address and exemplify important historic themes. The intent of the evaluation is
to assess the presence/absence of data that is needed to answer research questions. A site that has
lost substantial integrity through deterioration or alteration may thereby have lost much of its
significance. If similar, more intact, sites have been identified in close proximity to the subject
site, the site may be considered of lesser value than if it is the only such site found locally, and
therefore UIÙque, even if of poor integrity.
"Criteria for listing historical resources on the California Register are consis.tent with those
developed by the National Park Service for listing properties on the National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP), but have been modified for state use in order to include a range ofhistorical
resources which better reflect the history of California" (Department of Parks and Recreation
1998).
----
26
Criteria for Evaluating the Significance of Historical Resources
An eligibility evaluation for each cultural resource within the project area should be made under
the following criteria for the California Register ofHistoricàl Resources as established by the
revised CEQA Guidelines [15064.5(a)(3)(A-D)]:
"A resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be 'historically significant' if the resource
meets the criteria...including the following:
1. Association with events contributing to the broad patterns of the state's history
and culture;
2. Association with historically important people;
3. Embodiment of distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
construction method, or represents the work of a creative individual; or
4. Has the potential for yielding important information in California's history or
prehistory."
Thus, Criterion 1 is usually associated with "events," Criterion 2 with "persons," Criterion 3 with
"design/construction," and Criterion 4 with "information potential." Some historical
archaeological sites may be evaluated for eligibility under Criteria I, 2, and/or 3, but most are
evaluated under Criterion 4. (Please note that the criteria for the NRHP are worded very
similarly, except that they put more emphasis on the resource's significance on the national level.
The NRHP criteria are labeled A through D rather than 1 through 4 and are often found on DPR
523 forms.)
Criterion 1. Events. Properties are considered important if they are associated with significant
events. Association through the historic context has to be demonstrated. Providing evidence of
direct association of the events with the historic property is necessary. Properties can also be
considered important if they are the best examples of the result of historic settlement patterns or
economic development ("event," in this case, being rather broadly defined).
Criterion 2. Person. "Historically important people" refers to individuals whose activities are
demonstrably important within a local or state context. Correlation of an individual within the
framework of the historic context is crucial. Also, hislher meaningful ties with the specific
property is important.
Criterion 3. Design/Construction. Resources represented by extant architecture are evaluated
under this criterion. Elements that are important under Criterion 3 include distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or the work of a master, possessing
high artistic value. Integrity of the property is an especially important factor under this criterion.
.-----.....-'
27
Criterion 4. In order to qualify for eligibility for the California Register under this criterion, the
archaeological site (i.e., historic property) has to meet two conditions: I) the site must have
yielded or be likely to yield information such as archaeological data or historic data that will have
potential to answer research questions; and 2) the yielded information must be important with
respect to historical archaeology and other related historic preservation fields. -
Related Criteria--Generally, a historic property, to be considered eligible, should be of a certain
age, not be a reconstruction, and have never been moved from its original location. Federal
guidelines have traditionally prescribed a 50-year age for cultural resources evaluated for
eligibility for the NRHP (36 CFR 60.4); however, a 45-year age threshold is becoming
increasingly acceptable due to delays in project implementation whiGh can often stretch five
years or more beyond the evaluation date. The California State Office of Historic Preservation
has stated that, minimally, a site "must be at least 45 years of age" (1989:3). However, both the
National Park Service and the State Office of Historic Preservation do recognize special sites that
have achieved significance even though they may be less than 45 years old, have been
reconstructed, or have been relocated (Sherfey and Luce 1979; Interagency Resources Division
1987).
The NRHP has developed a chart of seven numerical evaluation codes for pinpointing the
significance status of historic resources. California Register regulations also recognize these
codes and require that they be entered onto DPR 523 forms.
I Listed in the NRHP
2 Determined eligible for the NRHP in a formal process involving
federal or state agencies
3 Appears eligible for listing in the NRHP in the judgment of the
professional evaluator
4 Might become eligible for listing in the NRHP when certain
conditions are met (such as restoration)
5 Not eligible for the NRHP but may be significant at the local
level
6 None of the above
7 Undetermined
These initial numerical codes can be further sub-classified by adding a letter code. Among the
most commonly used letter codes are:
S Resource is separately listed in the NRHP
D Resource is included as a contributor to a NHRP-listed district
B Both S and D above
M Resource may become eligible as a contributor to a NRHP-
listed district when more documentation is found or restoration
work is performed
-----
28
Refinements may be made to these alphanumeric codes by adding still more letters and/or digits
to cover all categories of actual or potential National Register eligibility. These finer divisions
are not listed here in view of space limitations.
Any historic resource given an initial NRHP code of I through 3 is eligible for listing on the
California Register. A resource given an initial code of 4 or 5 may be eligible for listing on the
California Register, but only after undergoing a formal nomination Rrocess involving the
agreement of the local jurisdiction and the State Historical Resources Commission. Code 5
properties are presumed eligible for the California Register unless there is significant evidence to
the contrary. In any case, it is recommended that resources with an initial code of 4 or 5 be given
special consideration in local planning.
------
29
Appendix 4
Findings of Effect and Recommended Mitigation Measures (Background)
Based on the eligibilitý evaluations for the California Register, a findings of effect (i.e., "no
effect", "no adverse effect", or "adverse effect") will be prepared for any sites eligible for the
Califomia Register within the project area. This is the third step of the review process. Sites that
will not be adversely affected by the proposed project will be preserved in place and "no effect"
or "no adverse effect" will occur. Sites that cannot be preserved in-situ within the project area
will suffer adverse effects by the proposed project and will require treatment or data recovery to
mitigate the loss of the resources. Recommendations for treatment and data recovery are to be
proposed for each project. A report containing all germane information relevànt to the study is to
be prepared and submitted to the lead agency. (In a case where a local historic preservation
ordinance has not been enacted, the evaluation report is designed to be of sufficient
comprehension, in terms of the identification, evaluation, and treatment of cultural resources, to
be of value in the context of any future ordinance the locality may enact within its jurisdiction.)
A project area represents the Area of Potential Effect (APE). As a result of a proposed project,
the APE will undergo direct and/or indirect changes with impact on cultJiral resources that may
have been evaluated as eligible or potentially eligible for the California Register.
The evaluator must determine whether the demolition or alteration of existing architectural,
landscape, and/or archaeological features constitute an effect on any significant cultural resources
within the project area. If there is an effect, the evaluator must decide whether the effect is
adverse or not adverse.
The revised CEQA Guidelines establish that "substantial adverse change in the significance of an
historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the
resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would
be materially impaired" [15064.5(h)(I)]. Where there is no local protective ordinance or other
regulation in place or where protective actions such as mitigation measures are insufficient to
avoid a "substantial adverse change" in the significant resource, the Lead Agency should
conclude that an adverse change will occur (Governor's Office 1994). A full EIR will need to be
prepared at this point ifnot already called for by other environmental impacts of the project.
Federal, state, and local historic preservation procedures for assessing effects and mitigation of
adverse effects from a proposed project on cultural resources eligible for the California Register
call for prudent and feasible alternatives. Planned construction, usually an adverse effect, may
not always permit in-situ preservation of the historic cultural resources within and directly
adjacent to the project area. Therefore, project alternatives or mitigation measures must be
proposed to preserve and/or document the significant cultural resources that will be destroyed by
a project.
----.-
30
Proiect Alternatives or Mitigation Measures
The revised CEQA Guidelines advise that "a lead agency shall identifY potentially feasible
measures to mitigate significant adverse changes in the significance of an historical resource.
The lead agency shall ensure that any adopted measures to mitigate or avoid significant adverse
changes are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures." The
guidelines also state that a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties (1995) "shall be considered as mitigated to a level less than a
significant impact on the historical resource" [15064.5(b)(I)(C)(3-4)].
Among the alternatives which can be considered by the lead agency for a significant site are:
1. No Project (no construction of the planned development); or
2. Mitigation of the Project's Effect on the Cultural Resources by:
2a. Adaptive reuse of the historic resource(s) within the project. Such reuse of
building facades and architectural features has become an innovative and highly
successful means of mitigating impacts on historic buildings in numerous cities
with historic buildings. The facades should be restored in conformance with the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Adaptive reuse may also involve the
construction of new buildings, sometimes as in-fill between existing historic
structures. Guidelines for the design of new buildings should include such
concerns as architectural style, materials, height, setbacks, colors, textures, street-
scape patterns, matching of the existing overall rhythm of new development to the
surrounding area, structural detailing, signage, and exterior treatments.
Various incentives exist for the adoption of this mitigation measure, such as use
of the State Historical Building Code (Health and Safety Section 18950, et seq.)
instead of the Uniform Building Code; and financial incentives such as local
property tax relief through the Mills Act (Revenue and Taxation Code Sections
439 et seq.), the Marks Historical Rehabilitation Act, and federal investment tax
credits for the rehabilitation of income-producing property. Other incentives such
as facade easements or low-interest construction loans may also be available
through the local jurisdictions.
2b. Relocation of the resource(s). This mitigation is a problematical one. The
majority of historic buildings will lose their significance when removed fÌ'om their
original setting or context. Relocation is usually preferable to demolition fÌ'om the
purely historic preservation standpoint, but the National Register will rarely
maintain a relocated structure's listing and then only ifit meets rigid criteria, such
as prior application, re.creation of the original setting at the new site, and the
retention of the structure's original compass orientation. Buildings that are
---
31
significant under Criterion C (or 3) are the most likely to retain significance after
moving. Regulations for the California Register are a bit more flexible, as the
State's Historical Resources Commission recognizes that this may be the only
way to preserve some historic resources.
2c. HABS-Ievel architectural documentation. The Historic American Building
Survey is a program of the National Park Service that documents historic
resources in great detail. It requires measured drawings, intensive historical
research, large format photographs, and prescribed procedures for transmission
and archival preservation. Published guides to HABS are available ITom the
National Park Service.
2d. Less thorough architectural documentation. This normally includes complete
photographic documentation of the site and a detailed historical report. This
permanent record shall include a history of the site, documentation of the
building itself, adjacent structures, and streetscapes. The record should be made
publicly accessible by placing it in the care of a local historical society, academic
institution, or public library.
In regard to 2c and 2d above, the revised CEQA Guidelines warn that "in some circumstances,
documentation of an historical resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or
architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolition of the resource, will not
mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would
occur" [15 I 26A(b)(2)].
When a proj ect will have significant effects, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, allowing
the project to go forward despite the effects, may only be considered by a lead agency after all
reasonable alternatives and mitigation measures have first been adopted and then analyzed as to
feasibility.
-----_. ---.--
APPENDIX 5
Maps
"""'--..---------_._---_..-... .-
32
. '0
----------
--...
------- .---
SITE 'MAP
...
}>I £ JI."'" me. AI....,
,~
-"..,
r
.......".
,~
.~..
I
-.:
II
""i,.....
...
.,,""0 c....ø. """
,.",.
c"","S/..
..r
I:
Third Street
"....
I
I
I
I
c..-...., t
II"
..... "'"
I
U_uA... i
I AU"
-"'-
I
i,
Tn'
u......,.....
-""""..1;'
-----.-.
-------..-..--........--
33
APPENDIX 6
Assessor's Records
, ..""" ¡r-
0;- 5"Y'--O;
.0 -
~4,
",4,
,,'
~
,I
'<:"
I
I
I
I
/"
:11
"
",:;1
,.",
..3 .;/
/fI}
,.
"'-<>-- /')) ..
,I
"'J ,
,~...
:/~
T ---."" -"'on.....--
... '"
II
.,...
I'
,....¡.
I
.I
^
. '~'-"_._"....
,ý ,¡,..-~ j{--
0"
ß' ,ß'
r' g '°
Ы I.r c:J
~.
,>' ~. $."0'
, 0
:¡"~
,/
".?
~i
~<
-- --------_.._--~-_...._---
h
~.
" i
..
,
-""------,p
...
f
. "
,
I
I
,;
3<
J
,
3'"
! ,,^,»
;SvJI..;J.--
.........--~"
-----Y
I..
.n
.,.0
"°
.2k
~.
"
70
1."1" ,
_1:1.1 ." '. '.¡
. f-. .t
-:~:I':' .
J
u
y
¿
--.---...------
- ------.--------.-----.-.-----.....
APPENDIX 7
Historical Photographs and
Documentation
.-----....-. -
34
....
-
"---p,-,,--"--
-.
.-------
- .-_u_------------
-------- --
.--------...
183 E. Main Street (demolished 1995)
Orange County Register
November 8, 1990; p. 8
-.- --no_-
.--.--------. ---------.-----------
1914: In September. grocers Charles Sauers, 'from
Hooper, Neb.. and Phil Bergquist became the first
tenants of the new un Building on the northwest
corner of Main and "E" (now Prospect), county
, Photo court_y Tustin ArM HI8IO~C81 Soc_1oty .
- hIStorian Jim Sleeper writes. By 1918, with three
ge~ral stores, Tustin was "considerably overbuitt:'
SO the three merged as the Tustin Mercantile Co.
under Charles Artz. The men shown are unIdentified.
Orange County Register
March 10,1987
-- ..-..-.-
----------- -
-----'-"'----'--
---
--------- ..
:,;
.0
E
'"
E
::
¡:
0
u
rl
0.
~
'"
.0
.2
0\
¡:
'x
:::
0
t:
~
-¡¡;
"
H
H
.¡.o
I'-<
riJ",
<Dt--
Sç¡,
'M rl
E-<
i:
'"
J?
~
Q.
WCD
<Drl
rl
<D <D
bD>=:
>=: ;3
<r:>-:>
W
0
,..:¡
v.
...,
co
0
:¡;:
...,
:¡
--------
-----..- -
--_... ---- ..,.....,--~,....--------------"---"-"--'---""
----'--.""-."
ù .~ èj:A ~g
t: ts iï g ,~
C Q ,. <: -
E 21 f,'; Ion ¡;j
.~ :: H 3~'
<: ,., (1 C
."í .., ;. .c
.§'~E.~g ~
I ~' ;. " ".
~~ f~ ~ ~
~~ g i'I ~ ..
'" ..1 ,. <:
4. ~ -".::J 1-
r:¡ ¡;; § i'l .
Z.-.,ì: ~ r!
""~, 0
>-~..ti U j;'-
-----.--------
.-.-....---
-------
. .--- ..--------------- -----------------...-----
U'1'T. Charles Edward
Acrl,ultur"'t, Pml'ent. San Joequln Fruit
and Investment Compeny.
Bo=, Pla..r Co. (Callt.'. Mar. 28. 1866, a.
of A. E. (Pia'" and L. Uit.
Ed.,.".., Ungraded d'strl,t "hool (Tustin,
CaHf.l, p.,t."aduate ,ou"e (life as It Is
Hvedl.
M.m'" Mary. d. of J. T. Shetdon In Mon-
rovia (CaH'-'- Feb., 1894, ,h.' Jam... Ger.
trude. Dorothy. Mary. EH..beth.
B"'. Be...,d, Experlen..d In "tall and whole.
sale dtstrlbutlon, manufa,turl"" and bankinc.
Organized (with two friendsl. San Joaquin
r~Jt B~U'h:¡'¡>~' ~~~tI~t\v;;'.~ew.,;,::.t J~8:
started ".ulldlng It that yoar and in 1941 Is
stili at It. Pm.. Son Joaquin Fruit and In.
vestment Co.
Dimto"".,, Pres.. Utt Development Co..
Red Hili Wator Co., Lemoh H". Mutual Wat-
er Co., Dlreo'or. Commercial Nat. Bank (Sen.
ta Ana'. San'a Ana Bldg. end Loan Co-.
Orange Co- Fruit Exohange, Irvine Citrus
Assn.. Fran,es Mutuat Wa"r Co-. Fran..s
Citrus Assn.. Exohance Lemon Produ," Co.
M",,'.,.e".., All the York degrees of Free
Masonry.
Be"gio., Di..t Chrletlan.
Po'It"'" Independent Repu.H"n.
Be.,.e.".." Work, huntl"". ",hlng and
travel.
B"'. Add"", San Joaquin Frull and Invest.
ment Co., Tustin, CaHf- .
Who's Who in California, 1942/43
p. 927
'--'-'--
-- ---...
- . . .
CJÎJA,RLI';S'EDWAltDU'1T .
-(PoI."._' JlaDche~ DI..) ,
Ch:àtl'ê'~:.'Ej..Uft'f.;:\",
.. """"',';", ',Y ','ff '""",-"",."
Iàkênb;i:Iff,eafh':
. 'ÔhÙl~... ¡:¡j~ard¡Jit:$3¡~t L.rn~
oD,Hel&h1s. ,plöpeer:ra~he'. acUve
In Orange county..';,d!'v"lop.lJlents,
dled',yUterdaY ,attorn..,\" In,' ¡¡~
.JDoeph ',;,hösplt.ai;:,.a.. <' ha,hitìffere4
tróm,a"lieatt:8Ilínent! :..,.<""',.<,:,.'.'
.', Dei.IOÎíer,";i:ievel'&ban:êit.¡:'Ìíé
, waS óiJ"'Of'.the,.orgân!z<!i-s,'øt<thè
San',Joaquln,Frult, CO':aiid,,"'" as,
socla,ted:Wlth ,èveraJi-othél'<"cltrus
assoctl;t1<Ì11O...water. ""mpaDiea "ìÎi1d
linanci,!> I'OUps: He,~dy- bacl<éd
éff""",,t(; 'III?" the'-'..-,an,:alJlþle
supply:otwat~. ¡-'f,: ' "'"
'In ,.partnershlp. with, Sherman
SteveDíi:and James lrYIne,.he:otart-
ed.tll,,'. San, Joaquin' :E'i-uU-Co.'on
1000 ..¿res,of -¡hi> :1rvIne'~"I',he
compàny lðt."'.developeíi:,.sevel'8l
other, renclies' I... Sôuthem"Cal1lqr-,
: nla. Mr. VIii- and: Mr.'S1!"1en",tô,
i gether',.!'pera"tè4.. ,à' numbe", , of
Santa Ana Register?
February 6,1950
---------..,,-.- _--_n'
- "
ranches and Ihe lorlner developed
many 01 his own;' including, the
Simi. and the Mugu,' ranches and
the, Lemon Heighls.ranch. whe,re
he made his ,home. '. '"-,, ,"-
.. Amónll" Ihe 1!'usiri...e.s;'in ,;whlch
b.; wa. Inlere.ted'-were:lheTu8'
tin Water. Wo*.. which ,hi! boughl
'60:yeàrs:..eo;\the ,IJ,UJuice,Cor
tHe Utt"Development Co;, aJ' 0,,-
n, .".r,d"".',-aÎid"",.",.,s..e".V",!r,.a.I:"w"a".I.e,'..',r".",c.,om, P,an,)e~;"
cttrus-packlng' associations. - ban
Md 'bulldlng and- loa": -asSoclalloM
-.-He,played an Important 'part Ii>
,tarUM&,'lhollenion and _orange b
product:l plai¡.to o( the Cltrll$ E~-
chenge and _erved as a director
many years: :. . '" _:: I
Early recogn,lzlng _the imporl-
on':", 01 wa.let to Southprr.. Caillor-
. hla "agrleulture. ae: was .among
1~~s"oft ~~ t.~iI ';1~~;~o..:~fe,,~fsl11 f~
more,Ovaluoble lB.t1d' àt' hither ele-
'vatloni,. HI! ¡¡elped' wlth,'the In,
ve.Ugatron 01 'po.slb,tlltles oC' Coid'
redo-- water lor ~he Soulhland be-
iÐre,lhe 10,,;,atlon:p(the'Metro.
'poUlan Water-dJ_trlct and for-
warded eClorts 10 have a dam- at
Prado In Ihe Santa Ana'rlver. .
FOR FRF.E; EN'l'ERPR1~JI)., .
- Mr.', VtI.. a '>tl'oilg, , advocate o~
Ihe Cree,flnterpris. - sYelem. also
iuknown30T hIS 'writings on po-
Iltical.tind economic Issueš.', '-
NaUve.of' Auburn, he:'had lived
:r.~;o~~~f.l~~tl~r~ ~~;'~~I
the grocery-' buslne..s. his' ather
operat.d,' Upon his lather's'death
he look ove~.the store and cOJiduct.
ed the buotness meralyëars. Al-
ways Inte~ledlnog"eulture, .he
r.¡sed" peanua on,--several, hundTed
acres oC rented', land 'and-became
widely, knawllos "the peanut king."
!'.Aó...-.boYhe-hadattended the
.,A""..d.',v".ò.n"..t,"."C.'. h"..."".'."",I",'.I,"'.,.'..'.'.'.Ch....,.u..."r, C.',.,h"',b. ','0, ',t. . l..a""",t..e",T""
j°ine4\ .Ihe" 8a!Jta, Ana Baptist
hùrcl\" whe..' he ',contlnued.. h..
membership. alth""gh as an' adillt
he",aUended:,the.:'l'usUn _Presbyte-
rlan.,ohurcll."','., ,-':1
. f ,,;be¡ongec! tô'-Santa Ana Lodge
No. 241. F.&A.M.;,!lrid Santa. Ana
CøllÎmandèry-. - No... :'FJõ. . : .xnlght:l.
!e::'~:':~Ü-""lv~ biJil~';':I1J; 14..':,.
g'a,retT on, lion,' JamÌ!e' B;Utt 01
Sanla'.Ma';. foue" dtughteJ: f,r Me"
Elizabeth 'Flliley: of Sant'... ':Ane¡
Mn; ~,.;,de Ho.. tbt)!'Mn. Do
Ihy- Robertìim. or Slrill' nd"Nrs.
Loul""De':""", of, Esoondillo; five
SteP-chIldren" Walter and: Clarence'
l!i,WllDgs, Mrs. Ruth COX; Mrs.
JetSl.. :JlOYSIOn" an, d MIss Marjorie
RawIlDP; 17 grandchIldren _and 17
great-¡....ndchlldren:;; " -.0.
FUneraF services will be Mid t...'
morrow at 10 ;'''''',.In the' Sml,th
and T'\Jthlll"chàpeL "Rev. Karl
Christ,paato. of ,the,TUItl.. Pres
byteelan chU:reh." and' Rev;' D. G.
Rldei-¡, 'Pastor: '01, :thè . Santa A}¡.
First. ,BaPtUt. church, ,will. o~cl"
ale. .lIIterment In Falrhaven ~"'"
'etery.-'¡'¡¡¡:be_ptivate. '.,"(
---------..'--------
----...-------
.F'
;j
:E:
v
'M
H
'M
::r:
.;;:
OJ
;j
H
Ö
c~
Q)
bO
ro
'D
rl
0
'D
¡::
oj
..c:
+-'
;j
a
þ,
¡::
'M
,+-,
, +-'
:::>
tfJ
Q)
rl
H
ro
..c:
0
- -.----
ó
Õ
..c
c.
"U
Q)
1ií
"U
C
:>
c
'"
.S
H
QJ
. .>
U)
'rl
òOD
QJD
~D
N
:>,
. .> -
>::N
;ON
0
0""
'rl
QJ H
òOo.
>::<>:
CII
H
0
----------..- .
----------
35
APPENDIX 8
Current Photographs
.. -,-,---------"-'" ---
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS ON FOLLOWING PAGES:
(Also consult photographs attached to DPR 523 forms)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
193 East Main Street, south facade, look,ing north
193 East Main, cornice; looking northwest
Junction of 193 and 195 East Main, cornice, looking north
195 East Main, cornice, looking northeast
195. East Main, east facade, looking west, showing wrap-around of cornice
195 East Main, south facade, looking north, showing entry
191 East Main, south facade, looking northwest
Junction of 191 and 193 East Main, looking northeast
195 East Main, east facade, looking southwest
10
195 East Main, north facade, looking southwest
11
191 - 195 East Main, north facades, looking southwest
12
195 East Main, west facade, looking east
13
193 East Main, north facade, looking southeast
14
191 East Main, west facade, looking east
15
191 East Main, west facade, looking southeast
16
191 East Main, west and south facades, looking northeast
17
Rear of property, looking south
18
Rear of property, looking northwest
19
Rear of property, looking east
20
Rear of property, looking northeast
21
Rear of property, looking southeast
-
N
--
--~--.__..
----..-
\.,
\")
- ----- ~. .. --~- m__~___..
,----
____.n__- n..
f'
~
--
....
\x:;:,
+
I
I~
(-
j
c"
i':
-..-- --------..
- ..,-----..-......-""-""-'
--s
\.,
~.... -
-
~
" .,'.~<
'-- "
0
('I
\
í
~~
J
-----.
,---------
DPR 523 FORMS
...--------
--,----------
, p.lmary#
Nit"
T11nomial
NRHP Status Code
State of Callfomia - The .Resouroes Agency
- - DEEMjIMENT OE,P.AAK:ltAND.RECREAIION- ----
PRIMARY R5CcaO
3S
Page 1 of 7
P1. Other Identifier:
P2. Location: 0 Not for Publication ~ Unrestricted
and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
b. USGS 7.5' Quad Date T; R
c. Address: 193-195 East Main Street City Tustin
d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/linear resources) mE/
e. Other Locational Data (Enter Parcel #, legal description, directions to resource, elevation, etc.. as appropriate)
East 155 feet of the north 162.5 feet of Block B, Lot 3 of the original Tustin City
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer
Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Date
Utt Juice Building #1
a. County
Orange
1/4 of
1/4 of Sec
Zip 92780
mN
Parcel No. 401-585.01
P3. Description (iJescrtJe.........-osen:!isrr-oP'eIemen1s.lrdJdedesi;¡n,~, o:n:IiIiJn,aIIeæIi:m,size..øtrg, a-d bou1c:Bias)
This is an L.shaped, one-story, 9,270.square-foot building of Victorian Italianate style. It has a "at parapeted composition roof. Th,
Assessor describes the foundation as reinforced concrete. The building extends sixty linear feet along Main Street and ninety linea,
feet along Prospect Street. The section behInd 193 East Main is thirty feet shorter than that behind 195 East Main. All but the soutn
(main) facada of the building appears to be constructed of poured.in-place concrete, although a layer of plaster has been applied
over the east (Prospect Street) wall. The building is crowned with an ornate metai cornice featuring large brackets at each end and I
the center. It wraps around the southeast corner of the building extending for about six feet aiong Prospect. The cornice consists (
a row of closeiy.spaced smaller brackets- Beiow iI is a row of iarge dentil work, a band of vertical panels. a row Of molding. a row or
smaller dentll work. and several rows of moiding. The comice ends just above transoms which are composed of small giass paneis.
The easterly transom is of more recent vintage than the one to its west, the latter having three reguiarly spaced venting paneis that
can be opened. (see continuation sheet)
P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP6. 1.3 story Commercial Building
P4. Resources Present [8J Building 0 Structure 0 Object 0 Site 0 District 0 Element of District 0 Other (Isolates, etc,)
PSa. Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures. and objects) P5b. ~ dPhob: ryeN. daI9. ocoessì:Jn #)
-" I . 195 East Main St.. south (main) facade (View
Î toward north). Photo No: 80.1; 4/1613
P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources:
0 Prehistoric I:8J Historic 0 Both
1914-County Assessor
:PT. Owner and Address
¡Community Redevelopment Agency
IClty of Tustin
~OO Centennial Way
,..:¡rustin. CA 92780
~ 1>8. Recorded by: (Name, aftiaIi:Jn. en:! adctess)
Tim Gregory DBA The Building Biographer. 400
Cellfomla BI.. #3, Pesadena. CA 91106
"-:.1>9. Date Recorded: 5/212003
P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
'f'roject-oriented
P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources. or enter "none")
Attechments 0 NONE 0 Continuation Sheet 0 District Record 0 Rock Art Record 0 Other: (LIst)
0 Location Map 0 Building, Structure. and Object Record 0 LInear Feature Record 0 ArtIfact Record
0 Sketch Map 0 Archaeoiogical Record 0 Miliing Station Record 0 Photograph Record
"Mo^"' ....1..,...........
.--.--"'-'
State of California - The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Primary iI
-HRJ-#------ ,---
Trinomial
--,,-...-.---..
. CONTINUATiON SHEET
Page 2 of 7 Resource Name or iI: (Assigned by recorder)
Recorded by: Tim Gregory
Uti Juice Building #1
Date 5/2/2003
[8IContinuation 0 Update
P3. Description
The double storefront design features centered entries recessed diagonally into the wall. These entries. leading to double wood doors.
have concrete noors and molded wood ceilings in the cenfers of which are lighf fixture out/ets. The doors have transom spaces above
them. the ones on the easterly door having been boarded over. Glass show windows appear on each side of the recessed entries and
along the diagonal walls leading to the doors. The easterly show window on 195 and the westerly window on 193 have been boarded
over. The original bulkheads of both stores (said by the Assessor to be made of marble) have been covered with plain wood panels. The
east facade of 195 has a double-molded cornice, a single large double.hung window located centrelly. and a barn-type sliding wood door
on lis northeriy end. The rear elevations display evidence of many bricked-up window and door openings. some of them archad. Only
two doors and e sing/a window now appear on the rear of the building.
CPR 523L ("") H."""'iœ' ,
- "'-._._-----
State of California - The Resources Agency
,ÐEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND-RECREAT1CJN---
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
Page 3 of 7 NRHP Status Code .
Resource Neme or #: (Assigned by recorder) UtI Juice Buiiding #1
---.PJ:tmM¥-tl
HRI#
-, -----,--.
35
B1. Historic Name:
B2. Common Name:
B3. Original Use: Commercial
B5. Architectural Style: Victorian Italianate
B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations. end date of alterations)
1914--first constructed
ca. 1922-addltion at rear
84. Present Use:
Vacant
B7. Moved? 0 No 0 Yas 0 Unknown
B8. Related Features:
Date:
Original Location:
89a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
810. Significance: Theme: CommercefTrade Area: Tustin
Period of Significance: 1914-1973 Property Type: Commercial Applicable Criteria: A. B, C
(Discuss importance In terms of historical or architectural context as deflnedby theme. period and geographic scope. Also address Integrity.)
The storefronts at 193 and 195 East Main Street were built in 1914 as investment properties by Tustin pioneer Charles Edward UtI.
Ownership of the property was recorded in his wife's name. (The Orange County Assessor shows that the firs.! Utt.owned
improvement on the property, which then occupied the entire west half of Biock B, appeared in tax year 1915 and had a value of
$750.) The first tenant of 195. in September 1914. was a grocery store (also selling dry goods and shoes) owned by Charles E.
Sauers, a native of Nebraska, and Phil H. Berquist. Sauers was active in the Tustin school system, having served on the
eiementary school board and the Tustin Union High School Board of Trustees. of which he was the first cierk. Sauers and Berquist
merged their store with two other simiiar establishments Into the Tustin Mercantile Company and moved elsewhere in 1918. A
bakery, owned by Charles H. Eaton. occupied 193 East Main Street.
Charles UtI (otten referred to as C. E. or Ed UtI) was bom in Auburn. California on March 23. 1866, the only chiid of Lysander
("San") and Arvilla (Platt) UtI. The senior Mr. UtI was a native of Virginia who first came to California durlng the Gold Rush of
1849. It is there he married his wife who had moved to Califomia from New York as a chiid. It is said San UtI made and lost
several fortunes during the next few years. criss-crossing the country on the Santa Fe Traii. In 1874. he bought his famiiy to
Tustin following a one-month journey by covered wagon from Placer County. At the time, Tustin was a "little cluster of half a dozen
cottages"(Armor) In the middle of mustard fields. The econorny of the area was largely based on cattle and sheep grazing. (See
continuation sheet)
B11. Additionai Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes)
B12. References:
Armor, Samuel. A History of Orange County. 1921
Halbert. Thomas 8. Historical Volume, 1963
Jordan, Carol H. A Hundred Years of Yesterdays, 1988
Jordan. Carol H. Tustin: A City of Trees, 1996
HP6 - 1.3 story Commerclel
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
tJ
r
r
..,
B13. Remarks:
814. Evaluator: Tim Gregory
Date of Evaluation: 5/2/2003
(This space reserved for official comments.)
¿]
I-
J
I!!
'-
"-
0
t
~
¡-,.q-,.t.!
J,.
I
-----------
.------
State ot California - The Resources Agency PrimarY #
.,. O~~~RTMENT OF PARKS A~_~ !,EC--R~~TION.-_--_- .__._.---,--~-"'RI,#------,
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 4 of
Recorded by:
B10. Significance
San UII entared into tha mercantile business, purchasing the stock and premises at the southwest comer of Main and D Streets of
Tustin's first store-owner H. H. Dlckennan. who had recently died. The new establishment was celled the "L. UII Pioneer Store." The UII
family lived above the shop. Cherles took over the business at the age of 21, upon tha daath of his father. Arvllia UII (known as "Villi"),
now a widow, ran a boarding house In connection with the store. At the same time. Charles UII raised peanuts on several hundred acres
of rented land, earning him the We of "peenut king. " His "Double-Jointed Goober Peas, " sold at five cents per bag, became popular
locally. Uti continued to run the family business until 1893 when he took up ranching. As well as calf/e, he wes said to heve raised
"practically eve/}' crop known to Orange County" (Armor). In 1906, he was one of the organizers. with James Irvine and Shennan
Stevens, of the San Joaquin Frull Company and was Its first president. Specializing In the growing and processing of citrus fruits,
walnuts, avocedos. end chilies. the finn owned over 1,000 acres of egriculturalland on the Irvine Rench and had three packing houses
served by a spur of the Santa Fe Railroad. The San Joaquin Fruit Company also developed several other ranches In Southern California,
including Mugu, Slmi, and Lemon Heights In Tustin. UII was instrumentel in the formation of the Orange County Citrus Exchange. of
which he served as director for a number of years.
7 Resourca Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Tim Gregory
Utt Juice Building #1
Date 5/212003
I8J Continuation 0 Update
In 1898, UII bought the Tustin Watar Works from the struggling Willard brothers. Early recognizing the importance of water to Southern
CalifOrnia. UII envisioned pumping water from low levels to more' valuabla land at higher elevations. Despite having made many
improvements, he ran the Water Works at a loss for many years, continuing It only to ensure that Tustin would have a relieble water
supply. He was later to assist In the investigation of using Colorado River water before the advent of the Metropolitan Water District and
forwarded afforts to build a dam et Prado. UII also served as presIdent of the Red Hili Water Company and the Lemon Heights Mutual
Water Company and was on the board of the Frances Mutual Watar Compeny. His Tustin Water Works was later purchased by the City
which renamad it Tustin Water Service.
Besides running his own business, UII also sarved on the board of Tustin's first bank. the Bank of Tustin, formed in 1888. When It wes
succeeded by the First National Benk of Tustin In 1911, he continued on the board end later served as president. He also sat on the
board of the Commerclel National Bank of Senta Ana and was a director of the Santa Ana Building and Loen Company.
UII wes traasurer of the Haven Seed Company and was involved with other agricultural orgenlzatlons. such as the Orange County Fruit
Exchange (mentioned above), the Irvine Citrus Association. the Frances Citrus Association. end the Exchange Lemon Products
Compeny. In 1930. he founded the UII Development Company, 'headquartered in Oxnard. He served as a boerd member of the Tustin
School District and;: in 1921, headed a citizen's committee to organize the Tustin Union High School District to halt a movement by Sante
Ana to annax TustIN schools. He became the new District's first president. UII was also part of a group that subdivided Lamon Heights,
where he was to build his own home In 1922, designed by Clifford Truesdell, Jr.
In Februa/}' 1894 in Monrovia. Uti had married Ma/}' M. Sheldon. the daughter of an old pioneer Tustin family. They were to have five
children. four daughters and one son. (Their son, James "Jimmy" B. UII, beceme a well.known local politician, representing Orange
County in the U. S. Congress from 1953 to 1970). Ma/}' Ulldied In 1918. The UII famllyallended the local Presbyterian Church
(although Charias UII once cheracterized his faith es "Deist Christian") and were strong Prohibitionists. Known for his conservative.
free.anterprise views, UtI was an Independent Republican and wrote articles on poll/lcal and economic Issues of the day. He was an
ective member of the Masons and listed his hobbles in 1942 as "work, hunting, fishing and travel."
"A man of much entarprise and forca of character." UII was said to have enjoyed the "confidence and good will of the whola community"
(Armor). Charles Edward UII died on Februa/}' 5. 1950 et the age of 83. He was survived by his second wife Margaret. his five children,
and five step-children. The City of Tustin named a street and a middle school after him.
Around 1913, UII had leased two acres of barren hillside lend In Peters Canyon in what is now the Lemon Heights neighborhood. After
providing irrigation, he planted Callfomla Concord and Isebella grapas. The vines were so productive by 1917 that UII needed to find a
larger market for them. Since his fiavorful home-made grape juice had won popularity with family and friends, he decided to bailie it
commercially, tha first 4,000 quarts produced using gas plates on his back porch. Considered e pioneer in the concept of producing
grape juice commercialiy, Ull's marketing allempts in the Santa Ana area were so successful that he pianted thirty more acres of vines.
(The vineyards would eventually encompass 150 acres, at their height.) (See continuation sheet)
MO"" """".0..".'..'
,-----..
Stale of Callfomia - The Resources Agency
OEFWHMENT OF. PARKS ðN_JLREÇRE.AII()N.
CONTINUATION SHEET
-"""---"""'--..-
Primary #
---HRI-#------,-....---.--
Trinomial
UtI Juice Building #1
Date 5/212003
IZI Continuation 0 Update
Page 5 of 7 Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Recorded by: Tim Gregory
810. Slgnlneanee
By 1922, UtI needed to expand his production facilities. In that year he moved his UtI Juice Company into tha buildings he owned at Main
and Prospect in Tustin. outfitting them with the required boilers. vats. and presses. To create more space. he constructed a brick buildin
(191 East Main) adjacent to the original 1914 buildings. Although documentation for It no longer exists, it seems logical that tha raar thirt,
feet of 195 East Main was added at that time as well. Over the succeeding years, sheds and other auxiliary buildings, mostly of metal, wert:-
built at the rear of the property. Three of these auxiliary buildings still existad in 1990 and were described as corrugated metal sheds fac;n 1
Prospect Street, two of which ran westwards all the way to the alley. Similar'in design, they had front-facing gabled roofs, the gabie-end,
which were screened.
UtI took on a partner, Arcy Lynn Schellhous, and sent him east to study juice-making processes and to purchase equipment No longer
claiming to be home-made, UtI Juice's products were labeled wilh the "Quean Isabella" brand. By the early 1930s. the vines from UtI's
original plantings were losing productivity due to disease, so he purchased replacement farmland in the San Femando Valley. In later
years. grapes from the Ontario area were used.
Schellhous ran the daily operations of the company while UtI ran the financial side of things. At its most active, the firm had a staff of 24,
including a number of seasonal workers. In 1931, Schellhous became the sole owner (assisted by his wife Mary), but kept the Utt Juice
Company nama. The firm's product line expanded to Include jams, jellies, marmalades and syrups which were produced not only under the
UtI name but also for private labels of other companies. including Knotts' Berry Farm and Iris. Although grape products remained the
primary output of Uti Juice, about half-a-dozen other fruits such as apples. black cherries, boysenbarrias, pomagranates,and raspberries
were also processed. UtI Juice markated Its output as far away as Texas and the San Francisco Bay area. The company also sold som
of Its products in the front part òf the building at 195 East Main.
According to the Tustin Area Historical Society and Musaum. the UtI company's process for creating juice included the following steps:
1) After being washed and stemmed. the grapes were cooked. The pulp was.thendrainedfrom the kettles on the sacond floor into the
press on the first floor. Pressure applied at 1,500 pounds was required to squeeze out the juice which ran down into a large underground
tank. (Note: the "second floo(' referred to was actually a mezzanine in the 195 East Main-building. according to Assesso(s records.)
2) The press stack was wheeled outside to remove the press cloths and boards. ' The dry. pulp wasthen hauled IIway.
3) Meanwhile. the juice was piped up to kettles for cooking and bottles.were broughtfrom the sterilizer to befliled.
4) Five-gallon bottles were filled with juice coming from the kettles on the second floor. The juice was then stored for three to four months
to let the craam of tartar settle.
5) After the storage period, the juice was re-cooked and biended with other grape juica varieties so that the sweetness remained constaf
No sugar was added. The juice then went to the bottling machine where It was put into retail botties.
The Ult Juice Company experienced difficulties after World War" due to the urbanization of both Los Angales and Oranga Counties whi I
greatly decreased nearby sources of fruit. The firm also faced compemlon from larger. more cost-efficient juice-makers. In addition. the
state's burgeoning wine industry was outbidding small firms for the grape supply. Arcy and Mary Schellhous were killed In an automobile
accidant in 1970. Although some interior remodeling. of the plant had occurred in 1968, the UtI Juice Company found itself unable to
finance more costly modernization and expansion. It closed its doors for good in 1973. after 55 years as one of Tustin's oldest. most
successfui. and best-remembered businesses. It was estimated that the UtI Company had produced over seven million gallons of juice
since 1922.
Later uses of the UtI Juice Company buildings Included a furniture store, a religious center. and contracto(s offices. The buildings were
increasingly neglected IInd became hazardous. At one point. they were said to constitute fourteen violations of the city codes. Using a (
grant, the owners of the property seismically reinforced the buildings in May 1995. The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
condemned the structures in April 1998. the final court judgment for which occurred in April 1999.
. ----------,. --.., ----
State of California - The Resourcea Agency
DEP.ðRTMENT DF PARKS N'!I¿B¡;¡Ç.Eì.I;AD91'1
CONTINUATION SHEET
Primary #
--..---..---..-'- ,.--- ---------------,-HRI-#-~-----"----"--
Trinomial
Page 6 of
Recorded by:
Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Tim Gregory
Uti Juice Building #1
Date 5/212003
181 COntinuation 0 Update
B10. Significance
Historic Context.
The modern era in the history of Tustin began in 1868 when Columbus Tustin, a carriage-maker from Petaluma, in partnarship with Nelson
O. Stafford, purchased 1,359 acres of tha Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana when It was being partitioned. They paid $2,000 for the land.
Mr. Tustin established "Tustin City." as a real estate venture, on the eastern half of tha property. making n the third town founded in the
County;of Orange. By the end of 1872. Columbus Tustin had laid out the streets, established the Sycamore School District and founded a
post office. Water first reached the town by way of the Semi.Tropic Ditch. but the Santa Ana Valley Irrigation Company was later organize
to ensure a more reliable flow. Mr. Tustin started seliing 50-by-100-foot lots in the 100 acres he had laid out in 300 square blocks. Later he
had to give the lots away to try to spur developmant. The only commercial buildings that lasted any length of time were a blacksmith shop,
three stores, a meat market, a tin shop, a saloon, and a grist-mill. By 1874,just a dozen famliies had settled wMhln the schooi district's
boundaries.
By the time Columbus Tustin died in 1883, his dream city seemed to be a failure. Santa Ana won out as the premier city of the region.
especially when the Southern Pecific Railway chose it as the location of its depot. Many Tustin residants moved to the bigger city and mo:r
TlJstin businesses closed. The later 1880s, however, was a boom period throughout Southern California and eventually brought renewed
life to the smali community of Tustin. Under the auspices of the Tustin Improvement Association, a hotel was built. a trolley-line started,
and a bank was established. The eariy one-room school had to be expanded. Former grazing lands became the site of extensive citrus
and walnut groves. Although there would be severai more times of economic reversal, Tustin had become a permanent, established
settlement by the 1890s. Early residents seemed to enjoy their small-town status and gave up the fight to become a city the size of Santa
Ana. By 1888, tha Southern Pacific had established a station in Tustin from which two trains a day ran to Los Angeles. Telephone servic,
reached Tustin in 1903 and electricity was available by 1906. Except for commercial thoroughfares, paved streets did not become a reatitt
in Tustin until the 1930s. Agriculture was the primary industry, but severallon9-term businesses were established near the
turn-of.the-2Oth-century. including the Tustin Lumber Company, Tustin Garage. Tustin Hardware, Piepers Feed Store, the Ult Juice
Company, andseverallarge cllrus association packing houses. Social life revolved around the Masons, the churches, the W.C.T.U.. and
the Farm Bureau. The city's life was governed by two schooi boards, a volunteer fire department, a one-man pollee force, and a City
Council (after its incorporation in1927).
By 1927. Tustin's population had reached 900. Its boundaries at that time included about 196 acres which is a slightly larger area than th"¡'
of the current Old Town Cultural Resources District.
Tustin began to turn away from an agricultural economy in 1942, when the U.S. Navy built its Lighter-Than-Air base on naarby bean fields
Two huge hangars, now on the National Register of Historic Places. were constructed. In the 1950s, the skyrocketing population growth d:
the region caught up with Tustin and it suddenly found itseil being ragarded as a residential suburb. Orange groves were replaced by ney,
housing and freeways. The population jumped from 2,000
in 1960 to 21.000 in 1970. (It had reached over 43.000 by the late 1980s.) The annexation of Tustin Ranch brought the City's total acrearo-
to 7,100.
By the early 1970s. historical organizations in town had become concemed about the disappearing landmarks of the past. The Tustin Are
Historical Society was founded In 1976 and opened a museum on EI Camino Real near Main Street. A graup called TRUST (Tustin
Residants United to Save Tustin) was organized in order to monitor zoning and development Issues which might change the character of
Old Town. In the Spring of 1987. the Tustin City Council imposed a moratorium on the Issuance of permns and zoning and land use
chang"" in the residential area of Old Town. The Old Town erea includes not only the commercial buildings in the vicinity of EI Camino
Raal and Main Street but a large residential area to the west. After a series of workshops and studies, the City adopted an ordinance on
June 20, 1988 which created a Cultural Resources Overlay District. Also in 1988. the City contracted with Thirtieth Street Architects. Inc.lO
undertake a Historical Resources Survey. the reporl of which was published In July 1990. Soon after, the City successfully applied to the
State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) to become a Certified Local Govemment (CLG). In order to become a CLG, a City must hav..
established Its own historic preservation commission and a program meeting Federai and State standards. A CLG is abie to receive and
distribute state grant funds. receive technical assistance and training from SHPO, review nominations to the National and Calilornia
Registers, and generaily localize the historic preservation process.
-,----------------
State of Callfomle - The Resources Agency Primary # '
DEE'ARTMENT OF -E'ARKS,AN D_RECREA TJON..-_----,----,-----_.-tfRl-#--------"'--- -
CONTINUATION SHEET Trlno",lal
Page 7 of
Recorded by:
Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Tim Gregory
Uti Juice Building #1
Date 5/212003
~ Contlnuetion 0 Update
810. S/gnlflcance
Sianificance Summarv:
The UtI Juice Buildings appear in the Historical Resources Survey conducted by Thirtieth Street Architects for the City of Tustin in 1990.
193.195 East Main Street was given an "A" rating on the Survey which means it was found historically significant because of its
architecture, integrity, and/or association with prominent persons in the Citýs history. This double store-front was pictured in the Survey c
being "one of the earliest and most elaborate non-residential buildings in the city." It was deemed eligible for inclusion on the Califomia
RegJster of Historical Resources.
Within the broad historic context of Orange County history. the Uti Julca Buildings are significant for their association with Charles Edwarc'
UtI. a Tustin pioneer since 1874 who. with partners, was the first person to bring an organized agricultural industry to the Irvine Ranch. H
is credited with experimentation as to what crops were best suited to the County. Uti was also a significant promoter of Orange County
development due to his association with a number of banks, savings and loan associations, and water companies. Within the context of
Tustin locai history, Charles UtI is a slgnificent figure due to his pioneering efforts In founding one of the citýs first large businesses (the L"'"
Juice Company), his real estate developments (Including Lemon Heights and the UtI Juice Buildings themselves). and his Involvement wi
local banks, water companies and the school district. As the headquarters of the Uti Juice Company from 1922 to 1973. the UtI Juice
Buildings aiso have significance as reminders of an early Tustin enterprise that helped make the city a canter for agricultural products
during the pre-World War II years.
Architecturally. the UtI Juice Buildings are significant historical resources. However, all architectural interest is centered in the elaborate
Main Street facades: the other walls (with the possible exception of the east wall along Prospect Street) are utilitarian in nature and much
altered. Of particular interest Is the double-storefront at 193-195 East Main Street. Its eye-catching metal cornice is significant not only fr ..
its beauty but also because historic metal cornices ere now a rarity in Southem Cal~omia.
The UtI Juice Buildings also derive significance because of their iocatlon at a prominent corner of Old Town Tustin. In fact, the Buildings
provide an "introduction" to Old Town as the first historic buildings one encounters when traveling west on Main Street. Their removal
would significantly reduce Old Town's initial visual impact.
Summary of Significance:
A resource of regional significance under Cal~omia Register Criteria 1 (association with sign~icant-events or trends); 2 (association with
historically important people); and 3 (embodying distinctive characteristics of a type or construction method). It is also a contributor to a
designated historic district.
National Register Evaluation code: According to the Cltýs Historical Resources Survey. an "A" rating corresponds,to a National Register
significance code of 3S (appears eligible for separate listing on the National Register of Historic Places). This consultant agrees with the
Citýs evaluation.
Califomia Register Eligibility: According to the regulations of the Cal~omia Register of Historical Resources, any resource eligible for the
National Register Is aiso automaticaily eligible for the listing on the California Register of Historical Resources.
Integrity: Fair. , Although altered and suffering from seismic damage and neglect. the exterior of the building (particularly along Its Main
Street and Prospect Street facades) has retained sufficient integrity to convey its originai appearance and usage. The interior. however, i'
empty, deteriorated, and much altered and no longer has any tangible connection to the UtI Juice-making process.
- --~----
,-- ~---------
State of Calilomia - The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION -
PRIMARY RECORD
_.!!rI!l!!!.!Y_t._.,.._-
HRI#
Trinomial
NRHP Status Code
5S1
Page 1 of 6
1"1. Other Identifier:
1"2. Location: 0 Not for Publication 0 Unrestricted
and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
b. USGS 7.5' Quad Date T; R
c. Address: 193.195 East Main Street City Tustin
d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/linear resources) mE!
e. Other Locational Data (Enter Parcel #. legal description. directions to resource, eievation. etc.. as appropriate)
East 155 feet of the north 162.5 feet of Biock B, Lot 3 of the original Tustin City
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer
Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Date
Uti Juice Building #2
a. County
Orange
1/4 of
114 of See
Zip 92780
mN
Parcel No. 401-585-01
1"3., Description (Desabe"""""".m lis rrejorelerner1S-lrd.x!edesQ1. maIeriaIs, roncJiJn. aIEraIb-1s. size, seIIi"Q,.m 1:o.Toc:I!res)
This is a rectanguiar. 1, 80o-square-foot, one.story building of vemacular commercial style with a gabled parapeted roof that features
a skylight on its southerly end. The building extends thirty linear feet aiong Main Street and sixty linear feet north-ta-south. It is of
brick construction. iIs east wail built immediateiy adjacent to the west wail of 193.195 East Main. The front elevation features light
and dark gold brick with an unbroken parapet crowned with an elaborate cornice of brick. Below the comice. there is a frieze of ven(¡-
containing five vertical bricks and edged with derker gold bricks. A row of white giazed brick runs across the entire front facade and
down the pilasters on each side. Recessed double wooden doors at the easterly end of the front facade. accented with a large
window in the center of each section, are topped wilh a single transom. Immediately to the west is a single service door (now
replaced with plywood) with transom. At the westerly end of the front facade is a recessed double-hung window wilh eight panes.
Two screened vents appear in the lower wail. Similar to 193-195. the west and rear elevations display evidence of a number of
bricked-up and boarded.over recessed window end door openings. Only one window now eppears on the easterly end of the rear
facade.
P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes)
P4. Resources Present ~ Building 0 Structure
HP6 - 1.3 story Commercial Building
0 Object 0 Site 0 District 0 Element of District 0 Other (Isoiates. etc.)
P 5b. Desa¡JIiJn ct PhoIc: (V""". dale, acœssi:Jn #)
..,191 East Main St.. south (main) facade /View
.z;.towarcl north). Photo No: 80.2. 4/16/3
...
, 1"6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources:
0 Prehistoric ~ Historic 0 Both
P7. Owner and Address
Community Redevelopment Agency
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way,
Tustin. CA 92780
PB. Recorded by: (Narre. afliaIì:Jn,.ro address)
Tim Gregoty DBA The Building Biographer, 400 E
Califomia BI., #3, Pasadena. CA 91106
Date Recorded: 5/2/2003
P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
1"11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources. or enter "none")
Attachments 0 NONE 131 Continuation Sheet 0 Districl Record 0 Rock Art Record 0 Other: (List)
0 Location Map 0 Building, Structure. and Object Record 0 Linear Feature Record 0 Artifact Record
0 Sketch Map 0 Archaeological Record 0 Milling Station Record 0 Photograph Record
.-----
Slate of California - The Resources AIIency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
BUILDING, STRUCTURE,AND OBJECT RECORD
pege 2 of 6 NRHP Status Code
Rasourca Nama or #: (Assigned by recorder) UN Juice Building #2
'Prliniïrýli
HRI#
551
B1. Historic Name:
B2. Common Name:
B3. Original Use: Commercial
B5. Archltectursl Style: Commerciai vemacular
B6. Construction History: (Construction date. alterations. and date of alterations)
1922-first constructed
B4. Present Use:
Vecant
B7. Moved? t8J No 0 Yes 0 Unknown Qate:
B8. Related Features:
Original Location:
B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown
B10. Significance: Theme: Commerce/Trade Area: Tustin
Period of Significance: 1914-1973 Property Type: Commercial Appllcsble Criteria: A. B
(Discuss Importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by lt1eme, period and geographic scope. Also address Integrity.)
Charles UN (often raferred to as C.-E. or.Ed UN) waS bom in Auburn, California on March 23. 1866, tha only child of Lysandar
("San') and Arvilla (PIaN) Utt. Tha sanior Mr. Utt was a nativa of Virginia who first came to California during tha Gold Rush of
1849. It is there he married his wife who had moved to Califomia from New York as a child. It is saId San Utt made and lost
several fortunes during the next few years. criss-crossing the country on fhe Santa Fe Trail. In 1874, he bought his family to
Tustin following a one-month journay by covered wagon from Placer County. At the time. Tustin was a "little cluster of half a dozen
cottages'(Annor) in the middle of mustard fields. The economy of the area was largely based on cattle and sheep grazing. (See
continuation sheet)
B 11. Additional Resource Attributes: (LIst attributes and codas)
B12. References:
Armor, Samuel. A History of Orange County. 1921
Halbert. Thomas B. Historical Volume. 1963
Jordan. Carol H. A Hundred Years of Yesterdays, 1988
Jordan. Carol H. Tustin: A City of Trees. 1996
HP6 - 1-3 story Commercial
(Sketch Map wIth north arrow requirad.)
B14. Evaluator: Tim Gregory
Date of Evaluation: 512/2003
(This space reserved for official comments.)
¡J
r
0
r'
'-,
B13. Remarks:
l-
v
II!
...
'-I
.
~
>-
""'II '"
f-r.
, --------,..- -
-----~_._-
Slate of California.,... The Reaources Agancy _.i-,
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
..------.------ -___._Pdmary.tL_---,. ---.--------
HRIIlI
Trinomial
Page 3 of
Recorded by:
Resource Name or Ill: (Assigned by recorder)
Tim Gregory
Uti Juice Building #2
Date 512/2003
ßJ Continuation 0 Update
810. Slgnincsnce
San un entered into the mercentiie business. purchasing the stock and premises at the southwest comer of Main and D Straets of
Tustin's first store-owner H. H. Dickarman. who had recently diad. Tha new astablishment was calied the "L Utt Pioneer Store." The un
femlly lived above the shop. Charles took over the business et the age of 21, upon tiie death of his father. Arvll/e un (known as "VII/i").
now a widow, ran a boarding house In connection with the store. At the same time, Charles Utt raised peanuts on s8¥eral hundred acres
of rented land, earning him the title of "peenut king. " His "Double-Jointed Goober Peas, " sold at five cents per bag, became popular
locally. Utt continued to run the family businass unti/1893 when he took up ranching. As well as caffle, he was seid to have raised
"practically every crop known to Orange County" (Armor). In 1906, he was ana oftha organizers, with Jamas irvine and Sherman
Stevens, of the San Joaquin Fruit Company and was ffS first president. Specializing in the growing and processing of cffrus fruffs.
walnuts. evocados, and chilies, the firm owned over 1,000 ecres of agricultural lend on the Irvine Rench and hed three pecking houses
served bya spur of the Sente Fe Railroad. The Sen Joequin Fruff Companyelso developed several other ranches in Southem Callfomia.
including Mugu, Simi. and Lemon Heights in Tustin. un was instrumental in the formation of the Orange County Cffrus Exchenge. of
which he served as director for a number of years.
In 1896, Utt bought the Tustin Water Works from the struggling WIllard brothers. Early recognizing the importance of water to Southern
Califomia, Utt envisioned pumping weter from low levels to more valuabie land at higher elevations. Despite heving made meny
improvements, he ran the Water Works at a loss for many years. continuing ff only to ensure that Tustin would have e reliable water
supply. He wes later to assist in the investigation of using Colorado River water before the advent of the Metropoman Water District and
forwarded efforts to build a dam at Prado. Utt also served as president of the Red Hili Water Company and the Lemon Heights Mutual
Water Company and was on the board of the Frances MutuafWater Company. His Tustin Water Works was later purchased by the Cffy
which renamed ff Tustin Water Service.
Besides running his own business. Utt also served on the boerd of Tustin's first bank. the Bank of Tustin, formed in 1688. When it was
succeeded by the First National Bank of Tustin in 1911. he continued on the board and later served as president. He also sat on the
board of the Commercial National Bank of Santa Ana and was a director of the Santa Ana Building and Loan Company.
UtI was treasurer of the Haven Seed Company and was involved with otheragricuftural organizations, such as the Orange County Fruit
Exchange (mentioned above), the Irvine Citrus Association, the Frances Citrus Association, and the Exchange Lemon Products
Company. In 1930, he founded the Utt Deveiopment Company. headquartered in Oxnard. He served as a board member of the Tustin
School District and, in 1921, headed a citizen's committee to organize the Tustin Union High School District to haft a movement by Santa
Ana to anneX Tustin schools. He became the new District's first president. Utt was elso part of a group that subdivided Lemon Heights,
where he was to build his own home in 1922, designed by Clifford Truesdell, Jr.
In February 1894 in Monrovia, UtI had manied Mary M Sheldon, the daughter of an old pioneer Tustin family. They were to have five
children. four daughters and one son (Their son, James "Jimmy" B. UtI. became a well.known local pomician, representing Orange
County in the U. S. Congress from 1953 to 1970). Mary Uttdied in 1918- The Uttfamilyattendedthe/ocalPresbyterien Church
(although Charles Utt once characterized his faffh as "Deist Chrlstlan") end ware strong Prohibitionists. Known for his conservative.
free-enterprlse views. Utt was an independent Republican and wrote articies on pomica/and economic issues of the day He was an
active member of the Masons end listed his hobbies in 1942es "work, hunting, fishing end travel. "
"A man of much enterprise and force of character," UtI was said to have enjoyed the "confidence and good will of the whole community"
(Armor). Cherles Edward un died on February 5, 1950 at the age of 83. He was survived by his second wife Margeret. his five chiidren,
and five step-chiidren. The City of Tustin named a street and a middle school after him.
Around 1913, Utt had leased two acres of barren hillside land In Peters Canyon in what is now the Lemon Heights neighborhood. After
providing inigation, he planted Califomia Concord and Isabelia grapes. The vines wera so productive by 1917 that Utt needed to find a
larger market for them. Since his fiavor/ut home-made grepe juice had wonpopularity wffh remiiy and friends, he decided to bottle ft
commercially, the first 4,000 quarts produced using gas piates on his back porch. Considered a pioneer in the concept of producing
grape juice commercially, Utt's marketing attempts in the Santa Ana area ware so successful that he planted thirty more acres of vinas.
(The vineyards would eventually encompass 150 acres. at their height.) (See continuation sheet)
DPR523L{1I9S)HoloyMo""
-----..-..
.------..-------
State of California - The Resources Agency'
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
-CONTINUATION SHEET
""-__'___00"_--"
Primary#--
HRI#
Trinomial
UtI Juica Building #2
Date 51212003
¡g¡ Continuation 0 Update
Page 4 of 6 Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Recorded by: Tim Gregory
B10. Slgnmcance
By 1922, Utt needed to expand his production facilities.. In that yeer he moved his Utt Juice Company Into the buildings he owned et Main
and Prospect in Tustin. outfftting them with the required boilers, vats, and presses. To create more space, he constructed a brick building
(191 East Main) adjacent to the original 1914 buildings. Atthough documentation for it no iongerexlsts, tt seems logical that the rearthirly
feet of 195 East Main was added at that time as well.. Over the succeeding years. sheds end other auxiliary buildings, mostly of metal,
were bum at the reer of the properly.. Three of these auxiliery buildings still existed in 1990 and were described es convgated metal
sheds facing Prospect Street, two of which ran westwerds all the way to the alley. Similar in design. they had front.faclng gabled roofs,
the gable-ends of which were screened..
Uti took on a parlner. Arcy Lynn Schellhous, and sent him east to study juice-making processes and to purchase equipment. No longer
claiming to be home.made. Uti Juice's products were labeled with the 'Queen Isabella' brand. By the eariy 1930s, the vines from UtI.s
original plantlngs were losing productivity due to disease, so he purchased replacement farmland in the San Femando Valley.. In later
years. grapes from the Ontario area were used.
Schellhous ran the dally operations of the company while Uti ran the financial side of things.. At Its most active, the firm had a staff of 24.
including a number of seasonal workers. In 1931, Schellhous became the sale owner (assisted by his wife Mary), but kept the Uti Juice
Company name.. The firm's product line expanded to include jams, je/iies, marmalades and syrups which were produced not only under
the Utt neme but also for private labels of other companies. including Knotts' Berrý Farm and Iris.. Although grape products remelned the
primary output of Uti Juice. about half-a.dozen other fruits such as apples, black cherries, boysenbarries, pomegranates, and raspberries
were also processed.. Utt Juice marketed Its output as far away as Texas and the San Francisco Bay area. The company also sold some
of its products in the front parl of the building at 195 East Main.
According to the Tustin Area Historicai Society and Museum, the Utt company's process for creating juice included the following steps:
1) After being washed and stemmed, the grapes were cooked.. The pulp was then drained from the kettles on the second floor Into the
press on the first floor. Pressure applied at 1.500 pounds was required to squeeze out the juice which ran down into a iarge underground
tank. (Note: the 'second floor' referred to was actually a mezzanine in the 195 East Main building. according to Assessor's records.)
2) The press stack was wheeled outsIde to remove the press cloths and boards. The dry pulp was then hauled away.
3) Meanwhile. the juice was piped up to ketttes for cooking and bottles were brought from the sterilizer to be filled.
4) Five.gallon bottles were filled with juice coming from the ketties on tha second floor. The juice was then stored for three to four months
to let the cream of tarlar setlle.
5) After the storage period. the juice was re.cooked and blended with other grape juice varieties so that the sweetness remained constant.
No sugar was added. The juice then went to the bottling machine where tt was put into retail bottles.
The Utt Juice Company experienced difficulties after Worid War II due to the urbanization of both Los Angeles and Orange Counties
which greatly decreased nearby sources of fruit. The firm also faced competnion from larger, more cost-eft/cient juice-makers. In
addition, the state's burgeoning wine industry was outbidding small firms tor the grape supply. Arcy and MeryBchellhous were kilied in an
automobile accident in 1970. Although some Interior remodeling of the plant had occurred in 1968, the Uti Juice Company found itself
unabla to finance more costly modemization and expansion. it ciosed Its doors for good in 1973, after 55 years as one of Tustin's oidest,
most successful, and best-rememb.ered businesses. it was estimated that the Utt Company had produced over seven million gallons of
juice since 1922.
Later uses of the Utt Juice Company buildings included a fumiture store, e religious centar. end contractor's oft/cas. The buildings were
increasingly negiected and became hazardous. At one point, they ware said to constitute fourleen vioiations of the cIty codes. Using a
City grant. the owners of/he properly seismically reinforced the buildings in May 1995. The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
condemned the structures in April 1998, the final courl judgment for which occurred in April 1999.
DPO52"('I95)",,""""""
- - --- -- - - ---
Stale of Callfamla - The Resourcoa Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECf\EA'ilON
CONTINUATION SHEET
,-"'---------_..---_...
Prlmary#._.......,
HR/#
Trinomial
UI! Juice Building #2
Data 5/2/2003
181 Continuation 0 Update
Page 5 of 6 Rasource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Recorded by: Tim Gregory
B10. Slgnlncance
Historic Context
The modern era in the history of Tustin began in 1868 when Coiumbus Tustin. a carriege.maker from Petaluma. in partnership with NeisOi
O. Stafford. purchased 1,359 acres of the Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana when n was being partitioned. They paid $2.000 for Ihe iand.
Mr. Tustin established "Tustin City," as a real estate venture, on the eastern haW of the prpperty, making II the third town founded in the
County of Orange. By the end of 1872, Columbus Tustin had laid out the streets, established the Sycamore School District and founded a
post office. Water first reached Ihe town byway of the Semi-Tropic Dnch. but the Santa Ana Valley Irrigation Company was latar organize
to ensure a more reliable fiow. Mr. Tustin started selling 5Q-by-100-foot lots in the 100 acres he had laid out in 300 square blocks. Later he.
had to give the lots away to try to spur development. The only commercial buildings thet lasted any length of time were a blacksmith shop.
three stores. a meat market, a tin shop, a saloon. and a grist-milL By 1874. Just a dozen families had settied within the school district's
boundaries.
By the time Columbus Tustin died in 1883. his dream city seemed to be a failure. Santa Ana won out as the premier city of the region.
especially when the Southern Pacific Railway chose it as the location of ns depot. Many Tustin residents moved to the bigger city and mo: t ,
Tustin businesses closed. The later 18BOs, however, was a boom period throughout Southern Califomia and eventually brought renewed
life to the small community of Tustin. Under the auspices of the Tustin Improvement Association, a hotel wes built. a trolley.llne started.
and a bank was established. The early one.room school had to be expanded. Former grazing lands became the site of extensive citrus
and walnut groves. Although there would be several more times of economic reversal. Tustin had become e permanent. established
settlement by the 1890s. Eariy residents seemed to enjoy their small-town status and gave up the fight to become a city the size of Santa
Ana. By 1888. the Southem Pacific had established a station in Tustin from which two trains a day ran to Los Angeles. Telephone servic€
reached Tustin in 1903 and electricity was available by 1 908. Except for commercial thoroughfares, paved streets did not become a reality
in Tustin until the 1930s. Agriculture was the primary Industry. but several lang-term businesses were established near the
turn-of-the-2Oth-century. including the Tustin Lumber Company. Tustin Garage. Tustin Hardware. Piepers Feed Store. the UI! Juice
Company, and severailarge citrus association packing houses. Social life revolved around the Masons, the churches. the W.C.T.U., and
the Farm Bureau- The city's life was govemed by two school boards. a volunteer fire department. a one-man police force, and a City
Council (after its incorporation in1927).
By 1927. Tustln'.s population had reached 900. Its boundaries at that time included about 196 acres which is a slightly larger area than thd
of the current Old Town Cultural Resources District.
Tustin began to tum away from an agriculturel economy in 1942. when the U.S. Navy built its Lighter-Than-Alr base on nearby bean fields
Two huge harygars, now on the National Register of Historic Piaces. were constructed. In tha 1950s, the skyrocketing popuiatlon growth a
the ragion caught up with Tustin and it suddenly found itself being regarded as a residential suburb. Orange groves were replaced by ne'"
housing and freeways. The populatiory jumped from 2,000 in 1960 to 21 ,000 in 1970. (It had reached over 43,000 by the late 1960s.) Th"-
annexation ofTustln Ranch brought the CIty's total acreage to 7.100.
By the early 1970s. historicai organizations in town had become concerned about the disappearing landmarks of the past. The Tustin Are
Historical Society was founded In 1976 and opened a museum on EI Camino Real near Main Street. A group celled TRUST (Tustin
Résldents United to Save Tustin) was organized in order to monitor zoning and development issues which might change the character of
Old Town. In the Spring of 1987, the Tustin City Council Imposed a moratorium on the issuance of permits and zoning and land use
changes in the residential area of Old Town. The Old Town area includes not only the commerciai buildings In the vicinity of EI Camino
Real and Main Street but a iarge rasidentlal araa to the west. After a series of workshops and studies, the City adopted an ordinance on
June 20.1988 which created a Cultural Resources Overlay District. Aiso in 1988, the City contracted with Thirtieth Straet Architects. lnc.-r,
undertake a Historical Resources Survey, the report of which was published in July 1990. Soon after, the City successfully applied to the
State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) to become a Certified Local Govemment (CLG). in order to become a CLG. a City must hav
established its own historic preservation commission and a program meeting Federal and State standards. A CLG is abie to receive and
distribute state grant funds. receive technical assistance and training from SHPO, review nominations to the National and Califomia
Registers. and generally localize the historic preservation process.
DPR"3L(1~5)"""""ke<'
State of Callfomla - The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CONTINUATION SHEET
--_n.-- ----....-.----- ,____!,rlmary#_--__------.....-----..
HRI#
Trinomial
Page 6 of 6 Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder)
Recorded by: Tim Gregory
Uti Juice Building #2
Date 5/2/2003
I2J Continuation 0 Update
810. Significance
The UN Juice Buildings appear in fha Historical Resources Survay conducted by Thirtiath Street ArchItects for the Cny of Tustin in 1990.
191 East Main Street was given a "B" rating on the Survey which means it Is somewhat less unusual or distinctive in terms of age and not
eligible for the Califomla Register. However. a "B"-rated building can be a contributor to a Califomia Register-eligible historic district.
Within the broad historic context of Orange County history. the Uti Juice BuIldings are significant for their association with Charies Edward
Uti. a Tustin pioneer since 1874 who, with partners. wes the first person to bring an organized agricultural industry to the Irvine Ranch.
He is credIted with experimentation as to what crops were best suited to the County. Uti was also a significant promoter of Orange
County dave/opmant due to his association with a number of banks. savings and loan associations, and watercompanias. Within the
context of Tustin local history, Charias Utt is a significant figure dua to his pioneering efforts in founding one of the CITY's first large
busInesses (the Utt Juice Company), his real estate developments (Including Lemon Heights and the Uti Juice Buildings themselves), and
his involvement with locel banks, water companies and the school district. As the headquarters of the Uti Juice Company from 1922 to
1973, the Uti Juice Buildings also have significance as reminders of an early Tustin enterprise that helped make the city a center for
agricultural products during the
pre-Worid War If Years.
Architecturally, the UN Juice Buildings are significant historical resources. However, all architectural Interest is centered in the eiaborate
Main Street facade; the other walls are utilitarian in nature and much alte;ed. The facade of 191 East Main Street is less significant. as
other axamples of this type of commercial vemacu/ar styie are evident throughout Old Town Tustin. However. the commercial area of Old
Town that contains historic buildings is relatively small, so the loss of any of ¡hem would constitute more of an impact than a similar action
might in cities with larger historic commercial districts. . ,
The UN Juice Buildings also derive significance because of their location at a prominent comer of Old Town Tustin. In fact. the Buildings
provide an "introduction" to Old Town as the first historic buildings one encounters when traveling west on Main Street. Their removal
would significantly reduce Old Town's initial visual Impact.
Summary of Significance:
A resource of iocal significance undar California Registar Critaria 1 (association with significant events or trends); and 2 (association with
historically important people). It is also a contributor to a dasignated historic district.
National Register Evaluation code: According to the City's Historical Resources Survey, e "B" rating corresponds to a Netionel Register
significance code of 5S1 (not eligible for listing on the Nationel Register of Historic PIeces but is listed or designated under an existing
local ordinance). This consultant agrees with the City's evaluation.
California Register Eligibility: According to the regulations of the California Register of Historical Resources. any resource included on a
local Inventory with a code of 5 or higher is presumed eligible for listing on the California Register unless there is substantial evidence to
prove otherwise.
Integrity: Fair. Although altered and suffering from seismic damage and neglect. the exterior of the building (particularly along Its Main
Street facade) has retained sufficient integrity to convey their original appearance and usage. The interior, however, is empty,
detMorated. and much altered and no longer has any tangible connection to the UN Juice.making process.
0"R523l(1/95)HO_",'
APPENDIX D
Adaptive Reuse Report
BKCM
.
GROUP
P.O. Box 7309
San Diego. CA 92167
Tel: 6195235300
Fax: 6192223340
www.kcmgroup.net
Construction Management and Consulting Services
City of Tustin
Uti Juice Building Rehabilitation
Tustin, California
Historic Rehabilitation Estimate Report
Prepared for:
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
300 Centermiai Way
Tustin, CA 92780
BKCM
.
GROUP
P.O. Box 7309
San Diego, CA 92167
Tel: 6195235300
Fax: 619222 3340
www.kcmgroup.net
Construction Msnagement and Consulting Sarvica.
October 10, 2003
City ofTustin
Redevelopment Program Manager, James Draughon
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
RE: Uti Juice Building Rehabilitation Estimates
Dear Jim,
Weare pleased to provide this report outlining the conceptual opinions of probable cost
on the above referenced project. The assignment consists of the development of opinions
of probable cost for four various alternatives for the rehabilitation òf structures located at
191 through 195 Main Street in the City of Tustin. We understand that this opinion of
probable cost, covering the rehabilitation scope along with costs for shell and
infrastructure improvements of the subject buildings as applicable, is to be supplemental
to the work covered by various elements of the redevelopment project scope and budgets.
No design or detailed scope of work has been provided and all costs and anticipated
scopes of work are conceptual and pre1iminary and should not be relied upon as a
statem~t of actual costs that will be incurred in the performance of the work.
The above referenced structures are as described in reference documents outlined herein.
In general, it is reported that the building located at 193 and 195 Main Street were
originally constructed in 1914 and are generally described as cast in place concrete wall
construction, wood framed roof, and slab on grade construction. The building at 191
Main Street is reported to have been constructed in 1922 and is ofunreinforced brick
masonry construction on three walls, wood framed roof, and slab on grade construction.
All three building are reported to have undergone a seismic retrofit in 1995.
The conceptual opinions of probable cost are based upon information as follows:
I. Draft Historic Resources Technical Report by The Building Biographer dated
May 5, 2003.
2. Recommendations contained in the Adaptive Reuse Study by Curry Price Court,
Structural Engineers dated June 12,2003.
3. Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
obtained from the Secretary of the Interior (Included in Section 8).
4. Retrofit drawings (review only) by Mark Grigorian and Associates dated c. 1995
as obtained from the City of Tustin.
Two site visits were conducted to field verify the general condition of the building, obtain
material characteristics, and determine approximate field measurements for various
elements of the work. For reference, this report offers plan conceptual views and
elevations of the assumed scope of work.
Four repair alternatives have been explored and are believed to be consistent with the
various redevelopment scenarios currently under consideration. The four alternatives vary
in terms of the physical boundaries of rehabilitation and some alternatives offer full or
partial demolition of select structures. The repair alternatives as contained in documents
and direction provided by the City of Tustin on or about October 7, 2003 are as follows:
1. Alternatives 2 & 5 Full Historic Preservation: This alternative provides for full
historic preservation based on the existing footprint configuration as outlined in
the scope of work presented in opinion of probable cost in Section #1.
2. Alternative 3 Modified Preservation: This alternative provides for the
configuration remaining from the demolition of the rear 30ft of the building at
195. This estimate includes a new rear wall to enclose the existing building
remaining after the demolition. The balance of the structures are to be restored in
accordance with the scope in opinion of probable cost presented in Section #2.
3. Alternative 4 Reduced Modified Preservation: This altemative provides for the
demolition of the building at 191; the demolition of the rear 15 feet of the
building at 193; and the demolition of the rear 45 feet (approx) of the building at
195. This estimate includes a new rear wall to enclose the existing buildings
remaining after the demolition. The balance of.the structures are to be
rehabilitated in accordance with the scope.in.opinion of probable costas presented
Section #3.
4. Alternative 6 Reduced Modified Preservation: This alternative provides for the
full historic preservation of the facades (only) at buildings 193 & 195 as outlined
in the scope of work presented in opinion of probable cost in Section #4.
As previously stated, an overview of the rehabilitation scopes of work corresponding to
each of the alternatives are presented in drawing format in Sections 5, 6, 7 and 8,
respectively. Section 9 presents photo documentation of the property condition at the
time of the inspection and are for reference.
The opinions of probable cost presented in this report are conceptual in their nature and
are intended to cover rehabilitation costs as preliminarily anticipated. No designs have
been provided and a detailed scope of work has not yet been developed by any
rehabilitation consultant. It is noted that the objective of the scope of work presented
herein is based upon the comprehensive rehabilitation of the subject structures as
applicable according to the alternatives. This global rehabilitation approach involves the
use of preservation, restoration, and reconstruction techniques based on a preliminary
assessment of the existing condition of the individual building elements.
The scope of work does not include demolition of the wholesale structures or exterior
walls which are anticipated to be part of the redevelopment scope and budget. The scope
of work does, however, include cost factors to provide for productivity impacts
attributable to selective demolition as in the case of Alternatives #3, #4, and #6. Further
allowances have been provided for the impact to new construction proposed by Alternate
#6 involving the rehabilitation and shoring of only the facades at 193 and 195. The
infrastructure costs have been approximated based upon providing a shell condition to a
conventional retail tenant. No infrastructure costs have been included for Alternate #6.
In general, the interpretation of shell condition would entail a new drywall surface taped
and sanded and provision of a single restroom is anticipated. Restaurant uses have not
been considered in this cost report. Contingencies have been gauged upon the potential
for unknown and unforeseen conditions using the consultant's skill and judgment.
Existing buildings or portions thereof are to be structurally integrated with new proposed
structures, if immediately adj acent. Therefore areas of new exterior wall construction,
outside of those required to complete the intended building envelope of the rehabilitated
buildings, are excluded from this estimate and are assumed to be carried in the primary
redevelopment budget.
Results: The opinions of probable cost conclude that Alternatives 2 & 5 providing for
full rehabilitation has a corresponding probable cost estimated to be $1,202,198.
Alternative #3, providing for full historic preservation of the buildings at 191 through
195, excepting the demolition of the rear 30 feet of 195, has a corresponding opinion of
probable cost estimated to be $1,161,398. Alternative #4 providing for a configuration
created'by rehabilitating the front 45 feet of 193 and 195 has a corresponding opinion of
probable cost estimated to be $677,386. Lastly, Alternative #6 providing for full façade
rehabilitation limited to 193 and 195 has a corresponding probable cost estimated to be
$399,679.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to
contact me at your convenience.
~~
Gordon Kovtun
Principal
KCM Group
BKCM
.
GROUP
P.O. Box 7309
San Diego. CA 92167
Tel: 6195235300
Fax: 6192223340
www.kcmgroup.net
Construction Management and Consulting Services
City of Tustin
Uti Juice Building Rehabilitation
Tustin, California
Historic Rehabilitation Estimate Report
Table of Contents
Tab No.1
Tab No.2
Tab No.3
Tab No.4
Tab No.5
Tab No.6
Tab No.7
Tab No.8
Tab No.9
Tab No. 10
Opinion of Probable Costs - Alternate 2 & 5
Opinion of Probable Costs - Alternate 3
Opinion of Probable Costs - Alternate 4
Opinion of Probable Costs - Alternate 6
Conceptual drawings - Alternate 2 & 5
Conceptual drawings - Alternate 3
Conceptual drawings - Alternate 4
Conceptual drawings - Alternate 6
Existing Building(s) Photographs
Historic Preservation Standards
City of Tustin
Utt Juice Building
Historic Rehabilitation Estimate
Alternatives 2 & 5 - Full Rehabilitation
Opinion of Probable Cost
October 10,2003
Prepared for:
City onustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City of Tustin
LOCATION: TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
DATE: 10/10/2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
KCM NO.
PAGE I
NUMBER
% of TOTAL
GRAND
TOTAL
INDEX AND SUMMARY
1. INDEX AND SUMMARY
SUBTOTAL
2-3
4-5 12.20% $146,728
6 -10 69.74% $838,358
-----
81.94% 985,085
6.56% $78,807
----- -----
88.50% $1,063,892
11.50% $138,306
100% $1,202,198 I
6,120 SF
2. BASIS OF ESTIMATE
3. GENERAL CONDITIONS
4. BUILDING AND SITE WORK
7. CONTRACTORS FEE@8%
SUBTOTAL
8. AlE SPECIALTY CONSULTING FEES @ 13%
TOTAL PROJECT
TOTAL BUILDING AREA
KCM Group.. Confidential
Page 1
PROJECT: City ofTus!ln UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
DATE: 10/1012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
BASIS OF ESTIMATE
Historical Building Rehabilitation
Introduction
This opinion of probable cost has been based on a competitive open bid situetion with a minimum of feur (4) bona fide
reputabie bids received from general contractors in a stebie bidding merket. The document is based on
the measurement and pricing of quantites where possible. and/or reasonabie allowances for items
not clearly defined. The unit rates refiected herein, have been obtained
from KCM's database, historical records and other derivative sources.
This estimate Is based on a rehabilitation of the existing buildings, in whole or in part and approximates these repiacement costs.
KCM strongly recommends that interested parties carefully review this estimate, such
that any estimate Interpretations contrary to those intended by the known project can be addressed. It
is recommended that the estimate be verified should more detailed information become available or if there
is a change in scope of work or in the basis of assumptions.
This opinion represents KCM's best judgment as a professional construction consultant familiar with the
construction industry. Since KCM hes no control over the cost of labor, materials and equipment, the actual scope of work or
over the contractor's method of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, KCM
cannot and does not guarantee that the proposals, bids or construction cost may not vary from the opinion
of probable cost.
Documentation
This cost estimate was prepared based on a brief sita observation of the e>dsting buildings 1 91, 1 93 & 195 Main Street. Tustin,
verbal reports and a review of the documents provided by the Client, as reterenced in this report.
A. Architectural drawings
None
Inclusions and assumotlons
The following' inclusions and assumptions have been made and are inciuded in this estimate:
A. General
Generai contractor's fee (8%)
Direct Cost Contingency (20%)
General Conditions Contingenoy (10%)
AlE Specialty Consulting Fee (13%)
B. Site Work
Demolition only required for the work of Preservation
Site surtace drainage only
Conventionally reinforced slab
C. Finishes
As noted.
D. Speolalties
None
E. Equipment
None
F. Furnishings
None
KCM Group, . Coofl.ando'
Pag02
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City 01 Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin CALIFORNIA
Exclusions
The lollo.,.;ng items are excluded from this estimate:
A. Owner's sol! costs
Land acquisition fees
Owners soft costs ather than included in estimate
Legal and flnancing costs
Inspection and utility connection tees
Fire and ali risk insurance
Owner's ancillary costs
Phasing/premium time requirements
Escalation
Permits and Fees
B. Site & Building Work
Hazardous material remova~abatemant
Removal of unlares.en underground obstructions
Mold remediation
Mass damalman or demaiitian of exterior mlis or slabs
Construction of new exterior walls
Structural integration of existing structura into proposed new structure
Tanant improvements
Piles. caissons or special foundation requirements
Feature signage
C. Furniture, fixtures and equipment
Movable furniture and furnishings
Indoor piants and planters
Equipment ather than noted
Loose carpets and furniture
Audia.visual equipment
Computer equipment
Artwork and Signage, eta.
D. Electrical
Telephone system and handsets, eta.
KCM Group. . Confidantial
, \
DATE: 10/1012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Pago3
PROJECT : City of Tustin Uti Juice Building Rehabilitation DATE: 10110/2003
CLIENT : City ofTustin OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
LOCATION ; Tustin, CALIFORNIA KCM NO.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Item Deserl lion Quanti E ulvale Unit Cost Total
A. JOB CONDITIONS
Supervision;
- Project manager 6 MO $3,000.00 $18,000
. Superintendent 6 MO $6,000.00 $36,000
Superintendent pick-up truck/mileage. 6 MO $100.00 $600
Superintendent phone 6 MO $50.00 $300
- Jobsite Secretary 6 MO $1.000.00 $6,000
- Safety program expense 6 MO $500.00 $3,000
Temporary Facilities:
- Trailer set-up 1 EA $250.00 $250
- Trailer dlsmantie 1 EA $150.00 $150
- Trailer monthly rent 6 MO $200.00 $1,200
. Dumpsters 30 EA $450.00 $13,500
- Storage set-up 1 EA $180.00 $180
- Storage dismantie 1 EA $180.00 $180
- Storage monthly rent 6 MO $150.00 $900
- Temporary site fence, etc. 400 LF $6.00 $2.400
. Temporery toilets 6 MO $150.00 $900
. Mobilize to site 1 EA $1,500.00 $1,500
- Demobilize from site 1 EA $1,500.00 $1,500
Utilities:
- Water meter 1 LS $500.00 $500
- Water lines 50 LF $10.00 $500
- Water service 6 MO $75.00 $450
. Install temporary electricity 1 LS $1,200.00 $1.200
- Monthly temporary electricity 6 MO $100.00 $600
- Power to trailers 1 LS $800.00 $800
- Telephone installation 1 LS $200,00 $200
- Telephone use 6 MO $75.00 $450
Field Office Equipment:
KCM "rou.. . Confidential
, ,
Page 4
PROJECT: City of Tustin Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City of Tustin
, LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
GENERAL CONDITIONS
DATE: 1011012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
KCM NO.
Item Description
A.
JOB CONDITIONS
Specials:
- As-built drawings
- Progress photos
- Survey
ToolslRental:
. Temporary barricadeslErosion Control
. Maintain temporary barricades
- Small tools and consumables
Ciean.up:
- Progressive clean.up
- Final clean-up
InsurancelBondlFee:
. General liability
- Permits, licenses. fees
- Bonds. 3%
- Architect I Enginesrs' fees
SUB TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS'
CONTINGENCY @ 10%
TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS
KCM Gron.. . Confiden"aJ
Quantity Equlvale Unit Cost Total
1 LS $1,250.00 $1.250
6 MO $120.00 $720
1 LS $2,000.00 $2.000
6 MO $1,000.00 $6,000
1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
6 MO $100.00 $600
6 MO $650.00 $3,900
1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500
LS $20.958.94 $20,959
Excluded
Excluded
See Summary
$133,389
$13,339
$146,728
Page 5
PROJECT : City of Tustin un Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 2 & 5 DATE: Oetober10,2003
¡CLIENT : City o,fTustin OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
LOCATION : Tustin, CALIFORNIA
~OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 2 & S Full Rehabilitation 191.195 Main Street
Historie Rehabilitation
,ÆSCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL SUMMARY
02 DEMOLITION 6,120 SF $5.31 $32,520
03 CONCRETE 6,120 SF $13.71 $83,932
04 MASONRY 6,120 SF $16.99 $116,225
05 METALS 6,120 SF $2.45 $15,000
06 WOOD AND PLASTICS 6,120 SF $5.35 $32,732
07 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION 6,120 SF $9.37 $57,338
08 DOORS AND WINDOWS 6,120 SF $20.64 $126,300
09 FINISHES 6,120 SF $16.73 $102,389
10 SPECIALTIES 6,120 SF $0.00 $0
11 EQUIPMENT 6,120 SF $0.00 $0
12 FURNISHINGS 8,120 SF $0.00 $0
, SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 6,120 SF $0.00 $0
14 CONVEYiNG 6,120 SF $0.00 $0
15 MECHANICAL 6,120 SF $16.14 $98,775
16 ELECTRICAL 6,120 SF $5.46 $33,420
----
SUBTOTAL HARD COSTS $114.16 $698,631
CONTINGENCY @ 20% $139,728
-----------
TOTAL PROJECT HARD COSTS: $136.99 $838,358
COST PER SF BUILDING ONLY $114.28
COST PER SF BUILDING & SITEWORK 136.99
TOTAL PROJECT HARD COSTS: 6,120 SF $136.99 $838,358
02 SITE WORK
Earthwork:
SF
$0
--
SUBTOTAL EARTHWORK
$0
)emolition:
Demolition Interior wood framed plaster walls
Demolition Interior wood fiooring
1
2,680
LS
SF
$3,500.00
$1.50
$3,500
$4,020
KCM Group Inc.
Page'
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 2 & 5
CLIENT: C,ity of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
'OPE OF WORK: ALTS: 2 & 5 Full Rehabilitation 191.195 Main Street
, Historic Rehabil~ation
,..ÆSCRIPTION
Demolition CMU wail ¡nfills
Demol~lon of existing glass block façade at 195
Demo roof framing at rear 195
Temp bracing/ scaffolding
Disposal
SUBTOTAL DEMOLITiON
Paving, walkways, landscaping, etc.
Sidewalk patch/replace/protect
SUBTOTAL PAVING, WALfWVAYS, LANDSCAPING, ETC.
Site Utilities:
SUBTOTAL SITE UTILITIES
TOTAL DEMOLITION
03 CONCRETE
CIP Concrete:
Slab on grade:
Existing slab rework, prep, and bushing
Levelin9/topping slab
Mise patching/trench repair
CIP Walls
Crack repairs w/ epoxy (5,236 sf - 1 side)
Wall patching
TOTAL CONCRETE
04 MASONRY
CMU - Concrete Masonry Units
Remove/Replace brick storefront w/ new fdn at 191
Option: epoxy injectJrepoint brick storefront ( 58751 x $45.00=$26,415)
Clean/Repair/Repoint & seal masonry exterior walls - bldg 191 north & west si
Repair/Repaint and seal masonry façade pilasters - bldgs 193 & 195
Mise masonry repairs and preparation
TOTAL MASONRY
05 METALS
KCM Group Inc.
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
8 EA $750.00 $6,000
1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500
1,000 SF $4.25 $4,250
1 LS $12.000,00 $12,000
$0
$0
Included above
---.
$31,270
LS $1,250,00 $1,250
------
$1,250
EA $0
---
$0
$32,520
6,120 SF $1_50 $9,180
6,120 SF $5,00 $30,600
3 LS $2,500,00 $7,500
10,472 SF $2.50 $26,180
5,236 SF $2.00 $10,472
$83,932
587 SF $125,00 $73,375
1,378 SF $25,00 $34,450
1 LS $900,00 $900
1 LS $7,500,00 $7,500
--_.-----
$116,225
, Page 7
I PROJECT: City of Tustin Uti Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 2 & 5
CLlENT ; City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin CAUFORNIA
~OPE OF WORK: ALTS: 2 & 5 Full Rehabilitation 191-195 Main Street
Historic Rehabilitation
..,ESCRIPTION
QUANTITY
UNIT COST
TOTAL
Structural Steel:
Roof parapet braces, two rows 90 ~ - bldg. 195
Remove and repiace Roof parapet braces wi concealed, aprox 30 - bldg. 191
Mise Iron/steel
TOTAL METALS
06 WOOD AND PLASTICS
Rough Carpentry:
Structural framing - Roof - bldg. 195
Mise wall framing repair at front façade - bldgs. 193 & 195
Miscellaneous framing repairs
Roof crickets at 195
Finish Carpentry:
Repair all wood trim and mouldings on sou1h façade - bldgs. 193 & 195
Repair and restore wood header at façade - bldgs 193 & 195
Repair and restore wood soffits at entry façade - bldgs 193 & 195
Rebuild mezzanine jevel/ soffrt at entry of bidg. 193
TOTAL WOOD AND PLASTICS
07 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
Roofing and Waterproofing:
Remove and replace built-up roofing, incl. fiashing
6,761
Caulking and sealants:
Miscellaneous caulking and seaiants
TOTAL THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
08 DOORS AND WINDOWS
Wood Doors & Frames:
Repair Woodlglass entry doors - 1 pair, 3070 wi transom panel -193 & 195
Repair/replace storefront entry sill, jamb. and glazing. bldgs. 193 & 195
Repair Wood/glass entry doors - 1 pair 2670 wi transom panel- bldg. 191
Provide new Wood I giass entry door 3070 . to match existing bldg, 191
,Repair wood warehouse sliding door and hardware - bldg. 195
I Provide new Wood I glass rear door 3070 - to match existing bldg. 195
Provide new rear entry doors.1 pair 2670 at rear of bldg. 193
Provide new rear doors 3070 - bldg. 191
KCM Group Inc.
DATE: October 10,2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
UNIT
1
30
1
LS
EA
LS
1,000 SF $12.00 $12,000
1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500
1 LS $6,500.00 $6,500
1 LS $3,500.00 $3,500
$0
$0
1 LS $1,200.00 $1,200
60 LF $20.00 $1.200
104 SF $8.00 $832
250 SF $20.00 $5,000
$0
$0
$0
-----
$32,732
SF
LS
2
445
1
1
1
1
2
1
EA
SF
EA
EA
EA
EA
EA
EA
$4,000.00
$250.00
$3,500.00
$4,000
$7,500
$3,500
$15,000
$8.00
$54,088
$3,250.00
$3,250
------
$57,338
$4,250.00
$20,00
$4,000.00
$2,750.00
$3,000.00
$2,750_00
$4,250.00
$2,750.00
$8,500
$8,900
$4,000
$2,750
$3,000
$2,750
$8,500
$2,750
Page B
PROJECT: CIty of Tustin Utt Juice BuildIng Rehabilitation Alt 2 & 5
CLIENT: City otTustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
',OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 2 & 5 Full Rehabilitation 191-195 Main street
, Historic Rehabilitation
luESCRIPTION
SUBTOTAL DOORS
Wood Windows, glazing and sash
Provide new leaded glass panels to match original. bldg 195
Remove/RepairlReinstall Leaded giass paneis. bldg 193
Remove/Repair/Reinstall 6'x10' wired glass skylight - bidS 191
Provide new divided light wood window 7070 . at bldg 195 side
Provide new wood window 3666 at rear of bldg, 195
Provide new high window 6626 at rear of bldg 193
Provide new wood window 4050 at rear of bldg. 193
Repair 4060 divided light wood window - bldg. 191 front
Repair existing arched top window 3040 at rear of bldg 191
Provide new arched top wood window 3040 to match. bldg. 191 rear
Provide new divided light wood window 2636 - bldg 191 side
Provide new divided light wood window 2680 - bldg 191 side
Provide new divided light wood windows 8066 - bldg. 191 side
SUBTOTAL WINDOWS
TOTAL DOORS AND WINDOWS
09 FINISHES
Painting / Finishes:
Repair/RepairlReinstall metal cornice facades. bldgs.
Prep I Paint I Finish doors
Prep I Paint I Finish windows
Prep I Paint I Finish trim / woodwork
Prep I Paint I Finish walls
193&195
Gypsum wallboard:
5/8" drywall at walls, taped & mud wi furring
518" drywall at cemng. taped and mud wi furring
Mise furring and drywalVshell part~ions
Marble I Stone
Marbie panels at base of facades - bldgs. 193 & 195
Flooring:
Sealed concrete slab
TOTAL FINISHES
I
" SPECIALTIES
KCM Group Inc.
DATE; October 10,2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
$0
$0
$41,150
160 SF $100.00 $16,000
131 SF $50,00 $6,550
1 LS 7,500.00 $7,500
1 EA $6.500.00 $6,500
1 EA $3,000,00 $3,000
1 EA $3,000.00 $3,000
1 EA $5,250.00 $5,250
1 EA $5,350.00 $5,350
1 EA $1,250.00 $1,250
2 EA $2,750.00 $5,500
1 EA $2,250.00 $2,250
1 EA $3,500.00 $3,500
3 EA $6,500.00 $19,500
----
85,150
$126,300
66 LF $150.00 $9,900
9 EA $400.00 $3,600
13 EA $350,00 $4,550
1 LS $5,500.00 $5,500
11,475 SF $1.75 $20,081
6,630 SF $3.00 $19,890
6,120 SF $3.75 $22,950
1 LS $7,500,00 $7,500
SF $0
$0
LS $7,500.00 $7,500
6,120 SF $0.15 $918
-------
$102,389
._---
Page'
PROJECT : City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 2 & 5 DATE: October 10, 2003
¡CLIENT : City ofTustin OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
LOCATION : Tustin, CALIFORNIA
~OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 2 & 5 Full Rehabilitation 191-195 Main Street
Historic Rehabilitation
,ÆSCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
TOTAL SPECIALTIES $0
11 EQUIPMENT
Appliances EXCLUDED $0
TOTAL EQUIPMENT $0
12 FURNISHINGS
Cabineby:
TOTAL FURNISHINGS $0
13 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
----.-
TOTAL SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION $0
15 MECHANICAL
'Imbing:
Install new sewer service lines (incl demo, trench, BF) 3 EA 4,500,00 $13,500
Install new water service lines (incl demo, trench, BF) 3 EA 3,500,00 $10,500
Install dom water backflows 3 EA 1.275,00 $3,825
HW heaters 3 EA 2,750,00 $8,250
Install new gas sarvice lines (incl demo, trench, BF) 3 EA 3,750,00 $11,250
Plumbing dist and flx!' 6,120 SF $1,00 $6,120
TOTAL PLUMBING $53,445
H,VAC.
HVAC package units, distribution, stat(shell only) EA $9,500,00 $28,500
----
TOTAL HVAC '
Fire Protection:
Fire protection (incl tap from new serv) 6,120 SF $2,75 $16,830
-----
TOTAL MECHANICAL $98,775
16 ELECTRICAL
Distribution, power, outlets, switching, lighting, (shell only), 6,120 SF $3,50 $21,420
Install new ulg 200A electrical service wi panel (from switchgear by others) 3 EA $2,250,00 $6,750
Install u/g CATV/teVdata service (to backboard) 3 SF $1,750.00 $5,250
--------..-
TOTAL ELECTRICAL $33,420
KCM Group Inc,
\ Pogo 10
City of Tustin
Utt Juice Building
Historic Rehabilitation Estimate
Alternative 3 - Modified Rehabilitation
Opinion of Probable Cost
October 10, 2003
Prepared for:
City ofTustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
PROJECT: City of Tustin Uti Juice 6ullåing Rehabilitation
CLIENT : City of Tustin
LOCATION: TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
DATE: 10/10/2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
KCM NO.
PAGE I
NUMBER
% of TOTAL
GRAND
TOTAL
INDEX AND SUMMARY
1. INDEX AND SUMMARY
SUBTOTAL
2-3
4-5 12.56% $145,633
6 -10 69.36% $805,820
--
81.94% 951,653
6.56% $76,132
----- ---
88.50% $1,027,785
11.50% $133,612
100% $1,161,398 I
5,240 SF
2. BASIS OF ESTIMATE
3. GENERAL CONDITIONS
4. BUILDING AND SITE WORK
SUBTOTAL
7. CONTRACTORS FEE @ 8%
8. AlE SPECIALTY CONSULTING FEES @ 13%
TOTAL PROJECT
TOTAL BUILDING AREA
KC/"I Group,. Confidential,
Paget
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice BuildIng Rehabilitation
CLIENT: city of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin. CALIFORNIA
DATE: 10/1012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
BASIS OF ESTIMATE
Residential Equivalent Estimate
Introduction
This opinion of probable cost has been based on a competitive open bid situation with a minimum of four (4) bona fide
reputable bids received from general contractors in a stable bidding markat, The documant is based on
the measurement and pricing of quantities where possible, andlor reasonable allowances for items
not clearly defined. The unit rates refiected herein, have been obtained
from KCM's database, historical records and other derivstive sources,
This estimate is based on a rehabilitation of the existing buildings, in whole or in part and epproximates these replacement costs.
KCM etrongly recommends that interested parties carefully review this estimate, such
that any estimate interpretations contrary to those intended by the known project can be eddressed, it
Is recommended that the estimate be verified should more detailed information become available or it there
is a change in scope of work or in the basis of assumptions,
This opinion represents KCM's best judgment as a professional construction consultant familiar with the
construction industry. Since KCM has no control over the cost of labor, materials and equipment, or
over the contractor's method of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions. KCM
cannot and does not guarantee that the proposals, bids or construction cost may not vary from the opinion
of probable cost.
Documentation
This cost estimate was prepared based on a brief site observation of the existing buildings 1 91, 193 & 195 Main Street. Tustin,
verbal reports and a review of the documents provided by the Client, as referenced in this report,
A. Architectural drawings
None
Inclusions and assumptions
The following Inclusions and assumptions have bean made and are included in this estimate:
A. General
General contractor's fea (8%)
Direct Cost Contingency (20%)
General Condroons Contingency (10%)
NE Specialty Consurong Fee (13%)
B. Site Work
Demolition only required for the work of Preservation
Site surtace drainage only
Conventionally rainforced slab
C. Finishes
D. Specialties
E. Equipment
Appliances not included
F. Furnishings
None
KCM Group, . Confidential
\
Pag,'
PROJECT: City of Tustin Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City o!Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
Exoluslons
The following items are excluded from this estimate:
A. Owner's soft oosts
Lend aoquisition faes
Legal and financing costs
Inspection and utility connaction fees
Fire and all risk insurance
Owner's ancillary costs
Phasing/premium time requirements
Escalation
B. Site work
Hazardous material removal/abatement
Removal of unforeseen underground obstructions
Mold remediation
Mass demolition or demolition of exterior walls or slabs
Construction of new exterior walls
Structural integration of existing structure into proposed new structure
Tenant improvements
Piles, caisaons or spacial foundation requirements
Faature signaga
C. Furniture, fixtures and equipment
Movabla furniture and furnishings
Indoor plants and planters
Equipment other than noted
Loosa carpats and fumitura
Audio-visual equipment
Computer equipment
Artwork, etc.
D. Electrical
. Telephone systsm and handsets, ete,
KCM Group. . confl~entiel
DATE: 10/10/2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Pege3
PROJECT : City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation DATE: 10/10/2003
CLIENT : City of Tustin OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
LOCATiON : Tustin, CALIFORNIA KCM NO.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Item Description Quantity Equivale Unit Cost Total
A. JOB CONDITIONS
Supervision:
- Project manager 6 MO $3,000.00 $18,000
- Superintendent 6 MO $6,000.00 $36,000
Superintendent pick.up truck/mileage. 6 MO $100.00 $600
Superintendent phone 6 MO $50.00 $300
- Jobs~e Secretary 6 MO $1,000.00 $6,000
- Safety program expense 6 MO $500.00 $3,000
Temporary Facilities:
. Trailer set.up 1 EA $250.00 $250
. Trailer dismantle 1 EA $150.00 $150
- Trailer monthiy rent 6 MO $200.00 $1,200
. Dumpsters 30 EA $450.00 $13,500
- Storage set-up 1 EA $180.00 $180
. Storage dismentle 1 EA $180.00 $180
- Storage monthly rent 6 MO $150.00 $900
- Temporary site fence, etc. 400 LF $8.00 $2,400
- Temporary toilets 6 MO $150.00 $900
- Mobilize to s~e 1 EA $1,500.00 $1,500
- Demobilize from s~e 1 EA $1,500.00 $1.500
Utilities:
- Water meter 1 LS $500.00 $500
- Water lines 50 LF $10.00 $500
. Water service 6 MO $75.00 $450
- InstaU temporary electricity 1 LS $1,200.00 $1,200
. Monthly temporary electricity 6 MO $100.00 $600
. Power to trailers 1 LS $800.00 $800
- Telephone instaUation 1 LS $200.00 $200
- Telephone use 6 MO $75.00 $450
Field Office Equipment:
KCM Omu., . Confldential
\
Page 4
PROJECT: City of Tustin Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin. CAUFORNIA
OATE: 10/10/2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
KCM NO.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Item Descrl tlon
Quanti E ulvale Unit Cost Total
1 LS $1,250.00 $1,250
6 MO $120.00 $720
1 LS $2,00D.00 $2.000
6 MO $1,000,00 $6,000
1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
6 MO $100.00 $600
6 MO $650.00 $3,900
1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500
LS $20,145.50 $20.146
Excluded
Excluded
See Summary
$132,576
$13,258
$145.833
A.
JOB CONDITIONS
Specials:
- As-built drawings
. Progress photos
. Survey
Tools/Rental:
. Temporary barricades/Erosion Control
. Maintain temporary barricades
. Small tools and consumables
Clean-up:
. Progressive clean.up
. Finai clean-up
InsurancelBondiFee:
. General LIability
. Permits, licenses, fees
. Bonds - 3%
. Architect / Engineers' fees
SUB TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS
CONTINGENCY @ 10%
TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS
KCM Orou.. . Confident'a'
Page 5
PROJECT : City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 3 DATE: October 10, 2003
CLIENT : City ofTustin OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
LOCATION : Tustin, CALIFORNIA
~OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 3 Rehabilitation 191, 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabil~ation
,uESCRIPTiON QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL SUMMARY
02 DEMOLITION 5,240 SF $6.90 $36,153
03 CONCRETE 5,240 SF $12.87 $67,432
04 MASONRY 5,240 SF $26.81 $139,425
05 METALS 5,240 SF $2.48 $13,000
06 WOOD AND PLASTICS 5,240 SF $3.81 $19,982
07 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION 5,240 SF $9.60 $50,298
08 DOORS AND WINDOWS 5,240 SF $24.53 $128,550
09 FINISHES 5,240 SF $17.34 $90,862
10 SPECIALTIES 5,240 SF $0.00 $0
11 EQUIPMENT 5,240 SF $0.00 $0
12 FURNISHINGS 5,240 SF $0.00 $0
, SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 5,240 SF $0.00 $0
14 CONVEYING 5,240 SF $0.00 $0
15 MECHANICAL 5,240 SF $18.22 $95,475
16 ELECTRICAL 5,240 SF $5.79 $30,340
--
SUBTOTAL HARD COSTS $128.15 $671,517
CONTINGENCY @ 20% $134,303
--......-
TOTAL PROJECT HARD COSTS: $153.78 $805,820
COST PER SF BUILDING ONLY $127.32
COST PER SF BUILDING & SITEWORK 153.78
TOTAL PROJECT HARD COSTS: 5,240 SF $153.78 $805,820
02 SITE WORK
Earthwork:
SF
$0
-----
SUBTOTAL EARTHWORK
$0
jemoiition:
Demolition Interior wood framed plaster walls
Demolition Interior wood flooring
1
1,935
LS
SF
$2,500.00
$1.50
$2,500
$2,903
KCM Group Inc.
Page.
¡PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 3
CLIENT: City ofTustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CAUFORNIA
~OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 3 Rehabilitation 191, 193 & 195 Main Street
, Historic Rehabilitation
..ÆSCRIPTION
Demolition CMU wali infills
Demolition of existing glass biock façade at 195
Temp bracing/ scaffolding
Selective demolition production impact (Demo N.I.C.)
Disposal
SUBTOTAL DEMOLITION
Paving, walkways, landscaping, etc.
Sidewalk patch/replace/protect
SUBTOTAL PAVING, WALf<WAYS, LANDSCAPING, ETC.
Site Utilities:
SUBTOTAL SITE UTILITIES
TOTAL DEMOLITION
.,3 CONCRETE
CIP Concrete:
Slab on grade:
Existing slab rework, prep, and bushing
Leveling/topping slab
Mlsc patchingltrench repair
CIP Walls
Crack repairs w/ epoxy (3696 sf - 1 side)
Wall patching
TOTAL CONCRETE
04 MASONRY
CMU - Concrete Masonry Units
RemovelReplace brick storefront w/ new fdn at 191
Option: epoxy Inject/repaint brick storefront (587s! x $45.00=$28,415)
Clean/Repair/Repaint & seal masonry exterior walls. bldg 191 north & west si
Repalr/Repoint and seal masonry façade pilasters - bldgs 193 & 195
Construct new rear masonry wall w/ footing - bldg 195
Mise masonry repairs and preparation
TOTAL MASONRY
05 METALS
KCM Group Inc.
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
,
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
8 EA $750.00 $6,000
1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500
1 LS $12,000.00 $12,000
1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
$0
Included above
---
$34,903
LS $1,250.00 $1,250
$1.250
EA
$0
$0
---
$36,153
5.240 SF $1.50 $7,860
5,240 SF $5.00 $26,200
3 LS $2,500.00 $7,500
7,392 SF $2.50 $18,480
3,696 SF $2.00 $7,392
---
$67,432
587 SF $125.00 $73,375
1,378 SF $25.00 $34,450
1 LS $900.00 $900
580 SF $40.00 $23,200
1 LS $7,500.00 $7,500
$139,425
Page 7
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 3
CLIENT: City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
~.OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 3 Rehabilitation 191, 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabilitation
ro.JESCRIPTION
Structural Steel:
Roof parepet braces, two rows 60 If. bldg, 195
Remove and replace roof parapet braces wi concealed, aprox 30 . bldg 191
Mise Ironlsteel
TOTAL METALS
06 WOOD AND PLASTICS
Rough Carpentry:
Mise wall framing repair at front façade . bldgs. 193 & 195
Miscellaneous framing repairs
Construct new roof crickets at 195
Finish Carpentry:
Repair all wood tJim and mouldings on south façade - bldgs, 193 & 195
Repair and restore wood header at façade . bld9S 193 & 195
Repair and restore wood soffits at entry façade . bldgs 193 & 195
Rebuild mezzanine level I soffit at entry of bldg, 193
TOTAL WOOD AND PLASTICS
07 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
Roofing and Waterproofing:
Remove and replace built-up roofing, inel. flashing
Caulking and sealants:
Miscellaneous caulking and sealants
TOTAL THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
08 DOORS AND WINDOWS
Wood Doors & Frames:
Repair Woodlglass entry doors - 1 pair, 3070 wi transom panel .193 & 195
Repairlreplaee storefront entry sill, jamb, and glazing. bldgs. 193 & 195
Repair Woodlglass entry doors. 1 pair 2670 wi transom panel. bldg, 191
Provide new Wood I glass entry door 3070. to match existing bldg- 191
Repair wood warehouse sliding door and hardware - bidg. 195
Provide new rear entry doors .1 pair 2670 at rear of bldg, 193
Provide new rear doors 3070 . bldg, 195
Provide new rear doors 3070. bldg, 191
SUBTOTAL DOORS
KCM Group Inc.
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
QUANTITY
TOTAL
UNIT
UNIT COST
1
30
1
$3,000
$7,500
$2,500
LS
EA
LS
$3,000.00
$250,00
$2,500.00
$13,000
LS $2,500.00 $2,500
LS $6,600,00 $6,500
LS $2,750.00 $2,750
$0
$0
1 LS $1,200_00 $1,200
60 LF $20.00 $1,200
104 SF $8.00 $832
250 SF $20,00 $5,000
$0
$0
$0
--
$19,982
5,881 SF $8,00 $47,048
LS $3.250,00 $3,250
$50,298
2 EA $4,250.00 $8,500
445 SF $20,00 $8,900
1 EA $4,000,00 $4,000
1 EA $2,750,00 $2,750
1 EA $3,000.00 $3,000
2 EA $4,250,00 $8,500
1 EA $2,750,00 $2,750
1 EA $2,750,00 $2,750
$0
$0
-----.
$41,150
,PageB
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
,
PROJECT; CIty ofTustin Uti Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 3
CLlENT : City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
'OPE OF WORK: ALT$: 3 Rehabilitation 191, 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabilitation
..ÆSCRIPTION
SUBTOTAL WINDOWS
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
160 SF $100.00 $16,000
131 SF $50.00 $6,550
1 LS $7,500.00 $7,500
1 EA $6,500.00 $6,500
1 EA $3,000.00 $3,000
1 EA $5,250.00 $5,250
1 EA $5,250.00 $5,250
1 EA $5.350.00 $5,350
1 EA $1,250.00 $1,250
2 EA $2,750.00 $5,500
1 EA $2,250.00 $2,250
1 EA $3,500.00 $3,500
3 EA $6,500.00 $19,500
-------
67,400
$128,550
Wood Windows, glazing and sash
Provide new leaded giass panels to match original. bldg 195
Remove/Repair/Reinstall leaded glass panels - bldg 193
Remove/Repair/Reinstall Leaded glass panels - bldg. 191
Provide new divided light wood window 7070 - at bldg 195 side
Provide new high window 6626 at rear of bldg 193
Provide new wood window 4050 at rear of bldg. 193
Provide new wood window 6030 at rear of bldg. 195
Repair 4060 divided light wood window - bldg. 191 front
Repair exiating arched top window 3040 at rear of bldg. 191
Provide new arched top wood window 3040 to match - bldg. 191 rear
Provide new divided light wood window 2636. bldg. 191 side
Provide new divided light wood window 2680 - bldg. 191 side
Provide new divided light wood window 8066 - bldg. 191 side
TOTAL DOORS AND WINDOWS
- FINISHES
,
.inting / Finishes:
Repair/Repair/Reinstall metal cornice facades. bldgs.
Prep / Paint! Finish doors
Prep / Paint / Finish windows
Prep / Paint / Finish trim / woodwork
Prep / Paint / Finish walls
193&195
66 IF $150.00 $9,900
8 EA $400.00 $3,200
13 EA $350.00 $4,550
1 lS $5,500.00 $5,500
9,855 SF $1.75 $17,246
5,010 SF $3.00 $15,030
5,240 SF $3.75 $19,650
1 lS $7,500.00 $7,500
$0
$0
lS $7,500.00 $7,500
5,240 SF $0.15 $766
---.
$90.862
---
$0
Gypsum wallboard:
5/6" drywall at walls, taped & mud w/ furring
5/8" drywall at ceiling, taped and mud w/ furring
Misc furring and drywall/shell partitions
Marble / Stone
Marble panels at base of facades - bldgs. 193 & 195
Flooring:
Sealed concrete slab
TOTAL FINISHES
10 SPECIALTIES
TOTAL SPECiALTIES
. I EQUIPMENT
KCM Group Inc.
Page 9
PROJECT: CIty of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 3
CLIENT: City cf Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
'OPE OF WORK: ALTS: 3 Rehabilitation 191, 193 & 195 Main Street
, Historic Rehabil~ation
,..ÆSCRIPTION
Appliances EXCLUDED
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
12 FURNISHINGS
Cabinetry:
TOTAL FURNISHINGS
13 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
TOTAL SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
15 MECHANICAL
Plumbing:
Install new sewer service lines (incl demo, trench, BF)
Install new water service lines (inc! demo, trench, BF)
Install dom water backfiows
HW heaters
,nstall new gas service lines (incl demo. trench, BF)
Plumbing dist and fix!.
TOTAL PLUMBING
HV.A.C.
HVAC package units, distribution, stat.(shell only)
TOTAL HVAC
Fire Protection:
Fire protection (incl tap from new serv)
TOTAL MECHANICAL
16 ELECTRICAL
Distribution. power, outlets, switching, lighting, (shell only).
Install new ulg 200A electrical service wi panel (from switchgear by others)
Install ulg CATV/teVdata service (to backboard)
TOTAL ELECTRICAL
KCM Group Inc.
QUANTITY
3
3
3
3
3
5,240
$52,565
5,240
5,240
3
3
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
UNIT
EA
EA
EA
EA
EA
SF
EA
SF
SF
EA
SF
UNIT COST
4,500.00
3,500.00
1,275,00
2,750.00
3,750.00
$1.00
$9,500.00
$2.75
$3.50
$2.250.00
$1,750.00
TOTAL
$0
----
$0
-----
$0
$0
$13,500
$10,500
$3,825
$8,250
$11,250
$5,240
----
$28,500
-------
$14,410
----
$95,475
$18,340
$6,750
$5,250
---
$30,340
Page 10
City of Tustin
Utt Juice Building
Historic Rehabilitation Estimate
Alternative 4 - Reduced Modified Rehabilitation
Opinion of Probable Cost
October 10,2003
Prepared for:
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
PROJECT: City of Tustin Uti Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City ofTustin
LOCATION: TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
DATE: 10/1012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE CO¡;T
KCM NO.
PAGE I
NUMBER
% of TOTAL
GRAND
TOTAL
INDEX AND SUMMARY
1. INDEX AND SUMMARY
2. BASIS OF ESTIMATE
2-3
3. GENERAL CONDITIONS
4.5
17.70%
$120,927
SUBTOTAL
6 -10 64.24% $438,954
--- ------
81.94% 559,881
6.56% $44,790
4. BUILDING AND SITE WORK
7. CONTRACTORS FEE @ 8%
SUBTOTAL
88.50%
$604,672
8. AlE SPECIALTY CONSULTING FEES @ 13%
11.50%
$78,607
TOTAL PROJECT
100%
$683,279 I
TOTAL BUILDING AREA
2,628 SF
KCM Group.. Confidential
Þage1
PROJECT: City of TusUn UttJulce Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
DATE: 1011012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
BASIS OF ESTIMATE
Residentiel Equivalent Estimate
Introduction
This opinion of probeble cost has been based on e competitive open bid situetion withe minimum of four (4) bona fide
reputable bids received from general contractore in a stabla bIddIng markat. The document is besed on
the meesurement and pricing of quentities where possible, andlor reasonable allowances for items
not clearly defined. The unit rates reflected herein, heve been obtained
from KCM's database. historical records and other derivative sources.
This estimate Is based on a rehabilitation of the existing buildings, in whole or in part and appro>dmates these repiacement costs.
KCM strongiy recommends that interested parties carefully review this estimate, such
that any estimate interpretations contrary to those intended by the known project can be addressed. It
is recommended that the estimate be verified shouid more detailed information become available or if there
is a change in scope of work or in the basis of assumptions.
This opinion represents KCM's best judgment as a professional construction consuitant familiar wm, the
construction industry. Since KCM has no control over the cost of labor, materials and equipment, or
over the contractor's method of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, KCM
cannot and does not guarantee that the proposals, bids or construction cost may not vary from the opinion
of probable cost.
Documentation
This cost estimate was prepared based on a brief site obseryation of the existing buildings 191, 193 & 195 Main Street. Tustin,
verbal reports and a review of the documents provided by the Cilento as referenced in this report.
A. Architectural drawings
None
Inclusions and assumotions
The followinginciusions and assumptions have been made and are included in this estimate:
A. General
General contractor's faa (8%)
Direct Cost Contingency (20%)
General Conditions Contingency (10%)
AlE Specialty Consuiting Fee (13%)
B. Site Work
Demolition oniy required for the work of Preservation
Site surface drainage only
Conventionally reinforced slab
C. Finishes
D. Specialties
E. Equipment
Appliances ,not included
F. Furnishings
None
KCM Group,' Confidentiel
Page 2
PROJECT: City of Tustin Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
Exclusions
The following items are exciuded from this estimate:
A. Owner's soft costs
Land acquisition fees
Legal and financing costs
inspection and utiiity connecjjon fees
Fire and all risk insurance
Owner's anciliary costs
Phasing/premium time requirements
Escalation
B. Site work
Hazardous material removal/abatement
Removal of unforeseen underground obstructions
Mold remediajjon
Mass demolition or demolition of exterior walls or slabs
Construction of new exterior walls
Structural integration of existing structure into proposed new structure
Tenant improvements
Piles, caissons or special foundation requirements
Feature signage
C. Furniture, fixtures and equipment
Movable furniture and fumishings
Indoor plants and planters
Equipment other than noted
Loose carpets and furniture
Audio-visua' equipment
Computer equipment
Artwork, etc.
D. Electrical
Telephone system end handsets, etc.
KCM Group,. Confidential
DATE: 10/1012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Page 3
PROJECT : City of Tustin UtI Juice BuildIng Rehabilitation DATE: 10/10/2003
CLIENT : City of Tustin OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
LOCATION : Tustin. CALIFORNIA KCM NO.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Item Desert tlon Quanti E ulvale Unit Cost Total
A. JOB CONDITIONS
Supervision:
- Project manager 5 MO $3,000,00 $15,000
- Superintendent 5 MO $6,000,00 $30,000
Superintendent pick.up truck/mileaga, 5 MO $100,00 $500
Superintendant phona 5 MO $50,00 $250
. Jobsite Secretary 5 MO $1,000,00 $5,000
. Safety program expense 5 MO $500.00 $2,500
Tamporary Facilities:
. Trailer set.up 1 EA $250,00 $250
- Trailer dismantie 1 EA $150,00 $150
. Trailer monthly rent 5 MO $200,00 $1.000
- Dumpsters 30 EA $450.00 $13,500
- Storage set-up 1 EA $180.00 $180
- Storage dlsmantie 1 EA $180,00 $180
- Storage monthly rent 5 MO $150,00 $750
- Temporary site fence, etc, 400 LF $6.00 $2,400
- Temporary toilets 5 MO $150,00 $750
- Mobilize to site 1 EA $1,500.00 $1,500
- Demobilize from site 1 EA $1,500.00 $1,500
Utilities:
- Water meter 1 LS $500.00 $500
- Water lines 50 LF $10,00 $500
- Water service 5 MO $75,00 $375
- Instali temporary eiectricity 1 LS $1,200,00 $1,200
- Monthly temporary electricity 5 MO $100.00 $500
- Power to trailers 1 LS $800,00 $600
- Telephone installajjon 1 LS $200,00 $200
- Teiephone use 5 MO $75,00 $375
Field Office Equipment:
KCM Grou., . Confldential
Page 4
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
GENERAL CONDITIONS
DATE: 10/10/2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
KCM NO.
Item Description
A.
JOB CONDITIDNS
Specials:
. As-buill drawings
. Progress photos
- Survey
Toois/Rental:
. Temporary barricades/Erosion Control
- Maintain temporary barricades
- Smali tools and consumables
Clean.up:
- Progressive clean-up
. Final clean'up
Insurance/Bond/Fee:
- General Llabiiity
. Permits, licenses, fees
- Bonds - 3%
- Architect / Englnaers' fees
SUB TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS
CONTINGENCY @ 10%
TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS
",CM °,°... . Confidential
Quantity Equlvale Unit Cost Total
LS $1,250.00 $1,250
MO $120.00 $600
LS $2,000.00 $2.000
5 MO $1,000.00 $5,000
1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
5 MO $100.00 $500
5 MO $650.00 $3,250
1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500
LS $10,973.85 $10,974
Exciuded
Excluded
See Summary
$109,934
$10,993
$120,927
Page 6
PROJECT : CIty of Tustin Uti JuIce Building Rehabilitation Alt 4 DATE: October 10, 2003
CLIENT : City ofTustin OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
LOCATION : Tustin, CALIFORNIA
-:OPE OF WORK: ALTS: 4 Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabilitation
"ÆSCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL SUMMARY
02 DEMOLITION 2,628 SF $12.26 $32,218
03 CONCRETE 2,628 SF $13.39 $35,186
04 MASONRY 2,628 SF $17.97 $47,235
05 METALS 2,628 SF $2.09 $5,500
06 WOOD AND PLASTICS 2,628 SF $6.75 $17,732
07 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION 2,628 SF $10.66 $28,024
08 DOORS AND WINDOWS 2,628 SF $26.26 $69,000
09 FINISHES 2,628 SF $20.28 $53,297
10 SPECIALTIES 2,628 SF $0.00 $0
11 EQUIPMENT 2,628 SF $0.00 $0
12 FURNISHINGS 2,628 SF $0.00 $0
1 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 2,628 SF $0.00 $0
I
14 CONVEYING 2,628 SF $0.00 $0
15 MECHANICAL 2,628 SF $22.99 $60,405
16 ELECTRICAL 2,628 SF $6.54 $17,198
SUBTOTAL HARD COSTS $139.19 $365,795
CONTINGENCY@20% $73,159
-----
TOTAL PROJECT HARD COSTS: $167.03 $438,954
COST PERSF BUILDING ONLY $133.28
COST PER SF BUILDING & SITEWORK 167.03
TOTAL PROJECT HARO COSTS: 2,628 SF $167.03 $438,954
02 SITE WORK
Earthwork:
SUBTOTAL EARTHWORK
SF
$0
1 LS $2,500.00
645 SF $1.50
$0
------.
Jemolition:
Demolition Interior wood framed plaster walls
Demolition Interior wood flooring
$2,500
$968
KC~ croup Inc. ,
Page 6
PROJECT: City of Tustin Ult Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 4
CLIENT: City ofTustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
DATE: October 10,2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
";OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 4 Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabil~ation
"ÆSCRIPTION
Demolition of existing glass block favade at 195
Temp bracing/ scaffolding
Selective demolition production impact ( Demo N.l.C.)
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
LS $1,500,00 $1,500
LS $16,000,00 $16,000
LS $10,000,00 $10,000
$0
Included above
---
$30,966
LS $1.250,00 $1,250
---
$1,250
Disposal
SUBTOTAL DEMOLITION
Paving, waikways, landscaping, etc,
Sidewalk patch/replace/protect
SUBTOTAL PAVING, WAL'r<WAYS, LANDSCAPING, ETC-
Site Utii~ies:
EA
$0
--oo...-
SUBTOTAL SITE UTILITIES
$0
TOTAL DEMOLITION
$32,218
iCONCRETE
CIP Concrete:
Slab on grade:
Existing slab rework, prep, and bushing
Levelingltopplng slab
Mise patchlngltrench repair
CIP Walls
Crack repairs w/ epoxy (18726 sf - 1 side)
Wall patching
2,628 SF $1,50 $3,942
2,628 SF $5.00 $13,140
2 LS $2,500.00 $5,000
3,744 SF $2,50 $9,360
1,872 SF $2,00 $3,744
------
$35,186
TOTAL CONCRETE
04 MASONRY
CMU . Concrete Masonry Units
Repalr/Rapoint and seal masonry favade pilasters. bldgs 193 & 195
Mise mesonry repairs and preparation
Construct new masonry wall w/ footing - bldg 193 & 195
1
1
1,181.00
LS
LS
SF
$900,00
$5,000,00
35,00
$900
$5,000
41,335,00
____moo
TOTAL MASONRY
$47,235
05 METALS
Structural Steel:
Roof parapet braces, two rows 45 ~ - bldg, 195
Misc iron/steel
LS
LS
$3,000,00
$2,500,00
$3,000
$2,500
KCM Group Inc.
Page 7
PROJECT; City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 4
CLIENT: City 01 Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
-:OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 4 Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabii~ation
"JESCRIPTiON
QUANTITY
UNIT
UNIT COST
TOTAL
TOTAL METALS
$5,500
06 WOOD AND PLASTICS
Rough Carpentry:
Mise wali Iraming repair at front laçade - bldgs. 193 & 195
Miscelianeous framing repairs
Construct new rool crickets at 195
TOTAL WOOD AND PLASTICS
LS $2,500.00 $2,500
LS $4,500.00 $4,500
LS $2,500.00 $2,500
$0
$0
1 LS $1,200.00 $1,200
60 LF $20.00 $1,200
104 SF $6.00 $632
250 SF $20.00 $5,000
$0
$0
$0
$17,732
Finish Carpentry:
Repair ali wood trim and mouidings on souih laçade - bldgs. 193 & 195
Repair and restore wood header at laçade - bldgs 193 & 195
Repair and restore wood soflrts at entry façade - bidgs 193 & 195
. THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
Roofing and Waterproo1ing:
Remove and replace bui~-up rooling, incl. flashing
3,126
SF
$6.00
$25,024
Cauiking and sealants:
Miscelianeous caulking and seaiants
LS
$3,000,00
$3,000
---------
TOTAL THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
$26,024
08 DOORS AND WINDOWS
Wood Doors & Frames:
KCM Group Inc. \
1 EA $2,750,00 $2,750
2 EA $4,250.00 $6,500
2 EA $4,250.00 $6,500
445 SF $20.00 $6,900
$0
$0
---
$26,650
160 SF $100.00 $16,000
131 SF $100.00 $13,100
1 EA $3,000,00 $3,000
1 EA $3,000.00 $3,000
1 EA $5,250.00 $5,250
Page B
Provide new Wood / glass rear door 3070 - to match existing bldg, 195
Provide new rear entry doors -1 pair 2670 at rear 01 bidg. 193
Repair Wood/glass entry doors - 1 pair. 3070 w/ transom panel.193 & 195
Repair/raplace storefront entry sill, jamb, and glazing - bldgs. 193 & 195
SUBTOTAL DOORS
Wood Windows, glazing and sash
Provide new leaded glass panels to match original - bldg 195
Provide neW leaded glass panels to match original- bldg 193
Provide new wood window 3666 at rear 01 bldg. 195
Provide neW high window 6626 at rear 01 bldg 193
Provide neW wood window 4050 at rear 01 bldg. 193
PROJECT: City of Tustin Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 4
CLIENT: City ofTustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
-:OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 4 Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabilitation
rùESCRIPTION
SUBTOTAL WINDOWS
TOTAL DOORS AND WINDOWS
09 FINISHES
Painting I Finishes:
RepairlRepair/Reinstall metal cornice facades - bldgs.
Prep I Paint I Finish doors
Prep I Paint I Finish trim I woodwork
Prep I Paint I Finish walls
Gypsum wallboard:
5/8" drywall at walls. taped & mud wi furring
5/8" drywall at ceiling, taped and mud wi furring
Mise furring and drywalVshell partitions
Marble I Stone
Marble panels at base of facades - bldgs. 193 & 195
Flooring:
Sealed concrete siab
TOTAL FINISHES
10 SPECIALTIES
TOTAL SPECIALTIES
11 EQUIPMENT
Appliances EXCLUDED
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
12 FURNISHINGS
Cabinetry:
TOTAL FURNISHINGS
13 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
TOTAL SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
15 MECHANICAL
KCM Gro.up Inc.
QUANTITY
UNIT
UNIT COST
TOTAL
--
40,350
--
$69,000
193&195
86 LF $150.00 $9,900
2 EA $400.00 $800
1 LS $5,500.00 $5,500
4,455 SF $1.75 $7,796
2,184 SF $3.00 $6,552
2,628 SF $3.75 $9,855
1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
LS $7,500.00 $7,500
SF $0
2,628 SF $0_15 $394
$53,297
---.
$0
$0
--
$0
$0
---.---
$0
Page 9
PROJECT: CIty of Tustin UtI JuIce Building Rehabilitation Alt 4
CLIENT: City of Tustn
LOCATION; Tustin, CALIFORNIA
~OPE OF WORK: AL TS: 4 Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
, Historic Rehabil~ation
lùESCRIPTION
Plumbing:
Install new sewer service lines (incl demo, trench, BF)
Install new water service lines (Incl demo, trench, SF)
Install dom water backflows
HW heaters
Install new gas service lines (Incl demo. trench, SF)
Plumbing dlst and fixt.
TOTAL PLUMBING
HVAC,
HVAC package units, distribution, slat(shell only)
TOTAL HVAC
Fire Protection:
Fire protection (incl tap from new serv)
TOTAL MECHANICAL
16 ELECTRICAL
'Istribution, power, outiets, switching, lighting, (shell oniy).
;tall new ulg 200A electrical service wi panel (from switchgear by others)
,nstall u/g CATVltel/data service (to backboard)
TOTAL ELECTRICAL
KCM Group Inc.
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
2 EA 4,500.00 $9,000
2 EA 3,500.00 $7,000
2 EA 1,275,00 $2,550
2 EA 2,750.00 $5.500
2 EA 3,750.00 $7,500
2,628 SF $1,Q0 $2,628
$34,176
2 EA $9,500.00 $19,000
2,628 SF $2.75 $7,227
$60,405
2,626 SF $3.50 $9,198
2 EA $2,250.00 $4,500
2 SF $1,750.00 $3,500
$17,198
Page 10
City of Tustin
Utt Juice Building
Historic Rehabilitation Estimate
Alternative 6 - 193/195 Facade Rehabilitation
Opinion of Probable Cost
October 10,2003
Prepared for:
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT : City ofTustin
LOCATION: TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
DATE: 10/10/2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
KCM NO.
PAGE I
NUMBER
% ofTOTAL
INDEX AND SUMMARY
GRAND
TOTAL
1. INDEX AND SUMMARY
SUBTOTAL
2-3
4-5 16.18% $64,680
6 -10 65.76% $262,818
---- ---
81.94% 327,498
6.56% $26,200
88.50% $353,698
11.50% $45,981
100% $399,679 I
1 SF
2. BASIS OF ESTIMATE
3. GENERAL CONDITIONS
4. BUILDING AND SITE WORK
7. CONTRACTORS FEE@8%
SUBTOTAL
8. AlE SPECIALTY CONSULTING FEES@ 13%
TOTAL PROJECT
TOTAL BUILDING AREA
KCM Group. - Confidential
Page 1
PROJECT: City of Tustin Ult Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT : City oITustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CAUFORNIA
DATE: 10/1012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
BASIS OF ESTIMATE
Historical Building Rehabilitation
Introduction
This opinion of probable cost has been based on a competitive open bid situation with a minimum of four (4) bona fide
reputable bids received from general contraC'tors in a stabla bidding markat. The document is based on
the measurement and pricing of quantities where possible, and/or reasonable allowances for items
not claarly defined. The unit rates refiected herein, have been obtained
from KCM's database, historical records and other derivative sources.
This estimate is based on a rehabilitation of the existing buildings, in whole or in part and approximates these repiacement costs.
KCM strongiy recommends that interested parties carefully review this estimate, such
that any estimate interpretations contrary to those intended by the known project can be addressed. It
is recommended that the estimate be verlfied should more detailed information become available or if there
is a change in scope of work or in the basis of assumptions.
This opinion represents KCM's best judgment as a professional construction consultant familiar with the
construction industry. Since KCM has no controi over the cost of labor, materials and equipment, the actual scope of work or
over the contraC'tor's method of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions. KCM
cannot and does not guarantee that the proposals, bids or construction cost may not vary from the opinion
of probable cost.
Documentation
This cost estimate was prepared based on a brief site observation of the existing buildings 191,193 & 195 Main Street. Tustin,
verbal reports and a review of the documents provided by the Client, as referenced in this report.
A. Architectural drawings
None
Inclusions and assumptions
The following inclusions and assumptions have been made and are included in this estimate:
A. General
General contractor's fee (8%)
Direct Cost Contingency (20%)
General Conditions Contingency (10%)
NE Specialty Consulting Fee (13%)
B. Site Work
Select demoiition only required for the work of Preservation
C. Finishes
As noted.
D. Specialties
None
E. Equipment
None
F. Furnishings
None
KCM "roup. . Confid.n6.,
Poge 2
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City ofTustin
LOCATION: Tustin CALIFORNIA
DATE: 10/1012003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
Exclusions
The following items are excluded from this estimate:
A. Owner's soft costs
Land acquisition fees
Owners soft costs other than included in estimate
Legal and financing costs
inspection and utility connection fees
Fire and all risk insurance
Owner's ancillary costs
Phasing/premium time requirements
Escalation
Permits and Fees
B. Site & Building Work
Hazardous material removaVabatement
Removal of unlcreseen underground obstructions
Moid remediation
Mass demolition or demolition at exterior walls or slabs
Construction at new exterior walls
Structural integration of existing structure into proposed new structure
Tenant improvements
Piles, caissons or special foundation requirements
Feature sigoage
C. Furniture, nxtures and equipment
Movable fumiture and fumishings
Indoor plants and pianters
Equipment other than noted
Loose carpets and furniture
Audio-visual equipment
Computer equipment
Artwork and Signage, etc.
D. Electrical
Telephone system and handsets, etc.
KCM Group. . Confldontio¡
Pag03
PROJECT : City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation DATE: 10/10/2003
CLIENT : City of Tustin OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
LOCATION : Tustin, CALIFORNIA KCM NO.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
Item Description Quantity Equlvale Unit Cost Total
A. JOB CONDITIONS
Supervision:
- Project manager 3 MO $3,000.00 $9,000
- Superintendent 3 MO $6.000.00 $18,000
Superintendent pick-up truck/mileage. 3 MO $100.00 $300
Superintendent phone 3 MO $50.00 $150
- Jobsita Secretery 3 MO $1.000.00 $3,000
- Safety program expense 3 MO $500.00 $1,500
Temporary Facilities:
. Trailer set-up 1 EA $250.00 $250
- Traiier dismantie 1 EA $150.00 $150
- Traiier monthly rent 3 MO $200.00 $600
- Dumpsters 5 EA $450.00 $2,250
. Storage set.up 1 EA $180.00 $180
- Storage dlsmantie 1 EA $180.00 $180
. Storage monthly rent 3 MO $150_00 $450
. Temporary site fence, etc. 400 LF $6.00 $2.400
- Temporary toilets 3 MO $150.00 $450
- Mobilize to site 1 EA $750.00 $750
- Demobilize from site 1 EA $750.00 $750
Utilities:
. Water meter 1 LS $500.00 $500
- Water lines 50 LF $10.00 $500
. Water service 3 MO $75.00 $225
- Install temporary eiectricity 1 LS $1,200.00 $1,200
. Monthiy temporary electricity 3 MO $100.00 $300
- Power tc traiiers 1 LS $200,00 $200
. Telephone installation 1 LS $200.00 $200
- Teiephone use 3 MO $35.00 $105
Field Office Equipment
KCM Orou.. . Connden"a'
Page 4
PROJECT: City of TusUn UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation
CLIENT: City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
GENERAL CONDmONS
DATE: 10/10/2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
KCM NO.
Item Deserl tion
Total
A.
JOB CONDITIONS
Specials:
. As.bui~ drawings
. Progress photos
- Survey
Tools/Rental:
. Temporary barricades/Eresion Control
. Maintain temporary barricades
- Small toels and eonsumables
Clean-up:
- Progressive clean-up
. Final clean.up
InsurancetBond/Fee:
. General Uability
. Permits, licenses, fees
- Bonds -3%
. Architect I Engineers' fees
SUB TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS
CONTINGENCY @ 10%
TOTAL GENERAL CONDITIONS
KCM G'DU., . Confidential
Quanti
E "Ivale
LS
MO
LS
3 MO
1 LS
3 MO
MO
LS
LS
Unit Cost
$BOO.OO
$BO.OO
$750.00
$750.00
$1,000.00
$100.00
$650.00
$750.00
$6,570.45
$800
$240
$750
$2,250
$1,000
$300
$1,950
$750
$6,570
Excluded
Excluded
See Summary
$58,800
$5,880
$64,680
Page'
PROJECT: City of Tustin Ult Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 6
CLIENT: City 01 Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
1COPE OF WORK: ALTS: 6 Façade Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabilitation
IDESCRIPTION
GRAND TOTAL SUMMARY
TOTAL PROJECT HARD COSTS:
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
LS $119,750.00 $119,750
LS $0.00 $0
LS $2,400.00 $2,400
LS $2,500.00 $2,500
LS $13,340.00 $13,340
LS $1,500.00 $1,500
LS $51,125.00 $51,125
LS $28,400.00 $28,400
LS $0.00 $0
LS $0.00 $0
LS $0.00 $0
LS $0.00 $0
LS $0.00 $0
LS $0.00 $0
LS $0.00 $0
------
$219,015.00 $219,015
$43,803
-----
$282,818.00 $262,818
$104,228.25
262,818.00
LS $262,818.00 $262,818
02 DEMOLITION
03 CONCRETE
04 MASONRY
05 METALS
06 WOOD AND PLASTICS
07 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
08 DOORS AND WINDOWS
09 FINISHES
10 SPECIALTIES
11 EQUIPMENT
12 FURNISHINGS
13 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
14 CONVEYING
15 MECHANICAL
16 ELECTRICAL
SUBTOTAL HARD COSTS
CONTINGENCY@20%
COST PER SF BUILDING ONLY
COST PER SF BUILDING & SITEWORK
TOTAL PROJECT HARD COSTS:
02 SITE WORK
Earthwork:
SF
$0
--.------
SUBTOTAL EARTHWORK
$0
Demolition:
Demolition 01 eyjsting glass block laçade at 195
Temp bracing! scaffolding! protection! maintenance
LS
LS
$3,500.00
$50,000.00
$3,500
$50,000
KCM Group Inc.
Page'
PROJECT: City of TusUn Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation Alts
CLIENT: CitypfTustin
LOCATION: TusUn, CAUFORNIA
,COPE OF WORK: AL TS: 6 Façade Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
, Historic Rehabllnation
¡DESCRIPTiON
Selective demolition production impact (Mass Demo N.l.C.)
New construction productivity impact
Disposal
SUBTOTAL DEMOLITION
Paving, walkways. iandscaping, etc.
Sidewalk patch/replace/protect
SUBTOTAL PAVING, WAUWJAYS, LANDSCAPING, ETC.
Site Utilities:
SUBTOTAL SITE UTILITIES
TOTAL DEMOLITION
13 CONCRETE
CIP Concrete:
Slab on grade: N.I.C.
CIP Walls: N.I.C-
TOTAL CONCRETE
04 MASONRY
CMU - Concrete Masonry Units
Repair/Repaint and seal masonry façade pilasters - bldgs 193 & 195
Mise masonry repairs and preparation
TOTAL MASONRY
05 METALS
Structural Steel:
Mise iron/steel
TOTAL METALS
KeM Group Inc.
DATE: October 10,2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL
LS $25,000.00 $25,000
LS $40,000.00 $40,000
$0
Ineiuded above
$118,500
LS $1,250.00 $1.250
$1.250
EA $0
---
$0
--
$119,750
SF
$0
SF
$0
$0
LS
LS
$900.00
$1,500.00
$900
$1,500
$2,400
LS
$2,500.00
$2,500
------
$2,500
Page 7
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice Building Rehabilitation Alt 6
CLIENT: ,City of Tustin
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
~COPE OF WORK: ALTS: 6 Façade Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabil~ation
¡DESCRIPTION
06 WOOD AND PLASTICS
Rough Carpentry:
Wall framing repair at front façade . bldgs. 193 & 1 95
Miscellaneous framing repairs
Finish Carpentry:
Repair all woad trim and mouldings an south façade - bidgs. 193 & 195
Repair and restore woad header atfaçade . bldgs 193 & 195
Repair and restore woad soffits at entry façade . bldgs 193 & 195
TOTAL WOOD AND PLASTiCS
07 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
Roofing and Waterproofing: N.I.C.
Caulking and sealants:
Miscellaneous caulking and sealants
TOTAL THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION
08 DOORS AND WINDOWS
Woad Doors & Frames:
Repair Woad/glass entry doors - 1 pair, 3070 w/ transom panei .193 & 195
Repair/replace storefront entry sill, jamb, and glazing. bldgs. 193 & 195
SUBTOTAL DOORS
Woad Windows, glazing and sash
Provide new leaded glass panels to match original - bldg 195
Remove/Repair/Reinstall Leaded giass paneis - bldg 193
SUBTOTAL WINDOWS
TOTAL DOORS AND WINDOWS
09 FINISHES
KCM Group Inc.
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
QUANTITY UNIT UNiT COST TOTAL
LS $2,500.00 $2,500
LS $6,500.00 $6,500
$0
$0
1 LS $1,500.00 $1.500
60 LF $30.00 $1,800
104 SF $10.00 $1,040
$0
$0
$0
$13,340
SF
$0
LS
$1,500.00
$1,500
---
$1,500
2 EA $6,500.00 $13,000
445 SF $35.00 $15,575
$0
$0
--.-
$26,575
160 SF $100.00 $16,000
131 SF $50.00 $6,550
-----.
22,550
-----.
$51.125
Page 8
PROJECT: City ot TusUn UtI Juice 6ulldlng RehabllltaUon Alt 6
CLIENT: City of Tustin ,
LOCATION: TusUn, CALIFORNIA
'SCOPE OF WORK: ALTS: 6 Façade Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
, Historic Rehabilitation
DESCRIPTION
Painting f Finishes:
RepairfRepair/Reinstall metal cornice facades. bldgs.
Prep I Paint I Finish doors
Prep I Paint f Finish windows
Prep I Paint I Finish trim I woodwork
Misc. Prep I Paint
Gypsum wallboard:
Marble I Stone
Marbie panels at base of facades - bldgs. 193 & 195
Flooring: N.I.C.
TOTAL FiNISHES
10 SPECIALTIES - N.I.C.
TOTAL SPECIALTIES
11 EQUIPMENT-N.I.C.
Appiiances EXCLUDED
TOTAL EQUIPMENT
12 FURNISHINGS - N.I.C.
Cabinetry:
TOTAL FURNISHINGS
13 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION. N.I.C.
TOTAL SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION
15 MECHANICAL- N.I.C.
Plumbing: N.I.C.
TOTAL PLUMBING
HV.A.C.: N.l.C.
KCM Group Inc.
DATE: October 10,2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST
66 LF $150.00
2 EA $750.00
1 EA $500.00
1 LS $5,500.00
1 LS $3,500.00
SF
LS $7,500.00
SF
193 & 195
SF
EA
$0
EA
TOTAL
$9,900
$1,500
$500
$5,500
$3,500
$0
$7,500
$0
$28,400
0.00
$0
$0
----
$0
----
$0
--.-
$0
$0
-----
$0
-------
Page 9
PROJECT: City of Tustin UtI Juice BuildIng Rehabilitation Alt 6
CLIENT: City of Tustin,
LOCATION: Tustin, CALIFORNIA
DATE: October 10, 2003
OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
<¡COPE OF WORK: ALTS: 6 Façade Rehabilitation 193 & 195 Main Street
Historic Rehabilitation
IDESCRIPTION
TOTAL HVAC
QUANTITY
UNIT
Fire Protection: N.I.C.
SF
TOTAL MECHANICAL
16 ELECTRICAL. N.J.C.
SF
TOTAL ELECTRiCAL
KCM Group Inc.
UNIT COST
TOTAL
$0
$0
$0
----
Page'O
$0
~ ~
~ ¡:: In
j> <0: ""
~ s I~.~ ~
<i . ;;¡ I-
"05 ~ ...J
,U UJ <t
21i
1M!
0081
tu~
w~
~~ æ
~~ i~
«w «
:::2 a: ()
-¡
0'
~!
w
w
:¡:.
(/)1
O:::z
0 <[ I'~
O.....J ,....
.....Jo...
LL 1
f
,,1:-,!òg
I
I
I
I
ï
1
,I
'!I 1 :,
'I I '>
B 1 "
¡ 1 '
II I
: l,. : "
: ' ~
, I'
I
II
111
I¡
II
~'
c.....
~
($)
E 'U:-
I\j d)
L¡{)
lli ~'
1
~
II
I, Ii
. I II
:.~,Ifl
I~i ", iii
¡II I" '
¡I! I '
~¡,: ': /> ,
, 1
, I ' '
, I.
1
1
1 .
II II
,i Ii
I; ¡
I! I ~
in
N
Ii
II I!
I
I
\I M"M 5l.
---
-~--
-~-
...~-~-,
--~-~
---~--
---
---
-..~---
~
c=J
EAST ELEvATION
--~~-
Q!]
::¡;;=~,=
SOUTI-J ELEVATION
---~-
...~-~-
--~-
...~-~-
---~-~
-..~-~-
----
-..~-~-
---
...~-~-
-~~~
~-~~
-----
----~
----
-~---
~~-~~
-----
-~--
~--~~
----..~
::¡;;=':":.=
BKCM
.._~......u
-~-
MAIN STREET
REHABILIT A llON
TUS1lN
CAUFOANIA
Inl, In.. In5 E- "'In 5tr..,
T~"". Go,
REHABILrr A TION
ESTlMA TE
ALT. 2 8. 5
SHEET No.2
:Ell
~I
00.1
lïiz
w~
~; i
~~ z~
~~ ~ ()
..
~ 15 '
< i= I/'J
~ j ~I« I!!~. ~
m . I-
Jr. ...J
;n w «
I()~
. ~
~I
w
w
V5!
,t
Ii
II
L
II
¡il ..
I .
III .
M.
II
II
Ii
il
III j
Iii I
IiII
..
ill ill j
¡II ¡II I
III II¡ I
¡i Ii
..
z
()
I-
-<{
>
ill
-1
ill
I-
ill
ill
:r
i
¡I ¡Iii'
II IIIII
Ii iii"
11
¡Ii
¡I'
lid
Iill
il
,-
ii
z
()
1-
~
ill
-1
ill
:I:
I-
æ
()
z
.~-
~~-
~'l\
=~~ ~,~~
1'ð3 Maín 5L
ROOF
.===~
D
7~
~-~
n
r
. /~
j
( -
I
/
..L
-I .
\
'-
"
\
"-
"-
"'
-"'~
Q
è===
ROOF
D',
--~,
ROOF
PLAN
@
BKCM
.1
"""""'"""",""",",M...........,,
-""....:.11
MAIN STREET
REHABILIT A llON
TUSTIN
CAUFORNIA
Iql. ,"3."5 E. Mo" SIr..t
T",.". c.a.
REHABILITATION
ESTIMA lE
ALT. 2 a. 5
SHEET No.4
:Eli
~II
00.1
..
~
liJõ .
~5 ~ L
z~ ~ ~ ~f
<i:w ~ () h
::;¡:a:
Ê
51!!'"
_I ~ .
¡;¡~
w«
- ~
. ~
~!
1-8
w
~~
CJ)o
.(2>-,<2)'11 -/<
OLz
83 (~
iD- f
~
IJ'
/I
"l-,E,g
..
.... ....
(j) '-
~ .~
<\J <I)
. r: ill .
ÚI \~r
~ N
I
I
. I
I
ï
. I .
: \
II i ?>
tl I
..Ii~: .
I .
: I.
I .
. I .
I
i2~J
~i
00.1
¡Iii
Illnl
" ill
¡lit i I, i I'
¡ I Iii' i i ,.
Ii I'!'" j' ,
Ii ¡hI II I' II'
tiJz
wS
,~g !
z~ z
«w ~
~a: ~ ()
.
~ z
~ ~
~3 ;~~
q' ;¡;¡;¡ ~
d I!:!w<t
'~ ~
a ;
zl
--8
w
W
:r:.
(f)~
t i I
Ii II 111"11 ¡
¡Ii ¡!i Ii !i Ii III, II!
~ ~ I~ I~ ¡~ iii! III
z
()
--
<[
>
ill
-1
ill
"I
--
:::J
()
~
.. .. ....
21i
~:I
oo.¡
jjz
w~
~g ,
(1)- ~
ZID z
<1 f¡;
:::¡¡~ ~ ()
..
.
~ z
~ 0
~ ~
~s ; ~I!! ~
,;. ~ I-
~~ II! ill <1
If)
. ~
0 !i
Z ~
tiJ8
W
:J: ~
cn~
I
I ¡Ilil
II I'll
.1 ¡I,'i!
Ii i ¡,
I II
i¡ II ¡Ii j
Ii 'I Iii I
If Ii iii I
L. z
() il
t- ,-
..q: II
>
w
...J
W
t-
ú)
W
", :r
Iii Iii j
¡Ii ¡Ii I
lillI, I
Ii Ii
z
()
t-
..q:
>
W
...J
W
I
t-
æ
()
z
-~-
---
h
.0iiU00'....
_._a_-
-~
_.~~
\
1'53 Marn SL
ROOF
.0'.
I,)
1'5!:> Marn 5..
ROOF
.0..
-_rii',
ROOF
PLAN
@
BKCM
.
""","n~-
K_.,"..'.""
MAIN STREET
REHABILITATION
1USTlN
CAUFOANIA
'"'. '"5. '"5 E. Mo" Str..t
T~"'. Ga-
REHABIUT A TlON
ES1lMA TE
ALT. 3
SHEET No.4
211
~.j
00.1
wZ:
w~
~; zæ
~~ ti5~
«w ::> ()
:::!:a: I-
~ ~
~, g ~ ~
~s ~ ~ ¡-:
~~ ~ fß <l
~..
- ~
. ~
~I
I-
w
W
:I:~
(/)0
"'
LJ
.Õ',GS ~
.ø',., - /.
!t::z
0"1 G""
0 -1 ~
-10...
LL 1
I II
I III
I
I IIi
¡ill j '
.,..ì I
GI !II d) .'-- .1
: ¡ I '
" 1i!O;: 'Ù" I ,>
<U tI) I, 1 I
I: !f! 1
Ii 1
ÛI ~- '.~
Q2, N
. 1 .
. I'
1
II !
I' I!
¡
:Ell
~II
oo.i
tüz
~~
z; z~
-~ f;¡~
~~ ~o
.
.1: z
j, ~
~s I~~~
~'5 Iii ~
¡;' ~ w «
~ ~
0 <;j
~!
w
w
:¡:.
(f)~
ï
I,ll ,I
'hi I IIi
i I¡I ¡ ql
II iii I 1111
z
0
I-
<[
I >
ill
..J
ill
I-
(j)
. J ~
. .
,llnd! III! .
II Ii Ii Ii Ii Ii
It ¡q~ I~ I~ I~ .
I¡ I i II II il!! no i!
¡ ¡I¡ !¡ I~ !I II' III IIi I!!
I !!! I I! I,!, 1,1 Ii' liI ill
I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ iii! iii mi liI~ II ~
z
0
I-
<[
>
ill
..J
ill
:r
I-
::J
()
(j)
¡
II ¡
Ii! I,
mil
~
1\
Ii
II
11
II
Ii
¡
II¡ j
Iii I
iii I
Iii
~:
00.1
IJjZ
wê
~;
~~
~~
d
¡
¡il,1
¡I llil
I, ¡III
Ii iii"
IZ
()
t-
<[
>
ill
. I ...J
ill
t-
ú)
ill
I::{
Iii I, 1
111 Ii! II ¡
hllli II!!I ilil
hili .,
~
~ Š
~ g I!! ~
~.S ~~~
~"" ~m«
<0
~~
0 0:
, ~ I
w
w
V5~
Ii
'Ii
'I¡'
IIi!
Iii!
j Z
0
t-
1<[
>
ill
...J
ill
. "I ::r
It-
a-::
()
Z
.~--
~a-
_._a-
1'33 Maín SL
1'3!:> Maín St,.
ROOF
ROOF
D
D
~_rno,
ROOF
PLAN
@
BKCM
8.
...... ~ ..............
11_""....::.1
MAIN STREET
REHABILITATION
TUSTIN
CALFORNIA
ql. Iq,. '"5 E- Ma" 5tr_'
T...'", Go,
REHABILfT A TION
ESTIMATE .
ALT. 4
SHEET No.4
~IJ
~:I
oo.i
wð
WF
t=~ «
( )~ Z~
~:f ¡;¡ ~
~Ii! i= ()
,
~ á
w ~~-o
~3 I ~ .
w" ¡;¡ ~
~~ w «
- ~
. .
~ ~'
1-9
w
w
:J:~
eno
!k::z
0 q (:'8'
0....1 :'9'
....10..
LL
\1 II
II I!
¡
I
~ \
I Ii II
I 111 I ¡It .
Ii 'II II '¡nl
II M II
;t~J
~.j
oo.i
lliš
a:~ ~
1--, z
(J)m z ~
;¡;;;~ ~
«w ;:) ð
::::æ:a: ¡-
.
~ ð
£ ~
oj 5 ~ '"
~ 3 ãi~ ~ f-..J'
iii .. tn
~~ W «
N~
c:i '
z !'
1-8
W
W
::r:~
(/)0
II, II II
t !i I, !i Ii III II III! Iii II~
II ill I 1!I¡!j M Illi Illi
I'I 1'1 ~II ¡I ¡I! Ib' ",' ¡ii ¡I '¡II
I~ I~ I~ I~ I~ iii! Ii! ,¡ II, I"
z
()
I-
<[
>
ill
...J
ill
::r
1-
::J
()
IS)
:ili
~II
DO.!
tüô
w¡=:
~~
ZOO
<ë~
:::¡;~
..
.
"
'"
~
:!'
ui
~s
'" -
~E
0
z
~
~I!!'"
m « .
¡fi~~
a:W
o/')
. ~
~ Ii
f-!
W8
w
:I:.
C/)~
I
I¡
Ii
II
II
'I
II
il
h¡ .
' I , '
it! ¡
ill ¡II'
11i ¡Ii ,
,I¡ ,II ¡
Ii II
I-
\J)
lill
:r
i
Z!(
¡;¡~
FU
¡
II l1:1
II 'I!II
Ii it ¡,
¡ i
Iii
,I¡-
¡I!!
d,
,
'J
1
.1
ì
1
I 'I
" \
J
" \
I, ~
I
, 'I
~'" ,
, '. '.1 ,,--J
~ ',-,'I )1., ' I
I "ViI" \ '0, I
II'j I'.~ hI' 'I
II ! " '-L- ' I
¡ 11',' I I', .--.. 'I ' .', 'I
II!¡II!II!!!"- œ,I'\...[1J'1
!II-jl!jljll';....r-!\~' I
I! ¡Ii iI,llhl ~', ~..~': \:::'..'è; :
L- ' ,,' \, ' ì
", ,c,'!""""::"",,,':- I
I , --.., " '\' 'I
~ ,I'" 'I
I" " " ',\', ~
I' _1',.,'\'"
I', ¡--". ~'1'm'-.' ."ì'..-Y'.]' '\ ì
~ I ,- "".' \' 1
I -..J , ' - . - ',\ 'I
!-..l,',"':,\\
-.¡ , , ' ' \ 1
II' ",'1
r-l" '" .., ' I
II " .' , , \I
:EI'
~
00.1
t¡j:z
wS
~~ æ
~~ ~$
~a: ~()
..
i ~
~s ~~~
~" ~ ¡¡¡ ~
~] M!J;U<t
'"
. I
0 "
z!
1-:
w
w
J:~
(/)"
It
,I
¡
~ ~ 1""
O...J ,..
œ!L
IIi
II!
II
.1
!i
fl/ m,: ""If
""
",.
,..,""
¡iii ,¡it
¡JliI'
,¡",il
,,:1'
'UI~lii ,c!u,'
,'111
ittl
I¡II
1Wit 'Iiirii'!
'i:>!illì
..
III. . ."..
"
. ~
~
'. '
'¡~~w
~
'"'If"; '-'~.'
'"
- --------
":"",,.,_0" -.-
Standards for
Rehabilitation
&
Guidelines for
Rehabilitating
Historic Buildings
&habiIitahon is tkfined as the act or procesJ of makingpos.
sible a compatible use fir a property through repai~ alter.
ations, and additions while pTr!Serving those portions or fia-
turn which convey its histvrû:al, cu/tuml, or architectural
values.
SiaI1dards fur Rehabilitation
1. A property will be used as ir was historically or be given a new use thar requires minimal change to irs
disrinctive marerials. fearures, spaces, and spacial relarionships.
2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of disrincrive materi-
als or alteration of fearures, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record ofirs time, place, and use. Changes that create a
false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectUral fearures or elemenrs ITOm other historic
properties, will not be undertaken.
4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and
preserved.
5. Disrincrive materials, featUres, finishes, and consuuction techrúques or examples of craftsmanship that
characterize a property will be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic fearures will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration
requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new lèarure will match the old in design, color, texrure,
and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing fearures will be substantiated by documentary
and physical evidence.
7. Chemical or physical treatmenrs, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
Treatmenrs that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such tesources must be distUrbed,
mitigation measures will be undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, fea.
tUres, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be diHèrentiated ITOm
the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, fearures, size, scale and proportion, and mass-
ing to protect the integrity of the property and irs environment.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new conStruction will be undertaken in a such a mannet that,
if removed in the furure, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and irs environment
would be unimpaired.
62
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings
Introduction
In Rehabilitation, histOric building materials and
character-defining featUres are protected and main-
tained as they are in the treatment Preservation; how-
ever, an assumption is made prior (0 work that exist-
ing historic fabric has become damaged or deteriorat-
ed over time and, as a reswt, more repair and replace.
ment will be reqtÚred. Thus, latitUde is given in the
Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitation to replace extensively dereriorated,
damaged, or missing featUres using either traditional
or substitUte marerials. Of the four treatments, only
Rehabilitation includes an opporrunity to make pos-
sible an efficient contemporary use through alter-
ations and additions.
IdentiJY, Retain, and Preserve Historic Materials
and Features
Like Preservation, guidance fur the treatment
Rehabilitation begins with recommendations to
identifY the form and derailing of those architecrural
marerials and featUres that are important in defining
the building's historic character and which must be
retained in order tOpreserve that charaCter.
Therefure, guidance on iJentifying, 1itaining,
and preserving character-defining features is always
given first. The character of a histori<: building
may be defined by the fuon and derailing of exterior
materials, such as masonry, wood, and metal; exterior
features, such as roofS, porches, and windows; interior
materials, such as plaster and paint; and interior
featUres, such as moldings and stairways, room
configuration and spatial relationships, as well as
structUral and mechanical systems.
Protect and Maintain Historic Materials and
Features
After identifÿing those materials and featUres that are
important and must be retained in the process of
Rehabilitation work, then proredÍng and maintain-
ing them are addressed. Protection generally involves
the least degree of intervention and is preparatory to
other work. For example, protection includes the
maintenance of historic material through treatments
such as rust removal, caulking, limited paint removal,
and re.application of protective coatings; the cyclical
cleaning of roof gutter systems; or installation of renc-
ing, alarm systems and other temporary protective
measures. Although a historic building will usually
require more extensive work, an overall evaluation of
its physical condition showd always begin at this
level.
Repair Historic Materials and Features
Next, when the physical condition of character-
defining materials and featUres warrants additional
work nrpairing is recommended. Rehabilitation
guidance for the repair ofJllstgric materials such as
masonry, wood, and architecrural metals again begins
with the least degree of intervention possible such as
patching, piecing-in, splicing, ooosolidating, or other.
wise reinforcing or upgradÏnß them according to rec-
ognized preserVation methods. Repairing also
includes the limited replacement in kind--or with
No<c The Gwddio" 10, Rd.oblliooriog Hmo"c Buildin p m ,¡,;, chap"" have.hculy 'P~;O Tb< S"""", aftlx I_~ s""¡""¡' ftr ~ c!-
llIus<ramI GuiJJin~ ftr RJuJ,iJibdmg H'utoric BUilJing<, publßh<d m 1992.
63
Originally built ar single-fàmibl semi--tÚtm:hed duplexes, these houses were Tf!habilitat<d fir a n<w use ar rmtal apartments.
While some alt<ration to non-significant int<rWr flatu"" and spaces war necessary in each on£, the <Xt<riors w<re essentially
pTf!served. Photos: Mistick, Inc.
compatible substitUte matetial--of eXtensively deteti-
orated or missing partS of features when there are sur.
viving prototypes (for example, bracketS, dentils,
steps, plaster, or portions of slate or tile roofing).
Although using the same kind of material is always
the preferred option, substitute material is acceptable
if the form and design as well as the substitUte materi-
al itSelf convey the visual appearance of the remaining
partS of the featUre and finish.
Replace Deteriorated Historic Materials and
Features
Following repair in the hierarchy, Rehabilitation
guidance is provided for replacing an entire character.
defining fèatUre with new material because the level
of deterioration or damage of materials precludes
repair (for example, an exterior cornice; an interior
64
staircase; or a complete porch or store&ont). If the
essential form and detailing are sci11 evident so that
the physical evidence can be used to re-establish the
fèature as an integral part of the rehabilitation, then
its replacement is appropriate. Like the guidance fur
repair, the preferred option is always replacement of
the entire feature in kind, that is, with the same mate-
rial. Because this approach may not always be techni-
cally or economically fèasible, provisions are made to
consider the use of a compatible substitute material.
It should be noted char, while the National Park
Service guidelines recommend the replacement of an
entire character --defining fèarure that is extensively
deteriorated, they never tecommend removal and
replacement with new material of a featUre that-
although damaged ot deteriorated-Œuld reasonably
be repaired and thus preserved.
Design fur the Replacement "fMissing Historic
Features
When an entire interior or exterior bmre is missing
(for example, an entrance, or cast iron facade; or a
principal staircase), it no longer plays a role in physi-
cally deEming the historic character of the building
wùess it can be accurately recovered in furm and
detailing through the process of carefully document-
ing the historical appearance. Although accepting the
loss is one possibility, where an important architecmr.
al fèature is missing, its replacement is always recom-
mended in the Rehabilitation ~elines as the first or
preferred, course of action. Thus, if adequate histori-
cal, pictorial, and physical documentation exists so
that the feature may be accurately reproduced, and if
it is desirable to re-establish the fèature as part of the
building's historical appearance, then designing and
constructing a new reamre based on such infOrmation
is appropriate. However, a second acceptable option
for the replacement reature is a new design that is
compatible with the remaining character~elìning
features of the historic building. The new design
should always rake into accolUlt the size, scale, and
material of the historic building itself and, most
importantly, should be dearly dilkrentiared so that
a Iàlse historical appearance is not creared.
Alterations/Additions fur the New Use
Some exterior and interior alterations tci> a historic
building are generally needed to assure its continued
use, but it is most important that such alterations do
not radically change, obscure, or destroy character-
defining spaces, materials, reaa.u:es, or finishes.
Alterations may include providing additional parking
space on an existing historic building site; cutting
new entrances or windows on secondary elevations;
inserting an additional 800r; installing an entirely
new mechanical system; ot creating an atrium or light
well. Alteration may also include the selective
removal of buildings or other fèarures of tbè environ.
ment or building site that ""' intrusive and therefure
detract from the overall historic character.
The construction of an exterior addition on a historic
building may seem to be essential fur the new use,
but it is emphasized in the Rehabilitation guidelines
that such new additions should be avoided, if possi-
ble, and considered on/¡ after it is determined that
those needs aJNlot be met by altering secon~ Le.,
non character~elìning interior spaces. If, after a
thorough evaluation of interior solutions, an exterior
addition is still judged to be the only viable alterative,
it should be designed and constructed to be clearly
diffurentiated from the historic building and so that
the character~elìning fèarures are not radically
changed, obscured, damaged, or destroyed.
Additions and alterations to historic buildings are ref-
erenced within specific sectÏ- of the Rehabilitatio/l
guidelines such as Site, Roofs, $truqura! Systems,
etc., but are addressed in detail in New Additions tq
Historic Buiklingr, fuund at the end of this chapter.
65
66 Energ Efficienc
Energy Fllìåencyl Accessibility
ConsiderationsIHealth and Safety Code
Considerations
RehabiJikuion as a Treatment When repair and
replacement of deteriorat£d ftatures are necessary;
when alterations or additions to the property are
planned fir a new or continued use; and when its
tkpiction at a particular time is not appropriate,
Rehabilitation may be considered I1S a treatment.
Prior to untkrtaking work, a documentation plan
fir Rehabilitation should be developed.
Building Exterior
1)øh1'
'~:-¡)Ì1
Masonry: Bñck, stone, terra rotta, roncrete, adobe, stna:o and mortar
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving masonry featUreS that
are important in defining the overall historic character of the
building such as walls, brackets, railings, cornices. window
architraves, door pediments, steps, and colunms; and details
such as tooling and bonding patterns, coatings, and color.
Protecting and mttintaining masonry by providing proper
drainage so that water does not stand on flat, horiwntal sur-
faces or accumulate in curved decorative fearures.
Cleaning masonry only when necessary ro halt deterioration
or remove heavy soiling.
Carrying oUt masonry sUtrnce cleaning tests after it has been
determined that such cleaning is appropriate. Tests should be
observed over a sufficient period of time so that both the
immediate and the long range effects are known to enable
selection of the gentlest method possible.
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing masonry featUres wlúch are
important in defining the overal1lústoric character of the
building so that, as a result, the character is diminished.
Replacing or rebuilding a major ponion of exterior masonry
walls that could be tepaired so that, as a result, the building is
no longer lústoric and is essentially new construction.
Applying paint or other coatings such as stucco to masonry
that has been lústorically unpainted or uncoated to create a
new appearance.
Removing paint fi:om historically painted masonry.
Radically changing the type of paint or coating or its color.
Failing to evaluate and treat the various causes of mortar joint
deterioration such as leaking roofs or gutters, difkrential 5et-
tlem~nt of the building. capillary action, or extreme weather
exposure.
Cleaning masonry surfaces when they are not heavily soiled
to create a new appearance, thus needlessly introducing
chemicals or moisture into historic materials.
Cleaning masonry sur/àœs without testing or without suffi-
cient time for the testing results to be of value.
Building Exterior Masonry 67
Reru-
ttion
&com,m,ended
Cleaning masonry surfàces with the gentlest method possible,
such as low pressure water and detergents, using natural bris-
tle btushes.
Inspecting painted masonry surfàces to determine whether
repainting is necessary.
Removing damaged or detetiorated paint only to the next
sound layer using the gentlest method possible (e.g., hand-
scraping) prior to repainting.
Applying compatible paint coating systems following proper
surface preparation.
Repainting with colors that are historically appropriate to the
building and district.
Evaluating the overall condition of the masonry to determine
whether more than protection and maintenance are required,
that is, if tepairs to masonry features will be necessary.
Repairing masonry waUs and other masonry IèatUreS by
repointing the mot1M joints where there is evidence of deteri-
oration such as disintegrating mortar, cracks in mortar joints,
loose bricks, dan1p waUs, or dan1aged plasterwork.
Removing deteriorated mortar by carefully hand-raking the
joints to avoid damaging the masonry.' .
68 Building Exterior Masonry
Not &co1n111£tUkd
Sandblasting brick or stone surfàces using dry or wet grit or
other abrasives. Thèse methods of cleaning permanently
erode the surfàce of the material and accelerate deterioration.
Using a cleaning method that involves watet or liquid chemi-
cal solutions when there is any possibility of freezing temper-
atures.
Oeaning with chemical products that will damage masonry,
such as using acid o!1limestone or marble, or leaving chemi.
cals on masonry surfuces.
Applying high pressure water cleaning methods that will
damage historic masonry and the mortar joints.
Removing paint that islìrmly adhering to, and thus protect-
ing, masonry sur!àces.
Using methods of removing paint which are destructive to
masonry, such as sandblasting, application of caustic solu-
tions, or high pressure waterblasting.
Fai1ing to follow manu!àcrurers' produCt and application
instructions when reJ!>tinting masonry.
Using new paint colors that are inappropriate to the historic
building and district.
Failing to undertake adequate measures to assure the protec-
tion of masonry fèatures.
Removing nondeteriorared mot1M from sound joints,
then repointing the entire building to achieve a unifonn
appearance.
Using electric saws and hammers rather than hand tools to
remove deteriorated mortar from joints prior to repointing.
&commended
Duplicating old mortar in srrengrh, composition, color, and
rexcure.
Duplicaring old mortar joints in widrh and in joinr profile.
Repairing stucco by removing rhe damaged material and
patching wirh new scucco that duplicates rhe old in srrengrh,
composition, color, and textUre.
Using mud. plaster as a surfåce coating over unfired, unstabi-
lized adobe because rhe mud plaster will bond to rhe adobe.
Cutting damaged concrete back to remove rhe source of dete-
rioration (often corrosion on metal reinforcement bars). The
new patch must be applied carefully so it will bond satisfactO-
rily wirh, and match, the historic concrete.
Repairing masonry features by patching, piecing-in, or
consolidating rhe masonry using recognized preservation
methods. Repair may also include the limited replacement
in kind-or with compatible substitute material~f those
extensively deteriorated or missing parts of masonry lèatures
when there are surviving prototypes such as terra-cotta
brackets or stone balusters.
P~"1'
':')0
Not &commnukd
Repointing with mortar of high portland cement content
(unless it is the content of the historicmorrar). This can
often create a bond chat is stronger rhan the historic material
and can cause damage as a result of rhe differing coefficient of
expansion and the differing porosity of rhe material and the
mortar.
Repointing with a synthetic caulking compound.
Using a "scrub" coating technique to repoint instead of tradi-
tional repoincing merhods.
Changing rhe widrh or joint profile when repointing.
Removing sound stUcco; or repairing wirh new stucco that is
stronger than the .historic material or does not convey rhe
same visual appearance.
Applying cement stucco to unfired, unstabilized adobe.
Because rhe cement stucco will not bond properly, moisrure
can become entrapped between materials, resulting in acœler.
ated deterioration of rhe adobe.
Patching concrete wirhout removing the source of deteri-
oration.
Replacing an entire masonry feature such as a cornice or
balustrade when repair of the masonry and limited replace-
ment of deteriorated or missing parts are appropriate.
Using a substitUte material fur rhe replacement part that
does not convey rhe visual appearance of the surviving parts
of rhe masonry lèarure..or that is physically or chemically
incompatible.
Building Exterior Masonry 69
Reha'
"cion
&commended
Applying new or non-historic su.rlàce rrearments such as
warer-repellenr coarings to masonry only after repoinring and
only if masonry repairs have Iiùled to arrest water penetration
problems.
&pÚt£ing in kind an entire masonry feature that is too deteri.
orated to repair-if the overall form and detailing are still evi.
dent-using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce
the feature. Examples can include large sections of a wall, a
cornice, balustrade, column, or st3Ìrw;Ly. If using the same
kind of material is not technically or economically fèasible,
then a compatible substiture material may be considered.
Not &commended
Applying waterproof, water repellent, or non-historic
coatings such as stucco to masonry as a substitute fur repoint.
ing and masonry repairs. Coatings are fiequently unneces-
sary, expensive, and may change the appearance of historic
masonry as well as accelerate its deterioration.
Removing a masonry feature that is unrepairable and not
replacing it; or replacing it with a new fèature that does not
convey the same visual appearance.
The ftUowing work is highlighted to irulicate that it representr the partiadarly complee ti!Chnical or design aspectr of Rehabilitation
projects and should only be consider:rd after the preservation concerns listed above have been adtbessed.
70 Building Exterior Masonry
pa .,~'
'.:')n
Building Exterior
Wood: Oapboard, weatherboard, shúlgles, and other wooden siding and demrame elemenlS
Recommended
Identifjing, retaining, and preservingwood features that are
important in defining the overalllúsroric ch;uacter of the
building such as siding, cornices, brackets, window a.rchi.
traves, and doorway pediments; and theit paints, finishes,
and colors.
Protecting and maintaining wood features by providing
proper drainage so that water is not allowed to stand on flat,
horiwntal surfàces or accwnulate in decorative features.
Applying chemical preservatives to wood features such as
beam ends or outriggers that are exposed to decay hazards
and are traditionally \lI1painted.
Retaining coatings such as paint that help protect the wood
from moisture and ultraviolet light. Paint removal should be
considered only where there is paint surface deterioration and
as pan of an overall maintenance program wlúch involves
repainting or applying other appropriate prorective coarings.
Not Recommended
Removing or radically changing wood features which are
important in defining the overall historic character of the
building so that, as a result, the ch;uacter is diminished.
Removing a truljor portion of the lúsroric wood from a làcade
instead of repairing or replacing only the deteriorated wood,
then reconstructing the làcade with new material in order to
achieve a unifOrm or "improved" appearance.
~dically changing the type of finish or its color or accent
scheme so that the historic ch;uacœr of the exterior is dimin-
ished.
Stripping historically painted surfaces to bare wood, then .
applying clear finishes or stains in order to create a "nanual,'
~k" -
Stripping paint ot vunish to bare wood rather' than repairing
or reapplying a special finish, i.e., a grained finish to an exte-
rior wood feature such as a front door.
Failing to identifY, evaluate, and treat the causes of wood
deteriorarion. including faulty flashing, leaking gutters, cracks
and holes in siding, deteriorated caulking in joints and seams,
plant material growing too close to wood surIàces, or insect
or fungus infèstation.
Using chemical preservatives such as creosote which, unless
they were used historically, can change the appearance of
wood features.
Stripping paint or other coarin!';' to reveal bare wood, thus
exposing historically œated surfaces to the effects of accel-
erated weathering.
Building Exterior Wóod 71
Reha' "lrion
Recomm£nded
Inspecting painted wood surfàces to detemúne whether
repainting is necessary or if cleaning is all that is required.
Removing damaged or dereriorared paint to the next sound
layer using the gentlest method possible (handscraping and
handsanding), then repainting.
Using with care dectric hot-air guns on decorative wood fèa-
cures and dectric hear plates on lIat wood surfaces when paint
is so deteriorated that toral removal is necessary prior to
repainting.
Nor &comm£nded
Removing paint that is firmly adhering to, and thus, protect-
ing wood surfàœs.
Using destrUctive paint removal methods such as propane
or butane torches, sandblasting or waterblasting. These
methods can irreversibly damage historic woodwork.
Using thermal devices improperly so that the historic wood-
work is scorched.
According to the Stand4rds fir &htÚlilitation, exiJtjng hinoric materials should be protected, maintaÙ",d and repaired. In an exemplary project, the
windows and shutters of this hinoric midence were carefùlly pmeroed.
72 Building Exterior Wliod
&commended
Using chemical strippers primarily to supplement other
methods such as handscraping, handsanding and the above-
recommended thennal devices. Detachable wooden elements
such as shutters, doors, and columns may-with the proper
safeguards-be chemically dip-stripped. .,', , .
Applying compatible paint coating systems fOllowing proper
surface preparation.
Repainting with colors that are appropriate to the historic
building and district.
Evaluating the overall condition of the wood to detennine
whether more than protection and maintenance are required,
that is, if repairs to wood remtres will be necessary.
Repairingwood features by patching, piecing-in, consolidat-
ing, or otherwise reinforcing the wood using recognized
preservation methods. Repair may also include the limited
replacement in kind-or with compatible substitute materÏ-
al-of those extensively deteriorated or missing parts of fea-
tures where there are surviving prototypes such as brackets,
molding, or sections of siding.
Replm:ing in kind an entire wood feature that is too deterio-
rated to repair-if the ovéralJ fOrm and detailing are still evi.
dent-using the physical evidence as .. model to reproduce
the feanu-e. Examples of wood featureS include a cornice,
entablature or balUstrade. If using the same kind of material
is not tœhnical1y or economically fèasible, then a wmpatible
substitute material may be considered.
pph~'
»Õ'1D.
Not &com11le1'lded
Fai1ing to néurralize the wood thoroughly after using chemi-
cals so that new paint does not adhere. '
Allowing detachable wood features to soak too long in a caus-
tic solution so that the wood grnin is raised and the sudåce
roughened.
Failing to fOllow manulàcturers' product and application
instructions when repainting exterior woodwork.
Using new colors that are inappropriate to the historic build-
ing or district.
Failing to undertake adequate measures to assure the protec.
tion of wood features.
Replaçing an entire wood feature such as a cornice ot wall-
when repair of the wood and linùted replacement of deterio-
rared or missing parIS are appropriate.
Using substitute material. fOr the replacement part that does
not convey the visual appeaèance of the surviving parts of the
wood feature or that is physically or chemically incompatible.
Removing an entire wood feature that is uncepairable and not
replacing it; or replacing it with a new feature that does not
convey the same visual appearance.
Building Exterior Wood 73
Reha'
,cion
The ftllnwing work is highlighted to indicate that it represmtJ the particularly complex technical or design aspects <ifRehabilitation
projects and should only be comiáered after the preservation concerns listed above have bem addressed
74 Building Exterior Wóod
poL .
" \Il
Building Exterior
Architectural Metals: Cast iron, steel, pressed tin, copper, aluminum, and zinc
&commended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving architectural metal fea-
tUres such as colwnns, capitals, window hoods, or stairways
that are important in defining the overall historic character of
the building; and their finishes and colors. Identification is
also critical to differentiate between metals prior to wotk.
Each metal has unique properties and thus requires different
treaunents.
Protecting and maintaining architectural metals &om corro-
sion by providing proper drainage so that water does not
stand on flat, horiwntal surlàœs or accumulate in cUrved,
decorative featUres.
Cleaning architectUral metals, when appropriate, to remove
corrosion prior to repainting or applying other appropriate
protective coatings.
IdentifYing the partiœlar type of metal prior to any cleaning
procedure and then testing to assure that the gendest cleaning
method possible is selected or detennining that cleaning is
inappropriate lOr the particular metal.
Not &commentkd
Removing or radically changing architectUral metal features
which are important in defining the overall historic character
of the building so that, as a result, the character is dimin-
ished.
Removing a major portion of the historic architectural metal
¡¡'om a facade instead of repairing or replacing only the dete-
riorated metal, then reconstructing the facade with new
material in order to create a uniform, or "improved" appear-
ance.
Radically changing the type offilùsh or its historic color or
accent scheme.
Failing to identif}r, evaluate, and treat the causes of corrosion,
such as moisture ¡¡'om leaking roolS or gutters.
Placing incompatible metals together without providing a
reliable separation material. Such incompatibility can result
in galvanic corrosion of the less noble metal, e.g., copper will
corrode cast iron, steel, tin, and aluminum.
Exposing metals which were intended to be protected from
the environment.
Applying paint or other coatings to metals such as copper,
bronze, or stainless steel that were meant to be exposed.
Using cleaning methods which alter or damage the historic
color, texture, and IÌtÙsh of the metal; or cleaning when it is
inappropriate fur the metal.
Removing the patina of historic metal. The patina may be a
protective coaring on some metals, such as bronze or copper,
as well as a significant historic finish.
Building Exterior Metals 75
Reh:¡'
,cion
Recommended
Cleaning soli: metals such as lead, tin, copper, terneplate, and
zinc with appropriate chemic:J methods because their finishes
can be easily abraded by blasting methods.
Using the gentlest cleaning methods for cast iron, wrought
iron, and sted-hard metals-in order to remove paint
btÚldup and corrosion. Ifhandscraping and wire brushing
have proven ineffective, low pressure grit blasting may be
used as long as it doeS not abrade or damage the surface.
Applying appropriate paint or other coating systems after
cleaning in order to decrease the corrosion rate of metals or
alloys.
Repainting with colors that are appropriate to the historic
btÚlding or district.
Applying an appropriate protective coating such as lacquer to
an architectural metal feature such as a bronze door which is
subject to heavy pedestrian use.
Evaluating the overall condition of the architectural metals to
derermine whether more than protection and maintenance
are reqtÚred, that is, if repairs to features will be necessary.
Rtpairingarchitectural metal features by patching, splicing,
or otherwise reinforcing the metal following recognized
preservation methods. Repairs may also include the limited
replacement in kind--or with a compatible substitute materi-
al-of those extensivdy deteriorated or missing parts of fea-
tures when there are surviving prototypes such as porch
balusters, coltUlln capitals or bases; or porch cresting.
76 Building Exterior Metals
Not Rerommnzded
Cleaning soli: metals such as lead, tin, copper, terneplate, and
zinc with grit blasting which will abrade the sur/àce of the
metal.
Failing to employ gentler methods prior to abrasivdy clean-
ing cast iron, wrought iron or steel; or using high pressure grit
blasting.
Failing to re.apply protective coating systems to metals or
alloys that reqtÚre them after cleaning so that accelerated cor-
rosion occurs.
Using new colors that are inappropriate to the historic build-
ing or district.
Failing to assess pedestrian use or new access patterns so that
architectural metal features are subject to damage by use or
inappropriate maintenance such as salting adjacent sidewalks.
Failing to undertake adequate measures to assure the protec-
cion of architectural metal btures.
Replacing an entire architectural metal bture such as a col-
umn or a balustrade when repair of the metal and limited
replacement of deteriorated or missing parts are appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the replacement pa.rt that does
not convey the visual appearance of the surviving parts of the
architectural metal bture or that is physically or chemically
incomparible.
-po!..",,'
,,:'1D
Recommended
Not ReCfJmmmded
Removing an architectural metal featUre that is unrepairable
ap.d not replacing it; or replacing it with a new architectmal
metal featUre that dofS not convey the same visual appear-
ance.
Replacing in kind an entire arclûtectmal metal feature that is
too deteriorated to tepair-if the overall fonn and detailing
are still evident-using the physical evidence as a mood to
reproduce the feature. Examples could include cast iron
porch steps or sted sash windows. If using the same kind
of material is not technically or economically feasible, then
a compatible substitute material may be considered.
The ftlknving work is highlighted þJ indicate that it represents the particul4"¡y complex technical or design aspects of Rehabilitation
projects and should only be considered after the preservation CfJncerns listed above have been addressed.
Building Exterior Metals 77
Reha'
~tion
Building Exterior
RoofS
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving roolS-and their func-
tional and decorative features--rhat are important in defming
the overalllústoric character of the building. Tlús includes
the roofs shape, such as lúpped, gambrel, and mansard; dec-
orative features such as cupolas, cresting clúmneys, and
wearhervanes; and roofing material such as slate, wood, clay
tile, and metal, as well as its size, color, and patterning.
Protecting and maintaining a roof by cleaning the gutters
and downspouts and replaång deteriorated Haslúng. Roof
sheathing should also be checked for proper venting to pre-
vent moisture condensation and water penetration; and to
ensure that materials are me fi-om insect inksration.
Pl:oviding adequate anchorage for roofing material to guard
IÌnst wind damage and moisture penetration.
Pl:otecting a leaking roof with plywood and building paper
ptil it can be properly repaired.
I
I
78 BWLli", "",,wo, 1ft
Nor &commended
Radically changing, damaging, or destroying roofS which are
important in defining the ovetalllústoric character of the
building so that, as a result, the character is diminished.
Removing a major portion of the roof or roofing material
that is repairable, then reconstructing it with new material in
order to create a uniform, or "improved" appearance.
Changing the configuration of a roof by adding new features
such as dormer windows, venrs, or skylights so thar the his-
toric character is diminished.
Stripping the roof of soWld historic material such as slate,
clay tile, wood, and arclútectural metal.
Applying paint or oilier coatings to roofing material wlúch
has been historically Wlcoated.
Failing to clean and maintain gutrers and downspoUtS prop-
erly so that water and. debris rollect and cause damage to roof
fasteners, sheathing, and the Wlderlying structure.
Allowing roof fasteners, such as nails and clips to corrode so
that roofing material is subject to accelerated deterioration.
Pemùtting a leaking roof to remain unprotected so that accel.
erated deterioration of historic building materials-masonry,
wood, plaster, paint and structural members-occurs.
Recommended
Repairing a roof by reinforcing the hisroric marerials which
comprise roof fearures. Repairs will also generally include
the limited replacement in kind---Qr with compatible substi-
tUte material---Qf those extensively deteriorated Ot missing
parts of features when there are surviving prototypes such
as cupola louvers, dentils, dormer roofing; or slates, tiles, or
wood shingles on a main roof.
Replacing in kind an entire featUre of the roof that is too
deteriorated ro repair-if the overall fonn and detailing are
still evident-using the physical evidence as a model to
reproduce the feature. Examples can include a large sec-
tion of roofing, or a dormer or chimney. If using the same
kind of material is not technically or economically feasible,
then a compatible substitute material may be considered.
P-o.1'
Not Recommended
Replacing an entire roof feature such as a cupola or donner
when repair of the historic matetials and limited replacement
of deteriorated or missing pans are appropriate.
Failing to reuse intact slate or tile when only the roofing sub-
strate needs replacement.
Using a substitUte materiallòr the replacement part that does
not convey the visual appearance of the surviving parts of the
roof or that is physically or chemically incompatible.
Removing a lèature of the roof that is unrepairable, such as a
chimney or dormer, and not replacing it; or replacing it with
a new lèature that does not convey the same visual appear-
ance.
'.:-.n
Bnilding Extetior Roofi 79
'::. .- \ ,;
Rehabilitation
, ~ ¡; ;.
T L ~ j
11¡, jiu..;'l ""* . ¥Ü¡htd " - th.t it rtpr!!ou, II. ~ œ>np/a 1Nh";,,,} ~ ..... '"'"" if............
proj«o ......U .., ¡, ,..,;¡,.,¡ *" ,¡" -..... ""'- &..i .... ... '- ~
l' . ,
on
&commenckd
Not &commemkd
Replacing in kind an entire entrance or porch that is tOo dere-
riorated to repair-if the form and detailing are still evi-
dent-using the physical evidence as a modd to reproduce
the featUre. If using the same kind of material is not techni-
cally or economically feasible, then a compatiblesûbscitúte
material may be considered.
Removing an entrance or porch that ~ umepairable and not
replacing it; or replacing it with a new entrance or porch that
does not convey the same visual appearance.
The ftllowing work is highlighted to indictIk that it repments the panicularly complex technical or design aspects of Rehabilitation
projects and should only be comidered after the preservation concernr listed above have been addressed.
Building &rerior Entrance.r and Porrhe.r 87
Reha~
tion
Building Exterior
Storefronts
Recommended
IdentiIYing, retaining, and preserving stoœ&onrs--and their
fUnctional and decorative fèatures-that are important in
defining the overall historic character of the bwlding such as
display windows, signs, doors, transoms, kick plates, comer
posts, and enrablatures. The removal of inappropriate, non-
historic cladding, false mansard roofS, and other larer alrer-
ations can help reveal the historic charactet of a storefront.
Protecting and 11Ulintaining masonry, wood, and atchitec-
tural metals which comprise storefronts through appropriate
rreannents such as cleaning, rust removal, limited paint
temoval, and reapplication of protective coating systems.
Ptotecting storefronts against arson and vandalism before
work begins by boarding up windows and insral1ing alarm
systems that are keyed into local protection agencies.
Evaluating the exisring condition of storefront materials to
determine whether more than protection and maintenance
are reqwred' that is, if tepairs to features will be necessary.
88 Building Exterior StO1-efronts
Not Recommend£d
Removing or radically changing stote&onrs--and theit fèa-
tures--which are important in defining the overall historic
character of the bwlding so that, as a result, the character is
diminished.
Changing the storefront so that it appears residential rather
than commercial in character.
Removing historic material from the store&onr to create a
recessed arcade.
Introducing coach lantems, mansard designs, wood shakes,
nonoperable shutters, and small-paned windows if they can-
not be documented historically.
Changing the location of a store&onr's main entrance.
Failing to ptovide adequate protection of materials on a cycli-
cal basis so that deterioration of storefront features results.
Petmitting entry into the building through unsecured or bro-
ken windows and doots so that interior fèatures and finishes
are damaged by exposure to weather or vandalism.
Srripping store&onts of historic material such as wood, cast
iron, terra cotta, carrara glass, and brick.
Failing to undertake adequate measures to assure the preser-
vation of the historic sroœ&onr.
&commended
Repairing storefronts by reinforcing the histotic matetials.
Repairs will also genetally include the limited replacement in
kind--<>r with compatible substitute materiaJs.......<,f those
extensivdy deteriorated or missing parts of storefronts where
there are surviving prototypes such as transoms, kick plates,
pilasters, or signs.
Replacing in kind an entire srore!i-ont that is too deteriorated
to repair-if the overall form and detailing are still evident-
using the physical evidence as a model. If using the same
material is not technically or economically feasible, then com-
patible substitute matetials may be considered.
Fph~~ .. 'hnn
Not &commended
Replacing an entire store!i-ont when repair of materials and
limited replacement of its parts are appropriate.
Using substitute materiallòr the replacement parts that does
not convey the saIne visual appearance as the surviving parts
of the storefront or that is physically or chemically incom-
patible.
Removing a srorettont that is untepairable and not replacing
it; or replacing it with a new storefront that does not convey
the same visual appearance.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it representJ the particularly complex technical or design aspects of Rehabilitation
projects and should only be considered after the p"scroatian concerns listed above have been a.ddressed.
Building Exterior Storefronts 89
Kefia'
"loon
In the treatmmt, Rehabilitation, one option ftr repltu:ing missing his-
toric ftaturrs is to use pir¡toriaJ dt1cummtation ttnd/or physical evidence
to re-a-eate the historic fmturr. (a) In this exampk, the 017llt7nmtill
anniee Of4n I866/imestone building WtlS missing; and the ground
levelstorrþrmt hmJ been extozsively aItn.d. (b) tmd (e) &sed on the
flIfI!i/ability ofpholDgmphit: tmd other dt1cummt4tion, the 0UJ7Im were
abk ID acrurt#ely restorr the CtJ17Ú£e tmd sturrftrmt to their historic con-
figurraion. A mbstitute 1TIi#erÙÚ, fibergltm, WtlS used to jitbrimu the
missing pressed md4l cornice, an 4(:eeptable alternative in this project.
AD work met the Stondtmls.
90 Building Exterior Storefronts
Building Interior
Structural Systems
Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving structural ~systerns-
and individual fèatures of systems-that are important in
defining the overall historic character of the building, such as
post and beam systems, trusses, summer beams, vigas, cast
iron columns, above.grade stone roundation walls, or load-
bearing brick or stOne walls.
Protecting and maintaining the structural system by cleaning
tbe roof gutrers and downspouts; replacing toof flashing;
keeping masonry, wood, and architectural merals in a sound
condition; and ensuring that strUcrural members are £fee
fi-om insect infestation.
Examining and evaluating the physical condition of the struc-
tural system and its individual features using non-destructive
techniques such as X-ray photOgraphy.
D_I.?'
-.: ílÍ1
Not Recommended
Removing, covering, or radically changing visible features of
structural systems which are important in defining the overall
historic character of the building so that, as a result, the char-
acter is diminished.
Putting a new use into the building which could overload the
existing strUcrural system; or installing equipment or
mechanical systems which could damage the structure.
Demolishing a loadbearing masonry wall that could be aug'
mented and retained, and replacing it with a new wall (i.e.,
brick or stone), using the historic masonry only as an exterior
veneer.
Leaving known structural problems untreated such as deflec-
tion of beams, cracking and bowing of walls, or racking of
structural members.
Utilizing treatments or products that accelerate the deteriora-
tion of strUcrural material such as introducing urea-formalde.
hyde foam insulation int<> &ame walls.
Failing to provide proper building maintenance so that dete-
rioration of the structural system results. Causes of deteriora-
tion include subsurfàce ground movement, vegetation grow'
ing too close ro foundation walls, improper grading, fungal
rot, and poor interior ventilation that results in condensation.
Utilizing destructive probing techniques that will damage or
destroy structural material.
Building Interior Structural Systems 91
Reh?'
ltion
&commmded
Repairing the structUral system by augmenting or upgrading
individual parts or featUres. For example, weakened structur-
al members such as floor framing can be paired with a new
member, braced, or otherwise supplemented and reinforced.
ReplAcing in kind-or with substitUte material-those
portions or features of the structural system that are either
extensivdy deteriorated or are missing when there are surviv-
ing prototypes such as cast iron colwnns, roof rafrers or
trusses, or sections ofloadbearing walls. Substitute material
should convey the same form, design, and overall visual
appearance as the historic featUre; and, at a minimum, be
equal to its loadbearing capabilities.
92 Building Interior Structural Systems
Not &commended
Upgrading the building structurally in a manner that dimin-
ishes the historic character of the exterior, such as insralling
scrapping channels or removing a decorative cornice; or dam-
ages interior fèatures or spaces.
Replacing a structUral member or other fearure of the struc-
rural system when it could be augmented and retained.
Insralling a visible replacement fèature that does not convey
the same visual appearance, e.g., replacing an exposed wood
summer beam with a steel beam.
Using substitUte matetial that does not equal the loadbearing
capabilities of the historic material and design or is otherwise
physically or chemically incompatible.
V_I.?'
"':í>n
The fillowing work is highlighted w indicate that it rrpwl!1lts the partû:u/miy complex technical or design aspects of Rehabilitation
projects and should only be consitkred t1fier the prrservation concerns listed above have been aátb-essed
Building Interior Structural Systems 93
Reha~ .-. ,cion
Building Interior
Spaces, Features, and Fmishes
&commended
Interior Spaces
Identifjing, retaining, and preserving a floor plan or interior
spaces that are important in defining the overallhisooric char-
acter of the building. . This includes the size, configuration,
proportion, and relationship of rooms and corridors; the rela-
tionship of features 10 spaces; and the spaces themselves such
as lobbies, reception halls, entrance halls, double parlors,
theaters, auditoriums, and important industrial or conuner-
cial spaces.
Interior Features and Finishes
Identifying, retaining, and preserving interior featUres and
finishes that are important in defining the overall historic
character of the building, including columns, cornices, base-
boards, fireplaces and mantels, panelling, light fIXtUres, hard-
ware, and flooring; and wallpaper, plaster, paint, and fmishes
such as stencilling, marbling, and graining; and other decora-
tive materials that accent interior featUres and provide color,
textUre, and patterning 10 walls, floors, and ceilings.
94 Building Interior Spaces, Features, and Finishes
Not &commend£d
Radically changing a floor plan or interior spaces-including
individual rooms--which are important in defining the over-
all historic character of the building so that, as a result, the
character is diminished.
Altering the floor plan by demolislúng principal walls and
particions to create a new appearance.
Altering or destroying interior spaces by inserting Hoors, cut-
ting through floors, lowering ceilings, or adding or removing
walls.
Relocating an interior feature such as a staircase so that the
hisroric relationship between featUres and spaces is altered.
Removing or radically changing features and finishes which
are important in defining the overall historic character of the
building so that, as a result, the character is diminished.
Installing new decorative material that obscures or damages
character-delìning interior featUres or finishes.
Removing paint, plaster, or other finishes from historically
finished surlàces to create a new appearance (e.g., removing
plaster 10 expose masonry sur/àces such as brick walls or a
chimney piece).
Applying paint, plaster, or other finishes to surfàces that have
been historically ~ed 10 create a new appearance.
Stripping paint to bare wood rather than repairing or reapply-
ing grained or marbled finishes to featUres such as doors and
panelling.
Radically changing the type of finish or its color, such as
painting a previously varnished wood featUre.
Recommended
ProtedÍng and maintaining masonry, wood, and architec-
tural metals which comprise interior featUres through appro.
priare surface treatments such as deaning, rust removal,
limited paint removal, and reapplication of protective
coating systems.
Protecting interior features and finishes against arson and
vandalism befOre project work begins, erecting protective
fencing, boarding-up windows, and installing fire alarm
systems that are keyed to local protection agencies.
Protecting interior featUres such as a staircase, mantel, or dec-
orative finishes and wall coverings against damage during
project work by covering them with heavy canvas or plastic
sheets.
7.
//
//
I //
I // .
I //
I //
I //.
//
J:-
NOTE: USE ONLY FIRE RETARDANT
LUMBER
SCREW FASTENER
EXISTING MARBLE
STAIR
Not Recommended
D~¡'V'
":?n
Failing to provide adequate protection to materials on a cydi-
caI basis so that deterioration of interior featUres results.
Permitting entry inro histOric buildings through unsecwed or
btoken windows and doors so that the interior fèatures and
finishes are damaged by exposure to weather or vandalism.
Stripping interiors of fèatures such as woodwork, doors, win-
dows, light fixtUres, copper piping, radiators; or of decorative
materials.
Failing to provide proper protection of inrerior features and
finishes during work so that they are gouged, scratched, dent-
ed, or otherwise damaged.
¡-5I8" OR, 314" PLYWOOD
CONTINUOUS WALL
TO WALL
~
NOMINAL 2" PLANK
CONTINUOUS WALL
TO WALL
l' X l' WOOD STOP
SCREWED TO TREAD
112" HOMASOTE
BOARD (OR SIMILAR
PRODUCT) EXTENDS
BEYOND EXISTING
NOSING
Historic featum that charm:ter-
ize a buik/ing shou/á aiwoys be
protected ¡rom damageáuring
rehabilitation work. The dmw-
inK shows how a milim~ tern-
pantry stair covering was
applùd over the aisting marble
staircase. Drawing: National
PtU"k Servia stllff, based on
material originally prepared by
Emery Roth anti Stms. Be.
Building Interior Spaces, Features, and Finishes 95
R.eha'
~tion
&commmded
Installing protective coverings in areas of heavy pedestrian
traffic to protect historic feamres such as wall coverings,
parquet flooring and panelling.
Removing damaged or deteriorated paints and finishes to
the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible,
then repainting or tefinishing using compatible paint or
other coating systems.
Repaiming with colors that are appropriate to the historic
building.
Limiting abrasive cleaning methods to certain industrial
warehouse buildings where the imerior masonry or plaster
featUres do not have distinguishing design, detailing, tooling,
or finishes; and whete wood featUres ate not finished, mold-
ed, beaded, or worked by hand. Abrasive cleaning should
only be considered after other, gentler methods have been
proven ineffective.
Evaluating the existing condition of materials to determine
whether more than protection and maintenance are required,
that is, if repairs to interior featUres and finishes will be neces.
sary.
R£pairing interior featUres and finishes by reinforcing the his-
toric materials. Repair will also general1yinclude the limited
replacement in kind--or with compatible substitUte materi.
al--of those extensively deteriorated ot missing parts of
repeated featUres when there are surviving prototypes such
as stairs, balustrades, wood panelling, colwnns; or decorative
wall coverings or ornamental tin or plaster ceilings.
96 Building Interior Spaces, Features, mzdFinishes
Not &commended
Failing to take new use patterns into consideration so that
interior features and finishes are damaged.
Using destructive methods such as propane or butane torches
or sandblasting to remove paint or other coatings, These
methods can irreversibly damage the historic materials that
comprise interior fèatures.
Using new paint colors that are inappropriareto the historic
building.
Changing the textUre and patina of character-defining
features through sandblasting or use of abrasive methods
to temove paint, discoloration or plaster. This includes both
exposed wood (including structural members) and masonry.
Failing to undertake adequate measures to assure the protec.
tion of interior fèarures and fmishes.
Replacing an entire interior fèature such as a staircase,
panelled wall, parquet floor, or cornice; or finish such as a
decorarive wall covering or ceiling when repair of materials
and limited replacement of such parts are appropriate.
Using a substitute material for the replacement part that
does not convey the visual appearance of the surviving parts
or portions of the interior feature or finish or that is phy-
sically or chemically incompatible.
pat..,
"';'1n
Recommended
Not Recommended
Replacing in kind an entire interior feature or finish chat is
too deteriorated to repair-if che overall form and detailing
are still evident-using che physical evidence as á model for
reproduction. Examples could include wainscoting, a tin
ceiling, or interior stairs. If using che same kind of material is
not technically or economically feasible, then a compatible
substitUte material may be considered.
Removing a character-defining featUre or finish chat is
unrepairable and not replacing it; or replacing it willi a new
lèature or finish chat does not convey che same visual appear'
ance.
a b
Rehabilitating historic dwelling units oJim includes >ome level of kad-paint hl/Zllrd abatement Whenever lead.bllJe paint begin> 10 pee' mi¡, =
or oth~ come> Iome (a), it should be ronoved in a manner that protects the worker IlJ weD as the immediate environment In this example
(b). the deteriorating lead. paint was removed throughout the ttpartment building and a compatible primer and finish paint ttpplied.
Pholvs: Sharon C Park, AM.
Building Interior Space.<, Features, and Finishes 97
Reh,'
l.tion
The fòlkwing work is highlighted to imlicate that it represents the particularly complex technical or d£sign aspects of Rehabilitation
projects and should only be considered after the preservtHÍon concerns listed above have been addressed.
98 Building Interior Spaces, Features, and Finishes
:;
0
..,
...
'"
'"
~
~
i
¡f!
l
~
j
tî
~
ð5<
..
0
.;::
j
OJ)
~
'3
~
Reha' "'~1.tiön
Building Interior
Mechanical Systems: Heating, Air Conditioning, Flectrical, and Plumbing
Recommended Not &commended
ldentijýing, retaining, and preserving visible fèatmes of early
mechanical systems that are imponant in defining the overall
historic character of the building, such as radiators, vents,
fans, grilles, plumbing fIXtures, switchplates, and lights.
Protecting and maintaining mechanical, plumbing, and elec.
trical systems and their featUres through cyclical cleaning and
other appropriate measures.
Preventing accelerated deterioration of mechanical systems by
providing adequate ventilation of attics, crawlspaces, and cel-
lars so that moisture problems are avoided.
Improving the energy efficiency of existing mechanical sys-
tems to help reduce the need for elaborate new equipment.
Consideration should be given to ins railing storm windows,
insulating attic crawl space, or adding awnings, if appropri-
ate.
R£pairing mechanical systems by augmenting or upgrading
system parts, such as insralling new pipes and ducts; rewiring;
or adding new compressors or boilers.
R£púu:ing in kincl---<Jr with compatible substitute material---
those visible fèatures of mechanical systems that are either
extensively deteriorated or are prototypes such as ceiling Ems,
switchplates, radiators, grilles, or plumbing fIXtures.
100 Building Interior Mechanical Systems
Removing or radically changing features of mechanical
systems that are important in defining the ovetall historic
character of the building so that, as a result, the character is
diminished.
Failing to provide adequate protection of materials on a cycli.
cal basis SO that deterioration of mechanical systems and their
visible fèatures results.
Enclosing mechanical systems in areas that are not adequately
ventilated so that deterioration of the systems results.
Instal1ing unnecessary air conditioning or climate control
systems which can add excessive moisture to the building.
This additional moisture can either condense inside, damag-
ing interior surfaces, or pass through interior walls to the
exterior, potentially damaging adjacent materials as it
migrates.
Replacing a mechanical system or its functional parts when it
could be upgraded and retained.
Insraillng a visible replacement featUre that does not convey
the same visual appearance.
~
~
.. ~
'I - "!If ~
... ¡¡;:::::;~
!~. ~
^j~, ~
. '" -
g
'§
:;¡.
1
'1"
i
.~
~~
~i
11
"i;fi
.;:¡~
.J1!1
if'.iJ
e~
$~
-EJ
~E
-Š¡¡¡
.::2 e
f¡ §
if! -.z::
~€
-'!:t if!
~ ~
"""" ""
"""-s
~ lL;
~.~
;; 11
--:-§if
~ òi!
~a
.:..:t ""
:-§>~
'""'~
.::2 ..,
't:~
~ ¡g
~--S;
.E~
.. '"
~~
... 'è'
~......
)';.'1
M
The .fòllowing work is highlighted tv. indicate that it represents the particu/ar/¿y complex technical or design aspects of Rehabilitation
projects and Jhou/d on/¿y be comidered after the pmervotion concerm listed above haUl! been addrroed.
108 Setting
R"'v'
--"ti,on
If a rear ekvaÞon of a historic building Í5 distinctive and highf:.1
vÍ5ibk in the neighborhood, altering it may not meet rhe StdndÄrtiJ.
(a and b) ThÍ5 J.story brick rowhous< ftatured a second story g.4kry
and brick kitchen wing charact<ristic of other residmc<s in the district
whú:h backed onto a connecting roadway. (c) In the rehabilitation.
the wing and galkry wert! tkmo/ished and a large additûm constTui:t<d
that s<V<r<o/ implJJkd the buildings historic firm and charrzct<r.
setting 109
Kehat""
""tOOD
110 Energy Efficiency
Although the work in these seaions is quite often an important aspect of rehabilitation projects, it is usually not part of the overall
process of preserving chart1£ter-rkfiningfiatures (mainrmance, repair, replAcement); rather, SU€h work is assessed fir its potnztial neg-
ative impt1£t on the buildings historic character. For this redJon, particular care must be taken not to obscure, radically change,
damage, or dðtroy character-.definingfiatures in the process uf rehabilitation work.
Energy Efficiency
Recommended
MasonrylWood/ Architectural Memis
Installing thermal insulation in attics and in unheated cellars
and crawlspaœs to increase the efficiency of the existing
mechanical systems.
lnsralling insulating material on the inside of masonry wal1s
to increase energy efficiency where there is no charaCter-
defining interior molding around the windows or other inte-
rior archirectural detailing.
Wmdows
Utilizing the inherent energy conserving features of a huild-
ing by maintaining windows and louvered blinds in good
operable condition for natUral ventilation.
Improving thermal efficiency with weatherstripping, stann
windows, caulking, interior shades, and if historically appro-
priate, blinds and awnings.
Installing inrerior storm windows with air.tight gaskets, ven.
tilating holes, and/or removable clips to ensure proper main-
renance and to avoid condensation damage to historic win-
dows.
Insralling exterior storm windows which do not damage or
obscure the windows and frames.
Not Recommended
Applying thennal insulation with a high moisture content in
wall cavities which may damage historic fåbric.
Insralling wall insulation without considering its effect on
interior molding or other architectural detailing.
Removing historic shading devices rather than keeping them
in an operable condition.
Replacing histotic multi-paned sash with new thermal sash
utilizing fàlse muntins.
Installing interior storm windows that allow moisture to
aa:umulate and damage the window.
Installing new exterior storm windows which are inappro-
priate in size or color.
Replacing windows or transoms with fixed thermal glazing
or permitting windows and transoms to remain inoperable
rather than utilizing them fur their energy conserving
potential.
&commentkd
Entranœs and Pon:.hes
Maintaining porches and double vestibule entrances so that
they can retain heat Ot block the sun and provide natUtai ven-
tilation.
Interior Features
Retaining lústoric intetior shutters and transoms fOr their
inherent energy conserving featUres.
Mechanical Systems
Improving energy efficiency of eJtisting mechanical systems
by installing insulation in attics and basements.
Building Site
Retaining plant materials, trees, and landscape featUres wlúch
perfònn passive solar energy functions such as sun shading
and wind breaks.
Setting (District!Neighborhood)
Maintaining those existing landscape featUres which moder-
ate the eflècts of the climate on the setting such as deciduous
trees, evergreen wind.blocks, and lakes or ponds.
New Additions to Historic Buildings
Placing a new addition that may be necessary to increase
energy efficiency on non-character-defining elevations.
Rph¡l' --. ..õpn
Not &commenlÚ!d
Changing the historic appearance of the building by enelos.
ing porches.
Removing lústoric interior featUres wlúch play an energy con-
serving role.
Replacing eJtisting mechanical systems that could be repaired
for continued use.
Removing plant materials, trees, and landscape fearures that
perfòrm passive solar energy functions.
Stripping the setting of landscape featUres and landfonns so
that eflècts of the wind, rain, and sun result in accelerated
deterioration of the lústoric building.
Designing a new addition which obscures, damages, or
destroys character-defining fearures.
Energy FlIiciency 111
Reha~ .. '<ttíon
New Additions to Historic Buildings
&commended
Placing functions and services required for the new use in
non-character-defining interior spaces rather than construct-
ing a new addition.
Constructing a new addition so that there is the least possible
loss of historic materials and so that character-defining fea-
rures are not obscured, damaged, or destroyed.
Designing a new addition in a manner that makes clear what
is historic and what is new.
112 New Additions to Historic Buildings
Not &commended
Expanding the size of the historic building by constructing a
new addition when the new use could be met by altering
non-character-defìning intetior spaces.
Attaching a new addition so that the character -defining fea-
tures of the historic building are obscured, damaged, or
destroyed.
Duplicating the exact fonn, material, style, and detailing of
the histotic building in a new addition so that the new work
appears to be part of the histotic building.
Imitating a historic style Ot period of architecture in a new
addition.
Rchohi/itation, like PresmJd.tÛJn, ttdmowledges a building} change
over time; the rttentùm and rrpair of existing historic mauriaIs and
ft4tures is thus ttlwøysre<ommmdeå.. HtJUXVCt', unlike PresmJd.tÛJn,
the dual goal of Rchal1ílitation is ~ tv or tÚtu a
building in orrlu tv meet new USI! requirements. This downtown
Chkagv lilmuy WIIS expandtd in 1981 when additiona! space WIIS
required with light andhumidif:J control fòr the rare book colkrtWn.
The compatíbk 10-st<1ry wing 1O1IS linked tv the hÍSÞ11"Û: block on side
and rear ekvasions. Its simple design is compatible with the historic
finin, ft4tures, and dmtiling; old and new arc clearly diJfrrcntúztcJ.
Photo: Dave Clifton.
&commended
Considering the design fur an attached exterior addition in
teans of its relationship to the histOric building as well as the
historic district or neighborhood. Design for the new work
may be contemporary or may reference design moWs from
the histOric building. In either case, it should al;à'ys be dear-
ly differentiated from the histOric building and be compatible
in terms of mass, materials, rdationship of solids to voids,
and color.
Placing a new addition on a non-character-de!ining devation
and limiting the size and scale in relationship to the historic
building.
Designing a rooftop addition when required for the new use,
thar is set back from the wall plane and as inconspicuous as
possible when viewed from the street.
~. ,
- I
~n
Not Recommentkd
Designing and constructing new additions that result in the
diminution or loss of tbe historÍè character of the resource,
including its design, materials, workmanship, location. or
setting.
Designing a new addiliÎon that obscures, damages, or destroys
character-defining featUreS of the historic building.
Constructing a rooftop addition so that the historic appear-
ance of the building is radically changed.
New Additions to Historic Bnildings 113
Reha~"- 'non
Accessibility Considerations
Recommended
Identifÿing the historic building's character-defining spaces,
fearures, and finishes so thar accessibiliry code. required work
will nor resulr in their damage or loss.
Complying with barrier.free access requiremenrs, in such a
manner that character-defining spaces, featUres, and finishes
are preserved.
Working with local disability groups, access specialists, and
historic preservation specialisrs to deternúne the most appro-
priate solution to access problems.
Providing barrier-free access thar promotes independence for
the disabled person to the highest degree practicable, while
preserving significant historic features.
Designing new or additional means of access thar are com.
patible with the historic building and irs setting.
--
"""""IT.
~~
......-
=----
~~
~-_.-
~ b-."'- .--
:.j':.' .", ,-..;' .
.....
=--
114 Accessibiliry Considerations
Not Recommended
Undertaking code-required alterations before identifYing
those spaces, featUres, or finishes which are character-defining
and must therefore be preserved.
Altering, damaging, or destroying character-defining fèatures
in attempting to comply with accessibility requiremenrs.
Making changes to buildings without first seeking expert
advice from access specialisrs and historic preservationisrs, to
determine solutions.
Making access modifications that do not provide a reasonable
balance between independent, safe access and preservation of
historic features.
Designing new or additional means of access without consid-
ering the impact on the historic building and its setting.
Making a building aa:mible /I} the public is a requirement under the
Ammcans with Disabilities Act of 1990, whatever the lTfatmmt.
Full, partia£ or alterniitW[(lpproaches /I} aa:mibility depends upon the
historical significance of a building and the ability /I} 71U1Ú changes.
In these examples, thr.sho/ds that exceed allowable heights WI!re modi-
fied sroeral ways to im:reme aa:mibi/iry. without jeopardizing the his.
/l}rÍ<: character. Drawing: Uniftrm FedemiAccessibility Standard
(UFAS) &trofit Manual
Health and Safuty Considerations
&commended
Identifÿing the historic building's character-defming spaces,
features, and finishes so that code-required work will not
result in their damage or loss.
Complying with health and safety codes, including seismic
code requirements, in such a manner that cllaracter-defining
spaces, features, and finishes are preserved.
Removing roxic building materials only after thorough resr.
ing has been conducted and only after less invasive abatement
methods have been shown ro be inadequate.
Providing workers with appropriate personal protective
equipment for hazards found in the worksite.
Working with local code officials to investigare sysrems,
methods, or devices of equivalenr or superior effectiveness
and safety to those prescribed by code so that unnecessary
alterations can be avoided.
Upgrading historic stairways and elevarors to meet health and
safety codes in a manner thar assures their preservation, i.e.,
so that they are not damaged or obscured.
Installing sensitively designed fire suppression sysrems, such
as sprinkler systems that result in retention of historic features
and finishes.
Applying fire-retardanr coatings, such as inrumesœnt paints,
which expand during fire to add thermal protection to steel.
Adding a new stairway or elevator to meet health and safety
codes in a manner that preserves adjacent character-defining
features and spaces.
Placing a code-required stairway or elevator that cannot be
accommodated within the historic building in a new exterior
addition. Such an addition should be on an inconspicuous
elevation.
Ken¡l~
......tllim
Not &commended
Undertaking code-required alterations to a building or site
before identifÿing those: spaces, features, or finishes which are
character.delining and must therefOre be preserved.
Altering, damaging, or destroying character-defìning spaces,
features, and finishes while making modifications to a build-
ing or site to comply with safety codes.
Destroying historic interior features and finishes without
careful testing and without considering less invasive abate-
ment methods.
Removing unhealthful building materials without regard to
personal and environmental safety.
Making changes to historic buildings without first exploring
equivalent health amI safety systems, methods, or devices
that may be less damaging to historic spaces, features, and
finishes.
Damaging or obsctlfing hisroric stairways and elevators or
altering adjacent spaces in the process of doing work to meet
code requirements.
Covering character-defìning wood features with fire-resistant
sheathing which. results in altering their visual appearance.
Using fire-retanlant œatings if they damage or obscure
characrer-defìning kaMes.
Radically changing, .bunaging, or destroying character-defìn-
ing spaces, fearures, or finishes when adding a new code-
required stairway or ei......tor.
Consrructing a new addition to accommodate code-required
stairs and elevators on d.aracter-defìning elevations highly
visible from the street; or where it obscures, damages, or
destroys character-dtfining features.
Health and Safety Considerations 115
APPENDIX E
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE
ASSESSMENT REPORT
191, 193 & 195 East Main Street
Tustin, Califomia 92680
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE
ASSESSMENT REPORT
191, 193 & 195 East Main Street
Tustin, California 92680
~
PREPARED FOR:
City of Tustin
Community Development Department
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Converse Project No. 97-42-529-01
June 1, 1998
CONVERSE - -
ENVIRONMENT Al.
185 East Paularino
Suite B
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Geotechnical and
Envlronmentsl Engineering
~ CONVERSE
~ ENVIRONMENTAL
185 East Paularino Avenue
SuiteS
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
714/444-9660
FAX 714/444.9640
June I, 1998
Mr. James Draughon
City of Tustin
Community Development Department
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Subject:
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report
191, 193 & 195 East Main Street
Tustin, California 92680
Converse Project No. 97-42-529-01
Dear Mr. Draughon:
Attached is a copy of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report conducted for the
referenced property.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If you should have any questions or
comments regarding the contents of this report please contact Joseph Radonich at (714) 444-9660.
Sincerely,
CONVERSE ENVffiONMENTAL WEST
H!1f !:!-.
Senior Geologist
A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of
The eonve... Prof8nionaJ Gn>""
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ExecutiveSummary ..........,."...,...........................
1.0 Introduction......,....."..,...,....,.....,....,.............,
1.1 .Purpose.........."....,.,.,.,.......,.....,.........,...
1.2 Limitations and Exceptions of Assessment. . . . . , . . . . , . . . . ' , . . . . ' . . . .
2.0 Site Description ....,.......',.' "........."..............,.,
2,1 LocationandDescription .,.",.........-..,....,........."""
2.2 Physical Setting.",.,.., ,.,...............,..,......
3.0 SiteUseInvestigation..,....., ,........,.,.,....,..,.....
3.1 CurrentUsesoftheProperty., ,...,."...........,.....,......
3.2 Past Uses of the Property .,."..,..",,""'" ,..,.......,
3.3 Current and Past Uses of Adjacent Properties. . . . . . ' . . . . ' . , . . . . . . '
3.4 AerialPhotographReview ,.,..,.............,....,.,.........,
3.5 SanbornMaps ."... ",...,. ...,....,.,...,...,
3,6 USGSTopographicMapReview" ,.,....,.,....",....,....,
3,7 BuildingPermits ...."....... ..,..."", ....,....,
3.8 RegulatoryDatabaseSearch ." .'"......, ,............,
3,9 .Division of Oil and Gas Maps.....,.",.......,....,....".,..,
3,10 Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division, . ' , . . . '
3,11 Orange County Fire Authority. ' . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . ' . . .
3.12 Orange County Sanitation District. . ' . . . , , . . . . . . , . . . . ' . . . . .
3.13 South Coast Air Quality Management District, . . . , . , . . . . '
3.14 Prior Investigations ......" ,..,.,.,.....".,...,.,..'
4.0 Site Reconnaissance .." ,....",..,.,..,
4.1 Methodology......,...,., ,..,.,....",...,.,,""
4.2 Limiting Conditions .....,.' ..,..",........,...,
4.3 Findings ,........,...' ".................,..........
404 Interviews...."".., ..,....,.........".,.,
4.5 AsbestosSurvey.,.,..,., ,..,...."..."...
4.6 Lead-basedPaintSurvey..,., ,...",...".........",..
5.0 Conclusions ...'"....,...'.'
".........."..........,. .
6.0 References ....,.....',.
..,.........
. . . . . . . . . '
Figure 1: Site Location Map
Figure 2: Site Plan
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E:
Sanborn Maps
EDR-Radius Map Report (Regulatory Agency Databases)
Site Photographs
Asbestos Survey Analysis and Documentation
Lead-based Paint Survey Analysis and Documentation
PAGE
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
10
12
13
15
Executive Summary
Converse Environmental West (Converse) has prepared this Phase I Environmental Site As-
sessment for the property located at 191, 193, and 195 East Main Street, in Tustin, California.
Our study has been conducted in order to identify, to the extent feasible, recognized
environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. The work has been in
conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E.1527-97 and is based on
observations of the site on December 30, 1997 and May 5, 1998.
The Property is generally rectangular in shape and covers an area of approximately one-acre and
is currently developed with three, one. story commercial buildings located on the southeastern
corner of the Property. The buildings are currently unoccupied with no business activity. The
buildings are constructed with concrete foundations, concrete/plaster or brick walls, and wood-
supported roofmg and range in size from 900 to 2,700 sqyare feet. The buildings are separate
structures however have adjoining walls. Primary development on the Property is located at the
southern end. The remaining area on the Property is surfaced with either concrete, asphalt, or
grass which occupies 75 percent of the Property. One undergrounder clarifier was observed at
the middle portion of the Property.
The current buildings at the Property were constructed in 1912 and 1922. According to the
historical information gathered by Converse, the Property was developed with a residential
dwelling from 1895 to at least 1906. The Utt Juice Company occupied the Property from as
early as 1920 to 1973 when the business closed, Building permits from the 1980's, indicate that
the Property as been used for retail purposes and as a religious center,
This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection
with the property, with the exception of the following:
It could not be determined from the available information whether the clarifier has been
closed or abandoned. Information concerning the past use and current status of the clarifier
was not available to Converse. In order to reduce the potential for an unauthorized discharge
and depending on the future use of the Property, the clarifier should either be upgraded,
closed/abandoned, or removed. In order to reduce the uncertainty concerning the possible
environmental impact to the property from the clarifier, a sampling and analysis plan could
be developed and implemented in the area of the clarifier.
The following materials were found to be asbestos containing material (ACM):
Approximately 300 square feet of floor texture coat located in the 195 building. It was
difficult to assess the material due to the large amount of dust and debris on the floor.
Approximately 20 square feet of 9x9 green vinyl floor tile and mastic exists in the 195
building.
Converse recommends abatement of the ACMs prior to any demolition or remodeling
activities.
191.193, & 195 Eas/Mom SI>'eet
TusH.. Colifor.;.
Conve...e Projeat No. 97.42.529-01
Approximately 500 square feet of exterior stucco as decorative inlays were found to be
asbestos containing construction material (ACCM).
The ACCM should be handled as an ACM; however, disposal as asbestos waste is not
required.
In addition, if during any future demolition or remodeling activities additional suspect rnaterials
are observed, Converse recommends that bulk sample be collected or" these materials and
analyzed for asbestos content. All suspect materials at the Property are Presumed Asbestos-
containing Materials (PACMs) until the asbestos content is confirmed or denied by analytical
testing.
The EPAand BUD have defined a LBP at 0.5percent by weight. The following paints
contain greater than 0.5% lead: ~
exterior white paint on the doors and door frames (approximately 300 square feet).
interior white paint on the doors, door frames, windows and window frames
(approximately 300 square feet).
interior cream paint on the walls, doors, and windows in the front portion of the 191
building (approximately 600 square feet).
interior red paint on the walls and doors in the rear portion of the 195 building
(approximately 400 square feet).
Converse recommends the damaged (peeling, flaking) lead-based paint be abated by a
licensed abatement contractor prior to any demolition activities.
191, 193. & 195 East Main S"",,,
Tustin. Californio
Converse Project No. 97-42.529.01
ii
1.0
Introduction
1.1
Purpose
This report presents the results of the Converse Environmental West, Inc. (Converse) Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment performed for the property located at 191, 193, and 195 East
Main Street in Tustin, California. Our study has been conducted in order to identify, to the
extent feasible, recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. The
work has been performed by environmental professionals in accordance with our proposal with
the City of Tustin dated December 5, 1997, and has consisted of the following:
Interviews with the property representatives
Site and vicinity reconnaissance
Review of regulatory agency records
Description of physical setting
Historical review
Preparation of this report
1.2
Limitations and Exceptions of Assessment
This report is for the exclusive use of City of Tustin, as it applies to the property located at 191,
193, and 195 East Main Street in Tustin, California. Its preparation has been in accordance with
generally accepted practices in environmental sciences, geology and hydrogeology. No other
warranty, either express or implied, is made. This report should not be regarded as a guarantee
that no further contamination beyond that which could be detected within the scope of this
investigation is present at the site.
The conclusions presented in this report are based on the agreed upon scope of work outlined
above. Converse makes no warranties or guarantees as to the accuracy or completeness of
information provided or compiled by others. Due to access restrictions, Converse has not
observed the interior condition of the buildings. It is possible that information exists beyond the
scope of this investigation. It is not possible to absolutely confirm that no hazardous materials
and/or substances exist at the subject site. If none are identified as part of a limited scope of
work, such a conclusion should not be construed as a guaranteed absence of such materials, but
merely the results of the evaluation. Also, events may occur after the site visit which may result
in contamination of the site. Additional information which was not found or available to
Converse at the time of report preparation may result in a modification of the conclusions and
recommendations presented. Reliance on this report by Third Parties shall be at the Third party's
sole risk.
191. 193. & 195 East Main Street
rusHn. California
Converse Project No. 97-42.529.01
2.0
Site Description
2.1
Location and Description
The subject property is located at 191, 193, and 195 East Main Street in Tustin, California
(property). The Property is bordered by Third Street to the north, East Main Street to the south,
Prospect Avenue to the east, and an alley way to the west (Figure 1: Site Location Map).
The Property is generally rectangular in shape and covers an area of approximately one-acre. The
Property is currently developed with three, one-story commercial buildings located on the
southeastern corner of the Property. The buildings at the Property are currently unoccupied with
no business activity. The buildings are constructed with concrete foundations, concrete/plaster
or brick walls, and wood-supported roofing and range in size from 900 to 2,700 square feet. The
buildings are separate structures, however, have adjoining walls. Primary development on the
Property is located at the southern end. The remaining ~ea on the Property is surfaced with
either concrete, asphalt, or grass which occupies 75 percent of the Property (Figure 2: Site Plan).
2.2
Physical Setting
The Property is located in the u.S. Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) 7.5-Minute Series Quadrangle
Map for Tustin, California dated 1965, photorevised in 1981. The Property is located at an
approximately elevation of 125 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The surface topography of the
Property can be characterized as gently sloping from the north to south.
The subject region is located south of the Santa Ana Mountains within the Tustin Plain of Orange
County, California. The Santa Ana Mountains, of late Eocene to Middle Miocene in age, are
composed of the Topanga Formation and undifferentiated Vaqueros and Sespe Formations with
andesite and breccia volcanic flows. The Topanga Formation consists of sandstone,
conglomerate, and interbedded siltstone. The Vaqueros and Sespe Formations also consist of
sandstone and conglomerate.
The Property is located upon younger alluvium of Recent age deposited from the Santa Ana
Mountains. The alluvium has been deposited by two major streams in the area, the Santa Ana
River and Santiago Creek. The alluvium beneath the Property has been primarily derived by
Santiago Creek and consists of interbedded and unconsolidated mud, sand, pebbly sand, and
gravel, however, mainly consists of clayey sand and silt on the western and southern portion of
the Tustin Plain.
Based on groundwater information from the Orange County Water District, two groundwater
production wells, T-MS2 and T-MS3, are located 500 feet east of the Property. The wells reach
a maximum depth of approximately 607 and 630 feet. When last measured in January 1997,
depth to groundwater in the wells was 151 feet (T-MS2) and 95 feet (T-MS3). However,
shallow, perched groundwater zones may exist within the younger alluvium. Based on the
J9J.J9!J.&J9!JEartMainS"..et
TlUdn. Califomio
Conv"". Proj.ct No. 97-42-S29-Ol
2
Orange County Groundwater Contour Map dated November 1996, groundwater was estimated
to flow in a west-southwesterly direction in the general area of the Property. Additionally, the
Property is located within the 500-year floodplain zone.
3.0
Site Use Investigation
The site use investigation was based on site reconnaissance, review of aerial photographs,
building permits, interviews, and review of regulatory agency records.
3.1
Current Uses of the Property
The Property consists three adjoining buildings which are currently unoccupied with no business
activity. The northem three-quarters of the Property is ßeveloped with concrete and asphalt
surfaces and two grassy areas.
3.2
Past Uses of the Property
According to the historical information gathered by Converse, the Property was developed with
a residential dwelling from 1895 to at least 1906. The Uti Juice Company occupied the Property
from as early as 1920 to 1973, when the business closed. Building pernrits from the 1980's,
indicate that the Property as been used for retail purposes and as a religious center.
3.3
Current and Past Uses of Adjacent Properties
Based on our research and observations during our site visit, the Property is bordered by the
following sites:
West:
Third Street, beyond which is vacant and undeveloped and residential houses.
East Main Street, beyond which are retail and commercial buildings.
Prospect Avenue, beyond which is the City of Tustin Water Works (treatment area
and production wells).
Retail and commercial buildings and the Tustin Chamber of Commerce.
North:
South:
East:
According to the historical information gathered by Converse, land use south and west of the
Property developed from vacant and undeveloped land with scattered houses in 1895 to "stores"
by 1963. Land use has remained relatively similar with retail and commercial use frorn 1963 to
the present. The "Hotel Tustin" was located north of thé Property from 1895 to some time prior
to 1949 when land use changed to residential housing. The Tustin Water Works was located east
of the Property as early as 1949 until the present.
191. 193. & 195 Ecu' Main S",,'
Twtin. CalIfornia
Converse Project Nn. 97.42.529.01
3
3.4
Aerial Photograph Review
Available aerial photographs covering the Property were supplied by Phase One, Inc. The years
of the photographs supplied and reviewed are as follows: 1938, 1955, 1964, 1970, 1980, and
1993. Additionally, Converse reviewed an aerial photograph dated 1985 from Converse reference
material. The following is a chronological summary of the aerial photograph review.
1938: The south half of the Property was developed with the three current buildings and by
up to three smaller buildings on the northern half. Adjacent land use to the south and east
appeared as orange groves. Residential and commercial development was evident north and
west of the Property. Regionally, orange grove development was evident in all directions.
1955: Significant changes were not observed with the Property with the exception of an
additional larger structure on the northern half. Land use to the south and east remained
relatively unchanged, however, increased residential and commercial development was evident
north and west from the Property.
1964: The Property remained developed as discussed. Adjacent land use developed from
orange groves to the south and east to commercial use. Regionally, increased development
was evident in all directions.
1970: Significant changes were not observed with the Property or surrounding adjacent land.
Regional land use appeared primarily commercial with scattered residential development in
all directions with minor orange grove development to the south.
1980 - 1985: The Property remained developed with the current buildings on the south half
with the various buildings on the north half demolished. Commercial development was
evident east, west, and south of the Property and residential development was evident to the
north. Regionally, increased residential and commercial development was evident in all
directions.
1993: Significant changes were not observed with the Property, surrounding land use or
region from 1985.
3.5
Sanborn Maps
Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps with coverage for the Property were requested from E Data
Resources, Inc. (EDR). According to EDR, maps covering the area of the Property were
available for years 1895, 1906, 1949, and 1963 (Appendix A: Sanborn Maps). A summary of
the Sanborn map review is provided below:
1895: The Property was developed with one residential house on the southwest corner and
a hay shed. The remaining Property was vacant and undeveloped.
191.193. '" 195 East Main SIr..t
TU3Ü1O, Californ;a
Converse Project No. 97.42.529.01
4
1906: The south and north halves of the Property were each developed with a residential
dwelling. The dwelling on the south half appeared to be a different dwelling than the one
depicted in 1895.
1949: The Property was occupied by a "grape juice" processing facility. Buildings depicted
at the Property included bottle goods and carton warehouses, juice storage buildings, a store,
and buildings for the processing of grape juice.
1963: The map depicted the same buildings as were shown on the 1949 map.
3.6
USGS Topographic Map Review
United States Geologic Survey (USGS) maps covering the Property were reviewed regarding past
uses at the site. Based on a review of the USGS Tustin Quadrangle dated 1935 photorevised in
1945 and a map dated 1965 and photorevised in 1981, the Property and surrounding land was
depicted with development.
3.7
Building Permits
Available building permits were researched and reviewed at the City of Tustin, Community
Development Department. The current buildings at the Property were constructed in 1912 and
1922. Based on a review of the records, permits were issued for the Property in 1988 for the
intended use of a book store, gift shop, offices, and a proposed church. Permits were also issued
for the Property in 1989 for the retail sale of arcade games.
The legal description of the Property was identified as:
Assessors Parcel Number: 401-585.01
Parcell: The east 155.00 feet of the north 162.50 feet of Block B of Tract No.3, as shown
on a map recorded in Book 9, Page 4 of Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County,
California.
Parcel 2: The east 145.00 feet of the south 137.50 feet of Block B of Tract No.3, as shown
on a map recorded in Book 9, Page 4 of Miscellaneous Maps, Records of Orange County,
California.
191. 193. & 195 East MaiM Stroot
rustiM. California
Converse Project No. 97-42-529-01
5
3.8
Regulatory Database Search
A regulatory database search was completed for the Property by EDR. The complete EDR report
is provided in Appendix B - EDR-Radius Map Report. The Property was not identified on any
database as listed in the EDR report.
Based on a review of the EDR database, one site of environmental concern is located within the
vicinity of the Property (less than 1/8 mile from the Property) and is identified as follows:
City of Tustin Water Division
235 East Main Street
Tustin, California
(located adjacent to the Property across Prospect Avenue)
This site is listed for having a current 450-gallon gasoiine underground storage tank. Based
on the EDR report, the tank was installed in 1965 and does not have leak detection in place.
This site is located cross gradient from the Property with respect to the direction of
groundwater flow.
Listing UST
This site and other off-site locations of concern were identified within a maximum one-mile
radius of the Property and included hazardous waste generators, underground storage tank
facilities, leaking underground storage tank facilities, and hazardous waste transfer.storage-
disposal facilities. The potential for environmental impact from these off.site locations of
concern and the previously identified site appears to be low due to one or more of the following:
distance from the Property; location with respect to the direction of regional groundwater flow;
type of regulatory listing; identification of a potential responsible party; and/or status assigned
to the case by the regulatory agency.
3.9
Division of Oil and Gas Maps
Oil and gas field maps published by the California Division of Oil and Gas (DOG) were
reviewed for the Property. The purpose of this review was to deternrine the possible presence
or past existence of oil and/or gas wells at locations that could impact the Property. Potential
sources of hazardous wastes associated with the oil field operations include drilling fluids, crude
oil spills, sump bottoms, waste oil, waste water lines and improper well abandonment.
Based on a review of the oil and gas maps, no plugged and abandoned or active oil and/or gas
wells are located on or near the Property (Regional California Department of Conservation, DOG,
Map WI-6).
191,193, & 195 EastMatn Stre.t
Tustin, California
Converse Project No. 97-42-529.01
6
3.10
Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division
Information regarding the subject Property was requested from the Orange County Health Care
Agency (County). The County maintains records regarding UST permits/installation, regulatory
compliance, hazardous material use, storage, and disposal, and other environmental issues. Based
on information from the County, information regarding UST permits/installations, regulatory
compliance or hazardous materials was not on file for the Property.
3.11
Orange County Fire Authority
Information regarding the subject Property was requested from the Orange County Fire Authority.
The department maintains records regarding regulatory compliance, hazardous material disclosure,
business plans, incidents and/or citations for USTs and other information related to environmental
issues. The fire department did not have any information regarding incidents, violations,
compliance, or hazardous material issues for the Property.~
3.12
Orange County Sanitation District
The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) maintains permits and records for site requiring
an industrial wastewater discharge (IWD) permit. One underground clarifier was observed at the
Property. The OCSD did not have any information regarding IWD permits for the Property.
3.13
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Air emissions potentially requiring a permit from the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD) were not observed at the Property. The SCAQMD did not have any
information regarding en1issions for the Property.
3.14
Prior Investigations
Prior investigation reports were not provided to or reviewed by Converse.
191,193. & 195 EastMoinStree,
TWlhn, California
Couverne Project No. 97-42.529.01
7
4.0
Site Reconnaissance
4.1
Methodology
On December 30, 1997, and May 5, 1998, Converse visited the site to evaluate the present use
and to identify environmental conditions at the site. Our methodology involved walking the site
perimeter and accessible areas of the buildings while noting observed evidence of present and
potential environmental concerns. Site photographs are provided in Appendix C.
4.2
Limiting Conditions
Converse's findings are based on the site conditions observed on Tuesday, December 30, 1997,
and Tuesday May 5, 1998.
4.3
Findings
During our site visit, Converse did observe evidence of the following at the Property:
The Property is developed with three, one-story buildings. Two of the buildings are wood
structures with a concrete foundation, plaster and stucco walls, and wood supported roof. The
third building is constructed with bricks. All three buildings are separate structures, however,
have adjoining walls. The buildings are located on the southern end of the Property.
The interior of the buildings were observed to be vacant and unoccupied. Portions of the
ceiling material appeared to have fallen to the floor. The floor appeared to be wooden and
significant staining was not apparent.
The middle portion of the Property is surfaced with asphalt for automobile parking. The
northern end of the Property consists of a concrete slab indicating the location of former
buildings. Two grassy areas were also observed at the Property.
The asphalt and concrete surfaces appeared in good condition with no major cracks or
staining. The grassy areas appeared lush and green.
One underground clarifier was observed in the middle portion of the Property within the
asphalt parking lot area. The clarifier was covered with metal plates and appeared to be full
of water. The past use of the clarifier could not be determined.
A vent line most likely associated with the clarifier was also observed at the east end of the
clarifier.
191. 193. & 195 East Ma;n Street
rust;n, California
Convene Project No. 97-42.\29.01
8
During our site visit, we did not observe evidence of the following at the Property:
Unusual odors
Wastewater or any discharge into a drain, ditch, culvert, or gully
Pools, vats, ponds or lagoons
Flowing, standing, or ponded liquids other than water
Stressed or dead vegetation (other than from lack of water)
Hills, mounds or fill piles
Active, inactive, or abandoned water wells
Evidence of active, inactive, or abandoned underground storage tanks or inactive and
abandoned aboveground storage tanks.
Septic systems
Staining or spillage from standard cleaning equipment
Roads, railroad tracks, or spurs ~
Electrical transformers
4.4
Interviews
Information was requested from the City of Tustin.
environmental issues were not available or not known:
Information regarding the following
Environmental pernrits
Registration for underground and aboveground storage tanks
Material safety data sheets
Community Right to Know Programs
Pending, threatened or past litigations, violations, or liens
Use, treatment, storage, disposal, or generation of hazardous waste and petroleum products
Hazardous waste generator notices or reports
Environmental problems with adjacent or vicinity locations
191.193. &- 195 Bas/Main Street
r"""n. Callfa,nia
Converse Project No. 97-42-529-01
9
4.5
Asbestos Survey
Converse performed an asbestos survey of the three structures at the subject Property on May 5,
1998. The survey was performed to identify asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) at the
Property. Converse collected 36 bulk samples of suspect ACMs. Functional spaces and
homogeneous areas were identified and sampled in general accordance with the Asbestos hazard
Emergency Response Act (AHERA), National Environmental Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAPS), and industry standards. Suspect materials sampled included flooring
materials, drywall, acoustical spray-on ceiling; exterior plaster, exterior stucco, and roofing
materials. The samples were submitted and analyzed according to Environmental Protection
AgencY (BPA) Method 600/M4-82-020, Polarized Light Microscopy (pLM). The analytical
results are summarized in the following table.
Table 4.5 - Summary of Bulk Asbestos Analysis
ecorative inlays on the
02 ont of the building.
pprox. 500 square feet
03 ND Good f material.
04 J93, front window ND Damaged
05 ND Damaged
06 ND Damaged
07 195, bathroom ND Damaged
08 nclosure ND Damaged
09 ND Damaged
JO J95 floor 5 Damaged pprox. 300 square feet of
aterial. It was difficult to
JJ Damaged ssess material due to the
J2 Damaged arge amount of dust and
ebris on the floor.
J3 J95, outside J2/3 Good ercent of asbestos detected
the tile ranged from 12 to
J5%
14 athroom 12/2 Good ercent of asbestos detected
'n the mastic ranged from
ace to 3%
15 15/trace Good pprox 20 square feet of
aterial
Interior wall material 16 195, east wall ND Good
17 195, west wall ND Good
J8 J93, east wall ND Good
191, 193. <I< 195 Ea" Main Srreei
Tustin, California
Conven¡e Project No. 97-42.529.01 10
Good
Good
24 ND Good
25 ND Good
26 195/193 roof seam ND Good
27 193/191 roof seam ND Good
28 195, west side ND Good
29 195, west side ND Good
30 ND Good
31 ND Good
32 195, south center ND Good
33 195, north center ND Good
34 193, southeast comer ND Good
35 193, southwest comer ND Good
36 191, center east ND Good
Trace amounts of asbestos (less than 1%) was detected in the stJicco finish coat located at the
195 building. Sample number 02 was re.analyzed by point-count procedure to evaluate the
asbestos content below I %. The point-count results indicated an asbestos content of 0.19%,
which identifies the stucco as an Asbestos-Containing Construction Material (ACCM). See
Appendix D for the Asbestos Survey Analysis and Documentation.
191.193. '" 195 EastMam Street
r",tin. California
Converse Project No. 97-42.529.01
11
4.6
Lead-based Paint (LBP) Survey
Converse also performed a LBP survey at the Property on May 5, 1998. Converse collected 11
bulk samples of suspect LBPs. Samples were analyzed by flame atomic absorption to determine
the lead content. The analytical results are summarized in the following table.
Table 4.6 - Summary of LBP Analysis
Exterior white A 193, below northwest 0.005 Good
corner of window
Exterior green B 193, window frame 0.409 Good
Exterior white C 191, door frame 12.05 Good Approx. 30 square
feet of paint.
Interior white D 195, west wall 0.016 Good
Interior red E 195, metal handle in 6.282 Good Paint of walls and
rear of suite doors. Approx. 400
sqnare feet of paint.
Interior white F 195, window frame, east 4.164 Damaged Paint on window and
wall window frame.
Approx. 30 square
feet of paint.
Interior blue G 193, front office wall 0.034 Good
Interior peach H 193, front office wall 0.110 Good
Interior cream I 191, door frame 0.650 Good Paint on walls,
doors, and windows.
Approx. 600 square
feet of paint.
Interior light green-blue J 191, east wall 0.079 Good
Exterior white K 191, north exterior wall BDL Damaged
(over bricks)
BDL = Below Detectable Limits
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (BUD) have defined a Lead.Based Paint (LBP) at 0.5 percent by weight. The
following paints contain greater than 0.5% lead:
exterior white paint on the doors and door frames.
interior white paint on the doors, door frames, windows and window frames.
interior cream paint on the walls, doors, and windows in the front portion of the 191
building.
interior red paint on the walls and doors
See Appendix E for the Lead-based Paint Survey Analysis and Documentation
191.193. '" 195 East Main Street
Tustin. California
Converse Project No. 97-42.529.01
12
5.0
Conclusions
Converse has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in general conformance with
the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527-97 for the property located at 191, 193, and
195 East Main Street, in Tustin, California. Any exceptions to or deletions from this practice are
described in the Limitations and Exceptions of Assessment section of this report. This
assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with
the property, with the exception of the following:
This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection
with the property, with the exception of the following:
It could not be determined from the available information whether the clarifier has been
closed or abandoned. Information concerning the past use and current status of the clarifier
was not available to Converse. In order to reduce the potential for an unauthorized discharge
and depending on the future use of the Property, the clarifier should either be upgraded,
closed/abandoned, or removed. In order to reduce the uncertainty concerning the possible
environmental impact to the property from the clarifier, a sampling and analysis plan could
be developed and implemented in the area of the clarifier.
The following materials were found to be asbestos containing material (ACM):
Approximately 300 square feet of floor texture coat located in the 195 building. It was
difficult to assess the material due to the large amount of dust and debris on the floor.
Approximately 20 square feet of 9x9 green vinyl floor tile and mastic exists in the 195
building.
Converse recommends abatement of the ACMs prior to any demolition or rernodeling
activities.
Approximately 500 square feet of exterior stucco as decorative inlays were found to be
asbestos containing construction material (ACCM).
The ACCM should be handled as an ACM; however, disposal as asbestos waste is not
required.
In addition, if during any future demolition or remodeling activities additional suspect materials
are observed, Converse recommends that bulle sample be collected of these materials and
analyzed for asbestos content. All suspect materials at the Property are Presumed Asbestos-
containing Materials (PACMs) until the asbestos content is confirmed or denied by analytical
testing.
191. 193, & 195 Eas! Main Stro.!
T"'~n, California
Converso ProjoctNo. 97-42-529.01
13
The EPA and BUD have defined a LBP at 0.5 percent by weight. The following paints
contain greater than 0.5% lead:
exterior white paint on the doors and door frames (approximately 300 square feet).
interior white paint on the doors, door frames, windows and window frames
(approximately 300 square feet).
interior cream paint on the walls, doors, and windows in the front portion of the 191
building (approximately 600 square feet).
interior red paint on the walls and doors in the rear portion of the 195 building
(approximately 400 square feet).
Converse recommends the damaged (peeling, flaking) LBP be abated by a licensed abatement
contractor prior to any demolition activities.
191. 193. & 195 Eœl Main 8/,.,el
TU8ün. California
Converse Project No. ~7-42.529.0l
14
6.0
References
Aerial Photomaps, Inc., Photo Map Book, Orange County, Califomia, Edition 1985.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas, Map WI-6 Los Angeles !!lli!
Orange Counties January 11, 1997. .
Phase One, Inc., Aerial Photograph Review, January 1998.
E Data Resources, Inc., The EDR-Radius Map Report, December 11, 1997.
E Data Resources, Inc., Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps, December 15, 1997.
Orange County Health Care Agency, Environmental Health Division, Information Request,
December 1997. .'
Orange County Fire Authority, Information Request, December 1997.
Orange County Sanitation District, Information Request, January 1998.
Orange County Water District, Groundwater Contour Map, November 1996.
Orange County Water District, Water Quality Department, Information Request, December
1998.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Information Request, November 1997.
Tustin, City of, Community Development Department, Building Pernrit Review, Decernber 30,
1997.
Tustin, City of, Jim Draughon, Personal communication, December 1997.
United States Geological Survey, 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle, Tustin, California,
1935 photorevised 1945.
United States Geological Survey, 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle, Tustin, California,
1965 photo revised 1981.
191,193. & 195 Ear/MainS'm/
TIIJtin. California
Converse Project No. 97-42.S29-01
15
t)
F
. I
G
U
R
. E
S
~
l'
SCALE 1:24000
0
1 MILE
-
-
-
1000 0
~--
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
5000
7000 FEET
SITE LO~
1Þ1, 1H 8IIIGI - ìi8&t ..... I!itnet
1iøIIIJI, CIIIfønìa
Project No.
97-42-529-01
~ CONVERSE !IJI n::' ~
~ ENVIRONMENTAL"" a;;;.v I
Figure No.
1
Prospect Avenue
.-¡
J I
: -t-- --- CIañfior
. I
'--
195 East Mai1 Street
(
Ccncre'" S<dace
193 East Mai1 Street (
..
!
(
I
!
Asph«t fWfdJg /.of
191 East Mai1 Street 1
,
-
Gassy AnM
Gassy AIN
em.:.- -
--
AIey
SITE PLAN
~+-=
..... Not To Scol~- No.
.... 01/09/98 ~-529-0
......,...", Iy JR -. No.
Chod<od Iy JR 2
-'" HBA
191, 193, and 195 East Main Street
Tustin, California
@ Converse Environmental West
'I)
A
P
P
E
N
D
I
X
A
~'J
I
I
.
.
Þ
b
II....
~
k
.
.
,
I
,
I
I
J
I
I
~
"
~
~
~
\
~
\
\
I
I
\
~
I
L
~ . ~
- ;;1/ .
. ð~ ~
'--~--l---~--~== -=--~~ ---=-.....~-""'-- =- - - ---- --
. , ¡ " 4 ~ ~ :-~ ~ -..;:
1Ø__!1_~ II 1;.' !!Iii' .
i!f ~ ~ n' ! - ~
"'- ,"' . OJ . t t .
íl!::.~. ~ - --~ ~ ~ .
~_.r I ~ ~ !t~ .. I
IT !I ~: ~ '
\ .
,~I \ . . .
, . ,
ð{/'
c
HOTSL TUSTIN,
1815
~
;>
8
:III:'~" 'I"~
i I;~'" -~~
-=-. I. ..~:=-:
-¡'I-II! =1' :Ihll. .¡~
Itl-.!'" ,.!:I ïl;¡h
'11hll! II: ~ i ili:: i
",,'
§
io-
=.
~ e¡
,"
~
^'U, Q
-_...:...- I.l:..l"~:~ 80 ..
~,
~
\:i
~
¡.:¡
43 4i? 4/
(b"Ei fÎ wide)
t:
'.;:
~
:;¡
0
'..j
~
-".'
(I)
~
--¡¡;¡ 43
"iT. (lJO ft wide I
10 II
.;:¡
1':'::
, '
, .
J
..... ._-_..Jjl
L
,
«-l~
: - -- -¡
d
F-j è-"---
'=1' .-L-
~:: ~ ~"-
.þ0):¡1"i .,,¡;~ II
ú.)O~:I:.1 ~;:::!;;: ."
~.þ'" -<"'" :~;,
I~~~~ -. ~ ~=.;:;~ ~=~;,~
,'\ot,
.þ~
U"I
:fT}
f~
~t::)"
'~'Q
~'- L_-"'--"-
~
~I
¡,~--:n
L..-J ,:1
~
'-
...:.
'i,
51'
:!
3
~
:¡¡;t
-..
~
"
'"
~
4j
4,.f
4
~
!:.
.1.
f
Z8"':
/11 ~
- ,."'1
~,^/11
':;:,:
",.
":1.
.:t-
'"
'"
"--
I~
I
I
'^
..
~
.~.. .'"
'"
J.J
".
,-
"
.'
,;,
."-
,.
II
12
~
I~<::: -
~-=
~..:!
~
r::
,.
.;;;
"
I
I
.~6Ï'
.,'wf'/f}f'
-==...%===.
I,'
/I
"
! ~;" ~;.~:.'. ~
"~~. "L"- J..t..:.,-
~~I ~j
"~¡LJ
;~; rr\ :<
~ ' '~.-
~~ ;,,;" - ':T';~ ,þ
U. '" I.
:1:" ':J, C~~"-:~ ~
\~ ' I'Io1L Mfa
~;;._'---- -
<."", --I
"', 1r- I
1:: .. H"":2"':
.-~---:--I~:
..[ : \:...:
'.. ' "
~" '-" ,>2 "" of[) .'J,'f-"'¡4J' ISS ".'
~.
'I: WliJeb-- -- -- .f'l!::'.!'~,)¡.fì"gl"". uI'1'-::.,t u'
P.
,~. I
'» -
:~~
. , ,
.~.;;) ~
" '.' ':::I.I~~
, ,"" II!
L~_-:, .
", , ~
--,-. II I
~ . I
,. >', ~!.
r;:l
. ~I
,-I "
'r::T- ~ ~ .
I ~~.,
-{~! ;~,.
d,' .".""-.
""-5 rt 'Vld",J
.-.~.:
(:
,
us
- ..:/
.12
,'3
~
I' ,
~
,-,
't~
~
.,;:
0
'CJ)
-I
~
~
~
., :
'"
"'I:
"
"
LJ
Jr.!
':. '.,'
~~
i} :' I~"'-'
.: '.:.
QjL-:11 ~-~
~\
':b~
~ :tl~~
I 'LJ
~I '~.
J
~I
.-,."
~~L..
~-
.~~,"
iy
!; q¡
n
-f>
-'--.-
, \
"..1!.1:1 )
I
I
.1
--J
. ì
1-
r~-
"'," "~LJ
~I 0"
.' <
\ ç
;¡
,;
'"... ..'
_....._~
Eo'
ô
. '-,--'-'--~
3
:.: ,,; .
'-..;'
, >
., ..
i.
-
'~
I 5
r-
Q2 "
CJJ
~
-:¡;--:.~:_'-~'
it'
'.
I~
, .
I..
,
J
=c-"I
:~ - 11
11'11' "'.' c-
._'- -'-'-~ -"'.
2.'" 3" UO
..
14.7
Ii
/2
,
W- .'
/<1
v"
""
,
,
)..
.J
h
H
~
OJ
N
(.¡.)
",',.."c,J'
~,q',s~~::?1,~q~~~~~ \0
~,~:'~~c.iI\~'W:"t:I~ ~
~,,"""';I;:¡'i'~;;.n"\i~ ~ -....J
~~:ìq~.,...~~,~,~~,., ,,~""l
1:.¡~ ~".".~i:;;"~~ '!""",,, ì::
>""':~~~~~,;,'R, ~~:"~.,
,¡",:,",.,,"~, .~I¡;~::::¡
d~,~n~~ ~ L::,'L ~~,:"i '"
I , ,.
"> Hh"':'-: ;~,
"'~----"1 : :
{ : '"': '"': '.,
.. . '
~ .. '_.52~' SO 'J ./..¡f
"
~'"
~~
~
¡' I ,,'
r
:!j¡
j'"
"
~
'"
'\
'"
ST. (66/'t Jl'1i1..J
I:Q"'s::", .
,
'" '
'" ,<"
. , ' ~ ~ "
" "
,:"'--------'"
- . ,r
- -. t
~~
. .
...
~
.
.(¡)
0
~I
;.
.
, .
- ,
'..'
. ,
. ~.
,
ì ~
n
, ..,
..
~
Cft
-
i
~
~'
ST.
Ilf
, --.'"
w Ii WIde). - - -.' -- i':4M,;,.g"D:,{t..
:",
It
," .
~ I
. ,
E. MAI"I
p.,.. , '" '
."
I '" ...
'-\ '
,
/iJ
IZ
13
,ru~
'n~
I:,: .
L~,'"
I ~ t : Y'-. ¡:i~1
~~
E. 3RD ST.
Q'\
',<0 ". 0"
. .::<'
! ~
'c"
) ~
.
~ ,""
~ ~,
I ~ - ~ ¡
; ~",
,~
v' ".
,
I
I
I
I
(J:
d'
"t
;::
C')
ø W
~
j ~
~.
..~
;.'
--~... .f'æ"'.f§:- - -'
/'
r
,1<7-
II
/2
"'-
.'
NO
ì
;,~~~m~~~~.~ii~~~~ .,.
~~-tH'~N¡'~~~ .~<i:!' ~
~~~~i~'~~~~~~~h~'Ii ~ :;:~':::i
h~r ,~~,.. ,,~~~. ,~~~~~,,~~¡::'
.-'>",- ~~1~~~~a ,,~. :¡¡~¡
~~~~'.'!~:~ ~ ~~'~>" ~~~1ì5::::!
\ ."
(f)'
A
P
p
E
N
D
I
X
B
, \
The EDR-Radius Map
with GeoCheckTM
Main Sf/Tustin
191-93-95 E Main St
Tustin, CA 92680
Inquiry Number: 217084.1s
December 11, 1997
.edr
..
...
;;.~~~~ .
e data resources, inc.
The Source
For Environmental
Risk Management
Data
3530 Post Road
Southport, Connecticut 06490
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone: 1-800-352-0050
Fax: 1-800-231-6802
Internet: www.edrnetcom
SECTION
PAGE
Executlvè Summary.- _n- - --- - - n- - - - - ---- -- ---- - - -.. n -- -- - - - _n - - - - -- - -- ES1
Topographic Map. n_-- - - - _u-- - -- - - uu- - n- -- - - u u _u- u-- - - u- u- -- u- 2
GeoCheck Summary. -- ---- - --- - __n - - -. - - - - n_- ----- - n - _"n- -- n --- - -- -- 3
Overview Map.. - - - - . n - - - - n - n - - - - - - - -- -. - - - - - n - - - n - - - - - --. u - -- - - ---
5
Detail Map- --u - - --. - - _----_un - - - - n- -- - - - u--u.u-. nU -- -- u_n - -- -- 6
Map Summary. All Sites..--n ._n- -- n - - -. - U - n_nn___-- _n--.n- -- -- --- 7
Map Summary. Sites with higher or the same elevation as the Target Property. - -.. - - -. 8
Map Findings-- --- _u.- - - - - - - - --- - - - --- U U - uuu.. -. -- - - - ----- _u _n --- 9
Orphan Summary. -- n n -- n -- - nn - - -- - -. n n- nn n -- - - -- n_- -. - - __n --. 30
APPENDICES
GeoCheck Version 2.1... n n' n --- n _n - n- n - -. n- -" nn -- -- nn_n - _n -- A1
Government Records Searched I Data Currency Tracking Addendum. -- n'- n n - _n-
AS
Thank you for your business.
. Please contact EDR at 1-800.352.0050
with any questions or comments.
DIsclaimer
This Report conteins Information obtained from a variety of public sources end EDR makes no represantatlDn or warranty
regarding the accuracy, reilabllity, quality, or completeness Df said Information or the information contained In this report.
The customer shail aasume full reaponsibillty for the use of this report.
No warranty of merchantability or of fitness for a particular purpose, expressed or Implied, .hall apply and EDR
epeclflcally disclaims the making of euch warTantles. In no event shall EDR be liable to anyone for speclsl,
Incidental. consequentlel or exemplary damages. Copyright (c) 1997 by EDR. All rights reserved.
TC217084.1. Page 1
A search of avaIlable environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources. Inc.
(EDR). The report meets the government records search requirements of ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental $1Ie Assessments, E 1527-97. Search distances are per ASTM standard or custom
distances requested by the user.
The address of the subject property for which the search was intended is:
191-93.95 E MAIN ST
TUSTIN, CA 9268Ò
No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ( 'reasonably ascertainabie ') government
records either on the subject property or within the ASTM E 1527-97 search radius around the subject
property for the following Databases:
NPL:_ooo_---._mooo----_m- National Priority LIst
Dellsted NPL:_-------------.. NPL Deletions _c
RCRIS-TSD:--._m.---_m_-c Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
AWP:--_.-_--------_--ooo.--- Annual Workplan
Cal-Sltes:_--_---------------- Calsltes
CHMIRS:_m-_ooo-_---m__-. California Hazardous Material Incident Report System
Toxic Plts:_.-------....---..- Toxic Pits
CERCLlS:_._.-------.-----m Ccmprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Uabillty Information
c System
CERC-NFRAP:..-------_..... Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Uability Information
System
CORRACTS:_...m_..m---- Corrective Action Report
SWIS:__.._...---.----------.. Solid Waste Informetion System
AST:..m--__m----__.m._- Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities
RAATS:__m_.m---m_m-- RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
WMUDS:___. ---.---_...__m- Waste Management Un;t Database
HMIRS:._...---..------------ Hazardous Materials ;nformeöon Reporting System
PADS:__m.-----..m._m.-c PCB Activity Database System
ERNS:..___.------_....._m.. Emergency Response Noöfication System
FINDS:..m...----_-----_m- Facility Index System
TRIS:___-------_m----__m-c Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA:mm....----'--------c Toxic Substances Ccntrol Act
ML TS:_m..m--------'----.c Material LIcensing Tracking System
NPL Llen:---__m_----------- Federal Superfund Uens
Indus Slte:--_.---_...._----.. LIst of Industrial Site Cleanups
CA SLlC:-------m___-----'" CA SUC regions.
ROD:_m._---------------.'-' Records Of Decision
CONSENT:_---__---.-__--m. Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
Ca. WDS:--_--------_...----- Waste Discharge System
S Bay Reg. 2:000------------- South Bay Site Management System
Coal Gas:m.--------------'- Former Manufactured gas (Coal Gas) Sites.
Unmapped (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
Search Results:
Search results for the subject property and the search radius, are listed below:
Subject Property:
The subject property was not listed In any of the databases searched by EDR.
TC2170B4.1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
Surrounding Properties:
Elevations have been determined from !he USGS 1 degree Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated
on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of olose proximity
should be field verified. EDR's definition of a site with an elevation equal to the subject property
includes a tolerance of -10 feet. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the subject property
have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the subject property (by more than
10 feet). Page numbers and map Identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detalied
data on Individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold Italics are in multipie databases.
NOTIFY 65: Notify 65 records contain facility notifications about any release that couid impact drinking
water and thereby expose the public to a potential health risk. The data comes from the State Water
Resources Control Board's Proposition 65 database.
A review of the Notify 65 list. as provided by EDR, and daW10/21/1993 has revealed that there is 1
Notify 65 site within approximately 1 Mile of the subject property.
Equal/Higher Elevation
ARCO FAC # 206
Address
302 WEST FIRST STREET
Dlst/Dlr
MaplD
Page
19
1/4-1/2NW H31
CORTESE: This database Identifies public drinking water welis with detectable levels of contamination,
hazardous substance sites selected for remedial action. sites.with known toxic material Identified
through the abandoned site assessment program, sites with USTs having a reportable release and all
solid waste disposal facilities from which there Is known migration. The source is the California
Environmental Protection Agency/Office of Emergency Information.
A review of the Cortese list, as provided by EDR. and dated 12/31/1994 has revealed that there are 21
Cortese sites within approximately 1 Mile of the subject property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Dlst/Dlr MaplD Page
SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY ELCAMINOREAL(1011) 1/4-1/2S 1328 18
ARCO SERVICE STATION #206 01ST ST W. (302) 1/4.1/2NW H3O 19
TEXACO SERVICE STATION NEWPORT AVE (14041) 1/4 - 1/2S J34 20
UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #5386 NEWPORT AVE (13348) 1/4 - 1/2ENE K37 22
CIRCLE K #7861 (THRIFTY #75) NEWPORT AVE (14121) 1/2-1 SSW 38 22
CHEVRON SERVICE STATION #2r:J79 NEWPORT AVE (14122) 1/2.1 SSW 39 23
ARCO SERVICE STATION #1865 NEWPORT AVE (14244) 1/2-1 SSW 40 23
ARCO SERVICE STATION #1077 RED HILL AVE (13742) 1/2-1 SE 41 23
MOBIL SERVICE STATION #18-H7Q RED HILL AVE (13872) 1/2-1 SE L42 24
SHELL SERVICE STATION RED HILL AVE (13891) 1/2-1 SE L43 24
CHEVRON SERVICE STATION #3742 RED HILL AVE (13922) 1/2.1 SE 44 25
ISACC, lNc. (VILLAGE PNT & BDY 01ST ST W. (1734) 1/2-1 WNW 45 25
CHEVRON SERVICE STATION #8149 NEWPORT AVE (13052) 1/2.1 ENE 46 25
GATRON INDUSTRIES NEWPORT AVE (1301) 1/2-1 NE 47 25
UNOCAL SERVICE STA TlON #5678 RED HILL AVE (14081) 1/2-1 SSE M48 26
EXXON SERVICE STATION #0755 RED HILL AVE (14082) 1/2 - 1 SSE M49 26
ANAHEIM STATIONS 01STSTw. (2002) 1/2-1 WNW N51 27
CHILDRENS HOSPITAL TUSTIN AVE N. (1001) 1/2 -1 NW 53 28
EXXON SERVICE STATION #3573 MCFADDEN AVE (16951) 1/2-1 SW 54 28
UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #5224 MCFADDEN A VE E. (16801) 1/2-1 SW 55 28
Lower Elevation Address Dlst/Dlr MaplD Page
ARCO SERVICE STA TION #3045 RED HILL AVE (14231) 1/2-1 SSE 52 27
T0217084.10 EXEOI.1T1VE SUMMARY 2
LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports contain an inventory of reported
leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data comes from the State Water Resouroes Control
Board Leaking Underground Storage Tank Information System.
A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/1997 has reveaied that there are 10
LUST sltes within approximately 0.5 Miles of the subject property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Dlst/Dlr ~ Page
EDS ARCO STATION 13662 NEWPORT AVE 1/4 - 1/2ESE F25 17
ARCO SERVICE STATION #3132 13662 NEWPORT AVENUE 1/4 -1/2ESE F26 17
ARCO SERVICE STATION #0206 30201 ST STREET, WEST 1/4.1/2NW 27 17
SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO 1011 EL CAMlNO-flEAL 114 - 112S G29 18
UNOCAL 14011 NEWPORT AVE 1/4-1/2S 132 20
UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #4953 14011 NEWPORT AVENUE 1/4.1/2S 133 20
TEXACO SERVICE STATION NEWPORT AVE (14041) 114 - 112S J34 20
TEXACO USA 14041 NEWPORT AVE 1/4-1/2S J35 21
UNOCAL 13348 NEWPOR,T AVE 1/4-1/2ENE,K36 21
UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #5386 NEWPORT A VE (13348) 114 - 112ENE K37 22
UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are reguiated under
Subtitie I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data comes from the State
Water Resources Control Board's Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database.
A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR. and dated 10/15/1990 has revealed that there are 9 UST
sites within approximateiy 0.25 Miles of the subject property.
Equal/Hlgher'Elevatlon
CITY OF TUSTIN WATER DiVISION
TUSTIN TRANSMISSION
DiSTRICT ADMINISTRATION CENTER
TUSTIN PLAZA AUTO WASH
STEVEN L. KELSO
EDGAR E. PANKEY
H & I MOBIL
ECONO LUBE N TUNE #7
TUSTIN AUTO WASH
Address
235 E. MAIN STREET
770 EL CAMINO REAL
300 SOUTH 'C" STREET
240 E 1ST ST
171 E. FIRST ST.
320W, MAIN
171E1STST
155 W 1ST ST
535 E MAIN ST
Dlst/Dlr MaplD
0 -1/8 SE 1
0-118 NW 5
1/8.1/4WNW8
1/8-1/4N C12
1/8" 1/4NNW 013
1/8-1/4W 15
1/8 .1/4NNW 019
118. 114NNW £20
1/8-1/4E F23
CA FID: The Faciiity Inventory Database contains active and inactive underground storage tank
locations. The source is the State Water Resource Control Board.
A review of the Ca. FID list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/31/1994 has revealed thatJhere are 3
Ca. FID sites within approximately 0.25 Miles of the subject property, '
EquallHlgher Elevation
TUSTIN TRANSMISSION
ECONO LUBE N TUNE #7
TUSTIN AUTO WASH
Address
Dlst/Dlr MaplD
0-118 NW 5
118-114NNW E2O
1/8.1/4E F24
770 EL CAMINO REAL
155 W 1ST ST
535 E MAIN ST
TC217084,15 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
Page
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
16
Page
10
15
16
HAZNET: The data is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each year
by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700,000-1,000,000 annually, representing
approximately 350,000.500,000 shipments. Data from non-California manifests & continuation sheets
are not included at the present time. Data are from the manifests eubmitted without correction,
and therefore many contain some Invaiid values for data elements such as generator 10, TSD 10,
waste category. & disposal method. The source is the Department of Toxic Substance Control Is the agency
A review of the HAZNET list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/1995 has revealed that there are 8
HAZNET sites within approximately 0.25 Miles of the subject property.
Equal/Higher Elevation
TUSTIN GARAGE
TUSTIN GARAGE AUTO RPR
HARRIS HISTOLOGY SERVICES
PRINTING PARADISE
NEWPORT 30 MIN FOTO
NEWPORT 30 MIN FOTO
ECONO LUBE N TUNE #7
ECONO LUBE N TUNE #7
Address
560 EL CAMINO REAL
560 EL CAMINO REAL
420 EL CAMINO REAL #4
307 EL CAMINO REAL
13842 NEWPORT AVE
13842 NEWPOEiT AVE
155 W 1ST ST
155W1STST
Dlst / Dir Map 10
0.118 WSW A2
0-118 WSWA3
118 -1/4SSW B6
1/8-1/4SSW 87
118 - 1/4SSE 16
1/8-1/4ESE 18
118 - 114NNW E20
1/8 - 1/4NNW E21
RCRIS: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act database includes selected information on sites
that generate, store, treat, or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Act. The source of this
database is the U.S. EPA.
A review of the RCRIS.SOG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 07/01/1997 has revealed that there are
10 RCRIS-SOG sites within approximately 0.25 Miles of the subject property.
Page
9
9
10
11
14
15
15
16
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Dist / Dlr Map 10 Page
TUSTIN GARAGE AUTO RPR 560 EL CAMINO REAL 0-1/8 WSW A3 9
TUSTIN TRANSMISSION 770 EL CAMINO REAL 0 -1/8 NW 5 10
ALL STAR CLEANERS 13771 NEWPORT AVE STE 4 118 - 114SE 9 11
ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT & CONSTRUC 195 S CST #250 118 - 114NW 10 12
DA VIDSON SERVICE 224 E FIRST ST 118 - 1/4N C11 12
TIP TOP CLEANERS 13652 NEWPORT AVE J 118 - 1/4ESE 14 13
NEWPORT 30 MIN FOTO 13842 NEWPORT AVE 118 - 1/4SSE 16 14
BIG 0 TIRES 131 E FIRST ST 118 - 1/4NNW E17 15
ECONO LUBE N TUNE #7 155 W1STST 118 - 114NNW E20 15
JRS ROLLS ROYCE 1111 W1STST 118 - 114NNW 22 16
RCRIS: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act database includes seiected information on sites
that generate, store, treat, or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Act. The source of this
database is the U.S. EPA.
A review of the RCRIS.LOG list. as provided by EDR, and dated 07/01/1997 has revealed that there are
2 RCRiS.LOG sites within approximately 0.25 Miles of the subject property.
Equal/Higher Elevation
BRONCO CLEANERS
HARRIS HISTOLOGY SERVICES
Address
705 EL CAMINO REAL
420 EL CAMINO REAL #4
Dlstl Dir
Map 10
0-118 NW 4
118 -114SSW B5
TC2170B4.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
Page
9
10
BEP: Bond Expenditure Plan comes from the Department of Health Services.
A review of the Ca. BEP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/01/1989 has revealed that there is 1
Ca. BEP site within approximately 1 Mile of the subject property.
Equai/Higher Elevation
PHIL'S CUSTOM PLATING
Address
Dlst/ Dlr
MaplD
Page
27
1214 WEST 1 ST STREET
1/2. 1 WNW NSO
TC217OS4.15 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
Due tQ poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped:
Site Name
Database(s)
Cal.Sites
SWIS
SWIS
LUST
LU3T
LUST
UST
UST
UST
HAZNET
FINDS, RCRIS.LOG
TUSTIN PARCEL D
UNKNOWN #1
MOFFET TRENCHESITUSTIN MCAS LF
MOBIL SERVICE STATION #18.LW8
EL TORO PIPELINE
MCAS TUSTIN HELICOPTER BASE
98149
DBA WORLD 01,. MARKETING CO. #4
GEORGE W. KR1DNER UNION 76
HARRIS HISTOLOGY SERVICES
WORLD OIL CO
TC217084.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
FAlI\IIAViNAVE
D
~
Ii
!II
~
i
Ell AVE .
i
AI Major Roads
I Contour Una.
N Wale_yo
J..f Earthquake Fault Unas
V Earthquake eploanter. RIohtBt 5 orgrealer
(£) Clos.st Forierlll Wallin quadrant
"il Closest Stole WeB In quadrant
, Clos.st Publlo Wltar Supply Wall
~
ŒJD Closest Hydrogaologloal Data
Main StlTustin
191-93-96 E Main St
Tustin CA 92680
33.7428/117.8218
CUSTOMER:
CONTACT:
INQUIRY#:
DATE:
Converse Environmental West
Joe Radonlch
217084.15
December 11,1997 11 :58 am
L TARGET PROPERTY:
ADDRESS:
CITYlSTATElZIP:
LATILONG:
TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
LDng~ude (West):
Universal Transverse Mercato~
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATIONt
33.742790.33' 44' 34.0"
117.821808.117.49' 18.5"
Zone 11
423876.9
3733747.2
Gaologic Code:
Era:
System:
Series:
Q
Cenozoic
Quaternary
Quaternary
ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNITt
Category:
Stra~fed Sequence
GROUNDWATER FLOW INFORMATION
Groundwater flow direction for a particular BIte fs best determIned by a qualified envIronmental professional using
sIte-specific well data. If such data Is not reasonably ascertaInable, It may ba necessary to rely on other sources at
Information, Including well data collected on nearby propertIes, regional groundwater flow Information (from deep
aquifers), or surface topogrsphy.*
General Topographic Gradient: General South
Genera! Hydrogeologic Gradient: No hydrogeologic data available.
SIte.Speclflc Hydrogeological Data':
Search Radius: 2.0 miles
LDcation Rela~ve to TP: 1 . 2 Miles WSW
S~e Name: Xerox Corporation Facility
S~e EPA 10 Number: CAD9824001O3
Surficial Aquifer Flow Dlr.: West. Southwest
Measured Depth to Wate~ 43 feet to 4<ì feet.
Hydraulic Connection: The surficial and underlying aqulters are hydraulically
Interconnected.
No Information about a sole source aquifer Is available
Information based on slte.speclfic subsurface Investlga~ons Is
documented In the CERCLIS Investigation report(s)
Sole Source Aqulfe~
Data Qua1~y:
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE
Target Property:
2433117.F7TUSTIN, CA
FEDERAL DATABASE WELL INFORMATION
WELL DISTANCE
~ EBQ!!I.L
NO WELLS FOUND
LITHOLOGY
DEPTH TO
WATER TABLE
STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION
WELL
~
Northern
Eastem
Southern
Western
DISTANCE
~
1(2..1 Mile
1.2Mllea
1/2.1 Mile
1.2Mlles
,.~~:P.G. """"~.R.E."""~dW",""C,G_....c..-_u~."1:,",coo"".Ad~_~d""" P.~,\,:,t:::'~... ......"",.U9G9 "... Co. "'.00"" (""'I,
;g,~~=== :'::=':;"é,~uc::::::;~=:""~~~"",;.::":=~':~=':":;~:::.i;:~"'~'::'.""d ,PA_<. ""'--'" ~d.
,,:om..-.. _D<m"""~,",Uo",",""~"~"-(CEI'IDU9)-_. TC217084.1s Page3
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION
Searched by Neerest PWS.
NOTE: PWS System location Ie not always the same as we1l10cation.
PWS Name: GRANT LAKE MARINA
GRANT LAKE MARINA CAMPGROUND
RTE3 BOX 1
JUNE LAKE, CA 93529
Location Relative to TP: 1/4.1/2 Mile West
PWS currentiy has or has had major vlolation(s): Yes
AREA RADON INFDRMATION
EPA Radon Zone for ORANGE County: 3.
Note: Zone 1 Indoor average level> 4pCI/L
: Zone 2 Indoor average level >- 2pCI/L
: Zone 3 Indoor average level < 2pCI/L.
ORANGE COUNTY, CA
Number of s~es testad: 30
Area
Average Activity
% <4 pCI/L
'k 4-20 pCI/L
% >20 pCI/L
Uvlng Aree. 1st Floor
Uvlng Area. 2nd Floor
Basement
0.753 pCI/L
Not Reported
Not Reported
100'k
Not Reported
Not Reported
0%
Not Reported
Not Reported
O'k
Not Reported
Not Reported
TC217084.1s Page4
* Target Properly
... Site. at e¡evatlon. higher 1I1an
or equal Ie 111. target properly
. ellas at elevations lawor than
the target properly
Å Coal Gaslfloation Silas (If requoated)
0 National Priority Us! SIte.
Q Landflll Site.
TARGET PROPERTY:
ADDRESS:
CITYlSTATElZIP:
LATlLONG:
N Power transmission nn..
N 011 & Ga. plp.nno.
~ 1DO-yearflood zone
IZ3 500-year flood zone
~
Msln StlTustin
191-93-95 E Msln St
Tustin CA 92680
33.74281117.8218
CUSTOMER:
CONTACT:
INQUIRY Ii:
DATE:
Converse Environmental West
Joe Raclonich
217084.1s
December 11,1997 11 :51 am
* Target Property
À Sites .t elevatione higher than
or e~ual Ie the target property
Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
... COal Geslflcation SItes (11 requested)
Ii Sensitive Receptoro
I::J Notional PrlorltyUotSltas
;::;] Landnll Sitas
~
N Power transmission lInes
N
~
123
011 & Gas pipelines
100-\I8ar flood zone
500-year nood zone
Converse Environmental West
Joe Radonlch
217084.1s
December 11, 1997 11 :55 am
CUSTOMER:
CONTACT:
INQUIRY#:
DATE:
Main StlTustin
191.93-95 E Main St
Tustin CA 92680
33.74281117.8218
I TARGET PROPERTY:
ADDRESS:
1 CITY/STATElZIP:
LAT/LONG:
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 -1/4 1/4 -1/2 1/2.1 >1 Plotted
NPl 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Dellsted NPl TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
RCRIS-TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
AWP 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Gal-Sites 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Notify 65 1.000 0 0 1 0 NR 1
CHMIRS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Cortese 1.000 0 0 4 17 NR 21
Toxic Pits 1.000 0 -0 0 0 NR 0
CERCUS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CERC-NFRAP TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Sl Landfill (SWIS) 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
LUST 0.500 0 ~ 0 10 NR NR 10
UST 0.250 2 7 NR NR NR 9
CAFID 0.250 1 2 NR NR NR 3
AST TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
WMUDS/SWAT 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
HAZNET 0.250 2 6 NR NR NR 6
RCRIS Sm. Quari. Gen. 0.250 2 8 NR NR NR 10
RCRIS Lg. Quan. Gen. 0.250 1 1 NR NR NR 2
HMIRS TP NR Nfl NR NR NR 0
PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TSCA TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MlTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
NPl Uens TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
Induslrial Site TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
CA SUC 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CA Bond Exp. Pian 1.000 0 0 0 1 NR 1
ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
CA WDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
South Bay Region 2 TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
Coal Gas 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
TP - Target Property
NR - Not Requested at this Search Distance
. Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC21?OB4.1S pags?
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8.1/4 1/4.1/2 1/2.1 > 1 Plotted
NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Delisted NPL TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
RCAIS.TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
AWP 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Cal.Sites 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Notify 65 1.000 0 0 1 0 NR 1
CHMiRS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Cortese 1.000 0 0 4 16 NR 20
Toxic Pits 1.000 0 -.0 0 0 NR 0
CERCLIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CERC.NFRAP TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Sl Landfill (SWIS) 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
LUST 0.500 0 '- 0 10 NR NR 10
UST 0.250 2 7 NR NR NR 9
CAFiD 0.250 1 2 NR NR NR 3
AST TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
WMUDS/SWAT 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
HAZNET 0.250 2 6 NR NR NR 8
RCRIS Sm. Quan. Gen. 0.250 2 8 NR NR NR 10
RCRIS Lg. Quan. Gen. 0.250 1 1 NR NR NR 2
HMIRS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TSCA TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MLTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
NPL Liens TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
Industriai Site TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
CASLIC 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CA Bond Exp. Plan 1.000 0 0 0 1 NR 1
ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
CA WDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
South Bay Region 2 TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
Coal Gas 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
TP - Target Property
NR - Not Requested at this Search Distance
. Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC2170B4.1S Page B
Map 10
Direction
Distance
Elevation
1
SE
< 1/8
Higher
A2
WSW
<1/8
Higher
A3
WSW
< 1/8
Higher
4
NW
<1/8
Higher
Site
Database(s)
-
Coal Gas S~e Search: No s~e wae found In a search of Real Propeny Scan's ENVIROHAZ database.
CITY OF TUSTIN WATER DIVISION
235 E. MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92880
State UST:
Facility 10:
Tank Num:
Tank Capacity:
Tank Used for.
Type 01 Fuel:
Leak Detection:
Contact Name:
Total Tanks:
Facility Type:
128
1
450
PRODUCT
REGULAR
None
PAUL MURPHY, WATER SUPERINTEND'telephone:
1 Region:
2 Other Type:
Container Num:
Year Installed:
Tenk Constrctn:
UST
5
1965
1/4'lnches
(714) 544.8890
Not reported
WATER DIVISION
TUSTIN GARAGE
560 EL CAMINO REAL
TUSTIN, CA 92680
HAZNET
TUSTIN GARAGE AUTO RPR
580 EL CAMINO REAL
TUSTIN, CA 92680
RCRIS:
Owner.
Contact:
Record Date:
TUSTIN GARAGE AUTO RPR
(415) 555-1212
CHORNOMUO ROBERT
(714) 544.1966
07/11/91
Classification: Small Quantity Generator
Used 011 Recyc: No
Violation Status: No violations found
Industrial Site:
Facility ID:
Open Date:
Closed Date:
Haz Mat
911C21
05.31.91
02.02-95
2070.W
EDR ID Number
EPA 10 Number
UO01577886
N/A
5100876568
NIA
RCRIS-SQG 1000595053
FINDS CAD983589433
HAZNET
Indus Site
BRONCO CLEANERS
708 EL CAMINO REAL
TUSTIN, CA 92680
FINDS 1000308530
RCRIS-LOG CAD981842630
TC217084.1s psge 9
MaplD
Direction
Distance
Elevation
5
NW
< 1/8
Hlghar
B6
SSW
1/8-1/4
Higher
Site
EDR 10 Number
~ EPA ID Number
1000308530
BRONCO CLEANERS (Continued)
ACAIS:
Owner.
SHELTON GUY
(415) 555.1212
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(714) 730-7130
01f09/87
Contact.
Record Oa1e:
Classification: Large Quantity Genera1or. Small Quantity Generetor
Used all Recyc: No
Vlola1lon Sta1Us: No violations found
TUSTIN TRANSMISSION
770 EL CAMINO REAL
TUSTIN, CA 92680
RCRIS:
Owner.
HENRY KUMAGAI
(714) 838.0808
HENRY KUMAGAL
(714) 83B-0808
Record Date: 03104/92
Classification: Small Quant~y Genera1or
Used all Aecyc: No
Violation Sta1us: No violations found
Contact.
FID:
Facility ID:
Reg By:
Cortese Coda:
Status:
Mall To:
30010502 Regulate ID:
Active Underground Storage Tank location
Not reported SIC Code:
Active Facility Tel:
Not reported
POBOX
TUSTIN. CA 926BO
Contact Not reportad
DUNs No: Not reportad
Craation: 10/22/93
EPA ID: Not reported
Comments: Not reported
UST Orange County:
Region: ORANGE
Contact Tel:
NPDES No:
Modified:
RCRIS-SOG 1000598012
FINDS CAD983620493
UST
Ca. FlD
Not reported
Not reportad
(714) 838.0808
Not reported
Not reported
OOfOOfOO
HARRIS HISTOLOGY SERVICES
420 EL CAMINO REAL #4
TUSTIN. CA 92680
FINDS 1000362625
RCRIS-LQG CAD981367634
HAZNET
TC217084.1S Page10
MaplD
Direction
Dlatanee
Elevation
Site
Databese(s)
EDR ID Number
EPA ID Number
HARRIS HISTOLOGY SERVICES (Con1Inued)
1000362625
RCRIS:
Owne~
Contact:
RICK HARRIS
(415) 555.1212
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(714) 832-4041
01/23/86
Record Date:
Classlflcatlon: Large Quentlty Generetor, Small Quantity Generator
Used 011 Recyc: No -
Violation Status: No violations lound
HAZNET:
Waste Category:
Tons:
Waste Category:
Tons:
Hydrocarbon solvents (benzene. hexane, Stoddard, etc.)
66 Handling method: Recycler
Laboratory waste chemicals
4 HandlIng method: Thermal Treatment (Including Incineration)
87
SSW
1/8-114
Higher
PRINTING PARADISE
307 EL CAMINO REAL
TUSTIN, CA 92680
HAZNET
S100942826
N/A
8 DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION CENTER
WNW 300 SOUTH "C" STREET
118-1/4 TUSTiN, CA 92680
Higher
State UST:
Facility ID: 65922
Tank Num: 1
Tank Capac~y: 550
Tank Uaed fo~ WASTE
Type of Fuel: Not Reported
Laak Detection: None
Contact Name: W.H. TETER
Total Tanks: 2
Faoility Type: 2
Facility ID: 65922
Tank Num: 2
Tank Capacity: 250
Tank Used lor: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: Not Reported
Leak Detection: None
Contact Name: W.H. TETER
Total Tanks: 2
Facility Type: 2
9 ALL STAR CLEANERS
SE 13771 NEWPORT AVE STE 4
1/8-1/4 TUSTiN, CA 92680
Higher
UST
UO01577890
N/A
Container Num: SOO
Year Installed: 1961
Tank Constrctn: X centimeters
Telephone: (714) 730.7515
Region: Not reported
Other Type: ADMIN. CENTER
Container Num: 301
Year Installed: Not reported
Tank .Constrctn: Not reported
Telephone: (714) 730-7515
Region: Not reported
Other Type: ADMIN. CENTER
RCRIS-SOG 1000593318
FINDS CAD982439374
TC217084.1s Page 11
Map 10
Direction
Distance
Elevation
'0
NW
'/8-'/4
Higher
'c"
North
'/8-'/4
Higher
C'2
North
'/8-'/4
Higher
Site
ALL STAR CLEANERS (Con1Inued)
ACAIS:
Ownec
DOUG UNG LEE
(7'4) 544.3025
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(714) 544.3825
09/16/92
Contect:
Record Date:
Classification: Small Quanti1y Generator
Used 011 Recyc: No
Vlolmlon Status: No violations found
ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT & CONSTRUC
195 S CST #250
TUSTIN, CA 82680
RCRIS:
Owner:
CHARLES CREGAN
(714) 555.1212
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(714) 779-8002
07/27/94
Hazardous Waõ!e Transporter
Contact:
Record Date:
Clessmeatien:
Used 011 Recyc: Ne
Vlolmion Stmus: Ne violations found
DAVIDSON SERVICE
224 E FIRST ST
SANTA ANA, CA 92701
RCRIS:
Owner:
SECURITY AUTO REPAIR LTD CORD
(714) 834.1725
JESUS SALCE
(714) 834.1725
09/26/96
Contact
Record Date:
Classification: Small Quantity Generator
Used OIi Recyc: No
Violation Status: No violations found
TUSTIN PLAZA AUTO WASH
240 E 1ST ST
TUSTIN, CA
EDR 10 Number
Database{s) EPA ID Number
-
1000593318
RCRIS-SaG 1000261677
FINDS CA098247951'
RCRIS-SaG 1000595845
FINDS CA0983598004
UST
UO0314B397
N/A
TC217084.1S Page 12
Map ID
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevaflon Site Datebase(a) EPA ID Number
TUSTIN PLAZA AUTO WASH (Conflnued) UO03148397
UST Orange County:
Region: ORANGE
D13 STEVEN L KELSO UST UO01577914
NNW 171 E. FIRST ST. N/A
1/8-1/4 TUSTIN, CA 92680
Higher
State UST:
Facility 10: 39359
Tank Num: I Container Num: I
Tank Capacity: 12000 Year Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: UNLEADED ""nk Constrctn: Not reported
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Name: Not reported Telephone: (714) 544.2923
Total Tanks: 4 Region: Not reported
Fecility Type: I Other Type: Not reported
Fecility ID: 39359
Tenk Num: 2 Conteiner Num: 2
Tenk Cepec~y: 10000 Yeer Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: REGULAR Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Neme: Not reported Teiephone: (714) 544.2923
Total Tenks: 4 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: I Other Type: Not reported
Facility 10: 39359
Tank Num: 3 Container Num: 3
Tenk Capacity: 6000 Year installed: Not reported
Tank Uaed for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: PREMIUM Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Leek Detection: Stock Inventor
Contect Neme: Not reported Telephcne: (7141544.2923
Total Tenks: 4 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
Fecility ID: 39359
Tank Num: 4 Container Num: 4
Tank Capacity: 280 Year Installed: Not reported
Tank Uaed for: WASTE
Type of Fuel: WASTE OIL Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Comact Name: Not reported Telephone: (714) 544.2923
Total Tenks: 4 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: I Other Type: Not reported
14 TIPTOP CLEANERS RCRIS-saG 1000596787
ESE 13662 NEWPORT AVE J FINDS CAD983607672
1/8-1/4 TUSTIN, CA 92680
Higher
TC217084.1S Page 13
Map ID
Direction
DI5tance
Elevation
Site
EDR ID Number
~ EPA ID Number
TIP TOP CLEANERS (Continued)
tOO0596787
RCRIS:
Owne" TIP TOP CLEANERS
(714) 838.0408
Contact DAVEN PATEL
(714) 839.3157
Record Date: 04/04/97
Classification: Small Quantity Generator
Used 011 Recyc: No
Violation Status: No violations found
15 EDGAR E. PANKEY
Wast 320 W. MAIN
1/8-1/4 TUSTIN. CA 92680
Higher
State UST:
FaciIItyID: 57444
Tank Num: 1
Tank Capacity: 500
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: UNLEADED
Leak Detection: Visual. Stock Inventor
Contact Name: Not reported
Total Tanka: 2
Facility Type: Not reported
Facility ID: 57444
Tank Num: 2
Tank Capacity: 500
Tank Used tor: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: REGULAR
Leak Detection: Visual. Stock Inventor
Contact Name: Not reported
Total Tanks: 2
Facility Type: Not reported
18 NEWPORT 30 MIN FOTO
SSE 13642 NEWPORT AVE
1/8-1/4 TUSTIN, CA 92680
Higher
RCRIS:
Owne" BEHROZATTAR
(714) 458.6686
Contact: BRUCE ATTAR
(714) 669.1931
Record Date: 04/10/92
Classification: Small Quantity Generator
UST
UO01577895
N/A
Container Num: I
Year Installed: Not reported
Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Telephone: (714)544-1224
Region: Not reported
Other Type: FARM
Container Num: 2
Year Installed: Not reported
Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Telephone: (714) 544-1224
Region: Not reported
Other Type: FARM
RCRI5-SQG 1000686361
FINDS CAD983636341
HAZNET
TC217084.1s Page 14
Map 10
Direction
Distance
ElevaUon
E17
NNW
1(8-1/4
Higher
18
ESE
1/8-1/4
Higher
D19
NNW
1/8-1/4
Higher
E20
NNW
1/8-1/4
Higher
SI1e
NEWPORT 3D MIN FOTO (Continued)
Used 011 Recyc: No
Violation Status: No vlola1ions found
Database(s)
BIG 0 TIRES
131 E FIRST ST
TUSTIN, CA 92680
RCRIS:
Owne~
SECURITY CAL INC
(415) 555.1212
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(714) 544.9431
01/04/93
Contact:
Aecord Date:
ClasslficaUon: Small Quantl1y Generator
Used 011 Recyc: No
Violation Status: No violations found
EDR 10 Number
EPA 10 Number
1000686361
ACRIS-SQG 1000125313
FINDS CAD981667884
NEWPORT 3D MIN FOTO
13842 NEWPORT AVE
TUSTIN, CA 92680
HAZNET
H& I MOBIL
171 E 1 ST ST
TUSTIN, CA
UST Orange County:
Region: ORANGE
UST
ECONO LUBE N TUNE #7
155 W 1ST ST
TUSTIN, CA 92660
RCAIS:
Owne~
RICK FERNANDEZ
(714) 731.8990
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(714) 731.2656
02/28/96
Contact
Record Date:
Classification: Small Quantl1y Generator
RCAIS-SQG
FINDS
UST
Ca. FID
HAZNET
5100940713
N/A
UO03147798
N/A
1000317945
CAD103118477
TC217084.1S Page 15
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation
E21
NNW
1/8-1/4
Higher
22
NNW
1/8-1/4
Higher
F23
East
1/8-1/4
Higher
F24
East
1/8-1/4
Higher
Site
EDR ID Number
~ EPA ID Number
ECONO LUBE N TUNE #7 (Continued)
Used 011 Recyc:. No
Violation Status: No violations found
FID:
Facility 10:
Reg By:
Cortese Code:
Ststus:
MeliTo:
Not reported
30008889 Regulate 10:
ActIve Underground Storage Tank location
Not reported SIC Code:
ActIve Facility Tel:
Not reported
ATTN: JOHN MC CAW 15 ST
TUSTIN, CA 92880
Contact: Not reported
DUNs No: Not reported
Creation: 10/22/83
EPA 10: Not reported
Comments: Not reported
UST Orange County:
Region: ORANGE
Not reported
(714) 552-1848
Not reported
Not reported
00/00/00
Contact Tel:
NPOES No:
-Modified:
ECONO LUBE N TUNE #7
155 W 1ST ST
TUSTIN, CA 92680
HAZNET
1000317846
5100934481
NfA
JRS ROLLS ROYCE
1111W1STST
SANTA ANA, CA 82703
RCRIS-SOG 1000130219
FINDS CAD881976988
RCRIS:
Owner:
JUNIOR SHAVER
(415) 555.1212
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(714) 953.0896
05124/85
Contact:
Record Oate:
Classification: Small Quantity Generator
Used 011 Recyc: No
Violation Status: No violations found
TUSTIN AUTO WASH
535 E MAIN 5T
TUSTIN, CA
UST
UST Orange County:
Region: ORANGE
TUSTIN AUTO WASH
535 E MAIN 5T
TUSTIN, CA 92580
Ca. FID
UO03148391
N/A
UO01743139
NIA
TC217084.1s Page 16
MaplD
Dlractlon
Distance
Elevation
F25
ESE
1/401/2
Higher
F26
ESE
1/401/2
Higher
27
NW
1/401/2
Higher
Site
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA iD Number
-
TUSTIN AUTO WASH (Continued)
FID:
FacIlItyID:
Reg By:
Cortese Code:
Status:
Mall To:
Comact.
DUNs No:
Creation:
EPAID:
Comments:
30003472 Regulate ID:
ActIve Underground Storage Tank Location
Not reported SIC Code:
Active Faciliry Tel:
Not reported
535 E MAIN ST
TUSTIN. CA 92680
Not reported
Not reported
10/22/93
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
(714) 838.3134
Contact Tel:
NP"DES No:
Modified:
Not reported
Not reported
DO/OO/OO
EDS ARCO STATION
13662 NEWPORT AVE
TUSTIN, CA 92680
LUST Region OR:
Employee No:
FacIlItyID:
Case Type:
Status:
Funding:
Clremles!:
Lead Refee
LUST
95
89UT100
Soli only
Determining sire status and notify sta1e board
Federal Funds
80068190 GASOUNE
Local
Clean Date:
04.13.90
LOCAL
Lead Agency:
LUST
ARCO SERVICE STATION #3132
13662 NEWPORT AVENUE
TUSTIN, CA
State LUST:
Caee Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char:
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID:
Clremlesl:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Cross Street:
Qty Lesked:
BRYAN
Not reported
083001279T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Soli only
Signed off. remedial action completed or deemed unnecessary
4//92/11/2 Confirm Leak: III
II/ Prelim Aasess: 11189/08/0
11/ Remed Plan: III
III Monitoring: III
0//90/05/3 Release Date: 06/16/1989
Cross Street:
BRYAN
083DO1279T
Gasoline
Spßl
Signed off. remedial action completed or deemed unnecassary
Local Agency
LUST
ARCO SERVICE STATION #0206
302 01ST STREET, WEST
SANTA ANA, CA
UO01743139
5102429125
NIA
5102424414
N/A
5102424402
N/A
TC217084.1s Page 17
Map ID
Direction
Dlstanc8
Elevation
G28.
Sou1h
1/4-1/2
Higher
G29
SOu1h
1/4-1/2
Higher
Site
EDR ID Number
~ EPA ID Number
ARCO SERVICE STATION #0206 (Continued)
State LUST:
Case Numbec
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char.
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Cross Straet:
Qty Leaked:
BROADWAY
Not reported
083OO1157T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Soli only
Signed off, remedial action completed or deemed unnecessary
31/92111/2 Confirm Leak: III
/II P1:ellm Aasesa: III
/II Ramed Plan: /II
/II Mon~ortng: III
2/189/02/2 Releaae Date: 02/06/1989
<:ross Street:
BROADWAY
083001157T
Gasoline
Spill
Signed ofi. remedial action completed or deemed unnecessary
Local Agency
Corteae
SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL COMPANY
EL CAMINO REAL (1011)
TUSTIN, CA 92680
CORTESE:
Facility ID: 30.000723
Data Source: LTNKA
5102424402
5101300113
N/A
SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO
1011 EL CAMINO REAL
TUSTIN, CA 92680
FINDS 1000409090
RCRI5-LQG CAD981420680
HAZNET
LUST
RCRIS:
Owner:
Contact:
Record Date:
CHEVRON CORP
(4151555-1212
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(7141544.7140
06/24/87
Classification: Large Quantity Generator. Small Quantity Generator
Used Oil Recyc: No
Violation Statua: No violations found
TC217084.1s Page 18
Map 10
Direction
Dlstanca
Elevation
H30
NW
114-1/2
Higher
H31
NW
1/4-1/2
Higher
Site
Database(s)
SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO (Contlnuad)
Stata LUST:
Caae Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Abate Method:
Review Date:
Wor1<plan:
Pollution Char:
Remed Action:
Clo.e Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility 10:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Abate Method:
LUST Region OR:
Employee No:
FacilItyID:
Ca.e Type:
Status:
Funding:
Chemical:
Lead Refer:
Employee No:
FacilItyID:
Case Type:
Status:
Funding:
Chemical:
Lead Refee
Cross Street:
Oty Leaked:
NEWPORT
Not reported
083000718T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Aquifer affected
Post remedial action monitoring In progress
Excavate and Dispose' remove contaminated soli and dispose In approved
site, Remove Free Product. remove floating product from water table,
Vapor Extraction, Pump and Trea, Ground Water. generally employed to
remove dissolved contaminants
11/97/03/2
III
8//87/12/1
1/189/01/0
III
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Asaess:
.fIemed Plan:
Monnoling:
Release Data:
Cross Street
//I
II/
11188/1210
//I
11123/1987
NEWPORT
083000716T
Gasoline
A
Post remedial action monltoling In progress
Local Agency
Excavate and Dispose. remove contaminated soil and dispose in approved
site, Remove Free Product. remove lIoatlng product from watertOOle,
Vapor Extraction, Pump and Treat Ground Water. generslly employed to
remove dissolved contaminants
237
87lFT234
Ground water
Remedial action (cleanup) In progress
Federal Funds
12034. DIESEL
Local
237
87lFT234
Ground water
Remedial action (cleanup) In progress
Federal Funds
8006619. GASOUNE
Local
Clean Date:
Leed Agency:
Cleen Date:
Lead Agency:
Nct reported
LOCAL
Not reported
LOCAL
ARCO SERVICE STATION #206
01ST ST W. (302)
SANTA ANA, CA 92701
CORTESE:
FacUlty 10: 30-021084
Data Source: LTNKA
Corteae
ARCO FAC # 206
302 WEST FIRST STREET
SANTA ANA, CA 90603
Notify 65
EDR 10 Number
EPA 10 Number
1000409090
S1013O0069
N/A
S100178930
N/A
TC217084.1S Page 19
Map 10
Direction
Distance
Elevation
132
South
1/4-1/2
Higher
133
South
1/4-1/2
Hlghar
J34
South
1/4-1/2
Higher
5110
EDR 10 Number
~ EPA 10 Number
ARCO FAC # 206 (Continued)
NOTIFY 65:
Date Reported:
Board FIle Number:
Facility Type:
Discharge Data:
Incldan! Dascriptlon:
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
90603
Staff In~lals: Not reported
UNOCAL
14011 NEWPORT AVE
TUSTIN, CA 926eO
LUST Region OR:
Employee No:
Facility 10:
Case Type:
Status:
Funding:
Chemical:
Lead Aafer:
LUST
237
89UT219
Ground water
Post remedial action monitoring In pr09ress
Federal Funds
BO0661e. GASOUNE
Local
Clean Date:
06.01.93
LOCAL
Lead Agency:
LUST
UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #4B53
14011 NEWPORT AVENUE
TUSTIN, CA
State LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Boerd:
Chemical:
Laad Agency:
Case Type:
StalUs:
Abate Method:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char:
Aemed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility 10:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Laad Agency:
Abeta Method:
Cross Street.
Qty Laeked:
Not reported
Not reported
083001385T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Soli only
Signed off, remedial action completed or deemed unnecessary
Excavate end Dispose. remove contamlna1ed soli and dispose In approved
site, Excavelo and Treat. remove contaminated aolland treat (Includes
spreading or land farming)
3//93/06/2
III
11/
III
11/93/06/0
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Aasess:
Remed Plan:
Mon~oring:
Relea.e Date:
III
61/92/05/0
III
III
01/19/1geO
Cross Street.
Not reported
0830013B5T
Gasoline
Spill
Signed off, remedial action completed or deemed unnecessary
Local Agency
Excavate and Dispose. remove contamlnalod soli and dlspoae In approved
alte, Excavate and Treat - remove contaminated soli an<! treat (Includes
spreading or land farming)
TEXACO SEAVICE STATION
NEWPORT AVE (14041)
TUSTIN, CA 926BO
Cortese
LUST
S10017e930
S102439760
NIA
S102440300
N/A
S101300118
N/A
TC217084.1S Page 20
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation
J35
South
1/4.112
Higher
K36
ENE
1/4-112
Higher
Site
TEXACO SERVICE STATION (Con1Inued)
State LUST:
Case Number:
Aeg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Cass Type:
Status:
Abate Method:
Aevlew Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char:
Aemad Action:
Close Date:
LUST Aegion 8:
Facility ID:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Stetus:
Lead Agency:
Abate Method:
COATESE:
Facility ID: 30.000891
Cross Street:
Oty Leaked:
083001134T
Santa Ana Aeglon
Aegular Gasoline
Local Agency
Aquifer affected
Post remedial action monitoring In progress
Vapor Extraction
9//96/11/1
III
6//89/0210
III
11/
Confirm Leak:
Prèllm Assess:
Aemed Plan:
Monffortng:
Aelease Date:
Cross Street:
083001134T
Regular Gasoline
A
Post remedial action monhorlng In progress
Local Agency
Vapor Extraction
Data Source: LTNKA
HWY5
Not reported
11/
III
7//91/08/2
3//96/09/2
01/25/1988
HWY5
LUST
TEXACO USA
14041 NEWPORT AVE
TUSTIN. CA 92680
LUST Ae91on OA:
Employee Nc:
FacilItyID:
Case Type:
Status:
Funding:
Chemical:
Lead Aefer:
237
89UT10
Ground water
AemedlallnvestJgation Phase
Federal Funds
12032. REGULAA GASOLINE
Local
Clean Date:
Lead Agency:
Not reported
LOCAL
UNOCAL
13348 NEWPORT AVE
TUSTIN, CA 92680
LUST Aeglon OR:
Employee No:
FacilItyID:
Case Type:
Status:
Funding:
Chemical:
Leed Refer:
237
91UT131
Ground water
Aemedlallnvestlgatlon Phase
Federel Funds
8006619. GASOLINE
Local
Clean Date:
Lead Agency:
LUST
Not reported
LOCAL
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
5101300118
5102438823
NfA
S102439757
NfA
TC217084.1s Page 21
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation
K37
ENE
1/4-1/2
Higher
~8
SSW
1/2-1
Same
Site
EDR 10 Number
Database(a) EPA 10 Number
UNOCAL (Continued)
Employee No:
Facility 10:
Case Type:
Status:
Funding:
Chemical:
Lead Refer:
237
91UT131
Ground water
RemedlallnvestlgaUon Phase
Federal Funds
127184. PERCHLORETHYLENE
Locel
Clean Date:
Lead Agency:
Not reported
LOCAL
UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #5386
NEWPORT AVE (13348)
TUSTIN, CA 92680
StaIB LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Abate Method:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char:
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
F&:lIItyID:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Abste Me1hod:
083OO1807T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Soli only
Remedial action (cleanup) In progress
Excavate and Dispose. remove contaminated soli and dlspoee In approved
site
31/94/11/2
41/91/02/1
91/94/04/1
II/
III
Cross Street.
Qty Leaked:
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monttorlng:
Release Date:
Cross Street:
Cortesa
LUST
1ST
Not reported
III
11/91/05/0
8//94/01/1
11/
03/14/1991
1ST
083001807T
Gasoline
Spill
Remedial action (cleanup) in progress
Local Agency
Excavate and Dispose' remove contaminalBd soli and dispose In approved
site
CORTESE:
F&:IIItyID: 30.001140
Data Source: LTNKA
CIRCLE K #7851 (THRIFTY #75)
NEWPORT AVE (14121)
TUSTIN, CA 92660
State LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char:
Remed ActJon:
Close Date:
08300D640T
Santa Ana Aeglon
Gasoline
Local Agency
Aquifer affected
Pollution characterization
11/88/09/0
1/1
61167/08/0
1/1
1/1
Cross Street.
Qty Leaked:
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monttoring:
Aelease Date:
Cortege
LUST
MITCHELL
Not reported
11/
1/1
1/1
II/
07/25/1988
S102439757
S101300117
N/A
S101300119
N/A
TC217084.1s Page 22
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation
39
SSW
1(2-1
Same
40
SSW
1/2-1
Same
41
SE
1(2-1
Higher
Site
Database(s)
CIRCLE K #7851 (THRIFTY #75) (Conllnued)
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
CORTESE:
Facility ID: 30.000675
083000640T
Gasoline
A
Pollution characterization
Local Agency
Cross Street:
MITCHELL
Data Source: LTNKA
Cortese
CHEVRON SERVICE STATION #2079
NEWPORT AVE (14122)
TUSTIN, CA 92680
CORTESE:
Fscility ID: 30-000659
Data Source: LTNKA
ARCO SERVICE STATION #1865
NEWPORT AVE (14244)
TUSTIN, CA 92680
Cortese
LUST
State LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Aba1e Me1hod:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Chac
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Fac!IItyID:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Abate Me1hod:
Cross Street:
Oty Leaked:
MITCHELL
1200
083OO0459T
Santa Ana Region
Unleaded Gasoline
Local Agency
Aquifer affectad
Remedial action (cleanup) In progress
Pump and Treat Ground Water. generally employed 10 remove dissolved
contaminants. Remove Free Product. remove floating product from water
table, Vapor Extraction
21194/12/1
III
III
41187/07/2
11/
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monhoring:
Release Date:
11/
III
11/
1/1
10/30/1985
Cross Street:
MITCHELL
083oo0459T
Unleaded Gasoline
A
Remedial action (cleanup) In progress
Local Agency
Pump and Traat Ground Water. generally employed to ramove dissolved
contaminants, Remove Free Product. remove floating product from water
table, Vapor Extraction
CORTESE:
Facility ID: 30-000602
Date Source: LTNKA
ARCO SERVICE STATION #1077
RED HILL AVE (13742)
TUSTIN, CA 92880
Cortese
LUST
EDR ID Number
EPA ID Number
S101300119
S100231181
NIA
5101300120
N/A
5101300121
NfA
TC217084.1s Page 23
Map 10
Dlractlon
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
ARCO SERVICE STATION #1077 (Contlnuad) 5101300121
State LUST:
Case Number: 083001980T Cross Street SAN JUAN
Reg Soard: Santa Ans Raglon Qty Lesked: Not reported
Chemical: Gasoline
Lesd Agency: Locs! Agency
Case Type: Aquifer affected
SIatus: Preliminary s~e assessment workplan submitted
Abate Method: Vapor Extraction. AS
Revlaw Date: 5//95/09/1 confirm Leak: /If
Workplan: 9//91/12/1 Prelim Assess: /If
Pollution Char: 1/1 Remed Plan: /If
Remed Action: 1/1 Mon~oring: /If
Close Date: III Release Date: 11/13/1991
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID: 0B3001980T Cross Street SAN JUAN
Chemical: Gasoline
Case Type: A
Status: Preliminary a~e assessment workplan submitted
Lead Agency: Local Agancy
Abste Mathod: Vapor Extraction, AS
CORTESE:
Facility ID: 30.001230 D.ats Source: LTNKA
L42 MOBIL SERVICE STATION #18-H7Q Cortase S10t300122
SE RED HILL AVE (13872) LUST NIA
1/2.1 TUSTIN. CA 92680
Same
State LUST:
Case Numbar: 0B3000982T Cross Street: ELCAMINO
Reg Soard: Ssnta Ana Region Qty Leaked: Not repotted
Chamlcal: Gasollna
Lead Agency: Local Agency
Case Type: Aquifer affected
Status: Remedlel action (cleanup) In progress
Review Date: 7//94/12/0 Confirm Leak: /If
Workplan: 1/1 Prelim Assess: /If
Pollution Char: 0//89/01/3 Remad Plan: 4//94/1111
Ramed Action: /1/ Mon~oring: /If
Closa Date: 1/1 Release Date: 08/09/1988
LUST Region 8:
Facility 10: 0B3oo0982T Cross Street ELCAMINO
Chemical: Gasoline
Case Type: A
SIatus: Remedlel action (cleanup) In progress
Lead Agency: Locs! Agency
CORTESE:
Facility ID: 30.000829 Data Source: LTNKA
L43 SHELL SERVICE STATION Cortese 5100231187
SE RED HILL AVE (13891) N/A
1/2-1 TUSTIN, CA 92680
Bame
TC217084.1S Page 24
Map 10
Direction
Distance
Elevation
44
SE
1/2-1
Same
45
WNW
1/2-1
Higher
46
ENE
1/2-1
Higher
47
NE
1/2-1
Higher
SIIe
Database(s)
-
SHEl.l SERVICE STATION (Continued)
CORTESE:
Facility 10: 30-000517
Data Source: LTNKA
Cortes.
CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 113742
RED HIl.l AVE (13922)
TUSTIN, CA 92680
CORTESE:
Facility 10: 30-000476
Data Source: LTNKA
ISACC, INC. (VILLAGE PNT & BDY)
01ST ST W. (1734)
SANTA ANA, CA 82703
Cartee.
LUST
State LUST:
Case Numbec
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Abate Method:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char.
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility 10:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Abale Method:
Cross S1reet
Oty Leaked:
RAITT/WALNUT
Not reported
0B3001166T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Regional Board
Aquifer affected
Remediation plan devaloped
Pump and Treat Ground Water - generally employed to remove dissolved
contamlnams. Vapor extraction
3//97/05/1
11/
8//89/02/2
11/
11/
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monllorlng:
Release Date:
II/
11/
8/189/06/2
11/
01130/1989
Cross Street:
RAITT/WALNUT
083001166T
Gssollne
A
Remediation plan developed
Regional Board
Pump and Traat Ground Water. generally employed to remove dissolved
contaminants, Vapor extraction
CORTESE:
Facility 10: 30.021110
Date Source: LTNKA
Cortese
CHEVRON SERVICE STATION 118149
NEWPORT AVE (13052)
TUSTIN, CA
CORTESE:
Facility 10: 30.001361
Data Source: LTNKA
Cortese
GATRON INDUSTRIES
NEWPORT AVE (1301)
TUSTIN, CA
\ '
EDR ID Number
EPA ID Number
S100231187
5101300123
N/A
5101300064
N/A
5101307874
N/A
S101307873
N/A
TC217084.1s psge 25
MaplD
Diractlon
Distance
Eleva1ion
M48
SSE
1{2-1
Same
M49
SSE
112-1
Same
5118
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
S101307873
GATRON INDUSTRIES (Continued)
CORTESE:
Faclllty!D: 30.001191
Data Source: LTNKA
UNOCAL SERVICE STATIDN #5678
RED HILL AVE (14081)
TUSTIN, CA 92680
State LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char:
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
0B3000721T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Aquller affected
Pollution characterization
5/19510911
01/9210811
O/l94109{2
III
/II
08300072tT
Gasoline
A
Pollution charactelizatlon
Local Agency
CORTESE:
Facility 10: 30-000726
Data Source: LTNKA
Corte.e S101300124
LUST N/A
Cross Street: NISSON
Qty Leaked: Not reported
Confirm Leak: III
Prelim Assess: 31193112f1
Remed Plan: III
Monkortng: III
Releaee Date: 0410211993
Cross Street NISSON
EXXON SERVICE STATION #0755
RED HILL AVE (14082)
TUSTIN, CA 92680
Stete LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Abate Method:
Review Date:
Workþlan:
Pollution Char:
Remad ActIon:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility 10:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Abs18 Method:
083000709T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agancy
Aquifer affected
Pollution charactertzaflon
AS, Vapor Extraction
6/19710210
III
8/18711211
III
III
083000709T
Gasoline
A
Pollution charactertzaflon
Local Agency
AS. Vapor Extraction
Cortese
LUST
S101300125
NIA
Cross Street:
Qty Leaked:
NISSON
Not reported
Confirm Laak:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monkortng:
Release Deje;
21187/1111
III
III
III
11{2011987
Cross Street:
NISSON
TC217084.1s Page 26
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation
N50
WNW
112.1
Higher
N51
WNW
112-1
Higher
52
SSE
1/2.1
Lower
Site
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
EXXON SERVICE STATION #0755 (Continued)
CORTESE:
Facllny ID: 30.000722
Data Source: LTNKA
PHIL'S CÙSTOM PLATING
1214 WEST 1ST STREET
SANTA ANA, CA 92701
Ca. BEP
ANAHEIM STATIONS
01sr ST W. (2002)
SANTA ANA, CA 92705
State LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
'Case Type:
Status:
Abate Methbd:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Chac
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID:
Chemical:
Caae Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Abate Method:
Corteae
LUST
Cross Street:
Qty Leaked:
TOWNSEND
Not reported
083001306T
Santa Ana Region
Gasoline
Regional Board
Aquifer affected
Signed off, ramedlal action completed or deemed unnecessary
Excavate and Dispose. remove contaminated 5011 and dispose In approved
sne, Vapor extraction
9//96/10/0
/II
0//94/04/2
1//92/05/2
9//96/10/0
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monnortng:
Release Date:
/II
71/89/07/1
/II
/1/
07/14/1989
Cross Street
TOWNSEND
083001306T
Gasoline
A
Signed on, remedial actjon completed or deemed unnecessary
Regional Board
Excavata and Dispose. remove contaminated 5011 and dispose In approved
sne, Vapor extraction
CORTESE:
Facility ID: 30.021100
Data Source: LTNKA
ARCO BERVICE STATION #3045
RED HILL AVE (14231)
TUSTIN, CA
Cortese
LUST
S101300125
B100833530
N/A
S101300065
N/A
5101307875
N/A
TC217084.1S Page 27
Map 10
Direction
Distance
Elevation
53
NW
112-1
Higher
54
SW
1/2-1
Same
55
SW
1/2-1
Same
She
EDR ID Number
~ EPA 10 Number
ARCO SERVICE STATION #3045 (Continued)
State LUST:
Case Numbec
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Poliutlon Chac
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Faclilty 10:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
CORTESE: .
Faclilty 10: 30.000606
083000487T
Sante Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Aquifer affected
Preliminary she assessment underway
51/95/09/1
III
III
II/
III
083000487T
Gasoline
A
Prelimlnery site assessment underway
Locel Agency
Data Source: L TNKA
Cross Street:
Qty Leaked:
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Assess:
Rerned Plan:
Monhorlng:
Release Dete:
~ross S1reet:
Not reported
Not reported
III
01190/01/3
III
III
01/10/1990
Not reported
Cortese
CHILDRENS HOSPITAL
TUSTIN AVE N. (1001)
SANTA ANA, CA 92705
CORTESE:
Facility 10: 30.000334
Data Source: LTNKA
EXXON SERVICE STATION #3573
MCFADDEN AVE (16951)
TUSTIN, CA
CORTESE:
Feclilty ID: 30.001301
Data Source: LTNKA
Corteee
UNOCAL SERVICE STATION #5224
MCFADDEN AVE E. (16801)
TUSTIN, CA 92680
State LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Aba1e Method:
Review Date:
Workplan:
poliutlon Chac
Remed Action:
Close Date:
083001565T
Senta Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Aquifer affected
Remedial action (cleanup) In progress
Vapor Extraction
3//94/1110
III
71/94/10/1
71/92{11/1
III
Cross S1reet
Qty Leaked:
Confirm Lesk:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monhorlng:
Release Da1e:
Cortese
LUST
TUSTIN VILL.
Not reported
81/90/0611
3119010710
III
III
06114/1990
S101307875
S101300051
NIA
5101307871
NIA
5101300114
NIA
TC217084.1s Page 28
MaplD
Direction
Distance
Elevation
Site
UNDCAL SERVICE STATION #5224 (Continued)
LUST Region 8:
FacilItyID:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Abate Method:
083001565T
Gasoline
A
Remedial action (cleanup) in progress
Local Agency
Vapor Extraction
Crass Street
TUSTIN VILL
CORTESE:
Facility ID: 30-001047
Data Source: LTNKA
Database(s)
EDR ID Numbe'
EPA ID Numbe,
5101300114
TC217084.1s Page 29
01
'SUM
Cily EDRID Site Name
--
ORANGE COUNTY S102361501 UNKNOWN #1
l1JSTIN S102338758 HARRIS HISTOLOGY SERVICES
l1JSTIN S1oo27oo76 l1JSTIN PARGa. 0
l1JSTIN S102433831 MOBIL SERVICE STATION ,18.LW8
l1JSTIN S102361569 MOFFET TI1ENCHESflUSTIN MCAS LF
l1JSTIN 1000278363 WORLD OIL CO
l1JSTIN U001577879 98149
l1JSTIN U001577889 DBA WORLD OIL MARKETING CO.'4
l1JSTIN U001577899 GEORGEW. KRIDNER UNION 76
l1JSTIN S102429164 EL TORD PIPELINE
l1JSTIN S102531548 MCAS l1JSTIN HELICOPTER BASE
She Address
NWCORNEROFSANTIAGOBLVD / HEWESS"
420 a. CAMINO REAL' 4
EDINGER AVE. / HARVARD AVE. NW QUAD.
17241 IRVINE BOULEVARD
JAMBOREE/EDINGER
13662 NEWPORT BLVD
13052 NEWPORT BLVD
13682 NEWPORT BLVD.
13398 NEWPORT BLVD
1301 NEWPORT AVENUE
TANK '222C
ZIp
Detebase(s}
Fecl61y 10
SWIS
92680 HAmET
92880 Cal.Shes
LUST
SWIS
92680 ANDS. RCRIS.LQG
92880 UST
92880 UST
92880 UST
LUST
LUST
3Q-CR.0042
30970007
083002544T
3û-CR-C128
00000O63O73
OOOODD13719
00000O5O253
0830019O9T
083û02965T
TC2170B4.1s Page 30
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Sne
UNKNOWN 111
NW CORNER OF SANTIAGO BLVD I HEWES ST
ORANGE COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator.
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Cioslng Comment
Date Ciosed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
3D-CR-0042
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Closed
To Be Determined
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
HARRIS HISTOLOGY SERVICES
420 EL CAMINO REAL 114
TUSTIN, CA 92680
TUSTIN PARCEL D
EDINGER AVE. / HARVARD AVE. NW QUAD.
TUSTIN, CA 92680
CAL-SITES:
Facility ID 30970007
Facility Type: N/A
Status Date: 01121/92
Status: NO FURTHER ACTiON FOR DTSC
Lead: NIA
Activity; SITE SCREENiNG
Activity Status: NO FURTHER ACTION FOR DTSC
Activity: PRELIMINARY ENDANGERMENT ASSESSMENT
Activity Status: NO FURTHER ACTION FOR DTSC
Activity: SITE SCREENING
Activity Status: NO FURTHER ACTION FOR DTSC
Background: Not raported
Altematlve Name: ARCEL D .NEW FAMILY HOUSINGffUSTIN USMC
Aiternative Addr: NORTH OF EDINGER AVENUE. WEST OF HARVARD
TUSTIN. CA
Alternative Name: USTIN PARCEL D
Alternative Addr. NORTH OF EDINGER AVENUE. WEST OF HARVARD
TUSTIN, CA
Comment Date: 02106/1991
Comment: Navy raquested DTSC oversight of PEA activities for Housing
project iocated north of Edinger Avenue and west of Harvard
Avenue in the City of Tus1ln. Land was olrtslde Tustin MCAS
so Calslar #400299 was obtained.
Navy transmitted $23,694 to cover PEA fees for 3 reports to
be submitted after field deta Is collected and processed.
DTSC sent comments on review of PEA report received 11/21/91
requasting rasponse within 30 days for Departmant concurrane
Databese(s)
SWIS
HAZNET
Cal-Sltes
EDR 10 Number
EPA ID Number
S102361501
N/A
S102338758
N/A
S100270076
NIA
TC217064.15 Pege 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Database(s)
TUSTIN PARCEL D (Continued)
with Navy's NFA recommendation.
PEA Report submitted 4/17/92 Was approved by DTSC. Depart-
ment concurs that NFA lor pesticide contamination is needed
at this site.
Detebase Valldetion Program confirms NFA for DTSC.
MOBIL SERVICE STATION #18-LWB
17241 IRVINE BOULEVARD
TUSTIN, CA
State LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Leed Agency:
Cese Type:
Status:
Abete Method:
Revlaw Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char:
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID:
Chemical:
Case Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Abate Method:
LUST
Cross Street
Oty Leaked:
Not rsported
Nol reported
083002544T
Senta Ana Region
Gasoline
Local Agency
Soli only
Signed off, remedial action completed or deemed unnecessary
Excavete and Dispose - remove contaminated soli BIld dispose In approved
site, Vepor Extraction
1//96/04/1
11/
21/95/04/1
1/195l1210
1//95104/0
Conllrm Leak:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monitoring:
Release Date:
III
III
3//95/0212
/11
05109/1994
Cross Street:
Not reported
083002544T
Gasoline
Spill
Signed off. remedial action completed or deemed unnecessary
Local Agency
Excavate and Dispose. remove contaminated soil BIld dispose In approved
site. Vapor Extraction
SWIS
MOFFET TRENCHESfTUSTIN MCAS LF
JAMBOREE/EDINGER
TUSTIN, CA
EDR ID Number
EPA ID Number
S'00270076
S102433831
NIA
5102361569
NIA
TC2170B4.1S Page 32
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Database(s)
-
MOFFET TRENCHEsrrUSTIN MCAS LF (Continued)
LF:
Facility 10:
Operatoe
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Oparator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Closing Comment
Date Closad:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
30-CR-0126
Not reported
Not reportad
Not reportad
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Closed
Pre-regulations
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
WORLD OIL CO
t3662 NEWPORT BLVD
TUSTIN, CA 92680
RCRIS:
Owner:
Contact:
Record Date:
WORDL OIL MARKETING CO #40
(415) 555.1212
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER
(213) 560-6901
10129165
EDR ID Number
EPA ID Number
S102361559
FINDS 1000278363
RCRIS-LOG CAD981160617
Classification: Large Quantity Generator, Smell Quantity Generator
Used 011 Recyc: No
Violation Status: No violations found
98149
13052 NEWPORT BLVD
TUSTIN, CA 92680
State UST:
Facility ID:
Tank Num:
Tank Capacity:
Tank Used for:
Type of Fuel:
Leak Detection:
Contact Name:
Total Tanks:
Facility Type:
63073
1
6000
PRODUCT
Not Reported
Stock Inventor
POWELL.B W
4
1
UST
Container Num: 1
Year Installed: Not reported
Tank Constrctn: 0000250 unknown
Telephone: (714) 730.5922
Region: Not reported
Other Type: Not reported
UO01577879
NlA
TC217084.1s Page 33
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Site Database(e) EPA 10 Number
98149 (Continued) UO01577879
Facility ID: 63073
Tank Num: 2 Contalnar Num: 2
Tank Capacity: 5000 Vear'lnstalled: Not reported
Tank Used foe PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: Not Reported Tank Constrctn: 0000250 unknown
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Name: POWELL,S W Telephona: (714) 730-5922
Total Tanks: 4 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
Faoility ID: 63073
Tank Num: 3 Container Num: 3
Tank Capacity: BOOO Vear Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: Not Reported Tank Constl'Øln: 0000250 unknown
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Name: POWELL,S W Telephone: (714) 730-5922
Total Tanks: 4 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
Facility ID: 63073
Tank Num: 4 Container Num: 4
Tank Capacity: 1000 Vear Installed: Not reported
Tank Used foe WASTE
Type of Fuel: Not Reported Tank Constrctn: 0000250 unknown
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Name: POWELL.S W Telephone: (714) 730-5922
Total Tanks: 4 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
DBA WORLD OIL MARKETING CO. #4 UST UO01577889
13662 NEWPORT BLVD. N/A
TUSTIN, CA 92680
State UST;
Facility ID: 13719
Tank Num: 1 Container Num: 4001
Tank Capacity: 12000 Veer Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: REGULAR Tank Constretn: Not reported
Leak Detection; Stock Inventor
Contaet Name: RON COLEMAN Telephone: (213) 560-BBOI
Totel Tanks: B Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
Facility ID: 13719
Tank Num: 2 Container Num: 4002
Tank Capacity: 10000 Vear Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: UNLEADED Tank Consfretn: Not reported
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Name: RON COLEMAN Talephone: (213) 5S0-BBOI
Total Tanks: B Region: Not ,sported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
TC2170B4.1s Page34
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDRID Number
Site Database(s) EPAID Number
-
DBA WORLD OIL MARKETING CO. #4 (Continued) UO01577889
Facility ID: 13719
Tank Num: 3 Contelner Num: 4003
Tenk Capacity: 10000 Vear Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: PREMIUM Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Leek Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Name: RON COLEMAN Telephone: (213) 580.8801
Total Tanks: 8 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
Facility ID: 13719
Tank Num: 4 Container Num: 4004
Tank Capacity: 10000 Veer Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: Not Reported Tank Constfctn: Not reported
Leak Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Neme: RON COLEMAN Telephone: (213) 560.8801
Total Tanks: 8 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
Facility ¡D: 13719
Tank Num: 5 Contelner Num: 4101
Tank Capeclty: 12000 Veer Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: REGULAR Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Leek Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Name: RON COLEMAN Telephone: (213) 560-8801
Total Tanks: 8 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 0111er Type: Not reported
Facility ID: 13719
Tank Num: 6 Container Num: 4102
Tank Capacity: 7500 Veer Instelled: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: REGULAR Tenk Constrctn: Not reported
Leek Detection: Stock Inventor
Contect Name: RON COLEMAN Telephone: (213) 560.8801
Total Tenks: 8 Region: Not reported
Facility Type: 1 Other Type: Not reported
Facility ID: 13719
Tank Num: 7 Container Num: 4103
Tank Capacity: 12000 Year Installed: Not reported
Tank Used for: PRODUCT
Type of Fuel: UNLEADED Tank Constrctn: Not reported
leek Detection: Stock Inventor
Contact Neme: RON COLEMAN Telephone: (213) 560.8801
Total Tanks: 8 Region: Not reported
Fecility Type: 1 0111er Type: Not reported
TC217084.1 s Pege 35
Site
DETAILED OAPHAN LISTING
EDA ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
UO01577889
Container Num: 4104
Veer Installed: Not reported
Tank Cons1rctn: Not reported
Telephone: (213) 560.8801
Aeglon: Not reported
O1herType: Not reported
UST UO01577899
N/A
Container Num: 1
Veer Installed: 1963
Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Telephone: (714) 544-0780
Region: Not reported
Other Type: Not reported
Container Num: 2
Year Installed: 1963
Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Telephone: (714) 544.0780
Aeglon: Not reported
O1her Type: Not reported
Container Num: 3
Year Installed: 1963
Tank Constrctn: Not reported
Telephone: (714) 544-0780
Aeglon: Not reported
Other Type: Not reported
LUST S102429164
N/A
DBA WORLD OIL MARKETING CO. #4 (Continued)
Facility ID:
Tank Num:
Tank Capacity:
Tank Used for.
Type of Fuel:
Leak Detection:
Contact Nama:
Total Tanks:
Facility Type:
13719
8
12000
PAOOUCT
Not Reported
Stock Inventor
RON COLEMAN
8
1
GEORGE W. KRIDNER UNION 76
13398 NEWPORT BLVD
TUSTIN, CA 92680
Stata UST:
FacilItyID:
Tank Num:
Tank Capacity:
Tank Used for:
Type of Fuel:
Leal< Detection:
Contact Name:
Total Tanks:
Facility Type:
Facility ID:
Tank Num:
Tank Capacity:
Tank Used for;
Type of Fuel:
Leak Datec1lon:
Contact Name:
Total Tanks:
Facility Type:
Facility ID:
Tank Num:
Tank Capaolty:
Tank Used for;
Type of Fuel:
Leak Detection:
Contact Name:
Total Tanks:
Facility Type:
50253
1
200
WASTE
WASTE OIL
None
DEALEA
3
1
50253
2
9980
PRODUCT
PREMIUM
Stock inventor
DEALER
3
1
50253
3
9980
PRODUCT
UNLEADED
Stock Inventor
DEALER
3
1
EL TORO PIPELINE
1301 NEWPORT AVENUE
TUSTIN, CA
TC217084.1s Page36
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Datebese(s)
-
EL TORO PIPELINE (Continued)
State LUST:
Ca.e Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Cess Type:
Status:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Cher:
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID:
Chemical:
Cese Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
083001909T
Santa Ana Region
Jet Fuel
Regional Board
AquUer affected
Pollution charactertzatlon
7/f76102/0
7//90/06/2
7//97/02/0
1//94/02/2
///
Cro.. Slreet:
Qty Leaked:
OLD IRVINE
Not reported
///
///
1//
///
06/01/1990
OLD IRVINE
MCAS TUSTIN HELICOPTER BASE
TANK #222C
TUSTIN, CA
State LUST:
Case Number:
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
ea.e Type:
Status:
Review Date:
Wor1<plan:
Pollution Char:
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 8:
Facility ID:
Chemical:
Ca.e Type:
Status:
Lead Agency:
Confirm Leak:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan: -
Monftortng:
Release Date:
083001909T
Jet Fuel
A
Pollution characterization
Regional Boerd
Cross Street:
083002965T
Santa Ana Region
Gesollne
Regional Board
Soli only
Leek being confirmed
4//97/0311
///
II/
11/
11/
Cross Street:
Oty Leaked:
Confirm Leek:
Prelim Assess:
Remed Plan:
Monftortng:
Release Date:
08300296ST
Gasoline
Spill
Leak being confirmed
Regional Board
Cross Street:
LUST
MOFFETI
Not reported
11/
11/
///
///
11/27/1996
MOFFETI
EDR ID Number
EPAID Number
5102429164
S102531548
NIA
TC217084.1s Page 37
Water Wells:
Well W~hln 1/2 . 1 Mile 01 Target Property (Northern Quadrant)
Water System Inform81lon:
Prime Station Code: 05S/09W.09K01 S
FRDS Number Numbe" 3010046003
District Number: 08
Water Type: Well/Groundwater
Source Let/Long: 334500.0 1 174900.0
Source Name: COLUMBUS TUSTIN
System Numbe" 3010046
System Name: CITY OF TUSTIN
Owner Type: Not RepMed
Organization That Operates System:
P.O. BOX 466
TUSTIN, CA 92680
Pop Served: 52100
Area Served: Not Reported
Semple Informetlon: . Only FIndings Above Detection Level Are LIsted
Sample Collected: 08/15/1989 Findings:
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 11/'4/'989
Chemical: COLOR
Semple Collected: 11/14/1989
Chemical: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
Sample Collected: 11/14/1989
Chemical: PH (LABORATORY)
Sample Collected: 11114/1989
Chemical: TOTAL ALKALINITY (AS CAC03)
Sample Collected: 1111411989
Chemlcel: BICARBONATE ALKALINITY
Semple Collected: 11/14/1989
Chemical: TOTAL HARDNESS (AS CAC03)
Sample Collected: 11/1411989
Chemical: CALCIUM
Semple Collected: 11/14/1989
Chemical: SODIUM
Semple Collected: 11/1411989
Chemical: POTASSIUM
Sample Collected: 11/14/1989
Chemical: CHLORIDE
Sample Collected: 11/14/1989 FIndings:
Chemicel: FLUORIDE (TEMPERATURE DEPENDENT)
Semple Collected: 11/1411989 Findings:
Chemical: ARSENIC
Sample Collected: 1 1/14/1989
Chemical: BARIUM
UserlD:
County:
S!a~on Type:
Well Status:
Precision:
Connections:
Findings:
Findings:
FIndings:
Findings:
Findings:
Findings:
Findings:
Findings:
FIndings:
FIndings:
Findings:
TEE
Orange
WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE
Active Untreated
1 Mile (One Minute)
TUSTIN
1.000 PC/L.
3.000 UNITS
750.000
7.700
180.000 MGIL
160.000 MGIL
272.000 MGIL
84.000 MG/L
59.000 MG/L
1.300 MG/L
76.000 MG/L
.180 MG/L
6.200 UG/L
140.000 UG/L
TC2170B4.1s PageA1
Sample Collected: 11114/1989 Findings: 190.000 UG/L
Chemical: IRON
Sample Collected: 11114/1989 FIndings: .030 UG/L
Chemical: FOAMING AGENTS (MBAS)
Sample Collected: 11114/1989 Findings: 494.000 MG/L
Chemical: TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
Sample Collected: 1111411989 Findings: 38.100 MGIL
Chemical: NITRATE (AS N03)
Sample Collected: 06/2011990 Findings: .800 PC/L
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 02/0311992 FIndings: 8.000 UNITS
Chemical: COLOR
Sample Collected: 02/0311992 Findings: 527.000
Chemical: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
Sam pie Collected: 02/03/1992 Flndinga: 7.900
Chemical: FIELD PH
Sample Collected: 02/0311992 Findings: 8.200
Chemical: PH (LABORATORY)
Sample Collected: 02/03/1992 FIndings: 138.000 MGIL
Chemical: TOTAL ALKALINiTY (AS CACO3)
Sample Collected: 02/0311992 FIndings: 138.000 MGIL
Chemical: BICARBONATE ALKALINiTY
Sample Collected: 02/03/1992 Findings: 112.000 MGIL
Chemical: TOTAL HARDNESS (AS CACO3)
Sample Collected: 02/03/1992 Findings: 35.000 MG/L
Chemical: CALCIUM
Sample Collected: 02/0311992 Findings: 64.000 MG/L
Chemical: SODIUM
Sample Collected: 02/03/1992 Findings: 1.700 MG/L
Chemical: POTASSIUM
Semple Collected: 02/03/1992 Findings: 34.000 MG/L
Chemical: CHLORIDE
Semple Collected: 02/03/1992 Findings: .280 MGIL
Chemical: FLUORIDE (TEMPERATURE DEPENDENT)
Sample Collected: 02/0311992 Findings: 4.700 UG/L
Chemical: CADMIUM
Semple Collected: 02/0311992 Findings: .020 UGIL
Chemical: FOAMING AGENTS (MBAS)
Sample Collected: 02/03/1992 Findings: 330.000 MGIL
Chemical: TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
Sample Collected: 02/03/1992 Findings: 11.300 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 02/03/1992 Findings: .100 NTU
Chemical: TURBIDITY (LAB)
Sample Collected: 07/1411993 Findings: 10.580 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
TC217084.1s PageA2
Sample Collected: 07/14/1993 Andlngs: 2.180 PC/L
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample Collected: 07/14/1993 FIndings: 1.290 PCIL
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 09/2211993 Andlngs: 12.300 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 10/20/1993 Andlngs: 2.160 PC/L
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample Collected: 10/20/1993 Andlngs: 1.290 PCIL
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 01/26/1994 Andlngs: 2.160 PC/L
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample Collected: 01/25/1994 Andlnga: 1.290 PCIL
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 04/1211994 Andlngs: 11.100 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 04/12/1994 Findings: 2510,000 UGIL
Chemical: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
Sample Collected: 04/12/1994 Findings: 2.160 PCIL
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample Collected: 04/12/1994 Andlngs: 1 .290 PC/L
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 07/26/1994 Andlngs: 11.900 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 07/2611994 FIndings: 2690.000 UG/L
Chemical: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
Sample ColieCled: 11116/1994 FIndings: 29.700 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NOS)
Sample Collected: 11/1611994 Andlngs: 6700.000 UGIL
Chemical: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
Sample Collacted: 01/24/1995 Andlngs: 565.000
Chemical: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
Sample ColieCled: 01/24/1995 FIndings: 6.000
Chemical: PH (LABORATORY)
Sample Collected: 01/24/1995 Andlngs: 141.000 MG/L
Chemical: TOTAL ALKALINITY (AS CACO3)
Sample Collected: 01/24/1995 Andlngs: 172.000 MG/L
Chemical: BICARBONATE ALKALINITY
Sample Collected: 01/24/1995 FIndings: 124.000 MG/L
Chemical: TOTAL HARDNESS (AS CACO3)
Sample Collected: 01/2411995 findings: 74.100 MG/L
Chemical: SODIUM
Sample ColieCled: 01/2411995 findings: 1.600 MG/L
Chemical: POTASSIUM
Sample Collected: 01/24/1995 Andlngs: 290 MG/L
Chemical: FLUORIDE (TEMPERATURE DEPENDENT)
TC217084.1S Page AS
Sample Collected: 01[24/1995 FIndings: 330.000 MG/L
Chemical: TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
Sample Collected: 01/24/1995 Findings: 13.000 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 01[24/1995 Findings: 2950.000 UG/L
Chemical: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
Sample Collected: 03/06/1996 FIndings: 15.500 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Well Within 1 .2 Miles of Targst Property (Eastern Quadrant)
Wster Sys1em Informstlon:
Prime Station Cade: 05S/09W.10L01 S
FROS Number Numbec 3010046009
District Numbec 08
WeterType: WelVGroundwater
Source LaI/LDng: 334500.01174800.0
Source Name: NEWPORT
Systam Number: 3010046
System Name: CITY OF TUSTIN
OWner Type: Not Reported
Organization That Operates System:
P.O. BOX 466
TUSTIN, CA 92680
Pop Served: 52100
Area Served: Not Reported
Semple Information: . Only Findings Above De1ectlon Level Are Lls1ed
Sample Collected: 12/01/1990 FIndings:
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample Collected: 12/01/1990
Chemloal: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 12/01{1990
Chemical: URANIUM
Sample Collected: 09/25{1991
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample Collected: 09/25{1991
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 02/20{1992
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
UsarlD:
County:
Station Type:
Well Status:
Precisian:
Connections:
Findings:
FIndings:
FIndings:
FIndings:
FIndings:
TEE
Orange
WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INT AKE/SUPPL Y
Active Raw
8
TUSTIN
4.800 PC/L
3.300 PC/L
3.000 PIC/L
5.200 PC/L
3.200 PC/L
1.400 PCIL
Well Within 1/2.1 Mile ofTargst Property (Southem Quadrant)
Wstar System Informstlon:
Prime Ststion Code: 05S/09W.16Q05 S
FRDS Number Numbec 3010092012
District Numbec 08
Water Type: Wsli/Groundwater
Source Lal/LDng: 334403.81174921.3
Source Neme: WEU 21 . INACTIVE
UsarlD:
County:
Sta1lon Type:
Well Status:
Precisian:
TEE
Orange
WELL/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE
Inactive Untreated
Not Reported
TC2170B4.1s Page A4
System Numbe~ 3010092
System Name: Irvine Ranch Water DIstrict
Owner Type: Not Reported
Organization That Opera1es System:
P.O. BOX 57000
IRVINE, CA 92716
135000
Nol Reported
Pop Served:
Area Served:
Connections:
IRVINE
Well WIthin 1 .2 Miles of Target Property (Westem Quadrant)
Water System InformatIon:
Prime Station Code: 05S/09W-ISA01 S
FRDS Number Numbe~ 3000757001
District Number: 08
WatBrType: Weli/GroundwatBr
Source Lat/Long: 334448.01175112.0
Source Nama: WELLOI.ABANDONED
System Number: 3000757
System Name: Diamond Newporl Corporetion
Owner Type: Not Reported
Organlzallon That OperatBs System:
1105 E. WALNUT ST.
SANTA ANA, CA 92701
Pop Served: 100
Area Served: Not Raported
Sample Infonnatlon: . Only Findings Above Detection Level Are Llated
Sample Collected: 09/15/1993 FIndings:
Chemical: SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE
UserlD:
County:
Station Type:
Well Status:
Precision:
Connections:
Sample Collected: 09/15/1993 Findings:
Chemical: PH (LABORATORY)
Sample Collected: 09/15/1993 Findings:
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 09/15/1993 FIndings:
Chemica!: GROSS ALPHA
Sample CollectBd: 09/15/1993 FIndings:
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: '1/10/1993 Findings:
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: '1/10/1993 FIndings:
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample Collected: 11/10/1993 FIndings:
Chemica!: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 02/16/1994 Flndln9s:
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample CollectBd: 02/16/1994 Findings:
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 06/21/1994 FIndings:
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 06/21/1994 FIndings:
Chemica!: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
TEE
Orange
WELl/AMBNT/MUN/INTAKE
Abandoned
1.000 Feet (10 Seconds)
Not Reported
804.000
7.800
34.800 MG/L
2.160 PCIL
1.190 PCIL
23.200 MG/L
2.160 PC/L
1.190 PCIL
2.160 PC/L
1.190 PCIL
13.700 MG/L
3100.000 UG/L
TC217084.18 Page AS
Sample Collected: 06/21/1994 FIndings: 2.160 PC/L
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA
Sample Collected: 06/21/1994 Flndlnga: 1.190 PC/L
Chemical: GROSS ALPHA COUNTING ERROR
Sample Collected: 08/1711994 FIndings: 34.500 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 08/17/1994 FIndings: 7790.000 UG/L
Chemical: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
Sample Collected: 11/17/1994 FIndings: 39.100 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 11/17/1994 FIndings: 8850.000 UG/L
Chemical: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
Sample Collected: 03/15/1995 Findings: 12.600 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 03/15/1995 FIndings: 2850.000 UGIL
Chemical: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
Sample Collected: 05/31/1995 FIndings: 39.200 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 05/31/1995 FIndings: 8860.000 UG/L
Chemical: NITRATE + NITRITE AS N
Sample Collected: 09/14/1995 Findings: 40.800 MG/L
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
Sample Collected: 11/28/1995 FIndings: 33.400 MGIL
Chemical: NITRATE (AS NO3)
TC217084.1S pageA6
PWS SUMMARY:
PWSID:
Date Initiated:
PWS Name:
Addressee/ Fecillty:
Facility Letltude:
City Served:
Treatment Class:
Searched by Nearest PWS.
CA2600552 PWS Status:
June /1977 Date Deactivated:
GRANT LAKE MARINA
GRANT LAKE MARINA CAMPGROUND
RTE 3 BOX'
JUNE LAKE. CA 93529
Active
Not Reported
Distance from TP: '/4. '/2 Mile
Dlrrelative to TP: Wes1
Syatem Owner/Responsible Party
GRANT LAKE MARINA CAMPGROUND
130 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE
TUSTIN. CA 92680
334444
Not Reported
Untreated
Facility longitude: 11749 3'
population Served: Under '0' Persone
PWS curren1ly has or has had major vlolatlon(s): Yes
Violations Information not reported.
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
VIolation Type:
Compliance Period:
Contaminant:
Enlorcement Date:
Infilal Tap Sampling for Pb and Cu
07/01/93 . , 2/31/93
LEAD & COPPER RULE
Not Reported
Enf. Action:
Not Reported
TC2'70B4.1s Page A7
To maintain currency of the following federal and sto1e databases, EDR contacts the appropriate govemmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Elapaed ASTM days: Provides confirmation that this EDR report meets or exceeds the 90.day updating requirement
of the ASTM standard.
FEDERAL ASTM RECORDS:
CERCLlS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation. and LIability Information System
Source: EPNNTIS
Telephone: 703-413.0223
CERCLlS: CEACLIS contains do1a on potentially hazardous waste slles tho1 have been reported to the USEPA by states,
munlclpalilles, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and LIability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either prcposed to or on the
National Prlor~es Ust (NPL) and slles which are In the screening and assessment phase for possible Inclusion
on the NPL
Date of Government Version: 08/01/97
Date Made ActIve at EDR: 11/28/97
Database Release Frequency: Monthly
Date of Deta Arrival st ED A: 10/01/97
Elapsed ASTM days: 58
Do1e of Lest EDR Contact: 09/09/97
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Source: EPNNTIS
Telephone: 202.260.2342
EANS: Emergency Aesponse Notification System,
hazardous substances.
Date of Government Version: 06/01/97
Date Made ActIve at EDA: 10/09/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Ouarterly
EANS records and stores information on reported releases of all and
Date of Deta Arrival 01 EDR: 08/29/97
Elapsed ASTM days: 41
Date of Last EDR Contact: 08/26197
NPL: National Prlor!1y LIst
Source: EPA
Telephone: 703.603.8852
NPl.; Nationel Priorlties LIst (Superlund). The NPL 15 a subset 01 CEACLIS end identmes over 1 .200 slles for prlor!1y cleanup
under the Superiund Program. NPL sites mey encompass relatively large areas. As such. EDA provides polygon coverage
for over 1,000 NPL slle boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC).
Date of Government Version: 09/25/97 Date of Deta Arrival at ED A: 09/26/97
Date Made ActIve 01 EDA: 11/26/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 63
Database Aelease Frequency: Seml.Annually Dste of Last EDR Contact: 09/22/97
RCRIS: Aesource Conservation and Aecovery Information System
Source: EPNNTlS
Telephone: 800.424-9346
ACRIS: Resource Conservation and Aecovery Infomation System. RCAIS Includes selective Information on elles which
generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste es defined by the Aesource Conservation and Aecovery
Act (ACRA).
Date of Government Version: 07/01/97
Date Made ActIve at EDA: 11/28/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Seml.Annually
Do1e of Data Arrival a! EDA: 09113/97
Elapsed ASTM days: 76
Date of Laa! EDA Contact: 08104/97
CORRACTS: Corrective Action Aeport
Source: EPA
Telephone: 800-424-9346
COARACTS: CDRAACTS Idenm;es hazardous waete handlers with RCAA corrective action activity.
Date of Government Version: 12/01/96 Date of Data Arrival a! EDR: 12130/96
Date Made ActIve at EDR: 03/03/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 63
Datebasa Release Frequency: Seml.Annuaily Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/24/97
TC217084.1S
Page A8
FEDERAL NON.ASTM RECORDS:
BRS: Biennial Reporting System
Source: EPAlNTlS
Telephone: 800-424.9346
BAS: The Biennial Reporting System Is a na~onal system administered by the EPA that collec:ts data on the genera~on
and management of hazardous waste. BAS captures detailed data from two groups: Larga Quanti1y Genarators (LQG)
and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Faclll~es.
Date of Govemmant Version: 12/31/93
Database Aelease Frequency: Biennially
Date of Last EDR Comact: 10/22/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/22/97
CONSENT: SUperfund (CEACLA) Consent Decrees
Source: EPA Aeglonal Offices
Telephone: Varies
Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites.
by United States DIstrict Courts after settlemem by parties to litigation mattera.
Released periodically
Data of Govemment Version: Varies
Database Release Frequency: Veries
Dme of Last EDR Contact: Varies
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contect: N/A
FINDS: Facility Index System
Source: EPA¡NTlS
Telephone: 703.908.2493
FINDS: Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility Informa~on and "pointers" to other sources that contain more
detell. EDR Includes the following FINDS databases in this report. PCS (Pennit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometrlc
Infonnatlon Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track Infonna~on on civil Judicial
anforcemant cases for all envlronmentel statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C.DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes). FFIS (Federal Facilities
Information System). STATE (State Environmental Laws and Stetutes). and PADS (PCB A~vlty Data System).
Date of Govemment Version: 04/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/29/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/05/98
HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reportln9 System
Source: U.S. Department of Transporta~on
,Telephone: 202.386-4526
-HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Incident Report System.
Date of Govemment Version: 12/31/96
Database Relaase Frequency: Annually
HMIRS contains hazardous matarial spllllncidenta reported to DOT.
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/27/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/26/98
ML TS: Material LIcensing Trackin9 System
Sou rea: Nuclear Ragulatory Commission
Telaphone: 301.415.7169
MLTS Is malntalnad by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8.100 sites which possess or
use radloe~ve mmeriels and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency
on a quarterly basis.
Date of Govemment Version: 07/28/97
Database Reiease Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/14/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/12/98
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund LIens
Source: EPA
Telephone: 205.564.4267
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund LIens. Under the euthority granted the USEPA by the Comprehensive Envlronmemal
Responae, Compensation and LIability Act (CERCLA) of 1 980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real
property In order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner receives notification of potential
liability. USEPA complies a listing of flied notices of Superfund LIens.
Data of Government Version: 10/15/91
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Last EDR Contact: 08/25/97
Date of Next Scheduled EOR Contact: 11/24/97
TC217084.1s
Page A9
PADS: PCB ActIvity Database System
Source: EPA
Telephone: 202-260.3936
PADS: PCB Activity Database. PADS Iden1lfies generators, transponers. commercial storers snd/or brokers and dlspcsers
of PCB's who are required to notify the EP A of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 03/27/97
Database Release Frequency: Seml.Annually
Date of Last EDI'I Contact: 09/22/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact 11/17/97
RAATS: RCRA Admlnlstretive Action Tracking System
Source: EPA
Telephone: 202.564.4104
RAATS: RCRAAdmlnlstretion Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records besed on enforcement ectlons Isaued
under RCRA penalning to major violators and Includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration
actions aher September 30, 1995, data entry In the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of the
detabase for historical records. n was necessary to terminate RAATS bEicause a decrease In agenCy resources made n
Impossible to continue to updete the Information contained In the database.
Date of Government Version: 04/17/95
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Dste of Last EDR Contact: 09/15/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/15/97
ROD: Records Of Decision
Source: NTIS
Telephone: 703.416.0223
Record Of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) sne containing technical and
heanh Information to aid In the cleanup.
Date Of Government Version: 03/31/95
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/03/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/01/97
TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 202.260.1531
TRIS: Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS Identifies facllnies which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and Isnd
In reponable quantiMs under SARA Tnte III SectIon 313.
Date of Govemment Version: 12/31/95
Datebsse Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/29/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/29/97
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 202.26Q.1444
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA Identifies manufacturers and imponers of chemical substances Included on
the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It Includes data on the production volume of theaa substances by plant
site. USEPA has no current plan 10 updete and/or re-Issue this dstabese.
Date of Govemment Version: 01/31/95
Dstsbase Release Frequency: Annually
Dste of Last EDR Contact: 09/18/97
Dste of Next Scheduled EDR Contact 12/15/97
TC217084.1s
Page AtO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASTM RECORDS:
BEP: Bond Expenditure Plan
Source: Department of Health Services
Telephone: 916.255-2118
BEP: Department of Health Services developed s slte.speclfic expenditure plan as the basis for an appropriation of
Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act funds. ~ Is not updated,
Date of Govemment Version: 01/01/89
Date Made Active at EDR: 08/02194
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 07/27/94
Elapsed ASTM days: 6
Date of Laat EDR Contsct; 05/31/94
CAL-SITES (AWP): Annual Workplan
Source: Callfomis Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 916.323-3400
CAL.SITES (AWP): Known Hazardous Waste Sites, California DTSC'sÃnnual Workplan (AWP), tormerly BEP, identifies
known hazardous substsnce sites tsrgeted for cleanup.
Date of Govemment Version: 10/29/96
Date Mede ActIve at EDR; 03/17/g7
Database Rele... Frequency: Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/16/97
Elapsed ASTM days: 60
Date of Last EDR Contact: 07/28/97
CAL-SITES (ASPIS): Cals~es
Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control
Telephone: 916.323.3400
CAL.SITES (ASP IS): The Calsltes dstabase contains potentlsl or confirmed hazardous substance release properties.
In 1996. Callfcmla EPA reavaluated and slgnlflcsntly reduced the number ot s~es In the Cals~es database.
Date of Govemment Version: 05/20/97 Date of Deta Arrival at EDA: 07/10/97
Data Made Active at EDR: 09/08/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 60
Database Aele..e Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDA Contact: 10/27/97
CHMIRS: California Hazardous Material Incident Aeport System
Source:- Office of Emergency Services
Telephone: 916-464-3277
CHMIAS: California Hazardous Material Incident Aeportlng System.
material incidents (accfdental rele..es or spills).
Date of Govemment Version: 12/31/94
Date Mede Active at EDR: 04/24/95
Database Aele..e Frequency: Annually
CHMIAS contains Information on reported hazardous
Date of Data Arrival at EDA: 03/13/95
Elapsed ASTM days; 42
Date of Lest EDR Contact: 09/10/97
CORTESE: Cortese
Source: CAL EPA/Offlce of Emergency Information
Telephone: 916-327.1848
CORTESE: Identified Hazardous Waste and Substance Sitee, The database Iden~fles public drinking water wells with
detectable levels of contemlnatlon, hazardous substence sites selected tor remedial action, sites wltl1 known toxic material
Identified through the abandoned site assessment program, sI1es with USTs having a reportable release and all solid waste
disposal faclll1les from which there Is known migration.
Date of Govemment Version: 12/31/94
Date Made ActIve at EDA: 04/04/95
Database Aele..e Frequency: Annually
Date of Data ArrIval at EDR: 01/23/95
Elapsed ASTM days: 71
Date of Last EDA Contact: 10/10/97
LUST: Laaklng Underground Storage Tank Informa~on Syatem
Source: State Water Aesources Control Board
Telephone: 916.445-6532
LUST: leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an Inventory of reported leaking
underground storsge tank Incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the Informstlon !tored varies by state.
Dste of Government Version: 04/01/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDA: 05/05/97
Dste Made Active at EDR: 06/30/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 56
Databsse Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Laat EDR Contact: 08/12197
TC217084.1s
PageA11
NOTIFY 55: Proposition 65
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916.667.0696
NOTIFY 55: Proposition 65 Notification Records. NOTIFY 65 contains facility notifications about any releaae which could
Impact drinking water and thereby expose the public to a potentlal health risk.
Data of Govemment Version: 10/21/93
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/19/93
Detebase Releese Frequency: Querterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/01193
Elapsed ASTM days: 18
Date of Last EDR Contact: 07/31/97
SWF/LF (SWIS): Solid Waste Information System
Source: Integratad Waste Management Board
Telephone: 916.255.4035
SWF/LF (SWIS): Active, Closed and Inactive Landfills. SWF/LF records typically contsln an Inventory of solid waste
disposal facilities or landfills. These may be sctive or Inactive facilitlespr open dumps that failed to meet ACRA
Section 2004 crhena for solid waste landfills or disposal sites. .
Date of Govemment Version: 06/01/97
Data Mede Active at EDR: 09/08197
Detabase Release Frequency: Ouarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 07/07{97
Elapaed ASTM days: 63
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/02/97
TOXIC PITS: Toxic Phs
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916.227.4364
TOXIC PITS: Toxic PITS Cleanup Act Sites. TOXIC PITS Identifies shes suspected of containing hazardou, substance,
where cleanup hss not yet been completed.
Date of Govemment Version: 07{01/95
Data Mad,e Active st EDR: 09/26/95
Dstabsse Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 08/30/95
Elapsed ASTM days: 27
Date of Laat EDR Contact: 08/14197
CA UST:
U5T: Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916-227.4408
UST: The Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database Is a histoncaillsting of UST sltas.
source for current data.
Refer to local/county
Date of Government Version: 10/15{90
Date Made Active at EDR: 02112/91
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Dste of Data Arrival st EDR: 01/25/91
Eispsad ASTM days: 18
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/21197
FID: Facility Inventory Database
Sourcs: California Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 916.445-6532
The Fscility Inventory Databsse (FID) contains a historlcsillsting of actlve and Inactive underground storage tank
locations from the State Water Resource Con1rol Board. Reier to local/county source for current data.
Data of Government Version: 10/31/94 Data of Data Arrival at EDR: 09{05/95
Date Made Active at EDR: 09/29/95 Eispsad ASTM days: 24
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/29/97
WMUDS/SWAT: Waste Management Unll Database
Source: Slata Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916.227-4448
WMUDS{SWAT: Waste Management Unh Database System. WMUDS Is used by the State Water Resourcea Control Board
staff and the Regional Water Quality Con1rol Boards for program 1racking and Inventory of waste management units.
WMUDS Is composed of the following databases: Fadllty Information, Scheduled Inspections Information, Waste
Management Unllinformatlon, SWAT Program Information, SWAT Report Summary Information, SWAT Report Summary
Data, Chapter 15 (formerly Subchapter 15) Information, Chapter 15 Monltonng Parameters, TPCA Program Information.
RCAA Program Information. Closure Information, and Interested Parties Information.
Date of Govemment Version: 06/20/87 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 06/24197
Date Made Active at EDR: 08/01/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 38
Database Aelease Frequency: Quarteny Date of Last EDR Contact: 09{08/97
TC217084.1S
Page A12
STATE OF CALIFORNIA NON-ASTM RECORDS:
AST: Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities
Source: State Wster Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916.227.4382
AST: Registered Aboveground Storage Tanks.
Date of Govemmem Version: 06/09/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR ContBCt 08/11/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/10197
HAZMAT: Hazmat Facilities
Source: City of San Jose Fire Department
Telephone: 4<)8.277.4659
Date of Govemment Version: 02/11197
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 08/27/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/24/97
HAZNET: Hazardous Waste Informaton System
Source: California Environmental Protection Agency
Telaphone: 916.324.1803
HAZNET: Facility and Manifest Data. The data Is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each
yaar by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700,000. 1,000,000 annually, representng approximately
350,000.500,000 shipments, Data tram non.California manifests and continuation sheets are not Included at the present
time. Data are from the manifests eubmltted without correction, and therefore many contain some Invalid values for data
elements such as generator ID, TSD ID, waste category, and disposal method.
Date of Govemment Version: 12131/95
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/22/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact. 01/19/98
SOUTH BAY: South Bay Site Management System
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2)
Telephone: 510.286-0457
SOUTH BAY: Groundwater pollution cases in the Sants Clara Valley where the re9ulatory lead Is the San Francisco Bay
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Date of Govemmem Version: 09101/96
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of LBst EDR Contact. 09/17/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12{15{97
WDS: Waste Discharge System
Source: State Water Reaources Control Board
Telephone: 916.657.1571
WDS: Sites which have been Issued waste discharge requirements.
Date of Government Version: 06{01/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of LBst EDR Contact: 08{25/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11{24/97
TC217084.1S
PageA13
CALIFORNIA COUNTY RECORDS
ALAMEDA COUNTY:
Underground Tanks
Source: Alamada County Environmental Health Services
Telephone: 510.567.6700
Date of Govemment Version: 04/07/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Seml.Annuaily
Date of Last EDA Contact: 09/15/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 10/27/97
Local Oversl9ht Program Listing 01 UGT Cleanup Sites
Source: Alameda County Environmental Hea~h Services
Telephone: 510.567.6700
Date of Govamment Version: 12/01/96
Database Aelease Frequency: Seml.Annually
Date of Last EDA Contact: 09/15/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 10/27/97
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY:
SL: Site LIst
Source: Contra Costa Hea~h Services Department
Telephone: 510.646.2286
Ust Includes s~es ~om the under9round tank. hszardous waste generator and business plan/2185 programs.
Date of Govemment Verelon: 05/02/97 Date of Lest EDA Contact: 08/11/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 11/10/97
KEAN COUNTY:
UST: S~es & Tanks Llstin9
Source: Kem County Envlronmem Health Servlcea Department
Telephone: 805.862-8700
Kern County Sites & Tanks LIsting.
Date of Govemment Version: 06/10/94
Database Aelease Frequency: No Upda1e Planned
Date of Last EDA Contact: 10/14/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 01/12/98
LOS ANGELES COUNTY:
HMS: Street Number LIst
Source: Depanment of Public Works
Tslephone: 818-458.3517
HMS: Industrial Waste snd Underground Storage Tank S~es.
Date of Govemment Version: 02/27/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDA ComBOt: 10/14/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 01/12/98
SWF/LF: LIst 01 Solid Waste Facll~les
Source: La County Depanment of Public Works
Telephone: 818-468-5185
Date of Govemment Version: 01/31/98
Database Aeleese Frequency: Annually
Dete of Last EDA Contact: 08(26/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/24/97
TC217084.1s
Page A14
SITE MITI: Site Mitigation Complaint Control Log
Source: Community Health Services
Teiephone: 213.890.7806
Industrial sites 1I1at hava had some sort of splil or complaint.
Date of Government Version: 08/21/96
Detabasa Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 08/25/97
Date of Ne><t Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/24/97
MARIN COUNTY:
UST - Currently Permitted
Source: Public Works Department Waste Management
Telephone: 415.499.6647
CurrenUy permitted USTs In Marin County.
Date 01 Govammem Veralon: 05/12/97
DElabasa Release Frequency: Quarterly
DEle of Last EDR Comact: 08/14{97
DEle of Next Scheduled EDR Conlact: 11/10/97
NAPA COUNTY:
LUST: Site. WIth Reported Contemlnetlon
Source: Nepa County Department of Environmental Management
Telephone: 707.253-42ti9
Data of Govemment Version: 03/10/97
Database Release Frequency: Semi.Annually
Date of Lsst EDR Contact: 09/22197
DEle Of Next Schedulad EDR Contact: 12/22197
UST: Cloeed end Operatln9 Underground Storage Tank Sites
Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Manegement
Telephone: 707.2ti3.4269
Date of GovemmentVerslon: 10/09{96
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10114/97
Date ofNe><t Scheduled EDRContact: 01/12/98
ORANGE COUNTY:
LlS1 of IndustrIal Site Cleanups
Source: Health Care Agency
Telephone: 714.834-3446
Petroleum and non.petroleum splils,
Data of Govemment Version: 04/11/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
DEle of Last EDR Contact: 09/15/97
Data of Ne><t Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/15/97
LUST: List of Underground Storage Tank Cleenups
Source: Hesl1l1 Care A9ancy
Telephone: 714.834-3446
Orange County Underground Storage Tank Cleanups (LUST).
Data of Gove,mment Version: 06/26/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/15/97
DEle of Ne><t Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/15/97
UST: LIS1 of Underground Storage Tank Facilities
Source: Health Care Agency
Telephone: 714.834-3446
Orange County Underground Storage Tank FaclilUes (UST).
Date of Govamment version: 06/26{97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/15/97
Date of Ne><t Scheduled EDR Contact: 12115/97
TC217084.1S
Page A15
PLACER COUNTY:
MS: Master LIst of Facilities
Source: Placer County Heslth & Human Services
Telephone: 916.889.7335
Ust Includes aboveground tanks, underground tenks and cleanup s~es.
Data of Government Version: 01/t4{97
Database Release Frequency: Seml.Annually
Date 01 Last EDR Contact: 09/29{97
Dste of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/29/97
RIVERSIDE COUNTY:
LUST: Listing 01 Underground Tank Cleanup Sites
Source: Department of Public Health
Talephone: 909.358.5055
Riverside County Under;¡round Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST).
Date of Government Version: 04/'6/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/27/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 0'/26/98
UST: Tank Llat
Source: Health Services Agency
Telephone: 909.358.5055
Dete of Government Version: 05/06/97
Databaee Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/27/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/26/98
SACRAMENTO COUNTY:
LUST: Toxlslte Cleanup Program. Site Specific Report
Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management
Telephone: 916.386.6706
Date of Government Version: 04/16/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Laet EDR Contact: 08/26/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/04/97
ML: Regulatory Compliance Master List
Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management
Telephone: 916.386.6706
Any business thst has hazardous materials on site. hazardous material storage slles, under9round storage tanks, waste generators.
Date 01 Govemment Version: 02/03/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/15/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/15/97
SAN BERNARDIND COUNTY:
DEHS Permll System Prlnt.Qut By Location
Source: San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division
Telephone: 909.387.3041
This listing Includee underground storage tanks, medical waste handlerS/generators. hazsrdous materials handlers,
hazardous waste generators. and waste 011 generatorS/handlers.
Date of Govemment Version: 03/07/97
Database Rele... Frequency: Monthly
Date of Laot EDR Contact: 09/15{97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/15/97
TC217084.'s
PageA'6
SAN DIEGO COUNTY:
SWF/LF: SOlid Waste Facllnlas
Source: Department of Health Services
Telephone: 619.338.2209
San Diego County Solid Waste Facllilies.
Date of Government Version: 11/08f96
Database Release Frequency: Seml.Annuaily
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/02197
Dste of Next Scheduled EpR Contact: 12101/97
HMMD: Hazerdous Materials Management Division Database
Source: Hazardous Mlrterlals Management DIvision
Telephone: 619.338.2268
The database Includes: HE58. This report contains the business name, slle address. business phone number,
establishment 'W perrnll number, type of parmll. and the business statu.s. HEI7. In addition to providing the
same Information provided In the HE58 listing, HE17 provides Inspection dates, violation a received by the
establlshmen~ hazardous waste generated, the quantity, method of storage, treatment/disposal of waste and the
hauler, and Information on undarground storage tanks. Unauthorized Relesse Ust . Includes a summary of
environmental contamination cases In San Diego County (underground tank cases, non.tank cases, groundwater
contamination, and soli contamination arelneluded.) ~
Date of Government Version: 11/15/96
Databasa Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/25{97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/22/97
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY:
LUST: Local Overslte Facilltiea
Source: Department Of Public Heallh San Francisco County
Telephone: 415.252-3920
Date of Government Version: 05/14{97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 08/18{97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/17/97
UST: Active Underground Report City and County of San Franclaco
Source: Department of Public Health
Telephone: 415.252.3920
Date of Government Verslcn: 05/01197
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 08/18197
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11117/97
SAN MATEO COUNTY:
Buelnees Inventory
Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division
Telephone: 415.363-1921
Us! Includes Hazardous Materials Business Plan. hazardous waste generators, and underground storage tanks.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 08/18/97
Database Relesse Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/17/97
LUST: Fuel Leek List
Source: Ssn Mateo County Envlronmentel Health Services DIvision
Telephone: 415.363-1921
Dsta of Gcvemment Version: 04/21/97
Dstabase Release Frequency: Seml.Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 08/18/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/17/97
TC217084.1s
Psge AH
SANTA CLARA COUNTY:
LUST: Fuel Leak 81te Activity Report
Source: Sarna Clera Valley WB1er District
Telephone: 408.927.0710
Date 01 Govemment Version: 04/01/97
Databsse Release Frequency: Quarterly
DB1e 01 Last EDA Contact: 10/06/97
Date of NeXl Scheduled EDA Contsct: 01/05/98
80LANO COUNTY:
LUST: Leaking Undergroung Storage Tanks
Source: Solano County Department 01 Envlronmemal Management
Telephone: 707.421-6770
Date of Govemment Version: OS/20/97
Database Aeleaae Frequency: Quarterly
DB1e of Last EDA Comact: 09/15/97
Date of NeXl Scheduled EDA Contact: 12/15/97
UST: Underground Storage Tenks
Source: Solano County Department 01 Environmental Management
Telephone: 707.421-6770
Date 01 Govemment Version: 03/13/97
Databaae Aeleaaa Frequency: Quarterly
Date 01 Laat EDA Contact: 09/15/97
Date 01 NeXl Scheduled EDA Contact: 12/15/97
SONOMA COUNTY:
LUST Sitea
Source: Department 01 Health Services
Telephone: 707.525.6565
Date of Govemment Version: 04/04/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Mon1hly
DB1e of Last EDA Contact: 09/22/97
Date 01 Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 12/22/97
SUTTER COUNTY:
UST: Underground Storage Tanks
Source: Sutter County Department 01 Agriculture
Telephone: 916.741.7504
Date of Govarnment Version: 06/01/97
Database Aelease Frequency:Seml'AnnusJly
DB1e of Last EDA Contact: 10/14/97
DB1e of NeXl Scheduled EDA Contact: 01/12/98
VENTURA COUNTY:
BWT: Bualneas Plan, Hazardous Waste Producers, and Operating Underground Tanks
Source: Ventura County Envtronmental Heel1h Dlvlelon
Telephone: 805.654-2813
BWT: The BWT list Indicates by site address whe1her 1he Environmental Health Division has Business Plan (8),
Waste Producer (W), and/or Underground Tank (ì) Information.
Dste 01 Govemment Version: OS/29/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDA Contact 09/22197
DB1e of NeXl Scheduled EDA Contact: 12/22/97
TC217084.1s
PageA18
LUST: LIsting of Underground Tank Claanup Sites
Source: Environmental Health DIvI.lon
Telephone: 805.654-2813
Ventura County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST).
Date of Government Version: 06/27/97
Database Release Frequency: Quartel1y
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/22197
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/22{97
UST: Underground Tank eloood Site. Llet
Source: Environmental Health Division
Telephona: 805.654.2813
Ventura County Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites (UST)/Underground Tank Closed Sites Us!.
Date of Govemment Version: OS/29/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/22197
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/22/97
SWFILF: Invemory 01 Illegal Abandoned and Inactive Sites
Source: Environmental Health Division
Telephone: 805.654.2813
Ventura County Inventory of Cloeed. Illegal Abandoned, and Inactive S~e..
Date of Govemment Version: 06101 {97
Database Relea.e Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09102/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12'°"97
TC217084.1.
Page A19
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) LUST Records
LUST Region 1: ActIve Toxic Sne Investigation
Source: California Regional Water Qualf1y Control Board North Coast (1)
Telephone: 707.576.2220
Data of Government Version: 03/1 B/97
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
LUST Raglon 2: Fuel Leak LIst
Source: California Regional Water Qualf1y Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2)
Telephone: 510-286.0457
Date of Government Version: OS/22/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST Region 3: LUSTIS Database
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region (3)
Telephone: 805.549.3147
Date of Government Version: OS/20/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST Region 4: Underground Storage Tank Leak LIst
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Re910n (4)
Telephone: 213.266.7544
Date of Government Version: 04/16/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST Region 5: leaking Under9round Storage Tank Database
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (5)
Telephone: 916.255.3125
Date of Government Version: 04/22/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST Region 6L: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case LIsting
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lehontan Region (6)
Telephone: 916.542.5424
Date of Government Version: 06/27/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST Region 6V: leaking Underground Storage Tank Case LIsting
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Victorville Branch Office (6)
Telephone: 760.346-7491
Date of Government VerBlon: 05/01/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST Region 7: leaking Underground Storage Tank Case LIsting
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Colorado River Basin Region (7)
Telephone: 760.346-7491
Date of Government Version: 04/03/97
Database Release Frequency: Seml.Annuaily
LUST Region B: (LUSTIS) leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (B)
Telephone: 909-782-449B
Date of Government Version: 03/2B/97
Database Relesse Frequency: Seml.Annuaily
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/02}97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/01/97
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/26/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/22/97
Date of Lest EDR Contect: 08/25/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/24/97
Date of Last EDR Contact: to/06/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: Ot/05/9B
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/14/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/12/9B
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/15/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/12/9B
Date of Laat EDR Contact: 09/29/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/04/97
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/02/97
Date Of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/01/97
Date of Laat EDRContact: 10/14/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/12/9B
TC217084.1s
Page 1'.20
LUST Region 9; !.asking Underground Storage Tank Report
Source: Cellfomle Aeglonal Weter Quality Control Board San Diego Aegion (9)
Telephone: 6t 9-467.2952
Dete of Government Version: 01 IOS/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/10/97
Date of Nex1 Scheduled EDA Contact. 12/08/97
TC217084.1a
Page A21
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) SUC Records
SLIC Region 1: Active Toxic S~e Investigations
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region (1)
Telephone: 707.576.2220
Date of Government Version: 03/18/97
Database Release Frequency: Seml.Annually
Date of Last EDA Contact: 09/02{97
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 12/01/97
SLIC Aeglon 2: North and South Bay Sllc Report
Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Aeglon (2)
Telaphone: 510.286.0457
Any contaminated sUe that Impacts 9roundwater or has the potential to Impact groundwster.
Date of Govemment Version: 06/30/97 Date of Last EDA Contact: 09/26/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact 12/22197
SLiC Region 3: Active Slic Cases
Source: California Aeglonal Water QuaJlty Control Board Central Coast Aegion (3)
Telephone: 805.549.3147
Any contaminated site that impacts groundwater or has the potential to Impact groundwater.
Date of Government Version: 05(20/97 Date of Last EDA Contact: 08/25/97
Database Release Frequency: Semi.Annuelly Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 11/24/97
SLiC Region 4: SUC Sites
Source: Region Water Quellty Control Board Los Angeles Aeglon (4)
Telephone: 213.26&7544
Any contamlneted site that Impacts groundwater or has the potential to Impact groundwater.
Date of Govemment Version: 04/01/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDA Contact: 10107/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 01/05/98
SUC Region 5: SUC.Ust
Source: Aeglonal Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Aeglon (5)
Telephone: 916.855.3075
Unregulated sites that impact groundwater or heve the potential to Impact groundwater.
Date of Government Version: 10/31/96 Date of Last EDA Contact: 08/26/97
Database Release Frequency: Seml.Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 11/24/97
SLIC Region s: SUC Ust
Source: Callfomla Ae9ion Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Aegion (8)
Telephone: 909-782.3298
Date of Govemment Version: 12{20/96
Database Release Frequency: Seml.AnnuaJly
Date of Laat EDA Contact: 10/15/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 01/12/98
SLIC Region 9: Nurds/Nugtank
Source: Callfomla Aeglonal Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (9)
Telephone: 619-4<;7.2980
Date of Govemment Version: 11/21/97
Database Aelease Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDA Contact: 09/09/97
Date of Next Scheduled EDA Contact: 12/08/97
Historical and Other Database(s)
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the dats provided In these specialty databases mayor may not be
complete. For example, the existence of wetiands Information data In a specific report doe. not mean that all wetiands In the
araa covered by the report are Included. Moreover, the ebsence of any reported wetlands Information does not necessarIly
mean thatwetiands do not exist In the aree covered by the report.
TC217084.1S
Page P-22
Former Manufactured Gaa (Coal Gae) Sites: The existence and location of Coal Gas snesls provided exclusively to
EDR by Real Property Scan, Inc. @Copyright 1993 Reai Property Scan, Inc. For a teohnical description of the types
of hazards which may be found at such snes, contact your EDR customer service representative.
Dlaclelmer provided by Real Property Scan, Inc.
The information contained In this report has predomlnantty been obtained from publicly available sources produced by entities
other than Real Property Scan. While reasonable steps have been taken to Ineure the accuracy of thie report. Reel Property
Scan does not guarantee the accuracy 01 this report. Arty liability on the part of Real Property Scan Is strictly limited to a refund
of the amount paid. No claim Is made for the actual existence of toxins at any site. This report does not consmute a legal
opinion. .
DELISTEDNPL: DelistedNPLSnes
Source: EPA
Telephone: 703.603.8769
DEUSTED NPL: Tha National 011 and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that
the EPA uses 10 delete snes from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites mey be deleted from the NPL
where no further response Is appropriate.
NFRAP: No Furthar Remedial Action Plsnned
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 703.413.0223
NFRAP: As of February 1995, CERCUS sites designated, 'No Further Remediel Action Plenned" (NFRAP) have been
removed from CERCUS. NFRAP sites may be snes where. following an initial Investigation, no contamination wes found.
contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL. or the contamination was not
serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed approximately 25.000 NFRAP
snes 10 11ft the unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties and has ",chlved them as historical records
so EPA does not needlessly repeat the investigations In the future. This polley change Is part of the EPA's Brownfields
Redevelopment Program 10 help cnles. states, private Investors and affected citizens to promote economic redevelopment
of unproductive urban sites.
PWS: Public Water Systems
Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: 202.260.2805
Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS Is any water systam which provides water to at
least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources.
PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data
Source: EPA/Offlce of Drinking Water
Telephone: 202.280.2805
Violation and Enforcement data for Public Weter Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SWDIS) efter
August 1995. PriorlO August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporong Data System (FRDS).
Area Radon Information: The National Radon Databese has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) and Is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey. The
study covers the yeers 1986 . 1992. Where neceasary dats has been supplemented by Information collected at private sources
such as universities and research Instttu1fons.
Oil/Gee PipelineS/Electrical Transmlselon Lines: This data wss obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It fs referred to by
USGS as GeoData Digital Une Graphs from 1:1 OO,OOO.Scaie Maps. n was extracted from the transpoltation category Including
some 011. bU1 primarily gas pipelines and electrical transmission lines.
Sensftlve Receptors: There are Individuals deemed sensitive receptors due 10 their fragile Immune systems and special sensnlvlty
to environmental discharges. Theae sel'ls~lve receptors typically Include the elderiy, the sick, end children. While the location of all
sensitive receptora cannot be determined, EDR Indicates those buildings and facilities' schools. daycares, hospftais, medical centers,
and nursing homes. where Individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located.
USGS Water Wells: In November 1971 the Unned Stetes Geological Survey (USGS) Implemented a netional water resource
Information tracking system. This database contains descriptive Information on snes where the USGS collects or has collected
dete on surfece water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data Indudeslnformetion on more than 900,000 wells. springs, and
other sources of groundwater.
TC217084.1s
Page A23
Flood Zone Deta: This data. available In select countiaa across the country. was obtained by EDR In 1994 from the Faderal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts !DO.year and 500.year "ood zones as defined by FEMA.
Eplcan1ers: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater
Source: Department 01 Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
WeIer Oems: Netlonallnventory of Dams
Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Telephone: 202-646.2801
WATER DAMS: Nationel computer datsbase of more than 74,000 dams melntalned by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
California Earthquake Faull Lines: Tha fault lines displayed on EDR's Topographic map are dlgl1lzed qua1amary fault lines,
prepared In 1975 by the Un lied S1ste Geological Survey. Additional Information (also from 1 975) regarding actlvl1y at specific fault
lines comes from Callfomla's Prelimlnsry Fault Activity Map prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology.
California Drinking WlI1ar Quellty Detebase
Source: Department of Health Services
Telephone: 916.324-2319
The database Includes all drinking water compliance end special studlesmonllorlng for the state of California
since 1984. II consists of over 3,200,000 Individual analyses along with well and water system Information.
TC217084.1s
Page A24
I)
A
p
P
E
N
D
I
X
C
-. -
Photograph 1: Front view of subject Property structures along East Main Street.
Photograph 2: Side view of subject Property structures along Prospect Avenue.
Photograph 3: Rear view'of subject Property structures.
Photograph 4: View of subject Property facing south showing concrete
and asphalt surfaces
- ,
Photograph 5: View of subject Property facing north showing concrete
and asphalt surfaces.
Photograph 6: Grassy area at northern end of subject Property.
View of subject Property faßingnorth showing coricrëie,
asphalt, and grassy surfaces.
Photograph 8:
View of underground clarifier at subject Property.
8)
A
p
P
IS
N
D
I
X
D
.'Page - of -
. CHAIN OF CUSTODY
EMC Laboratories
7342 E. ThDm8$ RDed
S~atUdale, A1iZOn$ 85Z51
{800)362-3373 (602)990.84S8 Fax
LABj'IO3 7
TAT; ó( dcu¡--..
!l.eC'd:5~15-7)
ConV8lSe Envi'Dnmentel West #41
222 E. Huntington Dr.. Ste. 211A
Monrovia, CA 9101S.3500
L.:a.lJ.fO-TtU'ì'a k~
-,F.. /626) 930.1200 1 (626) 930-12~2
Now ACcepting:VISA - MASTERCARD - (Indicate Payment Method)
CDMPAIIYIILWs,
IILl To-.
nrdl f"""L...IIa~
CQNTACT:
Price Quoted: $
$
f!)"
<15' 1 Semple
I LeVels
#
EXP DATE - SIGNATURE
COMPLETE ITEMS 1-4: (FeUure to ÇOmplete any items may cause Be2' =in9 or anaJyzíng your samples) .
,. TURNAROUND TIME: [4hr rush} [8hr rLlsh) ¡T-Day] [2-Day] [3-Day] [S-Day] 16-10 Day]
."'J::¡!¡u confirmation 01 turnaroUnd time hi ~ fot one dev anelva1s or aneIy. 0 more then 50 samol... per sl1ipment.
....Addltlon81 chers... lor 1'II8h enaJy¡;J. [pI...... cen matketing dsplll'tmen1; for pricing dat8l18l.
h..For no Fedoral E.<press oI1arges. e RÛnimum of 20 8$~8StO. or Glead semp,.'; -;... en;¡cð'C/:? ~èJlÌ1. t-
2. TVP!! OF ANALYSIS: {Bulk,PLM] [Air-PCM] ILead] .~Oìnt ~~- ITEM- ir! rTEM-BulkJ
3. DISPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS: rDispose of lamples at EM "~- rn samples to me at my excEIf1sel
Ilf "ou do not Inrficate Drefer/fJnO8, EMC will dlsDDS/fJ of SiImD/efi 60 diN' from 1Jni1Y:$isJ
4. Project Nem,,: 7/J,c:t/n I;::;. /Y/(} ¡'r7 .'Jr.
P.O. Number: I Proj"ct Numb"r: 'I r; - t.¡,,::) - (::)r9 q - 3/
EMC OUENT OAT!: LOCATION/MATERIAL SomplK A""""""INFCJao"_TO
SAMPLE SAMPLE # SAMPLED õYP2 Acaeptod ON 0", "",W
# V.. , No ..y.
I Oç;L 5- ::;" I /f . Y7/('t:.CJ/ /'1581'1; rv).
v .
y .
. ./1111\ y .
t17r!,r '-' y .
dI v' ..... h / '/ ...-'/-.
I! :J.- f jP' / /í I () ¿J V N
II 71[<7/ I y .
, .
, .
, .
, N
, N
, .
y N
SPECIAL INSTRUc:TIONS:
~~~:~::~::~:5-/~- Cjj
Relinquished by: Date:
Received by:
D!:i/~.
Dêlte:
Date:
5/19/98
ENVIRONMENTAL Ml<NAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
BULK MATE:RI~.L REPORT
Page
1
REPOR':r Labora tc:y Ana1ys is; lIt1LK
:lient: Converse Environmental
Reported to: Laura Tanaka
S~pled from: Tustin/E. Main Street
Shipped via: EMC Lab #47863 Received:
LAB: . 0010389
Methodology: EPA 600/M4-82-020PC
1'/0#:
prcj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
5/15/1998 Reported: 5/19/1998
SA2Œ'LE
IDEN'l'IFICA.'l'ION
PARAME':rER
TEST RESULTS
01
02
Ext. Stucco
Eeige/Yellow
195 Entrance
Asbestos
Trace_Detection. This sample
contains 0.19% Chrysotile,
0.28% cellulose, 99.53 Mica,
CaCO, Caso, Quartz, Einder.
..£ RR>O!l'1' ..',""n. TO till STANDAADO OR "'0"""""" ICW:r:".", AND ro tilt =PLI! 13) r....",. ,... "'0" """tn.U M" I<or ","........ILY INIac.
.rIVR .. ""PkJ!::B1fIJ\rIW OF TH¡ QUALrrn. or "'. LOT ..ON "'Q! TIŒ ."PLI IW T"""" OR 0' ...>....=< "",1<".= 0' ~r.ILAA .."DOas.
. DC TNBY """"0"'" AN 0>1<>0"'" O"""'on "SO1I.MOS ,",00""" "'OW,.. .. NO_. TH'" '..0... """ FOR "". """us,.", OOB OF ,... ""0"",,.
""" - "". """""10 .>0>1 ".. .""",..,.. :rHAr THEY WI"" .or .. ",xcDV,,",. ""oLLY OR ,. PI",r .., .....Tt<7,.. OR ",",,'R O""os,," ova.
"" """=0 OR :rn """"Zc-rl0. ~n" 0",," -t "'IKoW .Pier"" o.""nN ""'."ION. ""P'" Nor 0"""0<110 ,I< ns.,."",, ARt mAINJID . """.
""". 0, THuon OAY..
""UTTOO !Y ""¡ NL>I"""" I...."",. OP "'-- . """"""LOGY. VOL."".", """"""'RY ACClUIDttMIoN "_AM roo DBLB"""" nß'" H""HOU'
~-=lœ"~OM ~>= vm~ unMAn -... om"1wr- (~
..nalyst (s) :
Kurt Kettler
Signatory:
Kurt Kettler
rvLAP Aocreditation #101926-0, CA ELAP #1913, TX DOH #30-0094
".. ...,." "'HO"" 0o,," lcarr""""", ARIZONA ""1-12..
PH_, I,e» JPO-'."
fAX,
IGO') "'.'4"
""7.ge - of-
(;HAIN Of- (;U~ I UPy
EMC Laboratories
4455 East Camelback Road. Suite 0-155
Phoenix. Arizona 85018
1800)362.3373 (602)990.8468 Fax
......".. L/ '78 {¡:; ::S
TAT: 2~
Rec'd~Y 06 P11
";OMPANY NAME: Converse Environmenta' West
BILL TO:
(If diffarant Location)
one I Fax
NOW Accepting:
222 E. Huntinatcn Drive. ate. 211A ~
Monroyla. CA 91016-3500 - /J,-;;;:-- . " ,';::Û C
~M l--IUIJll -íalZtf..J..Æ- ~-r.lv- ---
818-930-12001818-930-1212 Price Quoted: $
VISA - MASTERCARD - AMERICAN EXPRESS - (INDICATE PMT METHOD)
EXP DATE _SIGNATURE
~OMPLETE ITEMS 1-4 BELOW: .
'ilure to complete any items may cause a delay in processing or analyzin
I. TURNAROUND TIME: [4hr rush} [8hr rush} [1-0ayl
""WTACT:
I Sample
I Layers
[3-Dayl
[5-0ay]
[6.10 Day]
. 2:!!!.!: confirmation of turnaround time Is reauired for one dav analvsis or analySis of mare than 50 samDles per shipment.
'+Additional charges for rush analysis (plesse call mrketing epertment for pricing details).
'...For no Federal Express char ¡nimum of 20 asbestos or 6 lead semples must be enclosed.
TYPE OF ANALYSIS: [Bulk-PL [Air-PCM] [Lead] [Point Count] [TEM-Airl [TEM-Bulk]
" DISPOSAL INSTRUCT) [Dispose of samples at EMC] / [Return samples to me at mv exoense]
(If Ii . d. EMC 71 cl: f l 6 . )
you 0 not In ìcate preference. WI Ispose 0 samp es 0 davs from analysIs.
. Project Name::::r~ I '(¿" tv{ C/1..A- %í
II P.O. Number: -C¡1-4--;t,--5'd1n I Project Number: tt 'J 4?- SJ-"1(jf
EMC CLIENT DATE lOCA TIONIMA TERIAL Samples AIR SAMPLE INFO/COMMENTS
'AMPLE SAMPLE # SAMPLED TYPE AoC.pIOd 0. OFF FLOW
II # Y.o I No
AATE
T I-<" -A=- oL c......., '/71. c: -::- ?Ú/ y N
I y .
-~ -i rÏiírD'1 Pi (11-1 h,';r~ ßrv /;,.¡"J7') y N
(51 v ' J (J1N
II I y N
\ y .
II Y N
) v/ N
1,10 NN
I
I Y .
Y .
II Y .
I
Y N
L Y N
, Y N
,..nquíshed b .
l"'Unquished b: -
nquished by:
..
Date:
Date: sí r;, 'Î 'Ò
Date: J y /'
Date:
UL
SA
I'L
0
:;
... (j CONVERSE 1 ~I'I
JUU ,~u",~;~U1¿J(¡Y1 ~L~ai~ 1F' Notes: Ac;¡~ ENVIRONMENTAL WEST t.\
Converse Job Number: q' - /t¿j¡;, 222 E. Huntington Drive, Suite 211
Dale: ô~'D5"t~ fí. ¡ ðl 1 Monrovia, CA 91016-3500
Telephone: 626/930.1200
Collected By: UX\ FAX: 626/930-1212
SAMPLES PHOTO MATERIAL SAMPLED lOCATION AREA CONDITION COMMENTS
# # SQ. FT.
Öl Øf.1. ~d.LV 1~5 5ÓD 1/( ~t~-\ÌlM.....
1 -r' ,I1-1v1. J. ~ J '~-\.'Il<..~
ó¿, r
0'1 \;
aLl -6i-t. 1l C{þ.\{;V .}i~ WltJÞ6W '2. 0 t) ~.
bS
(%; v '
61-' l71A1) vV cuJ¿ Iq5 fJ'~ 10-0/ iltvl'Yl---
tl: ,J-'.."oI11
..Y '"" ¡IQU
bC(y vv ~
0\ \. II ¥
10 fll5DY -tÐr+. ~ lq5
CHAIN OF ~
Relinquished By: - .
Received By: ...
Relinquished By: ~:;;.
Received By: -
Time:
Time:
Time:
Time:
~fM .
30' :;J f h¡
7fI;O
O.te: ~~1/?5 .~ í
D.te: 'a.-
D.te: . . D -
D.te: _~r-7 ¿=--
...
;J,.
,r ..
.Lou
@} "ON\,
SE
fq
Job Name: Noles: ~
Converse Job Number: q1~+l.Jj~ .-0 I
Date: ùS' rY5 ,Q15
Collected By: l,f)?( Y'~ Z-o~ 4
SAMPLES PHOTO MATERIAL SAMPLED LOCATION AREA CONDITION COMMENTS
# # SQ. FT.
n ~*IO
)-z..- 'L
12 QiCj \Jf~ ttì5 P%\ IV ;)0
.iI r ~
IL t7~L-"{ yv.
...
)S ,[)
\¡J' Ul-!.t.y wcß1 (':i1)ÆclD tq~ '.
'^^íl- V - ,
1'1 ---
II lO¡!:J
Il> (\ \\~ ~Il-(J.,-'
to¡ l1 \q1:? E Cth1
dO " t~~ ~
C~IN OF ~
Relinquished By . -
Received By:. >
Relin~uished By: . . '
ReceIved By: -- - --- .
Time: '6 M
Time: i3 ( se f
Time: ' fJ)
Time: I G d V
::::: ~Ís-;r
Date'
Date; ;J) .ç-Ýrr
v.
;),.
r..
~~ -
Job Name:
Converse Job Number: ~ 1-- 4:1.-- 8;"4 - ó I
Date: f)C;~OS..Jl cp
Collected By: I Pi
SAMPLES
#
PHOTO
#
MATERIAL SAMPLED
L\
~1,.
1-2
2~
1fõ
2-~
-Z"1
1-~
2-
1;0
f~n t-+Yíd~tIY'-
T-~t-
CHAIN OF CU~
Relinquished . . ... .
R.~..d ."'t)\O",, _: ~
Relinquished By:
Received By: ~
Notes: þ(?ß
? 6f '-I
LOCATION
\q\
l q \
IQS;
-e¡1t.
¡QS('£1?
\ c¡ ~/I q \
\q5 \N
W~
~
AREA
SQ. FT.
~ CONVERSE ~~
~ ENVIRONMENTAL WEST J<
222 E. Huntington Drive, Suite 211
Monrovia, CA 91016-3500
Telephone: 626(930.1200
FAX: 626/930-1212
CONDITION
COMMENTS
Gf\-~
Time: ~ ~
Time: I
Time: / ~ y~"l
Time: I ,þ "J'v
Date: ÞJ/ttlitó~
Date: '
Date: -
Date: ç- ¡:-'ý¡/"
III
SI
¡PI
lC
i) ~ON'
.6E
Joe l"'4ome: Noles:
Converse Job Number: ~ 1- -Lt -t - ð ?£j- () I ~
Date: oS-- óc;~q '4 o~~
Colleded By:
SAMPLES PHOTO MATERIAL SAMPLED LOCATION AREA CONDITION COMMENTS
# # SQ. FT.
~\ t W6f U-t f?(L :\t-,LC( -~
1:Jl f-()ì)t- cø-ú \45' ~ '3 ~
1J? / IQS ... Iv CQ-ttAw
~4 l~~ - ~rc
1þ \ \q3 - 6W(¡
j(P ~ I~ \ ~ Cm4tr f "
,
'U~OD~ ~ - J. ~f~1 ~ ~
{; b/1S
~ ~ . ~
Iy. ~ /6 r'
'J/ 111"0
CI~VI"UNIVICI~ IAL IVIANAl.Ot:IVIt:N I l-UN;:¡UL IAN I ¡;;
"age 1 or ~
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
¡AMPLE
01A
IDENTIFICATION
01
exterior, stucco-scratch coat
beige, black, tan
195 ENTRANCE
PARAMETER
Asbestos
LAB: 47863
Methodology: EPA 600/M4-82-020
PlO#: 97-42-529-01
proj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
Received: 5/6/98 Reported: 5/11/98
TEST RESULTS
EPORT Laboratory Analysis: BULK MATERIAL
':lient: CONVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL WEST #41
sported to: LAURA TANAKA
.ampled from: TUSTINIE. MAIN ST.
Shipped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Quartz. CaCO , Mica, Binder
01B 01
exterior, stucco-finish coat
yellow
195 ENTRANCE
02A 02
exterior, stucco-scratch coat
beige, black, tan
195 ENTRANCE
02B 02
exterior, stucco-finish coat
yeliow
195 ENTRANCE
03 03
ext. stucco, scratch coat
beige, black. tan
195 ENTRANCE
Asbestos
Jrace detected. This sample contains approx.
trace Chrysotile, 99% Quartz, CaS a . Mica, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Quartz, CaCO . Mica, Binder
Asbestos
Trace detected. This sample contains approx.
trace Chrysotile, 99% Quartz, CaSO , Mica, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Quartz, CaCO , Mica, Binder
REPORT APPUES TO THE STANDARDS OR PROCEDURES 10EN11FIED AND TO THE SAMPLE(S TESTED. THE Tl!ST RESULTS A"" NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OR REPRESENTATIVE
>IE QUALIT1SS OF THE LOT FROM WHICH THE SAMP'" WAS TAKEN OR OF APPARENTLY IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR PRODUCTS. NOR 00 THEY REPRESENT AN ONGOING QUAUTY
.URANCE PROGRAM UNLESS SO NOTED. THESE REPORTS ARE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADDRESSED CUENT AND ARE RENDERED UPON THE CONOlT10N THAT THEY
LL NOT BE REPRODUCED WHOLLY OR IN PARHOR ADVERTISING OR OTHER PURPOSES OVER OUR SIGNATU"" OR IN CONNECTION WITH OUR NAME WITHOUT SPECIAL WRITTEN
MISSION. SAMPLES NOT DESTROYED IN TESTING ARE RETAINED A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY DAYS.
REDITI!D BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTë OF STANDARCS .TI!CHNDLDGY. VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM FOR SELECTED Tl!ST METHOD FOR ASBESTOS. THE
,~""DITA TIDN DR ANY REPORTS GENERATI!D BY THIS LABORATORY IN NO WAY CONS1lTUTI!S OR IMPLIES PRODUCT CERTIFICATION, APPROVAL, OR ENDORSEMENT BY THE
oTJONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY. ALL ANALYSES A"" DERIVED FROM CALIBRATED VISUAL ESTIMATI! UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. POLARlZED.LIGHT IS NOT
SISTENTLY RELIABLE IN DETECTING ASBESTOS IN FLOOR COVERINOS AND SIMILAR NON.FRIABLE ORGANICALLY BOUND MATI!RlALS. QUANTITATIVE TRANSMISSION ELECTRON
<DSCOPY IS CUR""NTLY THE ONLY METHOD THAT CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE IF THIS MATI!RIAL CAN BE CONSIDERED OR TREATED AS NON-ASBESTOS.CONTAINING.
L7 --'/ .
~ .=.~ -~~
l~r-
L
Analyst: Cynthia M. Smith
By: Kurt Kettler
"LAP Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP#1913, TX DOH #30-0094
2 EAST THOMAS ROAD SCOTTSDALE. ARIZONA 85251.7216 (602) 990-2069 FAX: (602) 990-8468
111198
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMI::N I (;UNSUL TANTS
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
J-'age ¿ or ~
JRT Laboratory Analysis: BULK MATERIAL
.liant: CONVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL WEST #41
,rtad to: LAURA TANAKA
~I"pled from: TUSTIN/E. MAIN ST.
hinped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
IDENTIFICATION
04
ext. plaster
white
193 FRONT WlNDOW
Received:
LAB: 47863
Methodology: EPA 600/M4-82-020
PlO#: 97-42-529.01
Proj: 97-42.529-01
By: Client
5/6/98 Reported: 5/11/98
TEST RESULTS
AMPLE
04
PARAMETER
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Perlite, Quartz. CaCO. CaSO . Binder
05 05
ex!. plaster
white
193 FRONT WINDOW
06 06
ex!. plaster
white
193 FRONT WlNDOW
07A 07
drywall
tan, off white
195 BATH ENCLOSURE
07B 07
compound
It. beige
195 BATH ENCLOSURE
Asbestos
Iione detected. This sampie contains approx.
100% Perlite, Quartz, CaCO , CaSO, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Perlite, Quartz, CaCO. CaSO, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
10% Cellulose, 90% CaCO, CaSO, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
1% Cellulose. 99% Quartz, CaCO , Mica, Binder
PORT APPLIes TO THE STANOAROS OR PROCeDURES IDENTIFleO AND TO THE SAMPLelSI TESTED. THe TEST RESULTS ARE NOT NeCESSARILY INDICATive OR REPRESENTATIve
QUALITIES OF THe LOT FROM WHICH THE SAMPLE WAS TAKE>! OR OF APPARENTe Y IDeNTICAL OR SiMILAR PRODUCTS. NOR DO THEY RePRESENT AN ONGOING QUALITY
¡URANCE PROGRAM UNLESS SO NOTED. THESe REPORTS ARe FOR THE EXCLUSive use OF THE AODRESSeD CLIENT AND ARe RENDeReD UPON THE CONOITION THAT THEY
LL NOT BE REPRoDutee WHOLLY OR IN PART FOR ADVERTISING OR OTHER PURPOSES OVER OUR SIGNATURE OR IN CONNECTION WITH OUR NAMe WITHOUT SPECIAL WRJTTEN
iSION. SAMPLES NOT DESTROYED IN TESTING ARE RETAINED A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY DAYS.
OITED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS .TECHNOLOGY. VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCReDITATION PROGRAM FOR seLECTeD TEST MeTHOD FOR ASB""OS. THE
:ReOITATlON OR ANY REPORTS GeNeRATED BY THIS LABORATORY IN NO WAY CONSTITUTES OR IMPLIES PRODUCT CeRTIFICATION. APPROVAL, OR ENDORseMeNT BnHe
,TI,,"AL INSTITUTE OF STANOARDS ANOTECHNOLO( '(. ALL ANALYSES ARE DERIVEO FROM CALIBRATED VISUAL ESTIMATE UNLESS OTHERWiSe NOTED. POLARIZeD-LIGHT IS NOT
,TENTL Y ReLIABLE IN DETECTING ASSESTOS IN FLOOR COVERINGS AND SIMILAR NON.FRlABLe ORGANICALLY SOUNO MATeRIALS. QUANTITATIVe TRANSMISSION E!.ECTRON
SCOFY IS CURReNTLY THE ONLY MeTHOD THAT CAN Be USED TO DeTeRMINe IF THIS MATERIAL CAN BE CONSIDEReD OR TREATED AS NON-ASBESTOS.CONTAINING.
--.---
l~ r-.
~
~ ...s;>.~ '</..L'~
AnBlyst: Cynthia M. Smith
By: Kurt Kettier
" ^,P Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP#1913, TX DOH #30-0094
EAST THOMAS ROAO SCOTTSDALE. ARIZONA 85251.7216 (602) 990-2069 FAX: (602) 990-8468
~/11/!;!:!
ENVIRONMEN1AL MANAGEMI::NI c.;UN;;ULTANTS
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
I-'age;; at!;
EPORT Laboratory Analysis; BULK MATERIAL
';lient; CONVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL WEST #41
~ported to: LAURA TANAKA
"impled from: TUSTIN/E. MAIN ST.
f;l1ipped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
IDENTIFICATION
08
drywall
tan. off white
195 BATH ENCLOSURE
PARAMETER
Asbestos
LAB; 47863
Methodology; EPA 600/M4-82-020
P/O#; 97-42-529-01
proj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
Received: 5/6/98 Reported: 5/11/98
TEST RESULTS
jAMPLE
08A
None detected. This sample contains approx.
10% Cellulose, 90% Quartz, CaCO , CaSO , Binder
08B 08
compound
It. beige
195 BATH ENCLOSURE
09 09
drywall
tan, off white
195 BATH ENCLOSURE
10 10
fioor, texture, coat
It. beige. black. brown
195
11 11
floor. texture, coat
It. beige, black, brown
195
Asbestos
~one detected. This sample contains approx.
1% Wollastonite, 99% Quartz. CaCO , Mica, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sampie contains approx.
10% Cellulose, 90% CaCO , CaSO, Binder
Asbestos
Positive. This sample contains approx.
5% Chrysotile, 95% Quartz, CaCO , Binder
Asbestos
Positive. This sample contains approx.
3% Chrysotile, 2% Cellulose. 95% Quartz, CaCO ,
Binder
'REPORT APPLIes TO THE STANDARDS DR PROCEDURES 10ENTlFlED AND TO THESAMPLEIS) TESTED. THE TEST RESULTS ARE NOT NECesSARILY INDICATIVE OR REPRESENTATIVE
'HE QUALITIES OF THE LOT FROM WHICH THE SAMPLE WAS TAK!!N DRDFAPPARENTLY IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR PRODUCTS, NOR DO THEY REPRESENT AN ONGOING "UALITY
¡SURANCE PROGRAM UNLESS SO NOTED. TH!!SE REPORTS ARE FOR THE exCLUSIVE US!! OF THE ADDRESSED CLIENT AND ARE RENDERED UPON THE CONDITION THAT THEY
"LL NOT SE REPRODUCED WHOLLY OR IN PART FOR ADVERTISING OR OTHER PURPOS!!S OVER OUR SIGNATURE OR IN CONNEc-nON WITH OUR NAME WITHOUT SPECIAL WRITTEN
IMISSION. SAMPLES NOT DESTROYED IN TESTING ARE RETAINED A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY DAYS.
:REDITED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS TECHNOLOGY. VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM FOR SELECTED TEST METHOD FOR ASBESTOS. THE
:CR!!DITATlDN OR ANY REPORTS GENERATED BY THIS LABORATORY IN NO WAY CONSTlTUT!!S DR IMPLI!!S PRODUCT CERTIFICATION. APPROVAL. OR ENDORSEMENT BY THE
A TIONALlNSTlTUTE OF STANDARDSAND TECHNDLOGV. ALL ANAL VSES ARE DERIVED FROM CALIBRATED VISUAL ESTIMATE UNLESS DTHERWlS!! NOTED. POLARJZED.LlGHT IS NOT
ISISTENT1. V RELIABLE IN DETECTING ASBESTOS IN FLOOR COIieRINGS AND SIMILAR NON.FRJABLI! ORGANICALLY BDUND MATERJALS. DUANTlTATlVE TRANSMISSION eLECTRON
.RDSCDPV IS CURRENTLY THE DNLV METHOD THAT CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE IF THIS MATERJAL CAN BE CONSIDERED DR TREATED AS NON-ASBESTOS.cONTAINING.
L7~<--<'
~..s;>..~-.,-~~
l~'r-
L
-----
Analyst: Cynthia M. Smith
By: Kurt Kettler
"'LAP Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP #1913, TX DOH #30.0094
.2 EAST THOMAS ROAD SCOTTSDALE. ARIZONA 85251.7216 (602) 990-2069 FAX: (602) 990-8468
tlI11/\:11:!
I::NVIRONMI::N I AL MANAt;;I::Mt::N I L;UN::iUL I ANTS
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
I-'age 4 01 ~
PORT Laboratory AnalysIs: BULK MATERIAL
Glient: CONVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL WEST #41
ported to: LAURA TANAKA
"ampled from: TUSTIN/E. MAIN ST.
-';hipped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
IDENTIFICATION
12
fioor, texture, coat
It. beige, black, brown
195
Received:
LAB: 47863
Methodology: EPA 600/M4-82-020
PlO#: 97-42-529-01
proj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
5/6/98 Reported: 5/11/98
SAMPLE
12
PARAMETER
Asbestos
TEST RESULTS
Positive. This sample contains approx.
5% Chrysotile, 95% Quartz, CaCa , Binder
13A 13
9x9, VFT
green
195 BATH
13B 13
mastic
black
195 BATH
14A 14"
9x9, VFT
green
195 BATH
14B 14
mastic
black
195 BATH
Asbestos
I?ositive. This sample contains approx.
12% Chrysotile. 88% CaCa , Binder
Asbestos
Positive. This sample contains approx.
3% Chrysotiie, 2% Cellulose, 95% Quartz, CaCa .
Binder
Asbestos
Positive. This sample contains approx.
15% Chrysotile, 85% CaCa. Binder
Asbestos
Positive. This sample contains approx.
2% Chrysotile, 98% CaCO , Binder
REPORT APpLIES TO THE STANDARDS DR PROCEDURES 10ENõ1FIED AND TO"I1<E SAMPLEtS) TESTED. THE TEST RESULTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE DR REPRESENTATIVE
HE QUALITIES OF THE LOT FROM WHICH THE SAMPLE WAS TAKEN OR OF APPAREN11. Y IDENTICAL DR SIMILAR PRDDUCTS. NOR DO THEY REPRESENT AN ONGOING QUALITY
SSURANCE PROGRAM UNLESS SD NOTED. THESE REPDRTS ARE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADDRESSED CUENT AND ARE RENDERED UPON THE CONDITION THAT THEY
WIll. NOT SE REPRODUCED WHOLLY DR IN PART FOR ADVE1mSlNG OR OTHER PURPOSES OVER OUR SIGNATURE OR IN CONNECTION WITH OUR NAME WITHOUT SPECIAL WRITTEN
,.,SSION. SAMPLES NDT DESTRDYED IN TESTING ARE RETAINED A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY DAYS.
REDITED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDB .TECHNOLDGY, VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM FOR SELECTED TEST METHOD FOR ASBESTOS. THE
CCREDITATlDN DR ANY REPORTS GENERATED BY THIS LABORATORY IN NOWAY CONSTITUTES DR IMPLIEB PRODUCT CERTIFICATION. APPROVAL QR ENDORBEMENT BY THE
N""ONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY. ALL ANALYSES ARE DERIVED FROM CALIBRATED VISUAL ESTIMATE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. POLARJZED.UGHT IS NOT
SISTEN11. Y RELIASLE IN DmCTING ASBESTDS IN FLODR COVERINGS AND SIMILAR NON.FRIABLE ORGANICALLY BOUND MA TEBlAI.S. QUANõ1TA TlVE TRANSMISSION EJ.ECTRON
ROSCDPY IS CURREN11. Y THE ONLY METHOD THAT CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE IF THIS MATERIAL CAN BE CONBIDERED OR TREATED AS NDN.ASBESTOS-CONTAINING.
L?7--4A::, ~ -=~ ~"..¿.-
l~r-
L
AnBlyst: Cynthia M. Smith
By: Kurt Kettler
i"'LAP Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP #1913. TX DOH #30-0094
2 EAST THOMAS ROAO SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA 85251-7216 (602) 990-2069 FAX: (602) 990-<1468
II ""0
!::1~VIr<U"'VI!::" I "L IVI""""'!::IVI!::" I '"'U"~UL I "'~ I '"
,..,,~'" iJ UI 0
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
,PORT Laboratory Analysis: BULK MATERIAL
.lient: CONVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL WEST #41
'ported to: LAURA TANAKA
dmpled from: TUSTINIE. MAIN ST.
õhipped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
IDENTIFICATION
15
9x9, VFT
green
195 BATH
Received:
LAB: 47863
Methodology: EPA 600IM4-82-020
PIO#: 97-42-529.01
Proj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
516/98 Reported: 5111/98
TEST RESULTS
AMPLE
15A
PARAMETER
Asbestos
Positive. This sample contains approx.
15% Chrysotile, 85% CaCO, Binder
15B 15
mastic
black
195 BATH
16 16
interior, wall, material
It. beige, black, tan
195
17 17
interior, wall, material
It. beige. black. tan
195
18 18
interior, wall, material
beige. black, tan
193 WEST
Asbestos
"trace detected. This sample contains approx.
trace Chrysotiie. 99% CaCO , Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
trace Synthetics. 99% Quartz, CaSO , Mica, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
trace Synthetics, 99% Quartz, CaCO , Mica. Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Quartz, CaCO, CaSO. Mica, Binder
REPORT APPLIES TO THE STANDARDS OR PROCEDURES IDENTIFIED AND TO THE SAMPLEtS) TESTED. THE TEST RESULTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE DR REPRESENTATIVE
,.. OUALITIES OF THE LOT FROM WHICH THE SAMPCEWAS TAKEN DR OF APPARENTLV 'DENTICALOR SIMILAR PRODUCTS. NOR DO THEY REPRESENT AN ONGOING OUAU"TY
IURANCE PROGRAM UNLESS 50 NOTED. THESE REPORTS ARE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADDRESSED eUENT AND ARE RENDERED UPON THE CONDITION THAT THEY
u.. NOT BE REPRODUCED WHOLLY DR IN PART FeR ADVERTISING OR OTHER PURPOSES OVER OUR SIGNATVREOR IN CONNECTION WITH OUR NAME WITHOUT SPECIAL WRITTEN
MISSION; SAMPLES NOT DESTROYED IN TESTING ARE RETAINED A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY DAYS.
REDITEO BV THE NATIONAL INSTlTIJTE OF STANDARDS .TECHNOLOGY. VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM FOR SECEeTED TEST "'ETHOD FOR ASBESTOS. THE
,.ECITATION OR ANY REPORTS GENERATED BY THIS LABORATORY IN NO WAY CONSTITUTES OR IMPLIES PRODUOTCERTlReATlDN, APPROVAL. DR ENCORSEMENT BY THE
.TlONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY. ALL ANALYSES ARE DBRIVED FROM CALIBRATED VISUAL ESTIMATE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. POLARIZED.UGHT 15 NOT
SISTENTLY REUABLEIN DETECTING ASBESTOS IN FLOOR COVERINGS AND SIMILAR NON.FRlABLE ORGANICALLY BOUND MATERIALS. QUANTITATIVE TRANSMISSION ELECTRON
'OSCOPY IS CURRENTLY THE ONLY METHOD THAT CAN BE USED TO QETERMINE'F THIS MATERIAL CAN BE CONSIDERED OR TREATED AS NON.ASBESTOS-CONTAINING.
é7--~ .
~ ..s:."ç -s/-L'~
l~~
L
Analyst: Cynthia M. Smith
By: Kurt KBttler
"LAP Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP #1913, TX DOH #30-0094
2 EAST THOMAS ROAD SCOTTSDALE. ARIZONA 85251-7216 (602) 990-2069 FAX: (602) 990.8468
'l1/!;tj
_,MPLE
19A
19B
20A
20B
, a!;~ ~ v' ~
t:NVIKUNIVIt:N I "L IVI",~,,"'C:IVIC:" I \JV"""UL I "" I""
19
interior, wall, material, 2nd layer
gray, It. yellow
193 EAST
20
Interior, wall, material, 1st layer
beige. black, tan
193 WEST
20
interior, wall. material. 2nd layer
yellow
193 WEST
21
21
interior, wall. material
beige, off white
191
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
PARAMETER
Asbestos
LAB: 47863
Methodology: EPA 600/M4-82-020
PlO#: 97-42-529.01
Proj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
5/6/98 Reported: 5/11/98
TEST RESULTS
)RT Laboratory Analysis: BULK MATERIAL
uent: CONVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL WEST #41
¡rted to: LAURA TANAKA
,..pled from: TUSTIN/E. MAIN ST.
hillped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
IDENTIFICATION
19
interior, wall, material, 1st layer
beige, black, tan
193 EAST
Received:
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Quartz. CaSO, Mica, Binder
Asbestos
N.one detected. This sample contains approx-
100% Quartz, CaCO . Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Quartz, CaSO. Mica. Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
trace Cellulose, 99% Quartz, Caca , Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx,
trace Cellulose, 99% Quartz, Casa , Mica, Binder
PORT APPLIES TO THE STANDARDS OR PROCEDURES IDENTIFIED ANC TC THE SAMPLEIS} TESTED. THE TEST RESULTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OR REPRESENTATIVE
QUALITIES OF THE LOT FROM WHICH THE SAMFLE WAS TAKEN OR OF APPARENTLY ICENTICAL OR SIMILAR PROOUCTS. NOR DO THEY REPRESENT AN ONGOING QUALITY
"KANCE PROGRAM UNLESS SO NOTED. THESë REPORTS ARE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADORESSEC CLIENT ANC ARE RENCERED UPON THE CONCITICN THATTHEY
LL NOT BE REPROCUCEC WHOLLY OR IN PART FCR ADVERTISING OR OTHER PURPOSES CVER OUR SIGNATURE CR IN CONNECTION W1TH OUR NAME W1THOUT SPECIAL WRITTEN
-1SION. SAMPLES NOT CESTROYEC IN TESTING ARE RETAINED A MAXIMUM OF THIRTYCAYS.
CITEC BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS .TECHNOLOGY. VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDrrATlCN PROGRAM FOR SELECTED TEST METHOC FOR ASBESTCS. THE
KêDITATION OR ANY REPCRTS GENERATEC BY THIS LABORATCRY IN NC WAY CCNSTITUTES OR IMPLIES PROCUCTCERTlFlCATION. APPROVAL, CR ENCORSEMENT BY THE
,TlONAL INSTITUTE CF STANDARCS AND TECHNOLOGY. ALL ANALYSES ARE DERIVED FROM CALIBRA TEC VISUAL ESTIMATE UNLESS CTHERW1SE NCTED. POLARIZEC.LlGHT IS NOT
-;TENTLY RELIABLE IN CETECTING ASBESTCS IN FLCCR COVERINGS ANC SIMILAR NON.FroABLE CRGANICALLY BOUNC MATERIALS. QUANTITATIVE TRANSMISSION ELECTRCN
SCOPY IS CURRENTLY THE ONLY METHOD THAT CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE IF THIS MATERIAL CAN BE CONSIDERED OR TREATED AS NCN-ASBESTOS.CONTAINING.
~ ..s: .ç '<r-~/
_nalyst: Cynthia M- Smith
l~r-
L
By: Kurt Kettler
"AP Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP #1913, TX DOH #30.0094
EAST THOMAS ROAD SCOTTSDALE, ARiZONA 85251.7216 (602) 990-2069 FAX: (602) 990-8468
fi/11/98
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGE:MI::N I l;UN::;UL TANTS
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
Page 7 of 9
~AMPLE
22
EPORT Laboratory Analysis: BULK MATERIAL
l,;lient: CONVERSE ENviRONMENTAL WEST #41
eported to: LAURA TANAKA
ampled from: TUSTIN/E. MAIN ST.
"'hipped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
IDENTIFICATION
22
interior, wall, material
beige, offwhite
191
PARAMETER
Asbestos
LAB: 47863
Methodology: EPA 600/M4-82-020
P/O#: 97-42-529-01
Proj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
Received: 5/6/98 Reported:' 5/11198
TEST RESULTS
None detected. This sample contains approx,
100% Quartz, CaSO. Mica, Binder
23 23
acoustical, spray-on
beige, white, off white
195 ENTRY
24 24
acoustical, spray-on
beige, white, offwhite
195 ENTRY
25 25
acoustical, spray-on
beige. white, off white
195 ENTRY
26 26
penetration, tar
black
195/193
Asbestos
fljone detected. This sample contains approx,
100% Quartz. CaCO, Mica, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Quartz, CaCa . Mica, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
100% Quartz, CaCO, Mica, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
10% Cellulose, 90% CaCO. Binder
, REPORT APPUES TO THE STANDARDS DR PROCEDURES IDENTiFIED AND TO THE SAMPLE(S) TESTED. THE TEST RESULTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY INDICA 11VE DR REPRESENTATiVE
fHE QUAUTIES OF THE LOT FROM WHICH THE SAMPLE WAS TAKEN DR OF APPARENT\. Y IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR PRODUCTS. NOR DO THEY REPRESENT AN ONGOING QUALITY
,"URANCE PROGRAM UNLESS SO NOTED, THESE REPORTS ARE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADDRESSED CLIENT AND ARE RENDERED UPON THE CONomDN THAT THEY
"LL NOT BE REPRODUCED WHOLLY OR IN PART FOR ADVERTISING OR DTHER PURPOSES OVER OUR SIGNATURE OR IN CONNECT10N WITH OUR NAME WITHOUT SPECIAl.. WRITTEN
"'ISSION. SAMPLES NOT DESTROYED IN TES11NG ARE RETAINED A MAXIMUM OF THIRTY DAYS.
:REDITED BYTHENATlQNAL INSTITIITE DF STANDARDS ,TECHNDLOGY, VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM FOR SELECTED TEST METHQD FOR ASBESTOS, THE
:CREDITATION DR ANY REPORTS GENERATED BY THIS LABORATORY IN ND WAY CDNSTlTUTES OR IMPUES PRODUCT CERTIFICATION. APPROVAl.., OR ENDORSEMENT BY THE
ATiDNAL INBTlTUTE OF STANDARDBAND TECHNDLOGY. ALL ANALYSES ARE DERIVED FROM CALIBRATED VISUAL ESTIMATE UNLESS DTHERWISE NOTED. POLARIZED.LIGHT 15 NOT
ISISTENT\.Y REUABLE IN DETECT1NG ASBESTOS IN FLOOR COVERINGS AND SIMILAR NON.FRIABLE DRGANICALLY BOUND MATERIALS. QUANTITATIVE TRANSMISSION ELECTRON
RDSCOPT IS CURRENT\. Y THE ON!. Y METHOD THAT CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE IF THIS MATERIAL CAN BE CONSIDERED OR TREATED AS NON.ASBesTOS.CONTAlNING.
L:7-4;¿'
~~
lL:st- .r-
L
--.--. --
.----
Analyst: Cynthia M. Smith
By: Kurt Kettler
"'LAP Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP #1913, TX DOH #30-0094
,2 EAST THOMAS ROAD SCOTTSDALE. ARIZONA 85251-7216 (602) 990-2069 FAX: (602) 990-8468
!">/11/98
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
Page 8 of 9
PORT Laboratory Analysis: BULK MATERIAL
'::lient: CONVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL WEST #41
Jorted to: LAURA TANAKA
'Q,npled from: TUSTIN/E. MAIN ST.
"hipped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
IDENTIFICATION
27
penetration, tar
black
193/191
Received:
'LAB: 47863
Methodology: EPA 600/M4-82-020
P/O#: 97-42-529-01
Proj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
5/6/98 Reported: 5/11/98
TEST RESULTS
>AMPLE
27
PARAMETER
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
12% Cellulose, 88% Quartz, CaCO . Binder
28 28
penetration, tar
black
195 W SIDE
29 29
felt
black, gray
WEST SIDE OF 195
30 '30
felt
black, gray
WEST SIDE OF 195
31 31
felt
black, gray
WEST SIDE OF 195
Asbestos
lIdone detected. This sample contains approx.
10% Cellulose, 90% CaCO, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
12% Fiberglass, 88% Quartz, CaCO , Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
15% Fiberglass, 85% Quartz, CaCa , Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sam pie contains approx.
15% Fiberglass, 85% Quartz, CaCO . Binder
. ,"PORT APPUES TO THE STANDARDS DR PRDCEDURES IDENTIFIED AND TO THE SAMPLEIS! TESTED. THE TEST RESULTS ARE NDT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OR REPRESENTATIVE
E aUALmES OF THE LDT FROM WHICH THE SAMPLE WAS TAKEN OR OF APPARENTLY 10ENTICAL DR SIMILAR PRODUCTS. NOR DD THEY REPRESENT AN ONGOING QUAUTY
iSURANCE PRDG"". UNLESS SD NOTED. THESE R!PO"",,, ARE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADDRESSED CUENT AND ARE RENOERED UPON THE CONDITION THAT THEY
~LL NOT BE REPROOUCED WHOLLY DR IN PART FDR ADVERTISING OR OTHER PURPOSES OVER OUR SIGNATURE OR IN CONNECTION WITH OUR NAME WITHOUT SPECIAL WRITTEN
"'ISSION. SAMPLES NDT DESTROYED IN TESTING ARE RETAINED A MAXIMUM DFTHIRTY DAYs.
EDITED BY THE .ATlDNAL INSTI1\ITE OF STANDARDS .TECHNOLOGY, VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM FOR SELECTED TEST METHOD FOR ASBESTOS. THE
:CREDITATION OR ANY REPORrs GENERATED BY THIS LABORATDRY IN NO WAY CONSTITUTES OR IMPLIES PRODUCT CERTlFlCATlDN, APPROVAL., OR ENOORSEMENT BY THE
IATIONAL INSTITUTE DF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY. ALL ANALYSES ARE DERIVED FROM CALIBRATED VISUAL ESTIMATE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. POLARIZED-LIGHT IS NOT
, "'ISTENTL Y RELIABLE IN DETECTING ASBESTtlS IN FLDOR COVERINGS AND SIMILAR NON-FRIABLE ORGANICALLY BOUND MATERIALS. QUANTITATIVE TRANBMISS'ON ELECTRON
OSCOPY IS CURRENTLY THE ONLY METHOD THAT CAN BE USED TtI DETERMINE'F THIS MATERIAL CAN BE CONSIDERED OR TREATED AS NON.ASBESTOS.cONTAlNING.
L7""""-;--<"
~ ..=.~ ~/<,,"~
l~r-
L
Analyst: Cynthia M. Smith
By: Kurt KBttlBr
I',".AP Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP #1913, TX DOH #30-0094
! EAST THOMAS ROAD SCOTTSDALE. ARIZONA 85251-7216 (602) 990-2069 FAX: (602) 990.8468
" 1/9tj
I::NVIKUNMt::NIAL NIANAl.">t:IVIt:N I L..U'~"ULIANI"
""'\;=" UI"
BULK MATERIAL REPORT
,PORT Laboratory Analysis: BULK MATERIAL
:lient: CONVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL WEST #41
'ported to: LAURA TANAKA
ampled from: TUSTIN/E. MAIN ST.
"ipped via: FEDERAL EXPRESS
IDENTIFICATION
32
roof core
black
195-S CENTER
AMPLE
32
PARAMETER
Asbestos
LAB: 47863
Methodology: EPA 600/M4-82-020
P/O#: 97-42-529-01
Proj: 97-42-529-01
By: Client
Rèceived: 5/6/98' Reported: 5/11/98
TEST RESUL T5
None detected. This sample contains approx.
15% Fiberglass, 85% Quartz, CaCO , Binder
33 33
roof core
black
195-N CENTER
34 34
roof core
black
193 SEC
35 35
roof core
black
193 SWC
36 36
roof core
black
191 CENTER E
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
15% Fiberglass, 85% Quartz. CaCa , Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
20% Fiberglass. 80% CaCa , Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
15% Fiberglass, 85% CaCa, Binder
Asbestos
None detected. This sample contains approx.
10% Fiberglass, 90% Quartz, CaCa , Binder
'REPORT APPUES TO THE STANDARDS OR PROCEDURES IDEN11F1ED AND TO THE SAMPL:(S¡ TESTED. THE TEST RESULTS ARE NOT NECESSA"'L V INDICATIVE OR REPRESENTATIVE
HE QUALmES OF THE LOT FROM WHICH THE SAMPLE WAS TAKEN OR OF APPARENTI.Y IDENTICAL OR SIMII.AR PRODUCTS, NOR DO THEY REPRESENT AN ONGOING OUALITY
SURANCE PROGRAM UNLESS SO NOTED. THESE REPORTS ARE FOR THE exCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADDRESSED CUENT AND ARE RENDERED UPON THE CONomON THAT THEY
LL NOT BE REPROOUCED WHOLLY OR IN PART FOR AOVER11SING OR OTHER PURPOSES OVER OUR SIGNATURE OR IN CONNECTION WITH OUR NAME WITHOUT SPECIAL WRITTEN
"SS'ON. SAMPLES NOT DESTROVED IN TESnNG ARE RSTAINED A MAXIMUM OF THIR.". DAYS.
'EOITED BV THE NAnONAL INsnTUTE OF STANDARDS ,TECHNOLOGY. VOLUNTARV I.ASORATORY ACCREOITAnON PROGRAM FOR SELECTSO TEST METHOD FOR ASBESTOS. THE
CREOITATION OR ANV REPORTS GENERATED BY THIS I.ABORATORV IN NO WAY CONS'I1TUTES OR IMPUES PRODUCT CER'I1F1CA'I10N, APPROVAL. OR ENDORSEMENT BV THE
,nONAL INSmuTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY. ALL ANALVSES ARE DERIVED FROM CALIBRATED VISUAL ESTIMATE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. POI.ARlZEO.UGHT IS NOT
,'STENTI. v REUABLEIN DETECnNG ASBESTOS IN FLOOR COVERINGS ANO SIMILAR NON.FRIABLE ORGANICALLV SOUND MATERIALS. OUAN11TATIVE TRANSMISSION ELECTRON
tOSCOPV IS CURRENTI. v THE ONLY METHOD THAT CAN BE USED TO DETERMINE IF THIS MATERIAL CAN BE CONSIDERED OR TREATED AS NON.ASBESTOS.CONTAINING.
L?'/,...<..,...
~ -S' ~ 'j/'..L'-
l~,r-
L
Analyst: Cynthia M. Smith
By: Kurt Kettler
'LAP Accreditation #1926, CA ELAP #1913, TX DOH #30-0094
2 EAST THOMAS ROAD SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA 85251.7216 (602) 990.2069 FAX: (602) 990.8468
"d, "
./l,
. ii!,
in
t~:
h
'.j',
, œ¡
CJ
ig
. . ~
r6 ~
I f'l ¡¡;
~ ¡:<-'"
-. "'"
I~ ß'È.
::> ,.,~
3 g.,~ (j)
~ g'¡;, ::¡
I ~ g. ~ fT1
5 .."
, ::: S' ç:
:I.....~ ~ z
it
it :
~
I
I ~
t,I.,.~i (I ik~ ~
:11 ~ 5;'lIt;~~;
I"~ j!i ~
, ,~. L fJ1 "{
¡;'ß I f 2 ;
I if
I ~
¡¡~:. '
'I Sd W::I>:.:80 866. ØE '..!do¡
..R
I
ä
f
f
f
:..
i
~
¡;r
f
i
6
,~
r'-fb
j
~
1
~
~
..
~ r;_156
- C1
!§ i D~gi
{J"I '
~ i en F
21- f 'f r Ib
,~ . ""
CII If Tlj
11 Iß ! t?,t-! D 'ß-15
_'0,1/,1
,;;:. ~1 :.0
,() .A,e.
East Main Street
, ¡
~
~
I
:,.
~
~
Ii
I:
;¡
!1
laÞ96 þþþ Þ.¿ : 'ON 3..o-1d
, ,
: Ii
S.LN::Jl"'T"6i'-ID 3S1::I3t'"íD :, WOlli
. .
,
I f'l :..
::¡ -1 ~
< c-
Ii:;' ; g
II 0 ? '"
~ ~¡¡;
::j :'0 '" t/)
m õ' -
~ =- à. g ;;:¡
f¡ c 0 ~
~ ""U
S' ç
~ z
it
i~
-
¡, ~' p :r,' ~ e:
¡ t ~Io\
~ It ~ ~~ So
I <....~ ¡¡'
, ."" 11$' Ii'
, ~I.. ~~
" ~." 11 ì', i
..: F 9 ,
, '"
'"
, 'f
;:
~
r
:..
~
f
>.
i
i
i
I
!
'.
r
..
!Þ
r
i
~
~
..
..)(
!2 ' 12
~ :?~', i '
f ~~. f
(II (II ,
Þ:' Þ:'
!l , ~
15 It ;4
..
~
r---L -
"f-:
f
I
~
i
. ~::
...
ro
tn
zip i
.;<"'}.'" 3)
g¡
!
¡,.;¡.~',,'!;<¡...
/'\
:;>
Q
~
~
):,.
(§
~
Sd W\:In:æ 8661 ØE "..¡c:!I:;
-
East Main Street
ØÞ96 17\'1' Þ1¿ : "ON 3t..o-td
II
I:
ii
i
ii
,¡ ¡ ;1 ;!
::J'I
~'¡,';,,:.;,', j, I
.. ¡ I
" :.;' t[
1,',::',\,::, "II :
'f"-' i ¡
1,I'i,i!j" ¡ II
:1' l' I
! i ,j
, :1 II
,I 'I I
'1.,1 ¡",Iii'.
: 'I
;',;. ¡ II
I ' .
12. tú "F ¡I ! i
?þ¡tv{f*
~
: I ,I
i ':
i :
SJ.N:IlìnSNeJ:) 3Sè6r"1D:! : WJòl:J
(8
A
p
P
IS
N
D
I
X
E
'I':: ¡
'- ¡:I . :' ~~II!I'\I..nr::..t".J;u:-.x.nn" I,Ml'lh
"lli, ','.,,',i 'Ii ,:',', 4455ED$tCamelbeckRoad,SuiteD;1SS TAT.
'I ,I ' Phoenix. Arizona 85018
Ii : . ¡,J ~' i : 1800)362.3373 . 1602J990-8468 Fax
'Ii: ""J, I' '
~j{ljt".' ;~~~A- ==- .
, ,1 '
tl N, ~~,A~j pIing: Iv, ISA - MASTER~ARD - AMEIlICAN exPRESS - (INDICATE PMT METHOD)
1[¡#! ::'¡ , EXP DATE _SIGNATURE
li"H' ,
COMPLETE ITEMS 14 BELOVY:
;!J'~f~.H to comple~ any items m¡y cause e delay in proces$i!)9 or analyzing your $amples)
',~jf~~~NAROUN~ TIME: , 14h r\lsh) [8hr tush) 8 [2-Day] (3-Day) [5-Day] [6.10 Day]
1M .,.Pr, ;br~, onflrmatlon of tutnoround 11m Is reQuired for one dsv analYsis or analysis of mare than 50 semoles per shipment.
OO"i:..Adclitional charges for rush 8n~ (pI...... c:aII mrketinliJ op"",,,ant for pricing datans). '
;¡;~í~ no Federal ~pre.. charges, a minimum of 20 a,basto ~ompleš must be enclo.~d.
112., TYPE OF' ANALYSIS: (Bulk- LMj (Air-PCM [Lead] [Point Coun~J [TEM-Air] ITEM-Bulk]
: ':3; D'/SPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS: (DIspose Of $amp CJ I (RetUrn samples to me at my exoense]
, Ilf you (/0 not inc(icate preference, EMC W¡7I çli$ O$~ of samples 60 da s from analysls.i
1:ílß"6:h)\/ 1:,. /Jill-Vi. ~
-13 I Project Numb..r:
f?'(")n
c9c.£hd.
MAY 0 5 P.""
Ree'd:
(If clitf..-ent LoClltionl
/ "emp"
/ LBYers
4. Project Name:
¡ ,
!, P.O. Numb..r:
II is':;LE
Ii ¡ #
1
AI" SAMF'1.IINFO/COMMfNTD
LOCA'T10NIMA'reRIAL
TY'PE
Sompl..
Acoopted
Y.. I No
CLIENT
SAMPLE #
DATE
SAMPLeD
o.
"'"
v .
y .
i 0/
....." I ,
i
I
I
¡
I ¡ ¡. i
I~P~CIIAL INSTRUOT!ONS:
: t I' : 1,
~..llnci'UI~hed b: -
", ,I r
I, elinqUlshed by'
\ ,( I
leOnciJished by:
~., Ii, 'I'
i II> I
" I,' .'
"Ii' 1,'1,:
,: ' ~ '
IU;,','I, ',,' ¡ ¡.' I
"", ! '
jJ ;:,1' ¡
y "
y .
y "
v "
Date: 5J (.. rB
Date: ,>-I,,/<¡D
Received þy:
Receiyed by:
AA.-.Alvo.-i ¡'V'
n"A'
"iillf
',~' ',',', ,",'.,,','
'II :::
:ii: j,
.1'1"
, ,1.
III,'
i ¡~.
¡ I~;."
iiF:
, '1.1
:1'
"r
. ,
""w
MY!
MANAGEMENT
CONSULTANTS, INC.
7342 E. THOMAS RD. I SCOTTSDALE. ARIZONA 85251.721 6 I 602.990-2069 I FAX 602-990-6468
emclsbOoertnlink.net
RESULT OF LEAD ANALYSIS
BY FLAME ATOMIC ABSORPTION
PAINT CHIP SAMPLES
EMC SOP METHOD #L01/l
EPA SW-846
Page 1
LAB #:
9728
DATE REC'D:
05/06/98
LIENT:
Converse Environmental West
REPORT DATE: 05/07/98
E:NT ADDRESS:
222 E. Huntington Dr, Ste. 21~
Monrovia, CA 91016-3500
P.O. NO.:
97-42-529-01
TECT NAME:
Tustin/E. Main St.
PROJ. #:
1 05/05 A Ext. White 193 Below Window NWC 0.003
2 as/os' B Ext. Green 193 Window Frame 0.003
3 05/05 C Ext. White 191 Door Frame 0.030
4 95/05 D Int. White 19S-West Wall 0.003
5 05/05 E Int. Red 195-Metal Handle-Rear 0.030
6 05/05 F Int. White 195-Window Frame-E. 0.030
Wall
0.005
0.409
12.05
0.016
6.282
4.164
. Diluticn Factcr Changad
..Exc..d~ Subatra'" May Si.. Sa""la ...ulta
Iolow Datact..la Limita
raFcr< apFliaa tc tho atandarda = F=oaduraa idanti"ed and to tho aa""l.. t..ted cn1y. Tha toot raaulta a~ nct naca..arily
icativa cr raFraaantati~ cf tho quaJ.iti.. cf tho lct f=m which tha a_"a ~a takan cr cf aFF-ntly idontical cr aimilar F=duota.
they raF""aant an ongoing quality ..au""".a program =1..a ao nctad.
it ia ""tad" that a a_"a with axca..iva aubatrata wa. .ubmitted fcr laboratory analyah. ouch analyais may boo hi..ad. The 1..-
ont cf ouch a_1o may. in actuaJ.ity. ... """atar than raFcrtad. "Me makea nc wan-anty. ."""".. cr i""liad. .. tc tho accuracy cf
analyai. cf ._"aa nc"'d tc ha~ "'an aubmittad with axc...iva aubatrata. '..ampling h ""c""""ndod in ouch ai tuati=a tc vorify
, ,1 laboratory ""ault..
""porta a"" fcr tho axcluai~ u.. cf tho add""..ed cli.nt and a"" rando""d upon tho o=diti= that thay will cct ... ""prcduoed
.ly cr in part fcr advarthin. cr othor pu"pc". ever our aignat=- Cr in ccnnacticn with cUr n."" without apecial writtan
"'..ion, Sa""l.. nct doot.-cyod in t..ting - ""tainad a maxim... cf aixty '60) daya.
","YST, tJ4t:.. A i6l ~ OJ< COOBDINATO', Il/!.V
Alexander DeRario I K t Kett~er
W
MANAGEMENT
CONSULTANTS, INC.
7342 E. THOMAS RD. I SCOTTSDALE. ARIZONA 85251-7216 / 602.990.2069 /
emcl.bCo."hHnk.not
RESULT OF LEAD ANALYSIS
BY FLAME ATOMIC ABSORPTION
PAIN'!' CHIP SAMPLES
EMC SOP METHOD #L01/l
EPA SW-846
FAX 602.990.8"68
Page 2
¡C LAB #:
9728
DATE REC'D: 05/06/98
REPORT DATE: 05/07/98
:LIENT :
Converse Environmental West
,IENT ADDRESS:
222 E. Huntington Dr, Ste. 2llA
Monrovia, CA 91016-3500
P.O. NO.:
97-42-529-01
:OJECT NAME:
Tustin/E. Main St.
PROJ. #:
7 05/05 G Int. Blue 193 0.003
8 05/05 H Int. Peach 193 0.003
9 05/05 I Int. Cream 191 Door Frame 0.003
10 05/05 J Int. Lt. Green-Blue 191 Wall 0.003
11 05/05 K Ext. Wht. 191 Bldg.-Over Bricks 0.003
0.034
0.110
0.650
0.079*
BDL
. Dilution hotor Cbang.d
. Exo...iv. Sub.trat. M,y Bi.. Sampl. ...ul"
. "'~ ""tactabla Limit.
" ~port .ppli.a t<> tho ,tanduds or p""o.du~. id.ntHi.d and to tho .ampl.. tut.d only. Tho t..t ruul.. "", not naou.arily
'c,tiva or rapra..n..ti~ of tho qualiti.a of tho lot f- wbith to. ..mpl. w.. tak.n or of app,rantly id.ntical or .'milar producto.
do tbay ""pr..ant an ongoing quality a..uronoa pro,r~ unl... .0 not.d.
ora it h not.d that' ..mpla with oxca..i~ a"".trato w.. auboù.ttod for laboratory anal".i.. auob analy.i. ..y b. "a..d. Tho '.ad
,tant of auch a~pl. ""'Yo in ,ct..lity, "" _,t.r than reportad. EMC ",k.. no warranty, .xp"".. or impliad. aa to tho acourany of
~aJ.y.i. of .ampl.. notod to ha~ ""on .ubmittod with .xoa..iv. a""otuta. ""mplin. ia ""no-ndod in .uob ait~tiona to vorify
ino1 labo""tory re.ult..
.. ~port. ~ for to. oxclu.iva u.. of tho addr....d cliant and ~ rondo""d upon tho oondition that thay win not"" reproduced
,11y or in part for ,d_robin. or othor purpoa.. avor our .i.natura or in oo""action witb our n- without ...oio1 =itton
'..ion. S'mpl.. not do.troyad in t..ting "'" ra..inad a "",ximum of oixty "'I daya.
"UoYST, 4Iý'-.. L if. ~ ',,- QA Coo"'INATOR, I!Ær K
Alexander DeRario ! urt Kettler
'-'-t~~~~4:~'~T
COßV8rse J~b7NJ~ber:c'-':'11- 4-V"" FJV'I r Ö I ...
Dale: Ð~ -oS -q c:¡ ,,;,.:,..~--... --- ..
- - <;olleded By: .. . lj)((
~
Noles: Lt&t\ 1Jh_~'_'
fð" l of 7-.
SAMPLES
#
AREA
SQ. FT.
PHOTO
#
MATERIAL SAMPLED
lOCATION
~~l' Wt\m::
Iq3
1?
c.,
ø::r f\ý~
l1'â w \.I'l...d-.-<:JV>
G
?
îC¡\ ~ ~
,q~ -- \M7i\ \}\JelL[
IN" ~J... 1\4,5- ~o-u-t~{M/'"
. [9 WI.I\d
It\-"f- W-lt\-rç S - ~vrnß-. "~I W
\h~. ~ \11 I ;;2DO
In.\-- f~ l1:J
1h-\-- 1,i;(~t\,\rY) \ '1 \
\\'It- . U-- . WœY\ - b(¿w, I '11
err . ~ ttrt£
1 f\1f. "'-5-\-1 f\1j'
]DO
t
~
ì)tr\5Y
Wt.l í I
OIAIN OF ~
RoIin'loi$h~d By-.:'" ) - TIm.,
ReceIved By: -'. Time: ~/
Relinqoish.d By:' Time:
Received By: . -'--TImo: ..., ,..,
F.'-.~..F-.,. .~. ~ ~
~ . , ""'. ~7"..iR,:~- 'If( ~~
~ CONVERSE~-~-- ~c..,. (
w ENVIRON~Ê~~'~~:céES~~Z~L~... .-.-:!
222 E. Huntington Dnva. Suite 211."". ..
Monrovia. CA 91016.3500. ...,...,:,::..:,::.:...
Telephone: 626/930-1200
FAX: 6261930-1212 '...:':..... .
CONDITION
COMMENTS
)"1ç "1m
\U.tL \.i.N..Rt)..Mtd-.
Do.. -1iiil
D.le: -&"6-
Date:
~~._~ ~o~ ~:mè~ ~Þ4t.~ ~'~-~'~~~~=,~:_: :_-~;;'¡~-~,c"~~~~~~i::::';:::;:~'.;I~,,:':Lk]\D' ,.. '- -(j~~~I~~~~~N~A~ ~~;-'~~~~&
converseJObNUmber:~].... .'5]..../,..°/,.,.-. ' 222E. Hunllnglon Drive.SuUe211 -:-"'õ
Dole: OG~D5-. ._".~:'.... R z- Of 1- ~~:~~~~:~~¿~~ ~
ColI~dedBy: -~ ", -n - -., _.~~---"-_..-- FAX:626{9.~~~_1?~3..... ..,.. ._--~
~
SAMPLES PHOTO AREA J
MATERIAL SAMPLED LOCATION CONDITION COMMENTS "
# # SQ. FT.
\/ t¥T~ 14\ fJ. ~ ~ 5\rVV - '
~
t-... §
I
~
(
(
(
no r
~
~
~
r
(
I
(
(
-
--
.
CH.AI~ OF CU1!:1Ia )/1. tl f) OJ<. Tim.: ~~
Rehn~ulsltod By,j C\.\t...,..o.:. ';",..1 ,/.."",
.
Roco,vod By: ~ . r"'----'
- --
-..-----.-
.~, --L eft.... ",. --- ";-i
~"-"... --, ,~.. ..;0-=.. -~ ,,'L-.-.-
...===~~~C"~~.. ' ,
--------'---- -
~
Tim.'
Tim.'
-i7;if~"'~;~
Dato: ~ì~'~
..
¡!
I
i
P'" ~
I;I!I -N-
~
¡lll
I¡~I
I';;.'
If,
I
"1
r¡¡
"!
1;1'
"
I
: I~ f
I ()
0
I ~ ~ I ¡
I ~ ~
:J. ~
< <="
II' =ï ~ g
1[°"-"'-
:J3 ~ to
='" V)
.~ [g ~
'"0' Q ~
~ u
"~ ~~'
, -+ it
. I
,I i I
'..~! r !~~ l
ill, 5¡ í;~ ë'
, )1$ (J\
.I..t L f¡~ ~{
':': I f r 1
11" I ~
Ill! ~
I Sd Wl:£1:80 EiE6, B>: '~
d!
f
i
I
f
g
~
~
f
Ii'
i
,.
t
I
,~
¡¿..
8
g.
.f
~
i
21. f
ø
1i
,.
,;:r:. ~\
V A,E;
East Msin Street
:_-fb
i
¡¡
1
~
~
..
r;~1~r5
, '"
o:OS'!
b'i !,
In F
::r
I:; .!l
D
,IO/JI,!
. i
~
i
....
:I>
1§
~
ØÞ95 \7t7i7 \7,¿ : 'o--<:NJf-Jd
, ,
'2!J'JS
: i
.:, ,
'II
'i
Ii
'I
:,
, .'
i ¡i
i ~
I ~
, .
, ,.
: \,
S.J.Ndl TISNCD 35'd3t'CO :. ~.::!
;i
.A
, 2-1.
APPENDIX F
Parking Study
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
October 9, 2003
Mr. Doug Anderson
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Subject: Prospect Village Shared Parking Evaluation
Dear Mr. Anderson
This study summarizes the findings of a shared parking analysis for the proposed Prospect Village
project ("Project") and potential alternatives to the Project ("Alternatives"), to be located at the
northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue ("MainlProspect"). These analyses are based
upon information provided by City staff, field studies of similar sites, past experience with these
types of evaluations, City of Tustin requirements, and standard reference materials.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves the redevelopment of an existing building (former Utt Juice facility)
to provide 16,653 square feet ("SF") of commercial use and twelve (12) residential dwelling units
("DU"), at the northwest corner of MainlProspect in the City of Tustin. The types of businesses
planned to be included in the Project are anticipated to include 6,251 SF of retail yses, 7,402 SF of
office uses, and 3,000 SF (112 seats) ofrestaurant use. The residential portion of the Project has a
somewhat unique aspect, as 10 of the 12 residential units are required to be occupied by business
owners with ground floor access to their businesses below the residential units ("LivefW ork").
There are 24 parking spaces plus three (3) guest spaces proposed on-site (within the gated area) that
would serve the residential units. There are 59 parking spaces at the City's Main Street Water.
facility, located on Prospect Avenue directly across from the Project, that can be designated for use
by the commercial portion of the Project. Two disabled spaces plus one added parking space will
also be available for use by the commercial development (located off the alley adjacent to the
commercial development near Main Street) resulting in a total of 62 parking spaces available for the
commercial uses.
The 27 spaces within the gated area of the Project site, satisfies City of Tustin parking requirements
for the residential portion of the Project. Shared parking analyses have been used to determine if
P.O. BOX 5159 LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92652 (949) 464-1178
2
parking requirements for the commercial portion of the Project will be satisfied by the 62 parking
spaces available for the project (3 on-site and 59 at the Main Street Water facility). The Project will
have a total of 89 spaces (62 commercial plus 27 residential spaces) available for use. A site plan
that shows the general concept for the buildings is shown in Figure 1 (this Figure does not
necessarily illustrate all details of the Project).
In addition to the Project, six Alternative development scenarios have been analyzed. A "No
Project" condition was considered. There were also three Alternatives with reduced commercial
square footage and residential components (two with 12 DU and two with 10 DU) that were
evaluated. The fifth Alternative reviewed, assumes a larger commercial use (28,120 SF) and no
residential component. The sizes, land uses, and available parking assumptions for each of the
Alternatives are shown in Table 1. The relatively unique "Live/Work" part of the Project (that
applies to ten (10) of the residential units) is also included for Alternatives 2, 3-60, 4-45, and 6
which also have residential components.
ANALYSES
As indicated above, the planned parking supply within the gated portion of the Project will allow the
residential units to meet the City of Tustin Parking Code requirements. The Code requirements are
also assumed to be satisfied for the residential portion of the Altemative projects. Since the
residential portions of the Project! Alternatives are expected to comply with Code requirernents (and
the residential parking area is gated), the "Shared Parking" evaluations are specific to the planned
commercial uses. After the Shared Parking analyses were completed, then the effects of the
"LivefWork" aspect of the potential developments are addressed in this Study.
By first evaluating the parking demand under the "standard" Shared Parking procedure, a "worst
case" type scenario is presented (since it does not account for the "LivefWork" aspect of the Project).
In general, accounting for Shared Parking means the peak parking demands for the different planned
uses will occur at different times and days. For example, the peak office parking occurs at a different
time and day than the restaurant and/or retail parking peaks. The anticipated mix ofland uses at any
particular development determines the opportunity for "Shared Parking" to occur.
Another "worst case" factor is included in these analyses since the evaluations are based on City
Code and Shared Parking for individual land uses. The potential for patrons to walk from other
nearby businesses (or even other businesses in the same development) are not included in the Shared
Parking considerations. It is likely that some added reduction in parking demand could result based
on the interaction of the Project (or Alternatives) with other nearby uses. While no specific
reductions were made in these calculations, the potential effects can be generally considered in the
review of the Project and Altematives (no reductions were included for this factor, which resulted in
a more conservative evaluation).
Regarding the actual Shared Parking evaluations, there are mixes of commercial uses proposed for
the Project and Alternatives. The proposed mix of uses are conducive to an expectation of "Shared
Parking" effects. As described earlier, the peak parking demands for office, retail, and restaurant
SASAKITRANSPORTATION SERVICES Prospect Village
C:\Documents and Settings\MAshabi\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\0LK28\Prspt Viii Park lo-9-Q3.doc Shared Parking Study
uses occur at different times/days. For example, the office parking peaks occur during the day on
weekdays, while the retail peaks are on the weekend. Restaurants are typically the busiest on Friday
and Saturday evenings when office and retail uses are not at their peaks. Given that the Project and
Alternatives include a mix of different commercial land uses, Shared Parking effects were
considered.
The City of Tustin Zoning Code authorizes the potential reduction in off-street parking requirements
through Section 9271, paragraph "aa", by allowing consideration of "joint-use parking" (Shared
Parking). The methodology to be used is required by City ofTustin Code to be "promulgated by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)". The ITE publications referenced included "Shared
Parking Plarming Guidelines" (prepared by the ITE Technical Council Committee 6F-52; August
1995), which promulgates use of a manual titled Shared Parking, published by the Urban Land
Institute ("ULf').
The potential parking demands were analyzed for the Project and each Alternative using the Shared
Parking methodology outlined in the ULI publication (and cited in the ITE guidelines). The peak
parking demands for each of the individual uses were based on parking requirements within the City
of Tustin combining Parking Districts (Tustin City Code, Zoning Section 9251) which is as follows:
Retail use: I space per 200 SF, Office: I space per 300 SF, and Restaurant: I space per 3 seats. The
City of Tustin Code was applied to the plarmed Project and Alternative land uses to determine the
peak number of required parking spaces (assuming no Shared Parking). These City parking
requirements were then incorporated in the ULI "Shared Parking" methodology.
The City of Tustin Zoning (parking) requirements reflect the peak demand for each individual land
use. The Shared Parking methodology (in the ULI publication) was then used to determine the
parking demands (characteristics) for each of the proposed land uses during the various days and
time periods. The Shared Parking analyses provided evaluations and adjustments for the differences
between weekday and weekend peaks, as well as time of day variations in parking demands for each
of the proposed land uses. The weekday and weekend Shared Parking demands for the Project and
each of the Alternatives, are summarized in Tables A and B (for each of the potential developments)
contained in the Attachments.
Exhibit 7 ofULI's Shared Parking publication was referenced in developing Tables A and B. This
Exhibit indicates that the weekday parking peaks forretail uses are about 75% of the weekend peaks
(City Code requirements are used for the weekend peak). In Exhibit 6 ofULI's Shared Parking
publication, office uses for the weekend peak are shown to be less than 20% of the weekday peak
(City Code was used for the weekday peak). For the restaurant uses, the City Code requirements
were applied to both the weekday and weekend conditions (as indicated in Shared Parking, Exhibit
9). It can be concluded, however, that the restaurant will only reach its peak on a Friday weekday
and on the other weekdays will actually have a lower parking demand than included in these
analyses.
The peak parking demands for each land use during both weekdays and weekends were identified
SASAKITRANSPORTATION SERVICES Prospect Village
C:\Docurnents and SettingslMAshabilLo<:aI SettingslTernporary Internet Filesl0LK28lPrspt Viii Park lQ.9-O3.dcc Shared Parking Study
4
based on the City Code requirements and the ULI publication. The Shared Parking information on
parking utilization by time of day (during both weekday and weekend) was then applied to the peak
parking demands for each land use. The "time of day" parking utilizations are shown as a percentage
of the peak demand. This allows calculation of the anticipated "Shared Parking" demands
throughout the day, for each of the proposed land uses. The time of day percentages were referenced
from Exhibit 28 of the ULI Shared Parking publication for the office, retail/supermarket, and
restaurant uses, which resulted in the overall parking demands.
Tables A and B which are attached, document the details and assumptions included in the "Shared
Parking" calculations for the proposed Project and Altematives. The results are shown by time of
day, for the weekday and weekend (Saturday) conditions as confirmed by the analysis. The weekday
evaluation is the more critical than the weekend conditions. This is reasonable given the office
component of the potential Project and Alternatives (office has significantly less parking demand on
weekends). It should also be noted that the parking demands shown in Tables A and B do not
include the residential "Live/Work" factors previously discussed.
The effect of the "LivefWork" aspect of the project is that the overall parking demand would be
reduced by ten (10) parking spaces. There are 10 vehicles that would typically be driven to the
project site by the business owners (in a typical development), but would already exist at the site (in
the residential parking area) due to the "LivefWork" occupied units. The result of the Shared
Parking analysis for the Project is an "unadjusted" peak parking demand of72 vehicles for the office,
retail and restaurant uses. The "unadjusted" peak commercial parking demand of 72, would be
reduced by ten (10) vehicles due to Live/Work factors, resulting in a net demand of 62 vehicles.
This "commercial" total can be met by the available supply of 59 spaces at the Water facility and
three spaces adjacent to the commercial (for a total to 62 spaces). The residential parking
requirements of27 spaces (for the 12 DU) would still be met by the 24 on-site spaces plus the three
on-site guest spaces. Overall a combined peak parking demand of89 vehicles (62 commercial + 27
residential) would be met by the 89 available parking spaces.
The same parking analyses procedures were applied to the proposed Alternatives to the Project. The
peak parking demands for each of the proposed uses (under each of the Altematives) are based on the
City ofTustin Parking Code (Zoning Section 9251). The City ofTustin Parking Code was applied to
the planned land uses to again deternrine the peak number of required parking spaces (assuming no
shared parking). The City parking requirements were then used in the ULI "Shared Parking"
methodology the same as was applied to the proposed Project.
The weekday and weekend peak parking demands for each Alternative (except the "No Project") are
documented in the attached Tables A and B (a set of Tables are provided for each Alternative).
The City Code required parking was used for both the weekday and weekend conditions (as indicated
in Shared Parking, Exhibit 9). As noted previously, the restaurant is only expected to reach its peak
on Friday "Weekdays". The other weekdays should have lower parking demands than reflected in
these analyses.
SASAKITRANSPORTATION SERVICES Prospect Village
C:\Documents and SettingslMAshabilLocal SettingslTemporary lntemetFileslOLK281Prspt Viii Park 1O.9.03.doc Shared Parking Study
The Shared Parking peaks for the commercial portion of the Altematives were then adjusted based
on the assumption of ten (10) "Live/Work" residential units. The overall parking demand was then
deternrined by including the residential parking demand (required under City Code) and the totals are
shown in Table 1 that was presented earlier in this Study. As previously noted the analyses do not
consider the potential for patrons from nearby developments (or within Prospect Village) to walk to
the proposed development, which results in a "worst case" factor.
SUMMARY
Parking analyses were conducted to deternrine the potential parking impacts of providing 16,653 SF
of mixed-use development plus twelve residential (of which ten (10) would be residential
"Live/Work" units) in the City of Tustin at the northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect
Avenue. Six Alternative projects were also considered, which included a no project scenario and
five other development options. Information contained in the ULI Shared Parking publication, was
referenced per ITE guidelines and the "Shared Parking" methodology was applied to the proposed
Prospect Village Project (the former Utt Juice facility). The following is a summary of the
considerations and fIDdings contained in this study.
I. The adjusted "Shared Parking" demand for the commercial portion of the project was
identified based on procedures outlined in Shared Parking published by the Urban Land
Institute (ULI). The assumptions included in these fIDdings resulted in a projected
parking demand of 62 vehicles for the commercial uses which can be met by the
proposed parking supply of 62 spaces.
2. The analyses consider the "Live/Work" requirementthat 10 of the 12 residential units be
occupied by the owners of the businesses that operate within the Project development.
This resulted in a reduced parking demand since the business owners that live at the site,
will not be required to drive/park at their business.
3. The City of Tustin Parking Code requirements (27 for the Project) for the residential
units are anticipated to be satisfied through the provisions of24 on-site spaces and 3 on-
site guest spaces. These spaces would be on-site within a gated area.
4. Overall the "Peak Parking Demand" for the Project is expected to be 89 vehicles and
would be met by the "Available Parking" of 89 spaces. Table 1 presents these results.
These totals contain a "worst case" factor since the potential for patrons to walk to the
development ITom nearby areas is not included in the calculations (no parking demand
reductions were made for this factor).
5. Alternative I is the "No Project" option, so there is no shared parking analysis.
6. For Alternative 2 the projected parking demand is 83 vehicles and the available parking
is assumed to be 83 spaces.
SASAKITRANSPORTATION SERVICES Prospect Village
C:\Documents and SettingsIMAshabi\Local SettingslTemporary Internet FilesIOLK28\Prspt Viii Park lD-9-O3.doc Shared Parking Study
6
7. For Alternative 3 (60 foot depth) the projected parking demand is 82 vehicles and the
available parking is assumed to be 82 spaces.
8. For Alternative 4 (45 foot depth) the projected parking demand is 84 vehicles and the
available parking is assumed to be 84 spaces.
9. For Alternative 5 the projected parking demand is 114 vehicles and the available parking
is assumed to be 114 spaces.
10. For Alternative 6 the projected parking demand is 89 vehicles and the available parking
is assumed to be 89 spaces.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions or
comments, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Respectfully submitted,
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
Steven S. Sasaki, P.E., PTOE
Principal
Civil and Traffic Engineer
State of California Registration
C52768 & TR1462
SASAKITRANSPORTATION SERVICES Prospect Village
C:\Documents and SettingslMAshabi\Local SettingslTemporarylntemet FilesI0LK28\Prspt Viii Park lO.9-o3.doc Shared Parking Study
Table 1
Street Segment Analyses Summary
Prospect Village 'Worst Case"
Existing
Roadway Capacity Existing Future withont Project Future with Project
STREET SEGMENT LanesCo) VPDCb) Daily Vol. V/CC') LOSCd) Daily Vol. V/CC') LOSCd) Daily Vol. V/C<') LOSCd)
--
Prospect Avenue between
. Main & First 20 15,000 4,100 0.27 A 5,900 0.39 A 6,200 0.41 A
Main Street between
. El Camino Real (ECR) & Prospect(e) 2D 15,000 9,000 0.6 A 12,400 0.83 D 12,500 0.83 D
. Prospect&Newport(e) 2D+4D 15,000 9,000 0.6 A 12,400 0.83 D 12,700 0.85 D
First Street between
. ECR & Prospect 4D 37,500 18,300 0.49 A 23,200 0.62 B 23,400 0.62 B
. Prospect & Newport 4D 37,500 15,300 0.41 A 21,400 0.57 A 21,400 0.57 A
(0) 2 ~ Number oftbrough lanes
U ~ Undivided lanes
D ~ Divided lanes
(b) VPD ~ Vehicles per Day. Capacities shown are for LOS E operations
C,) V/C~Volumeto Capacity ratio
Cd) LOS ~ Level of Service
(e) The "2D" actually has a capacity greater than 15,000 but this capacity was used as a "worst case"
Intersection
Signalized:
Prospect Avenue & First Streel
EI Camino Real & First Street
El Camino Real & Main Street
EI Camino Real & Newport Avenue
Main Street & Newport A venue
Two Way Stop Controlled:
Main Street & PropectAvenue
-Northbound
-Southbound
Table 2
Intersection Analyses Summary
Prospect Village "Worst Case"
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) and Level of Service (LOS) Resnlts
Existing Conditions Future withont Project Future with Project
AM PM AM PM AM PM
ICU LOS...J2L LOS ...J2L LOS ¡CU ~ ICU ~ ¡CU LOS
0.46 A 0.62 B 0.58 A 0.74 C 0.58 A 0.74 C
0.29 A 0.41 A 0.38 A 0.55 A 0.38 A 0.55 A
0.50 A 0.64 B 0.62 B 0.75 C 0.62 B 0.75 C
0.58 A 0.73 C 0.49 A 0.77 C 0.49 A 0.77 C
0.61 B 0.64 B 0.69 B 0.67 B 0.69 B 0.67 B
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
11.9 B 13.9 B 13.2 B 15.5 C 13.4 B 15.6 C
14.6 B 17.6 C 17.3 C 21.8 C 17.5 C 23 C
Table 3
Trip Generation
proposed Project - Prospect Village
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units ~ In Out .2!- ~
--
Trip Rates
+ Retail(#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
+ Office (#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
+ Restaurant (#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
+ Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
+ Retail 6,251 SF 254 4 3 7 9
With Passby Consideration (25%) 191 3 2 5 7
+ Office 7,402 SF 81 10 2 9
+ Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
+ Residential 12DU 70 4 4 2
TOTAL 600 23 15 24 26
Source
+ Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation. 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
+ Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook. An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 1O, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as caiculated for comparison purposes.
. Restaurant
With Passby Consideration (35%)
. Residential
Table 3A
Trip Generation
Alternative 1 - No Project
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Units Daily In Out In Out
--
per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
NO PROJECT
NO PROJECT
NO PROJECT
NO PROJECT
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0
Land Use
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814)
. Office (#710)
. Restaurant (#832)
. Residential (#230)
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail
With Passby Consideration (25%)
. Office
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation. 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engioeers (ITE); 1997
(#1 10) ~ (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
Table 38
Trip Generation
Alternative 2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out In Out
-- --
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
. Office (#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 9,625 SF 391 6 4 11 14
With Passby Consideration (250/0) 293 5 3 8 11
. Office 2,155 SF 24 NOM
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 10DU 59 4 4 2
TOTAL 630 18 15 26 24
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation. 6th Edition; institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook. An lTE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintIDned as calculated for comparison purposes.
Table 3C
Trip Generation
Alternative 3 - 60' Depth
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out In Out
-- --
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 l.ll 1.48
. Office (#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 8,430 SF 343 5 3 9 12
With Passby Consideration (25%) 257 4 2 7 9
. Office 3,755 SF 41
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 10DU 59 4 4 2
TOTAL 610 19 15 25 24
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation. 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook. An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as caiculated for comparison purposes.
Table 3D
Trip Generation
Alternative 4 - 45' Depth
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out In Out
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0040 J.11 1048
. Office (#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4045 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.Q7 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 6,772 SF 275 4 8 10
With Passby Consideration (25%) 206 3 6 8
. Office 5,298 SF 58 7 7
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 12DU 70 4 4 2
TOTAL 590 20 14 24 25
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation. 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook. An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as calculated for comparison purposes.
Table 3E
Trip Generation
Alternative 5
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out In Out
--
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
. Office (#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 16,120 SF 656 10 6 18 24
With Passby Consideration (25%) 492 8 5 14 8
. Office 9,000 SF 99 12 2 2 II
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 850 29 15 29 37
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) ~ (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook. An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Totai" the Daily trip eods were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as calculated for comparison purposes.
Table 3F
Trip Generation
Alternative 6
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out In Out
-- --
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0040 1.11 1048
. Office(#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4045 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) perDU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 6,251 SF 254 4 3 7 9
With Passby Consideration (25%) 191 3 2 5 7
. Office 7,402 SF 81 10 2 9
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 12DU 70 4 4 2
TOTAL 600 23 15 24 26
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trill Generation. 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (lTE); 1997
(#110) ~ (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trill Generation Handbook. An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as calculated for comparison purposes.
Table 4
Trip Generation
Summary
Trip Ends Generated
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Description Daily ----È- ~ ----È- ~
Proposed Project 630 23 15 24 26
Alternative 1 - No Project 0 0 0 0 0
Alternative 2 630 18 15 26 24
Alternative 3 - 60' Depth 610 19 15 25 24
Alternative 4 - 45' Depth 590 20 14 24 25
Alternative 5 850 29 15 29 37
Alternative 6 600 23 15 24 26
"Worst Case" Assumption' 630 23 15 26 26
'Provides a "Worst Case" evaluation for all potential alternatives exceptAIternative 5.
¡fthis alternative is considered, then added analyses may be required.
APPENDIX G
Traffic Study
PROSPECT VILLAGE
Traffic Impact Analyses
Prepared For:
the City of Tustin
Prepared By:
Sasaki Transportation Services
P.O. Box 5159
Laguna Beach, CA 92652
December 12, 2003
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
December 12, 2003
Mr. Douglas Anderson
Senior Project Manager - Transportation
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
SUBJECT: Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analyses
Dear Mr. Anderson:
The attached Traffic Impact Analyses presents evaluation of the potential traffic impact
associated with the Prospect Village project ("Project") located on the North side of Main
Street at Prospect A venue, in the City of Tustin. The Project involves redevelopment of an
existing building that is presently vacant.
This study documents existing conditions and future conditions, both with and without the
proposed Project. The analyses are based on accepted Traffic Engineering procedures. The
findings identify the ability of the surrounding street system to accommodate the proposed
Project. The study also identifies any significant traffic impacts at the study locations,
associated with the Project.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any
questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact us. .
Respectfully submitted,
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
~¿J!44~
Steven S. Sasaki, P.E., PTOE
Principal
Civil and Traffic Engineer
State of Califomia Registration
C52768 & TRI462
P.O. BOX 5159 LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92652 (949) 376-6613
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
PROSPECT VILLAGE
Traffic Impact Analyses
This study presents a summary of the traffic impact analyses for the proposed Prospect Village
project ("Project") located at the Northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue, in the
City of Tustin. The project involves redevelopment of an existing building that is presently
vacant. Although there is a trip generation potential associated with the existing building
development, these analyses are based on a "worst case" assumption that all of the project
related traffic is "new" to the surroünding street system. This allows a conservative evaluation
of the project related traffic and potential impacts on the surrounding street system.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This report analyzes the redevelopment of an existing building (former Utt Juice facility) to
provide 16,653 square feet ("SF") of commercial use and twelve (12) residential dwelling units
("DU"), at the northwest corner of MainlProspect in the City of Tustin. The types of businesses
planned to be included in the Project are anticipated to include 6,251 SF of retail uses, 7,402 SF
of office uses, and 3,000 SF (112 seats) ofrestaurant use. The residential portion of the Project
has a somewhat unique aspect, as 10 of the 12 residential units are required to be occupied by
business owners with ground floor access to their businesses below the residential units
("LivefWork"). Figure 1 illustrates the project location in relationship to the surrounding street
system.
There are 24 parking spaces plus three (3) guest spaces proposed on-site (within the gated area)
that would serve the residential units. There are 59 parking spaces at the City's Main Street
Water facility, located on Prospect Avenue directly across from the Project, that can be
designated for use by the commercial portion of the Project. Two disabled spaces plus one
added parking space will also be available for use by the commercial development (located on-
site off the alley adjacent to the commercial development near Main Street) resulting in a total
of 62 parking spaces available for the commercial uses.
The 27 spaces within the gated area of the Project site, satisfies City of Tustin parking
requirements for the residential portion of the Project. Shared parking analyses have been used
to determine if parking requirements for the commercial portion of the Project will be satisfied
by the 62 parking spaces available for the project (3 on-site and 59 at the Main Street Water
facility). The Project will have a total of 89 spaces (62 commercial plus 27 residential spaces)
available for use. A site plan that shows the general concept for the buildings is shown in
Figure 2 (this Figure does not necessarily illustrate all details of the Project).
In addition to the Project, six Alternative development scenarios have been analyzed. A "No
Project" condition was considered. There were also three Alternatives with reduced commercial
P.O. BOX 5159
I
LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92652
(949) 376-661 3
uJ
>
<X
N
~'
s
¡...:
(/)
«
m
3
>-
I-
0
w
!h
0
~
No Scale
4T~ ST.
¡2V1NE
8LVD.
1ST ST.
FIRST
ST.
«
(/)
w
:2
MCFADDEN
«
l-
(/)
0
0
(ÿ,
~ect Location
SASAKI TI'-ANSPOR.TATION SER.VIŒS
FIGURE 1
...
C
-
r:::
iff
l-
I
ãi
CJ
...
::::I
0
en
II
I
I
2
square footage and residential components (two with 12 DU and two with 10 DU) that were
evaluated. The fifth Alternative reviewed, assumes a larger commercial use (28,120 SF) and no
residential component. The relatively unique "Live/Work" part of the Project (that applies to
ten (10) of the residential units) is also included for Alternatives 2, 3-60, 4-45, and 6 which also
have residential components.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Prospect Avenue has its southerly terminus at Main Street and is a two-lane undivided roadway
south of First Street. Prospect A venue is stop sign controlled at Main Street and a traffic signal
is provided at its intersection with First Street. North of First Street this north-south roadway
continues as a four-lane roadway to Seventeenth Street. Prospect continues north of this location
but has offset intersections at Seventeenth Street. A speed limit of 25 miles per hour (MPH) is
posted in the vicinity of the project and on-street parking is allowed. The City's Arterial
Highway Plan ("AHP") designation for Prospect Avenue, in the General Plan, is a Secondary
Arterial roadway.
Main Street is an east-west arterial and has two-lanes divided by a two-way left turn lane in the
vicinity of Prospect Avenue. There are fow through travel lanes from just west of Newport
Avenue and further east where Main Street merges to become Bryan Avenue. To the west there
are two divided through lanes provided throughout the Old Town area. On-street parking is
allowed:in the vicinity of the project. Main Street is designated as a Primary Arterial roadway
in the AHP.
First Street has an east-west alignment and four-lanes divided by a raised median exist in the
study area. The intersections of First Street, with Prospect Avenue and EI Camino Real
("ECR") are both signalized. To the west First Street continues into the City of Santa Ana and
there is access and/or connection to the Interstate ("1") 5 Freeway. To the east, First Street
provides two through lanes east of Newport Avenue and forms a "T" intersection at Red Hill
A venue. A speed limit of 30 MPH is posted in the study area and on-street parking is generally
allowed. The AHP designation for First Street between Tustin Avenue and Newport Avenue in
the City of Tustin is a Primary Arterial roadway.
EI Camino Real has two undivided travel lanes and angle parking is provided from Sixth Street
at the south to First Street at the north. A speed limit of 25 miles per hour (MPH) speed is
posted in the Old Town area. At the north end ofECR it forms a "T" intersection at First Street
and this intersection is signalized. This two-lane section of ECR (north of Sixth Street) has a
north-south alignment, but it curves to a southeast-northwest direction, south of Sixth Street
where four travel lanes are provided. ECR continues southeast of the Newport Avenue
intersection (that is signalized) and essentially parallels the 1-5 Freeway. The current
designation for ECR is a Secondary Arterial roadway. However, OCTA has approved a
reduction in the road classification for the Old Town area and the City is currently preparing a
General Plan Amendment to reclassify ECR to a Local Collector roadway.
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
C:\Steve\Prosp Vill\Prspt Viii TIA22.doc
Prospect Village
Traffic Impact Analysis
Newport Avenue is a northeast-southwest roadway that provides four-lane divided travel lanes
in the study area. There is a raised median provided on Newport Avenue and a posted speed
limit of35 miles per hour (MPH). South of the study area there is 1-5 Freeway access to/from
the north via a "half' diamond interchange. The study section of Newport A venue presently
ends south of Sycamore Avenue, while to the north Newport continues into County of Orange
jurisdiction. This arterial roadway is designated as an Augmented Primary in the City AHP for
the section north of the 1-5 Freeway.
Field studies were conducted of the existing roadway conditions and in particular the lane
configurations. The existing field data were use in the analyses of the existing roadway
conditions. These analyses included both street segment analyses that are based on daily traffic
volumes and intersection evaluations that utilize traffic counts of peak hour conditions. The
study area is based on the pr,oposed Project location, to remain consistent with previous analyses
in this area, to address potential impacts in the immediate vicinity and to analyze potentially
critical locations.
Street'See:ment Analyses - Existine:
The street segment analyses of existing conditions are based on existing daily traffic volumes
and the current roadway geometries. The street segment analyses provide general evaluations of
the existing roadway operations. The number and configuration of the current through traffic
lanes at the study street segments are related to roadway capacities. The capacities used are
established by the County of Orange and used during their development of the Orarige County
Congestion Management Program (CMP) document. These CMP capacities are representative
of a Level of Service ("LOS") "E" condition, which for most situations is the maximum
allowable under the CMP legislation. The City of Tustin, however, uses LOS "D" as the
maximum "acceptable" LOS (the LOS "D" maximum, also assists in determining if a project
has a significant project related impact).
The CMP street segment capacities are incorporated in volume to capacity ("V /C")
comparisons, which allows for determination of the current street segment operations. In the
City of Tustin the "acceptable" LOS range is "A" through "D". Current daily traffic volumes on
the City's "2003 Average Daily Traffic Volumes" map were referenced and used in the
analyses. It was also noted that the current volumes are less than volumes contained in previous
traffic analyses conducted for the area (relative to the Master. Plan of Arterial Highway
("MP AH") changes for ECR). This indicates that the previous projections of future conditions
are representative of "worst case" analyses, based on the current traffic counts. Table 1
provides a summary of the V /C street segment analyses and the resulting LOS for the study
locations.
The existing through lanes, daily traffic volumes, V/C comparisons, and LOS results are shown
in Table 1. The V/C ratios allow conversion of the CMP capacities to LOS values that can then
be compared to the City of Tustin requirements. It can be seen (in Table 1) that the study street
segments for the Prospect Village project are presently operating at LOS "A", which is well
within the City of Tustin LOS "D" maximum. Overall these street segment arialyses are a
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
C:\SteveIProsp VilllPrspt Viii TIA22.doc
Prospect Village
Traffic Impact Analysis
Table 1
Street Segment Analyses Summary
Prospect ViU~ge "vyorst Case"
Exisling
Roadway Capaciiy Existing Future without Projecl Future with Project
STREET SEGMENT Lanes(o) VPO(b) Daily Vol. V/C«) LOS(d) Daily Vol. V/C«) LOS(d) Daily Vol. VlC«) LOS(d)
-- -- --
Prospecl Avenue between
. Main & First 2V 15,000 4,100 0.27 A 5,900 0.39 A 6,200 0.41 A
Main Street between
. El Camino Real (ECR) & Prospect(e) 20 15,000 9,000 0.6 A 12,400 0.83 0 12,500 0.83 D
. Prospect&Newport(e) 20 + 40 15,000 9,000 0.6 A 12,400 0.83 0 12,700 0.85 0
First Street between
. ECR & Prospect 40 37,500 18,300 0.49 A 23,200 0.62 B 23,400 0.62 B
. Prospect & Newport 40 37,500 15,300 0.41 A 21,400 0.57 A 21,400 0.57 A
(0) 2 ~ Number of through lanes
U ~ Undivided lanes
D ~ Divided lanes
(b) VPD = Vehicles per Day. Capacities shown are for LOS E operations
«) V/C~ Volume to Capacity ratio
(d) LOS ~ Level of Service
(e) The "20" actnally has a capaciiy greater than 15,000 but this capadiy was used as a "worst case"
4
general indicator of traffic operations in the vicinity of the project. The intersection analyses
that follow provide a more detailed evaluation of current traffic conditions at some of the critical
intersection locations.
Intersection Analyses - Existine
Intersection counts were conducted during the AM and PM peak periods for this study. The
traffic count summary worksheets are provided in Appendix A and the "peak hour" volumes are
also highlighted on these summary sheets for the six study intersections. The existing peak hour
intersection volumes were evaluated in conjunction with the current intersection approach lanes
using accepted intersection analysis methodologies. These efforts serve to further document the
existing traffic conditions.
The intersection data are incorporated in the analyses for each of the six study locations. The
methodology used for the signalized intersections is the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU)
procedure. The ICU methodology is required under the Orange County CMP and these
evaluations are also widely utilized throughout the Southern California area. Similar to the
street segment analyses, the ICU values are based on volume to capacity (V/e) ratios. The
"critical" V/C ratios for each intersection plus other "lost" time is considered, resulting in an
ICU value for the study location during each peak hour. The ICU value can then be related to a
LOS for each location.
At the intersection of Main Street & Prospect A venue, Prospect A venue is stop sign controlled
while Main Street is not required to stop. An appropriate analysis methodology for evaluating
this type of intersection is contained in the Highway CaDacitv Manual published by the
Transportation Research Board ("TRB"). This intersection analysis procedure is calculated
using the "Highway Capacity Software" ("HCS") and is specific to "Two-Way Stop Control"
locations. The calculations are expressed in terms of "delay", but the end result is a
determination of the intersection LOS, similar to the other methodologies.
The ICU and delay values at the six study locations and the resulting LOS conditions are
presented in Table 2. The Levels of Service (LOS), which range from "A" (the best) to "F"
(the worst), are provided to document existing intersection operations. The City General Plan
policy is that LOS operations of "A" through "D" are representative of acceptable traffic
conditions, while LOS "E" and "F" are considered over capacity. All of the existing
intersections are shown to operate at LOS "c" or better during both the AM and PM peak hours.
The intersection analyses worksheets can be referenced in Appendix B of this study.
FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROJECT
Extensive traffic modeling efforts were performed as a part of the Marine Corps Air Station
(MCAS) Tustin Disposal and Reuse Traffic Studyl. The MCAS traffic modeling for future
conditions included two of the current study intersections (Newport & ECR and Newport &
Main). In addition, the analyses for the ECR MPAH Amendment contained projections of
I "Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin Disposal and Reuse Traffic Study" Appendix B
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
C:\Steve\Prosp Vill\Prspt ViII TIA22,doc
Prospect Village
Traffic Impact Analysis
Intersection
Signalized:
Prospect Avenue & First Sireet
El Camino Real & First Street
El Camino Real & Main Street
El Camino Real & Newport Avenue
Main Street & Newport Avenue
Two Way Stop Controlled:
Main Street & Propect Avenue
+Northbound
+Southbound
Table 2
Intersection Analyses Summary
Prospect Village "Worst Case"
Inlersection Capacity Utilization (ICO) and Level of Service (LOS) Results
Existing Conditions Future withont Project Future with Project
AM PM AM PM AM PM
lCO LOS ICO LOS ~ LOS ¡CD LOS ¡CD LOS ¡CO LOS
0.46 A 0.62 B 0.58 A 0.74 C 0.58 A 0.74 C
0.29 A 0.41 A 0.38 A 0.55 A 0.38 A 0.55 A
0.50 A 0.64 B 0.62 B 0.75 C 0.62 B 0.75 C
0.58 A 0.73 C 0.49 A 0.77 C 0.49 A 0.77 C
0.61 B 0.64 B 0.69 B 0.67 B 0.69 B 0.67 B
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
11.9 B 13.9 B 13.2 B 15.5 C 13.4 B 15.6 C
14.6 B 17.6 C 17.3 C 21.8 C 17.5 C 23 C
future traffic assuming ECR remains at its two-lane configuration. The previous analyses and
modeled results were referenced for use in these evaluations. The four study intersections that
were not a part of the MCAS analyses are more "internal" to the City of Tustin. It was
determined that their future traffic increases would be less influenced by traffic generated
outside the City of Tustin. The traffic projections for the four "internal" intersections were,
therefore, reflected through use of a reasonably conservative growth factor. For purposes of
evaluating the four "internal" study intersections, a one percent per year growth factor through
the year 2020 was applied. The current 2003 daily traffic volumes served to show that the
previous ECR projections should be conservative estimates of future traffic.
Street Sel!'ment Analyses - Future Without Project
The street segment analyses for future conditions without the proposed Project are shown in
Table 1, which was presented earlier in this study. Prospect Avenue and First Street are
projected to operate at LOS "A" and "B", well within the acceptable range of operations. Main
Street is shown to have LOS "D" operations (which is still acceptable) even if Main Street
remains as a two-lane roadway (as it exists today) for future volume conditions. The acceptable
conditions remain in the future even considering very conservative assumptions since Main
Street actually has two "divided" travel lanes, while the Capacity only provides credit for a two
lane "undivided" facility. If the analyses included consideration for the "divided" (the CMP
Capacities did not show a two lane "divided" condition, but it could be developed if necessary)
condition or a four-lane future condition, then the projected street segment operations for Main
Street would be further improved.
Intersection Analyses - Future Without Project
The intersection analyses worksheets provided in Appendix B document the traffic projections
and lane assumptions for "Future Without Project" conditions. The future intersection approach
lanes were assumed to be the same as exist today to provide a "Worst Case" evaluation. Table
2, which was presented earlier shows that all of the study intersections maintain acceptable
(LOS "D" or better) operations for future conditions without the Project.
PROJECT TRAFFIC
The analyses for the Prospect Village project needs to be consistent with the Tustin General Plan
Circulation Element. The MCAS traffic modeling volumes and projections for the ECR MP AH
Amendment were, therefore, used in these evaluations as a base condition. Since these
projections assumed traffic to be generated by the Project site (and no "subtractions" were made
from the previous projections) the result is a conservative evaluation of the Prospect Village
related traffic. The Project was also analyzed using more conservative Institute of
Transportation Engineer ("ITE") rates for freestanding type developments (e.g., this is more
conservative than if a traffic model were run with and without the Project).
Trip Generation
In order to complete trip generation projections for the proposed Project, it was necessary to
reference applicable trip generation rates. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
C:\StevelProsp VilllPrspt Viii TlA22.doc
Prospect Village
Traffic Impact Analysis
6
publication Trip Generation. 6th Edition was referenced to obtain applicable trip generation rates
for the proposed Project. The ITE rates for the proposed land uses are listed in Table 3. These
rates were then applied to the proposed Project based on the sizes of each land use type. The
numbers of "Trip Ends Generated" are shown individually for each land use and a "TOTAL" is
also provided. No trip or traffic impact "credit" was taken for potential uses that could occupy
the vacant building. The Project was analyzed as if the project were being built on vacant land
with no existing structures, which provides a conservative evaluation. The projected volume of
traffic is further considered conservative since it does not consider that at least ten of the
residential units must be occupied by business owners (there may be more than one person, e.g.,
a husband and wife) that operate in the Prospect Village development (for the Project there are a
total of 12 units).
The retail and restaurant land uses have trip characteristics that allow "Passby Considerations".
Tills effect is addressed and well documented in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook as well as
other Traffic Engineering publications. The "Passby Consideration" is simply a reduction in the
trip generation impacts through recognition that some potential patrons (i.e. retail, restaurant)
will come from traffic already on the adjacent roadways. For example, if a driver uses Main
Street to go to work and stops at the proposed project on the way home; then this would be
considered a "Passby" trip. It can be seen that this type of patron would not add traffic to Main
Street, since he is already on the road system going to work. The percentages of "Passby
Considerations" applied in Table 3 were less (to be conservative) than the average passby
percentages observed at operating facilities of the same land use types.
In addition to the proposed Project, there were six Alternative projects considered for
implementation. Trip generation analyses were provided for each of the Alternative projects as
shown in Tables 3A - 3F. The "TOTAL" trip generation projections for each of the Alternative
projects, is summarized in Table 4. In order to provide traffic analyses for these Alternatives, in
addition to the proposed Projeét, the highest trip generation for each category of trip (i.e.,
"Daily", "AM Peak Hour In", etc.) was selected for use in the Project traffic analyses (except
Alternative 5 which may be significantly different than the Project and may require separate
added analyses to implement) as shown in Table 4. The Project traffic analyses, therefore,
present a "Worst Case" for the proposed Project and also include analyses for five of the six
Alternative projects.
Trip Distribution and Assi!!llment
Trip distribution and assignment percentages for the proposed Project were developed based on
factors that include but are not limited to the types of land uses proposed, the locations of
potential trip attractors, the proximity of freeways, orientation of roadways in the study area,
congestion factors, and access considerations. These distribution/assignment percentages also
provide a conservative evaluation of traffic since 100% of the traffic is assumed to be leaving
the study area. In reality some of the Project traffic will be local to the study area, which would
reduce Project traffic impacts at some of the outlaying intersections, but these "credits" were not
taken in the analyses. Figure 3 illustrates the trip distribution and assignment percentages. The
trip generation results in Table 4 were combined with the distribution/assignment percentages
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
C:\SteveIProsp Vil1IPrspt ViII TIA22.doc
Prospect Village
Traffic Impact Analysis
Table 3
Trip Generation
Proposed Project - Prospect Village
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units ~ ~~ ~~
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
. Office (#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant(#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 6,251 SF 254 4 3 7 9
With Passby Consideration (25%) 191 3 2 5 7
. Office 7,402 SF 81 10 2 9
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 12DU 70 4 4 2
TOTAL 600 23 15 24 26
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation, 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook, An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as calculated for comparison purposes.
. Restaurant
With Passby Consideration (35%)
. Residential
Table 3A
Trip Generation
Alternative 1 - No Project
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Units ~ ~~ ~~
per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 !.II 1.48
per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 .4.34
per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
NO PROJECT
NO PROJECT
NO PROJECT
NO PROJECT
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0
Land Use
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814)
. Office (#710)
. Restaurant (#832)
. Residential (#230)
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail
With Passby Consideration (25%)
. Office
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation, 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
Table 3B
Trip Generation
Alternative 2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units --E.@L ~~ ~~
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
. Office (#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) perTSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 9,625 SF 391 6 4 11 14
With Passby Consideration (25%) 293 5 3 8 11
. Office 2,155 SF 24 3 NOM
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 10DD 59 4 4 2
TOTAL 630 18 15 26 24
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation, 6th Edition; InstitUte of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook. An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as calculated for comparison purposes.
Table 3C
Trip Generation
AIternative 3 - 60' Depth
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units ~ ~~ ~~
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
. Office (#710) per TSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 8,430 SF 343 5 3 9 12
With Passby Consideration (25%) 257 4 2 7 9
. Office 3,755 SF 41 5
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential IODU 59 4 4 2
TOTAL 610 19 15 25 24
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation, 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook, An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily ttip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour ttip ends
were maintained as calculated for comparison purposes.
Table 3D
Trip Generation
Alternative 4 - 45' Depth
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units ~ In Out --È- ~
--
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) perTSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
. Office (#710) perTSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) perTSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 6,772 SF 275 4 8 10
With Passby Consideration (25%) 206 3 6 8
. Office 5,298 SF 58 7 7
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 12DU 70 4 4 2
TOTAL 590 20 14 24 25
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Tri" Generation. 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Tri" Generation Handbook, An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as calculated for comparison pwposes.
Table 3E
Trip Generation
Alternative 5
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units ~ In Out ~~
--
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 1.11 1.48
. Office (#710) perTSF 11.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) perTSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential(#230) per DU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retail 16,120 SF 656 10 6 18 24
With Passby Consideration (25%) 492 8 5 14 8
. Office 9,000 SF 99 12 2 11
. Restaurant 3,000 SF 391 14 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 850 29 15 29 37
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generation, 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (lTE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook, An ITE Recommended Practice; 1TE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintained as calculated for comparison purposes.
Table 3F
Trip Generation
Alternative 6
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out In Out
Trip Rates
. Retail (#814) per TSF 40.67 0.63 0.40 J.lI 1.48
. Office (#710) per TSF 1l.01 1.37 0.19 0.25 1.24
. Restaurant (#832) per TSF 130.34 4.82 4.45 6.52 4.34
. Residential (#230) perDU 4.86 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18
Trip Ends Generated
. Retai] 6,251 SF 254 4 3 7 9
With Passby Consideration (25%) 191 3 2 5 7
. Office 7,402 SF 8] 10 2 9
. Restanrant 3,000 SF 39] ]4 13 20 13
With Passby Consideration (35%) 254 9 8 13 8
. Residential 12DU 70 4 4 2
TOTAL 600 23 15 24 26
Source
. Trip Generation Rates: Trio Generatio!], 6th Edition; Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE); 1997
(#110) = (Land Use Code) in Trip Generation
. Passby Considerations: Trio Generation Handbook. An ITE Recommended Practice; ITE; March 2001
Note: For the "Total" the Daily trip ends were rounded to the nearest 10, and the peak hour trip ends
were maintaIned as calculated for comparison purposes.
Table 4
Trip Generation
Summary
Trip Ends Generated
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Description ~ ~~~~
Proposed Project 630 23 15 24 26
Alternative I - No Project 0 0 0 0 0
Alternative 2 630 18 15 26 24
Alternative 3 - 60' Depth 610 19 15 25 24
Alternative 4 - 45' Depth 590 20 14 24 25
Alternative 5 850 29 15 29 37
Alternative 6 600 23 15 24 26
"Worst Case" Assumption' 630 23 15 26 26
'Provides a "Worst Case" evaluation for all potential alternatives except Alternative 5.
¡fthis alternative is considered, then added analyses may be required.
7
presented in Figure 3, to obtain the future Project traffic volumes on the surrounding street
system, as illustrated in Figure 4.
FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH THE PROJECT
Street Sel!ment Analvses - Future With Project
The daily traffic volumes shown in Figure 4 were added to the "Future Without Project"
conditions, so the potential impacts of the Project could be documented. With the addition of
the Project traffic, Table 1 was recalculated. There were no changes in LOS caused by the
proposed Project and acceptable LOS is maintained at each of the study locations.
Intersection Analvses - Future With Project
Figure 4 also shows the Project traffic volumes at the study intersections during the AM and
PM peak hour. These volumes were added to the "Future Without Project" conditions and the
intersection analyses were again calculated. The results of the "Future With Project" analyses
are presented in Table 2. It can be seen that all six of the study intersections maintain
acceptable LOS values with the addition of the Project traffic. These results include all of the
"Worst Case" factors that have been previously discussed earlier in this study. It can, therefore,
be concluded that the Project does not have significant traffic impacts on the surrounding street
system.
Response to Caltrans ReQuest
Analyses were prepared to identify potential significant traffic impacts at the SR-55
Freeway/Irvine Boulevard Ramps and at the 1-5 FreewaylNewport Avenue Ramps. These
evaluations are based upon the trip generation and distribution/assignment analyses presented
earlier in this study. These analyses are provided in response to comments received from
Caltrans regarding the Prospect Village Project.
Trip distribution/assignment percentages were developed for the proposed project 'so the
potential traffic impacts on the surrounding street system (related to the proposed project) could
be identified., The percentages were applied to the "Worst Case" trip generation evaluations to
provide examination of the Project traffic that would travel through the two study locations.
Figure 4 presented earlier shows the percentage of project traffic anticipated to use the freeway
ramp locations and the peak hour volumes assigned to these intersections.
Based on the analyses, there are two inbound and two outbound Project related vehicles
accessing the Freeway at both the SR-55 Freeway/Irvine Boulevard Ramps and 1-5
FreewaylNewport Avenue Ramps during the AM peak hour. For the PM peak hour both the
SR-55 Freeway/Irvine Boulevard Ramps and 1-5 FreewaylNewport Avenue Ramps locations
would have three inbound and three outbound vehicles.
At the 1-5 FreewaylNewport Avenue location there are also three inbound and two outbound
during the AM peak hour and four inbound and four outbound Project trips that stay on Newport
Avenue through the ramp intersections, as illustrated in Figure 4. Overall, these "worst case"
peak hour Project traffic projections at the freeway ramp locations are not expected to result in
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
C:\StevelProsp Vil1\Prspt Viii T1A22,doc
Prospect Village
Traffic Impact Analysis
N
w.
E
t 110% I
110% I ~
¡..:
(/)
<!
~
0
>-
~ f IW/o I
()
w
fu
0
~
No Scale
4T~ ST.
Ih2VINE
BLVD.
1ST ST.
FIh25T
<!
(/)
W
~
MGFADDEN
crJ.
~~
LEGEND
~ = PROJECT DISTRIBUTION
PERCENTAGES
/"" 10% = PROJECT ASSIGNMENT
f PERCENTAGES
Meet Distribution And
Assignment Pereenta~
SASAKI TRANsrOR T A TION SERVICES
FIGURE 3
r:
CI)
~
m
01
0
>-
~
~
N
.'
s
I-
0
UJ
a.
CI)
0
01
a.
No Scale
4T1-4 ST.
IRVINE
BLVD.
~
I-
CI)
0
0
LEGEND
[ED = DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
3/4 = AM/PM PEAK
HOUR VOLUMES
iæject Only Traffic Volumes
SASAKI TR.ANSPOR.TATION SER.VICES
FIGURE 4
any significant Project related impacts. It is noted that those intersection locations closer to the
Project did not have significant increases in their operations due to the Project.
SUMMARY
This study provides traffic analyses related to the proposed Prospect Village Project located
north of Main Street at Prospect Avenue in the City of Tustin. Existing traffic conditions were
examined for both street segment and intersection locations. Future traffic conditions were
considered and analyses provided. Trip generation analyses were completed for both the
proposed Project and a number of Alternative project scenarios on a "Worst Case" basis. The
ability of the surrounding street system to accommodate the Project trips were evaluated.
The following are the principal findings of these analyses:
1. For Existing conditions the study street segments and intersections are shown to be
operating at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS), which for the City of Tustin is at LOS
"D" or better.
2. Future traffic conditions without the proposed Project were examined. The street
segments and study intersections continue to provide acceptable operations (LOS "D" or
better) when future traffic volumes are considered and the current roadway lanes are
assumed.
3. Trip generation analyses were completed for the proposed Project. These evaluations
were also provided for six Alternative projects. A "Worst Case" assumption for future
Project traffic was utilized in the analyses to directly address the proposed Project and
five of the six project alternatives. Added analyses may be required if Alternative 5 is
desired to be developed.
4. The Project trips were distributed and assigned to the surrounding street system using
conservative assumptions. All Project traffic was assumed to leave the study area
creating the greatest impact at outlying locations, even though it is known that some
traffic will remain in the study area.
5. Future traffic conditions with the Project traffic added to the surrounding street system
were analyzed. The study street segment and intersections all maintain acceptable (LOS
"D" or better) operations. The evaluations show there are less than significant traffic
impacts related to the proposed Project.
6. The traffic analyses include response to comments from Caltrans regarding the proposed
Project. Project related traffic traveling through the 1-5 Freeway/Newport Avenue and
SR-55 Freeway/Irvine Boulevard ramp locations were documented and no significant
impacts are anticipated at these locations. It is noted there are minimal impacts at
locations significantly closer to the proposed Project.
SASAKI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
C:\SteveIProsp VilllPrspt Vill TlA22,doc
Prospect Village
Traffic Impact Analysis
APPENDIX A
AM/PM INTERSECTION COUNTS
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: PROSPECT
AVE
DATE: 12/03/03
E/W STREET: 1ST
ST
DAY: WEDNESDAY
CITY: TUSTIN
FILENAME: 1230503A
------------------.----------------------------------------------------------
15 Mi n Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Period
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LANES: 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
6: 00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
7: 00 AM 10 15 6 28 31 14 19 70 9 3 63 14 282
15 AM 11 18 9 35 25 20 24 80 5 4 82 24 337
30 AM 10 41 9 41 34 47 47 100 5 10 113 26 483
45 AM 11 29 14 49 43 59 43 102 9 11 140 26 536
8: 00 AM 13 24 8 45 35 47 12 104 10 13 129 20 460
15 AM 21 16 11 40 43 43 12 86 5 15 121 18 431
30 AM 22 11 10 46 41 40 14 91 6 11 126 11 429
45 AM 17 25 28 42 35 29 15 97 8 27 101 17 441
9: 00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
10:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
- --- u - - u ------- - - u - - - -- u_u_u - - -- - - - - ---- - -- - - - -- - - - - - -- -- - - - - - -- - _u - --
AM Pea~ Hr
Begi ns at
730
VOLUMES = 55 110
42 175 155 196 114 392
29
49 503
90
1910
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services, Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: PROSPECT
AVE
DATE: 12/03/03
E/W STREET: 1ST
ST
DAY: WEDNESDAY
CITY: TUSTIN
FILENAME: 1230503P
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Period
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LANES: 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 1 2 0 1 2 0
2:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
3:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
4:00 PM 15 51 49 60 50 34 29 169 19 22 132 37 667
15 PM 23 51 49 42 35 31 41 174 21 24 157 59 707
30 PM 22 40 28 37 28 24 27 122 6 19 97 24 474
45 PM 23 51 49 42 33 34 41 160 19 22 140 37 651
5:00 PM IB 57 22 46 36 26 40 172 19 12 154 61 663
15 PM 13 46 11 35 20 25 21 133 7 5 91 62 469
30 PM IB 34 11 41 23 17 33 167 11 7 99 21 4B2
45 PM 12 26 17 42 IB 16 22 124 6 3 123 27 436
6:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM Peak Hr
Begins at
1600
VOLUMES = 83 193 175 181 146 123 138 625 65 B7 526 157 2499
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: EL CAMINO
REAL
DATE: 12/03/03
E/W STREET: 1ST
ST
DAY: WEDNESDAY
CITY: TUSTIN
FILENAME: 1230505A
n_- -- n_- - n--- -- --. - n- - - - ---- ---- -- -- --- --- - -- - n- - n - - - - n_- n -- --- - __On
15 Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Period
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-- n -- n -- - - _u. - _n -- n-- - - _n - - - - - - - n---_n - - --------- -- n n_n - _n- -- ----
LANES: 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 1 2
6: 00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
7: 00 AM 21 1 7 1 1 2 0 101 22 5 102 0 263
15 AM 25 1 10 0 1 0 1 114 28 9 123 0 312
30 AM 16 0 8 0 0 1 1 151 29 10 159 0 375
45 AM 20 1 11 1 1 0 0 150 29 10 158 1 382
8:00 AM 21 2 13 1 1 4 0 130 34 21 216 0 443
15 AM 20 1 11 0 0 0 1 84 25 22 129 2 295
30 AM 20 1 16 1 0 1 1 94 20 16 100 0 270
45 AM 29 1 18 1 1 1 1 94 24 22 132 0 324
9: 00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
10:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
_n- -- -- -- - - n- - -- -- _u- - - - --- - - - - u - - - - n- -- -- - - ---- - -- n _n un -- -- - - - - n --
AM Peak Hr
Begi ns at
715
VOLUMES = 82
4
42
2
3
5
2 545 120
50 656
1512
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: EL CAMINO E/W STREET: 1ST CITY: TUSTIN
REAL ST
DATE: 12/03/03 DAY: WEDNESDAY FILENAME: 1230505P
-----------------------------------------.-----------------------------------
15 Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Peri od
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
------------------------------------------._---------------------------------
LANES: 1 a 1 a 1 D 1 2 1 2 a
2:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
3:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
4:00 PM 40 1 22 a a 3 2 167 25 9 151 2 422
15 PM 31 2 24 0 1 2 0 119 23 17 123 3 345
30 PM 32 1 34 1 1 4 a 172 21 24 153 1 444
45 PM 34 1 32 0 1 4 2 159 26 17 144 3 423
5: 00 PM 40 0 18 1 a 2 2 155 38 26 160 a 442
15 PM 49 0 30 1 1 2 3 172 31 10 119 1 419
30 PM 52 2 31 a a 3 a 199 39 19 123 1 469
45 PM 42 0 23 a a 3 a 164 45 24 156 a 457
6:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
- _u - u - - - -- - - u - - - u u u- u -- -- - -- -- -- - - - u - - -- - - - - - - - - - - u - - - - - - - - - - --- - - --
PM Peak Hr
Begins at
1700
VOLUMES = 183
2 102
2
1
10
5 690 153
79 558
2
1787
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services, Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: EL CAMINO EM STREET: MAIN CITY: TUSTIN
REAL ST
DATE: 12/03/03 DAY: WEDNESDAY FILENAME: 1230506A
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 Mi n Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Period
Begi nni ng NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LANES: 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0
6:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
7: 00 AM 7 7 3 0 12 0 3 31 10 7 39 3 122
15 AM 11 34 1 4 27 0 4 62 16 9 46 8 222
30 AM 20 27 10 1 37 1 3 66 26 12 70 2 275
45 AM 18 36 2 0 30 6 2 92 14 10 92 7 309
8:00 AM 10 29 8 4 28 0 3 68 13 7 67 2 239
15 AM 7 29 5 5 28 2 7 57 19 16 62 4 241
30 AM 15 32 8 3 26 5 2 35 11 21 57 5 220
45 AM 12 43 9 3 32 4 3 43 16 18 57 11 251
9:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
10:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
- ---- -- - - - - -- -- -- - -- n- -- -- ---- - - - - - oooo- - - -- -- oo - _u -- - - - - - oo - oo - - - -- - - -----
AM Peak Hr
Begins at
730
VOLUMES = 55 121
25
10 123
9
15 283
72
45 291
15
1064
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: EL CAMINO E/W STREET: MAIN CITY: TUSTIN
REAL ST
DATE: 12/03/03 DAY: WEDNESDAY FILENAME: 1230506P
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Period
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LANES: 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0
2:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
3: 00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
4:00 PM 23 40 12 . 3 34 2 9 79 14 10 106 17 349
15 PM 16 41 14 5 27 4 5 66 6 13 75 8 280
30 PM 26 51 15 5 36 4 9 57 19 13 82 8 325
45 PM 13 38 11 6 27 7 7 74 15 17 94 8 317
5: 00 PM 22 46 18 10 52 6 8 99 20 19 90 6 396
15 PM 29 57 19 9 50 7 8 72 16 17 75 12 371
30 PM 25 52 15 8 51 7 10 88 20 19 84 11 390
45 PM 18 49 17 7 42 5 8 87 18 15 73 9 348
6:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM Peak Hr
Begi ns at
1700
VOLUMES = 94 204 69 34 195 25 34 346 74 70 322 38 1505
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: NEWPORT
AVE
DATE: 12/03/03
E/W STREET: EL CAMINO CITY: TUSTIN
REAL
DAY: WEDNESDAY FILENAME: 1230502A
_u - - - n- - - - -- - - - u - - - -- --- --- u _u- - u - - -- _u_u - - - - -- - _u- _u- - - _u- - u-- --
15 Min
Peri od
Begi nni ng
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
NL
NT
NR
SL
ST
SR
ET
ER
WL
WT
WR
TOTAL
EL
--- - u --- u - - u - _u - - - _u -- - u_u ---- -. - - u - _uu - - uu - --- - u - - - u u- - ------
LANES:
6:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
7:00AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
8:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
9:00AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
10:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
1
2
0
1 2.5 0.5
1
1
2
0
6 56 16 11 80 3 3 14 36 20 15 1 261
32 94 55 27 205 3 1 27 49 46 35 9 583
34 190 98 27 371 3 2 35 86 78 102 31 1057
38 139 32 19 419 1 1 14 71 51 68 23 876
39 164 36 23 349 5 3 27 72 37 39 20 814
39 117 10 11 256 5 3 14 38 33 31 13 570
44 130 17 23 278 2 6 18 42 39 56 10 665
34 139 15 25 240 12 3 26 53 24 43 20 634
- --- - - - -- -- - - --- u - - -- u- -- -- -- _u - -- - - - -. - _uu - - - - u u -- - _u- - - - _u- - - u ---
AM Peak Hr
Begins at
715
VOLUMES = 143 587 221
COMMENTS:
96 1344
12
7 103 278 212 244
83
3330
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: NEWPORT E/W STREET: EL CAMINO CITY: TUSTIN
AVE REAL
DATE: 12/03/03 DAY: WEDNESDAY FILENAME: 1230502P
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 Min Northbound - Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Peri od
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LANES: 1 2 0 1 2.5 0.5 1 1 1 2 0
2:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
3:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
4:00 PM 73 182 31 20 232 37 14 37 62 39 41 13 781
15 PM 67 227 30 53 221 36 27 42 87' 54 75 27 946
30 PM 60 221 33 51 224 35 30 44 88 49 73 29 937
45 PM 62 214 33 42 229 38 31 46 82 52 79 33 941
5:00 PM 69 244 46 39 303 24 36 52 80 50 67 34 1044
15 PM 63 226 42 36 291 26 36 56 71 68 62 30 1007
30 PM 58 230 41 35 276 27 39 60 82 73 65 33 1019
45 PM 57 231 39 38 264 28 37 62 72 64 61 30 983
6:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
---------"-------------------------------------------------------------------
PM Peak Hr
Begi ns at
1700
VOLUMES = 247 931 168 1481134 105 148 230 305 255 255 127
4053
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: NEWPORT
AVE
DATE: 12/03/03
E/W STREET: MAIN
ST
DAY: WEDNESDAY
CITY: TUSTIN
FILENAME: 1230501A
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 Min
Period
Beginning
Northbound
Southbound
Eastbound
Westbound
NL
NT
NR
5L
5T
SR
EL
ET
ER
WL
WT
WR
TOTAL
- - --- - u- - - -- u- -- - -. - - - - uu- - -_u- -- - u - - _u - u - --- - - u --- u u -- - u -- -- - ---
LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2
6: 00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
7:00 AM 13 9B 7 5 167 19 9 32 15 21 45 2 433
15 AM 16 105 14 5 227 16 11 29 25 36 36 1 521
30 AM 35 140 52 12 297 24 14 32 16 59 62 2 745
45 AM 33 134 19 5 282 30 19 33 24 48 89 4 720
8:00 AM 25 134 24 7 301 17 19 37 22 45 62 2 695
15 AM 15 116 4 14 235 23 10 20 18 31 44 2 532
30 AM 16 109 6 13 272 25 10 18 12 31 59 1 572
45 AM 18 106 9 9 244 18 12 24 11 34 60 1 546
9: 00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
10:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
uu- - -- u - - n_- -- u - - -- - - u -- _u u - -- _un - n - _u _u- - - -_u - u - - --- - - - - -_u-
AM Peak Hr
Begi ns at
730
VOLUMES = 108 524
99
38 1115
94
62 122
80 183 257
10
2692
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
NIS STREET: NEWPORT EIW STREET: MAIN CITY: TUSTIN
AVE ST
DATE: 12/03/03 DAY: WEDNESDAY FILENAME: 1230501P
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Peri od
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1
2:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
3:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
4:00 PM 38 198 16 22 178 28 29 47 32 26 72 3 689
15 PM 30 211 16 16 210 16 14 42 32 17 58 2 664
30 PM 36 236 20 18 198 28 21 53 27 36 81 2 756
45 PM 34 207 26 15 203 22 27 49 33 37 94 1 748
5: 00 PM 50 219 48 25 247 29 34 78 31 36 69 1 867
15 PM 31 211 25 18 205 18 37 73 26 51 83 3 781
30 PM 44 241 43 30 263 31 28 76 34 44 88 2 924
45 PM 35 259 34 24 223 26 37 60 18 50 102 3 871
6: 00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
- u - - u - u - - --- u u_- - - u u - - u_u - - - - u -- ---- - u - - - - - -- - - u - - u - - - - -- - uu_-
PM Peak Hr
Beg; ns at
1700
VOLUMES = 160 930 150
97 938 104 136 287 109 181 342
9
3443
COMMENTS:
Traffi c Data Servi ces. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: PROSPECT E/W STREET: MAIN CITY: TUSTIN
AVE ST
DATE: 12/D3/03 DAY: WEDNESDAY FILENAME: 1230504A
------------------------------------------_u_-------------------------------
15 Min Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Peri od
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-----------------_u_-------------_u_---------------------------------------
LANES: 0 1 a 0 1 0 1 1 a a 1 a
6:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
7: 00 AM a 0 a 19 a 13 8 38 a a 46 12 136
15 AM 1 a a 16 a 7 16 52 1 a 55 5 153
30 AM 0 0 1 16 1 15 32 59 3 1 64 17 209
45 AM a 0 0 14 0 16 30 58 2 0 71 17 208
8:00 AM 1 a a 20 2 14 24 63 2 0 76 14 216
15 AM 1 0 2 23 1 15 14 74 3 2 81 9 225
30 AM 2 0 a 20 2 12 8 49 1 a 62 14 170
45 AM 0 0 1 20 1 11 10 37 0 0 67 11 158
9: 00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
10:00 AM
15 AM
30 AM
45 AM
- _u- - - -- - -- u _u - -- -- - --- - u - _u__u - - u- _u_- u- - - - -- - u- _u - -- - - - -- - u----
AM Peak Hr
Begi ns at
730
VOLUMES =
2
0
3
73
4
60 100 254
10
3 292
57
858
COMMENTS:
Traffic Data Services. Inc.
TABULAR SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR TURNING MOVEMENTS
N/S STREET: PROSPECT EIW STREET: MAIN CITY: TUSTIN
AVE ST
DATE: 12/03/03 DAY: WEDNESDAY FILENAME: 1230504P
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 Mi n Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Period
Beginning NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LANES: 0 1 D 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0
2:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
3: 00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
4:00 PM 0 1 1 23 0 15 25 80 0 4 126 33 308
15 PM 1 3 3 15 1 13 16 79 1 1 91 23 247
30 PM 0 2 4 17 1 18 19 49 0 a 66 23 199
45 PM 3 1 3 25 1 11 18 76 2 1 112 22 275
5:00 PM 2 4 5 25 a 11 18 95 0 a 94 23 277
15 PM 3 1 4 25 a 10 17 84 0 a 97 22 263
30 PM 1 2 1 21 a 7 16 85 1 0 91 25 250
45 PM a a 1 20 a 13 11 88 2 a 100 24 259
6:00 PM
15 PM
30 PM
45 PM
u- u UU- u - u - u- uuu u - u u- u u u u -- - _u -- - -- - -- - - - - - - - u - --- - - - - - -_u
PM Peak Hr
Begi ns at
1645
VOLUMES = 9 8 13 96 1 39 69 340 3 1 394 92 1065
COMMENTS:
APPENDIX B
INTERSECTION ANALYSES WORKSHEETS
Table X
AM Peak Hour ICU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECT VILLAGE
PROSPECT AVENUE & FIRST STREET N-S Split Modified
Existinp; Vol, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi 0 Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi Project, Exist Lanes
Movement Lanes Capacity Volume V /C Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V /C Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V IC Ratio
NB Left 1 1700 55 0.03' 1 1700 0 43 0.03' 1 1700 2 45 0.03'
NB Thru 1 1700 110 0.09 1 1700 0 168 0.12 1 1700 3 171 0.12
NBRip;ht 0 0 42 0 0 0 39 0 0 1 40
SB Left 0 0 175 0 0 0 0 198 0 0 0 0 198 0
SB Thru 2 3400 155 0.10' 2 3400 0 193 0.12' 2 3400 6 199 0.12'
SB Rip;ht 1 1700 196 0.12 1 1700 0 161 0.09 1 1700 0 161 0.09
EB Left 1 1700 114 0.07' 1 1700 0 164 0.10' 1 1700 0 164 0.10'
EB Thru 2 3400 392 0.12 2 3400 0 502 0.16 2 3400 0 502 0.16
EBRip;ht 0 0 29 0 0 0 31 0 0 2 33
WB Left 1 1700 49 0.03 1 1700 0 54 0.03 1 1700 1 55 0.03
WB Thru 2 3400 503 0.15' 2 3400 0 641 0.19' 2 3400 0 641 0.19'
WB Rip;ht 1 1700 90 0.05 1 1700 0 131 0.08 1 1700 0 131 0.08
N/S Critical Sum = 0.19 N/S Critical Sum = 0.24 N/S Critical Sum = 0.24
E/W Critical Sum = 0.22 E/W Critical Sum = 0.29 E/W Critical Sum = 0.29
[RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00
Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05
Total ICU = 0.46 Total lCU = 0.58 Total lCU = 0.58
LOS = A LOS = A LOS = A
Table Y
PM Peak Hour ICU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECf VILLAGE
PROSPECf AVENUE & FIRST STREET N-S Split Modified
Existin¡>; Vol, Exist Lanes FutuIe Vol w /0 Project, Exist Lanes FutuIe Vol w / Project, Exist Lanes
Movement Lanes Capacity Volume V /C Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V /C Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V /C Ratio
NB Left 1 1700 83 0.05 1 1700 0 106 0.06 1 1700 3 109 0.06
NB Thru 1 1700 193 0.22 * 1 1700 0 299 0.23 * 1 1700 6 305 0.23 *
NB Ri¡>;ht 0 0 175 0 0 0 85 0 0 1 86
SB Left 0 0 181 0* 0 0 0 '229 0 * 0 0 0 '229 0*
SB Thru 2 3400 146 0.10 2 3400 0 131 0.11 2 3400 6 137 0.11
SBRi¡>;ht 1 1700 123 0.07 1 1700 0 123 0.07 1 1700 0 123 0.07
EB Left 1 1700 138 0.08 1 1700 0 235 0.14 * 1 1700 0 235 0.14 *
EB Thru 2 3400 625 0.20 * 2 3400 0 882 0.27 2 3400 0 882 0.27
EBRi¡>;ht 0 0 65 0 0 0 40 0 0 3 43
WB Left 1 1700 87 0.05 * 1 1700 0 24 0.01 1 1700 1 25 0.01
WB Thru 2 3400 526 0.15 2 3400 0 699 0.21 * 2 3400 0 699 0.21 *
WB Ri¡>;ht 1 1700 10 0.01 1 1700 0 251 0.15 1 1700 0 251, 0.15
N/S Critical Sum = 0.32 N/S Critical Sum = 0.34 N/S Critical Sum = 0.34
E/W Critical Sum = 0.25 E/W Critical Sum = 0.35 E/W Critical Sum = 0.35
[RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00
Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05
Total lCU = 0.62 Total lCU = 0.74 Total lCU = 0.74
LOS = B LOS = C LOS = C
Table X
AM Peak Hour ICU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECT VILLAGE
EL CAMINO REAL & FIRST STREET
Existing Vol, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi 0 Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi Project. Exist Lanes
Movement Lanes Capacity Volume V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V IC Ratio
NB Left 1 1700 82 0.05 * 1 1700 0 170 0.10 * 1 1700 0 170 0.10 *
NB Thru 10 6800 0 0.00 10 6800 a a 0.00 10 6800 0 0 0.00
NB Right 1 1700 42 0.02 1 1700 a 70 0.04 1 1700 a 70 0.04
5B Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 a a a
5B Thru 10 6800 0 0.00 * 10 6800 0 0 0.00 * 10 6800 0 a 0.00 *
5B Right a 0 a a a 0 a a 0 a 0
EB Left 1 1700 2 0.00 1 1700 a 2 0.00 1 1700 a 2 0.00
EB Thru 2 3400 545 0.16 2 3400 0 570 0.17 2 3400 2 572 0.17
EB Right 1 1700 120 0.07 1 1700 a 128 0.08 1 1700 0 128 0.08
WB Left 1 1700 50 0.03 1 1700 a 107 0.06 1 1700 a .107 0.06
WB Thru 2 3400 656 0.19 2 3400 a 778 0.23 2 3400 2 780 0.23
WB Right a a 1 a 0 Ú 1 0 0 0 1
N/5 Critical Sum = 0.05 N/S Critical Sum = 0.10 N/S Critical Sum = 0.10
E/W Critical 5um = 0.19 E/W Critical Sum = 0.23 E/W Critical Sum = 0.23
[RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00
Clearance = 0.05 Clearance = 0.05 Clearance ~ 0.05
Total lCU = 0.29 Total lCU = 0.38 TotallCU= 0.38
1.08= A 1.08= A 1.08= A
Table Y
PM Peak Hour ICU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECT VILLAGE
EL CAMINO REAL & FIRST STREET
ExistinR Vol, Exist Lanes Future Vol wjo Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol w j Project, Exist Lanes
Movement ~ Capacity Volume V jC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V jC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V jC Ratio
NB Left 1 1700 183 0.11 * 1 1700 0 261 0.15 * 1 1700 0 261 0.15 *
NB Thru 10 6800 0 0.00 10 6800 0 0 0.00 10 6800 0 0 0.00
NB RiRht 1 1700 102 0.06 1 1700 0 149 0.09 1 1700 0 149 0.09
SB Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SB Thru 10 6800 0 0.00 * 10 6800 0 0 0.00 * 10 6800 0 0 0.00'
SB RiRht 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EB Left 1 1700 5 0.00 1 1700 0 5 0.00 1 1700 0 5 0.00
EB Thru 2 3400 690 0.20 * 2 3400 0 954 0.28 * 2 3400 3 957 0.28'
EB RiRht 1 1700 153 0.09 1 1700 0 207 0.12 1 1700 0 207 0.12
WB Left 1 1700 79 0.05' 1 1700 0 116 0.07' 1 1700 0 116 0.07'
WB ThIu 2 3400 558 0.16 2 3400 0 776 0.23 2 3400 3 779 0.23
WB RiRht 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
NjS Critical Sum = 0.11 NjS Critical Sum = 0.15 NjSCriticalSum= 0.15
EjW Critical Sum = 0.25 EjW Critical Sum = 0.35 EjW Critical Sum = 0.35
[RT Adjusbnent] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00
Clearance = 0.05 Clearance = 0.05 Clearance = 0.05
Total lCU = 0.41 Total lCU = 0.55 Total lCU = 0.55
1.05= A 1.05= A 1.05= A
Table X
AM Peak Hour leU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECT VILLAGE
EL CAMINO REAL & MAIN STREET, N-S Split Mod.
Existin/l Vol, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi 0 Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi Project, Exist Lanes
Movement ~ Capacity Volume V IC Ratio ~ Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V IC Ratio
NB Left 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 73 0 0 0 0 73 0
NB Thru 1 1700 121 0.10' 1 1700 0 164 0.14' 1 1700 0 164 0.14'
NB Right 1 1700 25 0.01 1 1700 0 50 0.03 1 1700 2 52 0.03
SB Left 0 0 10 O' 0 0 0 15 O' 0 0 0 15 O'
SBThru 1 1700 123 0.08 1 1700 0 166 0.11 1 1700 0 166 0.11
SB Ri/lht 1 1700 9 0.01 1 1700 0 29 0.02 1 1700 0 29 0.02
EB Left 1 1600 15 0.01' 1 1600 0 35 0.02' 1 1600 0 35 0.02'
EB Thru 1 1700 283 0.21 1 1700 0 366 0.27 1 1700 3 369 0.27
EB Ri/lht 0 0 72 0 0 0 98 0 0 0 98
WB Left 1 1600 45 0.03 1 1600 0 61 0.04 1 1600 2 63 0.04
WB Thru 1 1700 291 0.26' 1 1700 0 448 0.30' 1 1700 1 449 0.30'
WB Right 0 0 155 0 0 0 57 0 0 0 57
N/S Critical Sum = 0.18 N/SCritical Sum = 0.25 N/S Critical Sum = 0.25
E/W Critical Sum = 0.27 E/W Critical Sum = 0.32 E/W Critical Sum = 0.32
[RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustmentj = 0.00
Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = . 0.05 Oearance ~ 0.05
Total lCU = 0.50 Total lCU = 0.62 Total lCU = 0.62
LOS = A LOS = B LOS = B
Table Y
PM Peak Hour leU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECT VILLAGE
EL CAMINO REAL & MAIN STREET, N-S 5plit Mod.
Existinl'; Vol, Exist Lanes Future Vol wjo Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol w j Project, Exist Lanes
Movement Lanes Capacity Volume V jC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol.~. V jC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V jC Ratio
NB Left 0 0 94 0 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 133 0
NB Thru 1 1700 204 0.18 * 1 1700 0 248 0.22 * 1 1700 0 248 0.22 *
NB Ril';ht 1 1700 69 0.04 1 1700 0 112 0.07 1 1700 3 115 0.07
SB Left 0 0 34 0* 0 0 0 39 0 * 0 0 0 39 0 *
5B T\uu 1 1700 195 0.13 1 1700 0 225 0.16 1 1700 0 225 0.16
SBRi¡1;ht 1 1700 25 0.01 1 1700 0 28 0.02 1 1700 0 28 0.02
EB Left 1 1600 34 0.02 1 1600 0 49 O.Œ 1 1600 0 49 O.Œ
EBThru 1 1700 346 0.25 * 1 1700 0 344 0.27 * 1 1700 3 347 0.27
EB Ril';ht 0 0 74 0 0 0 115 0 0 0 115
WB Left 1 1600 45 O.Œ* 1 1600 0 82 0.05 * 1 1600 3 85 0.05
WBThru 1 1700 291 0.18 1 1700 0 434 0.28 1 1700 3 437 0.29
WB Ri¡1;ht 0 0 15 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 50
Nj5 Critical5um = 0.31 Nj5 Critical5um = 0.38 Nj5 Critical5um = 0.38
EjW Critical5um = 0.28 EjW Critical Sum = 0.32 EjW Critical5um = 0.32
[RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adfu¡¡tment] = 0.00
Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05
TotallCU = 0.64 TotallCU = 0.75 TotallCU = 0.75
LOS = B LOS = C LOS = C
Table X
AM Peak Hour ICU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECT VILLAGE
NEWPORT AVENUE & EL CAMINO REAL
ExistinK Vol, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi 0 Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi Project, Exist Lanes
Movement Lanes Capacity Volume V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V IC Ratio
NB Left 1 1700 143 0.08' 1 1700 0 110 0.06 1 1700 2 112 0.07
NB Thru 2 3400 587 0.17 2 3400 0 520 0.15' 2 3400 3 523 0.15
NB RiKht 1 1700 221 0.13 1 1700 0 190 0.11 1 1700 0 190 0.11
SB Left 1 1700 96 0.06 1 1700 0 170 0.10' 1 1700 0 170 0.10
SB Thru 3 5100 1344 0.27' 3 5100 0 900 0.18 3 5100 2 902 0.18
SB RiKht 0 0 12 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 10
EB Left 1 1700 7 0.00 1 1700 0 20 0.01 1 1700 0 20 0.01
EB Thru 1 1700 103 0.06' 1 1700 0 190 0.11 . 1 1700 0 190 0.11 .
EB RiKht 1 1700 278 0.16 1 1700 0 490 0.29 1 1700 2 492 0.29
WB Left 1 1700 212 0.12' 1 1700 0 140 0.08' 1 1700 0 140 0.08'
WB Thru 2 3400 244 0.10 2 3400 0 140 0.06 2 3400 0 140 0.06
WB RiKht 0 0 83 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 70
N/S Critical Sum = 0.35 N/SCriticai Sum = 0.25 N/S Critical Sum = 0.25
E/W Critical Sum = 0.18 E/W Critical Sum = 0.19 E/W Critical Sum = 0.19
[RT Adjusbnent] = 0.00 [RT Adjusbnent] = 0.00 [RT Adjusbnent] = 0.00
Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05
Total ICU = 0.58 Total ICU = 0.49 Total lCU = 0.49
LOS = A LOS = A LOS = A
Table Y
PM Peak Hour ICU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECT VILLAGE
NEWPORT AVENUE & EL CAMINO REAL
Existing Vol, E¡dst Lanes Future Vol wlo Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol wi Project, Exist Lanes
Movement Lanes Capacity Volume V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V IC Ratio
NB Left 1 1700 247 0.15 * 1 1700 0 390 0.23 * 1 1700 3 393 0.23 *
NBThru 2 3400 931 0.27 2 3400 0 1200 0.35 2 3400 4 1204 0.35
NB Right 1 1700 168 0.10 1 1700 0 40 0.02 1 1700 0 40 0.02
SB Left 1 1700 148 0.09 1 1700 0 100 0.06 1 1700 0 100 0.06
SB Thru 3 5100 1134 0.24 * 3 5100 0 930 0.19 * 3 5100 4 934 0.19 *
SB Right 0 0 105 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 60
EB Left 1 1700 148 0.09 1 1700 0 60 0.04 * 1 1700 0 60 0.04 *
EB Thru 1 1700 230 0.14 * 1 1700 0 230 0.14 1 1700 0 230 0.14
EB Right 1 1700 305 0.18 1 1700 0 400 0.24 1 1700 3 403 0.24
WB Left 1 1700 255 0.15 * 1 1700 0 100 0.06 1 1700 0 100 0.06
WB Thru 2 3400 255 0.11 2 3400 0 550 0.26 * 2 3400 0 550 0.26 *
WB Right 0 0 127 0 0 0 320 0 0 0 320
N/S Critical Sum = 0.39 N/S Critical Sum = 0.42 N/S Critical Sum = 0.42
EIW Critical Sum = 0.29 EIW Critical Sum = 0.30 EIW Critical Sum = 0.30
[RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment) = 0.00 [RT Adjustment) = 0.00
Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05
TotallCU= 0.73 Total ICU = 0.77 Total lCU = 0.77
LOS = C LOS = C LOS = C
Table X
AM Peak Hour ICU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECT VILLAGE
NEWPORT A VENUE & MAIN STREET
Existin¡>; Vol, Exist Lanes Future Vol w /0 Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol w / Project, Exist Lanes
Movement Lanes Capacity Volume V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V IC Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot. Vol. V IC Ratio
NB Left 1 1700 108 0.06 * 1 1700 0 240 0.14 * 1 1700 3 243 0.14 *
NBThru 2 3400 524 0.18 2 3400 0 340 0.11 2 3400 0 340 0.11
NB Ri¡>;ht 0 0 99 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 50
SB Left 1 1700 38 0.02 1 1700 0 30 0.02 1 1700 0 30 0.02
SB Thru 2 3400 1115 0.33 * 2 3400 0 1010 0.30 * 2 3400 0 1010 0.30 *
SB Ri¡>;ht 1 1700 94 0.06 1 1700 0 130 0.08 1 1700 1 131 0.08
EB Left 1 1700 62 0.04 1 1700 0 40 0.02 1 1700 1 41 0.02
EB Thru 2 3400 122 0.06 2 3400 0 240 0.11 * 2 3400 3 243 0.11 *
EB Ri¡>;ht 0 0 80 0 0 0 140 0 0 2 142
WB Left 1 1700 183 0.11 1 1700 0 160 0.09 * 1 1700 0 160 0.09 *
WB Thru 2 3400 "257 0.13 2 3400 0 380 0.11 2 3400 5 385 0.12
WB Ri¡>;ht 0 0 183 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 10
N/SCriticalSum= 0.39 N/S Critical Sum = 0.44 N/S Critical Sum = 0.44
E/W Critical Sum = 0.17 E/W Critical Sum ~ 0.20 E/W Critical Sum = 0.20
[RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] ~ 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00
Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05 Oearance = 0.05
Total lCU = 0.61 Total ICU = 0.69 Total lCU = 0.69
1.05= B 1.05= B 1.05= B
Table Y
PM Peak Hour ICU/LOS Worksheet
Sasaki Transportation Services
PROSPECf VILLAGE
NEWPORT AVENUE & MAIN STREET
Existing Vol, Exist Lanes Future Vol w / 0 Project, Exist Lanes Future Vol w / Project, Exist Lanes
Movement Lanes Capacity ~ V /C Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V /C Ratio Lanes Capacity Added Vol. Tot Vol. V /C Ratio
NB Left 1 1700 160 0.09 * 1 1700 0 80 0.05 1 1700 4 84 0.05
NB Thru 2 3400 930 0.32 2 3400 0 1090 0.37 * 2 3400 0 1090 0.37 *
NB Ri¡;ht 0 0 150 0 0 0 180 0 0 0 180
SB Left 1 1700 38 0.02 1 1700 0 70 0.04 * 1 1700 0 70 0;04 *
SB Thm 2 3400 1115 0.33 * 2 3400 0 780 0.23 2 3400 0 780 0.23
SB Ri¡;ht 1 1700 94 0.06 1 1700 0 120 0.07 1 1700 1 121 0.07
EB Left 1 1700 62 0.04 1 1700 0 60 0.04 1 1700 1 61 0.04
EB Thru 2 3400 122 0.06 * 2 3400 0 490 0.16 * 2 3400 5 495 0.16 *
EB Right 0 0 80 0 0 0 40 0 0 4 44
WBLeft 1 1700 183 0.11 * 1 1700 0 90 0.05 * 1 1700 0 90 0.05 *
WB Thru 2 3400 257 0.08 2 3400 0 520 0.16 2 3400 5 525 0.16
WB Ri¡;ht 0 0 10 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 10
N/S Critical Sum = 0.42 N/S Critical Sum = 0.41 N/S Critical Sum = 0.41
E/W Critical Sum = 0.17 E/W Critical Sum = 0.21 E/W Critical Sum = 0.21
[RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00 [RT Adjustment] = 0.00
Clearance = 0.05 Clearance = 0.05 Clearance = 0.05
Total lCU = 0.64 Total lCU = 0.67 Total lCU = 0.67
1.05= B 1.05= B 1.05= B
, TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Analvst MJE Intersection MainSt/Prospect Ave
Aaencv/Co. Hartzoo & Crabill, Inc. Jurisdiction Citv of Tustin
Date Performed . Analvsls Year 2003
Analvsis Time Period
Proiect Descriotion ect
EasVWest Street: Main Street INorth/South Street: Prosoect Ava
Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudv Period (hrs): 0.25
~ehicle Volumes and Adiustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume (vehlh) 121 433 3 1 290 112
Peak-hour factor. PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 121 - 433 3 1 .290 112
Proportion of heavy a 0
Vehicles. PHV - - - -
Median type Two Way Left Tum Lane
RT Channelized? a a
Lanes 1 1 a 1 1 1
Configuration L TR L T R
Upstream Sianai a a
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume Ivehlh) 9 8 13 122 1 68
Peak-hour factor. PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 9 8 13 122 1 68
Proportion of heavy 0 a 0 0 a a
vehicles, PHV
Percent grade (%) 0 a
Flared approach N N
Storage a a
RT Channelized? a a
Lanes a 1 0 0 1 a
Configuration LTR LTR
Control DelaV', Queue Lenath, Level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR
Volume, v (vph) 121 1 30 191
Capacity, cm (vph) 1168 1134 369 387
v/c ratio 0.10 0.00 0.08 0.49
Queue length (95%) 0.35 0.00 0.26 2.64
Control Delay (slveh) 8.4 8.2 15.6 23.0
LOS A A C C
i\pproach delay (slveh) -- -- 15.6 23.0
Approach LOS -- -- C C
HCS2000TM
Copyright C> 2003 Unive"ity of Florida, An Righ~ Reserved
Version4.1d
tWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
Analvst MJE Intersection MalnSt/Prosnect Ave
Aoencv/Co. Hartzoo& Crabill, Inc. urisdiction citv of Tustin
Date Performed ~ Analysis Year 2003
Analysis Time Period
Proiect Descriotion F . ct
East/West Street: Main Street ¡North/South Street: Prosoect Ave
Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudv Period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Malor Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 83 323 10 3 409 98
Peak-hour factor. PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 83 323 10 3 409 98
Proportion of heavy 0 0
vehicles, PHV -- - - -
Median type Two Wav Left Tum Lane
RT Channelized? 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 1
Configuration L TR L T R
Upstream SiGnal 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
olume (veh/h \ 2 0 3 83 4 90
Peak-hour factor, I:'HF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 2 0 3 83 4 90
Proportion of heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0
vehicles, PHV
Percent grade (%) 0 0
Flared approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized? 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
onfiouration LTR LTR
Control Delav, Queue Lenath Level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR
Volume, v (vph) 83 3 5 177
Capacity. cm (vph) 1068 1238 442 467
v/c ratio 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.38
Queue length (95%) 0.25 0.01 0.03 1.75
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.7 7.9 13.2 17.3
LOS A A B C
~pproach delay (s/veh) -- - 13.2 17.3
V>-pproach LOS -- -- B C
HCS2000TM
Copy,ight 10 2003 Unlve"lty of Florida, All Rights Resenoed
Ymlon 4.ld
, TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
IGenerallnformatíon Site Information
IlAnalvst MJE Intersection MainStlProsoect Ave
ilAoency/Co. Hartzoa & Crabill, Inc. Uurisdlction City of Tustin
Date Performed !Analysis Year 2003
IAnalysis Time Period /8IIIIIfííIveít
Pro'ect Descriotion "ect
EastIWest Street: Main Street North/South Street: ProsIJect Ave
Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudv Period hrs\: 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adíustments
Maior Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume (Yeh/h) 117 433 3 1 290 105
Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 117 433 3 1 290 105
Proportion of heavy 0 0 -
ehicles, PHV - - -
Median type Two Way Left Turn Lane
RT Channelized? 0 0
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 1
Configuration L TR L T R
Upstream Sionai 0 0
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 9 8 13 115 1 63
Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Houriy Fiow Rate (veh/h) 9 8 13 115 1 63
Proportion of heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0
vehicies. PHV
Percent grade (%) 0 0
Flared approach N N
Storage 0 0
RT Channelized? 0 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Control Delay, Queue Lenath, Level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR
Voiume, v (vph) 117 1 30 179
Capacity, cm (vph) 1175 1134 374 390
v/c ratio 0.10 0.00 0.08 0.46
Queue length (95%) 0.33 0.00 0.26 2.34
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.4 8.2 15.5 21.8
LOS A A C C
'\pproach delay (s/veh) -- - 15.5 21.8
Approach LOS _. -- C C
HCS2000TM
Cop",ight <C> 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved
YorslOn 4.ld
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
General Information Site Information
o,nalvst IMJE Intersection MalnSt/ProsDecl Ave
o,Qencv/Co. IHartzoG & Crabill, Inc. Uurisdiction Cltv of Tust/n
Date Performed ~ ~nalvsis Year 2003
o,nalvsis Time Period
Proiect Description F
EasVWest Street: Mai~et INorth/South Street: ProsDect Ave
Intersection Orientation: East-West IStudv Period Ihrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume (veh/h) 87 323 10 3 409 105
Peak-hour factor. PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 87 323 10 3 409 105
Proportion of heavy 0 - -- 0 - --
vehicles, PHV
Median type Two Wav Left Turn Lane
RT Channeiized? 0 a
Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 1
Configuration L TR L T R
.. Upstream Sianal 0 a
Minor Street Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
olume (veh/h) 2 a 3 87 4 92
Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 2 0 3 87 4 92
Proportion of heavy 0 a 0 a a 0
ehicles, PHV
Percent grade (%) 0 0
Flared approach N N
Storage 0 a
RT Channelized? a 0
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Control Delav, Queue Lenath, Level of Service
¡A,pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
Lane Configuration L L LTR LTR
Volume, v (vph) 87 3 5 183
Capacity, cm (vph) 1062 1238 436 462
v/c ratio 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.40
Queue length (95%) 0.27 0.01 0.03 1.87
Control Delay (s/veh) 8.7 7.9 13.4 17.8
LOS A A B C
Approach delay (s/veh) -- -- 13.4 17.8
Approach LOS -- -- B C
HCS2000TM
CoWight ~ 2003 University ofFlo,ida. All Righ" Reseev,d
Versioo4.1d
APPENDIX H
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives Report
';..
RECEIVED
KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES ,INC.
OCT 3"U 2003
AOPISORS IN,
SOO SOUTH ORAND AVBNUB. SUITS 148O
Los ANOBUS. CALIPOltNlA 90071
PRONEe 213/622.S095
FAX,2!>1622.S2D4
WWW.KBVSBRMARSTON.COM
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ~:~::::BNT
AFFORDABLB HouslNo
ECONOMIC DB..LOPM.NT
-
Los ANGELES
Colvin E. Holtls. 1I
Kathl... H. Hand
Jam.. A. Rab.
Paut C. A.dorso.
O,.gory D. Soo-Hoo
MEMORANDUM
SAN DIEGG
G."ld M. Tdmbl.
Paul C. Marn
To:
Mr. James Draughon, Redevelopment Program Manager
City of Tustin
SAN FaANCISCO
A. J.n-y K.y'"
nmolby C. K,Uy
Kat, Eerl, Funk
D,bbi, M. K",
Rob'rt J. Wctmo,"
From:
James Rabe
Kevin Engstrom
Date:
October 28, 2003
Subject:
Evaiuation of CEQÄ Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
Pursuant to your request, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) has evaluated development
feasibility of the proposed project and the development alternatives presented in the
Environmental Impact Report for the Prospect Village Project. The alternatives evaluated are:
Proposed Project - Raze the site and develop 3,773 square feet of retail space and
4,816 square feet of office space on Main Street, six live/work units on Prospect Avenue
and six live/work units on Prospect Lane.
Alternative 2 - Historic Preservation - Rehabilitation of the existing 6,120 square foot
structures to Department of Interior Standards and construction of an abutting 1,940
square foot structure, development of five live/work units on Prospect Avenue and five
live/work units on Prospect Lane. '
Alternative 3 - Modified Preservation - Rehabilitation of 5,240 square feet of the
existing structures to Department of Interior Standards, construction of 1,600 square feet
of retail space and 1,600 square feet of office space on Main Street, development of five
live/work units on Prospect Avenue and five live/work units on Prospect Lane.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CUEN1S
03D904S.TUS,JAR,K"",gbd
'BsaD.CO'.DD3
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 2
Alternative 4 - Reduced Modified Preservation - Rehabilitation of 2,628 square feet
of the existing structures to Department of Interior Standards and construction of 1,640
square feet of new retail space and 2,712 square feet of office space on Main Street,
development of six live/work units on Prospect Avenue and six live/work units on
Prospect Lane.
Alternative 5 - Historic Preservation with Existing Zoning - Rehabilitate the existing
6,120 square foot structures to Department of Interior Standards and construct an
abutting 2,200 square foot retail structure on Main Street, develop 10,800 square feet of
retail space on Prospect Avenue and 9,000 square feet of office space on Prospect
Lane.
Alternative 6 - Proposed Project with Façade Preservation - Same development
program as the Proposed Project except that facade for building 193 - 194 is preserved
and integrated into the Project. This Alternative also has six live/work units on Prospect
Avenue and six live/work units on Prospect Lane.
LIMITING CONDITIONS
In evaluating these altematives, KMA has separately analyzed the feasibility of development of
the commercial and residential components of each alternative. The development and
investment community examine for-sale residential projects differently than commercial projects
and KMA has adopted those conventions. Feasibility of commercial projects is measured on a
return on cost basis; feasibility for for-sale residential projects is measured on a profit margin
basis.
In preparing this analysis, KMA has utilized a number of data sources. Costs for the
redevelopment and rehabilitation of the historic buildings was provided in a memorandum report
prepared by Kovtun Construction Management dated October 10, 2003. We have also
reviewed the data submitted by the developer and consultants, and have contacted brokers and
leasing agents in the market area. KMA has also reviewed its files with respect to developing
cost factors for new construction and operating expense factors. A more detailed discussion of
the assumptions is found in the attachments.
It should also be noted, that this evaluation is based upon only conceptual development
programming. No detailed architect plans have been developed. Further, KMA has
standardized the construction and development costs to provide for a consistent analysis.
While these costs serve as a baseline for comparison purposes, actual cost may vary widely
based on unforeseen conditions, final decision elements, and construction materials and
finishes.
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - ProspeCt Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 3
ANALYSIS
Each of the alternatives is discussed separately below. The assumptions are summarized in
Table 1. The feasibility results are summarized in Table 2.
Proposed Project
The Proposed Project contemplates razing the site and building 3,773 square feet of retail and
restaurant space, and 4,816 square feet of office space on Main Street. The retail space
includes an additional 570 square feet of patio space. Total development costs for the
commercial space are estimated at $1,653,000 or approximately $193 per square foot.
A review of the market area indicates that new retail space and office space has a market rental
rate of $1.25 per square foot per month or $15.00 per square foot per year. New restaurant
space is projected to rent for $21.00 per square foot. Annual net operating income (NO!) is
projected at $131,000, as shown in Table 2. Assuming a threshold return requirement of
10.5%, the commercial portion of the project supports development costs to $1,248, which is
$405,000 less than the projected development costs. This component of the project has a
feasibility gap of $405,000.
The Proposed Project also contemplates the development of 12 live work units. The residential
units have a total of 31 ,884 square feet of livable space and 6,354 square feet of garage space
for a gross square footage of 38,238. Total development costs for the live/work space are
estimated at $6,239,000.
Market analyses have projected that the larger Prospect Avenue live/work units could sell for
$645,790 per unit or $212.50 per square foot. The smaller Prospect Lane units are projected to
sell for $576,520 or $247.50 per square foot. Allowing for a 10% developer profit, the live/work
units generate proceeds of $7,280,000, which is $1,041,000 greater than development costs.
Overall, the combined project has a project surplus of $636,000, which represents the amount
that the developer can pay for the site. The $636,000 supportable land value is equal to $14.00
per square foot of land, as shown in Table 2.
Alternative 2
Alternative 2 contemplates preserving the existing commercial buildings. The existing buildings
would be rehabilitated as 3,120 square feet of retail space and 3,000 square feet of restaurant
space. An additional 1 ,940 square feet of retail space would be added on Main Street. The
total retail/commercial space along Main Street is 8,060 square feet. Total rehabilitation and
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 4
development costs for the commercial space are estimated at $2,253,000 or approximately
$280 per square foot.
The preserved space is not as efficient as newly developed space. The existing buildings are
broken into small spaces that are less useful than newly developed retail and restaurant space.
Based on the review of the market, the preserved space is projected to rent for $13.00 per
square foot per year for retail uses and $15.00 per square foot for restaurant use. The new
retail space is projected to rent for $15.00 per square foot ($1.25 per square foot per month).
Annual NOI is projected at $103,000, as shown in Table 2. Assuming a threshold return
requirement of 10.5%, the commercial portion of the project supports development costs to
$98'1,000, which is $1,272,000 less than the projected development costs. This component of
the project has a feasibility gap of $1 ,272,000.
This alternative also contemplates the development of 10 live/work units. The residential units
have a total of 26,570 square feet of livable space and 5,295 square feet of garage space for a
gross square footage of 31 ,865. Total development costs for the live/work space are estimated
at $5,185,000. .
Market analyses have projected that the larger Prospect Avenue live/work units could sell for
$645,790 per unit or $212.50 per square foot. The smaller Prospect Lane units are projected to
sell for $576,520 or $247.50 per square foot. Allowing for a 1 0% developer profit, the live/work
units generate proceeds of $6,067,000, which is $882,000 greater than development costs.
Overall, the combined alternative has a feasibility gap of $390,000, which represents the
supportable land value or the subsidy required for the developer to undertake the alternative.
The negative $390,000 feasibility gap is equal to a negative $8.60 per square foot of land, as
shown in Table 2. In comparison to the Proposed Project, the difference in supportable land is
$1,026,000 or $22.60 per square foot of land. This is the difference between the $636,000 that
the Proposed Project can pay compared to the $390,000 subsidy required for this alternative.
The $1,026,000 difference represents the revenue loss to Agency of selecting Alternative 2.
Alternative 3
Alternative 3 contemplates preserving a portion of the existing commercial buildings. The
existing buildings would be rehabilitated as 2,240 square feet of retail space and 3,000 square
feet of restaurant space. An additional 1 ,600 square feet of retail space and 1,600 square feet
of office space would be added on Main Street. The total retaiVcommercial space along Main
Street is 8,440 square feet. Total rehabilitation and development costs for the commercial
space are estimated at $2,357,000, or nearly $279 per square foot.
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 5
The preserved space is not as efficient as newly developed space. The existing buildings are
broken into small spaces that are less useful than newly developed retail and restaurant space.
Based on the review of the market the preserved space is projected to rent for $13.00 per
square foot per year'for retail uses and $15.00 per square foot for restaurant use. The new
retail space is projected to rent for $15.00 per square foot. Annual NOI is projected at
$109,000, as shown in Table 2. Assuming a threshold return requirement of 10.5%, the
commercial portion of the project supports development costs to $1,038,000, which is
$1,319,000 less than the projected development costs. This component of the alternative has a
feasibility gap of $1,319,000.
As with Alternative 2, this altemative contemplates the development of 10 live/work units. The
residential units have a total of 26,570 square feet of livable space and 5,295 square feet of
garage space for a gross square footage of 31 ,865. Total development costs for the live/work
space are estimated at $5,185,000.
Market analyses have projected that the larger Prospect Avenue livelwork units could sell for
$645,790 per unit or $212.50 per square foot. The smaller Prospect Lane units are projected to
sell for $576,520 or $247.50 per square foot. Allowing for a 10% developer profit, the live/work
units generate proceeds of $6,067,000, which is $882,000 greater than development costs.
Overall, the combined altemative has a feasibility gap of $437,000, which represents the
subsidy required for the developer to undertake the alternative. The negative $437,000
feasibility gap is equal to $9.60 per square foot of land, as shown in Table 2. In comparison to
the Proposed Project, the difference in Supportable land value between the two altematives is
$1,073,000 or $23.20 per square foot.
Alternative 4
Alternative 4 contemplates less preservation than Altemative 3. One of the existing buildings
(191) would be demolished and the remaining 193-195 building would be reduced to a 45'
depth. The 193-195 building would be rehabilitated as 1,000 square feet of retail space and
1,628 square feet of restaurant space. An additional 1 ,640 square feet of retail space and 2,712
square feet of office space would be added on Main Street. The total retail/commercial space
along Main Street is 4,352 square feet. Total rehabilitation and development costs for the
commercial space are estimated at $1,805,000, or nearly $259 per square foot.
As noted above, the preserved space is not as efficient as newly developed space. The existing
buildings are broken into small spaces that are less useful than newly developed retail and
restaurant space. Based on the review of the market, the preserved space is projected to rent
for $13.00 per square foot per year for retail uses and $15.00 per square footfor restaurant use.
The new retail space is projected to rent for $15.00 per square foot ($1.25 per square foot per
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 6
month). The annual NOI is projected at $92,000, as shown in Table 2. Assuming a threshold
retum requirement of 10.5%, the commercial portion of the project supports development costs
to $876,000, which is $929,000 less than the projected development costs. This component of
the project has a feasibility gap of $929,000.
The smaller amount (45' depth) of commercial space allows for the development of 12 live/work
units. The residential units have a total of 31 ,884 square feet of livable space and 6,354 square
feet of garage space for a gross square footage of 38,238. Total development costs for the
live/work space are estimated at $6,239,000.
Market analyses have projected that the larger Prospect Avenue live/work units could sell for
$645,790 per unit or $212.50 per square foot. The smaller Prospect Lane units are projected to
sell for $576,520 or $247.50 per square foot. Allowing for a 10% developer profit, the live/work
units generate proceeds of $7,280,000, which is $1,041,000 greater than deveiopment costs.
Overall, the combined project has a surplus of $112,000, which represents the amount that the
developer can afford to pay for the site. The $112,000 surplus is equal to $2.50 per square foot.
of land as shown in Table 2. In comparison to the Proposed Project, the supportable land value
is $524,000 lower, or $11.60 per square footless.
Alternative 5
Alternative 5 contemplates preserving the existing commercial buildings as in Alternative 2,
however it adds commercial and office uses on the remainder of the site, rather than residential
uses. The existing buildings would be rehabilitated as 2,200 square feet of retail space and
3,000 square feet of restaurant space. An additional 2,000 square feet of retail space would be
added on Main Street. The total retail/commercial space along Main Street is 8,320 square feet.
In addition, 10,800 square feet of commercial retail space would be built along Prospect Avenue
and 9,000 square feet of office space along Prospect Lane. The total development would be
28,120 square feet of retail, restaurant and office space. Total rehabilitation and development
costs for the commercial space are estimated at $5,537,000 or approximately $197 per square
foot.
As discussed above, the preserved space is not as efficient as newly developed space. Based
on the review of the market, the preserved space is projected to rent for $13.00 per square foot
per year for retail uses and $15.00 per square foot for restaurant use. The new retail space is
projected to rent for $15.00 per square foot. The new commercial space on Prospect Avenue is
projected to rent for $17.00 per square foot and the office space for $15.00 per square foot.
Annual NOI is projected at $391,000, as shown in Table 2. Assuming a threshold return
requirement of 10.5%, the commercial portion of the project supports development costs to
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City ofTustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 7
$3,724,000, which is $1,813,000 less than the projected development costs. This alternative
has a feasibility gap of $1 ,813,000, which represents the subsidy required for a developer to
undertake this alternative. The $1,813,000 feasibility gap is equai to a negative $40.00 per
square foot of land, as shown in Table 2. In comparison to the Proposed Project, the
supportable land value is $2,449,000 lower or $54.10 per square foot less.
Public Revenues
Development of the site will generate public revenues for the City of Tustin and its
redevelopment agency. The Agency will receive tax increment revenues from the property
taxes paid, and the City will receive sales tax revenues from the retail sales that occur on-site.
Estimates of the public revenues from the project are shown in Table 2 and summarized below:
Project
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
Alternative 6
Tax Increment
$85,300
$70,500
$71,100
$81,600
$37,200
$85,300
Sales Tax
$10,500
$19,000
$16,700
$14,000
$41,200
$10,500
Total
$95,800
$89,600
$87,800
$95,600
$78,400
$95,800
Tax increment revenues are assumed to be 1% of assessed value. For commercial uses, the
assessed value is assumed to be the supportable development value. For the residential uses,
the assessed value is the sales price. As shown in Table 2, the assessed values range from a
high of $8.53 million for the Proposed Project and Altemative 6 down to $3.7 million for
Altemative 5. Property tax revenues (tax increment) range from $85,300 for the Proposed
Project and Alternative 6 down to $37,200 for Alternative 5.
Taxable sales and local sales tax revenues are also projected in Table 2. KMA estimates that
the retail space will have taxable sales of $200 per square foot and the restaurant $300 per
square foot. No taxable sales are assumed for office space. Given that the preserved space is
less efficient than newly developed space, it is likely that sales would be less in the preserved
space, however to be conservative, KMA utilized the same sales per square foot factors for all
alternatives. The all-commercial scenario (Altemative 5) generates the most taxable sales,
$4,124,000 and locai sales tax revenues of $41,200. The Proposed Project and Alternative 6
generate the ieast taxable sales, $1,050,000 and sales tax revenues, $10,500.
Overall, the Proposed Project and Alternative 6 are projected to generate $95,800 in public
revenues, and Alternative 5 is projected to generate $78,400 in public revenues. Alternative 4
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Altematives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 8
generates nearly as much public revenues ($95,600) as the Proposed Project. Alternatives 2
and 3 are in between generating $89,600 and $87,600 of annual public revenues.
CONCLUSIONS
From a real estate feasibility perspective, the Proposed Project is the most viable. Assuming
typical development costs, the Proposed Project can support a payment for land of $636,000.
Of the other altematives, only Alternative 4 and Alternative 6 support a positive land value. The
other three altematives are projected to require subsidies ranging from $390,000 for Altemative
2 to $1,813,000 for Altemative 5.
Supportable Value per SF Difference from Proposed Project
Land Value of Land Total Value Per SF of Land
Proposed Project $636,000 $14.00
Alternative 2 ($390,000) ($8.60) $1,026,000 $22.60
Alternative 3 ($437,000) ($9.60) $1,073,000 $23.70
Altemative 4 $112,000 $2.50 $ 524,000 $11.60
Alternative 5 ($1,813,000) ($40.00) $2,449,000 $54.10
Alternative 6 $198,000 $4.40 $ 438,000 $ 9.70
From an opportunity cost perspective, the differences between the Proposed Project and the
alternatives is substantial. The Proposed Project could generate value to the Agency, while
most of the alternatives require a subsidy. The difference in supportable land value between
the Proposed Project and Alternative 2, for example, is $1,026,000. On a per square foot basis,
the difference is $22.60. Alternative 6 has the smallest differential at $438,000 and Alternative
5, the largest differential at $2,449,000.
From a public revenue perspective, the alternatives are similar. The Proposed Project,
Alternative 6, and Alternative 4 generate the most public revenues ($95,800 and $95,600
respectively), while Alternatives 2 and 3 generate public revenues in the $88,000 to $89,000
range. Alternative 5 generates the least public revenues.
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 9
ATTACHMENT 1
Retail Assumptions
The underlying assumptions utilized for the retail/commercial analysis are consistent for each
scenario, with adjustments made to reflect the scope of development for each alternative. The
analysis is based on conceptual development plans and not detailed architectural plans.
Estimated Development Costs (Table 1)
The key development cost assumptions utilized in the retail pro forma analysis are discussed in
the following sections.
Direct Costs
Typical direct costs include building shell costs, on-site costs and tenant improvements. The
estimates made by KMA are based on our experience with similar projects in the region. The
costs for the rehabilitated building space are based on estimates provided by Kovtun
Construction Management (KCM).
1.
An asbestos abatement allowance of $100,000 was applied to all scenarios.
2.
Consistent with the Developer, the site costs were estimated at $9.00 per square foot.
3.
KMA estimated the shell costs for all of the new space at $80 per square foot, which is
in-line with similar projects we have reviewed in the region.
4.
For the rehabilitation/preservation space, KMA relied on estimates provided by KCM.
For Alternative 6, the façade is preserved but all commercial space is newly constructed.
The estimates have been summarized in the table below:
Price Per Square Foot
Scenario
Proposed Project
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
Alternative 6
Total Price1
No Preservation
$1,202,198
$1,161,398
$683,279
$1,202,198
$399,679
No Preservation
$196.44
$221.64
$260.00
$196.44
Façade only
'Includes architecture, engineering and consulting fees; contractor fee; general conditions; building costs;
contingency; and site work. Demolition costs have been added to these costs in the pro formas.
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin -
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 10
ATTACHMENT 1
Retail Assumptions (continued)
5.
The tenant improvement (TI's) costs are estimated to range from $20 to $80 per square
foot based on the type of space. The retail/commercial TI's in the new space are
estimated at $20 per square foot, the office and preservation retail TI's at $25 per square
foot, and the restaurant TI's are estimated at $80 per square foot. These costs are in-
line with similar projects in the region, with restaurants typically requiring greater n's but
also paying higher rents.
Indirect Costs
Indirect costs are typically estimated as a percentage of direct costs and are based on industry
standards. KMA highlighted a number of costs below:
1.
Architecture and engineering costs are estimated at 6% of direct costs less the building
costs associated with the preservation space.
2.
Permits and fees are estimated at $12.90 per square foot based on information provided
by City staff.
3.
Leasing commissions are estimated at $4.00 per square foot.
4.
The development management fee is estimated at 3.0% of direct costs, which is
consistent with similar projects in the region.
5.
The project contingency is estimated at 5.0% of direct costs less the building costs
associated with the preservation space.
Financing Costs
KMA assumed a 12-month construction period. 60% average outstanding loan balance, a 7.5%
interest rate and fees of two points to calculate the financing costs for the project.
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 11
ATTACHMENT 1
Retail Assumptions (continued)
Total Development Costs
The total retail/commercial development costs for each alternative are shown below:
Alternative
Proposed Project
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
Alternative 6
Net Operating Income (Table 2)
Development
Costs
$1,653,000
$2,253,000
$2,351,000
$1,805,000
$5,537,000
$2,091,000
KMA reviewed the market research provided by the developer and relied on our experience with
other projects in the Tustin market area to estimate the rents for the project. The table below
summarizes the estimated rents for the various types of space. All rents are expressed on a
triple net basis.
Space
Main Street Retail- Preservation
Main Street Restaurant- Preservation
Main Street Retail- New
Main Street Restaurant- New
Main Street Office
Prospect Avenue Commercial/Retail
Prospect Lane Office
Annual Rent
Per Square Foot
$13.00
$15.00
$15.00
$21.00
$15.00
$17.00
$15.00
Rents for the preservation space are assumed to be lower given the inefficiencies associated
with the space. The higher restaurant rents reflect the likelihood of greater sales than the retail
tenants and the higher TI allowances. No judgment has been made regarding the suitability of
the space for the uses identified in the development programs for the alternatives.
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 12
ATTACHMENT 1
Retail Assumptions (continued)
Other key operating assumptions include:
1.
Vacancy and collection is estimated at 5% of gross income.
2.
Management fees and reserves are estimated at 4% and 2% of effective gross income,
respectively.
The estimated NOI for the various scenarios is shown in the table below
Scenario
Proposed Project
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
Alternative 6
Estimated Residual land Value (Table 3)
Net
Operating
Income
$131,000
$103,000
$109,000
$92,000
$391,000
$131,000
KMA believes a reasonable and prudent Developer will require a 10.5% return on costs for the
Main Street retail/commercial component of the project. Given this return requirement, the
estimated land residual value (supportable land value) for the various scenarios is summarized
in the table below.
Scenario
Proposed Project
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
Alternative 6
Residual
land Value
($405,000)
($1,272,000)
($1,319,000)
($929,000)
($1,813,000)
($843,000)
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 13
ATTACHMENT 2
Residential Assumptions
The assumptions utilized for the residential analysis are consistent for each scenario. The only
adjustment is to the number of units included in the project, which is adjusted to reflect the
available site area net of the Main Street retail/commercial deveiopment.
Estimated Development Costs (Table 1)
The key development cost assumptions utilized in the residential pro forma analysis are
discussed in the following sections.
Direct Costs
1.
On-site costs are estimated at $25,900 per unit. This estimate is in-line with the
developer and is similar to other projects KMA has reviewed in the region.
2.
Garages are assumed to average 530 square feet per unit and have a shell cost of $90.
3.
The building shell costs are estimated at $90 per square foot of gross building area.
This estimate is within the range of similar projects reviewed by KMA in the region.
i Given the proposed quality of the development, KMA believes the direct costs shown above are
reasonable. The direct costs are lower than the Developer, but would still reflect a high quality
development.
Indirect Costs
1.
KMA estimated the architecture, engineering and consultant fees at 6% of direct costs.
This estimate reflects the costs for similarly designed developments in the region.
2.
The permits and fees are estimated at $18,100 per unit, based on information provided
by City staff.
3.
The taxes, license, insurance and accounting costs for the project are estimated at a
standard 3% of direct costs.
4.
KMA assumed a marketing/sales cost of $9,000 per unit.
5.
The development management fee is estimated at 3% of sales revenue.
6.
KMA assumed a project contingency of 5% of direct costs.
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 14
ATTACHMENT 2
Residential Assumptions (continued)
Financing/Closing Costs
1.
KMA assumed a 12-month construction period and a monthly absorption schedule of
three units.
2.
The loan origination fees are set at two points, and are based on financing at a 60% loan
to cost ratio.
3.
KMA assumed commissions equal to 3% of sales, closing costs of 1.5% of sales and
warranties of $3,000 per unit.
Total Development Costs
The total development costs are summarized below.
Scenario
Proposed Project
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
Alternative 6
Development
Costs2
$6,239,000
$5,185,000
$5,185,000
$6,239,000
NA
$6,239,000
Projected Sales Revenues (Table 2)
The projected sale prices for the units are summarized in the table below.
Prospect Avenue
Prospect Lane
For-Sale Live Work Units
Unit Size3 Price Per
Square Feet Square Foot
3,039 $212.50
2,293 $247.50
Price
Per Unit
$645,790
$567,520
2 Development costs include a developer profit equal to 10% of total sales revenue.
3 Does not include garage space.
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village Project
October 28, 2003
Page 15
ATTACHMENT 2
Residential Assumptions (continued)
To estimate the likely sales prices for the units, KMA reviewed the market study conducted by
Ultimate New Home Sales and Marketing Inc. It should be noted that the pricing reflects the
fact that each unit will have 530 square feet of garage space. The total revenues generated by
the various scenarios are shown in the table below.
Scenario
Proposed Project
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
Alternative 6
Residual land Value (Table 3)
Sales
Revenues
$7,280,000
$6,067,000
$6,067,000
$7,280,000
NA
$7,280,000
The residual land value for the project is equal to the difference between the sales revenue
generated by the project, the estimated construction costs and a reasonable developer profit.
The developer's profit compensates it for the inherent risk associated with the acquisition,
construction and sales of the residential units. KMA has reviewed a number of residential
projects in Southern California. For these projects, the developers have typically required a
profit equal to 8% to 10% of project revenue. Given the nature of the Proposed Project and its
location within the City, KMA believes a reasonable developer profit is 10% of sales revenue.
The resultant land residual values are shown in the table below.
Scenario
Proposed Project
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Alternative 5
Alternative 6
Residual
land Value
$1,041,000
$882,000
$882,000
$1,041,000
NA
$1,041,000
TABLE 1
UTI JUICE BUILDING
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND ASSUMPTIONS
Village Project Alternallve 2 Alternative 3 Alternallve 4 Alternative 5 Alternative 6
Project Scope- Square Feet 46,827 39.925 40,305 45,218 28,120
Retail/Commercial (Square Feet)
Main SI. Retail. Preservation 0 3.120 2,240 1,000 3,120 0
Main SI. Restaurant- Preservation 0 3.000 3,000 1,628 3,000 0
Main SI. Retail. New 773 1,940 1,600 1,640 2,200 773
Main SI. Restaurant- New 3,000 0 0 0 0 3.000
Main Street Office. New 4.816 0 1.600 2.712 0 4,816
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail 0 0 0 0 10,800 0
Prospect Lane Office 0 0 0 0 9,000 0
Total RetaiVCommerclal 8,589 8,060 8,440 6,980 28,120 8,589
LiveIWork (Units)
Prospect Avenue 6 5 5 6 0 6
Prospect Lane 6 5 5 6 0 6
Total Units 12 10 10 12 0 12
Total LiveIWork Square Feet (inci garage) 38,238 31.865 31,865 38,238 0 38,238
Project Revenues
RetaillCommercial (Rents PSF)
Main SI. Retail- Preservation $0.00 $13.00 $13.00 $0.00 $13.00 $0.00
Main SI. Restaurant- Preservation $0.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $0.00
Main SI. Retail. New $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00
Main SI. Restaurant- New $21.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $21.00
Main SI. Office. New $15.00 $0.00 $15.00 $15.00 $0.00 $15.00
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $17.00 $0.00
Prospect Lane Office $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $15.00 $0.00
LiveIWork (Price Per Unit)
Prospect Avenue $645.790 $645.790 $645.790 $645.790 $0 $645,790
Prospect Lane $567,520 $567.520 $567,520 $567.520 $0 $567,520
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. Inc,
Filename:UII Juice Summarv;Summarv 2;1012712003:10:54 AM;kee
TABLE 2
UTI JUICE BUILDING
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Village Project Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 Alternative 6
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Estimated Development Costs
Retail/Commercial (a) $1.653,000 $2,253.000 $2.357.000 $1,805,000 $5,537,000 $2.091,000
LiveIWor1< (b) $6,239,000 $5,185.000 $5.185,000 $6,239,000 $0 $6,239,000
Total $7.892,000 $7,438,000 $7.542,000 $8,044,000 $5,537,000 $8.330.000
Project Valuation
Retail/Commercial
Net Operating Income $131,000 $103.000 $109,000 $92,000 $391,000 $131,000
Return 011 Cost Threshold 10.50% 10-50% 10-50% 10.50% 10.50% 10.50%
Supportable Value (c ) $1,248,000 $981,000 $1.038,000 $876,000 $3,724,000 $1.248.000
Gross LiveIWork Sale Proceeds (d) $7,280,000 $6,067,000 $6.067,000 $7,280.000 $0 $7,280,000
Supportable Land Value
Retail/Commercial (e - a) ($405.000) ($1,272,000) ($1.319,000) ($929,000) ($1,813.000) ($843,ooO)
LiveIWork(d-b) $1,041,000 $882,000 $882,000 $1,041,000 $0 $1,041,000
Total $636,000 ($390.000) ($437.000) $112,000 ($1,813,000) $198,000
Per Square Foot $14.00 ($8-60) ($9.60) $2.50 ($40.00) $4.40
PUBLIC REVENUES ANALYSIS
Property Tax Revenues
Assessed Valuation
Commercial $1.248.000 $981,000 $1,038.000 $876,000 $3.724.000 $1.248,000
Residential $7,280,000 $6,067,000 $6,067,000 $7,280,000 $0 $7.280,000
Total Assessed Value $8,528,000 $7,048,000 $7,105,000 $8,156,000 $3,724,000 $8.528,000
Property Tax Revenues@ 1% $85,300 $70,500 $71,100 $81,600 $37,200 $85.300
Sales Tax Revenues
Taxable Sales
Main St Retail- Preservation $0 $624,000 $448,000 $200,000 $624,000 $0
Main St Restaurant. PreservaUon $0 $900,000 $900,000 $325,600 $900.000 $0
Main St Retail- New $154,600 $388.000 $320.000 $328,000 $440,000 $154.600
Main 51. Restaurant- New $900.000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $900,000
Main St Office- New $0 $0 $0 $542,400 $0 $0
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail $0 $0 $0 $0 $2.160,000 $0
Prospect Lane Office $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Taxable Sales $1,054.600 $1.912.000 $1.668.000 $1.396,000 $4.124,000 $1.054.600
Local Sales Tax Revenues @ 1% $10.500 $19,100 $16,700 $14.000 $41,200 $10.500
Notes: Assesed value equals supportable investment for the commercial component and sale prices for the residential component
Taxable sales are equal 10 $200 per SF for retail space and $300 per SF for restaurant space.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:Utl Juice Summary;Summary 2;10/2712003;10:54 AM;kee
Prospect Village Project Scenario-
Retai I/Commercial
TABLE 1A
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANAL YSIS- VILLAGE PROJECT SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Land Acaulsitlon
Land Acquisition $0 Allowance $0
$0
11. Direct Costs
Site Costs
Asbestos Removal $100.000 Allowance $100,000
On.Slte Work 7.286 Square Feet $9.00 lSf 66.000
Total Site Costs $166.000
Bulldl.ng Costs' Shell TI
Main SI Retall- Preservation 0 Square Feet $80.00 lSf $25.00 lSf $0
Main SI. Retail. New 773 Square Feet $80.00 lSf $20.00 lSf 77,000
Main SI. Restaurant. New 3.000 Square Feet $80.00 lSf $80.00 lSf 480,000
Main Street Office- New 4.816 Square Feet $80.00 lSf $25.00 lSf 506,000
Prospect Ave. Commerc;ai Retail 0 Square Feet $80.00 lSf $20.00 lSf '0
Prospect Lane Office 0 Square F...t $80.00 lSf $25.00 lSf
Total She/./. & TI Costs 1.063.000
Total Direct Costs $1,229,000
III. Indirect Costs
Architecture & Engineering 6.00% Direct Costs 74.000
Permits & Fees $12.90 ISq. Foot 8,589 Sf 111,000
Txs.nnsJLgl.lAcctng. 1.50% Direct Costs 18.000
Leasing Commission $4.00 ISq. Foot 8,589 Sf 34.000
Development Management 3.00% Direct Costs 37.000
Contingency 5.00% Direct Costs 81,000
Total Indirect Costs $335,000
IV. Flnanclna Costs
Building Interest' $1.653.000 Financed 7.50% Interest $74,000
Financing Fees' $749.000 Financed 2.00 Points 15,000
Total Financing Costs $89,000
V. Total Construction Costs (Excluding Land $1,653,000
1 Estimated costs based on KMA's experience with similar projects in the region.
2 Assumes 1.0 year building period and 60% average outstanding loan balance.
3 Assumes 60% loan to value ratio.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:Uti Julce1- Village Project;KMA Retail;10/21l2003;9:01 AM;kee
TABLE 2A
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
UTI JUICE BUilDING ANALYSIS. VillAGE PROJECT SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Income
Main Sl Retail- Preservation
Main St. Retail- New'
Main St. Restaurant- New'
Main St. OffIce- New'
Prospect Ave. Commercal Retail
Prospect lane Office'
Groes Income
0 Sf
773 Sf
3,000 Sf
4,816 Sf
0 Sf
0 Sf
$0.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$21.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0.00 1St
$0
12,000
63,000
72,000
0
0
$147,000
(7,000)
$140,000
($6,000)
(3,000)
($9.000)
$131.000 I
(Less): Vacancy & Coileclion
Effective Gross Income
5.00% Retail & Office Space Income
II.
Ooeratlno Exosnses
Management Fee
Reserves
Total Expenses
4.00% Effecllve Gross Income
2.00% Effective Gross Income
1111.
Net Oceratlna Income
1 Triple net rent.
, Office rents are net of expenses equal to $4.00 per square foot.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. inc.
Filename:Ut! Julce1. Viilage Project:KMA Retail:10/21/2003;9:01 AM:kee
TABLE 3A
ESTIMATED LAND RESIDUAL VALUE
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS. VILLAGE PROJECT SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Net Ocera!ln" Income
Retail Net Operating Income
Retail Threshold Retum on Investment
Retail Supportable DebVEquity Investment
$131,000
10.50%
$1,248,000
II.
Total DeveloDment Costs
($1,653,000)
III.
Residual Land Value
Value Per S uare Foot
($405,000)
($55.59
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:Uti Julce1. Village Project;KMA Retall;10/2112003;9:01 AM;kee
ViI-rage Project Scenario-
livelWork
TABLE 1
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
UTI JUICE BUilDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
VilLAGE PROJECT SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Direct Costs'
On-Sites Costs
Parking
Building Shell
12 Units
6.246 Sf GBA
31.992 Sf GBA
Total Direct Costs
II. Indirect Costs
Architecture, Eng. & Consulting
Permits & Fees/Impact Fees'
Taxes, Ins. Legal & Acctg
MarketlnglSales Office
Desi9n Center Profit
Development Management
Contingency Allowance
6.0% Direct Costs
12 Units
3.0% Direct Costs
12 Units
$0 Allowance
3.0% Sales
5.0% Direct Costs
Total Indirect Costs
III. FinancinalClosina Costs
Interest During Constructlon/Abs.'
Loan Origination Fees
Closing Costs/Warranties'
12 Units
12 Units
12 Units
Total FlnancinglClosing Costs
IV. Total Construction Cost
Construction Cost Per Unit
Construction Cost PerS uare Foot
$25,900 IUnit
$90.00 ISf
$90.00 ISf
$18.100 IUnit
$9.000 IUnit
$22.200 IUnit
$4,800 IUnit
$30,300 IUnit
$311,000
562,000
2,879,000
$3,752,000
$225,000
217,000
113.000
108,000
0
218.000
188.000
$1.069,000
$266.000
58.000
364.000
$688,000
$5.509,000
$459,100
$172.20
1 Based on KMA's axparlence with similar projects in tha region.
2 Assumes 8.0% interest rate.
, Assumas commissions of 3.0% of sales, closing costst of 1.5% of saies and warranties of $3,000.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, inc.
File name: Utt Juice1- Vlllsge Project; ResCos~ 10/20/2003
TABLE 2
PROJECTED SALES REVENUES
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
VILLAGE PROJECT SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Price/Unit
Number of Units Unit Size Base Premium Total
I. Market Rate Units
Prospect Avenue 6 Units 3,039 /Unit $645,788 $0 /Unit $3,875,000
Prospect Lane 6 Units 2,293 /Unit $567,518 $0 /Unit 3,405,000
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 12 2,666 /Unit $606,667 /Unit $7,280,000
II, Affordable Units
Prospect Avenue 0 Units 3,039 /Unit $0 /Unit $0
Prospect Lane 0 Units 2,293 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
PlanS 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 0 0 tUnit $0 /Unit $0
III. ~. Sales Reveiii¡iI" u $7.280,000 I
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. Inc.
File name: Utt Juice1- Village Project; ResRevenues; 10/20/2003
TABLE 3
LAND VALUE CALCULATION
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
VilLAGE PROJECT SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Sales Revenues'
Market Rate Units
Affordable Units
Total Sales Revenues
II. Construction Costs
Construction Costs'
Developer Profit'
10.0% Revenues
Total Construction Cost
III. Supportable land Value
Per Unit
Per Square Foot
$7,280,000
0
$7,280,000
$5,509,000
730,000
$8,239,000
$1,041,000
$86,800
$27.40
, See TABLE 2
. See TABLE 1
. Reflects threshold Developer return Identified In the Developers pro forma.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Assoctates. Inc.
File name: Utt Julce1- Village Project; ResLndVI; 10/20/2003
Alternative 2 Scenario-
Retail/Commercial
TABLE 1A
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANAL YSIS- ALTERNATIVE 2 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Land Acaulsltion
Land Acquisition $0 Allowance $0
$0
II. Direct Costs
Site Costs
Asbeestos Abatement $100.000 Allowance $100,000
On-Site Work 7,286 Square Feet $9.00 ISf 66.000
Total Site Costs $166.000
Building Costs 1 Shell TI
Main SI. Retall- Preservation' 3,120 Square Feet $196.44 ISf $25.00 ISf $691.000
Main 51. Restaurant- Preservation' 3,000 Square Feet $196.44 ISf $80.00 ISf $829.000
Main 51. Retall- New 1,940 Square Feet $80.00 ISf $20.00 ISf 194.000
Main Street Offlce- New 0 Square Feet $80.00 ISf $25.00 ISf 0
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail 0 Square Feet $80.00 ISf $20.00 ISf 0
Prospect Lane OffIce 0 Square Feet $80.00 ISf $25.00 ISf
Total Shell & TI Costs 1,714,000
Total Direct Costs $1,880,000
III. Indirect Costs
Architecture & Engineering 6.00% Direct Costs less Preservation 22,000
Permits & Fees' $12.90 ISq. Foot 8.050 Sf 104,000
Txs./lns./Lgl./Acctng. 1.50% Direct Costs 28.000
Leasing Commission $4.00 ISq. Foot 8.060 Sf 32.000
Deveiopment Management 3.00% Direct Costs 56.000
Contingency 5.00% Direct Costs less Preservation 18.000
Total Indirect Costs $280,000
IV. Flnanclna Costs
Building Interest' $2.253.000 Financed 7.50% interest $101.000
Financing Fees' $589,000 Financed 2.00 Points 12,000
Total Financing Costs $113,000
V. Total Construction Costs (Excludin Land $2,253,000
1 Based on KMA's review of similar projects In the region
2 Based on informallon provided by KCM.
3 Assumes 1.0 year building period and 60% average outstanding loan balance.
4 Assumes 60% loan to value rallo.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. Inc.
Fllename:Utt Juice1. Altemative 2:KMA Retall:10/2112003;9:10 AM;kee
TABLE 2A
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS. ALTERNATIVE 2 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Income
Main SI. Retail- Preservation'
Main SI. Restaurant- Preservation
Main at. Retail- New'
Main at. Offlce- New'
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail'
Prospect Lane Office'
Gross Income
3,120 Sf
3,000 Sf
1.940 Sf
0 Sf
0 Sf
0 Sf
$13.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$41.000
$45.000
29,000
0
0
0
$115.000
(6.000)
$109.000
($4,000)
(2.000)
($6.000)
$103.000 I
(Less): Vacancy & Collection
Effective Gross Income
5.00% Retail & Office Space Income
II.
ODeratlno Exoenses
Management Fee
Reserves
Total Expenses
4.00% Effective Gross Income
2.00% Effective Gross Income
1111.
Net Ooeratlno Income
, Triple net rent.
, Office rents are net of expenses equal to $4.00 per square foot.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. inc.
Fllename:Utt Julce1- Alternative 2;KMA Retail; 1 0121/2003;9:10 AM;kee
TABLE 3A
ESTIMATED LAND RESIDUAL VALUE
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS-ALTERNATIVE 2 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Net Ooeratlna Income
Retail Net Operating Income
Retail Threshold Retum on Investment
Retail Supportable DebtlEqully Investment
$103.000
10.50%
$981.000
II.
Total OeveloDment Costs
($2.253.000)
III.
Residual Land Value
Value Per Square Foot
($1,272,000)
($174.58
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:UIt Juice1. Altemative 2;KMA Retall;10/21/2003;9:10 AM;kee
Alternative 2 Scenario-
livelWork
TABLE 1
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
10 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 2 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Direct Costs'
On-Sites Costs'
Parking
Building Shell
10 Units
5.205 Sf GBA
26.660 Sf GBA
Total Direct Costs
II. Indirect Costs
Architecture, Eng. & Consulting
Permits & Fees/Impact Fees"
Taxes, ins, Legal & Acctg
Marketing/Sales Office
Design Center Profit
Development Management
Contingency Allowance
6.0% Direct Costs
10 Units
3.0% Direct Costs
10 Units
$0 Allowance
3.0% Sales
5.0% Direct Costs
Total Indirect Costs
III. Financina/Closina Costs
Interest During ConstructionfAbs. "
Loan Origination Fees
Closing CostslWarranties'
10 Units
10 Units
10 Units
Total Financing/Closing Costs
IV. Total Construction Cost
Construction Cost Per Unit
Construction Cost Per S uare Foot
$25,900 fUnit
$90.00 /Sf
$90.00 fSf
$18,100 fUnit
$9,000 fUnit
$21,100 /Unit
$4,800 /Unit
$30,300 /Unit
$259,000
468,000
2,399,000
$3,126,000
$188,000
181,000
94.000
90,000
0
182.000
156,000
$891.000
$211.000
48,000
303,000
$562,000
$4,579.000
$457.900
$171.76
1 Based on KMA's experience with similar projacts in the raglan.
2 Assumes 6.0% Inta,.st rate.
, As.ume. commissions of 3.0% of salas, closing costst of 1.5% of sales end warranties of $3.000.
Prepared by: Keyse, Marston Assoclatos. Inc.
File name: Uti Julc.1- AlternatiVe 2; ResCost; 10/20/2003
TABLE 2
PROJECTED SALES REVENUES
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
10 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 2 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Price/Unit
Number of Untls Unit Size Base Premium Total
I. Market Rate Units
Prospecl Avenue 5 Units 3,039 /Unit $645,788 $0 /Unit $3,229,000
Prospect Lane 5 Units 2,293 /Unit $567,518 $0 /Unit 2,838.000
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Untls 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 10 2,666 /Unit $606,700 /Unit $6,067,000
II. Affordable Units
Prospect Avenue 0 Units 3,039 /Unit $0 /Unit $0
Prospect I.ane 0 Units 2,293 /Unit $0 !Unit 0
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 !Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 !Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 !Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 !Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 !Unit 0
Total/Average 0 0 /Unit $0 !Unit $0
III. I Total Sales Revenues $6,067,000 I
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: Utt Juice1- Alternative 2; ResRevenues; 10/20/2003
TABLE 3
LAND VALUE CALCULATION
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
10 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCDME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 2 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Sales Revenues'
Market Rate Units
Affordable Units
Total Sales Revenues
II. Construction Costs
Construction Costs'
Developer Profit'
10.0% Revenues
Total Construction Cost
III. Supportable Land Value
Per Unit
Per S uare Foot
$6.067,000
0
$6,067,000
$4.579,000
606,000
$5,185,000
$882.000
$88,200
$25.70
, See TA8LE 2
, See TABLE 1
, Reflects threshold Developer return Identmed in the Developer's pro forma.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. Inc.
File name: UtI Julce1. Alternative 2; ResLndVI; 10/20/2003
Alternative 3 Scenario-
Retai I/Commercial
TABLE 1A
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS- ALTERNATIVE 3 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Land Acauisltlon
Land Acquisition $0 Allowance $0
$0
II. Direct Costs
Site Costs
Asbestos Abatement $100.000 Allowance $100.000
On.Slte Work 7.286 Square Feet $9.00 1St 86.000
Total Site Costs $166,000
Building Costs' Shell TI
Main 51. Retall- Preservation' 2.240 Square Feet $221.98 1St $25.00 1St $553,000
Main 51. Restaurant. Preservation' 3.000 Square Feet $221.96 1St $60.00 1St $906.000
Main 51. Retall- New 1,600 Square Feet $60.00 1St $20.00 1St 160.000
Main Street Office- New 1.600 Square Feet $60.00 1St $25.00 1St 168,000
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail 0 Square Feet $80.00 1St $20.00 1St 0
Prospect Lane Office 0 Square Feet $80.00 1St $25.00 1St
Total Shell & TI Costs 1.787.000
Totel Direct Costs $1,953,000
III. Indirect Costs
Architecture &, Engineering 6.00% Direct Costs less Preservation 30,000
Permits &, Fees' $12.90 ISq. Foot 8.440 St 109.000
Txs.llns.!Lgl.lAcctng. 1.50% Direct Costs 29,000
Leasing Commission $4.00 ISq. Foot 6,440 St 34.000
Development Management 3.00% Direct Costs 59.000
Contingency 5.00% Direct Costs iess Preservation 25.000
Total Indirect Costs $266,000
IV. Flnanclna Costs
Building Interest' $2.357,000 Financed 7.50% Interest $106.000
Financing Fees' $623,000 Financed 2.00 Points 12.000
Totel Financing Costs $118,000
V. Total Construction Costs (excluding Land $2,357,000
1 Based on KMA's review at similar projects in the region
2 Based on information provided by KCM.
3 Assumas 1.0 year building period and 60% average outstanding loan balance.
4 Assumes 60% loan to vaiue ratio.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. Inc.
Fllename:UU Juice1. Alternative 3a:KMA Retail:10/21/2003:9:09 AM:kee
TABLE 2A
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS- ALTERNATIVE 3 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Income
Main St. Retail- Preservation'
Main St. Restaurant. Preservation'
Main 51. Retail- New'
Main St. OffIce- New'
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail'
Prospect Lane OffIce'
Gross Income
2,240 Sf
3.000 Sf
1,600 Sf
1.600 Sf
0 Sf
0 Sf
$13.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$29,000
45.000
24,000
24.000
0
0
$122,000
(6.000)
$116,000
($5.000)
(2.000)
($7,000)
$109,000 I
(Less): Vacancy & Collection
Effective Gross Income
5.00% Retail & Office Space Income
II.
Ooeratlna Exoenses
Management Fee
Reserves
Totel Expenses
4.00% Effective Gross Income
2.00% Effective Gross Income
1111.
Net Ooeratlna Income
, Triple net rent.
, Office rents are net of expenses equal to $4.00 per square foot.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Fllename:Ut! Julce1- Altemative 3a;KMA Retall;10/21/2003;9:09 AM;kee
TABLE 3A
ESTIMATED LAND RESIDUAL VALUE
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANAL VSIS- AL TERNA TIVE 3 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Net Oaeratino Income
Retail Net Opera~ng Income
Retail Threshold Return on Investment
Retail Supportable DebtlEqulty Investment
$109.000
10.50%
$1.038,000
II.
Total Develoament Casts
($2.357,000)
($1,319,000)
($181.03)
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. Inc.
Filename:Ut! Juice1- Alternative 3a;KMA Retall:10/21/2003;9:09 AM:kee
Alternative 3 Scenario-
livelWork
TABLE 1
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
10 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 3 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Direct Costs'
On-Sites Costs'
Parking
Building SheH
10 Units
5,205 Sf GBA
26,660 Sf GBA
Total Direct Costs
II, Indirect Costs
Architecture, Eng. & Consulting
Permits & Fees/Impact Fees"
Taxes, Ins, Legal & Acctg
Marketing/Sales Office
Design Center Profit
Development Management
Contingency Allowance
6.0% Direct Costs
10 Units
3.0% Direct Costs
10 Units
$0 Allowance
3.0% Sales
5.0% Direct Costs
Total Indirect Costs
III. Flnancina/Closina Costs
Interest During Construction/Abs."
Loan Origination Fees
Closing Costs/Warranties.
10 Units
10 Units
10 Units
Totsl FinancinglClosing Costs
IV, Total Construction Cost
Construction Cost Per Unit
Construction Cost PerS uare Foot
$25,900 IUnit
$90.00 ISf
$90.00 ISf
$18.100 IUnit
$g,OOO IUnit
$21,100 IUnit
$4,800 IUnit
$30,300 IUnit
$259,000
468,000
2.399,000
$3,126,000
$188,000
181,000
94.000
90,000
0
182,000
156,000
$891,000
$211,000
48,000
303,000
$562,000
$4,579,000
$457,900
$171.76
1 Based on KMA's experience with similar projects In the region.
2 Assumes 8.0% interest rete.
3 Assumes commissions of 3.0% of sales. closing costst of 1.5% of sales and warranties of $3.000.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. Inc.
File name: UtI Julce1- Alternative 3a; ResCost; 10120/2003
TABLE 2
PROJECTED SALES REVENUES
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
10 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 3 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
PricelUnit
Number of Units Unit Size Base Premium Total
I. Market Rate Units
Prospect Avenue 5 Units 3,039 /Unit $645,788 $0 /Unit $3,229,000
Prospect Lane 5 Units 2,293 /Unit $567,518 $0 /Unit 2,838.000
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
.Plan6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 10 2,666 /Unit $606,700 /Unit $6,067,000
II. Affordable Units
Prospect Avenue 0 Units 3,039 /Unit $0 /Unit $0
Prospect Lane 0 Units 2.293 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unn $0 /Unn 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 0 0 /Unn $0 /Unn $0
1II.ITotal Sales Revenues $6,067,000 I
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: Uti Juice1- Alternative 3a: ResRevenues: 10/20/2003
TABLE 3
LAND VALUE CALCULATION
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
10 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 3 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I, Sales Revenues'
Market Rate Units
Affordable Units
Total SEllas Revenues
II, Construction Costs
Construction Costs.
Developer Profit'
10.0% Revenues
Total Construction Cost
III, Supportable Land Value
Per Unit
Per S uare Foot
$6.067,000
0
$6,067,000
$4,579,000
606,000
$5,185,000
$882.000
$88,200
$25.70
, See TABLE 2
. See TABLE 1
, Reflects threshold Developer return Identified in the Developer's pro forma.
Prepered by: Keyser Marston Associates. inc.
File name: Utt Juice1- Alternative 3a; ResLndVI; 10/20/2003
Alternative 4 Scenario-
Retai I/Commercial
TABLE 1A
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS-ALTERNATIVE 4 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Land Acaulsltlon
Land Acquisition $0 Allowance $0
$0
II. Direct Costs
Site Costs
Asbestos Abatement $100,000 Allowance $100,000
On-Site Work 7.286 Square Feet $9.00 ISf 66,000
Total SIte Costs $166,000
BuildIng Costs' Shell TI
Main SI. Retail- Preservation' 1,000 Square Feet $262.66 ISf $25.00 ISf $288.000
Main SI. Restaurant- Preservation' 1.626 Square Feet $262.66 ISf $60.00 ISf $558,000
Main SI. Retall- New 1.640 Square Feet $60.00 ISf $20.00 ISf 164.000
Main Street Office- New 2,712 Square Feet $60.00 ISf $25.00 ISf .285,000
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail 0 Square Feet $80.00 ISf $20.00 ISf 0
Prospect Lane Office 0 Square Feet $60.00 ISf $25.00 ISf
Total Shell & TI Costs 1.295.000
Total Direct Costs $1,461,000
III. Indirect Costs
Architecture & En91neering 6.00% Direct Costs less Preservation 44.000
Permits & Fees $12.90 ISq. Foot 5,980 Sf 77.000
TxsJlns.lL9l.1Acctng. 1.50% Direct Costs 22,000
Leasing Commission $4.00 ISq. Foot 6,980 Sf 28,000
Development Management 3.00% Direct Costs 44.000
Contingency. 5.00% Direct Costs less Preservation 37.000
Total Indirect Costs $252,000
IV. Flnanclna Costs
Building Interest' $1,805.000 Financed 7.50% Interest $81.000
Financing Fees' $526.000 Financed 2.00 Points 11.000
Total Finsncing Costs $92,000
V. Total Construction Costs (Excluding Land $1,805,000
1 Based on KMA's review of similar projects In the region
2 Based on Information provided by KCM. Assumes restaurant space would be reduced to 2,655 sf.
3 Assumes 1.0 year building period and 60% average outstanding loan balance.
4 Assumes 60% loan to value ratio.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filenamo:Ut! Julce1. Alternative 3b;KMA Retall;1 012112003:9:08 AM:kee
TABLE2A
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS. ALTERNATIVE 4 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Income
Main St. Retail. Preservation'
Main St. Restaurant. Preservation'
Main St. Retail. New'
Main 51. OffIce. New'
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail'
Prospect Lane OffIce'
Gross Income
1,000 Sf
1.628 Sf
1,640 Sf
2.712 Sf
0 Sf
0 Sf
$13.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$13,000
$24,000
25.000
41,000
0
0
$103,000
(5,000)
$96.000
($4,000)
(2.000)
($6,000)
$92.000 I
(Less): Vacancy & Collection
Effective Gro.. Income
5.00% Retail & Office Space Income
II.
ODerallnD ExDense.
Management Fee
Reserves
Total Expense.
4.00% Effective Gross Income
2.00% Effective Gross Income
1111.
Nel Oœratlna Income
, Triple net rent.
, Office rents are net of expenses equal to $4.00 per square foot.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Assoclales. Inc.
Fllename:UIt Julce1. Alternative3b:KMA Retall;10/2112003:9:08 AM;kee
TABLE 3A
ESTIMATED LAND RESIDUAL VALUE
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS-ALTERNATIVE 4 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Net ODeretlna Income
Retail Net Operating Income
Retail Threshold Return on Investment
Retail Supportable Debt/Equity Investment
$92,000
10.50%
$878.000
It.
Totel DeveloDment Costs
($1.805,000)
III.
Reslduel Land Value
Value Per Square Foot
($929,000)
$127.50)
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:Utt Julce1. Alternative 3b:KMA Retall:10/2112003;9;08 AM;kee
Alternative 4 Scenario-
livelWork
TABLE 1
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 4 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Direct Costs'
On-Sites Costs'
Parking
Buiiding Sheil
12 Units
6,246 Sf GBA
31,992 Sf GBA
Total Direct Costs
II. Indirect Costs
Architecture, Eng. & Consuiting
Permits & Fees/impact Fees'
Taxes, Ins, Legai & Acctg
Marketing/Sales Office
Design Center Profit
Development Management
Contingency Allowance
6.0% Direct Costs
12 Units
3.0% Direct Costs
12 Units
$0 Ailowance
3.0% Saies
5.0% Direct Costs
Total Indirect Costs
III. Financina/Closina Costs
Interest During Construction/Abs. .
Loan Origination Fees
Closing CostslWarranties'
12 Units
12 Units
12 Units
Total Financing/Closing Costs
IV. Total Construction Cost
Construction Cost Per Unit
Construction Cost ParS uare Foot
$25.900 /Unit
$90 /Unlt
$90.00 /Sf
$18,100 /Unlt
$9,000 /Unit
$22.200 /Unit
$4,800 /Unit
$30,300 /Unit
$311,000
562,000
2,879,000
$3,752,000
$225,000
217.000
113,000
108,000
0
218,000
188,000
$1.069,000
$266,000
58,000
364.000
$688,000
$5.509,000
$459.100
$172.20
1 Basod on KMA's axperienca with similar projocts In tho ,agion.
, Assumos 8.0% intorast rata.
3 Assumos commlsslens ef3.0% ef sales, closing CDstst of 1.5% ef salas and warrantias of $3,000.
Praparad by: Koysor Marston Associatas. Inc.
Fila nama: UII Juico1- Mornatlvo 3b; RosCost; 10/20/2003
TABLE 2
PROJECTED SALES REVENUES
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 4 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Price/Unit
Number of Units Unit Size Base Premium Total
I. Market Rate Units
Prospect Avenue 6 Units 3.039 /Unit $645,788 $0 /Unit $3,875,000
Prospect Lane 6 Units 2,293 /Unit $567,518 $0 /Unit 3,405,000
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 12 2,666 /Unit $606,667 /Unit $7.280,000
II. Affordable Units
Prospect Avenue 0 Units 3.039 /Unit $0 /Unit $0
Prospect Lane 0 Units 2,293 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 0 0 /Unit $0 /Unit $0
III. I Total Sales Reveimes $7,280,000 I
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Fiie name: Utt Juice1- Alternative 3b; ResRevenues; 10/20/2003
TABLE 3
LAND VALUE CALCULATION
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 4 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Sales Revenues;
Market Rate Units
Affordable Units
Total Sales Revenues
II. Construction Costs
Construction Costs"
Developer Profit '
10.0% Revenues
Total Construction Cost
III. Supportable Land Value
Per Unit
Per S uare Foot
$7.280,000
0
$7.280,000
$5,509,000
730.000
$6.239.000
$1,041.000
$86,800
$27.40
, See TABLE 2
, Sse TABLE 1
, Renec!s threshold Developer return Identified In the Developer's pro forma.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: Utt Julce1. Alternatlva 3b; ResLndVl; 10/2012003
Alternative 5 Scenario-
Retail/Com mercial
TABLE 1A
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS. ALTERNATIVE 5 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Land Acoulsltlon
Land Acquisition $0 Allowance $0
$0
II. Direct Costs
SIte Costs
Asbestos Abatement $100,000 Allowance $100.000
On-Site Wor!< 45.300 Square Feet $9.00 ISf 408.000
Total Site Costs $508,000
BuIlding Costs 1 Shell TI
Main SI. Retall- Preservation' 3.120 Square Faet $196.44 ISf $25.00 ISf $691.000
Main SI. Restaurant. Preservation' 3.000 Square Faat $196.44 ISf $80.00 ISf 829,000
Main 51. Retail- New 2,200 Square Feet $80.00 ISf $20.00 ISf 220.000
Main Street Office- Naw 0 Square Feet $80.00 ISf $26.00 ISf 0
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail 10.800 Square Feet $80.00 ISf $20.00 1Sf 1,080.000
Prospect Lane OffIce 9.000 Square Feet $80.00 /Sf $25.00 ISf 945.000
Total Shell & T/ Costs 3.765.000
Total Direct Costs $4,273,000
III. Indirect Costs
Architecture & Engineering 6.00% Direct Costs iess Preservation 165,000
Permits & Fees' $12.90 ISq. Foot 28,120 Sf 363.000
Txs.nns.lLgI./Acctng. 1.50% Direct Costs 64.000
Leasing Commission $4.00 '/Sq. Foot 28.120 Sf 112,000
Development Management 3.00% Direct Costs 128,000
Contingency 5.00% Direct Costs lass Preservation 138,000
Totellndlract Costs $970,000
IV. Flnanc!no Costs
Building Interest' $5,537.000 Financed 7.50% Interest $249,000
Financing Fees' $2.234,000 Financed 2.00 Points 45,000
Total Financing Costs $294,000
V, Total Construction Costs (Excluding Land) $5,537,000
1 Based on KMA's review of similar projacts in the region
2 Based on information provided by KCM. Assumes restaurant space would be reduced to 2,855 sf.
3 Assumes 1.0 year building period and 60% average outstanding loan balance.
4 Assumes 60% loan to value ratio.
Prepered by: Kayser Marston Associates, Inc.
Fllename:UIt Julce1- Alternative 4;KMA Retall;10121/2003;9:07 AM;kee
TABLE2A
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANAL YSIS- ALTERNATIVE 5 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Income
Main St. Retall- Preservation'
Main St. Restaurant- Preservation'
Main St. Retail. New'
Main St. Office- New'
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail'
Prospect Lane Office'
Gross Income
3.120 Sf
3.000 Sf
2,200 Sf
0 Sf
10.800 Sf
9.000 Sf
$13.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$17.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$41,000
$45.000
33.000
0
184.000
135.000
$438.000
(22.000)
$416.000
($17,000)
(8.000)
($25.000)
$391,000 I
(Less): Vacancy & Collection
Effective Gross Income
5.00% Retail & Office Space income
II.
Ooeratlno Exoenses
Management Fee
Reserves
Total Expenses
4.00% Effective Gross Income
2.00% Effective Gross Income
1111.
Net Ooeratina Income
, Tripie net rent.
, Office rents are net of expenses equal to $4.00 per square foot.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:Ut! Julce1. Alternative 4:KMA Retail;10/2112003;9:07 AM;kee
TABLE 3A
ESTIMATED LAND RESIDUAL VALUE
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS-ALTERNATIVE 5 SCENARIO
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Not Ooeratlno Income
Retail Net Operatln9 Income
Retail Threshold Rewrn on Investment
Retail Supportable DebtlEquity Investment
$391.000
10.50%
$3.724,000
II.
Total Develooment Costs
($5,537.000)
III.
Reaidual Land Value
Value Per Square Foot
($1,813,000)
($40.02)
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates. Inc.
Fllename:Utt Julce1- Alternative 4;KMA Retall;10121/2003;9:07 AM;kee
Alternative 6 Scenario-
Retail/Commercial
TABLE 1A
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS. ALTERNATIVE 6
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Land Acaulsltion
Land Acquisition
II. Direct Casts
Site Casts
Asbestos Removal
On-Site Work
Total Site Costs
Building Costs 1
Main St. Retall- Preservation
Main St. Retall- New
Main St. Restaurant- New
Main Street Office- New
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail
Prospect Lane Office
Total Shell & TI Costs
Total Direct Costs
tII. Indirect Costs
Architecture & Engineering
Permits & Fees
Txs.llns./Lgi.lAcctng.
Leasing Commission
Development Management
Contingency
Total Indirect Costs
IV. Flnancina Costs
Building Interest'
Financing Fees'
Total Financing Costs
$0 Allowance
$100.000 Allowance
7,286 Square Feet
$9.00 ISf
$0
$0
$100,000
66.000
$166,000
TI
$0.00 ISf $400.000
$20.00 ISf 77,000
$80.00 ISf 480.000
$25.00 ISf 506.000
$20.00 ISf 0
$25.00 ISf
1,463.000
$1.629,000
74.000
111,000
24.000
34.000
49.000
61,000
$353,000
$94,000
15.000
$109,000
$2,091,000
v.
Shell
0 Square Feet Allowance
773 Square Feet $80.00 ISf
3.000 Square Feet $80.00 ISf
4,816 Square Feet $60.00 ISf
0 Square Feet $80.00 ISf
0 Square Feet $60.00 ISf
6.00% Direct Costs less Preservation
$12.90 ISq. Foot 6.589 Sf
1.50% Direct Costs
$4.00 ISq. Foot
3.00% Direct Costs
5.00% Dlreci Costs less Preservation
6.589 Sf
$2.091.000 Financed
$749.000 Financed
7.50% Interest
2.00 Points
Total Construction Costs Excludln Land)
1 Estimated costs based on KMA's experience with similar projects In the region.
2 Assumes 1.0 year building period and 60% average outstanding loan balance.
3 Assumes 60% loan to value ratio.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:Utt Julce1. Village Project. facade;KMA Retall;1012612003;4:05 PM;kee
TABLE 2A
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS-ALTERNATIVE 6
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Income
Main St. Retail- Preservation
Main St. Retail- New'
Main 51. Restaurant- New'
Main St. OffIce- New'
Prospect Ave. Commerclai Retail
Prospect Lane OffIce'
Gross Income
0 Sf
773 Sf
3.000 Sf
4.816 Sf
0 Sf
0 Sf
$0.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$21.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0
12.000
63.000
72.000
0
0
$147.000
(7.000)
$140,000
($6.000)
(3.000)
($9.000)
$131,000 I
(Less): Vacancy & Coilection
Effective Gross Income
5.00% Retail & Office Space Income
II.
OD8retlna Exoenses
Management Fee
Reserves
Total Expenses
4.00% Effective Gross Income
2.00% Effective Gross Income
1111.
Net ODeretlna Income
, Triple net rent.
, OffIce rents are net of expenses equal to $4.00 per square foot.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, inc.
Filename:UIt Juice1. Village Project. facade:KMA Relail:10/2812003;4:05 PM:kee
TABLE 3A
ESTIMATED LAND RESIDUAL VALUE
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS. ALTERNATIVE 6
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Nel ODeralln" Income
Retail Net Operating Income
Retail Threshold Return on Investment
Retail Supportable OebUEqulty Investment
$131,000
10.50%
$1,248.000
II.
Total DeveloDment Costs
($2.091,000)
($843,000)
$115.70)
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:UIt Juica1. Village Project. tacade;KMA Retall;10/2812003;4:05 PM;kee
Alternative 6 Scenario-
livelWork
TABLE 1
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 6
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Diract Costs'
On-Sites Costs
Parking
Building Shell
12 Units
6.246 Sf GBA
31,992 SfGBA
Total Direct Costs
II. Indirect Costs
Architecture, Eng. & Consulting
Permits & Fees/impact Fees"
Taxes. ins, Legai & Acctg
Marketing/Saies Office
Design Center Profit
Development Management
Contingency Allowance
6.0% Direct Costs
12 Units
3.0% Direct Costs
12 Units
$0 Allowance
3,0% Sales
5.0% Direct Costs
Total Indirect Costs
III. Financina/Closina Costs
interest During Construction/Abs. "
Loan Origination Fees
Closing CostslWarranties'
12 Units
12 Units
12 Units
Total Financing/Closing Costs
IV. Total Construction Cost
Construction Cost Per Unit
Construction Cost Par S uare Foot
$25,900 /Unit
$90.00 /Sf
$90.00 /Sf
$18,100 /Unil
$9,000 /Unit
$22.200 /Unit
$4,800 /Unit
$30,300 /Unit
$311,000
562,000
2.879,000
$3,752,000
$225.000
217.000
113.000
108.000
0
218,000
188.000
$1,069,000
$266.000
58,000
364.000
$688,000
$5,509,000
$459,100
$172.20
1 Based on KMA's axperience with similar projects in tha region.
2 Assumas 8.0% Intarast rate.
, Assumos commissions of 3.0% of seles, closing costst of 1.5% of sales and warrantlas of $3.000.
Preparad by: Kaysar Marston Assoclatas, Inc.
File name: UtI Julco1. Village Projact .fecade; RasCost; 10/2812003
TABLE 2
PROJECTED SALES REVENUES
UTI JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS &0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 6
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Price/Unit
Number of Units Unit Size Base Premium Total
I. Market Rate Units
Prospect Avenue 6 Units 3,039 /Unit $645,788 $0 /Unit $3,875,000
Prospect Lane 6 Units 2,293 /Unit $567,518 $0 /Unit 3,405,000
ptan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 IUnit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
TotallAverage 12 2,666 /Unit $606,667 /Unit $7,280,000
II. Affordable Units
Prospect Avenue 0 Units 3,039 IUnit $0 /Unit $0
Prospect Lane 0 Units 2,293 /Unit $0 IUnit 0
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 0 0 /Unit $0 /Unit $0
1II. Total Sales Reven'ues $7,280,000 I
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associales, Inc.
File name: Utt Juice1. Village Project, facade; ResRevenues; 10/28/2003
TABLE 3
LAND VALUE CALCULATION
UTT JUICE BUILDING ANALYSIS
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
ALTERNATIVE 6
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Sales Revenues 1
Market Rate Units
Affordable Units
Total Sales Revenues
II. Construction Costs
Construction Costs <
Developer Profrt '
10.0% Revenues
Total Construction Cost
III. Supportable Land Value
Per Unit
Per S uare Foot
$7,280,000
0
$7,280.000
$5,509,000
730,000
$6,239,000
$1.041.000
$86.800
$27.40
, See TABLE 2
< See TABLE 1
> Reflects threshold Developer return Identified in the Develope~s pro forma,
Prepared by: Keyse, Marston Associates. Ino.
File name: UtI Julce1- Village Project - facade; ResLndVI; 10/28/2003
COUNTER COpy
VOLUME 2
PROSPECT VILLAGE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
191, 193, & 195 EAST MAIN STREET
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: City of Tustin
April 2004
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
VOLUME 2
SECTION 8.0
PROSPECT VILLAGE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
8.1
Introduction
................................................................................................",.... 8-1
8.2
List of Persons, Agencies, and Organizations Commenting on the EIR............. 8-2
8.3
Responses to Comments ....................................................................................... 8-3
8.4
................................................................................................... 8-218
Errata
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
SECTION 8.1
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3), the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) includes the
Draft Environmental Impact Report (contained in Volume I), a list of persons, agencies, and
organizations commenting on the EIR; comment letters; and the Lead Agency responses to the
substantive environmental issues raised in the comments. All components of the FEIR are
available for public review at the City of Tustin, Community Development Department, 300
Centennial Way, Tustin, California.
The Draft Environmental Impact Report was circulated for public review between January 9,
2004, and February 23, 2004.
Based upon the comments received, no revisions to the text of the Draft Environmental Impact
Report were necessary. However, the errata section contains some general corrections that
clarify the role of the various City agencies with respect to consideration of entitlements and the
current developing entity. Recirculation of the EIR was not necessary following the receipt of
public comments because the comments received did not result in any significant new
information being added to the EIR or revisions made to the EIR after the public review period.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
00
SECTION 8.2
LIST OF PERSONS, AGENCIES, AND ORGANIZATIONS
COMMENTING ON THE Em
The fôllowÍ1ig persons, agencies, and/or organizations submitted public comments during the
public review neriòdftorn JahUIirV 9 thtòu!!h Februarv 23, 2004:
Letter Dated Received From
No.
1. 1-11-04 1-14-04 Letter from Karen Wood, Old Town Resident
2. 1-15-04 1-22-04 Letter from Kris Keas, The Gas Company
Cover letter signed by Brent Ferdig, Bill Finken, Jeff
3. 12-22-03 1-22-04 Thompson, Rick Fox, April Pollock, Martin Diedrich, Thomas
Off, Ron Rocha (with petitions attached)
4. Undated 1-28-04 Letter from Robert Lindquist, Property Owner, Old Town
5. 2-17-04 2-23-04 Letter from Joyce B. Miller, President
Tustin Area Historical SocietY
6. 2-17-04 2-23-04 Letter from Robert F. Joseph, Chief, District 12, Caltrans
7. 2-18-04 2-23-04 Letter from Rick Fox, Architect, Old Town Resident
8. 2-18-04 2-23-04 Letter from Brent Ferdig, Old Town Resident
9. 2-18-04 2-23-04 Letter from Brent Ferdig, Old town Resident
10. 2-20-04 2-23-04 Letter from Lucy Burch, Old Town Resident, Cultural
Resources Committee Member
11. 2-21-04 2-23-04 Letter from JeffR. Thompson and Cherie A. Thompson,
Thompson Property Management
12. 2-21-04 2-23-04 Letter from JeffR. Thompson, Old Town Resident
13. 2-22-04 2-23-04 Letter from Carol Tink Fox, Architect, Old Town Resident
14. 2-23-04 2-23-04 Letter from Philip K. Cox, Old Town Business Owner
15. 2-23-04 2-23-04 Letter from April Pollock, Old Town Resident
Letter from Brent Ferdig, Bill Finken, JeffR. Thompson, and Rick
Fox, AlA
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
002
SECTION 8.3
RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
All comment letters and responses are contained in this section. Following each comment letter
is a response, which is keyed to the numbers indicated in the left margin of the corresponding
comment letter. For example, Letter No. I contains keyed numbers beginning with "8.1-1,"
which reflects Section 8 of the ErR, letter number I, and comment number I. The corresponding
response is also identified as "8.1-1" to facilitate cross-referencing.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
00'3
l' 1-1
¡ l-2
L.1-3
¡ 1-4
FLl-5
January 11,2004
RECEIVED
JAN t 4 2004
COMWNITY DEVELOPMEN-¡
Proj ect Title: Prospect Village Project
This letter is in response to the City of Tustin's official notice to the homeowners in
Tustin regarding the property on Prospect and Main.
I I understand the City's feeling that this property has been largely vacant since 1973 and
needs to be rehabilitated; however, I am strongly against the demolishing of the Utt Juice
Building. I was born in Tustin and my family and I have lived here for almost 50 years.
I remember the days of going to the old pac1cing house on Newport when it served as
Tustin's first Catholic Church and we called it the "Sunkist CathedraL" Tustin and
Orange County have a history based upon the citrus industry and packing houses. We
have lost a lot of our history as the old orange groves and strawberry fields have given
way to more and more development. If anything, I would think that the City would want
to keep the Uti Juice building at least as a museum and an example of what old packing
houses used to look like.
I I remember going to the old, beautiful bank on the corner of Main and EI Camino. I still
can't believe that the City allow. ed that architectural treasure to be torn down! It seems
that they are going to let the Utt Juice building suffer the same fate.
My husband and I work in the Civic Center of Santa Ana and have .really admired the
way that the City of Santa Ana has taken pride in their downtown and has somehow come
up with the funds to preserve their beautiful old buildings. Tustin must surely have a lot
more resources than poor Santa Ana, yet Santa Ana has found a way to keep their old
buildings. I think it' s a travesty that Tustin has let so much of downtown slip away
through the years.
I.live in the house I grew up in on Old Town Tustin. It is an 80 year old Craftsman
Bungalow. We take pride in our area and its history. How can the City not take the same
interest and pride in Old Town? Whenever we've wanted to make any structural changes
to our historic home, we've had to have the get the City's blessing. It doesn't make sense
to us that the City recognizes the importance of maintaining the historical intehrrity of our
neighborhood, but not its downtown.
I do agree that this property needs developing. I've watched as it has wasted away
through neglect. However, these are buildings that artists paint when they do open-air
painting contests in the city. Where is the City's pride?
Keepthe Utt Juice building but develop the surrounding area.
Thanking for letting our voices be heard. Please preserve our beautiful Old Towne
Tustin.
7<~
cMw¿
Karen Wood
155 Pacific St.
Tustin, CA 92780
0041
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.1
(Letter from Karen Wood received 1-14-04)
8.1-1 The comment is noted. Prior to rendering a decision on the project, including any
decision that may involve demolition of the existing buildings on the project site, the City
Council, and the Board of Directors of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
("Board") will consider the merits of the project and all public comments that are
received.
8.1-2 To correct the record, the existing buildings were not used as a packing house. As
documented in the Historical Resources Technical Report (Appendix C of the DEIR), the
buildings at 193-195 E. Main were built in 1914 as investment properties and were first
occupied by a bakery (193 E. Main Street) and a grocery store (195 E. Main). In 1922,
Charles Utt moved his grape juice production facilities into the buildings at 193-195 E.
Main Street and built the building at 191 E. Main to create additional space. These
buildings were used until 1973 for the production of various grape and fi'uit juices, jams,
jellies, marmalades and syrups. Some of these products were sold from the front of 195
E. Main Street.
8.1-3 According to Carole Jordan, the bank building that was previously located on the
northwest corner of Main Street and EI Camino was demolished in 1966, after being
determined to be unsafe with respect to seismic safety.
8.1-4 The viability and economic characteristics of commercial districts vary widely
throughout Orange County, as do the size and composition of redevelopment project
areas and their respective financial resources. It is impractical to compare the experience
of one area such as Santa Ana or any number of other areas in the County to the
economic circumstances present in Old Town Tustin and the Town Center
Redevelopment Project Area.
8.1-5 The decision to allow the demolition of any historic structure in the City is considered on
an individual, case by case basis. The purpose of the Draft Environmental Impact Report
("DEIR") and the CEQA process, in general, is to objectively inform the public, City
Council and Board of the potentially significant impacts of the project, including
potential impacts on historical resources, and to identifY mitigation measures and
alternatives that could reduce these impacts. The City Council and Board must consider
the DEIR before making a decision on the merits of the proposed project. If the City
Council and Board decides to approve the proposed project despite its significant impact
on historical resources, the City Council and Board must adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, which must identifY the economic, legal, social, or technological benefits
of the project that outweigh the project's significant and unavoidable environmental
impacts. The City Council and Board will also consider such matters prior to acting on
the DDA.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
005
MThe
Gas
Company.
Southern California Gas Company
Technical Services Department
. 1919 S. State College Blvd., Bldg. A
Anaheim CA. 92806
A ~ Sempra Energy" utility
January 15, 2004
City of Tustin City Hall
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
RECEIVED
JAN 2 2 2004
COAMlNITY DEVELOPMENT
Attention: Jim Draughon
Subject: ErR. Southwest Corner of Prospect Avenue & Main Street,
191, 193 and 195 E. Main Street
Thank you for providing the opportunity to respond to this E.I.R. (Environmental Impact Report)
Document. We are pleased to inform you that Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area
where the aforementioned project is proposed. Gas service to the project can be provided from an existing
gas main located in various locations. The service will be in accordance with the Company's policies and
, extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission when the contractnal arrangements
are made.
~ 2-1
This letter is not a contractual commitment to serve the proposed project hut is only provided as an
informational service. The availahility of natural gas service is based upon conditions of gas supply and
regulatory agencies. As a public utility,' Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the
California Public Utilities Commission. Our ability to serve cañ also b~ affected hy actions of federal
regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action, which affect gas supply or the conditions under
which service is availahle, gas service will be provided in accordance with the revised conditions.
This letter is also provided without considering any conditions or non.utility laws and regulations (such as
environmental regulations). which could affect construction of a main and/or service line extension (Le., if
hazardous wastes were encountered in the process of installing the line). The regulations can only he
determined around the time contractual arrangements are made and construction has begun.
Estimates of gas usage for residential and non-residential projects are developed on an individual basis and
are obtained from the Commercia¡.Industrial/Residential Market Services Staff by calling (800) 427.2000
(CommerciallIndustrial Customers) (800) 427.2200 (Residential Customers). We have developed several
programs. which are available upon request to provide assistance in selecting the most energy efficient
appliances or systems for a particular project. If you desire further inforrruttion on any of our energy
conservation programs, please contact this office for assistance.
Sincerely,
~\~~
Kris Keas
Technical Supervisor
West Region.Anaheim
KKinb
eirO4.doc
0062
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.2
(Letter from Southern California Gas Company received 1-22-04)
8.2-1 The comment states that gas facilities are located within the area to serve the Project.
The comment does not raise any significant environmental issues or otherwise pertain to
the adequacy of the EIR. Therefore, no further response is required.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
OO~
I1l:C€/11
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members J4 AI '" VE:: D
City ofTustin CfJJJlM". r, .? ¡
300Cent~Way -v"""fllllrv' (tJO~
Tustin, CA 92680 r, r'[}f¡/l';¡
Re: Petition Signatwesfor Sœling the Ult Juice Building in Old TawnTustin YC!.OPlilEiIr
December 22, 2003
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council M=bers,
This letter is to present new petirion signatures that we have gathered regarding saving the Utt Juice
Building in Old Tuwn Tustin.
As we have previously expressed, we are concerned with the present development proposal to
dismantle. or demolish 1his Historic Building. We believe that many citizens, business owners, and
patrons shareonr concerns. As a result, we have canvassedonr City through conmmnity events such
as Broadway in the Park and the Farmers Market, and places of business in East. Sollth, a:nd Old Town
Tustin. Our collecrive canvassing efforts have gathered more than 1,300 signatures - which we
believe is the largest number of peti,ti,OD, signatures collected on a single City issue.
0.',3-1
We thank you for the opportunity to present these for your consideration and development of policy
regarding this Historic Building. It is 0111' hope tlmt these sígnaínres will convey the feelings oftlw
community of how 1hese buildings are an iueplaceable part of Tustin' s heritage. .
Sincerely,
~d:~
Old Tcmn Tustin Resident &pQs¡ Chairperson of
Tu£tin's Cultural &source Advisory Committee
140 S. MyrtJeAvemæ, Tustin
:íiD~~
Old Town Tustin Resident, Business Owner & Past
Chairperson qf TrJ3tin's C,Ûtural Resource
Advisory Committee
Thompson Property Management
415 IV. 6"' Street, Tustin
~.;..e f ~
April Pollock
Re,<¡jáent
130 N. B Street, TIJ3tin
...--, /Î~..,
// //".' ,.,
~/,
/./' ",
Th~~ óri . '
Old Town Tustin Resident and Business Owner
Aø'aJrced Systems Group
325 IV. If" Streei, Tt¿~iJ1
- ~J( rÞ?L
Bill Finken
Old Tmvn TusIi:1tRcsìdcnt
690 W. 3'" Street, Tilstin
!\ artin -. edri
Business Owner
Diedrich Coffee Ffo1J.,e
13681N<, e.JWOrtA~",1J .
// //
I, .1'"
l::i/L ¡z..,
Ron Rocha
Resident
153 N. B Street, Tustin
Vi.¡;t: w",~"..\'a"'Œtri"ice.com
0083
Uti Juice Building
Tally of Petition Signatures
Petition Type
Business Resident Non-Resident Mixed Psge#
15 B1
6 62
1 63
15 R1
13 RZ
16 R3
15 R4
15 R5
15 R6
15 R7
15 R8
15 R9
15 R10
15 R11
15 R12
15 R13
15 .R14
15 . R15
14 R16
13 R17
11 R18
14 R19
6 RZO
e R21
5 R22
15 R23
15 R24
10 R25
15 R26
6 R27
4 R28
9 R29
15 R30
18 R31
16 R32
16 R33
17 R34
15 Ra5
16 Ra6
17 R37
12 R38
1 Rag
14. R41
15 R42
15 R43
14 R44
15 R45
15 R46
15 R47
14 R4B
14 R49
15 Rea
C:ID""""""", andiSettingsWI Us...lDocuman"IMisc\Utl JUiC8 Bidg\Copy of TaliyPotitionO40111
009
Petition Type
Business Resident Non-Resident MIxed PaQe#
14 R51
15 R52
13 R53
15 R54
15 R55
11 R56
15 R57
4 R5a
5 R59
15 M1
15 M2
14 M3
18 N1
16 N2
5 N3
12 N4
15 N5
15 N6
15 N7
15 NB
15 N9
14 N1D
13 N11
13 N12
9 N13
6 N14
14 N15
15 N16
6 N17
5 N18
13 N19
15 N20
5 N21
14 N22
15 N23
14 N24
15 N25
14 N3O"
14 N31
14 N32
15 Nô3
12 N34
13 N35
13 N36
14 N37
15 N36
15 N39
7 N40
13 N41
22 766 471 44
Grand Total of Signatures = 1303
C:\Documents an<£seffino¡¡\A]1 U..,..\DooumenteIMiscIUtlJuiœ EldO\Copy of TállyPetition040111
010
NON - rz£~IÞfNT
Petition for
the UttJuice Building, mOld Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition req~st the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Address
6~c
~ (J1UYX (./1./
I~lb¿. . ¿
,¡.r - /.fI v'
1 tt+?wÎ.)i.:..vr:
/""""
Email Address Phone Number
crJk, 2-ZA/
c; ¿f., 2LJ
õ.I!
n'>ll .'~(..¡V
j~~Ì'!A A'"L~r
r!:fJc-,V/tV t<. £i1A~ J31{,.f5llJJ¡Vi.b1R~'¡¡'
TO~íi ìJ eJtS¡?.7~b
),
r-r'rn" Po 11 £..{, 'u"
7;";-$32-;'/./7('
"'7f, ,0 /4..r"'-! ~,¡:.," f)
i I
all
,--;
NON - ~E$/DENT
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Buildìng, in Old Town Tustin
-
,.
Theundersígned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve aU or the ~ade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alterœtive for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
-1. ~V\I\
\-;,,~ \ "S~^
:...~"'- çp...
wo"~"""
.~
~(ù.~~
, "Jð¡¡,'
y11..¡u' J...,><--
~
NON Ii /¿.. c:::> I v 12/(\.1 I
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve aU or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse ofthe site.
Print Name
,~:ï.
~&M=rl¡'~
¿}Á<t"JI-ur
:lj[¿;b?ij
:¡'U,fJ
Address
Email Address
;4(¡'ð Sf! ¡JTfI fb.¥!-
, '
o.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
p,
01~
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
i'dulitu/ ~~
Email Address
---
ïl+T'3I-ln~
l.
l."-.
15.
v
19t'4
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oftms petition request the City ofTustfu to
preserve all ox: the fascade portion of the Uti JuiceBuildfugs
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in, partnersmp with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
Ie, ö72...
OVé>z.HI'-'- ,g¡
Email Address
).,
'7"11' -56:5~
"
I
/11 ð i /~~\
....
)
\Q,l5
ION' gZ;:?l Df.N7
, '
.' Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersignêd of this petitiOll request the City ofTustin to
- preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street.. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
8
ç
- (5016
0\'<1... ,If-£'STW,-'S\
. Petition for .
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
. preserve all or the fascade portion afthe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative far the reuse of the site.
Print Name Address Email Address
:J:ë-m'-{ Bð-Vn61t ?f\, ~ll- , ¡,°r!¡;",-r;, (71~bu.a~' !;:l,] I ( ¿, y fl," ~,' --..'
(yt' t.¡ilik.rti í þ, ~':' '\ Î t/ f6-. f.,/-{..";::':T
('811;4 pr.sul --$V ~'l.. '¡3¡;, ß2g\' - '11'-'7 .
¡(Jõv¡"J~ Ír/ 7I'e S3 B <1'UIV / L-f ?1.M~~
14-,fn ¡¿I) ,.;lk/leA.¿{J",,"(¿ cr.t4' .--
cJ ::~,:"':' }). ¿,a--~¡"'d.,C-i) (p ('-I' - ..;..fr iJ
'17 "T ......-<.~ (11 y) '" IQI -
X-r..-,""'-,<þ>' 6 ~
'.
96 Ý
s;io rs ({ ó
1\\..\ 420..q'-llt
U13S'f'ô5&(
Gf.(,-\) "'::;Z"(II"i.I\
/qr(lY¡
,\
0:17
, . ~
,. Petition for N (1;#
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
rr{ t:t:íøi/L1
7/(. f7f-7¿.,:":
, . 'lIp 9/V 33/ J
;/1 fit fA¡:Çi
tJ". )
.l~" 5$ ¡{,
Email Address
,
;..
5.
7. JJ
ð
,(tiS
¡iJCJYì-~~
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oftbis petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse ofthe site.
Eroail Address
q lvì €- 5 Id'l""~
/,
t"1$ _;?1?76
V;e..y S;~~'- "-' ",¡-
ì {'f- rt(1-7"'~J . L...../L-.
¡./ (C~ tJ~ i
\()¡
(H. 9
IVðtl - Tc(ßi~ f~
kes{ Jehi-~\
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigD.ed of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address
f
!so
-"'\.tJo,*;é.- :r{.>",t.~
(~ð
. ...~ ...1>-
b~
"':'
. '. -::;';¡"'V-.I'I-ø;
~L.-
'--
, ,
).
It)
. ,020
\ '-r
~) c V\- I ({çt-~ ""
,
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street, The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building, We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site,
V) 1'-1
54'-\ -hbZq
..,..&
9('3 - Z-D~,1
ìl,-\
y.j4.-i{(.:!»
'7;<;£- 61"'<;.£
f 7 t)'j'
7/ <-(- g3?--
.2Se,i?,
'ï/é!-
Cf7;:t 'r",,~
Email Address Phone Number
17//1,-,:::1.(1-
)1+'71
20:2.. w ;;;'o~"'5 .
.:!'4..¡-P".« A--A. 0..11
IG'C(fl w~
17/Ç"'f'4' """5"<;"
I '
'ny
Î90rd-I~'5 C-.
"TN .--
730 - ;;JI 'if 5 \
}!tf--
7l!' . /
1~~ 7;1f
~I 'I
6'12-. ~Y
.5.
! ll..
13 021
,
~ )fj.p..t:'~¡~ 'Petition for'
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
- preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Address
I .
\, 2..-
.; ::,0 2 2
...--'
v ~' T/tl
, Petition for
tt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned Of this petitiön request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation woWd be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
.I<P.~ r ':1'" "fl:.--
J.
c
--.
C
L1.
l2.
L3.
14.
15.
, \
1
\'~
D<' ~)!;Q23
! F',
. . .. ~ y~èN
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin '
J
The undersigned ofthis petition request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address Email Address
?i :;f) N Tuf¡,n~ Æ
.¡ ,
8.
9
1 .
] 1 .
12.
-
b.
-
I.
\ \
.024
("'
NoN . ~~;.IDYNT$ . Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oftrus petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all ortbe fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
S1reet. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
1. .~"
'-~ùo(" '~\...¡D
2~~n
3.
Address
QQCf 39'1
'1cJdb
C¡4Cf 1;}~ ð{J7
CJ1.<.fW35 nCjZ
71'1'1'it.f-i;J.8'h
1N '4-r..{Ch.U\"t-'"
I
lS
Q2!)
t.1:'
~~~t~l
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
Print Name
1,.."-'
.. :::iù'ì
2.
!':<-
3
r 7'\
The undersignedofthíspetition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Address
_Lr;;:s.-rc "'-
\ -'
i~6
r'-.jôI>-J- fè.'ESlOerJT J
. ". !1,~íÌ'~
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Building,\in Old Town Tustin
. . . '~~~
The undersigned ofthís petition request the CiíY'ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The presérvation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Address
Email Address
9flWc.¡YfJ
""'-
B.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
~7
n
",,';,".
,>i~¡t
'. Petition for ~
the Uti Juice Building~¡in Old Town Tustin N' ~--S(0eNT
, ,"",.-'¡,;f:""
The undersigned of this petition request. the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building, We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse ofllie site,
Ç<..t p
, Dð(ié)[l-/f
f2..U5SEli-
:- ~é. bf\\.
Ç3 f' \ I> c.,...£
.-ru-.b" N
'?3");..1D7.50
6
7.
'1. '\
"'\
b.
n,
12,
-
1.:1,
"
'-
I,
IV'
I
0,2-8
?
,1' "~~~tion o~" rAf;Nr;
. the Uti Juice Buildù1~:+in Old Town Tustin
" ' ""'-,11,,','1"'1111";"'-
The undersigned ofthispetitiön'request theCitfofTustin to'
preserve an or the fascade portion öfthe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
Email Address
:f.:)þÇ.¡2t,./
~r. Walter Mikes
2751 Woodlawn Ave
ustin, CA 92780,3538
'VQ
":r\~"Ü:.t;)'!;:<;,. \, '
¡ 'C\
~ I,
-: '::'\\:'i'¡:;; ,,:.
\
J
\"' '--,J 02f
:) ,?'J
, ,. ]~'~.:""'e
. . . the Uti Juice Build"
" . .',.'" ' " " ,'. '<'4,1,,¡M)¡;I;',;!¡"': . .".-¡
The undersigried of'(:his petition request the Citf òfTust . 'to'.'
preserve all or the fascade portion ö'fthe Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest earner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition~)
not an acê~table alternative for the reuse of the site.
(
,..Î'
, (~ "the UttJuice Buildhi'.!,.,
'.;. ",'i"""'" "',";"'<".i'i,.,~\ji¡...'~~;""""'."""""'~"~:"'"
The undersigned of this petition request the; Citýof Tustiil to" ,.
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect ^ venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in pa:rtnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse ofllie site.
Email Address
/.
.
,.
!.
o.
.1.
.2.
.3.
l4.
l5.
~ 03:
.. .~
- NoN 'TIJSíJN rz.~s.¡DE=N-1 .
.' Petition for
the Utt)uice Building, in Old Town Tustm
The undersigned òfthispetition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
CA
"'"
Print Name
Address
Email Address
)
7/-1!--54/2-'6555
7IQ-(P33-r..j;:J.72
- -
¿,.'2..-
14
032
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
Tint Name
1. \'" .
pvss fJ! ç..,A
..,
-'~"'ARZ r'\1~UI\
3. -,
~t1 ~cllr~
4¿t~ 'rXÎ-~ L\J1->éf
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildililgs
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Maìn
Street. The preservanon wou,1d be done in pæ1i1l1ership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for ttliIe .reuse of the site. "
Address
EmaiJ1 Address
II' .s:~WQ~&>
!¡£.,/,..,r: ,u 12-(;
)hvJ ¡P-VIN( Ip
r¡çíi¡J
16 q 12..
\7 q d c:! <:x...Jt-
H) \ '71\()v~
""'¡ti...GE,
MFiP-K -¡1'I-f3,?_DD/O
1~1~1.(t¡¡oæ,.¡-¡¡,L, C:D~
~$..y. C>¡tt{
~ kLI flçA,.
'--.,
¿.;..---
) .
~
rz.'f- ~lb£NT
,...
7"Ji'-70d
I _..,
I
,
rs
o~
petition for,
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Maîn
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
fLEe; ( D E N T
-£ 034
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uit Jmce Buildings
located at the nortbwest comer ofPmspect Avenue and Main
Street. Thepreservatiòn would be done in partnership WÍtll
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition. is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
, .
11'-\-~lo-1¿¡011 OJ
c¡'-{ Cj - 637.52'11 ~...J ~tA. ~
PriDt Name
Address Email Address.
~q \:,'ô,.ItQ-..::,.
"" r", . Ck I\) fA-
--""
I'\H::;p-l.ld 17'55" re,J L~
,f.fJ /
s
l~ON-l U'S>'r I [~
, \21/ c; I D 'c N, T
\5 0'
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old ToWIl Tustin
¡he undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
""reserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
coated at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership wítn
'edevelopment ofthe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.' N{.fi:J..
Print Name Address Email Address PboneNt,
r
. lov À^f\'A M cv.
61~\rC"'{'{
;~
~
A
036
,
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in .old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all OT the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in pa1'tnership with
redeveIàpment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable al ternatÌVe fOI' the reuse of the site.
Print Name
1. L /
/..LC. u:ç I<!?~)
Address
NO!\J-1Zt
f, i ~L\1~ TU :;TII\1
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this ,petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fa.scade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done m partnership with
redevðlopment of the the building, We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative fur the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
Email Address
1.
CtI.{Gv-
6.
'Î'
4"[ e:o MA-'11:
.l5. \l J J ~ÌJJ
~2.---
(
'1l,\»~(.f4\1
N 0 !\1. T u ~T \ \,--1
t2B:5 ì D e.NT
o~
Petition for
the Utt'Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
.
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the wcade portion of fue Uifit J'1JIi¡ce B.uit¡¡ijngs
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be dooem pætne1"sbip' willi
redevelopment Dfthe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
lI4-'!'~-16ll
7)Lj
'2-D ~ Lf I '5"~
=T1<-{
... -I \
/",
NON; - ~ LJ S T.I N
I
!:
[2-£~ I þ,t-NJ
?J
~39
'""?
:::>7
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done m partnership with
redevelopment ofthe the builcling. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
I. \tIp¡
IIf¡ <::. \4€;1\ I, '"
° lÇ¿..<; o-v~
\)-vv'S Liw l[..'V'
° 8
-NftJ
t-f[õ-ð-B~Q.LC~t']
1.: (y,
¡WQ6
p-d hi (( ftv¿
12..<:>'1" Þ..., /...¡¡,If\V<
S:-, vh *'-'- fA
tðt 62i I V(.>l~.i cW
v"-\ \ "-
S""""h: ¡I"'. c~
\4<,;1. Lf:.,.,..E>,,-(\.."4"1
I ¡W.í..... <IÑ q-¡..1 t",
n ú. ')'1.- VI,"" \V-V"
-ïvo..h;" ,n,\'¡ù
\ 1'\(jj e\\9"M1V¥:t"o
u¡¡¡¡.ÞD-!.An:)¡êlCAdI' ,
\Dlo:jf"BwcdYllA.i ~
\'~ON- 1 U~1\N
)
;;;'-"'-r
;'
iLES \D£NITJ4o
Petition for
the.UttJuice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
presewe ill or the fuscade port~O ¡ ¡ of the Utt Mce Build1m:gs
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation wantd be done m partnership witIil
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
oot an acceptable alternative for the re\!!se of the site.
""
T¡:¡I<~nU{);;;'j1J1 Ik'Î
. cLuo tf,I(/5 trOoe¡ 71'('3fi -/1 .
"'" .: ..:; .:
i EmmF Address
6.
¡,;
7. ¡J,CW¡.5
.,,----
15.
, /""'
,.::>
r~1 0 N - T U S T ( N
lc.~S \ P ?ï:~J T
)k
I~O41
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
Print Name
-1. NeiL
:;'AVANA 6-/1
-~. .....J (fv¡ I
~~-
.\'1
c. ~ t1
" ~ NtS fIt,~,
5~~
- . -¡;;-¡.gt+£1J i-v
6.
-:!1~11L> '"ft\f1'41/
, '....l 0"",',,1-,,,," c...1",~V-
-:
The undersigned Qfthis peritioI1 request the City of Tustin. to
preserve "all or the fascade pbrtion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redeveJopmentoftbe the building, We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
1-r'6J?Q
Phone Number
'714-
J..I- 8: 1- 8' 8'
'1
ðfJ -JD!> (
l'C1-V~-
vtnz..:.-
/'
í/A.Sf¡'~ '1'2-7['Z-
\,
+.
1),
L
I
..J
~L.,
NON"TVSTIN
p..e.S\ C~N.r
\1.)42
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oft11is peHtion request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings.
located at the northwest corne~ of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the _building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
PiD 'Tš I ri2.R-IJJe
..s (4-.
(,.;27("
~~ ~,Ú
Email Address Phone Number
c
)
~ ~ ~D. . }'l.'J
~rYAJ6"1
L D. ØJ~
~40 &.. z.,. It Sí
,,~ CA.
S. fVloý~"'\,\ 1,5,,2 f!"""\",,o.+
SVVI \-\-~ S~~\" A\'\.y'l &<27<>1
S~/2~
7,&~
p..,-,-~
146-\~
¿'PvlC\. í
\ lAú {ted tl..tVt;J NEMer UtL I
?,l
~ON- TU~"I ~
~~~tDeNT
\ i
I
i
!
I
/'
~43
¡..
,
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
. Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
, redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Email Address
7~
7 '
NON WTV?TI,N
~E.SìD£:NT
- \ ~44
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The tmdersigned ofthis petition request the City of TustÌn to
preserve all or the fascade portionofthe Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment oftbe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
15. L Ii J
'-:.0 11\I'J . (:;5tJJ,h
~
Wf1.2. ~ïTe
'_00___.
0 (\J -- T U s'T ì f~
r2B5!. DEN,S-
~ l~O4~
'7
Petition for'
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
(l/tIV
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue' and Main
Street. Thepreservatìon would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
~'
,/
Print NaIIle
Ernail Address
/
046
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The L!l1dersigned of this ¡ietitiori request the City of Tustin to
preserve 811 or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice BuiIdÙlgS
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in Partnership with
redevelopment of the the buildÙlg. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
1.
/5.
:~f-\N J':{ {;'
~\Nf"¡;.'¡ ~""olí-\-;j1¡¡ !
.'\;.ZGt!.XJ\ ell....
Email Address
-.
--
-
9f7-Stfif'-/?tf/ ç ~
~--
--J
I
I
i
e 1",-\""0'-', u"""-
T."v':í~ G;)
ho\'t'<\(.\', \ .,..'~
I
I
=-+
':::\'1' (Z.!V:.c ¡(ì 0:- ~
~/_C-
,
I<,,-.\..\U~"E'(¡S:.
A..r¿......'r......"...
No N .. TV$ T¡ J\J
Øw-.-L~-.-
,/
I
'~-..J 047
".
, Petition for
the Utt Juice BuiIdíng, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City ofTcitin to'
preserve all or the f?scade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done, in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address
~ ÕU?INž.~
/5
048
The undersigned of this petition request the CiiYofTustin to
. preserve all or the f¡;¡'scade portion öfthe Uti juice Buildings
located at the northwe'St comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
Dot an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
. "",--
.Petitiôi1 for'
the Uti Juice BuiIding~ in Old Town Tustin 80s r~
öC;J¡JèRS
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
"
15.
?
:t-, ")\(;¡ I--.\Z\) i>.Ó ~\'XI$ ~tP 4 n
<Jt: '\- "
, Petition for .
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned o£this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve aU or the fase:åde portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
S1reet. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the b¡¡ilding. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name Address
-1. 1;~*'t¿~~1.",~'1~ h~~~Ir+A(~
f.L.";~\ "- Ù, ~i'lC" I ~+" '" Cc,.
Email Address Phone Number ,Sismature
Md.¡...J..rl~",{) Î"f'i ~60 67 [6 "Q I (l / /
~.<!frJ..,c."'I '>fhZ-¡"¡
..
/-
5.
-
b.
-
.
-;:
I \
,
~
..
,
\
~
i
19.
-
11.
..
. -,
..
'.
~1.
"'
l').
-
~ ? þ~
f) 50
. Petition for
the UttJuice Building, in Old Town Tustin
.2
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect A vem¡e and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment ofthe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse öfthe site.
Print Name
1. Bit Ç1~(O,..,
Address
~{ ~c.;IJ:¡ScY>
1i..Y;.T¡'1
l \q 2---CÂ..w-X'..i(Ä
s
Email Address Phone Number
~(r;,? 71L(" )8'~
@ (fjY:Jlei 'LS Iff
'11<-( "5't~-f,Ir?¡
, ":k'i 7"" -"f( at
c.il (¿,y: p "N'
bllF"--¡/tÎr;¡~ 64-Ifye ì/'-tU'Q:J.S'7ì
7"'t.uÏ7Lt 9;).:¡?ù G,.¡.I1..)I R4mS;;;YSI\.J()J{>",....
1lL\\ 7A~
f :(hJ
¡Cliff¡ , &¡jIfS{¡I"{fMI
6 ttwL
---¡,
.3.
- 5. ¡:?r\;;.v~ ß¡¡id!.ev
_riJ'ì~
051
..J:fr
( (\,; ~eÀ
L-
,
, Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oftbís petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
'-
J
Print Name
Em.ail Address
¿;- 052
~ 7-
,
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this peti1íon request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildiings
locaf.ed at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
S1Teet. The preservation would be done in partnership with
, redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative f~ the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address Email Address '. POOne Number
J..7"J,.^1 (...<.IilJ""'\ fJ
Signature
~
,i4yi1v5/?~--'
~
'" '"
ì?>l-DõWt
1JY Tb I -<{ (0 (~
IA
\>
"I)$TltJ
~E $1 pE:"'lT'$
O\5~
\ u.'V"tW"J
, Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in OlçlTown Tustin
"IU;),~
Print Name
Address
Email Address
"""""I-ISI\
The undersigned ofills petition request the City of Tustin to
- "reserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
):?& tJ. B
.-, <3ClIt.~C2..
1-1
l 'i!$" Y~$ "vi ~I!.T'-:;
)~5. {
~ ~ ~fO ~v.'
112..sGeu<...spt411 f 3661
: ,e.ft/VIR G."""'ö FA/Kll1o¡v"f' 1414'
13.r:¡ú/ltflJl {£- }30 p/.ii6Le,
'.4~,)~:Ye;¡,jC;;", ;f;S;2-- OJ.
/' OI'<fh'J1f= y¿ee,
, -, r e !.söN 7Z <;: T, I
l5. i"lc.1.1 c..>'r"^"-
j.t,,-, "" /~",ce'1dO
GGl1,9f¡;
sr{r'~ C-(7rz.
"~
jD!";",,. tJ. /,.". °'" ;,.'c>
1'{)54
K\
. Petition for %J/'/ì¡
the Utt Juice l3uilding, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigried of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address
'),("'f':.t':~\-.,.Jf
èI".1",^,"",\.ur""
f(zttj)
....-r:¡,N A
, ,r 8 ifJJ:Ø..-
,.f\!le- I$G{k..
f\1lL'Fè.dr! P..-(
'. "j f.J\' 5'1; Ii,. \
'I^^cr+-.~
15.
~,.2
13055
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oftbis petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascad.e portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
J ~r'G ~b¡"'¡.r",
2. t~l\ik
- ..' i'\I..vvl1..t'\.
-' .-r6'2~-
-ÇUJ1 r ::-n..
¿jOC{ \-:"^"V'C"'iJ.-
, ",?~~,',I(",
: ~~t. [...):{,;\r¡
Email Address
,,-'--'-
11$
ú2
- V\\ A ..........-"'-
/IV' ~
,y/.{¿{" /)7LÝJ-
1\š72. lA' 13,""1{,}:
S'A. ..
7N.
,
/f4-7,¡-,71i)
lWei] IJ ¡)/:C->'",rr..
Br"",,~ /A-
)I~~~i.(~)
;)Cl&.u5 Té 11..(i-{
\.,
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The under.signed of this petiti.on request the City of Tus;in1:o
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buil~ings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation woald be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Email Address
~.
.-'
--'
~ '1.1'-
'ì'1..71; D
J¡..
, Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned ofthis petition request the City ofTustin to
- preserve aU or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the buHding. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alten:¡ative for the reuse ofilie site.
2.
¡-
C, Sc...- ~ r:=. R
5
/.j.7IJ S'c I~I
g
M
] '~7J
11{ ~,,) b~J? !f) :;;;;J't~ /
r,g¡/CAr2rS..y~" ë)/'? 3:.¿). /J/vr3..o,j
~'~i1j!;.,::::.--Q.-v..~/«U.5"1 "A¿
lxtc,Ci'c. ~€J hi,", IN/12"" sic,,;;
J "Ívo-h..,
t (,,'íJJ-b IJ.f.1:¿¡¡I'd;
- !;;"ta(l~.f'4 ât,:t/wtri --r;s+'~
5. v , nil.. f.,hJ..J.., ¡W-""-,,
-(.",,~i... 3..1:r"rc.Jv." "" ""'"
;::
Email Address
~
><
~) ú/ ~1j
------
ü! æI1 tvlS;ì¡~/;: I
,----'
c
,Cll
/1' "('-- 13 I -;¡~. ?, \/')';;.tß.-i... c.:::::::\., ¿""i->¿"
~()s:: bY'S:;
c/,/. --,/
~'-'- ~ ..L-C~
I /i I C'
U 'I " ( ~¡J/jn7:?,'.'/~
J:l~ . ,_M/tU-.i:t-c- . - '-..I
- Ij
dvS ,~~~
"
~
5C/iS.7-5;;"CJ
~.?,S- ì ~'ql
058
. . Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion ofthe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the thebuiJding. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
'1\+'
9')r~"iV{l
If'f
'3D -73 ðÎ
-11'..(
;)"'113
5.
\11'" 6J~1-
5. G u-( Sli u /:-H
<.0:
\ ..'
'^
Î
l~~'
. Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade porti9n. of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest ccirner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address Phone Number
('fti.f) 3'Z¡;¡,¡ÇZ"L 7ru~ÆÓA v'j
,'?rsW ðfûJ ~ Ÿ ¡Í-¿f'.-'
./
f\ ~. '?d(-LI. i 01- '(\1 ö'~~ ~ ~>;..-
~~
n
I':";
Tll~Vì
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
~
I')~J -(p;£"]ö
13 ~ ~c:Ø5¡
~15 061
( {DS'1ÏN 'ReS! DeNT 1
.' Petition for -
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request tl;1e CityofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not' an acceptab Ie alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address
z.
1\ y.-çc.¡ t.¡ rO'(Ç"
i5 062
~tirlt! ¡2e£ frJ¿::-AJTJ ,petitio~ for'
- ' the U Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the faseade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site:
~~~v'A c.i..{~,-.orc,
f. jlf;!1!()ôS'4'!l/f);,
~
VAAfi-' Æ~~u I
v
D
15063
R¡e
fUG{ I tV
" Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Tovvn Tustin
The UDdersigned oftrns petition request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion Dfthe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address
).
') .
..,. .
),
.' ¡'\.i.j..'SiPIt.e;l(lSl.-l"~,,I'¡'.5"'-"::€JoO "\oI" 1'-1..0,:
"""4.'r '-No"<,"/> _>7..'75"
l It./P/ ~
,- C" - , p:.'-¡¡-r1l6f.Hit..L ri!. '
L;.!:c-\t¡:I;.Þ';£líll£.k '-rï ,>-,~ C 1', ¿.
I
7/4- .S;4'-f- . c/¡;. N
II
as'~T
P~tition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned ofthís petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion ofthe Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
\'2.
. 1",,065
¡2t:£'/D'£NT
. Petition for
the Utt Juice Building; in Old Town Tustin
-
2.
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustín to
preserve all or the faseade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwèst cornet of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site. .
Print Name
'" '
\966
~lS
T ust~ \l~9v Jenis '
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascacJ.e portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Address
Email Address
~
I :)i)67
~ I~YL
.' Petition for
the Uti Juice Building. in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request thè City of Tustin to
preserve allot the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the norithwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
ifj68
?\'; ,
~£SIPS+JT
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned ofthisl'etition request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and MaID
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the builclirig. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Email Address
j
lb4.ôl{ .I
s.a \ICI. VI tI-Ol
~
j
'vY~ rxð (\...~
t. X ' i'\ t-r-
.~tb
.\.("
. \4.069
\ ustt fl
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undérSigned of this petition request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest carrier of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservátion would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
Erilail Address
1..
r
-
5
).
~\I
174- -~Q-~(
"j4:(-L(. - 7 c¡ ~ ¡;
_\-?O70
¡¡
~ ~u£ \f\
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fMcade portion of the UttJuice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We beUeve that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
.. 1-'1 A- "V1ï..-ð '\AI'
"".)Æ-t2MtG¡J'f?
:" 1':f1
~
l3.
l4.
15.
~\ M
l,071
-. I ~l¡;J
, Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
Print Name
:íÆ,f,J It ILIft!)
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascadeportion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main'
Street, The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not all acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address
)
^-
\,
\4Ü72
elf]
~~rrtl '
fZ(CyI bEÑfS
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
L
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion ofthe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main.
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building, We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable altêrnative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
Email Address
)OQ!\l'S <;, ~r\Jer
7. , \
,\
~.
),
lO.
L1.
L2.
L3.
14.
"
15.
'--cD
&:
~73
~~~ ~(~ J
, pention for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oftbis petition request the City ofT¡,¡stinto
preserve aU or the'fas'Cade por1;ion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located ät the northwest owner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation woqld be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternàtive for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
1~
- 1........c.,..q f"/ ~
2 . ,..-
.. -')Lftvó> .J
3',fÇ!
4
~-r
5 r
t
6 - . '
- )(aNl )díJ;fr:
7 -
'1(aJ ~J- %5 w ,SK7~;51
&.(1ßC\.r6 =~\\ ?id5 v-.J <;'I~\.k
.0.:J?t"> r v"l1-t,!,",
9
Email Address
. .......,.
714 5t4 0'241
-¡ {q 5LlL/ ':¡'J7.Hi
1 .
11..
12.
-
1.:).
..
).
61)74
~ 2..\
f'.¡:~tPiN T
' .' Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
sre,¿\(. ~3 "~4..s\ -q.
@ !.~¡c>o....\.4 Ltë.:.Ç'
. IU-"". ('nor('ì~ , (I.{ .. C¡cf.
~s.c.e,LoÞø.(, I:t 1{'fZ-Ç
Print Name
l.J eron', c..u....
L...
~. LeI,) ~\.\oi.I.\)
Solt
IS h,ejJo-
SU\-h-1.e.r
L¡'¿U\
(Y\b({ISOI"\
;.~'/
(;':;as¡
).
1.
\ Ii.
¡.
~.
~o.
L1.
l2.
l3.
14.
15.
~'Z,'"I...
D75
?
~ ee~~DÐ\Î( ] . Petition tor
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
3
The undersigned of this petition request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
- Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment ofthe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
:) C, ,
'F ;iL
1 ~¡'1 (t.11 AI::'"L.
,;,076
(¿3
",;:"
R {; SI!J fI/r~e Uti J~ce~~,!óild Town Tustin
,'", """'""""""",\""'",\"",,,:"'..,;,,~'/!iJ~1~1/ii¡~1""""':"":;:":
Theundersignèd of this petition request the; City of Tustin to' .',
preserve all or the fascade portion öfthe Utt Juice Buildings
located atthe northwest Comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. , The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
.1,4
-/k~/tJ%." """.',..', ,
, , ' , , " Petition for
thë Utt Juice BuildiIigt;lin Old Town Tustin
.. ,', ,""" ..""":':,,#~lIiW\t'.....,,, ',",
The undersignèd of this petition request the'CityofTustin to .. '
preserve al! or the fasoade portion ófthe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would, be done in partnership with
redeveloprpent of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acéêþte.ble alternative for the reuse of the site. '
Email Address
...-'
--"
11,
12.
.).
).
I
1978
fs
~......; -'\- '
/ '..'Q¿S\ci£%\ \
~- '. Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or thefascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
. located at the northwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Address Email Address
2-7410 rnð;!¡~
(, '! . ('1'1- f ç; íi
I ~.. fl(. ,;¡ I j.. _1(7'
I, . '.~C'a ï)
\SÜ7~
~"Z-c.,
Ê) t'l.ô,
""'::,1"','
. ,¡"i,¥iÍij,",
,', Petition: for
the Uti Juice Building~'ìn Old Town Tustin
, , 'A:"~;';i~"
The undersigz¡.ed of thiI¡ petition request the City of Tustin to
presérve all'or the faScade portion òfthe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwl,\$t coomer of Prospect A venue and Main '
Stre~t The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment ófthe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable altérnative for the reuse ofllie site.
Print Name
J..;J¡fi-e ¡;~J,4.
Email Address
5
6ÇN~~
7. 'l¡ \
8
9
10..,
11.
L.
1 ,
I .
( >1
I
O~,
1 "-.
, '
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Bui1ding~ in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reUSe of the site.
Print Name Address Email Address
1. V -5,f--r/H-¿r hlJ'1 !fo1./T~ (2t<.f) .
>iI-t'v'7'"'h- .11-
) ----
-'J (V{3'&R,
'G{~ e-I/ W I~
L .
[?t.., ~Ií=)- - \ ,zt,
).
).
7.
)
).
ì.
10.
11.
12.
[3.
14.
15.
~:z.ð
ì.5'T. S. ft,
\
L\D81
~~1
. PetÌtÌonfor
the Utt Juice Buildillg, ill Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petitJ,on request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascadeporliQn of the Uti Juice Buildings
located atthe northwest cöfuer of Prospect Avenue ând Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership .with
redevelopment oftM the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptablealtemative for thereuse of the site.
Address
Email Address
,/'
11.
12.
,
l-, .
-
: f.
).
I<?~
082
éì
TlJ"::>TIN F1i:5.' D~Ts
, Petition for
ilie Uti Juice Building; in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oftbis petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portien of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. . We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
5i/so5'j
PJe/9&&7
D¡'-!'J':Jí3-3>'ð"tS ~~ ~---~;:o
ót¡-:L/ ---it: 'i-;)
.::DL~
,~ /B-L-
V'
7/'1 SDJ. '-It 1'1
:SD
083
16
gE?1DENT
. . Petition for .
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undetSignedofthis petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fa.scade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an açceptablealternative for the reuse of the , site.
Print Name
Address
-
..
po 13"", 3307
ì"U5¡;.:,
"'
.f!. c')31~r:
þ.ÞV~ . & .1:;.-?t(
.~~J~ ~~ )
'/11
v
);¡-þ~~ ~4
" ;.,./
~
'" ...
y/
J2..ES1~NT '
. .' Petition for
the Uti Juice Building. in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the faseade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the noriliwestcorner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would b,e done in partnership with .
redevelopm~rít of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an accep'table alternative for the reuse of the site.
2.
Address
1c;,"')"S.~
'S Ìì /Ù 'P>Þ
furl7lfj)C¡
t:4-1Att
1'ð1'I:J2..~.:.. .n~':,
Tvshn q2.1~
[3'6'1 \ T1iõñV\.E. D{.
;I::¡.:;;3
ïl.6"'~ :J¥D
t 3Gd' ,2.. "Ir>l"tßf¡Jl
ri:>J.n/<./ 11- ì ïJ
\B.; \1... \À.<4'& '<
~n-~ Af'\ØL
1~(b1. ~1~(t.L.OW PI<.
..on_.!.., Ti~<-J.,..i "".'
1/ {'"fA /L",.(,céÍ
'11 :hL t!J)<A...
. /9)1 Yn )(~(/l -r
~ '.R.1
"5 .t... c?;Z-7C>.j;
1'S'r-f5"l..hß¡&<"'-.J
.3,1 ¡.¡ C-19, V",Jl:~
EmaiJ Address Phone Number
.2- ....r ,...-, {oJ ~
! ,;J/Aj
rz ESJ"DE N ,T
. .. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned oftlùs petition request the City ofTustin to
preserve a11 or the fas,cade portion oftheUtt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would b.e done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the buìlding. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse ofllie site. .
Print Name
1 -
~~ fŒNIÆtL-
~þCl ~5
hò~ lA.,e\I\"J
KobertB
Ernail Address Phone Number
Address
;¡r.T'\e.~
PiLI~.( . c,'l.-:W't..
{'i?.ù5:m..;Jt!~ g,me.~I£:.- Û
'/i.¡¡7i...." C¡ì_7õP¡'ftfZet:.IIJ ,NLf'
f2-ESI DEN T
. . Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City ofTustm to
preserve all or the fa4cade portion oftheUtt Juice BuiJdmgs
. located at the northwest cornerofProspect A venue and Mam
Street. The preservation would be done m partnershipwith
redevelopment of the the buildmg. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name Address
L I)'~?\ I~......,(':>...!-I\
::::J'\lt.C\::... Cb~<J~.J ~'I-W'Tu-,h,.J
2. /77-z.ß /Vti=l11ì¡;"".',f-
/ IJ /l./'L. WAís-J 7(./ S7'/~
3.. 7"1"o() TILù:......
I.-è>-~ j-> ",,- , ~ :.... j g, "-' J 1:< o...~ 5"
~.,- ~\...~
4. i'Z ... I pcJ2,.r- (IT
E.1.cf; ¡¡., A,:' 'IJ,. r-" <-,i (II' c;:¡q
'þl7..2~H~kll\ 'I
f\J':,l¡/.( C"Æ
[u:,Æ--,fj. CA 'l';tlrC!
fill So...... 1"<lI,"",-:5?
Hr..I'Z.~~
, \
. .'R-l£ b~è¡4¡--
4-
(~:1,I,i:)n,l)
Email Address
1"1'- '5 '¡Y"'//JJ$
-W I ,,3-b "\
,0..<0. I
"~
I
q,'i.~-'û'2." ':S
'TV~'T' N
¡/é>:;;Z/h,ít.fl-t..t!
ív.>JJI.-icl'r rz.7(JÛ
hl'iJ 542'7JO2
\7/'-f- 13 -;--
. . '70c/C'
I
/./ i
,01\ I
()""'~ ~---J
P1~~h \
~
( 1 ""'- If'"
087
...- ....,
t2.ES1DENT
. . PetitiOn for .
the Uti Juice Buildìng, ill Old Town Tustìn
The u,nde~Jgned of this petition requ.estth~ City of Tustin to
preserve ~l orthe falca,d~portion of the Ut1; Juice BuildÙlgs
located at the nQrthwe¡¡t,oomer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservàtiôI1 woJJld be done in partnership with
redevelöpment oftþ~tb.e blinding. We believe that demolition is
not an accep:~Ql~ alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
1. IVETTE c..
c HORrJOÞWP
:... Gi./)RJI/ M.
Cf/fJR.¡JI)MU/)
,Y11{f.'Í--
..
~":j5
7('f, ?fq
0(0 (
(L..I(J2{.l1fJJZ~ J}88
~(I.. \S'
Petition for
f~~Q.f-V-the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
IX .
'I; The undersigned of this petition request the City' of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. .We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reus,e of the site.
'lJ!
Print Name
1.' ',~\ol'~",
lL'
2. ~ M.w.-~
. ,61 Yo ð
3. (1.,\\0'(:\ 6¡"
:!-. ~ro(\~e..-
'Î\&?~1b4,'C¡;'k
G,Ç() \....0",'0 ~'\ Irwlc:.\t\V\s:'@'i"iA~\.i\
\:\{~ _èl<'l~JL...o.o..V(\(\ í;:ò'\ '--I "-
l~, (71)..';/"([""
, ~C{n,i c\ S:é-)NíÒ ~:.~\.. ~v
N~!pr I'/Ji¡vtlE)! i7 ".,;}.Z ~~~
, J -7Þ3£;..':"/
I.!i --T!Y~:,,:j ,
.,' k. - ,,~
A
/ I
l..
~f....., ".//~.9
~/ /~1Tw
JI~)97?.-'191.~
7/"" ~ .M"
¡ ':>dS'.¡/7J
,NON - f2.E~1 DfE".NT
. Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserVe all or the ~cade portion onhe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street The preservâtiG.l1 would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the thêbuilding. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptaþle alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
.L..
. OF'
/2 1: :; l!J"~~~ T ~ T US 7ì JJ
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
~
Print Name
1. f\UD"Re:y
'~w b.R <S.. .;.. ~
2.
The Ulldersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would b,e done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition ÍB
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Address
J Z 4> .s:'" .
CAR.ï'5 Z.
Email Address
I "Þ
14.
"
15.
,¡:;¡
)0
- I'LO 91
",.1i!;'-;'
. j¡¡,i~:,
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Bui1dîng~ln Old Town Tustin
. . ,,!',;""¡'Ì'-,.
The undersignedóftbis petition 'request the CitY of Tustin to
preserve all or the fasca.de portion of the Utt JuiceBuildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in þarmership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
~t!CðJf
Print Name
. U MJifé ¡1};ff e:
I r '-FkA/X);(, ~
4. '.
Address
/II1'7Im ~
Tif.J' ( /~
A'
v
-
3.
..
7
'1, ,
<.1
,\
8.
:>.
).
,1.
12.
.5.
Q92
I
13.
14.
~3~
Petition for .
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
e
8. (' j
~v.¿ . ....Jc.~oi\
9. &..:te,rl (101
-u.\'¥\ Il"Ïdlo
lO'\Y\/j
ll~ \[tIIMk'
12.
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the- Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done: Ìin partnership with
redevelüpment of the the building, We believe that demolition is
110t an acceptable alternative for the reuse: of the site.
Print Name
1 '~0lMQ.!; ~
f\Vì:Vl fA..
2. c>rNL \.
\!9ve.S
Aooress Email Address
\"::,-::,\.R ¡1'\I-\,:.~cll
fiJ..f ' íu. Ç..p n
1~:;ìJ'Z \fJt1>4fè.~ {¿{b-:;-o7(ð
Ç;;}5 -J(fq-'
tf;Ø't-¿¡oG!:i
15.
~
:7 ~~/î I V L.. I I 1
,- '" ",-, A -.- ~ ..- , 1"-. ,
h ..- /" . D - ........--1
\~ t=- ~! . ~ (\j, .
\~9
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascadeþortion ofthe Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnersÌ1Íp with
, redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
1 . V..,...J
kN $A-Æ..P D
1.. ~\e:'K
("'f:ý"
.C,.., $\"éí<
Q
. :]ÞK~
G-~ 1..-1.-("'>
~'. JO¡,N C~~
Email Address
TU'JT1N,
12-T7-~t þçN'T
\'194
'-"'-
Petition. for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of tI1Ìs petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve ail or th~ fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservationwolÙd be done in partnership with
redevëlopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse offue site.
Print Name
1. ¡,J I"'"" o'IW\
Address
It-"! "".0.11.- L~/-.L
. ---
~
--
1/'1)
s4 '1~ 1-/;131
_T V~TI N.
f2-ES { DE r'-J T.s
1%)95
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin, to,
preserve all or the faSóade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest cøÌ'ller of Prospect Avenue and Main '
S1reet The preserv~t:íon wo~l~ be done in ?artn~~. .
redev,clopment, of the the, ?ui1ding" We beh"e,V"e, th, ,~t ,de,lIj"o~t10h'iS,'
not an acceptable alternatwe for the reuse of the sIte. ..
---"
"""""""" ......,,-
Print Name Address Email Addres 0 ber
;<1-:'71 ,// _............-
d&?R./"'- 7'7"'.:¡§-"!- 77.s-c
~(¡11(
.ct, ¡'.!"ÛJIJt¡J\
1-302
Sz,n ,~
'2'3 ¡ 2-
~'C)
I.
~
2. ,S~\1\ jl;:I~r\..
.J. If\ðJjlÞ ~À-
, ?¡:w L..
~M-I b;>-J
1"'5,n:;;;. cø,I,',.,....
. -:;.r ~., .
S...~"",,,~..
6 ILLII!J #Î I
. I>. IZ. ') W¡<¡'¿;I)'" "i ful-e
"",¡¿OWl'"' If(
\7. tPJt;¡t¡m£jJ J4/MJGtI- rJu!1it~:J.':-
1J. ViVôs ~~ßI~
V\/&<J2-
(fl~) H'f'-:;nl,
~- .:t.~...c...J
~
) ,
~ ..
T" V 61 ¡ N.
~2J¿¿C; ¡ DE-NT
~6
"
" ,
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
'I11e undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue aDd Main
Street. The preservation would be done ill partnership with
redevelopment ofllie the building. We believe that demolition is
not aD acceptable alternative fo< the r~use of the site.
6. Ab\.\\.Rf t/ì<e1)'e\Wf
7 . .f:UJf!jy
-J 0 I-n-¡ ~œ¡-(~ Î
8. ;,;;ftfZJ();;
btm'e..:z::.
9. c",1ZEÍ>
~~
la..J
734-~\4v
I
C11lf)
7jL¡9S-3)
Î1/(çn"
Erow Address
1. KûY\eef
2. Jocw~
3.
(\-tCA:"Qr~"(N Dol (/'.
. G,D\.iC.Á)'>ï.IIJ<.T q I 'S -(p 117
)'
TV~TltJ
~E~ ftrEÑ T
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petitíon request the City of Tustin to
presetvè all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest cotner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservariO];J: would be done in partnership with
redevelòprnent öfthe theþuilding. We believe that demolitíon is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
1 Print Name
1. SI£fflf;;J ()
í(Lf \(7% ;¡,'? \
'----"
?
\g98
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
6.
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all Dr the fascaoo portion of the UttJuiceBuiIdings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done m partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative far the reuse of the site.
7.
1 'I'+\;l)' '77 ')Ö
7 T () ~Tj \\J
J2.:F- SI~ftliT
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The un.~signed of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserVe all or tI;te fascade.portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. ' The preserVation would be done in partlilersmp with
redevelopment òfthe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse attire sire.
Email Address Phone NtImber
Q'9 <{ol -&'f7}
/--
. ¡' j1. Î' '/Jr~'cCA)
I 7~ N\1¿W
J /..-C£"It.
I 51! '-- é. J
......
~
1vS11N
f2- ~ s: l D 1Vf\L1
¿aD
I/J.....
, .
Petition for
the UttJuice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the' fasca~portion of the Utt Juice Buildings.
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done ,in partnership with
redevelopment of the the bui1~" We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
<'7' '
\ cJ '?-\-\ ~
~
13S4AJ I~I:&J
13 i'\\... - ' J
\1 ",,1'0.10\.)' Vo
14. <'f\. ,I
\(\\1') vO
15.
~
(U.$f\-.J
"1 J '7'\\ \-.
---
~
lVSTI\~
~1-~S: l b~,\jT
\4Ì°l
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigtJ.5dofthis petition request the CityofTusM to .
preseNt) ail or the fa$ca.de portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
located at the northwest cörtlèr ofPrôspect Avenue and Main
Street The preservation wol1ld be done in partnership Wit11
redeveiopment oftl1e the. building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of th:e site.
Email Address
I 71'1 )'I'f "':,>uL
\j\~
¡33f;.. ò",/ (e.,-. ¡¡.
7' us,,>J
'J..- ì f J. vJ ""0 J \Av.~ r
,.:
, "
:' ì
T\)~1 IN
I2. iv:; [ I) 'tz.N 7
/
I ~.
~
.,,-
~
102
{:; ~ 6<; \ devrt'?
, Petition for
the Uti Juice Buildìng, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Uti Juice Buildings
Jocated at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and MaiD.
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment ofthe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site,
Print Name
1. M w~ \7 v IN"(l(
2'"Jo h,^~ Db
3
~p;
.-.-, "'" ~ rO
5'1
Address
Jitß:"f-- ¡/¡A,' I
~7;'-;/-.t7
I :?~ 1'L- .'
-c'^~~'c'-
IS<oOII'Yì'-/rl-le
F>.v, T vs.-hC'\
/1,7&f; ¡;::. /h.',"1
"'fi"d¡, ('A.
Email Address
~
if
~, nw1=
'$2' ¡--'I cff
QI'-t>'SlS-3'a"'-/::>
-¡ / t/ - :5 '/7 - 2-¿ Cl ~/ td ¡?(L)4~!
J"é/-- j:3.5f '33ð?
'7/U - ÇS'2'G £ 'fr
I
/) ,í ii' I
/dc:"~."A'li.i.Þþt--' ,
I
~3
,.
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tusti
The tmdersignéd of this pè1ition request the City of Tustin to
~ preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the norlhY\'~$t corner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservationWbuld be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the blinding. We believe that demolition is
. not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address Email Address
\0;654 ~
l.
-2
1.<::::.
~y..-D
~t~Ç,l..
--
,It ll.{i::: EU..1C>,,!,""
Î:?Q-~O<:ß
=:j
I
~
i
I
I
\
\
j
._..1
k5l
Tu 'STI ~
¡2.'f.SI D~N.T
~ - \'fO4
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade pqrtion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest c,þj;¡ler of Prospect À venue and Main
Street. The preservatíqnWoüld be done in partnership with
redevelopment ofthe.buiJding. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
Address
Email Address Phone Number
it' YOlh""cr."
i~o
~~~Tcb" ,If
53
TvSTr N
g~.SIDENT
-. ~O5
\;)
Petition for.
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The undersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve aU or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
- located at the northwest corner of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address
r
~ ~h(l¡Y11t \
S ()r\;~\'\l \ \
10. C>J<J
--. ""'1<i.hd¡
l'-\lv"2.'-
L,\\ IÚ\I'I y~c~
I "It ¿ "-
¿ ¡ II jCj.f) 'Sil;¿~
/:?sbÀ
'DIt¿jt¡)orJd ~ J-
2-'6'<> c~\O"\~
I'll f\
Il//'.
: ~
'TU51{f\t
~ J ~O6
~
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
, The undersigned of this petition requesrthe City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment oftbe thebuìlding. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
l.-nm
PrÞ r.
2. NWìq
\<oe.¡,,¡' ')
!
Email Address
tJ.lt. )SD" -"35'11
~.
15./fJ1ðQ.)Ct f<o,;"cil~:lIr.u,,;
{Jet 0 Ck'IÞ -7;1.
~:-
. ~-4- f/; r'l ~._.J
?55"
TtJsTrN ~E~'D£NT
~ .W7
\1;-
Petition for
the UttJuice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The tmdersigned of this petition request the City ofTustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the nortbwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment of the the building. We believe that demolition is
not an àcceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Print Name
. Ernail Address Phone Number
:... [AtIlt\{" ?t~f~'7
-
IfJ to
---
Lf 7l,d5 ç Z.
3-
- 4.
~5.
( -
<: ,"
-~
II
108
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, inDIct Town Tustin
The lmdersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and MÌiin
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redevelopment ofthe the building. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
Email Address
¡I~ '5::>':,-0742.
I{ , (7¿"Ò
.neT \?;¡Z-7æ'i
;'/I-I) C'Z¡¡'90i.'?<1
\ "2-1' K'(FoiLc') 12..!:>
-;o.(ð'õçTV;í'h' Co/' ~
"12.-.5'2.-
\ß':íl~D PUr..
~ M'fÌloJ¡ :1ßD .-
,-------- \
~57
Tv~TI~
'~E.SIDr=:N
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin,
The lmdersigned of this petition request the City of Tustin to
preserve all or the fascade portion oftlle Utt Juice Buildings
located at the northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would be done in partnership with
redeveIopment of the the blinding. We believe that demolition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site.
:. .....ß\:"\ N
... ~-
: ::v 'LlLs.f"I.ú' Itl/.ln.&I/Ú:.~~
,oM. 11\\ fl.
! g. i <I>. '" ';";r...,. \ ,
5.
-
1.
6.
~
tl0
I 1 1.
I
I
\ .2
i
3.
--. 4.
I
[J 5.
(;-58
I'
Address
I rJ!:/¡
Email Address
\.'
~
r~.\
I
-'!
~
I
\
1
.~
I
I
i
I
I
I
f
!
\
I
,
-,
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
-----.J
..
TV~TIN ~E.SIDtN.T
110
p-/
6.
-
The undersigned 0 fbis pe 1 . n re uest"e " 0 us
preserve all or the fascade portion of the Utt Juice BtlÌldings
located at the northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main
Street. The preservation would b~ done in partnership with
redevelopment oftbe the building. We.beheve that de~o ition is
not an acceptable alternative for the reuse of the site. -
~
Print Name Address Email Address Phone Number
l.~~ ;"/3; ,;. tef~Jn¿
2 ."' ¡)"Ç. ":, "> . e> "-,~ '-"'
¡"e:..'/\¥-. ~C:>lp\J 1"--""""""'"
(Î\-\,,-~i--'b,'<- c..~~L.\
3. cA.\¡~){..~c;, ~\. ~d-'1 ¥ì. ¡~X(€bt-
&: cf,¡"o.
I q-v:UW, exN,c:n'ì
~f'l'ì,cA
51 \í2~ G.t"Dc cn.. j..). l<O-é""'oVE.Ï1~
. ~,
G!..~(A;
1'7 ). ~'ß fi:.
~.(';¡ Wi... ¿; ::1
4. I28-JV\C\~[,I¡;J{AI'
~_.
7.
13.
...1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
14.
15.
I
1
I
i
.. ..J
NON.. TV ~T'r~
~E$I.Þ~ 1
í'11
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.3
(Letter from Brent A. Ferdig, Bill Finken, Jeff R. Thompson, Rick Fox, AlA, April Polluc1{,
Martin Diedrich, Thomas Orr, and Ron Rocha received 1-22-04)
8.3-1 This comment expresses concerns with the proposal to dismantle or demolish the historic
buildings commonly referred to as the Uti Juice Buildings. As discussed in Comment
8.1-5, the purpose of the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") and the CEQA
process is to objectively inform the public, City Council and Board of the potentially
significant impacts of the project, including potential impacts on historic resources, and
to identify mitigation measures and alternatives that could reduce these impacts. The
DEIR comprehensively analyzes several project alternatives that consist of varying
degrees of rehabilitation and reuse of the Utt Juice building that substantially lessen the
project's irnpact on the historic Utt Juice Buildings. The City Council and the Board
could either approve the Project or choose one of the álternatives. TheCity Council and
the Board will consider the DEIR and all public comments prior to acting on the project
or any alternátives. If the Project is approved, a Statement of Overriding Considerations
would be required to identify the economic, legal, social, or technological benefits of the
project that would outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts of the project.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
112
?o~f-l i~¿;¿ç¿://;j
¡'-fa ¿z} ¡!V(â/ Ù $'7.
. I'" /) ~"J/~L:)
,~ $ . (t" Þ ,,", (t) 7,:;L f?
To whom it may concern: ' ,
My name is Robert Lindquist, I oWn the buildings that house Rutabagorz and Gary' and
Co Rack. I have owned this property since 1977, and all that time the UTT Building has
been vacant. It seems to me, that if some one wanted desperately to restore it, they have
had all the time in the world todQ so. But ngw that the City of Tustin has found a
Developer to greatly improve this eyesore part of Old Town, a Group of people have
decided hat they must save this Old Ware House.
I would like to éommend the City of Tustin for moving forwaIJd on this new
development, and City Council for the courage and vision to hoFefully approve this
wonderful development. ' '
8.4-1
Respectfully '-.."~ ~')
. ./
~ð' .,--
RECEIVED
JAN 2 B 2004
~MMUNI1Y Ô~~ENT.
:...¡y¡,~ '
. '-",
113
4
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.4
(Letter from Robert Lindquist received 1-28-04)
8.4-1 This comment does not raise any significant environmental issues that require a detailed
response or modifications to the DEIR. Instead, it offers support for the project. The
City Council and Board will consider all public comments received on the Project, its
environmental impacts and the overall merits of the Project prior to acting on the Project.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
114
CommUlÙtyDevelopment Department
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
RECEIVED
FEB 2 32004
COUWNITY DEVElOPMENT
February 17,2004
Subject: Commentsfor Draft Environmental Impact Repoftfor Prospect Village at 191, 193 and
195 East Main Street, Tustin, CA .
8.5-1
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft Environmental Impact Report for Prospect
Village. In general, our membership is pleased to see on-going redevelopment of the Old Town
area that preserves o,ur historical heritage in builclingstandards. However, we are vet)' concerned
that this project recommends that the "significantly historical structures" cannot be preserv!J(i and
that demolition is "wlavoidable".
8.5-2
TIle report has done very well in documenting the lústorical significance of the buildings and the
builder, Charles E. Uti (Section 3.3 and Appendix 3), We are in concurrence that Charles E. Utt
was a true Tustin pioneer, con1ributing significantly, during the infancy of our commUlÙty, to its
economic and civic affairs. Some of the lúghlights of his life include: .
Establishment of the SM Joaquin Fruit Company with James Irvine and Sherman Stevens
Formation of the Orange County Citrus Exchange and other associations
Acquisition and operation of the Tustin Water Works, prior to formation of the
Metropolitan Water District in Southern Califomia
Served as a Board Member for the Red Hill, Lemon Heights, and Frances Mutual Water
Companies
Served as a Board Member for the Bank of Tustin, the First National Bank of Tustin,
Commercial National Bank of Santa Ana, the Tustin Union High School District, and more
The report has-also identified that the 193 and 195 E. Main S1reet buildings have UlÙque
architectural features and have received ratings of an "A" in the City's Historic Resources Survey.
These ratings correspond to N ationalRegister significance. We agree with the rep0l1 that
architecturally, the Utt Juice Buildings are significant historical resources in Old Town Tustin.
8.5-3
Based on the îmdings in the report, our experience, and Mr, Utt's significance, we believe
that these buildings are the most important historic buildings that remain in our City.
Preservation of our history and heritage is important. It shows respect for the work of our
forefathers and the seniors in our commUlÙty, and for their sacrifices toward a better life of those to
follow. We also believe that it galvanizes the growth and development of our future with a
cOlmnon cause,
Therefore, we appeal to the City of Tustin to enact at least nrinimum levels ofpreservatioD within
the project. The report has identified two alternatives that incorporate preservation, while
maintaining f¡p.ancial viability of the project.
Sincerely,
~~~~~~,
Joyce B, Miller, Presidell!
For the Board of Directors
Tustin Area Historical Society
115
cc: Tustin City Council Members
,5
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.5
(Letter from Joyce B. Miller received 2-23-04)
8.5.-1 The comment states that "this project recommends that the significantly historic
structures cannot be preserved and demolition is unavoidable." However, the DErR does
not "recommend" or otherwise take a position on the project or any particular altemative.
The DEIR functions as an informational document for the public and the decision makers
that discloses the environmental impacts of the project and identifies mitigation and
alternatives to reduce the impacts. The DEIR concludes that the Project would demolish
the existing buildings on site, which it determined, based on an historic resources survey.
are historic resources under CEQA. Therefore, the project would have a significant
impact on such resources. In aécordance with CEQA, the EIR identifies numerous
alternatives to the Project that contemplate varying degrees ofrehabilitation and reuse to
substantially lessen this Project's impact on historic resources. Prior to rendering a
decision on the project, including a decision that would require full or partial demolition
of the existing buildings on the project site, the City Council and the Board will consider
the merits of the project and all public comments. If the project is approved, a Statement
of Overriding Considerations would be required to identify the economic, legal, social, or
technological benefits of the project that outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts of the
project.
8.5-2 This comment noted the thoroughness of the City's historical resource evaluation. No
significant environmental issues are raised, therefore no detailed response is warranted
under CEQA.
8.5-3 The DEIR provides a comprehensive analysis of the historical significance of the Utt
Juice Building. The City Council and the Board will consider all public comments
received as well as the impacts and merits of the proposed project prior to acting on the
Project. If the project is approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which is
required to identify the economic, legal, social, or technological benefits of the project
that outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts of the project.
116
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
"DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 12
3337 MICHELSON DRlVE
SUITE C380
IRVINE, CA 92612-1699
PHONE (949) 724-2000
RECEIVED
FEB 23WO4
, Flexyaurpawer!
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Beene~ejJicienti
"TATE OF CAUFORNJA ",,"mESS TRANSPOR,ATION AND HO"SmG AGENCY
February 17, 2004
Mr. Jim Draughon
City of Tustin
Community Redevelopment
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
IGR/CEQA
SCH#: 2003041144
Log #: 1251A
SR: 5, 55
DEIR
Dear Mr. Draughon:
Subject: Prospect Village DEIR
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Environmental Impact
Report (DEIR) for the Prospect Village Project. The proposed project is for development of a
1,036-acre site with a two-story 9,182 square foot commerciaVoffice building and twelve three-
story live-work units. The project site is located at Prospect A venue and Main Street in the City
of Tustin. '
1.6-1
Caltrans District 12 is a reviewing agency and has no comments.
Please continue to keep us informed of projects that may impact our State Transportation
'Facilities. Tfyou have any questions or comments, please contact Lynne Gear at (949) 724-2241.
Sincerely,
II ~W7 f:t!:" /
1\A,J'~l, ,,'.-~ç'./r
in.! : ¿-t/ L/ ---
Robert F. seph¡K;hief ~
IGR/Community Planning
cc: Terri Pencovic, Headquarters
Terry Roberts, OPR
"CO/lmn, improves mobilily across Co/ifarnia"
117
6
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.6
(Letter from Robert F. Joseph received 2-23-04)
8.6-1 The comment does not raise any significant environmental issues, therefore no additional
responses or rnodifications to DEIR are required. The DErR did not identifY any
potentially significant impacts related to State transportation facilities.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
118
Community Development Department
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, California 92780
Attn: Ms. Minoo Ashabi
Associate Planner
Re:
Comments on Draft EIR
Prospect Village Project
191,193 & 195 Main Street
Ms. Ashabi:
I 'L.. V 1-" V ¡;: u
FEB 2}3' 2004
CDMMUfllTY DEVELOPMENT
BY m, ft¡, /tu.hr -'
February 18, 2004
After reviewing the Draft EIR ("DEIR") that has been prepared for the Prospect Village
Project at the southwest corner of Prospect and Main, I have the following observations,
concerns, and comments:
1.
Project Entitlements
According to the DEIR the project applicant is seeking the following entitlements:
A.
B.
C.
Re-zone the property from C-2 to Plenned Community zone;
jSubdividethe property into 14 parcels;
Demolish existing structures;
8.7-1
Since almost all of the required parking for the retail/office/commercial portion of the
project is to be provided offsite, wouldn't a parking variance also be required as an
additional entitlement?
'Given that the project has been deemed inconsistent with existing General Plan
Policies regarding preservation of historic resources (DEIR p. 3.5-12), isn't a General
Plan Amendment required as well to rectify this discrepancy? Does the
Redevelopment Agency have the authority to disregard Generai Plan policies forits
own projects, and don't general Plan policies always trump the needs of a specific
project? ----.
8.7-2
2.
Project Inconsistency with General Plan Policies
Section 3.5.4.2 of the DEIR is explicit that the proposed project is inconsistent with
three important policies (Policy 5.3,5.5, and 6.5) whose purpose is to promote
restoration and preservation of historically significant structures. The project proposes
File: Utt-juice-2-18-04
Page I
11'7
87_3
8 -4
8.7-5
to demolish two, very important historic structures. My concern is not just that the
project is "inconsistent" with these vital policies, but that it is calculated and deliberate in
. its disregard for them. No other property owner in Old Town, other that the City
\ Redevelopment Agency would be able to show such blatant and callous disregard for,
tfhese policies. As the pubHc record unequivocally shows, when the previous owner of
the Uti Juice property negiected the place, the city eventually purchased the property
through eminent domain forthe purpose of its preservation.
Why is it now okay for the City, acting on the behalf of and at the behest of the citizens
of Tustin, to disregard previous commitments??
Not only is the City setting a very bad .example for which history will not judge them well,
but by its actions it consigns to the rubbish heap of history all the conscientious and
good-hearted efforts of private landowners and citizens who strive to "play by the rules"
and work hard to preserve and enhance their own buildings and properties.
3.
Impacts on Cultural Resources
Given that the property has been deemed a "historic resource" under CEQA criteria
(DEIRp. 3.3-7), and given that the proposed demolition of Utt Juice is a substantial
adverse impact on those resources (DEIR p 3.3-9), even though the integrity of those
resources are only considered to be in "fair" condition (p 3.3-3), what possible reasons
could be given for a "Statement of Overriding Considerations for the outright and totai
demolition of the Utt buildings other than pure economic expediency??? The subject
property is not such a biight on ,the community that in its present state it is single-
handedly causing businesses and residents to flee, or cåusing rapid deterioration of
adjacent property values, or harboring vagrants. In short, the building sitting there as is,
may be considered an "eyesore" by some, but it is not a malignant presence that must
be eradicated.
I, and many of the citizens of Tustin, could easily support a Statement of Overrid ing
Considerations for one of the project alternatives (ie. Alternative #3) that attempts to
take the historic value of the property seriousiy.
The DEIR points out on page 3.3-6 that even though the Cultural Resources Overlay
\District has been established for several years, no actual buildings have as yet been
Ldesignated" within the District. If Utt Juice is not deserving, then what else in town is??
{Based on the data provided in the DEIR, a side by side comparison of the
environmentally superior projects with the financially viable projects, yields the
inescapable observation that the two lists are roughly inversely related to one another.
File: Utt-juice.2.18.04
Page 2
120
Envi,onmental/v SUDenD' Projects
Financiallv Vieble Projects
1"- "No Project"
2"' - Full Reuse Alternative (Alt #1)
3" - Full Reuse - Existing zone (Alt #4)
4" - Partial Reuse, ell three bldgs (Alt #2)
5"- Partialreuse,193&195(Alt#3)
6'h - A Facade-ectomy (Ait #5)
7'h - The Project
1" - The Project
20' - A Facade-ectomy (Alt #5)
3" - Partiai Reuse (Alt #3)
4" - Full Reuse (AI! #1)
5'h - Partiai Reuse (AI! #2)
6" - Full Reuse, Existing zone (Alt #4)
7'h - "No project"
.7-6
Isn't this inverse relationship, the one that developers always use when they want to
appeal to our economic "common sense", when all they really want is to maximize their
own profits??
Though I have not scrutinized in detail all of the cost estimates and economic analysis
contained in Appendices D & H as they relate to the project alternatives, it is fairly
obvious that the descriptions used in the DEIR on page 4-3 do not correlate with the
descriptions of those described in the Appendices. For example the DEIR describes
Alternative 3 as Rehab of 193 & 195 Only (DIER p. 4-3). This doesn't rnatch the scope
of work description of Alt 3: of Appendix D.. Page 6 of that appendix describes
rehabilitation of 191, 193 & 195. Appendix D graphics for Alt 3 depict the rehab of 191,
193 & 195 a nd not the demolition of 191 as descFibed in the DEI R. Additionally,
Alternative 3 of the KMA .report In Appendix H,(see cover letter to Jim Draughn page 6)
is in sync with Appendix D, but also out of sync with the DEIR itself.
.7-7
At this juncture i am not prepared to discuss in detail the economic viability of the
project and the alternatives or call into question the veracity of the various technical
studies, but I would like to know what price the Re-development Agency places on
historic preservation??? ,Isn't the Agency, as the seller of the property, in a position to
control the asking price?? And isn't the price of land a major factor on the cost side of
the financial ledger.
4.
Previous Attempts at Re-development of Subject Property
U-8
The DEIR presumes that the five previous failed attempts to secure a developer to
rehabilitate the property will be repeated if the applicant is required to do so this time as
well, yet no real evidence is given in the DEIR for this assertion (see p. 4-22). In other
words. the public has heard on many occasions that developers have walked away
from the property,but so far as I know the precise circumstances of previous project
constraints have not been widely discussed with the public.
As a hypothetical example: if re.zonlng to Include high-density residential was not an option open
to a developer in previous attempts, that would have had an affect on the financial viability of his
project. And differences like these are relevant and important distinctions between conditions
then and now.
Previous developers may have found the preservation and rehabilitation of the Utt
File: Utt'Juice-2.18-04
Page 3
121
8.7- 9
I buildings infeasible (too, expensive), but such infeasibility may have been fa. r entirely
different reasons from the present argument being advanced by the current applicant.
5.
The Certificate of Appropriateness
The issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for this project is required.
Presumably the "appropriateness" that the certificate addresses is reiative to the merits
of the replacement structure. But such a value judgement occurs within the
comparative context of what is being replaced - and does not occur in a vacuum.
I have grave doubts that the Community Development Director will be able to make any
I of the findings described on p 3.3-6, for the issuance of the certificate because:
Finding A. - Rehabilitation IS physically possible;
Finding B. - The site is not baing used for a greater public benefit;
(Unless one makes the non-sensical finding that a restaurant is a "public benefit"
greater thim preservation ofthe most significant building in Tustin).
Finding C. - The buildings are not "designated", so this finding is not available;
Finding D. - Reconstruction Is practical from a purely technical point of view; as I have stated
earlier, the City Is In the uniqu,e position of being abie to control the overall financial
feasibility of the project and thus the restoration of the Uti Juice buildings.
If Uti is totally demolished and a certificate Issued for its replacement, then "fake"
history will Indeed have become more important than "real" history. And thus the City
itself will have set in motion a cycle of cynicism with respect to the purposes of the
Cultural Resources Overlay District, the role of the Resources Advisory Committee, and
the very meaning of civic. responsibility.
Tustin Resident
170 North A Street
File: Utt-Juice.2-18.04
Page 4
122
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.7
(Letter from Rick Fox received 2-23-04)
8.7-1 Section 9271aa of the Tustin City Code allows a reduction in the total number of required
parking spaces through the approval of shared parking and Section 9252j3d3b provides
for off-site parking through the approval of a long term lease; no variance is required.
Appendix F of the DEIR contains a parking study. that demonstrates that a total of 59 off-
site parking spaces and three (3) on-site parking spaces will accommodate the peak
demand for the various non-residential uses in the project; all required parking for the
residential uses will be provided on-site. In addition, a reduction in the number of on-site
parking spaces and the provision of off-site parking does not require the approval of a
variance; a long term lease or Off-Site Parking Agreement is required under the Cultural
Resource Overlay District, which states, "On-site parking requirements may be waived
upon the presentation to the City o(a long term lease, running with and as a condition of
the business license, for private off-site parking accommodations within 300 feet of the'
business or activity to be served." TMC § 9252(J)(3)(D)(3)(B) Mitigation Measure T-2
on page 3.7-13 of the DEIR requires City approval of an Off-site Parking Agreement or
other shared use agreement or the project cannot proceed.
8.7-2 The DEIR identifies significant and unavoidable land use impacts related to the project's
inconsistency with a limited number of General Plan policies that encourage
rehabilitation of existing commercial facades, restoration or rehabilitation of properties
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and preservation of
historically significant structures. While each project is reviewed on an individual basis
for consistency with the General Plan, California law does not require a project to be
consistent with each and every General Plan goal and policy. . (SeQuovah Hills
Homeowners' Ass'n v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal. App. 4th 704, 719-720). As
stated on page II of the Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element Goals and Policies
provide a framework for land use planning and decision-making in the City. The policies
noted above related to historic structures are intended to support Goal 6, which states,
"Improve urban design in Tustin to ensure development that is both architectura:Jly and
functionally compatible, and to create uniquely identifiable neighborhoods, commercial
and business park districts." This goal can be achieved through the proposed project by
providing a high quality of design and materials, and as such, a General Plan Amendment
is not required for the project. However, the City Council will consider the merits of the
project in relation to the land use policy conflicts that have been identified prior to
rendering a decision on the project.
8.7-3 As discussed in Resolution No. RDA 97-6, the Agency condemned the buildings and
acquired the property by eminent domain for the purpose of eliminating blight and
redeveloping the site to contribute to revitalization efforts in Old Town pursuant to the
Town Center Redevelopment Plan. As a result of the property owner failing to correct
ongoing and significant building code and property maintenance violations, the buildings
could not be occupied and marketed in an effective manner; no tenants were willing to
make the require improvements to make the buildings safe for occupancy. The Agency's
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
123
action was limited to acquisition of the site; no detailed development plans were
included. During that process, the City or Redevelopment Agency did not commit to
preserving the existing buildings. As demonstrated in response 8.7-8, the Agency has
expended considerable time, effort and expense pursuing a redevelopment project that
would rehabilitate and reuse at least some portions of the existing buildings, however,
none of these have proven feasible.
8.7-4 If the City Council or Board decides to approve the Project, the City Council and Board
must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the proposed project due to its
significant and unavoidable impacts relating'to Land Use and Cultural Resources. The
Statement of Overriding Considerations must identify the overriding benefits of this
project, which include, for example, eliminating delay and uncertainties surrounding
future development of this site, stimulating .private investment by demonstrating
economic viability in the Old Town commercial area, increasing the amount of specialty
retailing and commercial development in the core of Old Town, short term (construction)
and long term (commercial retail) job creation and increasing the number of residential
units in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area.
8.7-5 The DEIR provides objective information regarding the financially viability of the
Project and each of the alternatives to the Project. The conclusions regarding the
financial viability of each alternative were based on studies performed by experts in real
estate and redevelopment. The purpose of the Alternatives section of the DEIR is to
provide sufficient detail about each alternative to allow the City Council and Board to
make an informed comparison of the impacts and feasibility of each alternative. The
DEIR accomplishes this purpose by providing a comprehensive comparison of each
alternative's environmental impacts relative to the project and each alternative's ability to
meet the project objectives, including the creation of a financia:1ly viable cornmercial
mixed use development with minimum public subsidy.
8.7-6 The comment states that the descriptions of the alternatives on page 4-3 of the DEIR do
not correlate with the description of alternatives in the Appendices. However, the
descriptions are consistent, only the numbering and the title of each alternative is
different. The numbering is different because "Alternative I" in the Appendix is the
Project which was evaluated in detail in the EIR. Therefore, there was no need to
identify the Project as an alternative in Section 4.0 Alternatives. Because "Alternative I"
was excluded from the Alternatives analysis, the numbering of each alternative changed.
For example, Alternative 2 ("Historic Preservation") of the technical appendix is the
altèmative listed as Alternative I on page 4-3 of the DEIR and was renamed "Full Reuse
Alternative." However, the description of the scope of work under this alternative (see p.
4-3 and 4-6), while summarized slightly different, are consistent. Alternative 3 of the
Appendix is alternative listed as Alternative 2 on page 4-3, and $0 on and so forth.
8.7-7 As demonstrated in response 8.7-8, the Agency has expended considerable time, effort
and expense pursuing a redevelopment project that would rehabilitate and reuse at least
some portions of the existing buildings. The Agency, however, was unsuccessful in its
efforts to find a developer that was willing to embark on a project that involved
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
124
rehabilitation and reuse of the existing structures unless the. City provided a substantial
public subsidy. Public subsidies were requested even for new construction projects at the
Utt Juice site, not just rehabilitation and reuse projects. Nonetheless, the DEIR identifies
a reasonable range of Project alternatives that contemplate varying degrees of
rehabilitation and reuse to substantially lessen the Project's impact on the historic Utt
Juice Buildings.
Regarding the comment about the Agency's ability to control the asking price, the asking
price and the sale price of properties are generally quite different. In development
projects, the price of land is a function of the economic value of a proposed project based
on the costs associated with developrnent and construction of the proposed
improvements, the rental and/or sales rates achievable within the given market area, and
the expectation of profits based on individual developers' projected financial risks and
third-party financing requirements. The KMA economic evaluation of the proposed
project and the identified alternatives in the DEIR provides an independent financial
analysis based on certain standardized costs and economic assumptions based on their
past professional experience for the purpose of preparing an "apples-to-apples"
comparison of development alternatives. The analysis was prepared to identifY the
"residual" value of the land after all other economic and costs are identified, that is, the
supportable cost of the land for any given development alternative. Nevertheless,
numerous variables are present in every separate development project, including but not
limited to, the individual investment requirements of the developers, their inequity
funding sources and their financial lenders.
Finally, the comment asks whether the price of land is a major factor on the cost side of
the financial ledger. As discussed above, land cost is derived as a residual from a number
of costs and operating variables rather than a cost assigned arbitrarily by a property
owner. As also identified in the KMA economic analysis in the DEIR, the supportable
land cost of a project may be identified as an amount less than the fair market price
including a negative value, which reflects the level of financial infeasibility for a project
or the requirement for additional financial assistance/public subsidy.
8.7-8 The following is a summary of the development solicitations and negotiations, which
serve as a basis for the Agency's conclusions regarding risks related to the timely
implementation of the project pursuant to the project objectives, and serves to .i11ustrate
the financial risks associated with uncertain development plans advanced by qualified
developers.
Upon acquisition of the property, the Tustin Redevelopment Agency immediately
initiated a broad solicitation of developer interest and a two-step process Request for
Qualifications (RFQ) for the development of the property in February, 1998. The
solicitation included publication of the request in regional newspapers of general
circulation (Los Angeles Times and Orange County Register) and direct mailings to one
hundred (100) firms actively involved in retail project development. The firms were
comprised of both large-scale commercial developers and smaller scale niche retail
developers and related redevelopment consultants (see Developer Solicitation List
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
125
available for review at Tustin City Hall). The RFQ (p¡¡ge 2) identified that the Agency
was seeking to enhmce the existing building improvements, particularly the facades of
the buildings, which were described as historically significant.
In response to this initial solicitation, eight firms were represented at a February 23, 1998
pre-submission meeting held at the Tustin City Hall with only two developers following
through with developer qualification submittals. Sandersol) J. Ray Development, an
Orange County developer of small to mid-sized retail and professional office projects,
was selected as best qualified to proceed with the second step of the solicitation process
calling for preparation of a site development proposal. Sanderson J. Ray Development
presented conceptual development plans for the site (David .A. Price Associates
(4/23/98», which were based on the Agency's architectural programming studies
reflecting an attempt to preserve. the building façade. The conceptual. plans were
subsequently revised (6/25/98) to reflect new construction on the site which was designed
to emulate the Uti Juice buildings rather than rehabilitate the exiting structures based on
the developer's determination of the infeasibility and impracticality of preserving the
existing structures. The developer failed to conclude the Proposal process and
negotiations were ternrinated on in August, 1998 after a period of six (6) months.
Subsequently, the Agency re-contacted the firms initially expressing interest and other
prospective firms identified by the Agency. Pursuant to the Agency's continuing
marketing of the development opportunity at the site, the Agency initiated discussions
with Burg Corporation and Gallo Corporation partnership and requested a written
expression of their interest and submission of a qualifications statement for the
partnership. While the written representations in the developer's proposals (July 14,
1999; revised November 15, 1999) described the partial preservation of the existing
building as being desirable, the conceptual plans reflected the revised design plans
prepared for Sanderson J. Ray Development by David Price Associates (6/25/98) for new
construction on the site, as well as reflecting a financial subsidy' requirement by the
Agency of $2.5 million. Through the course of continued negotiations between the
Agency and developer, the issues related to the developer's plan inconsistencies,
commitments to implementation and financial assistance requirements became
irreconcilable. Negotiations were terminated by the Agency in July, 2000 after a period
of sixteen (16) months.
In August, 2000 the Agency initiated discussions with and received a written
qualifications statement from Metropolitan Development, an affiliate of Highridge
Partners. The developer sought to move the Burg-Gallo development plans forward
under negotiations with Agency by recasting the financial assistance under provisions of
a long-term ground lease for the property which might mitigate the substantiat financial
subsidy requirements of the proposed project. During the course of negotiations, the
development entity was reconfigured as SK Development to include only two of the
principals in Metropolitan Development, which substantially diminished the entity's
fmancial capacity and led ostensibly to revising the development plans and restructuring
the proposal. Revised proposal terms and development plans were submitted (1/16/2001)
reflecting a new construction, 33,350 square feet monolithic building, elimination of the
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
126
ground lease, and a $2,255,000 financial subsidy plus $223,000 per year in rental
guarantees by Agency. The revised development plans and proposal terms were deemed
unacceptable by the Agency and negotiations were terminated by developer in April 2001
after a period of eight (8) months. .
In April, 2001 back-up development firms expressing interest in the property (Leason
Pomeroy, Georgino Development, CIM Group, Tolkin Group Development, and Land
Grant Development) were invited to submit written qualifications statements and outline
proposals for consideration by the Agency. On June I, 2001 Georgino Development
and Tolkin Group Development each responded to the Agency's request by submitting
qualifications statements and development proposals for the property. The Georgino
Development proposal was 'for a new construction, 32,317 square feet development
requiring a subsidy of approximately $1,717,000 by the Agency. The Tolkin Group
proposal was for a new construction, up to 30,000 square feet development requiring a
subsidy of approximately $2,130,000 by the Agency while allowing for potential
recapture of up to $1.6 million from residual receipts from the developer. Subsequent to
entering exclusive negotiations with Tolkin Group, the developer submitted revised
development plails in December, 2001 for a 20,000 square feet development requiring the
saIIÌe level of subsidy by the Agency; Negotiations led to another revision to the
development plans, which reflected a new construction, 10,800 square-foot retail/office
building with 13 live"work townhouse units and requiring a subsidy of over $2,130,000
by the Agency. After failure to reach satisfactory terms regarding the development plan
and financial subsidy requirements, the Agency terminated exclusive negotiations on
May 30, 2002 after a period often (10) months.
The Agency re-contacted developers expressing interest in developing the property.
Among those contacted was Tillotson Development, a highly qualified developer who
expressed interest in developing a mixed-use commercial project with a for-sale
residential component. In June 2002, Pelican Center LLC (now Prospect Village, LP, a
California Limited Partnership) (Tillotson) submitted written qualifications statement and
development proposal to the Agency reflecting new construction of a 13,000 square foot
retail comrnercial building and 12 live-work residential units, while requireing a subsidy
of$355,000.00 by the Agency as a write-down of the Agency's land cost. Subsequent to
entering exclusive negotiations and additional design refinements, a revised development
plan and project pro forma was submitted in April 2004 reflecting an approximately
9,300 square foot retail commercial building (8,589 leaseable square feet) and 12 live-
work units. Through the course of negotiations, the Developer determined it" more
desirable not to fmance the land purchase through the Agency, thus eliminating the
requirement related to the payment of prevailing wages and minimizing the potential
escalating costs for the Project. The revised development plan is reflected as the
proposed project in the EIR and the financial terms are identified in the Draft DDA, and
reflects the ongoing plan refinements and related negotiations over a period of twenty
(20) months.
The foregoing shows the complexity and nuances involved in bringing the próposed
project forward over a total period of six (6) years. The prior development proposals
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
127
found the preservation. of the existing structures to be both impractical based on current
market conditions and infeasible ftom 'a cost standpoint absent substantial fmancial
assistance by the Agency. This is reflected by the developers' consistent revisions to
their proposals to eliminate any form of preservation of the existing buildings and in their
respective representations to the Agency. The development planning revisions dìscussed
above reflects a wide-range of development options in terms of intensity, scale and uses
for the site, including residential use. The residential component is identified in the
KMA economic analysis in the DEIR as being the necessary viable component in
allowing' for expanding retail commercial development on the site and within the core
area of the Old Town area, which is a major objective of the project.
8.7-9 The Tustin City Code requires a finding that "reconstruction or restoration is not,
econornically feasible or practical," which addresses both the economic considerations
related to current acceptable market conditions and physical space requirements,. and the
financial considerátions related to construction cost, revenue generation and investment
retums.(Tustin Municipal Code § 9252 (d». This finding is independent of the rIDding
related to whether it is "physically possible" to repair, restore or reconstruct the existing
buildings. While the KMA economic analysis in the DEIR presumes that repair and
rehabilitation is "physically possible", it also assumes that some developer would be
willing to undertake such a project and identifies a likely order of magnitude of public
subsidy required for implementing a range of project alternatives.' Evidence to date
shows that prospective qualified developers have deemed reuse of the existing buildings
infeasible without substantial public subsidy and impractical ftom a present day
marketing perspective (see response 8.7-9). In addition, neither the City nor the Agency
is in a position to control the overall feasibility of the project or to provide the public
financial subsidy required by the alternatives identified in the DEIR. The only local
financial sources for subsidizing the project are the Town Center Redevelopment Plan tax
increment revenues, which are currently encumbered by debt service obligations and
other capital projects.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
128
February 18,2004
RECEIVED
FEB 232004
CßMMUN/1Y DEVELOPMENT
BYyJ1, ,(1rII/Ah -'
Ms. Minoo Ashabi
Community Development Department
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Re:
Public Hearing Comments
Prospect Village Project
8.8-1
Dear Ms. Ashabi,
¡This letter is in regard to the statement reflected in the draft EIR regarding my comments
I at the Public Hearing on the above referenced project. I would like to amend the record
I to reflect what X recall my comments to have been. I know staff tried to recall to the best
of their ability since the audio recorder was not working. I realize that it has been ahnost
a year since the statement was made, but I do recall my thoughts that occurred that
evening when I addressed City Staff.
Please amend to the following:
My name is Brent Ferdig and I live at 200 South B Street. I have lived in the Cultural
Resource District for over 20 years. My family has been in Tustin since 190 I, I am
, opposed to the demolition of the buildings due to their historic value and association with
\ the Utt family. The Utt family was an important part of the early development of Tustin.
, In fact, the Utt family was more important than the Tustin family in developing the City.
The citycouJd really be called "City of Uti."
The City has required all other properties in the Old Town area to follow the ¡¡uidelines
of the District. I feel that the City should hold itself to higher standards by exceeding the
guidelines that it has established
~'O- -
Brent A. F~
140 South Myrtle Avenue
Tustin, CA 92780
128
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.8
(Letter from Brent Ferdig received 2-23-04)
8.8-1 The Comment does not raise any significant environmental issues. Therefore, no
additional responses or modifications to the DEIR are required. The City Council and
Board will consider all comments for and against the Project prior to acting on the
Project.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
130
8.9-1
8.9-2
February 18,2004
RECEIVED
FEB 2'3 2004
COMMUNITY ~. PMENT
BY yYI,As '
Ms. Minoo Ashabi
Community Development Department
City ofTustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Draft EIR Report-Prospect Village Project
Dear Ms. Ashabi,
Re:
I am writing this letter in response to the draft EIR prepared on the Prospect Village
project located at 191, 193 & 195 Main Street in Old Town Tustin. After reviewing the
comments reflected in the draft EIR, I have several strong concerns in regard to the
proposed project. I strongly believe that redevelopment of the site is important for Old
TowÍi Tustin, but -there is also a responsibility to preserve the true historic character of
the Cultural Resources Overlay District. .
As supported by the draft EIR report, the Utt Juice bÌrildings are historically significant
due-to their association with the Utt family. Per the proposed project, all of the historic
buildings would be demolished. The Utt family was one of Tustin's earliest pioneering
families. The following are some of the highlights of their contributions to the early
development of Tustin and Orange County:
. Established the "1. Utt Pioneer Store" in 1874 on the-southeast corner of Main andEI
Camino Streets in Old Town Tustin.
. In 1906, Charles Edward Utt, with partners Sherman Steven and James Irvine, was
the' first person to bring an organized agricultural industry to the Irvine Ranch and his
experimentation help determine what crops were best suited to the County.
. Served as a Board M=ber for the Bank of Tustin, First National Bank of Tustin and
the Tustin Union High School District.
. Charles E. Utt served as President of the San Joaquin Fruit Company and its success
encouraged the planting of hundreds of acres of citrus and walnut orchards by James
Irvine and others on similar lands.
. Establishment of one of the City's first large business, The Utt Juice Company (1922-
1973) and real estate developments including Lemon Heights and the Utt Juice
Buildings.
The report also indicates that architecturally, the Utt Juice Buildings are significant
historical resources. The metal cornices, located on the Main Street facades, were stated
as significant not only for its elaborate design but also because historic metal cornices are
i now a rarity in Southern California. I also strongly agree that the Utt Juice Buildings also
i derive significan.ce because of their location at a prominent corner of Old Town Tustin.
: The report states that the Buildings provide an "introduction" to Old Town as the first of
\ its historic buildings one encounters when traveling west on Main Street. It also states
~1
¡ their elimination and replacement by new construction would significantly affect the '
I visitor's initial historical view of Old Town.
The City ofTustin's Historic Resources Survey gave the 193 & 195 East Main Street
Buildings an "A" rating and the draft EJR states that these buildings appear to be eligible
for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources since they satisfy the
following criteria:
I. Association with significant event or trends
2. Association with historically important person
3. Embodying distinctive characteristics or a type or construction method
9-3
It does not make sense to demolish actual historical buildings and replace them with
buildings that look historical. .
The Tustin City Council established the Cultural Resource OverlayDistrict in 1988. One
of the purpose ofthe Cultural Resource District is to safeguard the heritage of the City by
preserving neighborhoods, structures, sites and featureS which reflect the elementS of the
City's cultural, architectural; artistic, political, social and natural and engineering
heritage. Per the City of Tustin's Residential Design Guidelines, the City Council has
, declared as a matter of public policy that, "the recognition, preservations, protection and
use of culturally significant structures, naturalfeatUres, sites and neighbOrhoods within
the City of T~n is required in the interest of the health, safety, prosperity, social and
cultural enrichments and general welfare of City residents." It also states in the guidelines
that, "The development of Residential Design Guidelines is one more ofa continuing
effort by the City õfTustin to record and encourage the preservation of the rich historical
past of Old Town Tustin."
Achievements by the City to. enhan'ce, protect and preserve the City's cultural resources
have included: .
. Creation ofa Cultural Resources Overlay District to the area known as "Old Town
Tustin"
. Establishment of a Cultural Resources Advisory Committee
. Tustin Historical Resources Survey Report
. Recognition of Tustin as a Certified Local Government for historic preservation by
the State of California
. Completion of an Old Town Educational Videa promoting the benefits of historic
, preservation and Old Town's value as a cultural and educational resource
. Developed the Residential Design Guidelines
. Implemented a Mills ActProgram
. Formed a plaque designation program for residential and commercia:l buildings called
the Tustin Historic Register
The City Council, City staff, State Offi.ce of Historic Preservation and local citizens have
spent thousands of hours and dollars developing the district to enhance, protect and
preserve the City's historic resources. I served 10 years on the Cultural Resources
132
8.9-4
Advisory Committee and I am very proud of the accomplishments the CRAC made
during my term and what they'have been able to accomplish since my term expired. The
proposed project appears to be direct contradiction to the principles and philosophy of the
Overlay District. I feel that it is very important that the City ofTustin follow the
principles and philosophy established over the past 15 years on this development and all
future developments in the District. My concern is that if an "exception" is made for this
, project in regard to preservation of historic structures, it will set an unacceptable level of
! standards for all future projects in the District.
l
I Per the draft ErR, the proposed proj ect would be inconsistent with the City's General
¡Plan policies that promote preservation and rehabilitation of historic resources. The
f following are the General Plan policies that reflect inconsistency:
I.
I
,.
Policy 5.3 - Encourage the rehabilitation of existing commercial facades and signage
Policy 5.5 - Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of properties eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places according to the rehabilitation
guidelines and tax .incentives of the National Trust for Historic Preservation
<II Policy 6.5 - Preserve historically significant structures and site ;, and encourage the
conservation and rehabilitation of older buildings, sites and neighborhoods that
contribute to the City's historic character.
Why is.an exception being considerec.i to the General Plan for this specific project? I
would think: that the policies adopted in the General Plan are to accomplish a vision
and/or goal of the City. Has this exception been made for other projects located in Old
. Town?
8.9-5
The draft EIR has analyzed 6 project alternatives to the proposed project. From purely a
historic preservationist's point of view, Full Reuse Alternative provides the least amount
of impact on the historical resources. However, other factors must also be considered in
reviewing the project ~d th.e altematives. Based on, personal input at the public hearings
and also documented in the draft EIR, severe structural damage has occurred on the
, building at 191 Main Street when it was earthquake retrofitted.
I strongly feel that the Partial Reuse (193, 195 Buildings Only) Alternative provides
historic preservation responsibility and fmancial feasibility to developers. As stated in
the City's pamphlet, A Guide for Old Town Residential PrOPertY Owners 2001, "The
City is committed to preserving the City's historic resources." This alternative will
set a "good example" to the community that the City of Tustin is truly committed to
~ preserving the City's historic resources.
SinCerelY;f)
'~~.
Brent A Fer ig ~
140 South Myrtle Avenue
Tustin, CA 92780
133
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO.9
(Letter from Brent Ferdig received 2-23-04)
8.9-1 The level of preservation of the "true historic character" of the Cultura1 Resource Overlay
District is a policy decision that is reserved for the elected officials of the City. The
purpose of the EIR is to adequately inform the decision makers of the environmental
consequences of proceeding with the Project and to identifY feasible mitigation measures
and alternatives for reducing the Project's significant environmental effects. The EIR
adequately informs the City Council and Agency of Project's impacts on the Uti Juice
Buildings. A fmal decision on the merits of the Project or anyone of the alternatives
identified in the EIR will be made by the Council and Agency.
8.9-2 The DEIR for Prospect Village concludes that the Project would have significant and
unavoidable impacts relating to historic resources and land use due to the proposed
demolition of existing buildings. Comments are noted, with no additional responses or
modifications to DEIR for Prospect Village. The proposed buildings have been designed
to complement Old Town rather than replicate the existing buildings. The City Council
and Board will consider all impacts and merits of the proposed project prior to adopting a
Statement of Overriding Considerations or rendering a final decision on the project
entitlements.
8.9-3 Comments are noted. The project applicant is not seeking an exception to the regulations
of the Cultural Resources Overlay District. While the overall purpose of the District is to
protect and preserve the character of the district, demolition of buildings is not
prohibited. In accordance with the Tustin City Code, all project applicants must obtain a
"Certificate of Appropriateness" . to demolish or remove any Designated Cultural
Resources or of any improvements in the district or alter the exterior features of a
building or site within the district, alter a Designated Cultural Resource, or construct
improvements within the district requiring a City building pernrit. Each request is
evaluated on an individual basis by the Community Development Director. In the case of
the proposed project, if approved, the Community Development Director would issue a
Certificate of Appropriateness at the time a building permit is requested and prior to
issuance of permits.
8.9-4 Please see the comments related to implementation of General Plan policies provided in
Response 8.7-2.
8.9-5 The City Council and Board will consider all impacts and merits of and alternatives to the
proposed project prior to adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations or rendering
a final decision on the project entitlements.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
134
RECEIVED
FEB 23 2004
C[J~U.~~J'H
BY
February 20, 2004
Minoo Ashabi
Associate Planner, City of Tustin
3do Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 927&0
SUBJECT: HISTORIC UTT JUICE BUILDING PRESERVATION
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
Dear Ms. Minoo,
8.10-1
This letter is sent to you with concern about the future of the Utt Juice
building located at 191, 193 & 195 Main Street, Tustin, California. Old
Town Tustin has very few historic non-residential buildings left, and the loss
of another would greatly ìmpact the area. The proposed project does offer a
summary of alternatives to remin the historical integrity. Alternatives should
be taken into consideration due to the fact that this building has been
identified and evaluated for State and National Registry for Historic
Buildings,
~ The ErR stated that demolition of the building would caüSe a
SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE change in the significance of an historical
resource as deEmed in 15064.5 of the CEQA code.
8.10-2
The Utt Juice building is very significant due to the history of the family and
the contributions made in developing the city of Tustin. When one looks at
the effects of how Charles Edward Utt contributed to the development of
commerce in this area, it's easy to see that he was truly one of the city's
founding fathers.
This structure has been identified in the Tustin Old Town RlUDAT as a
building that should remain due to the historic value, and positive
contributions to the physical character to Old Town.
The question would be, "",That is the value of historical buildings in our
overlay district?" What price does our city place 011 historic presel'vatioli?
The validity that other proposals are not economically viable-this must be
\,- substantiated.
135
10
The state of California went through a long arduous process' to . set up the
laws and guidelines for preserving cultural. resources. Tustin made a
commitment to uphold the care and preservation of our historic structures.
The rules for the Utt, Juice building should the same for everyone in the
district. There are no shortcuts and cost shouldn't be the ultimate factor of
who gets to do what to historical sites.
10-3
The issue of an approval to eradicate the building would open to the general
public a precedent to destroy additionalhistoríc value to the city of Tustin.
This ultimately leads to the deterioration of the legacy of Tustin. Long after
the current city council leaves- the city will remain and so should i~. history.
I A statement of overriding consideration must be signed if the project goes
: though as proposed and designed. There is a reason for this process., and it
i should not be taken lightly. Historic preservation dGles matter... there are no
replacements: Please consider all possibilities before yourdecísion.
Sincercly, ~ 1)~
Lucy Burch
610 West Third Street
Tustin. CA 92780
136
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 10
(Letter from Lucy Burch received 2-23-04)
8.10-1 Comments are noted. No additional responses or modifications to the DEIR for Prospect
Village are required. The City Council will consider the impacts and merits of the
proposed project prior to adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations or rendering
a final decision on the project.
8.10-2 A chronology of the Redevelopment Agency's actions to develop the Utt Juice property
is identified in Response #8.7-9, which also serves to demonstrate the City's efforts to
preserve the existing structures and to document the economic infeasibility of the
previous project proposals.
8.10-3 The decision. to allow the demolition of any historic structure in the City is considered on
an individual, case by case basis. The DEIR for Prospect Village did identify significant
impacts associated with the demolition of the existing buildings. Thus, it will be up to
the City Council and Board to deternrine whether the Project's significant impacts are
outweighed by the benefits of Project. If the City Council and Board approve the Project
or an alternative that results in a significant and unavoidable impact, each entity must
adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which specifically identifies the
economic, legal, social, or technological benefits of the project that would outweigh the
unavoidable adverse impacts of the project.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
137
REÇ;EIVED
FEB 2'3 2004
COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT
BY rYL ~ W A ..h..
THOMPSON PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
+
February 21,2004
Minoo Ashabi, Community Development Department 714/573-3126
City of Tustin "
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780Fax 714/668-2660
Re: Draft Environmental Impact Report Project: Prospect ViHage 191,193 and 195
East Main Street, Tustin, CA, Prepared by: City of Tustin - Public Review Comments
Dear Ms. Ashabi,
Thank you for providing the opportunity to provide comments for the above referenced
document. We truly appreciate the effort that has been conducted by the City for many
. of the details that has been analyzed and presented. . As we have previously stated in
response to the Community Information meeting on April 22, 2003, we are excited about
the opþortunity for redevelopment of the referenced property.
¡ Ll-1
Although we are not in agreement with the recommendation, we are encouraged that a
couple of the alternatives which ínclude some preservation are economically feasible.
In particular, we are in support ofthe "Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building)" that is
economically feasible and provides the highest revenues to the City of all of the
altematíves presented on Page 4-21 of the report.
Also, we have many additional questions and concerns for the proposed development.
Our comments, with references to the report in parenthesis,' are as follows:
(11-2
Financial
1, "The prevailing view by the developers, which is consistent with the Agency's
financial feasibility study, . was that adaptive reuse of preservation of the existing
building was neither financially feasible nor practical to serve today's market
demand." (Page 2-6, paragraph 6) ..;. This statement appear¡=¡ to contradict other
statements within the report that indicate other alternatives that include some
historic preservation are economically feasible (Page 4-20 and 21). Also, a
P.O. Box 1224 . Tustin, California 92780 . (714) 544-4846 FAX & PHONE
138
11
8.11-3
8.11-4
8.11-5
8.11-6
Page 2
City of Tustin, Redevelopment Agency
Prospect Village Project Comments
previous public meeting by the Board of Appeals on April 11, 1994, page 6
stated" . .. the City. has determined that renovation is possible." As a result,
rehabilitation is not "avoidable', as stated in the report. Please clarify this
inconsistency. .
. '"2. "The Project requires a rezone from 'C-2N or "Central Commercial" to "Planned
Community to accommodaie the residential component of the proposed
UveNVork unIts.' (Page ES-6, Table ES-1) - The appraisal for the, property from
1997/1998 stated on the Summary of Salient Facts page that the "Estimated
highest and best use as if vacant land would be for development to a mixed use
project comprised of retail. service and office tenancies." (underlining added for
emphasis). Also, in a letter Lois E. Jeffrey, City Attomey, dated June~6, 2003 it
was stated thElt "The Court bfessedtheCity's pur.chase of the property, including
the price paid for it. The City's purchase was based on an MAl appraisal which
considers, as a matter oflaw, the highest arid best use of the property..." How
does this increase in highest and best use of the property effect these prior.
documents? Does this require that the Court recertify the appraisal? Does this
require that the City compensate the previous owner for increasing the zoning
and value of the property? "
( 3. Many of the impacts stated in Table ES-1 are indicated as "unavòidable" -
please provide reference to objective standards and include references in the
report
4. Page 2-7, Table 2-1 shows the allocation of Retaìl/Restaurant (9,251 sf),
Residential (23,928 sf), and Office & Retail/Office (7,402 sf). It appears that the
project contributes a very small amount of commercial area to the Old Town area
wIth the following questions:
i. What is the overall contribution of dedicated commercial area to the Old
Town area in % of area and number of businesses?
ii. How will this serve as a significant contribution to the local economy?
Iii. What are the financial benefits for Sales Tax and Property Tax that the
proposed project wfll contribute? Table 4-2 provides a summary of
economic benefits of the alternatives, but this analysis should also include
the proposed project and no project. Please also include assumptions
that are used for determining tax revenues to the City.
5, "the other two alternatives reflect a positive project vaiue, including the Partial
Reuse alternative and the Façade Only alternative. However, these alternatives
reduce the overall Project value from $14.00 pér square feet to $2.50 and $4.40
per square feet respectiveiy. Therefore, these alternatives are not as
eçonomic:aliy viable as the Project." (Page 4-22, paragraph 1) This is good
summary information, but we have the following questions: "
i. What constitutes financial viabifity?
P.D. Box 1224 . Tustin, California 92780 . (714) 544-4846 FAX & PHONE
139
3 1-7
["1-8
l.1l-9
Page 3
City of Tustin, Redevelopment Agency
Prospect Village Project Comments
ii. What determines unacceptable and unavoìda~te profits to a developer, in
general? . -
Hi. Why were tax credits not considered for alternatives for the benefit of
rehabiUtation? This would include CDBG .(S66 Attachment A for funding
that can. be easily obtained), Main Street Program, and other State of
Califomiafunds, realizing that some of these'funds are easier to obtain
than others.
6. Appendix D - A review of the cost estimates in Appendix, have the following
questions: '
i. The alternatives reference should use the same language (Alternative
number or title) as Section 4 of the report, it was confusing to understand
which feasibility analysis corresponded te;¡ the cost estimate analysis.
ii. The alternatives analyzed should not inctude costs that would normally be
considered with any proposed project and alternative, in order to
understand the incremental scope and additional cost. Also applicable
cost' portions of the proposed project should 'be deducted from the
Alternative cost estimates to understand the additive scope cost. A
separate analysis has been performed by a profe$slonal engineer and
architect, please see specific comments in Attachment Band C of this
letter for Alternatives 4 and 6. The other altematives should have similar
adjustments.
Traffic
~ While we are appreciative of the past street improvement prgject conducted by
the City, we found that the extensive dust, noise and restrictions of traffic
deterred patrons visiting the area and we incurred costs for extra cleaning and
reduced business activity. Therefore, to protect this from occurring we request
the following requirements to be imposed:
, a. Requirements should be made for daily sweeping of streets to minimize
impact of construction on nearby streets .
b. Wash down of private drives, sidewalks and streets should be provided as
needed,
c. Minimize impacts to traffic with accelerated work, no reduçtion in lanes
(where possible), alternate routes for trucks, etc.
2. "The Project would increase parking demand in the area. " is determined to be
"Less Than Significant" (Page ES-7, Table ES-1) - the retail use of the project
needs significant parking supplemented (approximately 95%), We support some
amount of supplemental parking provided by the City; however the amount
proposed seems to be detrimental to the Old Town area and imbalanced for
other businesses. Please clarify:
a. How many parking spaces does the City have avaiiable in the vicinity of
the Water Department property?
P.o. Box 1224 . Tustin, California 52180 . (114) 544-4846 FAX & PHONE
140
Page 4
City of Tustín, Redevelopment Agency
Prospect Village Project Comments
11-10
b. HoW much of this parking is dedicated to the use of the Water
Department, Tustin Hacienda, and the proposed library?
c. How much of this parking is leveraged for future development
opportunities?
3. "A total of 62 parking spaces would be provided to serve the Main
Street.. .However, the majority of the parking spaces or fifty-nine parking spaces
would be provided off-site pursuant to a shared use agreement between the
Project development and the City.. :(page 2-9, paragraph 2) - We have the
following questions:
a. How practical is this parking to be used at the City owned spaces
compared to adjacent on-street parking or other properties?
b. Assuming that patrons would prefer closer on-street parking, what will be
the impact on local business that utifize on- street parking?
c. What will be the imþact from the Farmer's Market operation, under a fully
permitted use scenario? ",'
4. Section 3.7 identifies traffic level of service with the project at a medium range
"0" (Table 3.7-6), where it is currently an A (Table 3.7-2). Please ensure that the
Heritage Plaza project on First Street and the full permitted use of the Farmer's
Market has been included in this analysis.
11-11
Also, the EIR should provide acknowledgement for fetters and post cards that have
been provided to the City on the matters regarding historical building preservation,
some of these are included as Attachment D. In addition, the over 1,300 petition
signatures submitted during the report review process, dated December 13,2004
should also be included; the cover letter transmitting these signatures is included as
Attachment E.
Again, thank you for your time on this matter. We recognize that some of these
questions may be unforeseen challenges of the development of the project ltis our
hope that the City wilt make appropriate changes to the development to address these
issues.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at 714/544-4846.
~/JV
Cherie ~son
Business Owner & Resident
P.o. Box 1224- . Tustin, eanfomia 92780 .(714) 544-4846 FAX & PHONE
141
Attachmen't A '. U
Sample Grant Funding Available for Alternative ses
_._~..._-_. ...".art<
PIlI!:" I of!
c:omm1!:!tc:ial R.hiibilrtettion Program
The prlm!lly objèctlve of tlte CIty, of Tustin'sCom~ RehðÞIUtatloß ,1""'0'- is to
-pmv1de 11..,,0211, iflçent""'" f<lr bu$ineft property owners am temol$ to utilize Federal
Houslii~ and Community ~""t lIIocl< Grant ,(ÇÐ6G) Funds to maIœ faœØe iI\tId
sign impro,vemeat:sto their structures. The l.,,;g i!erm <lbjectlve Ista (q>¡ nJI!Ie ti1e
OtIr'nri>erdaf - of the First Street Spedflc Plan, "",,iI,.the a Camino Real "Old Tðwn"
area ClQcate<t ,In the Cltys Cúltuntf Resourœs overlay Distr1çt)r !lne the Nem>ort Avenue
œrrlcfor between FIrst Street aN! 1:'1 'CaminoRæ bylm¡>l'OVIng the ¡IbysIœf as\d ~ofl( mlc
vlteltty,Ofthe/lTetI. .
Additional, P_<1'JTI ob]ectlves Indu'¡"":
1. Encouraqif\g the. retention of existing bustness Within the pt'Oject area.
2. Promoting the u1liqtote -I'I>,<If IOftCh area, ¡,y- en.t:ot,\ragil'liT tile use of armltectlOral
, deslgFlS Q) \~ with b¡_ri..llind cultf.jno' heritage.
3.. ProvIcf1ng emþlQyment; where possible, to low IIndmoderate incomè. residents.
4'- "To ,the' !Þ'eatest extent fl!lÞlble, ef\tOÚ....gtnO,!he alWi>ro of contracts for the
,reMhllbt:fon WOrk"" 1"",,1 corltnoCtDrs or mœe who "mploy low ...w moderate
Income persons. '
The primary b<lnel'k:ta...es - be busl"....ss, and property OWners whose trosfnesses will
benefIt from 'the imp"'V1Od a~pearanœ /Ind $truch",'¡ condillons of t!>eIr buiidinQ5 as Well
as loW ..nd m<>dl!f'llœincome reslàents iIj the ......... The Im¡>t<>ved building. ","p....ra"",",- WIll
...,..,ct shof>pers'/Ind new businesses to the ..rea and coulrlsubseqtrentiytncreese me
shappino <> Xions In the project "-..
The,.., Is Qty assistBnce -a"ailable for e;t/¡¡ible pl'Qperty owners or t:ena"t5 whose
app jctJtions have been 8¡OprovlOå line! who wish to _1Ii1:ate hl!;(her proøerty. The
pregr"m is only av..llabi" I" th1> City Of TUstin's t!esigna¡:ed Cmnmerctal RèhabtJltation
",""'.
Under this proçr8m. the City "",y proVide a ¡¡rant of 50% of the oost of ell~ib!e
construCt:fo" activities utHi2Ino CDS" Funds not to -exœe.de $lß,OÓO orant per commetèIa¡
property or establls!>ment located within the Did To-wn ~ea and is,DOC per
commerd'" prøpertoy locaœd, within any other portion of thè Col'I'Im9rdal Rehabilitation
Project A...,.,. All construction costs ÍIbo~ !lnd beyond the City's ,!tal'\! mattee the
responslbnll;¡i of the owner/tenant.
In õddltlo.n, appiiœrns may atS<J be <!!Ilglbfec for architeCtural and engineering design ""sts
assoCi"t"" With site, a<Id facade imp"'veme~ or sélsmic retT.ot!t aCtIVIties. Tna.se: =
",...,. be reimllul'Se!d by the, City at 1,01)% of the aa:u;ol cost utilIzing CDBGfun1ÓS not to
exceed ~per commercial property locate<! within tI1e Old Town Tàryet Area and
$-5",000 per anyotherc<lmmerclal p<operty loc"œu wfthin 1:11" Commercial Rehab!!itirtlon
Projec:t Area. All desiqn cost!> abOV ! and b<lvønll the Oty'sshare sllallthe responsibility of
an ownerftenant.
If you are interested fn participating In, this progr"", please~l:Ontact tbe Tustin Community
Rèó.."ei"I'ment Age"':y at 573-3128.
b tl:p ://Www. tUSlmca. o(g/tcrn/comrehaIUltm
ót7/U3
.-.l
A -1
142
Attachment B
Draft Environmental Impact RepoI1
Project: Prospect Village 191,193 and 195 East Main Street Tustin, CA
Appendix D Adaptive Reuse Report Comments
Alternative 4
02 Demolition - 7 $10,000
Selective demolition
02 Demolition - 7 $1,250
Paving, walkway,
Jandsca in , etc.
04 Masonry - 7 $41,335
Construct new
masonry wall
wffooting
05 Structural Steel
- Roof parapet
braces & Misc.
iron/steel
7
$3,000
$2,500
These soft costs the proposed
development For example the overall
project would need for a project manager,
supervisor, phone, secretary, safety program, trailer
facIlIties, dumpsters, storage,toilets, fencing,
mobilization, water, electricity, field office equipment,
as-buIlt drawings,' photos, barricades, erosion control,
clean-up, insurance etc. While It is poss/blethat the
developer may have other subcontractors perform this
work, the alternative must consider this scope as part
of the entire project. It is not reasonable to have these
types of services for one of the features of the project.
, Also, in some cases there would be less impact on
removals. erosion control, storage of new materials.
which are more beneficial than removing and
reconstructing. Therefore these costs should not be
included.
This is not olear and should be specIfic fora feature,-
such as glass or other items already defined for
demolition. Otherwise this is considered "above the
IIfIe contingency" imd would be ifIciuded with
conti enc added for this alternative.
This work is needed with overall project and should
not be considered specified for this alternative.
The proposed project will. also need similar types of
new walls. Since no design has been done for
AJtematlve4 and guideUnes do I\Ot require new
construction to be masonry, tt is speculative that It will
require an additional wall or that It should be masonry,
irrstead of wood and plaster. Therefore this cost
should be removed, If determined dupUcative, or
modified to represent the most cost effective
construction materials.
This Item is not needed since parapet bracing has
already been done under the seismic retrofit of the
building in 1995; photos show the existing bracing in
Appendix D.
B-1
143
AttachmentS
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Project: Prospect Village 191, 193 and 195 East Main Street Tustin, CA
Appendix D Adaptive Reuse Report Comments
Altemative 4
06 Thermal & 8 $28,024 This hard cost appears to be excessive for re-roofing.
Moisture Protection A preliminary quote from New Creation Reefing is
$160 to $200 per square which would include the
removal of 2 to 3 layers of existing roofing. hot mop or
new cOmposition roofing, and caulking.
ConservativelY this would cost $8,500.
08 Doors and 8 $2,750 The proposed project will also heed new rear entry
Windows - Provide $8,500 doors and meet the same architectural requirements.
new wood/glass Therefore this cost should not be included, since it
woUld be included In any project alternative and is not
rear door to match incrementally addliional.
existing, & proYide
new rear entry "
doors
08 Doors and 8 $3,000 The proposed project wIll also need new rear windows
Windows - Provide $3,000 and meet the same architectural requirements.
new high window, $5,250 Therefore this cost should not be included, since it
would be included in any project aliemative and is not
new wood window, incrementally additional.
and new wood
window
09 Finishes - Misc. 9 $5,000 This item is not speëifically needed for this altemative
furring and since it must related to the shell of the building. Also,
drywall/shell the proposed project will also need new partitions.
Therefore this cost should nct be included, since it
partitions would be included in any project alternative and.ls not
incrementallY additional.
15 Mechanical 10 $34,178 This item is not specifically needed for this altemative
Plumbing since the proposed project will also need new
plumbing fOr sewer. water and gas. Aiso. It ¡snot
uncommon fOr tenant Improvements to install many of
these devices sfterthe shell is constructed to meetthe
unique needs of the business operation. Therefore
this cost should not be included, since it would be
included in any project alternative and .is not
incrementallY additional.
B-2
144
Attachment B '
Draft Environmental Impact Report .
Project: Prospect Village 191, .193 and 195 East Main Street Tustin, CA
Appendix D Adaptive Reuse Report Comménts
Alternative 4
15 Mechanical - 10 $19,000 This item is not specfficaUy needed for ttlis alternative
HVAC since the proposed project wÍII also need new HVAC.
Also, it is not uncommon for tenant improvements to
install the final configuration of ductwork after the shell
is complete, to meet the unique needs of the business
operation. Therefore this cost should not be Included,
since it would be included in any project altemative
and is not incrementallv additional.
15 Mechanical - 10 $7,227 This item is not specifically needed for this alternative
Fire Protection since the proposed project will also need new fire
protection. Therefore this cost should not be included.
since It would be included in any project alternative
and is not incrementallv additional.
16 Electrical 10 $17,198 This Rem is not specifically needed for this alternative
since the proposed project will al$O need new fire
protection. Therefore this cost should not be included,
since It would be included in any project alternative
and is not incrementally additional.
Other Comparative costs for constructing the proposed
development should be identified and deducted from
the tota! to show an offset to the overalt hard cost for
this aitemative.
Contingency 6 $73,159 Contingency should be applied after comparative
-- costs from the orooosed develocment are deducted.
Other TBD Supplemental funding forthe project can easily be
obtained for rehabilitation. Such credits thatshouid be
included are CDBG for $20K.
Note: Item references correspond to those presented in Appendix D, with some
abbreviations. .
These comments are related to the necessary scope of work for the specific alternative.
As a result they reflect our professional judgment of information in Appendix D of Draft
Environmental Impact Report Project: Prospect Village 191, 193 and 195 East Main
Street, Tustin, CA, Prepared by: City of Tustin.
B-3
~L--lltJj<: . Fax
t<:.A.C-(~457
E,)(.P. q .30-0:;-
/7/22/°1-
145
Attachment C
Draft Environments/Impact Report
Project: Prospect Village 191,193 and 195 East Main Street Tustin, CA
Appendix D Adaptive Reuse Report Comments
Alternative 6
,ieornmtitJt'-
4&5
$64,680 These salt casts would be with the proposed
development or altemative. For exampJe the overall
project would require the !leed for a project manager,
supervisor, phone, secretary, safety program, trailer
facilities, dumpsters, storage, toilets, fencing, '
mobilization, water, electricity, field office equipment,
as-bullt drawings, photos. barricades. erosion control. ,
ciean-up, insurance etc. While It is possible that the
developer may have other subcontractors perform this
work., the alternative must consider this scope as part
of the entire project. It is not reasonable to have these
types of services for one of the features of the project.
Also, in some èases there wo~td be less impact on
removals.. erosion control, storage of new matenals.
which are more beneficial than. removing and
reconstructing. Therefore these costs shouid not be
included.
This is not ciear and should be specific for a feature,
sucl1 as glass or other items already defined for
demolition. Otherwise this is considered "above the
fine conting.Bncy' and would be included with
contin en added for this alternative.
While there will be some impact to the productivity
impact above demoiition , temporary bracing,
scaffolding, protection already cover. it is speculative
as to whet this will cover. Perhaps this could be better
estimated at prevamng wages for 2 workmen for four
, weeks, to cover incidental work efforts, instead of a
sl nlficant lum sum allowance with no detail.
$1,250 This work is needed with overall project and should
not be considered specified for thlsaltemative.
02 Demolition - 7 $25,000
Selective demolition
02 Demolition - 7 $40.000
New Construction
Productivity Impact
02 Demolition -
Paving, walkway,
landsca in ,etc.
Other
7
Contingency
6
$43,803
Comparative costs for constructing the proposed
development should be identified and deducted from
the total to show an offset to the overall hard cost for
this altemative.
Contingency should be applied after comparative
costs from the ro osee! deveio men! are deducted.
C -1
146
Attachment C
Draft Environmenta! ImpaçtReport
, Project:: Prospect Village 191, 193 and 195 East Main Street Tustin, CA
Appendix D Adaptive Reuse Report Comments
Alternative 6 .
Other TBD SUpplemental funding for the project can easily be
obtained for rehabilitation. Such credits that shol:lld be
Included are CDBG for $20K.
Note: Item references correspond to those presented in Appendix D, with some
abbreviations.
These comments are related to the necessary scope of work for the specific alternative.
As a result they reflect our professional judgment of information in Appendix D of Draft
Environmental Impact Report Project: Prospect Village 191, 193 and 195 East Main
Street, Tustin, CA, Prepared by: City of Tustin-
CA-1'2û L. ïJl\j~ - FOY.
'(2.-A. C-\Q4:::>!
f:;.I,Lp. '1' ß o. 0 5
2/2.2-/04
C-2
141
i )er ~!ty r "--¡age-
I
i
'lease keep me informed with all of the rûblic meetings
md information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
lorthw.est.comer of Pros pee! Av:enue and Main Street in
Jld Töwn'TUst~:".I'åÍrÌ vëéÿfutèrested in proposals "
)reserving allortlÌe;iåcaae'ôt't1i~ Building. Thank you. ~
'.':,,' ;, . -':'!:',;;!
--rí 11,z..- ~ lU'Yi E;:V
(.¿Cf'lÁð in 5 ¿:/((~+-
NDýwz....{(¿ C.A--'1~SD
lear City Manager,
'--,---_.,
lease keep me informed with all ofthe Public meetings and -'.
¡formation regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
)mer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street ill Old Tów.q,."--
ustin. I am very interest~d in proposals preserving all or the
Icade ofthe Building. Thank you.
r'; ',: j i"~: ¡ ,":':.',;';; ,;,' ,'; j
Ii;:-:"
,.:;¡:,'.;{1a f!tuJ¡5,-
/7 a ÆIW/( ~
#--11
""'.",.
'.';', '
~
"'"
00
IDe.- Jity --__JIlag_-.
-""""-'-""'-
Please keep me informed with all ofthe Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer °n}r~s~~tA~eIl:1,1~~~JIr1!1.Íf1iStreet in Old Town
Tustin. I am veryjn~e~es~é4 w-pp?pqsals preserving all or the
fàcade oftbe Build-Pig:. T¡;arirý'~~:
.""',...~
¡¡;;, 1¡;;¡ fJ. Cþ 7t ð
. /
I
I
I
L-.
, C".... . ...-..
'.. ~=~
fvqA« rhVOJõ
~ *ÿ ~;~: ;;' :";" ,:"'~ ,'~ ~
""',-"','":-,,, "',;'-'<.':~:.
.. . ,'j . ';'Ie: ¡ , "':;-,~;,,.'è':;' ;" .',
City Manager, City of TuStin ' ,
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
~
~
~
~
(7
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings-
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in -
Old Town Tustin. I am very interested in proposals' ,
preserving all or the facade ofthe Building. Thank you.
; ¡ :;,", ¡: ; ,'j '{ í, -' '!é1,£" ;";!;;~: t,
,;'~:;j;)¡;;'ÇÆe{) /7') JJd!J£Rd
'/ {, If! :5íl¡J E 6 '-~$s.
----rú-sh~. {'~ '1;;. 7f'(}
..
Dear City Manager.
..c-._,-,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and .
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer of Prospêct Ayenue .RII;d Main;Street in Old Town
Tustin. fMt veIýjri~~~S~~4J~i'.i't«?j)~sals preserving all or the
facade of the Building~; Thank'yo,ú; , ;
. ", , '. !...,!;
!!; .)þ~
IS 1~-2- ./l~(Jfc,
-?ûc:1f-¿~ C4. cr 2- 7 JJõ
~
~
c.o
uear ~llY IvIlUlilgt:r,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northwest,comer ofProspe.çJ Avenue and Main Street in
Old TôiviiTílstfu.:{liill v~¡.y llite.tesied in proposals
'.,,' ',.." '. '."', ' . ,".
preserving allôI:ìh~.façáÖ,~~fth~ Building. Thank you.
Y'. ,":; ,'" '.",1-:1;,
IV¿Æ1JtlO_- sA7y~
g K-O £-:2N /) )f '*' <-
rÙ5T/A-1 ~ 7C7h
'~"'"",ç '. "
Dear City Manager,
'-- '::~:::.2.'-::~~:::_;.!
Please keep me informed with all of the PúbIfc meetings'
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
north~est,èom~(ofpJ'()speþt A.v.enue and Main Street in
Old T ôwh' TÍJst~ 't~. ~~o/. ;jÞJ~f~sied in proposals
preserving all ótlli~Ja9ti4é'of-t1í~B1iiJding. Thank you.
"".'~' ,",'"H,C.'¡¡)
~~~
~Sl:f) J. (,~ j.1I~
~ CJJ. 'ìJ 7 8D
r
) Ci' '1an' i,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and '
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest' -
comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Town '---,
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all §r the
facade of the Building. Thank you.
':¡"::'¡"'::":':,o':;;;;,:J'i,'¡)
i;;'~:¡:;;""'!:::,::-)¡;rav~~
I r.¡ 7 f Sf?JctÞh 74 eßJ
~ÅPL C(¿'7DI}-'
If City Manager,
ase keep meinformed with all of the Public meetings and
Irmation regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
[ler of Prospect Avenue and Main Street inOld Town---'
tin. I àm very interested in proposals preserving all or the
Ide of the Building. Thank you.
'-::,:' 'JJ";';"¡'-":~~';;;";';!';'~ ' V-
i,'",.".,-' 'i' ,",:, "f=\\\'\\\:c",-,,' -.:-<:.\,- ,
) i
\ 60 1 ~ ~\,Ù~~fI N"i
\" Q\ ~'~
------ N
"\1..;\"""" f'>.
, q è). ì g" d---..
......
CJ1
a
leal yJ\.
:gel,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings -
and information regárding the Utt Juice Buildings at the .
northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in -,
Old Town Tustin. I am very interested in proposals
preserviqgall.orthe tacQ,de:of1b~Building. Thank you;
":~¡:i'~:~;~~,~f~I~~[-;:y~~~;;r;fhENi~ ~U~NN IN(
.' tpfp5-þ ~\)Çftt JT
-r~:IT ~ CfalfLc
Dèar City Manager,
¡>lease keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and' ,
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect Avenue and Main StreetiD Old Town' -,
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all or the
£:acade of the Building~ Tha* you. " .
;" ":: ¡ ~ i ¿",' i." "",; ;;;..; i: f;' J
," ""."
"',': ,",; V SSQ' Cd ,f\
"i, ¡':' ¡- !)V\I" I? e;oo
\l ß 1. "-JÎç~o.n d.t\-~ì,
ì£A~C~ 91-ì&2
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me infonned with all ofthe Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect Avenue nnd,MainStreet in Old Town. .
Tustin. i~m verr.~~e~e~~,~{M(jh?PR~als preserving all or the
facade of the BU11dmg~: rhirik you. ,,'
',.". , '" 'ip,'"
~J ~.u-t¿
/., ;f'J' J'I ef':;'¿ ku.r~/./...
¿; ~(/ ;9/
,
...-""....,.. .... ---
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings'
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northw.est comer ofProspeç! Avenue and Main Street in
Old iôwÌ1' Thstii.,'J 'iìffi:vèry illterested in proposals
preserving all' or ìh~"fåçøl\e' ?JtlÌ~ Building. Thank you.
" , , c. "". '","'.'"
fd
WtJS-
l~~ð;Å
/ c'lffø '1 í)tJl~
J;£;.., I a:,. q>-7?Jð
~
C;1
~~
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me infonned with all of the Public meetings ..
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in ~o
Old Town Tustin. I am very interested in proposals.
preserving alh)r the facade of the Building. Thank you.
I':),.¡ :î¡:~,;~)~..;.I".1,~.~,;:r.,;:;:'~'...;,:.¡::~. ~. .
"" '. '...";'..";;0>.... ',1...",
fJ>;~:' i'.""),:;;J¡¡if '
D ~
T~\;)/~~
....~~~~\ '
Dear City Manager.
- ,... "... "0__,
Please keep me infonned with all ofthe Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect Avenue nnd. Main Street in Old Town ..
Tustin. f~very.h~têres~~4W:PfQpq~aIs preserving all or the
facade of the Buildujg:: rhankioii . , '
, .".' , '...,...1'
",e:R..A. c... NAM E: ~
L.1¡9'-i E. IS'T ST as
lUST""'! (Ä "I2.ïe,
Dear tit)' IVlana!;;Ç';
Please keep me informed with all ofthe Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Town' '--
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all õr the
facade ofthe Building. Thank you.
'i,: ,::, :, .:" , '-::,i:!,::;.,;! '.:;','
'lii,/i ;,¡'\"';;;:.'-) 'i!,';
V',:,<','
.! .',n:.-,,)'
\-< flx71..ro..Ã
H ~\ l r'?/¥oI::v~"1
t ~1Vl fPr lì-z..)yÐ
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Town'
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all õr the'
facade of the Building. ~ you.
,'"c.'! ,') ," i .".-:-',:;;.:; ,<;'.'
. . . .
-¡".C' : ":,,,. ,.,."'",
. .'i;,p- ,j ..jv.,....) \)f.¡2..~
]\"77 ~ vJ
..., .
oooiò
U1
N
~ <.ft. qz ~
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with alÌ of the Publi;; meetings
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
north,,;est,c?,rner <?f.J.>1:~sp.eF!~v.enue and Main Street in
Old Towh'T~~~ l'~~~~&;ip~ested in proposals
preserving all or ih{faç&tte' ofthç Building. Thank you.
,', ',: ,. - -!¡i'~tJ ;
J'
C hæti ~
, )f/~ ~/6
~~.
:=-= ... "'--"""---- "" ".u "" .. . '~ro
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with !ill of the Public meetings --
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in '.
Old Town TuStin. I am very interested in Proposals
preserving all or the fucade of the Building. 11uink you.
1;; :,.,.': ; ¡ "( ,:. ; "';"'-'..::i; "0';'"
"',.'H !!:,;::¡,
;;L:':'::;~n; Cürd€vzœ;
L~ uJ;tlìcUTtS sf-:/fB:8
~gO
,i';,;'>
Dear City Nlanag~l,
..----.---.-....-
Please keep me informed with aU ofthe Public meetings and .
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospet<tÄ v~nue. "Wd :þJ.ai,n .Street in Old Town
Tustin. i-am veÍj:. ;n~e~é*4: ~Þr9pisals preserving all or the
facade ofthe BuildiJ!~:::r~~),~~::; -
~Y'~~~
I,?:> <) 1..-l) \--\ulliJ '
r-v CA\ ,\ \A
------ --~-~ L-1~L_---
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me infowed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Uti Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Töwn~c- .
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all õrthe
facade of ~e Building: Thank ~?u.. ,
""":'"\"<"c;"'-;";:;,,"';i.i-:
v'~~~.¡~,i:!",'-!":,;¡:":'; ~()\J
~~z..
\u ~'" ~ ìXO
~
c.n
w
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the uit Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer ofPr()spect.~ ven1,le. ~d Main'.Streèt in Old Town
." ". ",. ..., ',.'. -.1'" ""'.-
Tustin. I am veo/'!JI~e~~st~W~Pf?P1?sals preserving all or the .
facade of the Build4t,g:,. r~ Y,QU,. ;
. ".. ", .",..-.'
J~
\~O1h('-{(;~ 5-(.
~7&:
Dear City Manager,
cc, .-- --'--,
Please keep me infonned with all of the Public meetings --
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in- ,
Old Town Tustin. 1 am very interested in proposals
preserving. all or the facade of ~~ Building. Thank you.
,,".,.,:; !]{~.¡_:','.j-;'~~;,_f:'::_:!,~~,;:,_\:~', . ¡
...' ~:;:..:'- c: ", . \. ~ ..
";'-", -,."d;l~l ~\,;h"\..3c\Y1l¥
-C1t;~1' r(J4- t:¡'l.~'L-
~........ """ L'A~'U"'~"
i !
Please keep me informed with all ofthe Public meetings'
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northwest ,corner ofProspec~ Avenue and Main Street in
Old TowÌ1:ttIsiiri., 'Jam very hìteJested in proposals
preserving all' ¿'rlli~;.'t~~æ.k if th~ Building. Thank you, -
, ',0'.,' ' ""..¡"
~~
/U¥IU.~ý
5dtk-&4/ 9 ¿;t(
Dear City Manager,
"-..--,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings--
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in -,
Old Town Tustin. I am very interested in proposals
preserving all or the facade ofthe Building. Thank you.
"';,,,: ¡¡':,;¡"¡:~~:)"~;;":~;~!ãJ/{ß?écti
I 3 ({.2. ~ iT <tff Ol.. f) v?'.
(;ç;r(h, CÆ íJ-1_§'rp
t-
,...
c.n
01:..
Please keep me informed with all of the Pùblic meetingš '
and information regarding the UttJuice Buildings ilt the
northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in
Old i¡;wÌ1'ftIstiri..'Ùmvèry futerested in proposals
preserving all'örtliJ:taè,~ë'?l~~ Building. Thankyou. -
'.", c.' -!"- ','"
~r-. ø;:<:, (,. L..}t~~/V'I~'BL
) ?o V \~:n^~~,4"" Ptl€ ~
~<;{\,~ ~-*' ~;.)",~v
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all ofthe PublÍco;,eetiiìgs"-
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at tl,e
northw.est wrner ofProsþeç~ A v,enue and Main Street in
'-',..,.. ", ,.f' . '"co,. ""'., "" . .
Old TownTustÙl. ' I àm vèry mtetested m proposals
preserving all' bà¡j~'.'tac.~èi ?(ì.li~ Building. Thank you.
"';',' c, CO ',!q !"¡j !
)('sdy H áJe~«
/750:1 /Ømj1Æè-/'o/
---r;S-h)' " (?4
-. .
J:1-7/O
,Lo""'1 """J In"11"15<:'1,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Town - .
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all;;r the
fata", o~~~ ~O'~\[~,~~~,;p{J Liú t¥-
~1We1
~
-.._--=~=,=~
',"
, City Manager,
- U._-. "0_-
;e keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
mation regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
~r ofProspect,Avenue.RQ.d,l\1ain,Street in Old Town
ll. Î'~ni veí:Ýþi~ë~fst,~:W"p!"ÖPRsals preserving all or the
Ie ofthe BuildiW:k ThiiírÝ.o~: :~ .
'.' ,. j~$~~íL-
~ ~ hi ¡,.Jv
T ~'->-l A
.-
~
c.Jì
Vear t:ïty Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings --,
and infonnation regarding the Utt Juice Buildings atthe
northwest comer of Prospect A venue and Main Street in -.,
Old Town Tustin. I am very interested in proposals
preserving all or the facade of the Building. Thank you.
"'¡"'.:~i,;'{,I;"',1:;~¡f¡lid!j,~¡¡-.. ,
'Ji ¡le;;"":,:!,::-;"';;', / -
ii:';,!'> " ) ,""!:!il!í. L. {HAY£d¿
. - - /5b<Öf) PA.sA1£Ù4 ,£~
fur/v. G 'l;r?8'2J
Dear City Manager,
"--"-"n,_-
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Town" '.-
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all ;;r the
facade of the ~uilding:Thank.y~u. ",
" I" ::'; - I c,' - ¡ ,~:'" ':;;;,' ¡: ',i: .'
h:~' ¡";~"',
/-:,;;,~.!:;1/, {l'jr 'r1(~ />G'y¡ Hey
t30O( ~~ti /uJ
5~ ~11-
. ~2.1Ó1j
.'c' ,
.. ' -'.. '
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Uti Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Streetm Old Tò-wq.--"
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all or the
facade of the Building. Thankyou.
f;,',.:: ¡ "! 'u' I .':,~",:m,;: ¡;,j
;I' i¡;;':",,',;J') li:'i.
r:':':::""'}":¡k.!~~51
17 Z2- ÆllÑIt ~
/hI
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with aU of the Public meetings and '0,
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Towl!- "
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all or the
facade of the B~ilding.ThankY9U. ,
, ",,:' i " ',:' , " c, , ": ;;,: ,c <, :
-"",' ;
,',:;'¡::.';Sh,r1-~'I S'('I'C-'<-.
T:>;, r<:». GreIN (~ WI
--1L1<;,T, (If CP.. '1J- no
'0::"-"
......
CJ1
0)
Dear City Manager,
... .',,--..
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwe~
comer ofProspect'Avel1l,leJU;ld,Main,Streetin Old Towñ '
",I ..' '. ".'.. '..,.,.:,"", '",'
Tustin. I am very)n~er~s~4ÆPrçp~sals preserving all or th!
facade of the Build~g:c TiìãnKyoü: "
, ".. ' '... hO, .
,(.fO . nJ 1A""'fo , ~
~,
í<b cj /~Aß5Amfk '
~TI¡Jl)Å 9.:;J.'Iå
, I
..---..
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect A venue and Main Street in Old Town
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all ;;r the ,
facade of the' Building. Thankyou.
::;: ',: \ " :,'. J "':':-,:,:, "..:!: r;;','
L:;"," i:'",,; '::':
""":",! "'¡¡,:,:! !<c>Gj;--/l-. ,1ð/-4rsc..-....
31{" /"2-,4- (? ad')
-¡'c.--);.'7/-,y ~C,vl- 7¡1~
~--
please keep me informed with all ofthePûbllc meetings
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the "
northW,est,cornerofProspect Avenue and Main Strèet in
Old l'ô\Vií1\ìstfu;!i'ài.ivtty illietested in proposals
preserving alföl~Hìí~áÌ:\è' ?(~~ Building, Thank you.
",,'0. ,~.' """..: ;
-
~\'2tV1t~ ðcVØlto
2\\î'DW. ~t> pw¿NVt~
~~F (\N~! (jJr- q.97D~
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings-
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings ~t the
northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main'Street in-"
Old Town Tustin. I am very interested in próposals
preserving all or thefacadeoftþ.e Building. Thank you.
"". '~~::;;:r;:::;;'1];:J( ~ "
Iii J II f{l~ ø II-
1ß~¡;¡{ t1íJ 7d~
.....
CJ1
-.J
.. - "J ~,-.... ',", ..,
,. - -- ----
PleaSe keep me informed with all of the Publicmeetìngs and
information regarding the Uti Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer ofPI:ospèt:;tAvenue.an.d Main ,Street in Old Town--
Tustin. iMive~intër~s.Wd,p}f?Pi?saIs preserving all or the
facade of the Build.im( Th,Rnk},p.lI:' ,
~ ~~9/(1-~
1490\ ~IL-"'- ~
ðc-v~ Cë- q ;;:"'hOJ,
Dear City Manager,
-... '-'-- --- .
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetingS
and information regar,dingthe Uti Juice Buildings at the
north~estc~rne,I: of'piospl(~tAyenue and Main Street in
Old TôWÎ1:TÌisf.~) ~'\f~iylÞJ~iested in proposals
preserving all' òrîh~Jiiçad~' (jft1i~Building. Thank you.
,'- ,;,'-,:,""; ¿h~tiPM
,,' IfJ flKtIz IJ <;'f
!it {; f¿g Y!t fZ78ZJ
'epr. ",ty j\Jlolagrr
lease keep me informed with all ofthe Public meetings
Id information regarding the Uti Juice Buildings at the
>rthwestcomer of Prospect AVenue and Main Street in
ld T~wn'TùStiÌ}.'.Ù¡in' ~ë¡.y);ìt~fested in proposals '.c
eserving aIi'o~thè}á¿~ë'~rtN~ Building. Thank you.
, '.'" ~'.,',!'¡ ! cl'; "
~/l~ --r Ú-y Yl e:-r
/-¿9'U:, f n $ ¿/ ( (~-I- .
ND r wz...{ k CA-£} 04)"'0
'ear City Manager,
-'-"-'-- -
lease keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and -,
formation regarding the Uti Juice Buildings at the northwest
Imer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Towq,H' ---.
15tin. I am very interest~d in proposals preserving all or the
cade of the Building. Thank you.
f;¡:';"U."':,:.-:,:;;:.;/:~:;'j
J'~:.:.:.).!""",:.;,,::.; {]a &¿<;
172.7 Æ/dLIt ~
¡kll
I'-'
U1
QO
Ve. , ity ,-
tmg .
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Uti Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect ,Avenue..a.nrl Main $treet in Old Town
Tustin. i .~. verr F~~ès~~it ~~Pf?P9sals preserving all or the
facade ofthe Buildin.g;. ThaDk iou,:.
". "'w.J.1:J. 1/£
/ 357J-ß. D-
~ 1;:r lJ. c{) /¡ ð'
. I
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in Old Töwn'"
Tustin. lam very interested in proposals preserving all ór the
facade of the Building. Thank you.
-li'-:. ¡ : !-"~~'i;i:;~';"';':':~'.,;,-.,~,:.} ;~.:'::s-'i.} /t,J.. ..-r
. '~~
,: . "¡;, ". L.-
IWflWykL öfl-k
T-~ Co.. 9 ð )$0
tnDlIb If J . NJV'QJ1j
.~
Dear City Manager,
en
If)
- -- ---~
i T'rt:" ," '~. :""-"'"
'no,( ~ 'SIIJPung ~),o ,~j:pJ~~.trMl~ ,ftu 8I1!AJ
SfBSod(ud II! pa1sajajm ¥'~1~cI/m1s,t}J:~1\o~!
II! 1aa.qS IIJBW pUB anU;}A V í;)~SO.ldJOJ3UJ(XqS3A1
alp JU s8I1!pnng ;};)!Dr Un 3lp i}unuBiiaJ uoHUUJJoJI
__~1I!.1~3m ,;)!Ignd 3lpJO ßU 'P!M. p3IDJ°JO! am daa)[ ,
-. Please keep me informed with all ofthePùblÎc meetings
and information regarding the Uti Juice Buildings at the
. northwest,comer ofProspeçt Avenue and Main Street in
, . ,"" <', ',,- , ',',"" ",;..' .,-.,'. ,
Old Town Tusti'Q.:J am ~éty 1iit~rested mproposals '
., ""¡"""""o '."
preserving aIr ~r, ih~', façÌ\~e!~[~?t Building.' Than~ you.
'Ja8UUBW Á1!J
-r Wrob fews.k,
jbOt/-y n7f- (ß¡rrnc-I cf
R V. Cll-
-- ~---,- ,.~,.,'=:-::- ,:--.,....~_:_-~
qà-7tJlr
i
!
!
Jear City Manager,
~~ 'W¡;f XL::, ,:::w,." C "',' <.;('U¡, Plea~e keep ~e inform:d with all of!he Pu~li~ meetings ---
, L.:.¿¡) ,pJ,,:J.":;'¡¡ if:,;, and information regardmg the Utt Jutce Buddmgs at th,e
, . i~!,^ :!¡:;W!<¡,;;- '/:!'~, :!! : :'/' ",northwest com~r of Prospect ~venue ~d Main Street tn--
noÁ}fUt!If.I. 8I1!pnng alpJo apU;)ØJ aIjj JO "'îi ': üld Town Tustin. I am very mterested m proposals
,-' II! Ja:;:~ ;:~~:~¡VII! ::s~ I "U!1~~ u~~Jrese~.~~: a~\ O;,!h,)e"~~;:~~!~~~~,,~.j Building. Thank you.
am .. ....10 Jamo;) 1saMI ',. ' " , '.', -
... ¡U solIJPf!11g a3!nr Un ~m iimpJuB '(I.: I! !!,!I¡¡:-"-;:! -' .,I"',dJ' ~ 1 '
--- "'. aJUOIIUIUJO ""',~. .., "f' ,
~II!1aam 3!1qnd alp 10 DB 1J1!M. panuo m G~ d!JU! , /':"3," ,-, -,;.I'!; 1 JUUL- /fiil1T!J
!J , aa)[ QS . 411; flill \Jffl M
JJÆ/!l/1)?O ' [f}-q¿)&I:L
) ,
~1"72"" 'n ""} N\M1\
Ï}oa'Vw 'v a~
<jalimrnw Á1!;J
...
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in. Old Tòwn""
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all õr the
facade o~~e:~u;il,d~g., ,~~~lJ~:, j .
..L.i:" ,"'.:::':; cI~ ß«ýß-
I",',', . MPJ6LfA<Fur.:,¡f}~
~( ~ 7;2.ï:fù
Dear City Manager,
Plel\Se keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
information regårding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer of Prospect A venue .~d Main Street in Old Town
, ", , , ." , ,,:,,:,",\ .", ", ;
Tustin. I am very, ,inte~es~.é4 ~ pp;>p!?sals preserving all or the
facade ofthe Buiîá)..ij~::Ji¥nk)':~Ì1: :
1JI.fÞ¡ ç, UM ,.)~
414SEÚ!/1n¡,rlo . it
~ ~N eA-tlj ð
.....
OJ
a
Delu dty Ivuumgtr,
Please keep me informed with all oithe Public meetings,-
and information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the
northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in'"
Old Town Tustin. I am very interested in proposals
preserving all or the facade of the Building. Thank you.
o:!.<: ~ ,:: \.!,;..:,I,¡:!::~':, .~,I:~~:,~~",';:"'~,';',' I Cì.+
(¡;;';~'::;<;-:",;'~:;i;,';;~:1 V\(fL> I
J~
.~O
.-. -'----- "
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetliìgs'
and information règarding the Utt Juice Buildihgs at the
northwest comer of Pros pee! Avenue and Main Street in.
Old Tô~:T~t~l§.~ë!r,ip~lest~ ~ proposals
preservIng all or lli", ,taçÍ¡[,e of t~ Bwldmg. Thank you.
'."".'.. ," .' .11i!'" !
~
~fj/¡ h
~ ,~ '"
Lt~Z£~;j
T\JS'trJ teA
9 èí80
\\
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and-
information regarding the Utt Juice Buildings at the northwest
corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street ill Old Town-'-
Tustin. I am very interested in proposals preserving all Õr the
facade of the Building. Thank you. .'
!'i;':_'¡;')C'.I.'é';:",;';'.i/;/;!j
'Ir:i! í,;j,!!".;;;" ¡ !""f
f";';):: "
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings_,
and information regarding the Uu Juice Buildings at the'
northwest comer of Prospect Avenue and Main Street in-
Old Town Tustin. I am very interested in proposals ,
pre~øru¡no "II or thE'. fñcade of the Buildilm. Thank You.
Dear City Manager,
Please keep me informed with all of the Public meetings and
inÎormation regarding the Uu Juice Buildings at the northwest
comer ofPr()spect,Avçn~è.and ~ain_Street in Old Town
", " ". ", ., ..,¡",.. ", .
Tustin. lam veiy"ùiti~és.~é4m-'pfI?P~sals preserving all or the
facade ofthe Builðiii8:.: ,:rìtìîit<: 'ý'~Ü;,;
. d_., , ,'..,..-:"
81110.$ N\.I¡",d {Nib A.dk¡oJw
_IlOO E. B CamIno R9III
TuIIIn, CA 112780-4368
(114) 189 55æ
bkcL-
.....
(j)
I-'
PI
an
no
m
prl
...~
0
I
è
iJ
~
0
:~~.5 ::ï
.;.5 -.;i ü ~
Ülii~.!!3~
g "" r- Cd
~ bIIv. :g
:Q.5 1:1.
':::: -o.fä 0 . .
'..g:s::g a. ~
. ~ tQ -g .5 .5
'00<11-0-0
-5.g 0 .8 :os
~~ãtjtQ
..... ~ u'~.~':!!. '-
<ïi::> >, .8:~ ~
-5 0 -<"S~....~i
.....D _.',;:>".0-3
&: -;¡;;i, ~""";'o .
bII 0;,,'1)'-"0. ,..
-0 """":>'Cd.
o.;;¡ 0-. (: .~ u-"
~ ] ,t:]¡¡¡~~-
0 bile,.., H:-O ,
'fj 0 o-;s "
.s ... .....,d:- ..'
0 § ,o~'.p~~:-
"'.... E!,f> -~
~-fr~<ïi
. 8 ~ 'tf"c: g
~:ê° Oc&: '>
0 &:,0...
13' .c: ~ 0
o-gt::"t:Itj
iî::d8õa.
d [;
4.. .J.
3, N
'r
'I '
.¿ ...
r /J
~ ;, ~
\
"
M¡lq,ey G, t../.. Ci:J N
lð.5':fl'N'i;CòN$l'iN~S!i.': r¡ ri ,,', i. ':"" ,
",-.,..'A'"r :Er"',A~¡..;:~,i"D-J<';I:",,'I, ;0-, ". .'
""-":"J-;' -.:.nv-_"'O"~"~""""" ,"""'"
,.',. ..' "," ',: .." ',' 'HI", ,,', 0, ",.'
-ro C;="1i~ )(;A' "~ t 7fu ~ " City Mari¡!gèr, City'of Tùstin
:-1".:",> '.'..,: '¡"')OO'cezitènmalWay""":
TuS'tiÌÍ,'CK 92680'" ,,' ':."
';'-:.',;,:'.,/ ..' " :, ':.,
" :
oil '
Iv'\~"¡ DIE1)R.\~
\) \~ 0 t\c..~~ (þ~
~\W'~\,~~ ~.
l~\{¡Në 1'CJ.',~Z<o\~
. . .
on
..,
'.
. " ,
City Ma~age~, city ~fTustin
300 Centennial Way'
Tustin, CA 92680
162
December 22, 2003
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
'City ofTusûn
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
(A"l1"'~K~ 6= J
Re: Petition Signatures for Saving the Utt Juice Building in Old TflWn Tústin
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members.
This letter is to present new petition signatures that we have gathered regarding saving the Utt Juice
Building in Old Town Tustin.
AJ¡ we have previously expressed, we are concerned with the present development proposal to
dismantle or demolish !his Historic Building. We believe that many citizens, b\1SÏness owners, and
patrons share our concerns. As a rosult, we have canvassed our City through community events such
as Broadway in the Park and the Fanners MatXet, and places of business in East, South, and Old Town
Tustin. Our oollec1ive canvassing efforts have gathered more than 1,300 signatures - which we
believe is the largest munber of petition signatures collected on a single City issue.
We thank you for the opportunity to present these for your consideration and development of policy
regarding this Historic Bnilding. It is our hope that these signatures will convey the feelings of the
community of how these buildings are an irreplaceable part of Tustin's heritage.
:;;:. - () ~/
BrentA.~
Old Tmm Tustin Resideni & Pàst ChairperSO1l of
Tustin 's Cultural &source Advisory Commtttee
140 S. Myrtle Avenue, Tustin
itb~
Old Tawn Tustin Resident, Business Owll8r & Past
Chairperson of TllStin 's Cultural Rßsource
Advisory CommitJee
11wlllpson Property Management
415 W. 6'" Street. Tustin
~f~
April Pollock
R2sident
130 N. B Street, Tu.,¡jn
~.. . .~/~ ~.'./. -'.
,/./7 I' .~
Thomas &; ---
Old Town Tustin Rßsident and Business Owner
Advanced Systems Grrwp
325 W. (}h Street, Tu.,¡j"
{J;J( 4
Bill Finken
Old Town Tustin Resident
690 W. 3'" Stree~ Tustin
lifÞJJ::
Martin'edn
Busine.t~ Owner
Diedrich Coffee House
I368INT. rtAve¡yT'{/
~~
Ron Rocha
ResidenJ
153 N. B Street, Tustin
Vi,çit: www.saveuttiuice.com
163
Utt Juice Building
Tally of Petition Signatures
Petllfon Type Mbced
8uslnesa Resident Non.Resldent Page #
15 81
6 82
1 83
15 R1
13 R2
16 R3
15 R"
15 R5
15 FIB
15 R7
15 R8
15 FIe
15 R10
15 R11
15 R12
15 R13
15 R14
15 Fl.15
14 R16
13 R17
11 R18
14 R19
B RZO
5 R21
5 RZZ
15 R23
15 RZ4
10 RZ5
15 R25
6 RZ7
4 R28
9 R29
15 R30
18 R31
16 R32
1B R33
17 R34
15 R35
16 R3B
17 R37
1;< R38
1 R39
14 R41
15 R42
15 R43
14 R44
15 R45
15 R48
15 R47
14 R48
14 R49
15 ROO
C:lDocumonto ondl_ng81A11 UsorsIDocumenœ\Misc\Utt Jui"" BldglCopy OfTally?~D40111 16 4
PetitIOn Type
Business' Resident Non-Resident Mixed ?lIøe#
14 R51
15 R52
13 R53
15 R54
15 R55
11 R56
15 R57
4 R56
6 R59
15 M1
15 M2
14 M3
18 N1
16 N2
5 N3
12 N4
15 N5
15 N6
15 N7
15 N8
15 N9
14 N10
13 N11
13 N12
9 N13
6 N14
14 N15
15 . N16
6 N17
5 N16
13 N19
15 N20
/; N21
14 N22
15 N23
14 N24
15 N25
14 N3O'
14 N31
14 N32
15 N33
12 N34
13 N35
13 N36
14 N37
15 N38
15 N39
7 N40
13 N41
22 766 471 44
Grand Total of Signatures = 1~O3
ù:lOocumonts "".eselti"".Wi U...,.IDocumont&IMiBc\Utt Juice Bldg\Copy ofTaJlyP&tltion04D1' 1 16 5
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 11
(Letter from .Jeff R. Thompson and Cherie A. Thompson received 2-23-04)
8.11-1 Comments noted.
8.11-2 The comment states that the DEIR appears to be contradictory as the economic viability
of preservation of all or a portion of the existing Uti Juice Buildings. However, there is
no contradiction. The portion of the DEIR that is quoted in the comment relates to the
prevailing view of the developers, based on the history of this project and the City's
efforts to obtain a proposal that entail some level of rehabilitation and reuse. The
prevailing view is that preservation is not economically viable and would not meet their
expectation on return for the risk and investment in the project. On the other hand, the
discussion of economic viability in the Alternatives section of the DEIR is based on an
independent analysis performed by the City's expert on the economics of redevelopment
project. The independent analysis appropriately forms the basis for the cost comparison
of each alternative. The evaluation of alternatives uses a set of standardized costs
assumptions based on only conceptual development programming assumptions as
opposed to detailed plans, and on the independent professional judgment of the economic
consultant, not an individual developer. As identified in the KMA Report (Limiting
Conditions, pg. 2), the costs use in the analysis serve as a baseline for cornparison
purposes, actJial cost may vary widely based on unforeseen conditions, [mal decision
elements, and construction materials and finishes.
The comment quotes the minutes from a 1994 Board of Appeals meeting to support its
argument that renovation of the building is feasible. The comment states that at this
meeting, the City concluded that renovation of the Uti Juice Buildings was possible.
However, the meeting had nothing to do with the feasibility of rehabilitating and reusing
the buildings. Instead, the meeting related to rectifYing code violations and was an
appeal of the Building Official decision to require the seismic retrofit of the buildings.
The City deternrined, based on seismic retrofit estimates it obtained, that it was possible
to retrofit the structures to comply with applicable building codes.
8.11-3 This comment does not raise any significant environmental issues, but instead relates to a
prior 1997/1998 appraisal for the property. The comment suggests that proceeding with
the project may have economic ramifications as it relates to prior appraisal. First, it is
important to note that CEQA provides that the focus of an EIR shall be on the physical
changes to the environment. (14 Cal. Code Regs §1513I(a»). Economic or social effects
of the project shall not be treated as effects on the environment. (IQ.) This response is
applicable to all the comments that suggest the project may have economic consequences.
Nonetheless and to clarifY, a highest and best use appraisal is required to evaluate those
uses which are reasonably possible under the current zone designation and not those uses
that may be speculative in nature and subject to future entitlements and conditions.
Development of a mixed-use project comprised of retail, service and office uses are
current permitted uses under the C-2 designation, as identified in the DEIR and evaluated
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
166
in the Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative. The proposed re-zone of the property is
a discretionary action under the development application evaluated in the DEIR.
Accordingly, there is no further appraisal requirement nor any. compensation issues
related to the Agency's acquisition of the property.
8.11-4 The applicable thresholds and criteria for deternrining whether the proposed project
would result in a potentially significant impact are contained in Chapter 3 of the DEIR
for Prospect. Village under each topical discussion in sections entitled, "Criteria for
Determining Significance."
8.11-5 See, in part, response 8.11-4, which relates to the City's obligation to address economic
impacts under CEQA. In addition, while the proposed project will provide 16,653 square
feet (includes live/work commercial area) of commercial space as in the Old Town area,
the project will more importantly contribute substantially to the development of a
compact eight-block commercial core area of the district by the development of
approximately twenty percent of the remaining vacant land at a maximum intensity of
development in the core area.
The proposed project's contribution of the to the local econòmy is direct and indirect as
identified in the DEIR project objectives to increase the property tax and sales tax
revenues, to expand the niche market character of the Old Town commercial area, and to
increase the amount of specialty retailing and commercial development to enhance the
area's urban character and bolster the revitalization.
The KMA Report (Table 2) in the DEIR identifies the proposed project's estimated
property tax and sales tax revenues and the assumptions used for their calculations. The
No Project Alternative reflects the continuation of the existing condition, which does not
generate either property tax or sales tax revenues since the property has a public agency
exemption for property tax and would remain vacant, thus not have any sales tax revenue.
8.11-6 Economic viability as used in the context of the quoted paragraph is used interchangeably
with financial feasibility, expressed in the DEIR as the residual value of the land in an
amount equivalent to the fair market price for a property not requiring public subsidy.
Acceptable profits to a developer are generally established by market cornparables
reflecting similar projects developed under similar conditions, the assumptions used in
the KMA Report reflect their independent professional judgment and experience.
Historic preservation tax credits were not use in the cost analysis due to their speculative
character and the extended time period and uncertainty associated with obtaining them.
CDBG funding is limited to $10,000 (plus $10,000 for architectural services) under the
City's Commercial Rehabilitation Program due to resource limitations. Funding for
greater amounts may be made. using Redevelopment tax increment funds, if such funds
are available. The current limitations on tax increment funds in the Town Center Project
Area is discussed in Response 8.7-11. There are no identified funding resources available
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
"
16
under the Main Street Program or other State programs based on information obtained
£rom the State.
8.11-7 The purpose of the economic analysis is to identify the relative financial feasibility of the
selected alternatives for comparison to the proposed project using as clear and consistent
methodology as practical. For comparison purposes and clarity between the analyses for
the proposed project and the alternatives, a complete pro forma for each is necessary to
identify the financial feasibility of each and the level of public financial subsidy, if any,
required to implement each. While the differing scopes of construction are clearly
identified in the KCM and the KMA reports in the DEIR and a line-item comparison
between the development cost components was provided in the pro forma analyses, it is
the overall financial feasibility of each altemative, as reflected by the combination of
costs, income, expenses and developer profit that is the focus for consideration.
The comment also references Attachment B to the letter, which provides a separate costs
analysis for two particular alternatives performed by a civil engineer and architect who
co-authored the comments. CEQA provides that disagreement among experts does not
make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement
of the experts. (14 Cal. Code Regs § 15151). The Courts look not for perfection, but for
adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure. (Id.)
In this case, the comment challenges the inclusion of certain costs in the City's economic
feasibility analysis and contains a matrix explaining why certain costs should be excluded
£rom the cost side of the feasibility equation. The comment generally provides that the
economic feasibility study should not include costs that would normally be considered
with any proposed project. The comment also questions the inclusion of costs for such
items as masonry, structural steel, doors, plumbing, etc.
The City's cost estimate was based on a report prepared by KCM Group, a qualified
independent construction management and consulting firm with substantial experience in
the rehabilitation of historic structures, in collaboration with Cury Price Court, licensed
structural and civil engineers. The KCM Report was prepared by Gordon Kovtum, a
principal ofKCM Group and Anthony Court, a principal and licensed structural engineer
with Cury Price Court. The work was based on their personal onsite investigations of the
existing buildings' interiors, exteriors and roof, and reflects their collective profession
best judgment as consultants familiar with similar projects. A number of the comments
suggest that there is duplication scope and/or costs between the historic rehabilitation
work and the work related to the remaining new construction work identified in the KMA
Report. As identified in the KMA Report, care was taken to avoid double counting for
items already included in the KCM cost estimate, assigning such direct ("hard") and
indirect ("soft") only to those portions not addressed in the KCM Report. This effort is
documented in the KMA cost estimate tables which separately identifies the KCM costs
when applicable and the deduction of the KCM cost which applicable (e.g., architecture
and engineering at 6% of direct cost less preservation, and contingency at 5% of direct
costs less preservation). The commentor suggests that the work could be done as a part
of the proposed project or that the work could be done in a modified manner to represent
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
-' '--
168
the most cost effective construction materials. However, the KCM Report's work scope
reflects rehabilitation of existing building(s) in accordance with the U.S. SecretarY of the
Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings.
8.11-8 The requirement for daily sweeping of the streets and general clean up of the work area is
included as a requirement of the Public Works Encroachment Pernrit for work in the
public right-of.way. In addition, under NPDES requirements "washing down" is not
allowed. There will, however, be sweeping of the work areas on a daily basis, or as
needed. Also, traffic control plans will be required to be submitted to and approved by
the City of Tustin's Engineering Division prior to commencing work in the public right-
of-way. Potential traffic impacts due to construction activities will be minimized through
the submittal and approval of these traffic control plans.
8.11-9 Within the ,vicinity of the Water Yard facility, there are 73 striped public off-street
parking spaces at the facility with an additional 93 on-street parking spaces within a one
block distance from the facility, although on-street parking cannot be counted to meet on-
site parking requirements. Of the 73 striped parking spaces on the Water Yard property,
eight (8) spaces are under agreement for non-exclusive use by the Tustin Hacienda. The
Water Yard's operational parking is provided behind the gates and is not a part of the
public parking spaces. This leaves 65 parking spaces available for non-exclusive public
parking at the facility as identified in the DEIR. Since the Water Yard facility does not
conduct business to the general public, there is only an occasional visitor parking demand
at the facility. If approved, the proposed library expansion project would substantially
increase on-site parking for the proposed new library building and provide sufficient
spaces to meet its separate on-site parking demands. The public parking spaces at the
Water facility were developed in anticipation of serving the Old Town area, including a
proposed project at the Prospect Village site.
As a "practical" matter demonstrated throughout Old Town, area businesses and visitors
will use the nearest fIrst available parking space which is visible and easily accessible to
their first destination. This includes the on-street parking and adjacent off-street parking
(whether or not it is public parking). There are incentives and practicalities for using the
designated off-street parking. The incentives include but are not limited to; the ability to
access parking spaces without adjacent street traffic, having a selection of parking spaces
within a defined area (consistency for the location of available spaces), avoiding the
potential need to circulate "around the block" looking for parking, ability to enter/exit the
vehicle without adjacent throùgh traffic, etc. A Parking Study for Downtown Tustin
(February 2003) prepared by Kaku Associates corroborates this parking pattern and
shows that there are more than sufficient public parking spaces (off-street and on-street)
available to serve the Old Town users. The Kaku study analyzed the availability of
public parking in the entire Old town commercial district, block by block, including both
on-street spaces and off-street public parking lots.
The high visibility and immediate proximity of the adjacent off-street public parking at
the Water Yard would serve to minimize impacts on other parking spaces in the Old
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
16:
Town commercial district. Nonetheless, on-street parking is available to the area
businesses on a "first to use" basis. This on-street parking, however, is not designated or
assigned to any particular business. Its availability (or non-availability) is not
guaranteed. The primary factor related to Prospect Village parking is that the proposed
project is providing sufficient off-street parking supply to meet its projected parking
demands. According to the City's parking analysis, the off street parking provided for
the Project is sufficient to accommodate the Project's parking needs.
The Farmer's Market is an interim operation which currently uses the unimproved off-
street parking area adjacent to the Market and on the surrounding on-street parking
spaces.
8.11-10The traffic analyses for the Prospect Village project included significantly more
cumulative traffic than just the traffic associated with two specific projects (Heritage
Village and the Farmers Market) identified. The traffic analyses were based On traffic
modeling that relates to development of the General Plan. This is why the current LOS
conditions are shown to increase for future conditions (primarily due to cumulative
tràffic). In addition, since both projects are presently "approved" they have both been
individuaÎly reviewed on their own merits and determined to have less than significant
impacts (including traffic). Overall the cumulative traffic conditions analyzed serve to
address the traffic impacts of the two projects. The Prospect Village project has been
analyzed under a much more conservative scenario than suggested in the comment.
8.11-11 Comments 12 through 70 noted on the post cards to the City Manager are noted. The
comments on each post card are identical and do not raise any significant environmental
issues. Instead, the comment requests notice of public meetings and expresses interest in
proposal preserving the façade of the Utt Juice Buildings. Section 4 of the DEIR
specifically identifies and evaluates a Façade Preservation alternative. No additional
responses or modifications. to the DEIR are required. The City Council and Board will
consider all comments for and against the Project prior to acting on the Project.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
170
February 21, 2004
RECEIVED
FER 2 '3 2004
COMMUNIlY ~.OPMENT
øvrnA ~.
Minoo Ashab~ Associate Planner .
City of Tustin, Community Development Department
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Re: Notice of Community l¡ifarmation and Environmental Impact Sceping Meeting for
Prospect Village Project on Tuesday April 22, 2003
Dear Ms. Ashabi,
8.12-1
-This letter is provide a correction to the Summarv Oral Comments for the referenced meeting
-that was included in the KDraft Environmental Impact Report, Project: Prospect Village 191,
193 and 195 East main Street, Tustin, CA, Prepared by: City of Tustin". Please note that this
report was the first wne meeting notes on this meeting had been provided for review, so
please accept my apologies for not responding sooner. Also, it was noted at the end of the
minutes thatthe "tape recorder failed to pickup audio". As a result, the summary presentation
provided by.me IIDder Page 2, item 6 was not noted correctly and shou1d be replaced with the
following:
Jeff Thompson -- Stated that he, with his wife, wœ a resident owner at 415 W. Ch
Street and business owner of the commercial/office búilding at 100 W. Main Street.
He also served on the Cultural Resources Advisory Committee for the City of Tustin
for 8 years. He stated that the City would be invoking a double standard if they
allowed demolition on the City owned UtI Juice Buildings. since they also enforce the
requirementsfor historical structure preservation. .{fallowed, this would be a
con:tradiction in policies that community leaders have put in place aver many years.
He also expressed that historical preservation and rehabilitation is not easy and that
this chèlllenge should not deter the City in preserving these buildings. He stated that
his own eJ.perience in preserving his historic house inclurkd going to City Council
three times before approval Way given to ,issue permits.
Also, please include the following items as attachment to the minutes:
. List of attendees
. Letter dated May 19,2004 - a letter and approximate 240 petition signatures were
submitted to the City; this letter was a public response to the April 22, 2003 meeting
, Thank you for your time on tlús matter; should you have any further questions please do not
L hesitate to contact me at 714/231-6270 (cell).
S~. cere.~, .
ffi J ,
Je . T pso
Resident, Business Owner
415 W If'St.. Tustin
C:\Dooument, MId SettingsWl U"",\Dn...._IMisclU11 Juice BldglLetteTs\4()221UttJuiMindoc
171
12
Cc: Jim Draughon, City of Tustin Redevelopment PTOgramManager
May 19, 2003
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
City of Tustin .
. 300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
-Re: Additional Presentation of Petition Signatures for Public Policy for Historical
.Preservation and the Utt Juice Building in Old Town Tu.stin
flLi? CßN
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members,
This letter is to provide an additional presentation for petition signatures for the
referenced subject matter; The combined total of signatures represent approximately 240
concerned residents, business owners, and individuals interested in policy for preserving
Tustin's Historical Heritage.
Our primary concern is regarding the development being administered by the City that
williead to the demolition/dismantling of the historic Utt Juice Building. This process is
contrary to Public Policy documents, as noted in the following:
. The City of Tustiu Historical ResolU"Ces StIl,'e" ReT>Olt, 199(í (¡>;>.ge 25) rated this I.nùlclillg
",s an "A" (lllghest ranking) æcognizing its IlliÌqlle early and llloSI elaborate Imlieuate
Victorian styled a]"(:biteCtnæ (Anac\unentA).
III Allle.rìcan Institute ofA1"Chirects RUDAT IepOlt dated September 1991 (page 17) sites
this struc1lJre as an "existing building to æmain" (Attachment B).
811 Board of Appeals meeting on April 11, 1994, (page 6 of minutes) City officals stated "...the
City has determined that renovation is possible." (Attachment C).
II Stipulation of Citv of Tustin VB. Martin Perfit, dated.December 13, 1994 states that the
prope~ owner had failed "to complete all interior and exterior modifications to the
building" which later was part of the jnstification for City acquisition (Attachment D).
II Citv of Tustin. Residential Design Guidelines for the Culturnl Resource District, August 15,
1994 states that "The City Council has declared as a matter of pnblic policy that, 'the
recognition, preseIVation, protection and use of culturally significant structures...within the
City of Tustin is required...." (AttachmentE).
II ADDrnisal Report. Perfit Propertv NWC Main Street & Prospect Avenue. Tustin.
California, dated March 3, 1998 that was presented to the court for acquisition of the
prope~ states that "The significance of the historical S\JIVey is that it places the property
on a historically significant list of properties which would effectively require that the
building be retained, particularly thestorefronls." (Attachment F).
Public policy for preservation of historical structures and particularly the Utt Juice
Building is to be enforced by the City. Since the City is the guardian of these public
C:ID<>cum'l'ls md Set!inpWI Us...\DoaJmcntslMisclUtt Juice BldgIJO519!Æ'et.doc
J\.
172
City .0f'Tustin
Policy for Preservation of Historical Heritage
Page 2
policies, the Redevelopment Agency should not be directing a process that is .contrary to
these policies. Therefore, it is requested that the City administer a public forum to review
these public policies, before embarking on plans that are contrary to such. Thank you for
your consideration on this matter. .
Sincerely,
HL.E
coP'i
filE" <: òp(
Brent A. Ferdig
140 S. Myrtle, Tustin
~~
415 W. 6'h St., Tustin
Bill Finkin
690 W3rd St., Tustin
l3! ¡f(-
170 NA St.. Tustin
173
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 12
(Letter from JeffR. Thompson received 2-23-04)
8.12-1 Comments are noted, with no additional responses or modifications to the DEIR for
Prospect Village.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
174
Carol Fox
170 North A Street
Tustin, CA 92780
RECEIVED
FEB 2-!12004
ØfJ:;u~~~~P~ENT
. -
February 22, 2004
Community Development Department
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Attn: Minoo Ashabi, Associate Planner
RE:
Uti Juice Building, 191, 193, 195 East Main St.
Dear Ms. Ashabi:
I have had the opportunity to review the Draft EIR for the above referenced project, also known
as "Prospect Village". I want to thank the city stafffor the diligent effort and emphasize how
much I appreciate the alternatives that were studied as required. I found ample evidence that we
can find a compromise to the current proposal that could prove to be a win-win situation for all.
.13-1
First and foremost, I want to emphasize how delicate the balance is for the Owner of a property
to also be the one charged with approving the development. Since the City of Tustin owns this
property, the citizens of Tustin are stalœholders in this development, moreso than developments
at other sites in Old Town, not owned by the City. In other words, it gives us the unique
opportunity to impose an even higher standard than those imposed on private property owners,
and can set a strong example of how provisions of our General Plan can be applied. Ifwe ignore
certain General Plan policies aJ.1d Zoning OrdinaJ.1ces for our own property, it can be a very
slippery slope when enforcing those san1e policies and ordinances on property owned by others.
As you welllmow, precedence is one of only 4 findings that must be made when asking for a
zoning variance.
This said, I want to reinforce that! fully support some form of development ofthis property. I
don't know of a single citizen who would like to see the building remain in its current condition.
I am thrilled that the City would encourage a zone change to allow for residentiallcommercial
mixed use, allowing for a richer, "round-the-clock" use of the site.
There are, however, grave concerns about this specific proposal. I frod that the Draft EIR has
brought up some poignant issues and has also left some gaping holes. I will group my concerns
aJ.1d questions under the headings: Aesthetics, Function and Statemen t of Overriding
Considerations. .
1 Aesthetics:
I, The docun1ent states that "the project would alter the existing visual character of the site"
175
1~
13-2
2.
-3
.13-4
._3-5
\ 3.
<.13.6 .
an4 yet this has been determined to be less than significant (page ES-4, Table ES-l). I do
not see the justification for this. In fact, the Historical Resource Technical Report states
that "the Utt Juice Btiilclings also derive significance because of their location at a
prominent comer of Old Town Tustin... provide an. 'introduction' to Old Town as the first
of its historic buildings.". The report goes on to say "their e1irniœtion and replacement by
new construction would significantly affect the visitor's initial historical view of Old
Town." (Page 11) I see this as a direct contradiction between the documents included in
the Draft EIR.
The Historical Resources Technical Report also points out that the buiIding's "eye-
catching metal cornice is significant not only for its elaborate design but also because
historic metal cornices are now a rarity in Southern California." (Page 11) This feature in
itself is of major significance, and contradicts the same conclusion in the Executive
Summary that is stated above.
3.
Tearing down "Real Old" to make "Fake Old" and claiming it is better is a tragic
statement and violates the General Plan Policies 5.3, 6.5 and 5.5, which states:
"Encourage the restoration. and rehabilitation of properties eligiblefor inclusion on the
National Register of Historic Places..."
Function:
1. Land Use. I believe in live/work as a planning concept and wholeheartedly support its
use here. However, I believe the claim that a percentage of residential unit owners will
be required to maintain home-based retail and office uses at the ground floor of their units
is unenforceable. Even if such a CC&R can be written, how do you guarantee such
business models to be viable? If a homebased business fails, will the homeowner be
forced to sell to someone who can also provide a homebased business? Please indicate
how this requirement will be enfoceable. .Relying on the use of these areas for
retail/office in the tabulations of land use and potential tax revenues skews the results of
those tables. Tax revenues and enhanced retail traffic in Old Town should be considered
only as a fortunate byproduct ofthe live/work use.
2.
Commercial Parlång. No other new project in the area would be allowed to so blatantly
ignore on- site parking requirements. This proposal provides only 5% of required parking
for the commercial uses. 59 spaces in the Water Works parking lot would need to be
al1ocated to this project. (Traffic Impact Analysis, page I) That is 80% of the lot! Some
parking spaces in the lot have already been allocated to Tustin Hacienda and some are
provided for the Water Works employees. Are there 59 spaces left for this project? If so,
how many spaces are left for the general use of other businesses? I would imagine that
saving a portion of the 193 and 195 buildings would result in slightly less area for the
commercial uses and therefore require slightly less parking.
Residential Parking. The proj ect proposes to provide 2-car garages for each unit and 3
guest spaces total for all of the residences. The reality of residential parking is that much
of garage spaces go to storage and homeowners utilize nearby uncovered spaces to
actually park at least one of their cars. This is evidenced by higher density residential
projects in the area. Given that retaiVoffice uses are mandated for most of the residences,
~ ,
176
13-7 I
it is conceivable that even more of the garage spaces would go to business storage. It
appears the density of the residential portion of the project is also too high. .
4.
Traffic. A cumulative assessment for traffic in the area is not provided that includes
impacts from approved projects pending completion of construction (Draft EIR, page 2-
15, Table 2-3) and the internrittent use of the Farmer's Market.' Also, I question whether
Heritage Plaza and 1st Street/EI Camino Real proj ects should be on the list. .
13-8
13-9
S"tatement of Overriding Consideration: .
1. The proposed project would require the City Council to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations (SOC) ifit elects to approve this project. In fact, every alternative studied
(except full reuse) would require this. (Draft EIR page 3.3-10)
2.
Tearing down al¡ of the existing buildings would destroy 3 of 17 historic non-residential
structures Ì11 Old Town Tustin. That is over 17% of our inventory! The destruction
would includè the single oldest building in town built by a very prominent member of the
community to house an industry indicative of Tustin's agricultural roots. Table ES-I
contains a summary of all impacts and clearly lists 2 that are significant and unavoidable
even after mitigation measures are taken. (Although.! have presented evidence in this
Jetter that calls into question the "less than significant" impacts concluded in the
surnmroy) How can the Council possibly justify a SOC in this case?
13-10
COMPROMISE
Now for the positive side of my comments. The Alternative called "The Partial Reuse of 193 &
195" is one that could lead to asolution that could appeal to all.
A. It saves only the best ofthe buildings, still allowing them to remain eligible for
the California ro1d National Registers of Historical Resources.
According to the Economic Feasability Summary (Draft EIR, Table 4-2), this
alternative has the highest revenues (property tax + sales tax). I cam10t compare it
to the proposed project since projected tax revenues for it are not included in the
EIR.
The less significant 191 building could be removed to allow for the open space
"courtyard" so desired for the restaurant use.
The bricks that come from the 191 building could be used as a fund raiser to help
finro1ce the preservation of 193 and 195. Imprinted bricks with a donors name
could be used along with the 191 building used bricks to pave the new courtyard.
Similro' donor pavers are used in the Orange Circle.
B.
c.
D.
I hope that in the future, history will look back with appreciation at these preservation efforts.
~1~~~~~urs, .
Uffi Q , "
Carol TinkFox, AIA
Architect
u
177
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 13
(Letter from Carol Tink Fox received 2-23-04)
8.13-1 The decision to approve a project is considered on an individual, case by case basis. The
City Council and Board will consider all impacts and merits of the proposed proJect prior
to acting on the project. If the project is approved, the Council and Board must adopt a
Statement of Overriding Considerations, which will identify the economic, legal, social,
or technological benefits of the project that outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts of
the project.
8.13-2 The criteria for deternrining whether there will be a significant aesthetic impact as a result
of the project are contained in Section 3.1.3.1 of the DEIR for Prospect Village (DEIR),
which is based on the CEQA Guidelines Initial Study Checklist (14 Cal. Code Regs.
14000 et seq.). The project may result in a significant impact if it would: I) have a
substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista or substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
State scenic highway; 2) substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings; or, 3) create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
While the existing visual quality or aesthetics of the site will be altered with the
demolition of the existing buildings and construction of new buildings, the resulting
views would not degrade the area since the project is designed to complement the
massing and architecture of the Old Town area, as discussed in Section 3.1 of the DEIR.
However, the loss of the buildings, given their location on a prominent corner in Old
Town, and the distinct architectural features on the buildings at 193 and 195 E. Main
Street, would be a significant impact on historic resources, as identified in Section 3.3 of
the DEIR. As such, it is not inconsistent to state that aesthetic impacts associated with
the elimination and replacement of the existing buildings with new construction would be
less than significant while impacts associated with the loss of the existing buildings
would be significant.
8.13-3 The DEIR for Prospect Village identifies significant and unavoidable land use impacts
related to the project's conflicts with General Plan policies that encourage the
rehabilitation of existing commercial facades, the restoration or rehabilitation of
properties eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, and the
preservation of historically significant structures. While each project is reviewed on an
individual basis for consistency with the General Plan, not all General Plan goals,
policies, or programs are necessarily implemented through each individual project. As
stated on page II of the Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element Goals and Policies
provide a framework for land use planning and decision-making in the City. The policies
noted above related to historic structures are intended to support Goal 6, which states,
"Improve urban design in Tustin to ensure development that is both architecturally and
functionally compatible, and to create wiquely identifiable neighborhoods, commercial
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
178
and business park districts." This goal can be achieved through the proposed project by
requiring a high degree of architectural quality in design and materials.
8.13-4 There are three different forms of restrictions to be placed on the property regarding the
restriction for ground floor retail or office uses including: I) Restrictive Deed Covenants
that can be recorded against the individual units at the time they are purchased, which are
enforceable by the Redevelopment Agency and the City as provided for under California
Development Law; 2) the CC&Rs that can be recorded again the individual units thàt
may be enforced by the homeowners association under the provisions of California law;
and 3) the Planned Community District Regulations that may be approved as a function
of the properties zoning designation, which will be enforceable by the City of Tustin
Community Development Department. If approved, a homeowner may not change the
pernritted use on the ground floor or lease the commercial space of the individual units
under any circumstances without the expressed approvals. of the City of Tustin, the Tustin
Redevelopment Agency and the Home Owner Association pursuant to the restrictions
identified above.
The tax increment projects are provided as a measurement for achieving an economic
objective identified for the proposed project and for comparison between the proposed
project and the alternatives identified in the EIR. While actual results may vary for the
retail sale tax increment which goes into the City's General Fund, the property tax
incrernent is based on the projected sale price of the units, which will be deposited
separately into the Redevelopment Agency account for use in the Town Center Project
Area as identified in the DEIR. Both increased tax revenues and enhanced retail traffic
are project objectives identified in the DEIR, which result directly :!Tom the development
of the proposed project
8.13-5 The Tustin City Code allows a reduction in the total number of required parking spaces
through the approval of shared parking; no variance is required. (Tustin Municipal Code
§927Iaa) Appendix F of the DEIR for Prospect Village contains a parking study that
demonstrates that a total of 59 off-site parking spaces and three (3) on-site parking spaces
will accommodate the peak dernand for the various non-residential uses in the project; all
required residential uses will be provided on-site. In addition, a reduction in the number
of on-site parking spaces and the provision of off-site parking does not require .the
approval of a variance. However, a long term lease or Off-Site Parking Agreement is
required under the Cultural Resource Overlay District, which states, "On-site parking
requirements may be waived upon the presentation to the City of a long term lease,
running with and as a condition of the business license, for private off-site parking
accommodations within 300 feet of the business or activity to be served." (Tustin
Municipal Code §9252(j)(3)(d)(3)(b». Mitigation Measure T-2 on page 3.7-13 of the
DEIR for Prospect Village requires the applicant to obtain an Off-site Parking Agreement
or other shared use agreement or the project cannot proceed.
In addition, many Old Town Tustin projects that have requested approval for new
construction have been approved based upon the availability of off-site parking spaces in
the City's Downtown Parking Structure. Properties that currently rely on leased parking
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
J'
17£
spaces include 215 EI Camino Real (Helm), 301-307 EI Camino Real (Izsak), 333 EI
Camino Real (Rengel), 339 EI Camino Real (Rengel), and 425 EI Camino Real (Cox),
100 W. Main (Thompson), and 335 S. C Street (Heredia) (see also Response 8.11-9).
8.13-6 The residential garage. floor plans propose 400 square feet in Plan A and 400 square feet
in Plan B to accommodate two vehicle parking spaces and 121 and 116 square feet of
storage area, respectively. This is more than the minimum required for a typical garage
and could accommodate storage associated with business activities. In addition, the
Planned Community District Regulations, Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions, and
resolutions of approval for the project would require that each garage be used for the
parking of vehicles.
8.13-7 In accordance with the Tustin General Plan "Old Town Commercial" land use
designation, the density for residential uses' is to be prescribed within Planned
Community District regulations, which are proposed to be adopted by the City Council as
part of the project. As proposed, the overall residential density is proposed at 15.9
dwelling units per net acre. For comparison purposes, the City's high density residential
land use designation ranges from 15 dwelling acres per acre t025 dwelling units per acre.
The Old Town Commercial land use designation provides for a range of residential
densities by allowing a population density range of 2 to 54 persons per acre. The
proposed project would result in approximately 27 persons on approximately three-
quarters of an acre and is within the density range anticipated by the General Plan.
8.13-8 The traffic analyses for the proposed project included significantly more cumulative
traffic than just the traffic associated with two specific projects (Heritage Village and the
Farmer's Market) identified. The traffic analyses were based on traffic modeling that
relates to development of the General Plan. This is why the current LOS conditions are
shown to incrase for future conditions (primarily due to cumulative traffic). In addition,
since both projects are presently "approved" they have both been individually reviewed
on their own merits and determined to have less than significant impacts, including
traffic. Overall, the cumulative traffic conditions analyzed serve to address the traffic
impacts of the two projects. The Prospect Village project has been analyzed under a
much more conservative scenario than suggested in the comment.
8.13-9 The comment asks how the Council can justify a Statement of Overriding Considerations
in this case. The decision to approve the Project despite its significant and unavoidable
impacts is entirely within the discretion of the Council. If the City Councilor Board
decides to approve the Project, the City Council and Board must adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations for the proposed project due to its significant and unavoidable
impacts relating to Land Use and Cultural Resources. The Statement of Overriding
Considerations must identify the overriding benefits of this project, which include, for
example, eliminating delay and uncertainties surrounding future development of this site,
stimulating private investment by demonstrating economic viability in the Old Town
commercial area, increasing the amount of specialty retailing and commercial
development in the core of Old Town, short term (construction) and long term
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
-- ,-
180
(commercial retail) job creation and increasing the number of residential units in the
Town Center Redevelopment Project Area.
8.13-10 The City Council will consider all impacts and merits of and alternatives to the proposed
project prior to rendering a final decision on development of the site.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
181
~
c OX'S MARKET PLAZA
A Place of HiStory for Unique Shops. Sine< 1936 . Old Town 'Iùstin
. PHILIP K. COX
97415
. Phone V' Cell 714... 227-4610 V' Voice I Fax 541 - 469-3815 V' Home 541 - 469-5729
V'
POST OFFICE BOX 970
V'
BROOKINGS, OR
e-mail V' coxtáì.nwtec.com
February 23,2004
RECEIVED
FEB 2 3 2004
COMMJNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ms. Minoo Ashabi, Associate Planner
CityofTustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Re: PROSPECT VILLAGE PROJECT
Dear Ms. Ashabi;
Thank you for this opportunity to show my support for the project. As you know, the Cox Family has
had our roots in OLD TOWN TUSTIN sincè 1936. I have had ownership since 1970. As reflected in
the care and preserva:tion of my historical building, I have demonstrated a great interest in preserving
history. The Uti Juice Company Building has been allowed to deteriorate beyond the point of
14-1 restoration. The building history of many years of vacancy has shown that no one has had the interest of
~ investing any ffiances to make it a viable,project. I know many of the objectors and I respect their
wants and intent to save the building. However, they had had several months to find a developer that
could fulfill their wishes, this has not occurred. If this property is left abandoned much longer it will fall
down and mother nature will have made her decision.
I suggest that the deciding body/s take a tour both inside and outside the building and see for themselves
the unsafe and deteriorating conditions! Please note the photographs which show the cracks on the
outside go clear through to the inside and that the contractor attempted to conceal them with mortar and
spackle. .
Let the Prospect Village Project get started before the developer changes his mind andwithdraws from
the project.
Let's have an attractive and tax paying addition to our city. Not several more years of ugly abandoned
property.
182
,14
I have attached to this letter:
8 copies of previously submi~d petitions supporting this project
4 photographs of the interior
A photographic collection of 8 photos of the deteriorated store fronts
Thank you for allowing me to show my support.
Sincerely,
Philip K. Cox
PKC lmc LT \ C : \ 011 \ UTI miCE co \ Cityltr040222.doc
Delivery:
e-mail mashabi@tustinca.org
FAX 714 - 573-3113
183
184
1.85
186
.., 187
188
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 14
(Letter from Philip K. Cox received 2-23-04)
8.14-1 This comment does not raise any significant environmental issues that require a detailed
response or modifications to the DEIR. Instead, it offers support for the project. The
City Council and Board will consider all public comments received on the Project, its
environmental impacts and the overall merits of the Project prior to acting on the Project.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
189
February 23, 20.0.4
RECEIVED
FEB 2 3' 2004
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BYf2...~
April Pollock
138 North B Street
Tustin, Calif. 92780
Dear City of Tustin,
My husband and myself have lived in Tustin for almost ten years. We purchased
a home built in 1922. It's our dream home and plan on growing old in it
B 5-1
I love living, playing, running and enjoying life in Tustin. I'm out on foot or on my
bike with my 2 year old daughter every day. I'm a stay at home mom who
sacrifices the life style of Orange County to be with my child. A great day for me
would be a bike ride through old town to the Far¡ners Market Fill my basket with
beautiful fruits, vegetable and flower and ride back through old town stopping
í along the way to say hi to my friends and business owners. I've been getting my
¡ hair cut from the same lady for over 3D years, in the same iocation. Across the
f street from the Utt Juice Building.
,
I have been active in getting support from the community to help preserve what is
ieft of Old Town. In my process of getting signatures for our petition, I found an
overwhelming support of people who desired the preservation of our buildings in
Tustin. Especially the Utt Juice Building.
I have reviewed the EIR for the development project I do have many questions,
but the only one that really matters is this. Why doesn't Tustin care about
investing in our heritage? Why build a new building to make look like an old
building?
I like the project, but its way too big for our little Old Town. I like the idea with
businesses below and residents above. I like a restaurant out front on Main, but
why can't we use the two existing white buildings and tear down the brick
building and use the pavers to make an out door patio dining area for the
restaurant? Why can't we keep this historical building? It's historical I The
community supports keeping it. Please find away to preserve it. I want to drive
down Main Street when I'm 70. years old and still be able to recognize it
G:::i f ~
714-544-2080.
190
1~
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 15
(Letter from April Pollock received 2-23-04)
8.15-1 This comment does not raise any significant environmental issues that require a detailed
response or modifications to the DEIR. Instead, it generally asks the Council and Board
to support preservation of the Uti Juice Buildings. The City Council and Board will
consider all public comments received on the Project, its environmental impacts and the
overall merits of the Project prior to acting on the Project
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
191
i?{'6eI1~d oJ- C:-l+y ú.:DnC;¡
. JJ1..tdì~ 5-19-D3
May 19,2003
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
City ofTustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Re: Additional Presentation ofPetítion SignatJires for Public Policy for Historical
Preservation and the Utt Juice Building in Old Town Tustin
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members,
This letter is to provide an additional presentation for petition signatures for the
rèferenced subject matter. The combined total of signatJires represent approximately 240
concerned residents, 1:rosiness owners, and individuals interested in policy for preserving
Tustin's Historical Heritage.
8.16-1
Our primary concern is regarding the development being administered by the City that
will lead to the demolition/dismantling ofthe historic Uti Juice Building. This process is
contrary to Public Policy documents, as noted in the following:
II 11>e City ofTnstin Historical Resom"Ces Survey RepOl~. 1990 (pag"e 25) mted this ]"ùl<ling
as an "A" (highëst ranking) recognizing its uniqne early anc1111ost eL,borate It;ùienate
'Victorian styled architf'cture (Artachlllent A).
III American Institute of ~"Chitects R/UDAT rej.>OI1 dated September 1991 (page 17) sites
dris stroclIlre as an "existing builclingl:£> remain" (Attachment B).
II Board of Appeals meeting on April 11, 1994, (page 6 of minutes) City officals stated "...the
City has determined that renovation is possible." (Attachment C).
II Stipulation of Citv of Tustin vs. Marrin Perfit, dated.December 13, 1994 states that the
property owner had fiúled "I:£> complete all interior and extenormodificaùons I:£> the
building" which later wa¡; part of the jusùficaùon for City acquisiùon (Attachment D).
III CitY of Tustin. Residenùal Desim Guidelines for the Cultural Resource District, Angust 15,
1994 states that "The City Council has declared asa matter of public policy that, 'the
recognÌùon, preseJVatÌon, protecùon and use of cnlturally significant structnres...within the
City ofTusrin is required...." (Attaclnnent E).
II Appraisal Report. Perfit Property NWC Main Street & Prospect AveIllle. Tustin.
California. dated March 3, 1998 that was presented I:£> ti,e court for acquisition of the
property states tilat "The signjficance of the hisl:£>ncal smvey is dJat it places the property
on a histqnc.ally significant list of properùes which would eflèctively require that the
building be retained, particularly the sl:£>refronts." (Attachment F).
\ Public policy for preservation of historical structures and particularly the Uti Juice
. Building is to be enforced by the City. Since the City is the guardian of these public
C:\Documen" and SottingsWI U"""\DocumentslMi,,IUtt ¡woo BldgI30519LetPet.do,
192
16
City of Tustin
Policy for Preservation of Historical Heritage
Page 2
8.16-2
policies, the Redevelopment Agency should not be directing a process that is contrary to
these policies. Therefore,. it is requested that the City administer a public forum to review
these public policies, before embarking on plans that are contrary to such. Thank you for
your consideration on this matter.
;:. n
Brem A F~
140 S. Myrtle, Tustin
~M--
Bill Finkin
690 W. 3rd St., Tustin
~
JeffR Thompson, PE., P.LS.
415 W. 6'h St., Tustin
~Π,if .
170 N.A St., Tustin
193
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The Uti Juice Bui1ðJng is an important part of Old town Tustin's historical
hþritage. For decades,!!fter the beginning of the 1900's this building served as
an import busÙ\eSs to the local economy. The Utt family is recognized for
their loe¡ù leåðership with founding the water service (now operated by the
City of Tustin), foW1di¡ig of the Tustin Unified School District,
ownership/lèadershipofother businesses, and political representation with the
State of California. Currently,.this building is being considered for
demolition/dismantling by the City of Tustin Redevelopment Agency. This is
a serious concern with the following issues:
1. Historical Preservation Standards are strictly enforced throughout Old Town; the City
Redevelopment Agency should satisfy and exceed these standards.
2. The City of Tustin has approved documents indicating Utt Juice Building preservation; if this
policy is to change, it should be publicly addressed.
3. This building is recognized for its historical importance, other alternatives for development
should be considered now, that include preservation.
4. Old Town Tustin needs preservation and economic redevelopment.
The undersigned agree to these concerns and requests the City Council to publicly evaluate and address
these concerns prior to developing proposals for demolition/dismantling & development.
194
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The Utt Juice 13#Ui1.Wgis an important part of Old town Tustin's historical
heritage. For decad~;.1#ter the beginning of the 1900's this building served as
an import bw@~s.w 'the local economy. The Utt family is recognized for
their localléâdership With founding the water service (now oþenrted by the
City ofTûstin), foUIl.ding of the Tustin Unified School District,
ownership/Ieàdership of other businesses, and political representation With the
State ofCa.lifotnÌ¡\..Çurrently, this building is being considered for
demòIÎtiön/disìriant1mgby the City of Tustin Redevelopment Agency. This is
a serious concern with the following issues:
1. Historical Preservation Standards are strictly enforced throughout Old Town; the City
Redevelopment Ag~cy should satisfy and exceed these standards. .
2. The City of Tustin has approved documents indicating Utt Juice Building preservation; if this
policy is to change, it should be publicly addressed.
3. This building is recognized for its historical importance, other alternatives for development
should be considered now, that inch¡de preservation.
4. Old Town Tustin needs preservation and economic redevelopment.
The undersigned agree to these concerns and requests the City Council to publicly evaluate and address
these concerns prior to developing proposals for demolition/dismantling & development.
Print Name Address ' Phone Number Sj,gnatq,J6
1. /¿r,.j, ". / ¡u/ "7/ Lt_J/ /flU!', 11ft:.. 5<Yf'-#( ~ i: _/
2. Îí\C(!-->.j C;;-'-'v\Y,I.)(. '"' D'5'" I -:;',^L.va~ 7ùt- ) Y '/ - ')"51 fr ~/ ..A,- ,/11
3. /:'/M. ( \/fJý¿"".¡P( I I'). t~¡...{Jrdf 7 (Cf ,;¡ Us C"7 "P h. 'g ,- If
4.tA.M-., ) ¡¡) V1.9d I b5 í.JftC¡LìÍ/ 11L./~J;). f,1';,~ reA_I-- - ~g(%..)
5.C v~ l g; p~ -7(\-1 'i11.. Ý7 5"2.. ><:1. ~ J.~-¡
6./ ak jO/oA......' :1W;6u-..'-~i 1(,.o-'l-1c; -qo'ì.'ï /Tn. ~ Jb~
7. V-U..J n t.f3 ~. 'Juo-;~I"" (/'./4') 1/"D-57ôS"'" II -------
8. k;,.J,'.¡.¡, {jp'rvlJ1tM,¡ /.Jj",t;' AI .4,CJ (ó¡' "ï R¡. <f [¡ ',If .-e-: þ/
y'//,-,,~. ~-¡.¡ !CUI"7"'\. - - r. -1~7:;r.:;:z.. /, /' .?- -1- ,V--1-?
i7\. "1. rJ , 76B/ ~...&.' :J ( ()) 7.2 / ~..3:f CJš ' .\ê r.. v/'. Æ. ~
11SlG.Né..NJN~ :<;, ::;? Row ee. 714: L('2¡ '2--13)7.1) ,A 1"N'hp ...., ~.J
12.(llrLY"A'"", ftJurr 7cn-c..<./frnJJr 7/{- !r,/~-..¡ql(" L ~ '/7- \J ..'-, "I , . p 1-8
I3Ne.lL CAVANAG- -I J"!:, 732 el//<1~ fI.. Oil-SA 91 65., t7JZ; IiO r- >,./, ;~j7' ,
14,/-de. ,'("'ol.<lC\.v'U<.<'Ih (,'1 "Jð- e.11""""Q;có S' A. '-(d-7as: .....,," /J a . .,?< o/JI
15 ..::To:.... -eJ -.&d-h-;? \ :1$(0 K"d I.::...(-en "î9i~1 ~;;tì \ ('In '" ';oJ d ~ ~ : (J
16 R~~ l?:x v { Ïd-12 tLJ/1 c;;rj, (.:...,14 )~Ý-:)71 cw "p, ( ~ (þ'q: C1.?
17, 1.Ad.U k.vfJ..... I"-.~ ¡) l fl/~,,^ (l¡¡J¡. \.. . '1,~ f.- 7~ 7 . L.-4k1 ¡::v¿/1cÁJ j
18. I 1/\ \d\ n IH ')\ P J ,1 ¡¡-¡C/? 1.,;.[i,."""".J 5lf~ 19,')( /, (-'- v., (I t, ,/',-IJ.j)¡ \
19. ~¡ ð'fI¿t; in", ì s I If I< ß~\.-^"'-C;{!fIZo ÇO';; 1ø(;£! ~ ,A ~...j /: <'-"j
20. '-:v<UJ\,,'(u.rlI 1M ~j..:J.f(^ c;..,~");#-f' . c¡ ..¡4) 7/..9::--; Çf} .//-.....J. f: J~ ~
-..
~
(f
try"
.)
195
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The Utt JUÌce Buil~g Is an important part ofOld town Tustin's historical
heritage. Forde~es; after the beginning of the 1900's this building served as
an import busÍI¡es$ to the local economy. The Uttftunily is recognized for
their 1oca1lead~hip with founding the water service (now operated by the
City ofTuStili)' foundìng of the Tustin Unified School District,
ownershìp/leadersb,ip of other businesses, and political representation with the
State of California.. . Cu¡:rently, this building is being considered for
demolition/dismantling by the City of Tustin Redevelopment Agency. This is
a serious concern with the folloWing issues:
1. Historical Preservation Standards are strictly enforced throughout Old Town; the City
Redevelopment Agency should satisfy and exceed these standards.
2. The City of Tustin has approved documentsindicaring Utt Jwce Building preservation; if this
policy is to change, it should be publicly addressed.
3. This building is reCognized for its historical importance, other alternatives for development
should be considered now, that include preservation.
4. Old Town Tustin needs preservation and economic redevelopment.
The Ulldersigned agree to these concerns and reqnests the City CoUlicil to publicly evaluate and address
these concerns Drior to developing proposals for demolition/dismantling & development.
~-
196
(
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The Un JuicêBuildingis an important part of Old town Tustin's historical
heritage. For deCåd~$, after the beginning of the 1900's this building served as
an import Qusiness tö the local economy. The un fiunily is recognized for
their localleadershjp with founding the water service (now operated by the
City of Tustin), foi.\ndirig of the Tustin Unified School District,
ownership/leadership of other businesses, and political representation with the
State of Califopûa. . Cw;reníly, this building is being considered for
demolition/disInaIitling by the City of Tustin Redevelopment Agency. This is
aserio\lS concern with the following issues:
1. Historical Preservation Standards are strictly enforced throughout Old Town; the City
Redevelopment Agency should satisfy and exceed these standards.
2. The City of Tustin has approved documents indicaíÎi1g Utt Juice Building preservatÜm; if this
policy is to change, it should be publicly addressed.
3. This building is recognized for its historical importance, other alternatives for development
should be considered now, that include preservation.
4, Old Town Tustin needs preservation!!!J.!! economic redevelopment.
The undersigned agree tö these concerns and requests the City Council tö publicly evaluate and address
these concerns Driorto dflvelopingproposals for demolition/dismantling & development.
Print Name Address Phone Number Signature
l.Mì 1\ 'ct...,t-/YJU...m1 J3r;"tt~ Oc¿rvw{/t. 5(,.2)9,)(,;;l¡oJ>' 7ŸJ... ¿>d' ~ .I
2¡Sf¡ffR,ö¡J P'ETÉ'R~f/ ['1'34-/ TRINO U;>. (71q.ì77'i¿='-" J.lfdt.~)(~' ":; 't:::¿
3.Ç;E~(;..",,~~"I:\\e; :L~"bðr' \<? fro"Tii.S'h'OO\ \.M C'\~ - ~D'..J,J
4.,"Ï"n~ A\Î II..... 111..:J~1 O'f\i' '" 'ì30-;3i.{..J..:L \ð/'Jn1;;" 1. ":".1"'- dO,,/)
5:\4.111.\ \ ,,-,. K'r \l\O9\'(~)¡v\~\cf¡p~"- hllìì¡:;l\\.\'ì~ì IM'llil ..-v.,¡(1-IIIt1~
6.;1.e~(-? A :::/C5rF (1......./1.. 1..j-;CLI"f"l7..leÞ( n. \ 'J:
7. 81\.(1 .~ ¿ .~6.u~ vi . K~ 7( l{ '\"1),,- (,C)(.¡ ¡( ,,¿,iJ ...l'I /.:...>
8.0;)IIAJ/'i'PhA,d. i7¿)~d")L d-{¡~/Ð-I \\,,\"- 0 Y
V1-\PR\C'"7'l ?-'17' 9rb2--rØll'It'nI,:¡.J( "1h/JYH ÐIh~~l/
10. LIlA) J ,)(FIIE ,~/" S c...L:r-P &7;; «rJJ."<?: (Ai A'? r .-
l1.?«C,hN~~~;¡,a....,4íS V( -nft~ 4rr3~. 2.'7"iO I' ~ ì
12::r (L:1 'A òA Ò j).. i J;-::z, ...1) 14 "".,t- Ts I -z. 2o'Z....- ;¡ /J /I~
13.A M'\.It\tJ" "Ð.$T\'¡S 1.7<1.)," r.,," Sï- 1\'t- S73 - 0'+0:' d .&2.- IrJA .L--
1;[ J.JL, ì ".",..lI .0 (1...1;::¡1 IA hi"!) Î?:<1-'-- \;.d --;-1'í.~ ru r;1) j
~ " 1111'.1".,/ l'1.q'lZ'!fÎPI(JÀJ LIÎ(r.] t:;tJil5/""¡; ";,,:;?\' 'AA.,.¡
16 r¡J¡h L ~.M ,, J -rñ« .:vj-\7é2 .r);f..{ot:, -.- -,/f¡}'-...JPII, ;.-,' -_./
17 ~;N¡¡;lU"";\~v¡th I.¡q&)/~Ç;'þ...1 r¡'f'fJs-StJ-t(S;§s J;/'1Li Y.ídb/..-..oZ.'J....
l~(')r.,íÌtM- /),;,1 A lo£~<.2.1t1¡((t':'\ 1(fí'('K,IJ. t (~ i; L ~ .~/'-'
1 9.R.k",..+-- 0 "ficke, J. ~ Çb (4, J.r.. J '14. Ç7 5 I L 7 1 -1~
20. F"ik. T"",é'£'t',(-f IICf(¡6 I.l".( H,d ¡IV c.r't9-('If{D (,..¡' -t"\ -r<r:.-í
I
\~
197
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The UtI Juice B1!,UQin8 is an important part of Old town Tustin's historical
heritage. For Q\¡þâ,Øes.@erthe beginning of the 1900's this building served as
an impo¡;tb~;tq tÞ.e local economy. TheUtt family is recognized for
their locålløadetS.!ûÞ with founding the water service (now operated by the
City ofTustin),founding ofthe Tustin Unified School District,
ownerShip/leadership of other businesses, and political representation with the
State ofCalifomia. Currently, this building is being considered for
demolitiön/dismantlîng by the. City ofTusrin Redevelopment Agency. This is
a serious Concern with the following issues:
1. Historical Preservation Standards are strictly enforced throughout Old Town; the City
Redevelopment Agency should satisfy and exceed these standards. .
2. The City of Tustin has approved documents indicating Utt Juice Building preservation; if this
policy is to change, it should be publicly addressed.
3 . TIlls building is recognized for its historical importance, other alternatives for development
, should be considered now, that include preservation;
4, Old Town Tustin needs preservation and economic redevelopment.
The undersigned agree to these concerns and requests the City Council to publicly evaluate and address
these concerns uriorto developing proposals for demolition/dismantling & development.
Print Name Address Phone Number Signature
l.~",,'r. L/ £ <A "'~ /<¡vai j¡,;.,.ÜN~ 7'31. ::>'/7'1;/ ";:i\j <--~ '-JØ I
2.\ ~'" \;V) !\J ~ ~+ "ð'3 <ç-\'ì<cò )\ lQ..", ! L-'hJ
3 \.~ ..1f.<.ÙfA....", ;30 rV ß Sf ~:3 ír~ l1110 ». n~: f -ç¿
4. fi^"',...\-'A ~I: "Æ:() ~--9:noq '::I..J}m:\-hll.t'L\..
5" úrfiH .. ;pea,\(, 11f-Ot\ u.......l ¡",,\. Iuà 731-i-('1'q. 7'\ .1:'(1"'J f /' /
6.t tvCM.- 5*,,",(>1 '1"'K 11-4J/~ N (714'1 fJ'7Í>'ZJ)'4( >;Y.L:.-~¿'¿~
77- f]J' f) "rv. 1!\Wi. /11'72-- ];¡pj) riiW.;ru<j .';"J" {¡,)f1ttd1{JII[~ ~F X[¡ I'~ --
8,\.).,-" ~\, ( U \\'1\.1!\(i:hao./o ç",~", '-1~"-el,..)-(.I'.,, .~,"u 0 C{.
9.!~1(l (I I,...;::.)~ ~.::;I,,: ,n.. Tr'ì'~"I;:i' r~-lq'K7 :=t:/~Æ J-A-vlA~'
10.( r¿,f1rv)lMFit- "",Y?LI nt' ~-r;;¡j-,-ujCr ~~7/~~J8
11; ),.//,ÞtsiAA(¡ U",r IJÆJ a<11 r;¿¡7;r.: OJ~"'" I/~"""I.£L/_A'=/.~~~
12. ;,. ",v "-¡"II \Æ...' S Z (¡;eo \::; . t 11rJ.-<:.7?-",?9L<?, 1--- I}~ LEo tP"'"
13....6 c.Kbo,>J\..."",..¡.Q ,líl,~~o Q..¡..q-lc,,'l"-I,.'-f¡1 '" '\.. All .
14. Tck 6uro'7 I'ï""'.$. 8 £-k:~¡;O:\- l\l.I-ì"'\.\.ho,'}'R:\ \1\i\J~?--..
15..::J"ht.-'\ fold-. Î-bS S, OC."\'-S~. Or' hl'\\b33-3'ÖÒ .~d "J-
16.Cbv":- / '1/.!,:7Afr,h!li,,¡.. I/WdJ~~~C;?I1ì p-,~ I~~./
17. Pì",1' ~./lf;I(7. t ,Ii ,..(7, C,L-- l1ì(j..,r~J 'J// 'ì / I/U r./ /: U
18."':~1A1I1 '~IJVI~ 11'-1.;:; ¡jJ~:\.t:;-VlÇI- 7 4-Ìi~l.oiJØ?- ¡A;;."., AI.Jn7JJ-".,...-F./--\ .o:..f¡.JGf;
19. r
20.
198
~
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The Uti Juice Build¡~g.is an important part of Old town Tustin's historical
heritage. FoI'decades, after the beginning of the 1900's this building served as
an import bl!,~ipesstPthe local economy. The Utt flunily is recognized for
their localleådership with founding the water service (now operated by the
City of TuStin), founding of the Tustin Unified School District,
ownership/leadershiÞ of other businesses, and political representarion with the
State ofCalifomia, Curr!mtly, this building is being considered for
demolition/dismantling by the City of Tustin Redevelopment Agency.. This is
a serious concem with the following issues: .
I. Historical Preservation Standards are strictly enforced throughout Old Town; the City
Redevelopment Agency should satisfy and exceed these standards.
2. The City of Tustin has approved documents indicating Uti Juice Building preservarion; if this
policy is to change, it should be publicly addressed.
3. This building is recognized for its historical importance, other alternatives for development
should be considered now, that include preservation.
4. Old Town Tustin needs preservation and economic redevelopment.
The undersigned agree to these concerns and requests the City Council to publicly evaluate and address
these concerns prior to developing proposals for demolition/dismantling & development.
199
Petition for
the Utt Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The VttJuice núilðìng is an important part of Oldtown Tustin's historical
heritage. For~cäd.~,afterthe beginning of the 1900's this building served as
an illlportb¡j¡¡~¡¡tø1:he local economy. The Utt fà.mily is recognized for
their localleadetShìp with founding the water service (now operated by the
City of Tustin), founding of the Tustin Unified School Disttict,
ownerShipJIeaderShip of other businesses, and political representation with the
SìateofcaI.ifornia. CtpTeIrtly, this building is being considered for
demolition/dismantling by the City of Tustin Redevelopment Agency. This is
a serious concem with the following issues:
1. Historical Preservation Standards are strièt1y enfotced throughout Old Town; the City
Redevelopment Agency should satisfy and eXCeed these standards.
2. The City of Tustin has approved documents indicating Utt Juice Building preservation; if this
policy is tp change, it should be publicly addressed.
3. This building is recognized for its historical importance, other alternatives for development
should be considered now, that include preservation.
4. Old Town Tustin needs preservation and economic redevelopment.
The uridersigned agree to these concerns and requests the City Council to publicly evaluate and address
these concerns prior to developing proposals for demolition/dismantling & development.
~igD.ature
./
~
200
Petition for
the Uti Juice Building, in Old Town Tustin
The Utt Juice Building is an important part of Old town Tustin's historical
l:umtage. For dec¡¡des,after the beginning of the 1900' s this building served as
an import b!lSin~~s to the local economy. The Utt £unity is recognized for
their loca11~efs1¡iP with founding the water service (now operated by the
City ofTusûD.), fçunding of the Tustin Unified School District,
ownernhip/leadership of other businesses, and political representation with the
State çfCalifomia. C1¡1Tently, this building is being considered for
demoliiion/disrfuuttling by the City of Tustin Redevelopment Agency. This is
a serious concern with the following issues; ,
I. Historical Preservation Standards are strictly enforced throughout Old Town; the City
Redevelopment Agency should satisfy and exceed these standards.
2. The City of Tustin bas approved documents indicating Utt Juice Building preservation; if this
policy is to change, it should be publicly addressed.
3. This building is recognized for its historical importance, other alternatives for development
should be considered now, that include preservation.
4. Old Town Tustin needs preservation and economic redevelopment.
The undersigned agree to these concerns and requests the City Council to publicly evaluate and address
these concerns prior to developing proposals for demolition/dismantling & development.
Print Name Address
1. I h ....t.V.. - VI I.Ju 114" 1lf7-:2. ÞM~.,A.... 'r-,
2. k\,('o (...., laC¿¡ð" ¡Sù FA,. "¡::;;"':I
3..JLL-I~.pru)m ./4t':j~ 16(, 1\/ \\p..,fI~-h
4. - "
5. "
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
II.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Phone Number" Si211ature,- "
(1{1.\-\ 'Q '? .q~2-& I [ JIfu::::1t¡ h' j¿' 1,1\1 \1:)
('1I({)~;;;:J-IS< 1/ (--1,¡., "r, <.Q./~A- /"
'11i.f \$fOi-!-6/U/¡j ( J ';!'fA ,.-f .1' \.,; 0
i1 '
-
201
! 'fA~A~ ÃJ
CITY OF TUSTIN
HISTORICAL RESOURCES
SURVEY REPORT
,:)i¡I\'~;:;:...
JULY 1990
Prepared in Coordination with the
Tustin Community Development D¡jpartment
. by .
thirtieth street architects, inc.
202
of the Preliminary Rating System
In conducting the. building survey the consultant stàff drove through the entire city
on a street-by-street basis and examined each struCture. Specific notes were made on
the architectural styles, extent of alteration and estimated date of construction for
each building which appeared to be constructed prior to 1940. Based on this initial
review, each structure (or group of related structures) was assigned to one of four
categories (A through D), as described below:
40
"'A" BuiJdin~~. This category includes buildings which are obvious examples
of historically significant or notable structures indicated by distinctive
architectural characteristics or age. Occasionally, the structure's relationship
to patterns of local history is evident (such as an early church) and would be
included even if the architectural design was not significant. Many of these
buildings are already listed (the Steven's House) or are potential candidates
for individual listing on the National Register of Historic Places and research
is likely to reveal a connection with important persons or events.
."B" Buildinvs . This category includes buHdings which are somewhat less
unusual or distinctive in tenns of age or architecture. In genera], however,
these are well designed buildings which research may prove to have a
relationship to irÍ1pórtam events or persons in history. Many of these
buildings are likely to have local significance and some of these buildings may
also be candidates for the National Register, depending on the results of
research. .
.::V,d;¡i't';, .
"
."C" Buj]din~~ . This category inCludes pre-1940 buildings which reveal
much of their original architectural style (not substantially altered). These
buildings are fairly modest in architectural style or design and are less likely
to have historical importance. Most of these buildings are good candidates as
contributing structures in an historic district.
~
~
-"D" Buildin~ . This category includes pre-1940 buildings which are
clearly not significant in terms of architectural style or have been
substantially altered from the original style. While infonnation from other
general research could indicate a link between some of these buildings and
important persons or events in local history, the modest nature of the building
makes this connection fairly wùikely. Buildings in this category which can be
restored may contribute to an historic district. Buildings which have been
very severely altered and are wùikely to be restorable are not included Ù1 the
listing.
203 '
"'..'~""...'r" )"
.. '."'" ,'.cO¡ . ' '/"
~ "
, """.,..
..,',,' '. ': :;':;,'1', '
2. ConuDe~w Sryæs f""~ '.,
; ..' Tu,rin h." w,"ltb of ,omm'.cl'lbuitdilig~' in .vari'ty ohtyæ.. Fou, of th, moot
common styles are described below and illustrated in Figures 8 to 11.
.Western Falsefront. about 187010 1900
This style is the earliest commercial style found in the City. These one and two story
structures were often constructed of wood with an extended front facade or
"falsefront" which creates the illusion of another story. Prominent examples of this
style in Tustin are the blacksmith (245 S. C Street) and McCoy Sheet Metal (160 E.
Main Street). (See Figure 8) ,
, -Victorian Commercial. approximately 1880to'1930
The style includes some of the earliest and most elaborate non-residential buildings
in the city. Specifically included are the Italianate styled Utt Juice Company ~
building (193 E. Main Street) and the store building at 434 EI Camino Real. (See
Figure 9.) ,
!h;¡;~. -
-Neo-Classical Commercial. approximatèly1900 to 1925
The Neo-Classical period emphasized the simplicity and purity of Greek and Roman
Classical Architecture. The' style enjoyed great popularity for banks, libraries, and
civic buildings throughout California. The facades are' generally very fonnal,
incorporating full height columns with decorative capitals. Often classical porticos
are úsed ;}Vhich add balance to the very fonnal symmetry of the style. The exterior
materi'als included the use of concrete, plaster, stone, light cream colored brick, and
sometimes decorative terra cotta. Many of Tustin's most distinctive early buildings
are of this style; notably the Knights of Pythias building at 397-399 El Camino Real.
Ten of the City's 24 significant non-residential buildings are of this style. (see
Figure 100) ,
204
page 25
~_"Jf."'....,:'----~_......- .- ---~. - '-""--'"",
"'""",'.':. .;. .
"':T CITY OF TUStIN. HISTORICAL SURVEY-Listing by Address
I\ }PRJ:~~
STYLI'.
VlcT. - ITAUANATE
DATI'.
1885
1906
d)'
a CAMINO REAL
440 ELCAMINOREAL
d60 ELCAMmOREAL
~60 ELCAMINOREAL
13642- A GREENVAUEYAVE
1'712 HOLT AVE
12~2 IRVINE BLVD
160 MAIN ST (R)
165 MAIN ST (R)
18~-191 MAlNST(R)
193 MAIN ST (R)
19~-2~~ MAlNST(E.)
135 -55 MAIN ST (I!.)
115' MAlNST(W.)
130 MAIN ST (W.)
138 MAIN ST (W.)
IdO MAIN ST (W.)
148 MAIN ST (W.)
I~O'" 158 MAlNST(W.)
201 MAIN ST (W.)
228 MAIN ST (W.)
320 MAIN ST (W.)
330 MAIN ST (W.)
340 MAIN ST (W.)
345 MAIN ST (W.)
350 MAINST(W.)
CRAFrSMAN
illWN'.AL REVJV AL
INDUSTRIAL
CAUroRNIA BUNGALOW
VlcroRIAN-EASTLAKE
SPANISH COLONIALREVIV AL
1905
1915
1915
1890
1929
1880
WESTERN FALSEFRONT
MODERNE
NEO-CLASSICALBRICK
VlCT.-ITAUANATE
INDUSTRIAL
1935/36
1922
1912
1940
NEO-ClASsICAL 1912
illMMERClAL-NEO-CIASSICAL 1914
illMMERClAL-NEO-CIASSICAL 1914
illMMERClAL, NEO-cIASSICAL 1914
COMMERCIAL - NEO-CLASSICAL 1914
illMMERClAL - NEO-cIASSICAL 1914
SPANISHCOLONJAlftJO11UC 1929
VlCT.-QUEENANNE 11887
PERIOD REm AL-MONTEREY 1928
CRAFTSMAN 1914
CRAFTSMAN 1914
illLONlALREVlVAL 1905
CRAFTSMAN
CRAFTSMAN
CRAFTSMAN
AFTlES
1910
1914
1919
1950
400
405
415
MAIN ST (W.)
MAIN ST (W.)
MAIN ST (W.)
--
MAIN ST(W.)
1887
420
vier. - STICK
N
<=>
(T1
CITY OF TUSTIN. rMiE
6
-
SOURCE ALTS RATING NOTK'!
E
T
T
T
T
E
E
T
F
M
M
M
F
F
M
F
E
E
E
T
E
E
E
E
E
F
F
M
M
.
.
T
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
F
S
M
S
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
T
E
E
E
S
F
F
F
F
M
C
B
A
B
C
A
A
B
D
C
C
B
B
A
11ISI1N GARAGE
Me illVSHE£r I
C
B
^
C
lTIT 1UJCECO.
A
SEE397ELCAM
11IST1N HARDw¡
c
c
c
c
^
A
PRESBYl'ERIANI
STEVENs HOUSE
^
^
B
B
ROCK HOUSE
YES
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
m
m
m
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
m
m
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
YES
YFS
YFS
YFS
YFS
I
i
i
I
L-
....
AMERICAN INSTITUTE. OF ARCIllTECTS
REGIONALIURBAN DESIGN ASSISTANCE TEAM
(~AT)
Sponsored by: 1 ~
City of Tustin !
Community Developm ent.D e. partment
Tustin Area Senior Center
September 27 - 29, 1991 -
Report produced and financed by the Öty of Tustin Redevelopment Agency I tP
N
c> Tustin Old Town R/UDAT
en
.
J
~-
....
.....
h
~
:;;;
~
;:
:<
~
~
~
- 207
ljfA(\'{~
Board of. Appeals
Peli'fit Property
April 11, 1994
Page 6
violations, the city was instructed to go back through the
inspection process again. At this point in time, violations are
almost exactly the same as they were well over a year ago, and have
not been corrected. Violations were again confirmed by a new
inspection and reconfirmed by the present Building Official who has
testified for the City. " I will personally certify for the record
that these violations were also in existence at the time they were
inspected with attorney Driscoll".
Relative to the City code Section referencing market value,
Attorney Kirschenbaum is referencing a section of the' Code related
to requirements for a Certificate of Appropriateness required for
demolition. In the case of build in s 191 through 195, the cit has
determine t at renovatlon is oss e. sprepare cost
es for seism c retrofit wor 101 ich have been similarly borne
by the other owners of unreinforced masonry buildings in the Old
Town area. The actual code section does not say that. if it is not
economically feasible that it does not have to be renovated, but
instead says that if there are substantiated facts provided to the
record, that the Building Official has the ability to determine
where demolition is possible. In this case given the character of
the buildin s and the designatlon wltnln tne cultural resources
survey, .staff be leves a ase on the ac s examined by the
Cit 'ncludlng coet estlmates 0 Clt consultants that renovation
lS ossib e. 0 being able to afford renovation or to make
requlred repairs' is not justification under either the Uniform Code
for Abatement of- substandard buildings or the city's seismic
Retrofit Ordinance. There are means available which the property
owner and appellant do have. She urged the Board not to be swayed
by the owner's argument that he cannot afford to do the work stop
the consideration of what is a health and safety hazard.
Concerning the availability of the community Block Grant Funds, the
information was made available to the owner at a time when those
resources were available. The program is funded annually so that
at any point in the year depending on the number of applicants the
city mayor not have a balance available. Right now there are
balances. The owner, however, has not once submitted a letter of
interest or an application. If he had, it would have been given a
priority position due to the dangerous condition of the buildings.
Ms. Shingletcn stated that she had met with Attorney Driscoll on
three occasions with representatives from the city Attorney's
office and made funding information available. Ms. Driscoll
imparted that she had made this information available to the owner
as well.
Concerning the fact that the owner states that because the building
is vacant compliance is un-necessary. previsions of the city's
Seismic Ordinance require retrof it for all unreinforced buildinç¡s
whether occupied or not. The owner has not corrected nor responded
to the violations. There is a history of non- compliance and she
warned that a disaster such as a fire could virtually threaten the
whole block.
Rick Brown stated that the City's unreinforced masonry ordinance
defines a series of steps and time frames for taking certain
actions, including a survey of all city buildings, notification of
the property owners, allowance of time to prepare structural
engineering plans and materials required to develop those plans,
time for implementing the plans and a generous period of time for
actual completion of the retrofit. In this case, all notification
steps have been taken and as of July 7, 1992, all time periods had
expired with no action by the property owner. The former Building
ç]
208
~
2
"" 3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ROURKE, WOODRUFF & SPRADLIN
A Professional Cqrporation
LOIS E. JEFFREY, Esq. - Bar No. 86827
M. LOIS BOBAK, Esq. - Bar No. 127540
JOSEPH W. FORBATH, Esq. - Bar No. 149718
Suite 7000
701 South Parker Street
Orange, California 926G8
(714) 558.7000
Attorneys for Plaintiff CITY OF TUSTIN
I
1's-rrP,OW"\~ p !
I!"" ! ¡: >'" ~'"
1"-" . . ~.. ., ~
.. h 1;", a.." F-
IlIiil;iit OUt,l, f,UPERIOR COUll]
bec 13 1994.i
, ALAN SLA rEH, Executive DWœ; C ¡¡¡ý.
'ï>f'.~f;
6YRARZATE """ .:.}
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE
CITY OF TUSTIN, a municipal corporation, )
. )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
)
MARTIN PERFIT, an individual; JUNE E. )
PERFIT, an individual; and DOES 1 through)
25, inclusive, )
j )
Defendants. )
)
v.
CASE NO. 736441
ASSIGNED FOR ALL PURPOSES:
THE HON. ELEANOR M. PALK, COMM.
DEPARTMENT 24
STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND
ORDER FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
IT is HEREBY STiPULATED by and between Plaintiff City of Tustin ('City") and
Defendants Martin J. PE')rfit and June E. Perfit ("Defendants") that a Preliminary Injunction
be entered in favor of the City and against Defendants in the above-captioned matter as
follows:
Defendants, and their agents, employees, successors, and assigns, and anyone acting
on their behalf or in concert or participating with them, shall be and are hereby enjoined and
restrained from:
a. . Failing to complete demolition of the corrugated steel clad bui Iding located at
189-8 East Main Street within 30 days after execution of this Stipulation by Defendants;
III
209
';f
I:
r
I
b.
Failing to clear all construction material and debris from the prop-erty located
4
5
at 189, 189-B, 191, 193 and 195 East Main Street, Tustin, California (the "Property"),
including the interior of all buildings located on the Property, to the satisfaction of the City,
said satisfaction to be rendered by the CITY in a reasonable manner, within 30 days after
execution of this Stipulation by Defendants;
6
7
Failing to complete all seismic retrofitting required by the approved seismic
c.
retrofit plans to the satisfaction of the City, said satisfaction to be rendered by the CITY in a
reasonable manner, within 60 days after the date of final approval of the seismic retrofit plans
8
9
by the City, or the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness, if deemed necessary by the
City, by City to Defendants, whichever is later should the City reasonably determine that any
10
11
corrections or modifications are required in such seismic retrofit plans prior to final approval
of said plans by the City, pefendants shall complete such corrections or modifications and'
12
13
return the corrected plans to the City for further review within ten business days after written
notification from the City of the need for such corrections or modifications;
14
15
d.
Failing to complete all interior and exterior modifications to the building located
16
17
at 191, 193 and 195 East Main Street required by Tustin Board of Appeals Resolution No.
94-1, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this
18
19
reference, to the satisfaction of the City, said satisfaction to be rendered by the CITY in a
reasonable manner, within 60 days after the date of final approval of the seismic retrofit plans
20
21
by the City, or the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness, if deemed necessary by the
City, by City to Defendants, whichever is later;
22
23
Failing to complete the repair of all cracked, broken and/or uneven parking
e.
surtaces to the satisfaction of the City, said satisfaction to be rendered by the CITY in a
reasonable manner, within 60 days after the date of final approval of the seismic retrofit
24
25
plans by the City, or the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness, if deemed necessary
by the City, by City to Defendants, whichever is later;
26
27
f.
Failing to erect a six foot high chain link fence around the Property within 30
28
days after execution of the Stipulation by Defendants.
1102-00001
4385_3
.2-
210
!
2
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
. "....
...,,_..
~.
3
4
The parties further stipulate that the above named Defendants, and each of them, shall
perform all action required by the Preliminary Injunction entered in accordance with this
Stipulation in a workmanlike manner and in accordance with all applicable building and safety
standards and regulations; and
5
6
The parties further stipulate that should the above named Defendants fail to compiy
with any or all of the terms of the Preliminary Injunction entered in accordance with this
7
8
Stipulation, the City may, after providing 24 hours written notice to said Defendants or their
attorney of record, which notice may be provided by posting a copy thereof in a conspicuous
location on the Property and faxing or mailing a copy thereof to Defendants and/or
Defendants' attorney of record, enter onto the Property and take whatever action is deemed
reasonably necessary by the City to secure such compliance, assessing all reasonable cost
in said action, including reasonable attorneys' fees, against Defendants, and/or the Property;
and
The parties hereto further stipulate that Defendants shall permit appropriate officials
of the Cityto enter upon the Property at any time between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m., after providing 24 hours telephonic or written notice of their intent to do so, for the
purpose of conducting inspections to insure compliance with this Stipuiation, the Preliminary
Injunction entered in accordance with this Stipulation, and the Settlement Agreement entered
into between the parties effective November r.:Zì,1994.
CITY OF TUSTIN
By: w4~ U
Wi'LLiAM HUSTON, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~l.~
LOIS E. JEFf-'. t: SQ.
City Attorney
(Signatures and Order on Following Pages)
211
'102.00001
4385_'
City of Tustin
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
for the
CULTURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT
Adopted August 15, 1994
Prepared by:
URBAN DESIGN STUDIO
,
27132-A Paseo Espada, Suite #425
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
l\)
.......
f',;)
!
~
~
(\\
-'ft>
N
~
W
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Purpose and Intent of the
Guidelines
The City Council has declared as a
matter of public policy that, "the
recognition, preservation, protection
and use of culturally significant
structures, natural features, sites and
neighborhoods within the City of
Tustin is required in the interest of
the health, safety, prosperity, social
and cultural enrichment and general
welfare of City resident<;."
To ensure the maitHenance and
enhancement of Tustin's Old Town
area and the existing single farnily
zoning within the area, the City
Council approved Ordinance No.
1001 on June 20, 1988, adopting the
Cultural Resourcês Overlay District
In adopting the Overlay District, the
council appointed a Cultural
Resources Advisory Comrnittee
consisting of citizens who reside in
the City and within the Cultural
Resources Overlay District. An
objective of the cornmittee was to act
as a resource to assist in preparing
informational guidelínes for
property owners interested in
renovation of their homes.
In addition, the City has received
"Certified Local Government" (CLG)
status in recognition of its efforts in
historic preservation. The CLG
program was established by the
National Historic Preservation Act to
provide financial and technical
assistance for the preservation of
significant cultural resources.
A local governrnent can participate
directly in this program when the
State Historic Preservation Officer
certifies that the local governrnent
has established its own historic
preservation cornmission and a
program meeting Federal and State
standards.
The primary goal of these residential
Design Guidelines is to promote the
City's goals to preserve, protect and
enhance the existing historic
character and culturally significant
structures within the Cultural
Resources.District.
The Design uidelines are intended
to assist pr , erty owners and their
architects i' nderstanding the '
City's goals or the preservation of
historically. ignificant neighbor-
hoods and uctures and to provide
basic desig principles for achieving
quality dev , opment compatible
with the ch acter of the Cultural
Resources strict
This dO'
persons wb
historically
would like'
information
maintenano
preservatioJ
be useful, a
the Appendi
and mainte
To" informal
design prof,1
and the hor
glossary of t,
the Appen
nt will also be useful to
do not own a
gnificant structure but
hãve some basic
n home repair and
The guidelines on
and rehabilitation will
ng with information in
rehlted to home repair
!nce (i.e. technical "How
on, how to work with
sionals and contractors
! repair checklist.) A
IDS is also provided in
Guidelines provide a
e set of design
criteria that will:
.( " trA~MØ'IT F l
APPRAISAL REPORT
PERFIT PROPER11Y
NWC MAIN ST. & PROSPECT AVE.
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA)
\ !
Prepared for:
Community Redevefopment Agency
City of Tustin
,,¡.
Prepared by:
Riach &0 Donahue
Real Estat~ Appraisers and Counselors
214
.
ÏI
II
I(
I-
I.
.~
,
I-
I
,-
'-
l
t
t
L
.-
Maximum Lot Coverage - 100% less parking and landscape requirements.
Front Yard Setback -None, except 10 feet when frontage abuts a Jot in an R District.
Minimum Side Yard Setback - None, except when abutting an R District and then a
10 foot side yard is required.
Offstreet Parking:
Retail Stores - One space for. each 200 square feet plus one loading zone space for each
10,000 square feet of store floor area; .
Office Buildings - One space for each 300 square feet of floor area;
Wholesale and Industry - Two spaces for each three employees but not Jess than one
space for each 2,000 square feet of total ground and building area used for sales,
storage, warehousing or manufactUring;
Restaurants ~ One space for each three seats,
Historical Survey
Subject property has been identified on the City of Tustin Historical Survey as having a
'. .
rating of "A". The survey indicates that the building originally owned by E.E. Vtt housed a
drygoods store. Following this occupancy L¿tt moved the juice making operation into this building
about 1920. Tj'Je business occupied the premises until 1973 when it closed its doors. The two
bUildings featUre an ornate metal cornice featuring Jarge ornate brackets at each end and in the.
center. The single-story storefront is an unusual example of Victorian Italianate architecture and
retains most of its original integrity. The storefront buiJding with its el~borate metal cornice and
luxor glass transoms, is significant for its rare and pleasing design. The significance of the
historical survey is that it places the property on a historically significant list of properties which
would effectively require that the buildings be retaine~ularly the storefronts. Also, as
discussed in the zoning section, there are additional development criteria with properties, as the
subject, in the cultural resource overlay.
Title
CEent submitted a First American Title Insurance Còmpany Litigation Guarantee report-
OR.9636406, dated November 20, 1997: This report indic~tes numerous exclusions, surrunarized
as follows:
041-091
RIACH & DONAHUE
REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS AND COUNSELORS
21"
Page 29
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 16
(Letter from Brent Ferdig, Bill Finken, JeffR. Thompson, and Rick Fox, AlA
recieved May 19, 2003)
8.16-1 The commentorsnote that the demolition of the existing buildings to accommodate the
proposed project is contrary to several public policy documents that are listed. However,
none of the listed documents regulate or prohibit the demolition of buildings. The City's
Historical Resources Report is an informational document that evaluates the condition of
properties in the City that predate 1940. Similarly, the "Visions 9fOId Town" American
Institute of Architects R/UDAT was developed to help guide revitalization efforts in Old
Town and was prepared as informational, not regulatory, document. Also, the
Residential Design Guidelines are used in reviewing modifications to residential
structures that pre-date 1940 to ensure design compatibility of existing and proposed
improvements. The Board of Appeals action on April 11, 1994, upheld the Building
Official's diction to require the demolition of 189 and 189-B E. Main Street and health,
safety, l1nd property maintenance violations at 191, 193, and 195 E. Main Street. While
the minutes from the Board of Appeals meeting reflect that staff thought renovation of
the buildings at 191-195 E. Main Street was possible, the Board's action did not require
preservation of the buildings, but rather corrections of violations. The Stipulated
Judgment dated December 13, 1994, required the property owner to rectify outstanding
violations that had not been corrected and did not provide any judgment with respect to
ultimate preservation of the buildings. The Appraisal Report dated March 3, 1998,
outlines the existing conditions associated with the property, including City regulations
and requirements. Although the appraisal states that the buildings would be required to
be retained since they are listed on the historical survey, this is not an accurate statement
of City requirements. As discussed above, the Historical Resources Report is an
informational document that does not regulate the preservation or demolition of
buildings. In summary, while these documents discuss the existing buildings on the
project site, none of them provide public policy direction, which requires preservation or
prohibits demolition.
8.16-2 This comment expresses concerns with the proposal to dismantle or demolish the historic
Utt Juice BuiJdings. As discussed in Comment 8.1-5, the purpose of the Draft
Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") and the CEQA process is to inform objectively
the public, City Council and Board of the potentially significant. impacts of the project,
including potential impacts on historical resources, and to identify mitigation measures
and alternatives that could reduce these impacts. The DEIR comprehensively analyzes
several project alternatives that consist of varying degrees of rehabilitation and reuse of
the Utt Juice building that substantially lessen the project's impact on the historic Utt
Juice Buildings. In addition, public hearings on the proposed entitlements will be held.
The City Council and the Board could either approve the Project or choose to pursue one
ofthe Alternatives. The City Council and the Board will consider the DEIR and all public
comments prior to acting on the project or any alternatives. If the Project is approved, a
Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required to identify the economic,
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
216
legal, social, or technological benefits of the project that would outweigh the unavoidable
adverse impacts of the project.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
217
SECTION 8.4
ERRATA
General Correction:
Wherever it is noted within the responses that prior to rendering a decision
on the project, including any decision that may involve demolition of the
existing buildings on the project site, the City Council, and the Board of
Directors of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Board")
will consider the merits of the project and all public comments that are
received, it should be noted that the City of Tustin's Planning Commission
wilrreview, consider, certify, and make appropriate fmdings regarding the
Final Environmental Impact Report prior to taking any action on the
General Plan confornrity finding, design review, and conditional use
permit or recommending any course of action to the City Council
regarding the zone change or subdivision map.
General Correction: Any reference to the developing entity as Pelican Center, LLC, has been
changed to Prospect Village, LP, a California Limited Partnership.
Prospect Village Environmental Impact Report
April 2004
218
EXHIBIT B OF RESOLUTION NO. 04-45
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Exhibit B of City Council Resolution No. 04-45
Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report
Prospect Village Project
Zone Change 03-002
Tentative Tract Map 16481
Design Review 03-012
Conditional Use Permit 03-012
General Plan Conformity Finding
for Disposition of Property
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Prospect Village FEIR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Page
INTRODUCTION
4
THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
4
PURPOSE OF FINDINGS
5
INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES INTO PROJECT DESIGN 5
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE
ADVERSE IMP ACTS
5
Cultural Resources (Historical Resources)
Land Use
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT ARE
REDUCED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS BY
MITIGATION MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT
6
Cultural Resources (Archaeological Resources)
Hazards
Traffic/Parking
FINDINGS CONCERNING LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
12
Aesthetics
Air Quality
Hazards
Noise
Traffic
20
VIII. FINDINGS OF FACT CONCERNING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Introduction
Reasonable Range of Alternatives
Summary of Comparison of Alternatives
Project Objectives
IX.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Summary of Overriding Considerations
Adoption of Overriding Considerations
33
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15091, the City of
Tustin City Council based upon its review of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR),
including the comments and responses therein, and all the information and evidence in the record,
hereby makes the Findings of Fact and adopts of the Statement of Overriding Considerations set
forth herein:
I.
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, an Initial StudylNotice of Preparation (NOP) to
prepare an EIR was distributed on April 17, 2003, to regulatory agencies, local jurisdictions, and
public service providers, among others, for a 30-day comment period.
This Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") evaluates the potential environmental effects of
the proposed Prospect Village Project ("Project"), which is located on an approximately one-acre
parcel in the City of Tustin, County of Orange. This EIR has been prepared pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (California Public Resources Code Section 21 000
et seq.) and State Guidelines for the implementation of the CEQA (California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). The FEIR consists of two volumes entitled "Volume I, Draft
Environmental Impact Report for Prospect Village Project" and "Volume 2, Responses to Public
Comments."
The FEIR recommends mitigation measures to avoid significant environmental impacts of the project
or reduce them to less than significant levels. Specifically, the FEIR identified mitigation measures
to avoid or reduce Project impacts relating to unknown archaeological resources, hazards, short term
construction traffic and parking impacts to a less than significant level. While feasible mitigation
measures are also identified to reduce Project impacts on historical resources, the FEIR concludes
that this impact would be significant and unavoidable. The FEIR also concludes that Project impacts
relating to Land Use are significant and unavoidable despite implementation the recommended
mitigation measure.
II.
THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
CONTENTS OF THE RECORD
The following information is incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these
findings and the actions taken by City of Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIR and approving
the project:
1.
The FEIR, Draft EIR and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the FEIR
or Draft EIR.
2.
All testimony, documentary evidence and all correspondence submitted to or delivered to the
City in connection with the meetings, workshops, and public hearings at which the Draft EIR
and FEIR were considered by the City.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
3.
Any other documents specified by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e).
LOCATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
The City is the custodian of the administrative record, including all CEQA documents and the other
background documents and materials, which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which
City Council decisions to certify the FEIR and approve the project are based. The administrative
record is located at the Tustin Community Development Department at the City of Tustin, 300
Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780.
III.
PURPOSE OF FINDINGS
The FEIR, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), evaluates
the significant adverse environmental impacts that could result ITom the project. Section 15091 of
the CEQA Guidelines requires that the public agency approving or carrying out the project shall
make written findings for each significant impact identified in the EIR. These findings include one
of the following:
1.
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as defined in the EIR.
2.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision
of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
These findings accomplish the following:
1.
They address the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR for the approved
project.
2.
They incorporate all mitigation measures associated with these significant impacts identified
in the EIR.
3.
They indicate whether a significant effect is avoided or reduced by the adopted mitigation
measures to a less than significant level, or remain significant and unavoidable, either
because there are no feasible mitigation measures or because, even with implementation of
mitigation measures, a significant impact will occur.
The conclusions presented in these findings are based on the FEIR and other substantial evidence in
the record of proceedings. Each of the effects that remain potentially significant and unavoidable is
considered acceptable by the City Council based on a determination that the benefits of the project
outweigh the risks of the potentially significant environmental effect, as set forth in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations contained herein.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 4
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
IV.
INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES INTO PROJECT DESIGN
The mitigation measures identified in the FEIR as feasible and within the City's responsibility and
jurisdiction to implement are hereby incorporated into the design of the project as required by
CEQA. The City shall implement these measures during project implementation.
V.
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS
The FEIR concludes that the project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact on
historical resources and land use. As described below in the findings for the significant and
unavoidable impacts, there are either no feasible mitigation measures or the feasible mitigation
measures would only partially mitigate the impact and the residual effect would remain significant.
As set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations herein, the City Council finds that the
impacts to cultural resources and land use are acceptable in light of the project's benefits.
CULTURAL RESOURCES (FEIR SECTION 3.3)
IMPACT:
SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A HISTORICAL
RESOURCE AS DEFINED IN §I 5064.5
I.
Facts
The Project entails demolition of two buildings on-site that were determined to be eligible for listing
in the California Register of Historical Resources. As discussed in Section 3.3. of the Draft EIR, the
Historic Resources Technical Report, Utt Juice Redevelopment Project, dated July 14, 2003
concluded that the 193, 195 E. Main Street Building is a resource ofregional significance under
California Register of Historic Resources Criteria 1 (association with significant events or trends), 2
(association with historically important people); and 3 (embodying distinctive characteristics of a
type of construction method). The report also concluded that the 191 E. Main Building is a resource
of local significance under California Register of Historic Resources Criteria 1 (association with
significant events or trends), and 2 (association with historically important people). Therefore, the
proposed demolition of these buildings is considered a significant environmental impact under
CEQA.
This impact can be reduced, but not to a level of insignificance, by adopting a mitigation measure
that requires documentation of the buildings to be removed shall be undertaken by the City of Tustin
utilizing the standards of the Historic American Building Survey (HABS), including photo-
documentation and measured drawings of the East Main and Prospect A venue elevations. These
items, together with the Historical Resource Technical Report, shall be added to the Tustin Area
Historical Society Museum. See Mitigation Measure CR-I on p. 3.3-10 of the Draft EIR.
2.
Finding
PageS
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
This City Council finds this impact to be significant and unavoidable; the measure listed above is
adopted and will reduce this impact but not to a level of insignificance. This impact is overridden by
project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations.
LAND USE (SECTION 3.5)
IMPACT:
THE PROJECT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES THAT
PROMOTE PRESERVATION AND REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC
RESOURCES
I.
Facts
While the Project is consistent with the majority of the General Plan goals, objectives and policies
relating to development of the Old Town, the Project is inconsistent with three policies that promote
restoration and preservation of historically significant structures. The following policies are
described in the Land Use Element ofthe General Plan and are designed to avoid and minimize a
project's potentially significant impacts on historical resources:
Policy 5.3 - Encourage the rehabilitation of existing commercial facades and signage.
Policy 5.5 - Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of properties eligible for inclusion
on the National Register of Historic Places according to the rehabilitation guidelines and tax
incentives of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.
Policy 6.5 - Preserve historically significant structures and sites, and encourage the
conservation and rehabilitation of older buildings, sites and neighborhoods that contribute to
the City's historic character.
The Project will demolish the historic UtI Juice Buildings. Therefore, contrary to the above policies,
the Project does not entail restoration, rehabilitation or preservation of these historical resources.
The mitigation measures CR-l is intended to reduce Project impacts on these historical resources.
However, this mitigation measure will not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. For
purposes ofthe above policies, only restoration, rehabilitation or preservation would reduce Project
impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, similar to the Project cultural resources impacts,
the Project's inconsistency with these General Plan policies, which have been adopted to avoid and
minimize Project impacts on historical resources, is considered significant and unavoidable.
Finding:
The City Council finds this impact to be significant and unavoidable; the measure listed above is
adopted and will reduce this impact but not to a level of insignificance. This impact is overridden by
project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations.
VI.
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT ARE REDUCED TO A
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL BY MITIGATION MEASURES
INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 6
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRJDING CONSIDERATIONS
CULTURAL RESOURCES (FEIR SECTION 3.3
IMPACT:
DISTURBANCE OF UNKNOWN BURIED CULTURAL RESOURCES ON SITE.
1.
Facts
Because the project site has been previously disturbed due to excavation, grading, paving and
construction of buildings, the probability of archaeological resources, paleontological resources, or
Native American remains being present is considered low. Nonetheless and to ensure that no
previously undocumented or unknown buried cultural resources on site will be adversely affected by
the project, the Draft EIR recommends Mitigation Measure CR-2, which provides a mechanism
whereby construction work would be halted if buried cultural resources are discovered. The measure
further requires an archaeologist to assess the find and develop appropriate mitigation measures to
ensure the find is not damaged.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds that Mitigation Measure CR-2 is adopted as stated in paragraph IV of the
certification resolution. This measure will reduce Project impacts to unknown buried cultural
resources to a less than significant level.
HAZARDS (SECTION 3.4.1 OF FEIR)
IMPACT:
DISPOSAL AND REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALS, LEAD
BASED PAINT, AND EXISTING INOPERABLE CLARIFIER
1.
Facts
a.
As discussed in Section 3.4, pages 3.4-5 through 3.4-7 of the Draft EIR, the Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment revealed no evidence of recognized environmental
conditions in connection with the property, except for the presence of a clarifier on-site, the
presence of asbestos containing material (ACM), and lead based paint (LBP) which is typical
of older structures.
The Phase I Report could not determine from the available information whether the clarifier
has been officially closed or abandoned. Information concerning the past use and current
status of the clarifier was similarly not available. In order to reduce the potential for an
unauthorized discharge and depending on the future use of the Property, the Draft EIR
recommends Mitigation Measure H -1, which requires the applicant to abandon or remove the
clarifier in accordance with applicable local, State, and Federal regulations.
The Draft EIR also recommends as a precautionary measures, Mitigation Measure H-2,
which requires the removal of any unknown contaminated soils that could be encountered on
the project site during demolition, site clearance, or construction activities. The removal and
disposal of these hazardous materials would be in accordance with guidelines specified by
Page 7
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
the applicable local, State, and Federal resources agencies, including but not limited to, the
Department ofToxics Substances Control and federal Environmental Protection Agency
b.
The Phase I Report also disclosed the presence of ACMs on-site, including the following
materials:
.
Approximately 300 square feet of floor texture coat located in the 195 building. It was
difficult to assess the material due to the large amount of dust and debris on the floor.
Approximately 20 square feet of 9x9 green vinyl floor tile and mastic exists in the 195
building.
The Phase I Report identified approximately 500 square feet of exterior stucco as decorative inlays
as asbestos containing construction material (ACCM). The ACCM should be handled as an ACM;
however, disposal as asbestos waste is not required.
The Draft EIR recommends implementation of Mitigation Measures H-3 and concludes that this
measure would reduce any potential asbestos impacts to a less than significant level. This measure
provides that if during any future demolition or remodeling activities additional suspect materials are
observed, bulk samples shall be collected of these materials and analyzed for asbestos content. All
suspect materials at the Property are Presumed Asbestos-containing Materials (PACMs) until the
asbestos content is confirmed or denied by analytical testing
c.
The EP A and HUD have defined a LBP at 0.5 percent by weight. The Phase I Report
identified the following paints as containing greater than 0.5% lead:
.
Exterior white paint on the doors and door frames (approximately 300 square feet).
.
Interior white paint on the doors, door frames, windows, and window ftames (approximately
300 square feet).
.
Interior cream paint on the walls, doors, and windows in the front portion of the 191 building
(approximately 600 square feet).
.
Interior red paint on the walls and doors in the rear portion of the 195 building
(approximately 400 square feet).
According to the Draft EIR, Mitigation Measure H-4 would reduce any lead based paint impact to a
less than significant level. This measure requires the applicant to retain a licensed abatement
contractor to properly remove and dispose of the damaged (peeling, flaking) lead-based paint prior to
obtaining a demolition permit
2.
Finding
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 8
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures (H-l through H-4) relating to the
removal of the clarifier on site and potentially contaminated soils, the handling of asbestos, and the
handling of lead based paint are adopted as stated in paragraph IV of the certification resolution.
These measures will mitigate these impacts to a less than significant level.
TRAFFIC (SECTION 3.7 FEIR)
IMPACT: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WOULD GENERATE SHORT TERM
TRAFFIC TRIPS
I.
Facts
The Draft EIRdiscusses short term traffic impacts during construction in Section 3.7 on pages 3.7-7
to 3.7-8. Construction related traffic would be associated with workers arriving and leaving the
project site, and truck and construction vehicle traffic. According to the Draft EIR, Project generated
construction worker trips and haul trips are potentially significant but would be reduced to a less than
significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measure T -1. This measure requires the
developer to prepare a construction staging and parking plan for review and approval by City of
Tustin Public Works prior to issuance of a demolition permit. The developer or contractor must
monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the construction staging and parking plan during the
construction phase of the project. The plan will include one or more of the following potential types
of traffic-related mitigation measures to ensure that temporary disruptions to the adjacent uses and
circulation within the area are minimized:
.
Construction and Employee Parking: As part of the construction staging and parking plan,
the contractor would submit and obtain approval of a construction parking program which
reflects the schedule of construction activities and location of construction-related parking.
Locations of available parking would be identified.
Street Circulation and Parking Measures: The contractor may request and obtain a permit for
any temporary lane closures that may be required for adjacent roadways. The contractor
would utilize flagmen for traffic control to minimize inconvenience and for safety of vehicles
and pedestrians. .
Haul Truck Routes, Queue Areas, and Deliveries: The contractor would provide an estimate
of truck volume and schedule. Schedule adjustments would be made to minimize the volume
during peak traffic hours. Areas would be designated by the developer or contractor for
staging of all trucks. All earth-moving and ready-mix trucks would be equipped with two-
way radios. The trucks would follow a City-approved route to the project site, without
unnecessary waiting.
Hours of Excavation Hauling: Heavy truck hauling associated with excavation would be
scheduled to minimize interference with daytime activity in the area. The hours for
excavation hauling would be determined in conjunction with the City as part of the
construction staging and parking plan.
Pedestrian Safety Measures: The contractor would install a construction fence around the
perimeter, complying with City requirements before excavation begins. A flagman would be
.
.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 9
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
available at all times and would be utilized whenever trucks entering or leaving the Project
site may impede the flow of traffic.
2.
Findings
The City Council finds that Mitigation Measure T -1, which requires the applicant to prepare a
construction staging and parking plan, is adopted as stated in paragraph IV of the certification
resolution. This measure will mitigate short term traffic impacts during construction to a less than
significant level.
IMPACT:
THE PROJECT WOULD INCREASE PARKING DEMAND IN THE AREA.
The Draft EIR addresses parking impacts in Section 3.7 on pages 3.7-11 through 3.7-13. As
discussed in the Draft EIR, the City retained Sasaki Transportation Services to evaluate the Project's
peak parking demand. The Parking Study concluded that the twenty-seven (27) off-street parking
spaces would be adequate to serve the residences and is consistent with the City of Tustin parking
code requirements.
The Parking Study also analyzed the shared use parking needs for the commercial component based
on the different peak hours of operation. According to the Parking Study, the shared parking demand
for the commercial portion of the Project was sixty-two (62) spaces, which would be satisfied by the
use of fifty-nine (59) spaces at the City of Tustin Main Street Water facility ("Water Facility")
parking lot and three (3) on-site spaces. The Water facility parking lot is located across Prospect
Avenue, immediately east of the Project site. The three additional spaces are provided on-site,
immediately west of and adjacent to the E. Main Street building. The analysis was based on the ITE
"Shared Parking Planning Guidelines."
The Parking Study concluded that the Project's proposed mix of commercial uses (retail, office, and
restaurant) would be conducive to a shared parking arrangement. According to the study, the peak
parking demands for office, retail, and restaurant uses occur at different times of the day. For
example, the office parking peaks occur during the day on week days, while the retail peak is on the
weekend. Restaurants are typically busy on Friday and Saturday evenings when retail and office uses
are not at their peaks.
In order to satisfy the City's shared use requirements, the developer must enter into an agreement
with the City of Tustin to use the Water Facility parking lot. In conjunction with consideration of
project entitlements, the City of Tustin City Council shall consider an Off-Site Parking Agreement
for the provision of fifty-nine (59) parking spaces at the City's Main Street Water facility. If, for
some reason, the City Council rejected such an agreement, Project parking impacts would be
significant unless the City authorized some alternative arrangement. The Draft EIR recommended
Mitigation Measure T-2 to reduce the Project's potential parking impact to a less than significant
level. This measure states that if the City Council does not approve the Off-Site Parking Agreement,
the applicant must present an alternative shared use agreement to the City for review and approval
prior to issuance of a demolition permit. If the City does not approve an alternative shared use
agreement, the Project shall not proceed.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 10
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2.
Finding
The City Council finds that the Mitigation Measure T-2, which requires that the City Council to
approve an off site parking agreement or some alternative shared use agreement for the project to
proceed, is adopted as stated in paragraph IV of the certification resolution. This measure will
mitigate parking impacts to a less than significant level.
IMPACT:
DISPOSAL AND REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALs, LEAD
BASED PAINT, AND EXISTING INOPERABLE CLARIFIER
The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment revealed no evidence of recognized environmental
conditions in connection with the property, except for the presence of a clarifier on-site, the presence
of asbestos containing material (ACM), and lead based paint (LBP) which is typical of older
structures. A clarifier is a tank that is used to treat water, whereby solid particles suspended in the
water agglomerate and settle at the bottom of the tank. The solids resulting from the settling are
removed as sludge.
The Phase I Report could not detenmine from the available infonmation whether the clarifier has been
officially closed or abandoned. Infonmation concerning the past use and current status ofthe clarifier
was similarly not available. In order to reduce the potential for an unauthorized discharge and
depending on the future use of the Property, the clarifier would be abandoned or removed in
accordance with applicable local, State, and Federal regulations as required by mitigation measure H-
I.
The Phase I Report also disclosed the presence of ACMs on-site, including the following materials:
Approximately 300 square feet of floor texture coat located in the 195 building. It was
difficult to assess the material due to the large amount of dust and debris on the floor.
.
Approximately 20 square feet of 9x9 green vinyl floor tile and mastic exists in the 195
building.
The Phase I Report identified approximately 500 square feet of exterior stucco as decorative inlays
as asbestos containing construction material (ACCM). The ACCM should be handled as an ACM;
however, disposal as asbestos waste is not required.
The EP A and HUD have defined a LBP at 0.5 percent by weight. The Phase I Report identified the
following paints as containing greater than 0.5% lead:
.
Exterior white paint on the doors and door frames (approximately 300 square feet).
Interior white paint on the doors, door frames, windows, and window frames (approximately
300 square feet).
.
Interior cream paint on the walls, doors, and windows in the front portion of the 191 building
(approximately 600 square feet).
Prospect Village FEIR
Page II
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRlDINGCONSlDERATIONS
Interior red paint on the walls and doors in the rear portion of the 195 building
(approximately 400 square feet).
Any potential hazards impact resulting from the enviromnental conditions described above can be
reduced to a level of insignificance with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures
described below.
Mitigation Measures
H-l
The applicant shall remove the clarifier on-site in accordance with applicable local, State,
and Federal regulations prior to obtaining a grading permit.
VII.
FINDINGS CONCERNING LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
AESTHETICS (FEIR SECTION 3.1)
IMPACT:
VISUAL IMPACT
1.
Facts
The Draft ErR analyzes the Project's visual impact in Section 3.1 on pages 3.1-13 through 3.1-15.
As discussed in the Draft ErR, while the Project would increase the height and bulk the existing
structures and would be taller than some of the surrounding structures, due to the proposed three
story live/work units, these design characteristic would not "degrade" the existing visual character of
the site or its surroundings. The intent of the Project design is to retain the historic look and feel of
the existing buildings with references to the unique Victorian/Main Street architectural character that
currently exists in the vicinity of the Project site. To ensure that the Project compliments the
surrounding area, the buildings would be characterized by details and colors similar to the existing
buildings at 191-195 East Main Street.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project impacts on visual quality would be less than significant based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.1 of the Draft ErR and in light of the whole record.
IMPACT:
LIGHT AND GLARE
1.
Facts
The project site is currently vacant and no light is generated on the site. While the project would
increase the ambient light in the area, the incremental increase is not considered a new source of
substantial light and glare. Given the relatively small scale of the project and the fact that the
project site is within an urban area that currently generates ambient light, Project impacts relating to
light and glare are considered less than significant.
2.
Findings
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 12
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council finds the Project impacts on light and glare would be less than significant based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.1 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
The project development will incrementally contribute to changes in the aesthetic quality of the Old
Town area. However, the changes are considered less than significant due to the City's stringent
design review and cultural resources review process.
2.
Findings
The City Council finds the Project's cumlÙative aesthetic impact would be less than significant based
on the analysis contained in Section 3.1 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
AIR QUALITY (FEIR SECTION 3.2)
IMPACT:
SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS AND LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL
EMISSIONS
1.
Facts
As reflected in Table 3.2-5 of the Draft ErR above, the Project's estimated construction emissions
would be below the AQMD's significance thresholds. Therefore, Project construction activity wolÙd
have a less than significant air quality impact. As shown on Table 3.2-7, project air quality
emissions once operational are similarly insignificant. The Project's projected stationary and mobile
source emissions would not exceed the AQMD's significance thresholds.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Proj ect' s cumulative aesthetic impact would be less than significant based
on the analysis contained in Section 3.1 of the Draft ErR and in light of the whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
1.
Facts
As documented on pages 3.2-10 and 3.2-11, the Project will have a less than significant cumulative
air quality impacts. Giving the timing of each of the cumulative projects, Project construction
emissions would not be cumulatively significant.
From an operational standpoint, all three projects combined with the Project will increase vehicular
and stationary source emissions in the region. However, as described above, Project operational
emissions, which include vehicle emissions, are well below the AQMD significance thresholds. The
Page I3
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Project operational emissions combined with the other projects are not considered cumulatively
significant and no mitigation is required.
2. Findings
The City Council finds the Project's cumulative air quality impact would be less than significant
based on the analysis contained in Section 3.2 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
CULTURAL RESOURCES (FEIR SECTION 3.3)
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
While the Project will have a significant and unavoidable direct impact on two historical resources
within the Old Town commercial area, none ofthe other current projects in Old Town Tustin will
have an adverse impact on historical resources. In addition, while there may be other projects within
the Old Town commercial area at some point in the future, no other projects are currently planned or
proposed that would affect any historical resources in Old Town.
2.
Findings
The City Council finds the Project's cumulative cultural resources impact would be less than
significant based on the analysis contained in Section 3.3 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole
record.
HAZARDS (SECTION 3.4 OF FEIR)
IMPACT'
LAND USES THAT ROUTINELY USE NON-HAZARDOUS JANITORIAL
SUPPLIES AND CLEANING RELATED MATERIALS
1.
Facts
The project entails a combination of commercial, office, restaurant, and residential uses, which do
not involve the routine transport, storage, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Any hazardous
materials used by future occupants of the proposed uses would generally be limited to those
associated with janitorial, maintenance, and repair activities, such as commercial cleansers,
lubricants, paints, etc. The transport, storage, use, and disposal of these materials would be subject
to Federal, State, and local health and safety requirements.
Based on the anticipated nature and use of hazardous materials at the project, as described above,
there are no reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions that would create a significant
hazard to the public due to the release of hazardous materials. In the unlikely event of such an
occurrence, State law requires prompt reporting to local and State agencies to ensure the public
health and safety would not be jeopardized. No significant impacts related to release of hazardous
materials from upset and accident conditions are anticipated to occur.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 14
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project would have a less than significant impact relating to the possible
release or upset of hazardous materials on site based on the analysis contained in Section 3.4 of the
Draft ErR and in light of the whole record.
IMPACT:
USE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DURING CONSTRUCTION
I.
Facts
Project grading and construction would be short-term in nature and would be subject to Federal,
State, and local health and safety requirements relating to storage, use, and disposal of hazardous
materials. No significant impacts related to this issue area are expected to occur during project
construction.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project's short term use oflimited quantities of construction equipment
related fluids would be a less than significant hazards impact based on the analysis contained in
Section 3.4 of the Draft ErR and in light of the whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
I.
Facts
The Project requires the limited transportation of demolition materials that contain asbestos and lead-
based paint during construction activity. All transportation and storage of these materials will be
handled in accordance with Federal, State, and local regulations. Therefore, Project impacts are
considered less than significant. Aside from this limited and common remediation activity, the
Project does not involve the storage, use, or transport of any other hazardous materials or other
substances, nor does any environmental condition exist on the Project site that would be exacerbated
by Project construction or operation. Therefore, even assuming that there is currently a cumulative
hazards and hazardous materials impact, the Project does not create any impact that would be
cumulatively considerable. Because the Project does not result in any hazards and hazardous
materials impacts, the Project would not create any potential cumulative impact on the environment.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project would have a less than significant cumulative hazards impact
based on the analysis contained in Section 3.4 of the Draft ErR and in light of the whole record.
LAND USE (SECTION 3.5)
IMPACT:
THE PROJECT REQUIRES A REZONE FROM "C-2" OR "CENTRAL
COMMERCIAL" TO "PLANNED COMMUNITY" TO ACCOMMODATE THE
RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE PROPOSED LIVE/WORK UNITS
Page 15
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1.
Facts
The approximately one-acre Project site is currently designated "Old Town Commercial" in the
City's General Plan and zoned "C-2" or "Central Commercial District." The "C-2" designation
allows primarily commercial uses, including retail uses, and professional and general office uses
provided certain requirements are satisfied. Residential uses are not currently permitted or
conditionally permitted within this zone. Implementation of the Project requires a rezone to
accommodate the twelve (12) proposed live/work units behind the proposed commercial retail/office
building. The Project site would be rezoned from its underlying "C-2" zoning and overlay zones to
Planned Community ("P-C").
In conjunction with the proposed rezone, "Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations" is hereby adopted. The proposed "Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations" divide the Project site into two planning areas. Planning Area A is identified as
"commercial" and includes an approximately 9,300 square foot area of commercial and office related
uses. Planning Area B is approximately 32,900 square feet and is identified as "Live/Work." Six of
the twelve live/work units are planned to accommodate 913 square feet of retail space for a total of
5,478 square feet of retail. The remaining six units are planned to include 431 square feet of either
commercial or retail uses for a total of 2,586 square feet. Therefore, while the property will be
rezoned "Planned Community" the Project would retain approximately 17,000 square feet of
commercial retail and office space. Moreover, the permitted and conditionally permitted uses in
these spaces are either identical to or similar to the uses allowed under the Project site's existing "C-
2" zoning.
The Project also includes a considerable amount of commercial retail and office uses that are
identical or similar to the uses contemplated under the existing C-2 zoning designation. The mixed
use nature of the Project would be consistent with the General Plan's vision for the Old Town
Commercial area. The City of Tustin General Plan specifically contemplates an increase in
residential uses in the Old Town area, thus acknowledging the compatibility of such uses with other
existing uses in Old Town. Policy 10.2 of the Land Use Element provides "review and consider the
possible development of residential uses in the Old Town area both as individual residential projects
and integrated aboveground floor retail and office uses." This is precisely the type of residential
product contemplated here. In addition, the General Plan's discussion of the "Old Town
Commercial" area specifically states that "uses (such as residential uses) which support this land use
may be permitted subject to the discretion of the City." Therefore, even though the Project would
require a rezone, the Draft ERr concludes that this would not be a significant land use impact.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 16
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project's impact on land use due to the need for a rezone would be less
than significant based on the analysis contained in Section 3.5 of the Draft EIR and in light of the
whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
I.
Facts
The only potentially significant land use impact of the Project is its inconsistency with the
preservation policies of the City's General Plan. However, none of the cumulative projects listed in
FErR (Page 2-15) required the demolition or alteration of any historical resources. Therefore, there
would be no cumulative loss of historical resources or cumulative project inconsistency with the
historical resource preservation policies of the City's General Plan.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project would have a less than significant cumulative land use impact
based on the analysis contained in Section 3.5 of the Draft ErR and in light of the whole record.
NOISE (SECTION 3.6)
IMPACT:
SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS
I.
Facts
Land uses near the Project site include primarily commercial and institutional uses with some limited
residential north of the Project site along Prospect Avenue, at the northeast comer of Third Avenue
and Prospect Avenue, and east of the Project site along Third Avenue. During construction, it is
anticipated that land uses in the vicinity of the construction area would be exposed to noise generated
by various pieces of construction and demolition equipment operating within the project site. As
discussed in Section 3.6 ofthe Draft ErR, temporary noise levels adjacent to the construction area
could be 72 to 93 dBA depending on the distance the receptor is from the source of noise. However,
construction noise impacts during the loudest construction phases, including demolition, grading,
and utilities installation would be temporary, lasting only approximately two to three months. Due to
the temporary nature of the loudest phases of construction activity and the Noise Ordinance
requirements which restrict construction activity to the least noise sensitive daylight hours, Project
construction noise impacts are considered less than significant impacts.
2.
Findings
The City Council finds the Proj ect would have a less than significant short term construction noise
impact based on the analysis contained in Section 3.6 of the Draft ErR and in light of the whole
record.
Page 17
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
IMPACT: PERIODIC INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS DURING OUTDOOR PATIO
DINING AND OUTDOOR ENTERTAINING ON RESIDENTIAL DECKS
1.
Facts
The Project includes a 593 square foot outdoor dining area that will be located along East Main
Street. During the hours of restaurant operation people eating outdoors could periodically increase
ambient noise levels. However, any increase in noise levels would largely impact the other non-
noise sensitive uses, such as the commercial and office uses that currently exist on either side of East
Main Street. As discussed above, noise sensitive residential land uses are located north and northeast
of the Project site. However, these residential uses would be unaffected by the outdoor dining area
which faces E. Main Street. The live/work units located behind the new commercial retail office
building would function as a noise buffer between the restaurant and the residential uses located
north and north east of the Project site. Therefore, any potential increase in ambient noise levels
from the restaurant would be less than significant.
In addition to the outdoor dining area, each of the twelve (12) proposed live/works unit would have a
small approximately 80 square foot outdoor deck overlooking either Prospect A venue or new
Prospect Lane (currently a public alley). While a certain level of noise may be generated by one or
more people standing on these decks, due to the small size of the balcony, the amount of people on
the deck at any given time would be limited and any corresponding noise level would be less than
significant.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds that noise generated by the proposed outdoor dining area of the restaurant and
the residential balconies would be less than significant based on the analysis contained in Section 3.6
of the Draft ErR and in light of the whole record.
IMPACT: THE PROJECT WOULD GENERATEADDITIONAL TRAFFIC TRIPS THAT
WOULD INCREASE AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS.
1.
Facts
Currently, Prospect Avenue (between Main & First St.) experiences a daily traffic volume of
approximately 4,100 trips per day, while E. Main Street between Newport and EI Camino Real
experiences about 9,000 trips per day. The project would result in a six percent (6%) increase in
traffic trips along Prospect Avenue, which is negligible and would not substantially increase
pennanent ambient noise levels.
A noise level of 60 dB CNEL is considered an acceptable exterior residential noise level. Therefore,
while Project generated traffic would increase ambient noise levels in the area, these increases fall
within the acceptable range and are therefore considered less than significant.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 18
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2.
Findings
The City Council finds the Project would have a less than significant traffic noise impact based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.6 of the Draft ErR and in light of the whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
I.
Facts
According to Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR, the proposed project in conjunction with other past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would have a less than significant short-term
cumulative construction and operational noise impact. Each of the three (3) projects identified in
section 2.5 of the EIR are far enough from the project site that cumulative construction noise levels
would not be significant. In addition, construction activity at each of the Project sites would be
staggered. Similarly, the project would have a less than significant cumulative operational noise
impact.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project would have a less than significant cumulative noise impact based
on the analysis contained in Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
TRAFFIC (SECTION 3.7)
IMPACT:
ONCE OPERATIONAL, THE PROJECT WOULD GENERATE 600 TRAFFIC TRIPS
THAT WOULD BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE SURROUNDING ROADWAYS AND
INTERSECTIONS
I.
Facts
According to the Draft ErR, which is based on the Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analysis, dated
December 12, 2003 and prepared by Sasaki Transportation Services, the project would generate
approximately 600 traffic trips per day at build-out, including 23 inbound and 15 outbound trips
during the A.M. peak hour and 24 inbound and 26 outbound in the P.M. peak. The Traffic study
prepared for the project analyzed whether Project generated traffic would have a significant impact
on the roadways and intersections within the study area. As demonstrated on Pages 3.7-8 and 3.7-9
of Draft EIR and in the Traffic Study, the Project would not have a significant impact on roadway or
intersection operation. With the addition of Project traffic, each roadway in the study area would
operate at an acceptable LOS D or better.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project would have a less than significant operational traffic impact based
on the analysis contained in Section 3.7 of the Draft EIR, the Traffic Study and in light of the whole
record.
Page 19
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
The Traffic Study analyzed potential traffic impacts with and without the Project. The Traffic Study
first detennined future traffic conditions without the Project, which was based on cumulative traffic
forecasts that were perfonned in conjunction with the environmental studies for the MCAS Tustin
Disposal and Reuse Plan. The Traffic Study also added a one percent growth factor through the year
2020. Project traffic was then added to the "without" project conditions and impacts were assessed
accordingly. The Traffic Study concluded that Project traffic when combined with future traffic
forecasts for the area would not result in any significant impacts on intersections and roadways
within the study area.
The Project would also not create any significant cumulative parking impact in conjunction with the
other related projects identified in the FErR (Page 2-15). With respect to each of these projects, the
City detennined that the City's off-street parking requirements had been satisfied.
2.
Finding
The City Council finds the Project would have a less than significant cumulative traffic impact based
on the analysis contained in Section 3.7 of the Draft ErR, the Traffic Study, and in light of the whole
record.
VIII. FINDINGS OF FACT CONCERNING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Because the Project will cause unavoidable significant environmental effects, the City must consider
the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternative to the proposed project. As discussed in
the Draft ErR, the Project would have potentially significant impacts relating to historical resources
and land use.
The objectives for the proposed Prospect Village project are generally based on those in the City of
Tustin General Plan, Housing Element and Town Center Redevelopment Plan, as discussed in
Section 4.2 of the FErR, and are as follows:
.
To develop the vacant and underutilized site within the next 2 to 3 years to capitalize on the
current favorable private development financing conditions for mixed-use projects;
To eliminate delay and uncertainties regarding future development of the site;
To stimulate private investment and demonstrate economic viability in the Old Town
commercial area.
To increase the amount of specialty retailing and commercial development in the core of the
Old Town commercial area in order to enhance its urban character and bolster the
commercial area's revitalization and long-tenn economic viability;
To expand the niche market character of the Old Town commercial area by providing a
balanced and complementary mix of new retail and commercial uses;
.
Page 20
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
.
To increase the number of residential units in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area,
while reflecting a high-quality urban character;
To develop ground floor specialty retailing configurations consistent with current market
condition requirements;
To provide a minimum 3,000 square foot high-quality restaurant along with outdoor patio
dining to enliven the pedestrian environment along Main Street in the Old Town commercial
area;
To create a financially viable commercial mixed-used development with minimum public
subsidy;
To create constructionjobs and permanent jobs in the Town Center Redevelopment Project
Area;
To increase the property tax increment and sales tax revenues in the Project Area, which will
be earmarked for ongoing economic development activities in the Old Town commercial area
including business retention and outreach programs, façade improvement programs, and
community facility projects; and,
To achieve the Old Town commercial area redevelopment goals and objectives of the City's
General Plan and the Town Center Redevelopment Plan.
.
.
.
.
The project objectives are consistent with the Redevelopment Plan's goals, objectives, and proposed
activities to assist in eliminating conditions of physical and economic blight identified in the
Redevelopment Plan for the Town Center Area Redevelopment Project and further the City's goals
for the development of a viable Old Town Commercial district
A primary purpose of the Redevelopment Plan for the Town Center Area Redevelopment Project is
to eliminate and prevent the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area. To eliminate and
prevent the spread of blight and deterioration, the Redevelopment Plan identified activities proposed
by the Agency to include the following:
1. Providing for participation by owners and residents presently located in the Project Area;
2. Rehabilitation of structures and improvements by present owners, their successors, or the
Agency;
3. Redevelopment ofland by private enterprise or public agencies for uses in accordance with
the plan;
4. Installation, construction, or reconstruction of streets, utilities, and other public
improvements;
5. Acquisition of certain real property for public improvements or to help expedite private
development;
6. Relocation assistance to displaced residential and non-residential occupants should the need
arise;
7. Demolition or removal of certain buildings and improvements;
8. Management of any property acquired under the ownership and control of the Agency; and
9. Disposition of any property acquired by the Agency for uses in accordance with the Plan.
The goal for the Old Town commercial area is to create a sustainable and competitive 24-hour
district that will serve a broad segment of the City's business and residential population.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 21
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
Development of a compact eight-block commercial-retail core at the heart of the Old Town
commercial area would serve as the primary specialty retail area. The project's development
programming and design approach is consistent with the recommendations in the "Visions of Old
Town," a planning study that was prepared in 1991 and coordinated by the Regional/Urban Design
Assistance Team (RIUDA T) through the American Institute of Architects (AlA). As described in the
RIUDA T study, the commercial-retail core needs to be filled with new restaurants, retail stores, and
offices that will introduce a mix of commercial activities which will be competitive with the
surrounding strip commercial centers located along Newport Avenue. It is important to long-term
economic viability of the Old Town commercial area to re-establish the area in the near future as the
"town center" for the City of Tustin by intensifying private commercial retail development and
providing a viable alternative to the traditional neighborhood strip centers and community shopping
centers found on nearby Newport Avenue and other areas of the City.
AL TERNA TIVES CONSIDERED, BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION
CEQA provides that an EIR should identify any alternatives that the lead agency considered but
rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead
agency's determination. 1 Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed
consideration in an EIR are: (I) failure to meet most ofthe basic objectives, (2) infeasibility, or (3)
inability to avoid significant environmental effects? Consistent with this requirement, this section
identifies three (3) alternatives that the City of Tustin considered, but rejected as infeasible during
the scoping process, and provides a brief explanation of the reasons for their exclusion.
EI Camino Real/6th Street Site Alternative
This alternative site is approximately 1.7-acres and is located in the Old Town Commercial area at EI
Camino Real and 6th Street. The alternative site is a portion of a larger 4-acre subdivision. Over the
past five (5) years, the Agency has referred several private developers, who expressed an interest in
developing the site, to the property owners3 However, in each case, the property owners failed to
engage the developers in any level of meaningful negotiations. Instead, the property owners sought
to develop the site in accordance with their own investment objectives. Because the Agency does not
own the alternative site and based on the historic recalcitrance of the property owners to sell the site,
the Agency has determined that it is not feasible to pursue redevelopment of this site. Moreover, this
alternative would not meet several of the most basic project objectives including the need to develop
a mixed use project within the next two to three years and to eliminate delay and uncertainty
regarding future development of the site. Pursuing and ultimately developing this site against the
wishes of the property owner would take far longer than the two (2) to three (3) year redevelopment
period and substantially increase the uncertainty of a redevelopment project. The timing of the
project is critical in light of the favorable financing and market conditions, which could worsen over
1 14 Ca!. Code Regs §15126.6(c)
2 Ibid.
3 These developers included: Wannington Homes (developer of the 38 single family homes at Ambrose Lane located
across Sixth Street): the Olson Company (one of the nation's largest residential infiIl developers); CIM Group (a
highly experienced retaiIlresidential mixed-use infiIl developer); and Pacific Gulf Development (a large-scale senior
citizen and multifamily rental housing developer).
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 22
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
time. Based on past experiences with the property owner, pursuing this site and negotiating an
acceptable agreement would be difficult and time consuming.
W. First Sf. Site Alternative
This alternative site is approximately 1.2 acres and is located at 137 W. First Street. This alternative
site is located outside the Old Town Commercial area and outside the Town Center Redevelopment
Project Area. Due to its location outside the Old Town commercial area and the Town Center
Redevelopment Project Area, the site would not meet the most basic project objective, which is to
revitalize Old Town with a mixed use commercial/residential project. In addition, this alternative
site is a less attractive redevelopment option because the site has a limited amount of retail window
frontage on First Street. Thus, the ability to find viable retail tenants would be jeopardized. Finally,
the Agency would have to acquire this site from the current property owner, which, like the above
alternative site, would take far longer than the two (2) to three (3) year development period identified
in the project objectives.
Relocating the Utt Juice Buildings
The Agency also considered relocating the existing structures to an undeveloped site in the Old
Town Commercial Area. This alternative was rejected as infeasible for several reasons. First,
transporting the masonry structures, which are constructed on concrete slab foundations, without
significantly damaging the structures, would be difficult. Second, assuming the structure were not
significantly damaged during transit, relocating the structures to another part of Old Town would not
necessarily substantially lessen or avoid the Project's significant impact on historic resources. The
Historic Resources Technical Report in Appendix C of the EIR noted the historical significance of
these structures at their existing location:
"The UTT Juice Buildings also derive significance because of their location at a
prominent comer of Old Town Tustin. In fact, the Buildings provide an
"introduction" to Old Town as the first of its historic buildings one encounters when
traveling west on Main Street. Their elimination... would significantly affect the
visitor's initial historic view of Old Town.,,4
Therefore, relocating the structure would not reduce the Project's significant and unavoidable impact
on historical resources.
RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES AND REASONING FOR SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES
The EIS/EIR analyzed a reasonable range of alternatives by identifYing alternatives that could
potentially attain the project objectives while avoiding or substantially lessening the significant
effects of the proposed project. As documented in the ErR, the Project would have a significant and
unavoidable direct impact on historical resources and would be inconsistent with General Plan
policies that promote rehabilitation and reuse of historical structures. Therefore, the City developed
4 Historic Resources Technical Report at p. 11
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 23
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
a range of Project alternatives that focus on varying levels of rehabilitation and reuse of the existing
structures in accordance with the Secretary's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with
Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, 1995,
Weeks and Grimmer ("Secretary's Standards and Guidelines"). The Secretary's Standards and
Guidelines provide, among other things, that construction of adjacent buildings or additions to the
existing structures should: (a) be limited in size and scale in relationship to the existing structure, (b)
be located at or on non-character-defining building elevations of the existing structures, and (c) avoid
rooftop additions which would not be set back from the wall plane of the existing structures.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Six (6) Project alternatives, including a "No Project" alternative and five (5) Project alternatives
were evaluated, as listed below.
1.
Full Reuse Alternative: This alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the existing historic
buildings, construct a new retail structure on E. Main St., and construct ten (10) live/work
units;
2.
Partial Reuse Alternative: This alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the existing
structures, except for the rear portion of the 193, 195 Building, which would be demolished.
This alternative also includes a new retail building on E. Main St., and ten (10) live/work
units;
Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only) Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation
and reuse of a portion of the 193, 195 Building, demolition of the 191 building and
construction of a new retail building on E. Main Street and twelve (12) live/work units.
3.
4.
Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse of
the existing historic buildings and development of the remaining portions of the site in
accordance with the existing C-2 zoning designation.
5.
Facade Reuse Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse of only the façade
of the 193, 195 Building, construction of a new two story retail/office building on E. Main
Street and twelve (12) live/work units.
FINDINGS
The City Council finds that the "No Project" Alternative is infeasible within the meaning ofPRC §
21081 (a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or other considerations as
follows:
1.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of providing for near term
implementation of development on the Project site since no activity would take place and the
existing buildings are unsafe to occupy and likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 24
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
2.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of intensifying and expanding
commercial develùpment and specialty retailing in the Old Town commercial area since no
activity would take place and the existing buildings on the site are unsafe to occupy and
likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future.
3.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of creating a balanced and
complementary mix of retail and commercial uses since no activity would take place and the
existing buildings on the site are unsafe to occupy and likely to remain vacant for the
foreseeable future.
4.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of adding additional residential
units since no activity would take place and the existing buildings are unsafe to occupy and
likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future. In addition, the existing zoning does not
permit residential uses nor would the existing buildings accommodate residential uses.
5.
The No Project Alternative would failto meet the objective of providing ground floor
specialty retailing depths of 45 feet consistent with current market conditions and
recommendations since no activity would take place and the existing buildings are unsafe to
occupy and likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future.
6.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of providing a minimum 3,000
square foot restaurant use since no activity would take place and the existing buildings are
unsafe to occupy and likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future.
7.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of creating a financially viable
mixed use development with a minimum public subsidy since no development would occur.
8.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of creating increased property tax
increment in the Project Area to assist in funding economic development activities in the Old
Town commercial area since no development would occur.
9.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of creating employment
associated with construction and new commercial activities since no development would
occur.
10.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment
in the Old Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since no
development, or investment, would occur. In addition, the lack of new development in Old
Town would contribute to general uncertainties in the Old Town commercial area caused by
a delay in development of the site.
The City Council finds that "Alternative I (Full Reuse Alternative)" is infeasible within the meaning
of PRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or other
considerations as follows:
Prospect Village FEIR
Page2S
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1.
Alternative I would fail to meet the objective of providing for near term implementation of
development on the project site since no developers have indicated full rehabilitation is
feasible or practical. As documented in Draft EIR (p. 2-6) and extensively in the Response to
Comments (Response 8.7-8), the City has negotiated with five different developers and all
the developers have been unable to determine the feasibility of preserving and reusing the
structures. Given the City's inability to find a developer willing to reuse these structures for
a redevelopment project, adopting this alternative would cause delay and uncertainty in the
development of the site. The City would need to find a developer that is willing to
rehabilitate the existing buildings and able to secure the necessary private investment
funding.
2.
Alternative I would diminish the objective of intensifYing and expanding commercial
development and specialty retailing in the Old Town commercial area. In comparison the
proposed project, which would add 16,653 square feet of retail and office space, this
alternative would result in only 14,780 square feet, which is an 11.2 percent reduction in the
amount of retail and office space planned for the site.
3.
Alternative I would diminish the objective of creating a balanced and complementary mix of
retail and commercial uses. In comparison to the proj ect, which would add 9,251 square feet
(55%) of retail and 7,402 square feet of office (45%), Alternative I would add 12,625 square
feet (85%) of retail and 2,155 (15%) square feet of office, which does not balance the
provision of retail and office uses as well as the project.
4.
Alternative I would diminish the objective of adding additional residential units since only
ten (10) units would be provided in comparison to the project, which would provide twelve
(12) units.
5.
Alternative I would fail to meet the objective of providing ground floor specialty retailing
depths of 45 consistent with current market conditions and recommendations since full
rehabilitation would result in oddly configured building depths of sixty (60) to ninety (90)
feet and a restaurant space that is inconsistent with current market conditions and
recommendations.
6.
Alternative 1 would diminish the objective of providing a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant with outdoor patio dining since no outdoor dining area would be provided with full
rehabilitation of the existing buildings.
7.
Alternative I would fail to meet the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy. According to the independent economic
feasibility study conducted by the firm Keyser Marston Associates Inc., October 28,2003,
this alternative would reflect a negative supportable land value of -$390,000, requiring a
minimum subsidy of $1,245,000 (based on the difference between the Agency's cost of
acquisition, which was $855,000, and the supportable land value) as opposed to no public
Pwspect Village FEIR
Page 26
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
8.
9.
subsidy to support the proposed projectS In other words, the construction costs to
rehabilitate the structures in a manner suitable for reuse would exceed the value of the
project As documented in the KCM Group report, the increase in construction costs is
predominantly driven by the rehabilitation and reuse costs, which far exceed the cost of new
construction. For example, under the full reuse scenario, the probable cost of rehabilitation
of the buildings to a shell condition is approximately 196.44 per square feet6 On the other
hand, the probable cost of constructing new structures to a shell condition is about $116 per
square feet less or approximately $80 per square feet.7
In addition, the KMA Report concludes that the preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space.s The existing buildings are broken into smaller spaces that are less useful
than newly developer retail and restaurant spaces. Thus from a marketability standpoint,
space in the preserved building is not as attractive and has a negative impact on the overall
value of the project for a prospective developer. According to the KMA Report, preserved
retail space is projected to rent for $13 per square foot, as opposed to $15 per square foot for
new space, while preserved restaurant space is projected to rent for $15 per square foot
versus $21 per square foot for new restaurant space.9
Alternative I would diminish the objective of creating increased property tax increment in
the Project Area to assist in funding economic revitalization and development activities in
the Old Town commercial area since the proposed project is anticipated to generate $85,000
annually whereas Alternative I is anticipated to generate $70,500 annually, which is 17.4
percent less in revenues than the proposed project 10
Alternative I would diminish the objective of creating employment associated with new
commercial activities since it would generate thirty-three (33) percent less permanent jobs
than the proposed project
10.
Alternative I would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of$1 ,245,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within the Old Town
commercial area.
The City Council finds that "Alternative 2 (Partial Reuse Alternative)" is infeasible within the
meaning ofPRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or
other considerations as follows:
5 Evaluation ofCEQA Alternatives. Proposed Prospect Village Project, Lames Rabe and Kevin Engstrom, Keyser
Marston Associates Inc. October 28,2003, p. 3-4 ("KMA Report")
6 UII Juice Building Rehabilitation Estimates, Gordon Kovtum, KCM Group, October 10,2003; KMA Report,
Alternative 2Scenario,Table IA
7 KMA Report, Prospect Village Project Scenario, Table IA
8 KMA Report, p. 4
9 KMA Report, p. 3-4
10 KMA Report atp. 7
Page 27
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1.
Alternative 2 would fail to meet the objective of providing for near tenn implementation of
development on the project site since no developers have indicated rehabilitation and
reconfiguration of the existing buildings is feasible or practical. While this alternative entails
only partial, instead offull reuse, based on the City's prior experiences with developer, there
is considerable uncertainty as to whether the City could successfully find a developer willing
to implement this or any type of reuse alternative. As documented in the City's economic
feasibility studies, rehabilitating and reusing any portion of the existing structures
significantly increases construction costs and increase the amount of the public subsidy.1I
Adopting this alternative would cause delay and uncertainty in the development of the site
since a developer would need to be identified that is willing to rehabilitate the existing
buildings and able to secure the necessary private investment funding.
2.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of intensifYing and expanding commercial
development and specialty retailing in the Old Town commercial area. In comparison the
proposed project, which would add 16,653 square feet of retail and office space, this
alternative would result in only 15,160 square feet, which is a 9 percent reduction in the
amount of retail and office space planned for the site.
3.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of creating a balanced and complementary mix of
retail and commercial uses. In comparison to the project, which would add 9,251 square feet
(55%) of retail and 7,402 square feet of office (45%), Alternative 2 would add 11,405 square
feet (75%) of retail and 3,755 (25%) square feet of office, which does not balance the
provision of retail and office uses as well as the Project.
4.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of adding additional residential units since only
ten (10) units would be provided in comparison to the Project, which would provide twelve
(12) units.
5.
Alternative 2 would fail to meet the objective of providing ground floor specialty retailing
depths of 45 consistent with current market conditions and recommendations since full
rehabilitation would result in an oddly configured building depth of sixty (60) feet and a
restaurant space that is inconsistent with current market conditions and recommendations.
6.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of providing a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant with outdoor patio dining use since no outdoor dining area would be provided with
full rehabilitation of the existing buildings.
7.
Alternative 2 would fail to meet the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy since rehabilitation under this alternative would
reflect a negative supportable land value of -$437,000, requiring a minimum subsidy of
$1,292,000 (based on the difference between the Agency's cost of acquisition, which was
$855,000, and the supportable land value) as opposed to no public subsidy to support the
11 KCM Report; KMA Report
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 28
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
proposed project." The negative supportable land value is based on the increased
construction costs for the rehabilitation effort combined with the loss oftwo residential units.
In addition, the KMA Report concludes that the preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space.lJ The existing buildings are broken into smaller spaces that are less useful
than newly developer retail and restaurant spaces. Thus from a marketability standpoint,
space in the preserved building is not as attractive and has a negative impact on the overall
value of the project for a prospective developer. According to the KMA Report, preserved
retail space is proj ected to rent for $ I 3 per square foot, as opposed to $15 per square foot for
new space, while preserved restaurant space is projected to rent for $15 per square foot
versus $21 per square foot for new restaurant space.14
8.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of creating increased property tax increment in
the Project Area to assist in funding economic revitalization and development activities in
the Old Town commercial area since the proposed project is anticipated to generate $85,000
annually whereas Alternative 2 is anticipated to generate $71,100 annually, which is 16.6
percent less in revenues than the proposed project. 15 .
9.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of creating employment associated with new
commercial activities since this alternative would generate twenty-three (23) percent less
permanent jobs less than the proposed project.
10.
Alternative 2 would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of$1 ,292,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within in the Old Town
commercial area.
II.
While Alternative 2 would increase the level of rehabilitation and reuse, it would still cause a
significant and unavoidable impact on the historic Utt Juice Building. According to the
City's Historic Resources Report, the impact on these structures would only be reduced to a
less than significant level if the project retained all historic resources on site with reuse
dictated by what alterations and additions are possible under the Secretary of Interior
Standards.16 Because this alternative entails demolition of the rear portion one of the
structures, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
The City Council finds that "Alternative 3" is infeasible within the meaning ofPRC § 21081(a) (3),
due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or other considerations as follows:
1.
Like Alternatives I and 2, Alternative 3 would fail to meet the objective of providing for near
"KMA Report, p. 5
13 KMA Report, p. 4
14 KMA Report, p. 3-4
I'ld. atp. 7
16 Historic Resources Technical Report, UtI Juice Redevelopment Project, Tim Gergory, July 14,2003, p. 13
Prospect Village FE1R
Page 29
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
term implementation of development on the project site since no developers have indicated
rehabilitation and reconfiguration of the existing buildings is feasible or practical. While this
alternative entails only partial, instead of full reuse, based on the City's prior experiences
with developer, there is considerable uncertainty as to whether the City could successfully
find a developer willing to implement this or any type of reuse alternative. As documented
in the City's economic feasibility studies, rehabilitating and reusing any portion of the
existing structures significantly increases construction costs and increase the amount of the
public subsidy.17 Adopting this alternative would cause delay and uncertainty in the
development of the site since a developer would need to be identified that is willing to
rehabilitate the existing buildings and able to secure the necessary private investment
funding.
2.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of intensifYing and expanding commercial
development and specialty retailing in the Old Town commercial area. In comparison the
proposed project, which would add 16,653 square feet of retail and office space, this
alternative would result in only 15,044 square feet, which is a 9.7 percent reduction in the
amount of retail and office space planned for the site.
3.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of creating a balanced and complementary mix of
retail and commercial uses. In comparison to the proj ect, which would add 9,251 square feet
(55%) of retail and 7,402 square feet of office (45%), Alternative 3 would add 9,746 square
feet (65%) of retail and 5,298 (35%) square feet of office, which does not balance the
provision of retail and office uses as well as the project.
4.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of providing a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant with outdoor patio dining use since no outdoor dining area would be provided with
full rehabilitation of the existing buildings.
5.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy since rehabilitation under this alternative would
reflect a supportable land value of $112,000, requiring a minimum subsidy of $738,000
(based on the difference between the Agency's cost of acquisition, which was $855,000, and
the supportable land value) as opposed to no public subsidy to support the proposed project. 18
In addition, the KMA Report concludes that the preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space. 19 The existing buildings are broken into smaller spaces that are less useful
than newly developer retail and restaurant spaces. Thus from a marketability standpoint,
space in the preserved building is not as attractive and has a negative impact on the overall
value of the project for a prospective developer. According to the KMA Report, preserved
retail space is proj ected to rent for $13 per square foot, as opposed to $15 per square foot for
17 KCM Report; KMA Report
18 KMA Report, p. 6
19 KMA Report, p. 4
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 30
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA T!ONS
new space, while preserved restaurant space is projected to rent for $15 per square foot
versus $21 per square foot for new restaurant space.20
6.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of creating employment associated with new
commercial activities since this alternative. would generate seventeen (17) percent less
permanent jobs less than the proposed project.
7.
Alternative 3 would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of$738,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within in the Old Town
commercial area.
8.
While Alternative 3 would increase the level of rehabilitation and reuse, it would still cause a
significant and unavoidable impact on the historic Uti Juice Building. According to the
City's Historic Resources Report, the impact on these structures would only be reduced to a
less than significant level if the project retained all historic resources on site with reuse
dictated by what alterations and additions are possible under the Secretary of Interior
Standards.'! Because this alternative entails demolition of the rear portion one of the
structures, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
The City Council finds that "Alternative 4 (Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative)" is infeasible
within the meaning of PRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological,
environmental, or other considerations as follows:
1.
Like the other alternatives, Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of providing for
near term implementation of development on the project site since no developers have
indicated full rehabilitation is feasible or practical. As documented in Draft EIR (p. 2-6) and
extensively in the Response to Comments (Response 8.7-8), the City has negotiated with five
different developers and all the developers have been unable to determine the feasibility of
preserving and reusing the structures. Given the City's inability to find a developer willing
to reuse these structures for a redevelopment project, adopting this alternative would cause
delay and uncertainty in the development of the site since a developer would need to be
identified that is willing to rehabilitate the existing buildings and able to secure the necessary
private investment funding.
2.
Alternative 4 would diminish the objective of creating a balanced and complementary mix of
retail and commercial uses. In comparison to the Proj ect, which would add 9,251 square feet
(55%) of retail and 7,402 square feet of office (45%), Alternative 5 would provide 19,120
square feet (68%) of retail and 9,000 (32%) square feet of office, which does not balance the
provision of retail and office uses as well as the Project.
20 KMA Report, p. 3-4
21 Historic Resources Technical Report, UtI Juice Redevelopment Project, Tim Gergory, July 14,2003, p. 13
Prospect Village FE!R
Page3!
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
3.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of adding additional residential units since no
residential units would be provided in comparison to the Project, which would provide
twelve (12) units.
4.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of providing ground floor specialty retailing
depths of 45 consistent with current market conditions and recommendations since full
rehabilitation would result in oddly configured building depths of sixty (60) to ninety (90)
feet and a restaurant space that is inconsistent with current market conditions and
recommendations.
5.
Alternative 4 would diminish the objective of providing a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant with outdoor patio dining use since no outdoor dining area on Main Street would
be provided with full rehabilitation of the existing buildings.
6.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy since full rehabilitation would reflect a
negative supportable land value of -$1,813,3000, requiring a minimum subsidy of
$2,668,000 (based on the difference between the Agency's cost of acquisition, which was
$855,000, and the supportable lane value)."
In addition, the KMA Report concludes that the preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space." The existing buildings are broken into smaller spaces that are less useful
than newly developer retail and restaurant spaces. Thus from a marketability standpoint,
space in the preserved building is not as attractive and has a negative impact on the overall
value of the project for a prospective developer. According to the KMA Report, preserved
retail space is projected to rent for $13 per square foot, as opposed to $15 per square foot for
new space, while preserved restaurant space is projected to rent for $15 per square foot
versus $21 per square foot for new restaurant space."
7.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of creating increased property tax increment in
the Project Area to assist in funding economic revitalization and development activities in
the Old Town commercial area since the proposed project is anticipated to generate $85,300
annually whereas Alternative 4 is anticipated to generate $37,200 annually, which is 56.4
percent less in revenues than the proposed project"
8.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of$2,668,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within in the Old Town
commercial area.
"KMA Report, p. 6.7
23 KMA Report, p. 4
24 KMA Report, p. 3.4
"KMA Report, p. 7
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 32
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
The City Council finds that "Alternative 5 (Facade Reuse Alternative)" is infeasible within the
meaning ofPRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environ¡nental, or
other considerations as follows:
I.
Alternative 5 would fail to meet the objective of providing for near term implementation of
development on the project site since no developers have indicated facade preservation is
feasible or practical. Adopting this alternative would cause delay and uncertainty in the
development of the site since a developer would need to be identified that is willing to
preserve the façade of existing buildings and able to secure the necessary private investment
funding. In addition, special design and construction techniques would be necessary to reuse
the existing façade within a new development. Adding a second floor above the existing
façade would be problematic in terms of achieving architectural compatibility and
functionality of second floor areas.
2.
Although Alternative 5 would provide twelve residential units similar to the proposed
Project, these units would need to be designed to complement the existing façade and
architecture, which may add to the construction cost. Adopting this alternative would cause
delay and uncertainty in the development of the site since a developer would need to be
identified that is willing to design and build residential units that are compatible with the
façade of existing buildings.
3.
Although Alternative 5 could provide for a 3,000 square foot outdoor dining area
opportunity, it would need to be integrated within the existing façade, which may result in a
less than desirable outdoor dining area in comparison with the Project.
4.
Alternative 5 would diminish the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy since façade preservation would reflect a
supportable land value of$198,000, requiring a minimum subsidy of$657,000, compared to
no public subsidy to support the proposed project.
5.
Alternative 5 would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of$657,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within in the Old Town
commercial area.
IX.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
INTRODUCTION
The California Environ¡nental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a decision-maker to balance the benefits
of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve
the project. If the Planning Commission, Tustin City Council, or Tustin Community Redevelopment
Agency allows the occurrence of significant effects through approval of a project, it must state its
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 33
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
specific reasons for so doing in writing. Such reasons are included in the "statement of overriding
considerations."
Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines establishes the following requirements for a statement of
overriding considerations:
(a)
(b)
(c)
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal,
social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the
unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be
considered "acceptable."
When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant
effects, which are identified in the final ErR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the
agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR
and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be
supported by substantial evidence in the record.
If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be
included in the record of the Project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of
determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings
required pursuant to Section 15091.
The City Council of the City of Tustin adopts and makes the following statement of overriding
considerations regarding the remaining unavoidable impacts identified within the Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEISIEIR) for the Prospect Village Project. In adopting Resolution
No. 04-45, the City Council acknowledges that it has weighed the benefits of the identified the
Project against the adverse significant impacts that have not been avoided or substantially lessened to
less than significant levels through mitigation.
The City Council hereby determines that the benefits of the project outweigh the unmitigated adverse
impacts and the Project should be approved. The City Council finds that to the extent that the
identified significant adverse impacts have not been avoided or substantially lessened, there are
specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations which support approval of the
project.
SIGNIFICANT UNA VOIDABLE IMPACTS
Unavoidable or potentially unavoidable significant environmental effects of the project identified in
the Final EIRiEIS and Findings of Significant Impacts include the following:
.
The project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of historical resources
as defined in Section 150064.5.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 34
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The project would be inconsistent with General Plan policies that promote preservation and
rehabilitation of historic resources.
ADOPTION OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council specifically adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations and finds that: a)
as part ofthe approval provisions, the Project has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant
effects on the environment where feasible; b) mitigation measures to mitigate the effects associated
with the Project are within the jurisdiction ofthe City, and, c) the remaining unavoidable impacts of
the Project are acceptable in light of the environmental, economic, legal, social, technological, and
other considerations set forth herein, because the benefits of the Project outweigh the significant and
adverse impacts.
The City Council finds that each of the overriding considerations set forth below constitutes a
separate and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the Project: 1) outweigh its
significant adverse environmental impacts, and 2) is an overriding consideration warranting approval
of the Project. These matters are supported by substantial evidence in the record.
FINDINGS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the Prospect Village project ("the Project")
identified two closely related significant adverse unavoidable Project impacts associated with land
use and cultural resources. The Project will cause: 1) a significant unavoidable adverse land use
impact due to a conflict with a limited number of General Plan policies relating to the preservation of
historical resources as a result of the proposed demolition of the Utt Juice Buildings, and 2) a
significant unavoidable adverse cultural resources impact due to the permanent loss of the
historically significant Utt Juice Buildings.
The Project, however, will create substantial benefits for the City of Tustin, specifically the Old
Town commercial area. The City Council has balanced the Project's benefits against the Project's
significant unavoidable land use and cultural resources impacts. The City Council finds that the
Project's benefits outweigh the Project's significant unavoidable impacts, and the impacts are
therefore considered acceptable in light ofthe Project's benefits. The City Council finds that each of
the following benefits is an overriding consideration, independent ofthe other benefits, that warrant
approval ofthe Project as designed, notwithstanding the Project's significant and unavoidable land
use and cultural resources impacts:
1.
The Project will eliminate delays and uncertainties regarding redevelopment a/the site
Since 1998 when the Agency acquired the property, the Agency has actively marketed the
Project site. However, as documented in the Response to Comments portion of the Final
EIR, up until now, the Agency has been unsuccessful in its efforts to find a developer willing
to redevelop the Project site. (See Final EIR, Section 2.0 Response to Comments, Response
8.7-8) One developer initially expressed interest but failed to complete the proposal process.
After approximately 16 months of negotiations with another entity consisting of a partnership
Page35
Prospect VIllage FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
between two developers, the Agency was unable to reach a mutually acceptable agreement on
the amount of the substantial public subsidy to make the project viable and a commitment to
implementation. The Agency encountered similar issues with three other developers. This
Project finally removes the uncertainties surrounding build-out of this site and makes
redevelopment of the site a reality.
2.
The Project will stimulate private investment and demonstrate economic viability of the Old
Town commercial area
The Project site has not been in active and consistent pennanent commercial use since 1973.
The project site was included in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area because of
economic deterioration and physical blight. The Project with its exceptional design and its
mix of office, commercial, restaurant, and residential uses represents further progress in the
revitalization of the Old Town area. The Project will demonstrate to developers and other
private investors that Old Town can be a viable location for future commercial, retail, and
residential uses. The Project will increase the residential presence in Old Town and replace
the currently vacant Utt Juice buildings with a large street level restaurant and retail use
thereby enlivening this area of Old Town.
The Project would be consistent with the recommendations in the "Visions of Old Town," a
broad community-based planning study that was prepared in 1991 and coordinated by the
Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) through the American Institute of
Architects (AlA). As described in the R/UDA T study, the commercial-retail core needs to be
filled with new restaurants, retail stores, and offices that will introduce a mix of commercial
activities which will be competitive with the surrounding strip commercial centers located
along Newport Avenue. It is important to long-tenn economic viability of the Old Town
commercial area to re-establish the area in the near future as the "town center" for the City of
Tustin by intensifYing private commercial retail development and providing a viable
alternative to the traditional neighborhood strip centers and community shopping centers
found on nearby Newport Avenue and other areas of the City.
This Project with its retail, restaurant, and office component will also achieve the City's
General Plan land use goals, which promote economic expansion and diversification. These
goals include: to "Broaden the City's tax base by attracting businesses which will contribute
to the City's economic growth and employment opportunities..." (General Plan, Land Use
Element, Policy 7.1); and to "Focus retail development into consolidated, economically
viable and attractive centers of adequate size and scale which offer a variety of retail goods
and amenities. (General Plan, Land Use Element, Policy 7.5).
3.
The Project will add to the City's supply of residential units and improve the jobs to housing
ratio in Old Town
Implementation of the Project would increase the inventory of residential uses in the Old
Town area. Specifically, the Project would create twelve (12) new residential units and is
consistent with General Plan goals to develop character of the Old Town/First Street area
Page36
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
including "possible development of residential uses in the Old Town area both as individual
residential projects and integrated above ground floor retail and office uses." (General Plan,
Land Use Element, Policy 10.2). These new units will also be occupied by the owners and
proprietors of the retail and office uses that will be below each unit. Thus, the Project will
allow residents to live above their businesses and offices thereby eliminating commuting and
associated traffic congestion and air quality impacts.
4.
The Project would implement the General Plan's overall vision for development of the site
The Project's mix of residential, office, retail, and restaurant (with outdoor dining area) uses
achieves the General Plan's vision for future build-out of the Old Town/First Street area.
The Project's restaurant and outdoor dining patio is consistent with the General Plan policy
which encourages outdoor pedestrian spaces, such as courtyards, arcades, and open landscape
passages to be integrated into new development. (General Plan, Land Use Element, Policy
10.3). The Project's approximately 6,200 square feet of ground floorretail, 3,500 square foot
restaurant (includes the outdoor dining area) and another 2,500 square feet of ground floor
retail/office spaces accessible from public sidewalks would be consistent with the General
Plan policy, which encourages high-quality pedestrian oriented building frontages which
open onto these pedestrian spaces and public sidewalks. (General Plan, Land Use Element,
Policy 10.6). Moreover, as noted above, the General Plan specifically envisions the Project's
live/work or residential component for Old Town.
5.
The Project would implement the Town Center Redevelopment Plan's vision for the site
The Project implements the goals and objectives of the Town Center Redevelopment Plan
Area ("Area"). The Redevelopment Plan goals and objectives for the Area include the
creation of a mixed use town center that combines commercial, office, residential, and public
uses. The Redevelopment Plan also encourages residential development by actively seeking
private development in the redevelopment area. The Project's mix of retail, office, restaurant
and residential is consistent with these goals and objectives.
6.
The Project will generate property and sales tax revenues for the Agency and City
The Proj ect will create a new source of property and sales tax revenue for the City and the
Agency. The City will receive sales tax revenue for the retail sales that occur on-site, and the
Agency will receive tax increment revenues from the property taxes paid.26 According to
the feasibility study, property tax revenues for the Project would total approximately $85,300
and sales tax would total $10,500.27
7.
The Project will assist in the elimination of blight in the Town Center Redevelopment Plan
Area ("Area")
26 KMA Report, p.26 "Evaluation ofCEQA Altematives- Prospect Village," James Rabe & Kevin Engstrom,
Keyser Marston Associates. Inc., October 28, 2003, p. 7
"ld.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 37
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
The Project will assist in eliminating blight as identified under Sections 33031 and 33031 of
the California Redevelopment Law and in the Second Implementation Plan for the Town
Center and South Central Redevelopment Areas (January 2000) including the following:
.
Unsafe/Dilapidated/Deteriorated Buildings characterized by conditions caused by
serious building code violations, dilapidation or deterioration.
Physical Conditions that Limit Economic Viability and Use of Lots and Buildings
characterized by conditions that can be caused by substandard design, inadequate size
given present standards and market conditions, lack of parking, or similar factors.
Depreciated/Stagnant Property Values or Impaired Investments characterized, but not
necessarily limited to properties containing hazardous waste or other conditions that
require the use of agency authority.
High Business Turnovers and Vacancies/Low Lease Rates/Abandoned
BuildingN acant Lots within an area developed for urban use and served by utilities.
.
.
.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 38
EXHIBIT C OF RESOLUTION NO. 04-45
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Measure
Cultural Resources 1:
Prior to issuance of a demolitiou pemit,
documentation of the buildings to be removed
shall be undertaken by the developer to be
approved by the City utilizing the standards of
the Historic American Building Survey
(RABS), including photo-documentation and
measured drawings of the East Main and
Prospect Avenue elevations. These items,
together with the Historical Resource Technical
Report, shall be added to the Tustin Area
Historical Society Museum.
Cultural Resources 2:
If buried cultural resources, such as chipped or
ground stone, historic debris, building
foundations, or human remains are
inadvertently discovered during ground-
disturbing activities, work will stop in that area
and within 100 feet of the find until a qualified
archaeologist can assess the significance of the
find, and, if necessary, develop appropriate
treatment measures. Treatment measures
typically include development of avoidance
strategies, capping with fill material, or
mitigation of impacts through data recovery
programs such as excavation or detailed
documentation.
The construction contractor and lead
contractor compliance inspector will verify
that work is halted until appropriate treatment
measures are implemented if cultural resources
are discovered during construction activities.
Concurrence from the City on measures to be
implemented before resuming construction
activities in the area of the find will be
obtained.
Exhibit C of Resolutiou No. 04-45
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Timing and Implementation
Mitigation
Compliance
Responsibility
Mitigation
Monitoring and
Enforcement
Responsibility
Prior to issuance of a demolition permit
City of Tustin
Community Development
Department
During construction
City of Tustin
Community Development
Department
Hazards 1:
The applicant shall remove the clarifier on site
in accordance with applicable local, state and Prior to issuance of grading permits City of Tustin Community Development
federal regulations prior to obtaining a grading Department
permit.
Hazards 2:
Any unknown contaminated soils that could be
encountered on the project site during During construction City of Tustin Community Development
demolition, site clearance, or construction
activities shall be removed 1T0m the project site Department
and disposed of off-site. The removal and
disposal of these hazardous materials would be
in accordance with guidelines specified by the
applicable local, state and federal resources
agencies, including but not limited to the
Department of Toxics Substances Control and
federal Environmental Protection Agency.
Hazards 3:
If during any future demolition or remodeling
activities additional suspect materials are During demolition or remodeling City of Tustin Community Development
observed, bulk samples shall be collected of Department
these materials and analyzed for asbestos
content. All suspect materials at the Property
are Presumed Asbestos-containing Materials
(PACMs) until the asbestos content is
confirmed or denied by analytical testing.
Hazards 4:
The applicant shall retain a licensed abatement
contractor to properly remove and dispose of Prior to issuance of a demolition City of Tustin Community Development
the damaged (peeling, flaking) lead-based permit Department
paint prior to obtaining a demolition permit.
Traffic 1:
The developer shall prepare a construction Prior to issuance of a demolition permit City of Tustin Public Works Department
staging and parking plan for review and
approval by City of Tustin Public Works prior
to issuance of demolition permit. The developer
Exhibit C of Resolution No. 04-45
Page 2
or contractor shall monitor the implementation
and effectiveness of the construction staging
and parking plan during the construction phase
of the project. The plan shall include one or
more ofthe following potential types of traffic-
related mitigation measures to ensure that
temporary disruptions to the adjacent uses and
circulation within the area are minimized:
.
Construction and Employee
Parking: As part of the construction
staging and parking plan, the
contractor would submit and obtain
approval of a construction parking
program which reflects the schedule of
construction activities and location of
construction-related parking.
Locations of available parking would
be identified.
Street Circulation and Parking
Measures: The contractor may
request and obtain a pennit for any
temporary lane closures that may be
required for adjacent roadways. The
contractor would utilize flagmen for
traffic control to minimize
inconvenience and for safety of
vehicles and pedestrians.
Haul Truck Routes, Queue Areas,
and Deliveries: The contractor would
provide an estimate of truck volume
and schedule. Schedule adjustments
would be made to minimize the
volume during peak traffic hours.
Areas would be designated by the
developer or contractor for staging of
all trucks. All earth-moving and
ready-mix trucks would be equipped
with two-way radios. The trucks
would follow a City-approved route to
the project site, without unnecessary
waiting.
Hours of Excavation Hanling:
Heavy truck hauling associated with
.
.
.
Exhibit C of Resolution No. 04-45
Page 3
excavation would be scheduled to
minimize interference with daytime
activity in the area. The hours for
excavation hauling would be
determined in conjunction with the
City as part of the construction staging
and parking plan.
0 Pedestrian Safety Measures: The
contractor would install a construction
fence around the perimeter,
complying with City requirements
before excavation begins. A flagman
would be available at all times and
would be utilized whenever trucks
entering or leaving the project site
may impede the flow of traffic.
Parking 1:
If the City Council does not approve the Off-
Site Parking Agreement, the applicant must
present an alternative shared use agreement to
the City for review and approval prior to
issuance of a demolition permit. If the City
does not approve an alternative shared use
agreement, the Proiect shall not proceed.
Exhibit C of Resolution No. 04-45
Page 4
Prior to issuance of a demolition permit
City of Tustin
Community Development
Department
ATTACHMENT H
Resolution No. 04-46
RESOLUTION NO. 04.46
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN DETERMINING THAT LOCATION, PURPOSE, AND
EXTENT OF THE PROPOSED DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY AT
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MAIN STREET AND
PROSPECT AVENUE CONFORMS WITH THE TUSTIN
GENERAL PLAN
The City Council does hereby resolve as follows:
I.
The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A.
That the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency proposes to dispose of
the property at the northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue,
pursuant to a Disposition and Development Agreement between the Tustin
Community Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village LP, a California
Limited Partnership (formerly known as Pelican Center, LLC) for the
Proposed Village Project.
B.
That California Government Code Section 65402 (c) provides that no real
property shall be disposed until the location, purpose, and extent of the
project has been reported upon by the local planning agency as to the
conformity with the applicable, adopted General Plan.
C.
That on April 26, 2004, the Planning Commission, acting as the planning
agency for the City of Tustin, found the disposition of property to be in
conformance with the Tustin General Plan and on May 3, 2004, the City
Council appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council.
D.
That on May 17, 2003, the City Council considered whether the location,
purpose, and extent of the disposition of property conforms with the
applicable, adopted General Plan.
E.
The Prospect Village Project is consistent with the Tustin General Plan in
that the "Old Town Commercial" land use designation, where the project is
located, provides for the development of a variety of retail, professional
offices and service-oriented uses, including residential uses, which are
allowed at the discretion of the City. This land use designation provides for
the adoption of a Planned Community district and district regulations to
govern the location, land use type, density and building intensity standards
to ensure compatibility of land uses in the vicinity and within a development.
The proposed "Planned Community (P-C) zoning district and the "Prospect
Village Planned Community District Regulations" would provide for a
maximum building intensity (floor area ratio) of 1.0: 1.28 within Planning Area
A (commercial portion). Although the General Plan suggests a maximum
floor area ratio of 1.0: 1, the Planned Community district regulations are
intended to regulate building intensity. This floor area ratio is generally
consistent with many of the two-story buildings in Old Town and is
appropriate for the site and the type of development envisioned by the Old
Resolution No. 04-46
Prospect Village Project General Plan Conformity Finding
Page 2
Town Commercial land use designation. The live/work portion of the project
will have a residential density of 16 dwelling units per acre, which
corresponds to the lower end of the high density residential land use
designation range of 15 dwelling units to 25 dwelling units per net acre. The
Old Town Commercial land use designation provides for a range of
residential densities by allowing a population density range of 2 to 54
persons per acre. Using an average of 2.24 persons per dwelling unit
assumed for the high density residential range, the Planned Community
District Regulations would provide for approximately 27 persons on
approximately three-quarters of an acre (or 34 persons per acre) and is
within the density range anticipated by the General Plan.
F.
The proposed disposition of property supports and is consistent with the
Tustin General Plan. The Land Use Element includes the City's goals and
policies for the long-term growth, development, and revitalization of Tustin.
Based on the summary of issues, needs, opportunities, and constraints
described in the Tustin Land Use Element, ten goals are identified which
include the following:
1.
2.
3.
Achieve balanced development.
Ensure that compatible and complementary development occurs.
Revitalize older commercial, industrial, and residential
development.
Improve City-wide urban design.
Promote economic expansion and diversification.
Coordinate development with provision of adequate public facilities
and services.
Ensure that the development character of East Tustin is compatible
with the surrounding man-made and natural environment.
Strengthen the development character and mixture of uses in the
Old Town/First Street area.
Promote an integrated business park character for the Pacific
Center East area.
Implement a reuse plan for MCAS Tustin which maximizes the
appeal of the site as a mixed-use, master planned development.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
These goals establish the framework for policies related to allocation of
land use in the City and the implementation policies reflect the direction
and image the City seeks for the future. The proposed Planned
Community zoning district and Planned Community District Regulations
support several General Plan goals and policies, including the following:
1.
The project will implement policies under the goal to achieve
balanced development including:
a.
Policy 1.2 - Provide for and encourage the development of a
neighborhood serving commercial uses in areas
Resolution No. 04-46
Prospect Village Project General Plan Conformity Finding
Page 3
b.
underserved and encourage the integration of retail or
service commercial uses on the street level of projects.
Po/icy 1.5 - Encourage compatible and complementary infill
of a previously by-passed parcels in areas already
predominately developed.
2.
The project will implement policies under the goal to ensure
compatible and complementary development including:
a.
b.
Policy 3.8 - Encourage consolidation of parking and
reciprocal access agreements among adjacent businesses.
Policy 4.3 - Where mixed uses are permitted, ensure
compatible integration of adjacent uses to minimize conflicts.
3.
The project will implement policies under the goal to revitalize older
commercial, industrial, and residential properties including:
4.
5.
6.
a.
Policy 5.1 - Encourage and continue the use of
redevelopment activities, including the provision of
incentives for private development, public-private
partnerships, and public improvements in the Town Center
and South Central redevelopment project areas.
Policy 5.2 - Provide development incentives to facilitate the
consolidation of individual parcels along the City's
commercial corridors.
Policy 5.3 - Encourage the rehabilitation of existing
commercial facades and signage.
b.
c.
The project will implement policies under the goal to improve city-
wide urban design including:
a.
Policy 6.2 - Encourage and promote high-quality design and
physical appearance in all development projects.
The project will implement policies under the goal to promote
economic expansion and diversification including:
a.
Policy 7.1 - Broaden the City's tax base by attracting
businesses which will contribute to the City's economic
growth and employment opportunities while ensuring
compatibility with other General Plan goals and policies.
Policy 7.5 - Focus retail development into consolidated,
economically viable, and attractive centers of adequate size
and scale which offer a variety of retail goods and amenities.
b.
The project will implement policies under the goal to develop
character in the Old Town/First Street area including:
Resolution No. 04-46
Prospect Village Project General Plan Conformity Finding
Page 4
a.
Policy 10.2 - Review and consider the possible development
of residential uses in the Old Town area both as individual
residential projects and integrated above ground floor retail
and office uses.
Policy 10.3 - Encourage outdoor pedestrian spaces, such as
courtyards, arcades, and open landscape passages, to be
integrated into new development. Encourage high-quality
pedestrian oriented building frontages which open onto
these pedestrian spaces and public sidewalks.
Policy 10.6 - Encourage the integration of retail or service
commercial uses on the street level of office projects the
flexibility in site development standards.
Policy 10.7 - Encourage the consolidation of individual
parcels/consolidated site planning and parking and access
along First Street and in Old Town through utilization of
development incentives such as reduced parking, height
bonus, lot coverage relaxation, and allowance for secondary
uses, fee waivers, and/or financial assistance in land
acquisition and/or infrastructure improvements.
b.
c.
d.
The Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report identifies
significant and unavoidable land use impacts related to the project's
inconsistency with a limited number of General Plan policies that
encourage rehabilitation of existing commercial facades, restoration, or
rehabilitation of properties eligible for listing on the National Register of
Historic Places and preservation of historically significant structures.
Nonetheless, each project is reviewed on an individual basis for
consistency with the General Plan and California law does not require a
project to be consistent with each and every General Plan goal and policy.
(Seauovah Hills Homeowners' Ass'n v. Citv of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.
App. 4th 704, 719-720). As stated on page 11 of the Tustin General Plan,
Land Use Element Goals and Policies provide a framework for land use
planning and decision-making in the City. The policies related to historic
structures are intended to support Land Use Element Goal 6, which
states, "Improve urban design in Tustin to ensure development that is both
architecturally and functionally compatible, and to create uniquely
identifiable neighborhoods, commercial and business park districts." This
goal is achieved through the high quality of design and materials of the
project as shown in the conceptual development plans that are
incorporated into the Planned Community District Regulations for the
Prospect Village Project.
That the scope of this activity is within the scope of the Prospect Village
Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). In accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
Council has considered the FEIR and found that it is complete and
G.
Resolution No. 04-46
Prospect Village Project General Plan Conformity Finding
Page 5
II.
adequate and adopted Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to finding the
Prospect Village Project in conformance with the Tustin General Plan by
adopting Resolution No. 04-45.
The City Council hereby determines that the location, purpose, and extent of the
disposition of property at the northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue
for the Prospect Village Project is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting
held on the 1yth day of May, 2004.
TONY KAWASHIMA
Mayor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 04-46
SS
PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 04-46 was duly passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 17th day of May,
2004, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT I
Ordinance No. 1284
Exhibit A - Zoning Map Amendment
Exhibit B - Planned Community District Regulations
ORDINANCE NO. 1284
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 03-
002 TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN FOR A 1.036 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF MAIN STREET AND
PROSPECT AVENUE FROM THE CENTRAL
COMMERCIAL AND PARKING OVERLAY (C-2-P) ZONING
DISTRICT TO PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONING DISTRICT
(P-C) AND ADOPT PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS ENTITLED "PROSPECT VILLAGE
PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS"
The City Council of the City of Tustin hereby ordains as follows:
Section 1. Findinqs
A.
That a proper development application, Zone Change 03-002, was submitted by
Prospect Village LP, a California Limited Partnership (formerly known as Pelican
Center, LLC), requesting approval to change the zoning on a 1.036 acre site at the
northwest corner of Prospect Avenue and Main Street (known as Assessor's
Parcel Number 401-585-01 and described in the attached legal description) from
"Central Commercial and Parking Overlay" to "Planned Community (P-C)" as
shown in Exhibit 1 and adopt the "Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations" contained in Exhibit 2 in accordance with Section 9244 of the Tustin
City Code.
B. On April 26, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve Zone Change 03-002 to amend the zoning of the property located at the
northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue, as described in the
attached legal description, from the Central Commercial and Parking Overlay (C2-
P) to a Planned Community (P-C) zoning district and adopt the "Prospect Village
Planned Community District Regulations."
C.
On May 3, 2004, the City Council appealed the Planning Commission's decision to
the City Council.
D.
A public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on May 17,
2004, by the City Council, and the City Council has considered the staff report and
all evidence and testimony presented to the City Council at the public hearing.
E.
The proposed amendment to the City's Zoning Map is in the best interest of the
public in that:
1.
Amending the existing zoning to a Planned Community (P-C) zoning district
would provide an opportunity to create a mixed use development that would
provide for commercial and residential opportunities in Old Town Tustin.
Ordinance No. 1284
Page 2
2.
The proposed Planned Community (P-C) zoning district would be
compatible with the character of and uses allowed in adjacent districts,
including existing commercially zoned properties located to the south, north,
and west of the site and the City's Main Street Water Facility to the east.
The introduction of residential uses as a permitted use in the Planned
Community would be compatible with the traditional land use pattern in Old
Town, which includes close proximity of residential and commercial uses.
F.
The proposed zone change is consistent with the Tustin General Plan in that the
"Old Town Commercial" land use designation, where the project is located,
provides for the development of a variety of retail, professional offices and service-
oriented uses, including residential uses, which are allowed at the discretion of the
City. This land use designation provides for the adoption of a Planned Community
district and district regulations to govern the location, land use type, density and
building intensity standards to ensure compatibility of land uses in the vicinity and
within a development. The proposed "Planned Community (P-C) zoning district
and the "Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations" would provide
for a maximum building intensity (floor area ratio) of 1.0: 1.28 within Planning Area
A (commercial portion). Although the General Plan suggests a maximum floor
area ratio of 1.0:1, the Planned Community district regulations are intended to
regulate building intensity. This floor area ratio is generally consistent with many of
the two-story buildings in Old Town and is appropriate for the site and the type of
development envisioned by the Old Town Commercial land use designation. The
live/work portion of the project will have a residential density of 16 dwelling units
per acre, which corresponds to the high density residential land use designation
range of 15 dwelling units to 25 dwelling units per net acre. The Old Town
Commercial land use designation provides for a range of residential densities by
allowing a population density range of 2 to 54 persons per acre. Using an average
of 2.24 persons per dwelling unit assumed for the high density residential range,
the Planned Community District Regulations would provide for approximately 27
persons on approximately three-quarters of an acre (or 34 persons per acre) and is
within the density range anticipated by the General Plan.
G.
The proposed Planned Community zoning district and Planned Community District
Regulations support several General Plan goals and policies, including the
following:
The project will implement policies under the goal to achieve balanced
development including:
a.
Policy 1.2 - Provide for and encourage the development of
neighborhood serving commercial uses in areas underserved and
encourage the integration of retail or service commercial uses on the
street level of office projects.
Ordinance No. 1284
Page 3
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
b.
Policy 1.5 - Encourage compatible and complementary infill of
previously by-passed parcel in areas already predominately
developed.
The project will implement policies under the goal to ensure compatible and
complementary development including:
a.
Policy 3.8 - Encourage consolidation of parking and reciprocal
access agreements among adjacent businesses.
Policy 4.3 - Where mixed uses are permitted, ensure compatible
integration of adjacent uses to minimize conflicts.
b.
The project will implement policies under the goal to revitalize older
commercial, industrial and residential properties including:
a.
Policy 5.1 - Encourage and continue the use of redevelopment
activities, including the provision of incentives for private
development, public-private partnerships, and public improvements, in
the Town Center and South Central redevelopment project areas.
Policy 5.2 - Provide development incentives to facilitate the
consolidation of individual parcels along the City's commercial
corridors.
Policy 5.3 - Encourage the rehabilitation of existing commercial
facades and signage.
b.
c.
The project will implement policies under the goal to improve city-wide urban
design including:
a.
Policy 6.2 - Encourage and promote high-quality design and physical
appearance in all development projects.
The project will implement policies under the goal to promote economic
expansion and diversification including:
a.
Policy 7.1 - Broaden the City's tax base by attracting businesses
which will contribute to the City's economic growth and employment
opportunities while ensuring compatibility with other General Plan
goals and policies.
Policy 7.5 - Focus retail development into consolidated,
economically viable and attractive centers of adequate size and
scale which offer a variety of retail good and amenities.
b.
The project will implement policies under the goal to develop character in
the Old Town/First Street area including:
Ordinance No. 1284
Page 4
a.
Policy 10.2 - Review and consider the possible development of
residential uses in the Old Town area both as individual residential
projects and integrated above ground floor retail and office uses.
Policy 10.3 - Encourage outdoor pedestrian spaces, such as
courtyards, arcades and open landscape passages, to be integrated
into new development. Encourage high-quality pedestrian oriented
building frontages which open onto these pedestrian spaces and
public sidewalks.
Policy 10.6 - Encourage the integration of retail or service
commercial uses on the street level of office projects the flexibility in
site development standards.
Policy 10.7 - Encourage the consolidation of individual
parcels/consolidated site planning and parking and access along
First Street and in Old Town through utilization of development
incentives such as reduced parking, height bonus, lot coverage
relaxation, and allowance for secondary uses, fee waivers, and/or
financial assistance in land acquisition and/or infrastructure
improvements.
b.
c.
d.
That the Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report identifies significant
and unavoidable land use impacts related to the project's inconsistency with a
limited number of General Plan policies that encourage rehabilitation of existing
commercial facades, restoration or rehabilitation of properties eligible for listing on
the National Register of Historic Places, and preservation of historically significant
structures. Nonetheless, each project is reviewed on an individual basis for
consistency with the General Plan and California law does not require a project to
be consistent with each and every General Plan goal and policy. (Seauovah Hills
Homeowners' Ass'n v. Citv of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal. App. 4th 704, 719-720). As
stated on page 11 of the Tustin General Plan, Land Use Element Goals and
Policies provide a framework for land use planning and decision-making in the City.
The policies related to historic structures are intended to support Land Use
Element Goal 6, which states, "Improve urban design in Tustin to ensure
development that is both architecturally and functionally compatible, and to create
uniquely identifiable neighborhoods, commercial and business park districts." This
goal is achieved through the high quality of design and materials of the project as
shown in the conceptual development plans that are incorporated into the Planned
Community District Regulations.
H.
The proposed zone change is consistent with and supports the Town Center
Redevelopment Plan, including the six goals and objectives for the Town Center
Redevelopment Project Area, as follows:
I.
1.
The project will assist in creating a mixed-use town center that combines
commercial. office, residential and public uses, which will serve the needs of
the community, as well as encourage the healthy growth of the area;
Ordinance No. 1284
Page 5
J.
K.
L.
2.
The project will provide residential development by actively seeking private
development in the redevelopment area;
3.
The project will increase the level of capital improvements by requiring
sidewalk and street landscaping, street improvements, and related public
improvement projects around the project site;
4.
The project will provide a harmonious and efficient development in the
redevelopment area;
5.
The project will encourage business development, attract new customers to
the area to assist in alleviating pass-through traffic congestion and conflict,
and improving safety; and,
6.
The project will revitalize and develop amenities in the project area and
assist in the revitalization of Old Town.
The proposed zone change complies with Tustin City Code Section 9244. In
accordance with Section 9244(a), the "Prospect Village Planned Community
District Regulations" specify development standards for the entire site by including
text, exhibits, and development plans. The provisions contained within the district
regulations would serve to adequately protect the public health, safety, and welfare
by regulating the permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited land uses; site
development standards for building intensity, residential density, building site area,
setbacks, building height, open space, access, private drives, parking, and refuse;
and plan implementation and administration to ensure compatibility within the
development and within the vicinity of the district. The allowed uses, including
retail, service commercial, and office uses are consistent with uses allowed within
the Old Town commercial area. The site development standards for Planning Area
A (commercial portion) are generally consistent with the standards allowed in the
Central Commercial and Parking Overlay zoning district and the site development
standards for Planning Area B (live/work) are consistent with an urban residential
development. The plan implementation and administration provisions are generally
consistent with the provisions of the Tustin City Code, and in the event of any
ambiguity, defer to the provisions of the Tustin City Code.
The proposed zone change would support new development envisioned on the
conceptual development plans that are incorporated into the Prospect Village
Planned Community District Regulations. As currently configured, the two (2)
existing buildings located on the project site would not fit within Planning Area A,
nor conform to the development standards or conceptual development plans
identified in the Prospect Village Community District Regulations, and would
become non-conforming if Ordinance No. 1284 for Zone Change 03-002 is
adopted by the City Council.
That the scope of this activity is within the scope of the Prospect Village Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). In accordance with the provisions of the
Ordinance No. 1284
Page 6
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City Council has considered the
FEIR and found that it is complete and adequate and adopted Findings of Fact, a
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program prior
to adopting Ordinance No. 1284 by adopting Resolution No. 04-45.
Section 2.
Section 3.
Section 4.
Section 5.
Zone Change 03-002 is approved, and the Zoning Map of the City of Tustin
is amended as shown Exhibit 1, attached hereto.
Planned Community District Regulations entitled, "Prospect Village Planned
Community District Regulations" are hereby adopted for Zone Change 03-
002 as contained within Exhibit 2, attached hereto.
Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause,
phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted
this Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause,
phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more
section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion
thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
City Clerk. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and
cause the same to be posted at the duly designated posting places within
the City and published once within fifteen (15) days after passage and
adoption as may be required by law; or, in the alternative, the City Clerk
may cause to be published a summary of this Ordinance and a certified
copy of the text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the Office of the City
Clerk five (5) days after adoption, the City Clerk shall cause to be published,
the aforementioned summary and shall post a certified copy of this
Ordinance, together with the vote for and against the same, in the Office of
the City Clerk.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this - day of
,2004.
TONY KAWASHIMA
Mayor
PAMELA STOKER
City Clerk
Ordinance No. 1284
Page 7
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1284
SS
PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council
of the City of Tustin is five (5); that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 1284 was duly
and regularly introduced at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 17th
day of May, 2004 and was given its second reading, passed, and adopted at a regular
meeting of the City Council held on the 7th day of June 7, 2004 by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
City Clerk
Exhibit A of Ordinance 1284
Zoning Map
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
--~~I
oN;Ë,~¡ (~
PD , '.
,<,,-.!!'!§I \~
~/----:)
Central Commercial (C-2 P)
Cultural Resources and Parking Overlay District
F
New Zoning Designation
Planned Community (PC)
Cultural Resources District
Exhibit B of Ordinance 1284
Planned Community District Regulations
Prospect Village Planned Community
District Regulations
Adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 17, 2004 by Ordinance No. 1284
Prospect Village Planned Community
DISTRICT REGULATIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
INTRODUCTION
2.0
STATISTICAL SUMMARY
3.0
LAND USE REGULATIONS
3.1
Planning Area A - Commercial
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
Purpose and Intent
Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses
Prohibited Uses
Temporary Uses
Unlisted Uses
Development Standards
3.2
Planning Area B
A.
B.
C.
Purpose and Intent
Sub Area B~I
Sub Area B~II
Page Number
3.3
General Development Standards for Planning Areas B~I and B-II
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
3.4
Building Site
Gross Density
Lot Coverage
Building Setbacks
Building Height
Common Area Open Space
Projections into Required Setbacks
Fences, Walls, and Hedges
Private Drive
Refuse
Other Development Standards
General Parking Requirements for Planning Areas A and B
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
6
6
6
9
9
9
11
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
15
15
15
15
15
2
4.0
IMPLEMENTATION and ADMINISTRA nON
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
Responsibility
Interpretations
Subdivisions
Variances, Conditional Use Pennits and
Other Discretionary Actions
Amendment to District Regulations
Enforcement
Severability Clause
5.0
ZONING EXHIBIT AND CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Exhibit 1: Zoning Exhibit
Exhibit 2: Conceptual Development Plans
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
17
17
18
19
3
1.0
INTRODUCTION
The regulations set forth in this set of District Regulations for the Prospect Village
Planned Community has been established to satisfy the Planned Community District
requirements of the Tustin City Code and to provide diversification among the relationship
of uses, buildings, and structures in planned building groups. The application of these
regulations is specifically intended to encourage the appropriate use of land and create a
harmonious commercial and residential development to protect the health, safety, and
welfare of the community and provide the flexibility needed to create a quality environment.
Development within the Prospect Village Planned Community shall occur consistent
with these Planned Community District Regulations, including the Conceptual Development
Plans contained with Section 5.0.
2.0
STATISTICAL SUMMARY
There are two (2) distinct and separate planning areas provided within the Prospect Village
Planned Community. The land use designations are shown in Exhibit 1 with a statistical
summary of each planning area. The development plans for Planning Areas A and B are
included in Exhibit 2.
Planning Area A - Commercial: The site is approximately 7,286 square feet (0.167
net acres) in size and includes a two-story commercial building comprised of an
approximately 3,000 square feet of restaurant use with an approximately 593 square-
foot outdoor patio dining area open to Main Street, 773 square feet of retail space,
three (3) covered parking spaces (721 square feet) on the ground floor, and 4,822
square feet of second floor service and office uses. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is
1:1.3.
Planning Area B - Live/Work: The site is approximately 32,941 square feet (.756
net acres) insÌ2e and is designed to accommodate twelve (12) live/work units at a
density of sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre. The twelve live-work residential units
include: a) six wee-story units facing on Prospect Avenue with each having 913
square feet of ground floor retail space with a 2,126 square-foot residential unit in
two levels above; and b) six wee-story units facing the public alley to the west with
each having 431 square feet of ground floor commercial/office space with a 1,862
square-foot residential unit in two stories above.
Notes:
No changes to this Section of the District Regulations would be required with respect to future
changes and adjustment to the development. However, any new construction, alterations, or
modifications to the development would need to comply with all applicable provisions contained
in Section 3.0 and 4.0 of these district Regulations and the Tustin General Plan.
The square footage allocations and floor area ratios identified in the Planned Community
Regulations shall govern the overall maximum intensity and scale of development within each
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
4
planning area without the necessity of additional or new environmental documentation. All
acreage data is approximate and will be refined on a final map and in final development plans.
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
5
3.0
LAND USE REGULATIONS
The land use regulations and development standards contained within this document act as a
principle part of the controlling mechanism for implementation of the Planned Community
District designation. Standards set forth in this Section will ensure that development within
the Prospect Village Planned Community proceeds in a consistent and appropriate
manner as the community matures.
3.1
Planning Area A - Commercial
A.
Purpose and Intent
The commercial component of the Prospect Village Planned Community is
intended to provide for a complementary mix of specialty retail, restaurant, service
business, and office to achieve a high level of commercial activities and urban vitality
at the easterly gateway to the City's downtown district.
B.
Pennitted and Conditionally Pennitted Uses
The following uses shall be permitted by right or conditionally permitted in
Planning Area A (Main Street Commercial Building) as stated in the following text:
1.
Ground Floor Pennitted Uses
a.
Retail uses, when conducted within a building:
.
Restaurants (approximately 3,000 square feet with 112 seats)
Outdoor dining (see page 8 for Outdoor Seating and Operational
Standards)
Bakeries, delicatessens, specialty foods, coffee shops
Antiques and curios
Prepared foods stores (ice cream, yogurt, candy, and similar
items)
Clothing/ shoes stores
General merchandize variety stores
Specialty stores/antique shops
New household goods/home furnishings stores
Florist shops
Books/ stationery stores
Jewelry stores
Art shops/galleries
Musical supplies and instruments
Video/music stores
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Prospect ViRage Planned Community District Reguladons
6
b.
Service uses, when conducted within a building:
Barber shops
Beauty parlors
Interior decorator
Locksmith
Mail services
Photography studios
Prinring
Shoe repair
Tailoring
Travel agency
Real estate office
2.
Ground Floor Conditionally Permitted Uses
When conducted within a building:
Wholesale bakeries
Figure modeling studios
Day spa/massage establishments
Pet grooming
Pharmacies
Alcoholic beverage sales in conjunction
subject to the Planning Commission's
Alcoholic Beverage Sales Establishments
Wine tasting rooms
with restaurants
Guidelines for
3.
Second Floor Permitted Uses
When conducted within a building:
Retail and service uses listed as permitted on the ground floor
Professional and general offices (excluding medical, dental, or
veterinary offices) up to a total of 4,816 square feet
4.
Second Floor Conditionally Permitted Uses
Retail and retail service uses if listed under conditionally
permitted uses on the ground floor
c.
Prohibited Uses
Coin-operated laundromats
Dry-cleaning (on-site) and laundry services
Medical, dental, or veterinary offices or clinics
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
7
Uses that involve use or storage of hazardous/explosive materials, cause
offensive odors, and/or generate dust, noise, or excess light
D.
Temporary Uses
Temporary uses are subject to provisions of the Tustin City Code.
E.
Unlisted Uses
The Director of Community Development Department may determine similar uses
are permitted, conditionally permitted, or prohibited in Planning Area A or may refer
the matter to the Planning Commission.
F.
Development Standards
1.
Minimum Lot Size: None
2.
Lot coverage: lOa-percent, less parking and building setback requirements.
3.
Building Setbacks:
a.
Front Yard (Facing Main Street): a Feet
b.
Side Yard (Facing Prospect Avenue and the public alley): 0 Feet
c.
Rear Yard (Facing Planning Area B): Ten (10) feet
d.
Storefront entries including door swings shall not encroach into the
right-of-way to achieve minimum width needed for accessibility
required by the Americans with Disabilities Act
4.
Building: Height: 50 feet, including roof-mounted features and equipment.
5.
Fences Walls and Hedges:
a.
No walls or fencing shall be permitted at the right-of-way along
Prospect Avenue, Main Street, or the public alley to the west, unless
required by Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) standards to enclose
outdoor dining areas.
b.
Fences, walls, and hedges at the rear property line separating the
Main Street commercial area in Planning Area A and the residential
portion of the project in Planning Area B shall not exceed six (6) feet
eight (8) inches in height, unless required for noise mitigation and
approved in writing by the Community Development Director.
Prospect ViUage Planned Community District Regulations
8
6.
Signs
All signs are subject to the approved master sign plan for the project. The
sign plan shall be consistent with provisions of the Tustin Sign Code and
latest adopted California Building Code (CBC) and California Electrical Code
(CEC) and may include the following exceptions:
a.
Projecting signs shall be allowed to project andfor extend beyond the
property line and over the public right-of-way along Prospect Avenue
and Prospect lane (Alley) with adequate height clearance for
pedestrians, emergency vehicles, and refuse trucks, subject to review
and approval by the Community Development Department and City
Engineer and obtaining an encroachment permit from the Public
Works Department.
7.
Screening of Mechanical Equipment
All mechanical equipment shall be acoustically shielded if necessary and
architecturally screened from street and adjacent properties in accordance
with Ordinance. No. 1262, Sec. 2, 11-18-02 of the Tustin City Code. The
regulating, controlling, design, construction, installation, quality of materials,
location, operation, and maintenance of heating, ventilating, cooling,
refrigeration systems, incinerators, and other miscellaneous heat-producing
appliances shall be in compliance with the latest California Mechanical Code
adopted by the City of Tustin.
8.
Trash Enclosures
A covered trash enclosure shall be maintained at the southwest comer of the
commercial property integrated within the building design. The trash
receptacles shall be screened from Prospect lane (Alley) and Main Street with
decorative metal gates. The refuse collection area shall be maintained and
kept clean at all times. More frequent refuse service may be required to
prevent nuisances to adjacent properties.
9.
Merchandize Display
No merchandize shall be displayed or advertised for sale on or. over the
public right-of-way, and outside display of merchandize shall not be
permitred except by approval of a temporary use permit.
10.
Other Development Standards
Any development standard which is not specifically identified within the
District Regulations or shown on the approved development plans shall be
subject to the applicable provisions of Section 9233 of the Tustin City Code
or determination by the Community Development Director.
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
9
11.
Outdoor Seating Design and Operational Standards: The outdoor seating
areas shall be designed and operated as follows:
.
The outdoor area shall be managed, operated, and maintained as an
integral part of the adjacent food service establishment.
The hours of operation shall be complementary to the commercial
district standards.
Approval of an encroachment pennit is required, if the outdoor
seating area encroaches into the public right-of-way.
There shall be no cooking or food preparation in the outdoor dining
area.
Outdoor dining furniture shall be compatible with the building design
subject to approval of the Community Development Department.
No resin-type furniture is permitted.
The layout of outdoor seating shall maintain a clear passage and
emergency exit.
All barriers for defining the outdoor area shall be a maximum of
three foot (3) six (6) inches designed to withstand inclement outdoor
weather and are subject to review and approval by the Community
Development Department.
Lighting of the outdoor dining area shall complement the
architectural style of the building and Old Town Tustin. Table lamps
and candles are encouraged.
No free standing signs (A frame, ete.) shall be permitted in the
outdoor seating area
Water drainage on the public right-of-way is not pennitted. All
potted plants shall be maintained in a healthy and vigorous condition.
Saucers or other suitable system to retain seepage into the sidewalk
shall be provided.
All Orange County Fire Authority requirements shall be complied
with.
Outdoor seating area shall be maintained and clear of litter at all
times. At the end of business day establishments shall clean (sweep
and mop) the areas in and around the outdoor dining area.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Prospect ViUagt: Planned Community District Regulations
10
3.2
Planning Area B - Live/Work
A.
Purpose and Intent
The live/work component of the Prospect Village Planned Community is
intended to provide twelve (12) live/work units in an urban setting with common
open space for the enjoyment of all residents. Area (B-1) includes the six (6)
Live/Work units facing Prospect Avenue and Area (B-II) includes the six (6)
Live/Work units facing the public alley to the west of the project.
B.
Sub Area B-1 - Six (6) Live/Work Units Facing Prospect Avenue
Pennitted and Conditionally Pennitted Uses
The following uses shall be permitted by right or conditionally permitted as stated in
the following text:
1.
Ground Floor Pennitted Uses (Live/Work Units Facing Prospect
Avenue)
a. Retail uses, when conducted witllln a building:
.
Restaurants
. Outdoor dining (see outdoor dining standards for Planning Area A)
. Bakeries, delicatessens, specialty foods, coffee shops
. Antiques and curios
. Prepared foods stores (ice cream, yogurt, candy, and similar items)
. Clothing/ shoe stores
. General merchandize variety stores
. Specialty stores/antique shops
. New household goods/home furnislllngs stores
. Florist shops
. Books/stationary stores
. Jewelry stores
. Art shops/galleries
. Musical supplies and instruments
. Video/music stores
b. Service businesses such as:
. Barber shops
. Beauty parlors
. Interior decorator
. Printing
. Locksmith
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
11
.
Photography studios
Mail services
Dry cleaning/tailoring
Shoe repair
Travel agency
Real estate office
Telephone answering service/office support services
.
.
.
.
.
2.
Ground Floor Conditionally Permitted Uses (Live/Work Units Facing
Prospect Avenue)
When conducted within a building:
.
Figure modeling studios
Day spa/massage establishments
Pet grooming
Pharmacy
.
.
.
3.
Second/Third Floor Permitted Uses (Live/Work Units Facing
Prospect Avenue)
When conducted within a building:
.
Single family residential
Home occupation in accordance with Tustin City Code Section 9297
.
4.
Prohibited Uses (Live/Work Units Facing Prospect Avenue)
.
Coin-operated laundromats
Dry-cleaning (on-site) and laundry services
General, professional, medical, dental, or veterinary offices or clinics
Uses that involve use or storage of hazardous/explosive materials,
cause offensive odors, and/or generate dust, noise, or excess light.
Unlisted uses are not to be assumed to be permitted or conditionally
permitted.
.
.
.
***
5.
Use Limitations
A minimum of ten (10) residential units shall be owner/proprietor-occupied
on all floors and shall be designated as "Restricted Units" on the approved
plans. Four (4) of these units shall be located in Sub-Area I (facing Prospect
Avenue) and six (6) of these units shall be located in Sub-Area B-II (facing
the public alley). Owners of restricted units may obtain Redevelopment
Agency and City approval to lease the retail or office portion of the live-work
unit, provided the owner secures additional parking within 300 feet of the
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
12
unit as required by Section 9252 of the Tustin City Code, at the ratio
identified in the "General Parking Requirements" section herein, and the
records an instrument or agreement approved by the Agency and the City.
6.
Unlisted Uses
The Director of the Community Development Department may determine
similar uses are permitted, conditionally permitted, or prohibited in Planning
Area A or may refer the matter to the Planning Commission.
7.
Temporary Uses
Temporary uses are subject to provisions of Tustin City Code.
c.
(B-II) Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses
Six (6) Live/Work Units Facing Public Alley
The following uses shall be permitted by right or conditionally permitted as stated in
the following text:
1.
Ground Floor Permitted Uses (Live/Work Units Facing the Public
Alley)
a.
Retail uses, when conducted within a building:
.
Restaurants
Outdoor dining (see Outdoor Dining Standards for Planning Area A)
Bakeries, delicatessens, specialty foods, coffee shops
Antiques and curios
Prepared foods stores (ice cream, yogurt, candy, and similar items)
Clothing/ shoe stores
General merchandize variety stores
Specialty stores/antique shops
New household goods/home furnishings stores
Florist shops
Books/ stationery stores
Jewelry stores
Art shops/galleries
Musical supplies and instruments
Video/music stores
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
b. Service businesses such as:
.
Barber shops
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
13
c.
d.
.
Beauty parlors
Interior decorator
Printing
Locksmith
Photography studios
Mail services
Dry cleaning/tailoring
Shoe repair
Travel agency
Real estate office
Telephone answering service/ office support services
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
General or professional office uses, excluding medial, dental, or
veterinary uses.
Home occupation in accordance with Tustin City Code Section 9297
2.
Ground Floor Conditionally Permitted Uses (Live/Work Units Facing
the Public Alley)
When conducted within a building:
.
Figure modeling studios
Day spa/massage establishments
Pet grooming
Pharmacy
.
.
.
3.
Second/Third Floor Permitted Uses (Live/Work Units Facing the
Public Alley)
When conducted within a building:
.
Single family residential
Home occupation in accordance with Tustin City Code Section 9297
.
4.
Prohibited Uses (Live/Work Units Facing the Public Alley)
.
Coin-operated laundromats
Dry-cleaning (on-site) and laundry services
Medical, dental, or veterinary offices or clinics
Uses that involve use or storage of hazardous/explosive materials,
cause offensive odors, and/or generate dust, noise, or excess light
.
.
.
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
14
5.
Use Limitations
A minimum of ten (10) residential units shall be owner/proprietor-occupied
on all floors and shall be designated as "Restricted Units" on the approved
plans. Four (4) of these units shall be located in Sub-Area I (facing Prospect
Avenue) and six (6) of these units shall be located in Sub-Area B-II (facing
the public alley). Owners of restricted units may obtain Redevelopment
Agency and City approval to lease the retail or office portion of the live-work
unit, provided the owner secures additional parking within 300 feet of the
unit as required by Section 9252 of the Tustin City Code, at the ratio
identified in the "General Parking Requirements" section herein, and records
an instrument or agreement approved by the Agency and the City.
6.
Unlisted Uses
The Director of the Community Development Department may determine
similar uses are permitted, conditionally permitted, or prohibited in Planning
Area A or may refer the matter to the Planning Commission.
7.
Temporary Uses
Temporary uses shall be regulated pursuant to the applicable provisions of
the Tustin City Code.
3.3
General Development Standards for Planning Areas B-1 and B-II
A. Building- Site:
B. Gross Densit;y:
C. Lot Coverage:
D. Building- Setbacks:
32,941 square feet
16 units per acre
100 percent, less parking, open space, and building setback
requirements.
1.
Front Yard:
(Facing Prospect Avenue):
(Facing public alley):
0 Feet
5 Feet
2.
Side Yard (facing- Third Street):
Zero (0) Feet
3.
Rear Yard (Facing Planning Area A): One (1) Foot
4.
Building- to Building in Planning- Area B: Six (6) feet between buildings
E.
Building- Height: 50-feet, including roof-mounted equipment and chimneys.
Prospect ViDage Planned Community District Regulations
15
J.
F.
Common Area Open Space: All areas outside the building perimeters are
considered common open space and shall be maintained by the homeowners'
association.
G.
Projections into Required Setbacks: Eaves, cornices, chimney, balconies and other
similar architectural features shall not project into any required building setback
unless pennitted by the California Building Code.
H.
Fences Walls and Hedges:
No walls, fences, or hedges that exceed three (3) feet in height shall be pennitted at
the right-of-way along Prospect Avenue or the public alley to the west. Fences,
walls, and hedges in the interior motor court, between units, along Third Street, or
between the residential units in Planning Area B and the Main Street commercial
building in Planning Area A, shall not exceed six (6) feet eight (8) inches in height,
unless required for noise rnitigation and approved in writing by the Community
Development Director.
1.
Private Drive:
1.
The private driveway shall provide access to garages and guest parking spaces
and shall have a minimum travel way width of 28 feet, curb face to curb face.
No parking shall be permitted on the driveway, other than in designated
parking stalls.
2.
Sidewalks are not required within private drives. Sidewalks, where provided,
shall be designed in accordance with Standard B102 of the City's
Construction Standards for Private Streets, Storm Drains, and On-Site
Private Improvements and subject to compliance with applicable accessibility
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Tide 24 of the Uniform
Building Code as locally amended, and the Department of Housing and
Urban Development's Fair Housing Accessibility Guidelines.
Refuse:
Trash receptacles shall be stored inside private garages. No person shall place any
receptacle in any street, alley, or other public way at any time or place other than as
above provided, or no earlier than noon on the day before scheduled collections and
removed within twelve (12) hours of collection (Ord. No. 1014, Sec. 8, 1-3-89).
K.
Other Development Standards:
Any development standard which is not specifically identified within these District
Regulations or shown on the approved development plans shall be subject to the
applicable provisions of the Tustin City Code or a determination by the Community
Development Director.
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
16
3.4
General Parking Requirements for Planning Areas A and B
A.
Parking within Planning Area A and B shall be provided at the following ratios:
Pursuant to the Shared Parking Evaluation (Appendix F of Prospect Village Final
Environmental Impact Report) prepared for the project, a total of three (3) parking
spaces shall be provided within Planning Area A, adjacent to the Main Street
Conunercial Building. In addition, a total of fifty-nine (59) spaces shall be provided
subject to an off-site parking agreement between the Developer and the City of
Tustin, as provided for by Tustin City Code Section 9271aa and 9252j3 to
acconunodate conunercial uses in Planning Areas A and B. If the approved land use
mix is modified, any additional parking that is needed shall be provided in
accordance with the following ratios:
One (1) parking space per 200 square feet of retail use;
One (1) parking space per 300 square feet of office use; and,
One (1) parking space per three (3) seats for restaurant use (including
outdoor dining).
A minimum of two (2) enclosed garage spaces shall be maintained for each
dwelling unit in Planning Area Band permanendy used for the purpose of
parking vehicles. In addition, a minimum of three (3) open and unassigned
guest parking spaces, at a ratio of one (1) parking space for every four (4)
units, shall be provided within the development.
Other uses shall provide parking at rates required by the Tustin City Code or as
determined by an approved conditional use permit.
B.
Garage and Parking Stall Dimensions:
Parking area dimensions, locations and access shall conform to the City's design
review criteria on file in the Conununity Development Department. At a minimum,
garages shall be a 20 feet by 20 feet inside clear dimension. Automatic garage door
openers and sectional rollup doors shall be required on all residential units. Open
parking spaces shall be a minimum of nine (9) feet in width by twenty (20) feet in
depth. Up to a two (2) foot overhang may be permitted into a landscape planter or
sidewalk area provided the sidewalk has sufficient width to comply with accessibility
requirements.
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
17
4.0
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
IMPLEMENTATION and ADMINISTRATION
Responsibilit:)'
The Community Development Department of the City of Tustin shall be responsible for the
administration and enforcement of provisions of these regulations.
Intewretations
If ambiguity arises concerning the appropriate application of provisions contained in these
District Regulations, the Community Development Director shall make the appropriate
determination. In making a determination, the Director shall consider the following, but not
by way of limitation:
A.
Prior administrative interpretation of similar provisions;
B.
General intent and purpose of these District Regulations;
c.
Provisions contained in the General Plan; and,
D.
Other provisions of the Tustin City Code where standards do exist.
Any decision of the Director may be appealed to the Planning Commission.
Modifications to Development Plans
The characteristics and amenities of the Prospect Village Planned Community are to be
implemented through adoption of development plans. Any modifications to the approved
development plans shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of the Tustin City
Code.
Subdivisions
All divisions of land shall be processed in accordance with the Tustin City Code and State
Subdivision Map Act.
Variances Conditional Use Permits and Other Discretiona¡;y Actions
All applications shall be processed in accordance with the Tustin City Code.
Amendment to District Reg.ulations
Any amendment to these District Regulations contained herein which change the allowed
uses within the development, impose any regulation upon property not therefore imposed,
or removes or modifies any such regulation shall be initiated and processed in the same
manner set forth in the Tustin City Code for amending the Zoning Code.
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
18
4.7
4.8
Enforcement
The District Regulations are adopted by Ordinance and are therefore subject to penalty
provisions of the Tustin City Code. Specifically, violations of land use or development
standards shall be subject to penalty provisions and citation procedures of the Tustin City
Code, in addition to the City's authority to seek civil litigation in a court of law.
Severability Clause
If any part, section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion
of these District Regulations is held to be invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable by a
court of competent jurisdiction, these decisions shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of these District Regulations. The Tustin City Council hereby declares that these
District Regulations and each part, section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph, sentence,
clause, phrase, or portion thereof would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that one
or more portions of the District Regulations may be declared invalid, unconstitutional, or
unenforceable.
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations
19
g
Prospect Village Planned Community
------.-
The Prospect Village Planned Community is bounded by Main Street, Prospect Avenue, Third
Street, and Prospect Lane (public alley).
Legal Description: The east 155 feet of the north 162.50 feet of Block B of Tract No.3 as shown
on a map recorded in Book 9, page 4, of miscellaneous maps, of records of Orange County
California with the east 145 feet of the south 137.5 feet of said Block B (proposed as Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 16481)
111
'lS OmHl
-<
~
~
J,.'
-<
OJ)
=
.-
=
=
~
......
~
H
00.
-<
~
-<
~
Z
~
Z
Z
-<
~
~
~
~
~
J,.~
-<~
OJ)f
=
.-
=
=
~
......
~
. Project Statistical Summary
Acreage Non-Residential Uses Residential Uses
Net Areas FAR Ground Floor Second Floor Total Floor Density Total
Retail Area Office Area Area Units Per Units
(net leasable) (net leasable) (net leasable) Acre
Planning 1:1.35 3,773 sq.ft. & 4,816 sq.ft. 9,182 sq.ft.*
Area A 593 sq.ft.
outdoor
dininl!:
Planning 913 sq.ft. 2,126 sq.ft. 16 12
Area B Units facing living area
Prospect units facing
Avenue Prospect
469 sq.ft. Avenue
units facing 1,862 sq.ft.
alley units facing
allev
* Does not include 830 square feet of garage and trash area on ground floor and 117
square feet of deck on the second floor.
Gross and net acreage are an estimated allocation. Actual acreage will be refined by the
final subdivision map process.
Floor area ratios is the gross floor of buildings within a planning area divided by the net
acreage of the planning area.
Development Plans
--
--
~-
--------
.
-
"lSmJlH-1
H¡ ,
fn, H ~
l'riTI I~?,
m:1û~t
~fI ~ f-- f¡-
¡~r'- :-~~;Î '
w I~j:
~ '~L-~ -J i!
~ .~r~-Y ,-
o.~:,-'
1[ h~'f '-?, -~.-, ;_:
-]I - T
. ::::1
~
2UJ
Sl:)
~:5
lS-J
8>
21-
Su
w
Q..
V1
0
e::
Q..
G
"
, p
t\~
<;J=J
it:
s
~
ii
[1J
--~
C
Q
~
OJ
[jj
.r::
:J
0
~
c
0
.~
>
OJ
[jj
QJ
~
~
c
'rõ
:?:
---
....,
it
c
.g
~
~
UJ
€
0
~
OJ
u
IE
0
::::,.
.Œ;
i::
OJ
E
E
0
u
'§
rv
3:
2
01
£:
""
0
.2
t!
rv
È'
:J
0
u
E
,g
3:
OJ
~
.g
~
E
--
.ow
51.:)
f=~
§..J
w...J
~>
:!; -
:;:u
Ww
::;;a..
::;;1/1
80
C!:::
a..
.
{j
ß
~
~\
c
0
'~
¡;
¡¡¡
<l!
C
IV
...J
Ü
<l!
C-
O
0::
C
,2
~
¡¡¡
~
:B
~
"'I..U
ð\.?
~:S
w--!
~>
til-
::OU
OUJ
O~
"'I/)
0..0
Q::
~
l;J
~
'5
0
u
E
,g
:æ
c
<l!
l;J
'~
OJ
~I
ë
::J
Õ
~
:>
c-
,2
" ~
, <I.J
Üj
" ~J JE\~
,~.,' ';"",",
;~.'f ""'"
i \~t\~
"
zLU
g\.:)
~::S
~...J
~>
>-1-
~U
OLU
f;1Cl..
0..1/1
0
a:::
Cl..
ATTACHMENT J
Resolution No. 04-47
RESOLUTION NO. 04-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16481 TO SUBDIVIDE A 1.035 ACRE
PARCEL LOCATED AT THE NORTWEST CORNER OF MAIN STREET AND
PROSPECT AVENUE INTO THIRTEEN (13) NUMBERED LOTS AND ONE (1)
LETTERED LOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING A COMMERCIAL
BUILDING AND TWELVE (12) LlVElWORK UNITS WITHIN A PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
I.
The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A.
That a proper application for Tentative Tract Map 16481 was submitted by
Prospect Village LP, a California Limited Partnership (formerly known as the
Pelican Center LLC), requesting approval to subdivide a 1.035 acre parcel
located at the northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue into
thirteen (13) numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot for the purpose of
developing a commercial building and twelve (12) live/work units.
B.
That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said map on April
26, 2004, by the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission
recommended that the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 16481.
C.
On May 3, 2004, the City Council appealed the Planning Commission's
decision to the City Council.
D.
That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said map on May
17,2004, by the City Council.
E.
The project site is located at the northwest corner of Main Street and
Prospect Avenue and is located within the General Plan "Old Town
Commercial" land use designation, Central Commercial-Parking Overlay
(C2-P) zoning district, Cultural Resources Overlay zoning district, and
Town Center Redevelopment Project Area.
F.
The proposed subdivision would be consistent with the Tustin General Plan,
if Zone Change 03-002 is adopted by the City Council. In accordance with
the provisions of the General Plan "Old Town Commercial" land use
designation, Zone Change 03-002 would establish a Planned Community
district and Planned Community district regulations to govern the location,
land use type, density, and building intensity standards to ensure
compatibility of land uses in the vicinity and within the development.
Tentative Tract Map 16481, as conditioned, would be required to conform to
the "Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations."
Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
May 17, 2004
Page 2
G.
As conditioned, the map would be required to conform with the State
Subdivision Map Act and the Tustin City Code Section 9323 (Subdivision
Code).
H.
As conditioned, the subdivision would promote orderly development to
preserve the public health, safety, and general welfare and provide for proper
use of land and adequate traffic circulation, utilities, and other services.
I.
The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in that
the project is accessible through the City's current street system and could
be supported with existing transportation and public facilities.
J.
The site is physically suitable for the proposed building intensity and density
of the development in that the project, if Zone Change 03-002 is approved,
would be consistent with the "Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations," which provide for a maximum building intensity of 1.0:1.28
within Planning Area A (commercial portion). Although the General Plan
suggests a maximum floor area ratio of 1.0: 1, the Planned Community
district regulations are intended to regulate building intensity. This floor area
ratio is generally consistent with many of the two-story buildings in Old Town
and is appropriate for the site and the type of development envisioned by the
Old Town Commercial land use designation. The live/work portion of the
project will have a residential density of 16 dwelling units per acre, which
corresponds to the lower end of the high density residential land use
designation range of 15 dwelling units to 25 dwelling units per net acre. The
Old Town Commercial land use designation provides for a range of
residential densities by allowing a population density range of 2 to 54
persons per acre. Using an average of 2.24 persons per dwelling unit
assumed for the high density residential range, the Planned Community
District Regulations would provide for approximately 27 persons on
approximately three-quarters of an acre (or 34 persons per acre) and is
within the density range anticipated by the General Plan.
K.
The design of the subdivision or the types of improvements proposed are not
likely to cause serious public health problems in that the project has been
conditioned to comply with applicable regulations of the City of Tustin and
Orange County Fire Authority.
L.
The proposed tentative tract map or the proposed improvements would not
cause substantial environmental damage to fish or wildlife in their natural
habitat.
Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
May 17, 2004
Page 3
N.
o.
M.
As conditioned, the developer would be required to enter into a
reimbursement agreement for construction of improvements including: 1)
enhanced paving and landscape improvements in the public alley, 2) half-
width street improvements (paving, curbs, and gutters) on Prospect
Avenue between Main Street and Third Street, 3) sidewalks on Prospect
Avenue and Third Street with enriched paving and pedestrian bump-outs
at Main Street and Third Street, and 4) landscaping, which is consistent
with the recently installed streetscape improvements in the Old Town
commercial district. The developer will also be required to construct a
new sidewalk on Main Street that is consistent with the Americans with
Disabilities Act, which is needed to support pedestrian access to and from
the new commercial building. In addition, an approximately 4,900 square
foot portion of the alley to the west, which is currently an easement and
defined in Attachment 1 to the Disposition and Development Agreement,
will be granted in fee title to the City.
As conditioned, the subdivider will be required to pay park fees, on a per
unit basis, based on a minimum of .0065 acre per dwelling unit, and
reflecting the value of land required for park purposes in accordance with
Section 9331.d.3 of the Tustin City Code and as required by the DDA.
The subdivision would establish a planned unit development where there
are undivided interests in common areas such as the drive aisle, open
parking areas, open space areas, and landscape areas with separate
interests in space for the units. Section 1350, et al of the California Civil
Code authorizes the creation of an association to set forth the restrictions
on the use or enjoyment of any portion of the common interest in a
condominium development. As conditioned, the developer would be
required to record a declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions
for the project.
That the scope of this activity is within the scope of the Prospect Village Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). In accordance with the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City Council has
considered the FEIR and found that it is complete and adequate and
adopted Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
a Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to approving Tentative Tract Map
16481 by adopting Resolution No. 04-45.
The City Council hereby approves Tentative Tract Map 16481 to subdivide a 1.035
acre parcel located at the northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue into
thirteen (13) numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot for the purpose of developing
a commercial building and twelve (12) live/work units within a planned unit
P.
II.
Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
May 17, 2004
Page 4
development, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on the 17111
day of May, 2004.
TONY KAWASHiMA
Mayor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 04-47
SS
PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 04-47 was duly passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 1yth day of May,
2004, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
The subdivider shall conform to all applicable requirements of the State
Subdivision Map Act, the City's Subdivision Ordinance, and the City's zoning
regulations. Within 24 months from tentative map, the subdivider shall
record with the appropriate agencies a final map prepared in accordance
with subdivision requirements of the Tustin Municipal Code, the State
Subdivision Map Act, and applicable conditions contained herein unless an
extension is granted pursuant to Section 9323 of the Tustin Municipal Code.
Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the
Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to
expiration.
SOURCE CODES
(1) STANDARD CONDITION
(2) CEQA MITIGATION
(3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S
(4) DESIGN REVIEW
EXCEPTION
GENERAL
(1 )
1.1
(1 )
1.2
(1 )
1.3
(1 )
1.4
EXHIBIT A
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16481
RESOLUTION NO. 04-47
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for
the project date stamped May 17, 2004, on file with the Community
Development Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the
Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The
Director of Community Development may also approve minor modifications
to plans during plan check if such modifications are to be consistent with the
provisions of the Tustin City Code and other applicable codes.
Approval of Tentative Tract Map 16481 is contingent upon the applicant
returning to the Community Development Department a notarized
"Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and
recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a notarized "Notice of
Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms
shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and
evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development
Department.
As a condition of approval of Tentative Tract Map 16481, the applicant shall
agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim,
action, or proceeding brought by a third-party against the City, its officers,
agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or
annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other
decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City
agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed
against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The
City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any
such action under this condition.
(5)
(6)
(7)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT
LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES
PC/CC POLICY
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
Page 2
(1 )
1.5
(1 )
1.6
(1) 1.7
(1) 1.8
(5) 1.9
Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be
complied with as specified or prior to the recordation of a final map, subject
to review and approval by the Community Development Department and City
review required pursuant to the Disposition and Development Agreement for
Prospect Village.
Approval of Tentative Tract Map 16481 shall become null and void in the
event that the City Council does not approve the Disposition and
Development Agreement (DDA) in case of default by the developer or
termination by the City, including, but not limited to, the City's approval of
any final maps not completed at the time of default or termination.
Approval of Tentative Tract Map 16481 shall become null and void in the
event that City Council does not approve Zone Change 03-002, Tentative
Tract Map 16481, or if conditions of the DDA for the project are violated.
Approval of Tentative Tract Map 16481 shall become null and void in the
event that Community Development Director does not issue a Certificate
of Appropriateness for the project.
This development is subject to the applicant's fulfillment of all provisions of
DDA.
1.10 The development of the project authorized by Tentative Tract Map 16481
shall be in accordance with the FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program, Zone
Change 03-002, and Design Review 03-012 as approved by Resolution
Nos. 3910, 3911, and 3913 which are incorporated herein by reference, as
though fully set forth in the DDA.
(1 )
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS. CONDITIONS & RESTRICTIONS ¡CC&RS\
(1 )
2.1
Prior to issuance of building permits or recordation of the final map,
whichever occurs first, all organizational documents for the project
including Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be
submitted to and approved by the Community Development Department
and the City Attorney. The applicant is responsible for costs associated
with the review of these documents. The approved CC&Rs shall be
recorded prior to, or concurrently with, recordation of the final map. A copy
of the final documents shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department within five (5) days after their recordation. These provisions
shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
a.
No dwelling unit in the development shall be sold or a Certificate of
Occupancy issued, unless a homeowners association has been
legally formed with the right to assess all these properties which are
jointly owned or benefited to operate and maintain all other mutually
available features of the development including, but not limited to,
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
Page 3
open space, amenities, landscaping, private streets, and utilities.
b.
The City shall be included as a party to the CC&Rs for enforcement
purposes of those CC&R provisions in which the City has interest, as
reflected in the following provisions. However, the City shall not be
obligated to enforce the CC&Rs.
c.
The requirement that association bylaws be established.
d.
Provisions for effective establishment, operation, management, use,
repair, and maintenance of all common areas and facilities including
but not limited to, landscaped areas, walls and fences, private
roadways (i.e., walkways, sidewalks, driveways), trash enclosures,
and open space areas.
e.
Membership in the homeowners association shall be inseparable from
ownership in individual units.
f.
Architectural controls shall be provided and may include, but not be
limited to, provisions regulating exterior finishes, roof materials, fences
and walls, accessory structures such as patios, sunshades, trellises,
gazebos, awnings, exterior mechanical equipment, television and
radio antenna, consistent with the Tustin City Code.
g.
The ground floor of the Live-Work units along Prospect Avenue shall
be limited to retail uses specifically noted in the Planned Community
regulations (Attachment A of Resolution No. 9311).
Retail/Professional office uses are permitted on the ground floor of the
Live-Work units facing the alley (Prospect Lane) limited to uses
specified in the Planned Community regulations (Attachment - A of
Resolution No. 3911). (DDA)
h.
At the minimum ten (10) of the twelve (12) Live-Work units shall be
owner/retail proprietor occupancy on all floors. (DDA)
i.
Maintenance standards shall be provided for applicable items listed in
Section D. Examples of maintenance standards are shown below:
1.
All common area landscaping and private areas visible from
any public way shall be properly maintained such that they
are evenly cut, evenly edged, free of bare or brown spots,
debris, and weeds. All trees and shrubs shall be trimmed so
they do not impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Trees
shall be pruned so they do not intrude into neighboring
properties and shall be maintained so they do not have
droppings or create other nuisances to neighboring
properties. All trees shall also be root pruned to eliminate
exposed surface roots and damage to sidewalks, driveways,
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
Page 4
k.
j.
k.
and structures.
2.
All private roadways, sidewalks, and open space areas shall
be maintained so that they are safe for users. Significant
pavement cracks, pavement distress, excessive slab
settlement, abrupt vertical variations, and debris on travel
ways should be removed or repaired promptly.
3.
Common areas shall be maintained in such a manner as to
avoid the reasonable determination of a duly authorized
official of the City that a public nuisance has been created by
the absence of adequate maintenance such as to be
detrimental to public health, safety, or general welfare.
Homeowners association approval of exterior improvements
requiring a building permit shall be obtained prior to requesting a
building permit from the City of Tustin Community Development
Department. All plans for exterior improvements shall conform to
requirements set forth by the City and the CC&Rs.
No private open space would be provided for the Live-Work Units;
areas within Lot A surrounding Lots 2 through 13 will be common
open space.
The approved "Site Plan" shall be made part of the CC&Rs and
shall be enforced by the homeowners association. In addition to
the exhibit, provisions regarding parking shall be included in the
CC&Rs, including the following:
1.
All units are required to maintain a two-car garage.
2.
A minimum of three (3) unassigned guest parking spaces
shall be permanently maintained in locations shown on the
site plan.
3.
Residents shall not store or park any non-motorized
vehicles, trailers, or motorized vehicles that exceed 7 feet
high, 7 feet wide, and 19 feet long in any parking space,
driveway, or private street area except for the purpose of
loading, unloading, making deliveries, or emergency repairs
except that the homeowners association may adopt rules
and regulations to authorize exceptions.
4.
Residents shall park vehicles in garage spaces. Storage of
items may occur in the garages only to the extent that
vehicles may still be parked within the required garage
spaces.
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
Page 5
5.
The homeowners association shall be responsible for
monitoring and enforcing all parking and traffic regulations
on private streets. The proposed CC&Rs shall include
provisions requiring the association to develop and adopt an
enforcement program for parking and traffic regulations
within the development which may include measures for fire
access and enforcement by a private security company.
6.
Trash and recycling bins shall be located on the designated
areas on Prospect Avenue and the alley twelve hours before
trash pick up day and collected twelve (12) hours after
collection.
I.
Maintenance of all common areas, drive aisle, driveways, etc., shall
be the responsibility of the homeowners association.
m.
Television and radio antennas shall be installed in accordance with
the requirements of the Tustin City Code.
n.
All utility services serving the site shall be installed and maintained
underground.
o.
The homeowners association shall be required to file the names,
addresses, and telephone numbers of at least one member of the
homeowners association Board and, where applicable, a manager
of the project before January 1 st of each year with the City of Tustin
Community Development Department for the purpose of contacting
the association in the case of emergency or in those cases where
the City has an interest in CC&R violations.
p.
The homeowners association shall be responsible for establishing
and following procedures for providing access to public utilities for
maintenance of their facilities within the project area, subject to
those agencies' approval.
q.
No amendment to alter, modify, terminate, or change the
homeowners association's obligation to maintain the common areas
and the project perimeter wall or other CC&R provisions in which
the City has an interest, as noted above, or to alter, modify,
terminate, or change the City's right to enforce maintenance of the
common areas and maintenance of the project perimeter wall, shall
be permitted without the prior written approval of the City of Tustin
Community Development Department.
HOMEBUYER NOTIFICATION
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
Page 6
Prior to issuance of building permits or recordation of the final map,
whichever occurs first, the subdivider shall submit to the Community
Development Department for review and approval a homebuyer
notification document that includes the notifications listed below. The
notification document shall be signed by each homebuyer prior to final
inspection and occupancy, and a copy of the signed notification shall be
provided to the Community Development Department prior to final
inspection and/or issuance of each Certificate of Occupancy.
(1 )
3.1
A.
A notice for potential roadway noise and airport noise that may
impact the subdivision, including roadway noise associated with
Main Street which is a primary four (4) land road and Prospect
Avenue which is a secondary two (2) lane road and potential noise
and activity associated with the adjacent commercial buildings and
operation of the ground floor retail or office uses in the commercial
building and Live-Work units.
B.
A notice regarding units that are adjacent to aboveground utilities or
structures (such as street light standards and fire hydrants)
identifying the type of structure and their locations.
C.
A notice indicating that any use of Live-Work Units shall be in
accordance with the requirements of the Planned Community
Regulation and subject to the City's Business License regulations
and Home Occupation Ordinance.
E.
A notice indicating the development standards associated with the
live/work units.
F.
A notice explaining and providing a copy of a "Common Area Open
Space Exhibit."
G.
A notice explaining and providing a copy of the approved "Guest
Parking Exhibit" and related CC&R provisions.
H.
A notice of existing and future improvements and developments in
the area, including nearby non-residential uses.
I.
A notice that Tustin is subject to aircraft overflights into John
Wayne airport.
J.
A notice that the adjacent commercial building will contain a
restaurant use (approximately 3,000 square feet) with an outdoor
dining area.
K.
A notice that street parking would not be permitted on Prospect
Avenue during trash pick up hours.
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
Page 7
MAPPING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall submit the
site plan to the Orange County Fire Authority to demonstrate adequate
emergency vehicle access will be provided at all times.
The Subdivider shall satisfy dedication and/or reservation requirements as
applicable, including but not limited to, dedication of all required street and
flood control right-of-way easements, vehicular access rights, sewer
easements and water easements defined and approved as to specific
locations by the City Engineer and other agencies.
Through a reimbursement agreement with the City, the developer shall
design and reconstruct Prospect Avenue adjacent to the project site
consistent with current City standards. The developer shall construct
public improvements including sidewalk, curb and gutter, street light,
landscaping, and any missing improvements along the project frontage to
the centerline of Prospect Avenue.
Through a reimbursement agreement with the City, the developer shall
remove and replace sidewalk, curb and gutter, and landscape and install
street lights along the project frontage on Third Street.
Through a reimbursement agreement with the City, the developer shall
construct improvements in the public alley consistent with the City plans
for the East Alley Improvements. In addition, the easement held by the
City on a portion of the public alley between Main Street and Third Street
and defined in Attachment 1 of the Disposition and Development
Agreement shall be granted in fee to the City and shall be consistent with
the approved legal description submitted and approved by the Public
Works Department.
Through a reimbursement agreement with the City, the developer shall
design and construct a brick paver crosswalk on Prospect Avenue at Main
Street.
The backflow prevention devices shall be installed in accordance with
applicable standards and codes and shall be installed within an easement of
suitable size to allow for unobstructed access, inspection, testing, and
maintenance.
Upon recordation of final tract map, the applicant shall obtain new addresses
from the Engineering Division.
Prior to the approval of a subdivision map (except for financing and
conveyance purposes), the project applicant shall design and construct a
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
Page 8
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
local drainage collection system designed for a minimum 10-year storm
frequency except in sump conditions where a 25-year storm frequency shall
be used. Secondary discharge outlets shall be provided for all sump inlet
conditions. Design shall be in accordance with the City of Tustin and County
of Orange standards.
4.10 Improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Orange County
Fire Authority (OCFA) for fire protection purposes. The adequacy and
reliability of water system design and the distribution of fire hydrants will be
evaluated. The water distribution system and appurtenance shall conform to
the applicable laws and adopted regulations enforced by the Orange County
Health Department.
4.11
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, building permit, or submittal of the final
map, whichever comes first, the subdivider shall identify type and class of
water main and laterals.
4.12 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, building permit, or submittal of the final
map, whichever comes first, all proposed utility points of connection shall be
clearly shown on the utility plans. An internal looped water system shall have
at least two (2) points of connection to the City's water system. The design
of the looped water system shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Street stations at connection points to these mainlines shall be identified.
4.13 Prior to final map approval, the subdivider shall submit:
A.
B.
A current title report; and,
A duplicate mylar of the Final Map, or 8 % inch by 11 inch
transparency of each map sheet prior to final map approval and "as
built" grading, landscape, and improvement plans prior to Certificate
of Acceptance.
4.14 Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall execute a
subdivision and monumentation agreement and furnish the improvement
and monumentation bonds as required by the City Engineer.
4.15 In addition to the normal full-size plan submittal process, all final
development plans including, but not limited to: tract maps, parcel maps,
right-of-way maps, records of survey, public works improvements, private
infrastructure improvements, final grading plans, and site plans shall be
submitted to the Public Works DepartmenUEngineering Division in
computer aided design and drafting (CADD) format. The standard file
format is AutoCAD Release 2004 having the extension DWG. Likewise,
layering and linetype conventions are AutoCAD-based (latest version
available upon request from the Engineering Division). In order to
interchangeably utilize the data contained in the infrastructure mapping
system, CADD drawings must be in AutoCAD "DWG" format (i.e.,
produced using AutoCAD or AutoCAD compatible CADD software). The
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-47
Tentative Tract Map 164B1
Page 9
FEES
(1 )
5.1
(1 )
5.2
(2)
5.3
most current version of AutoCAD is Release 2004. Drawings created in
AutoCAD Release 2004 is compatible and acceptable.
The CADD files shall be submitted to the City at the time the plans are
approved and updated CADD files reflecting "as built" conditions shall be
submitted once all construction has been completed. The subdivision bonds
will not be released until the "as built" CADD files have been submitted.
The applicant shall submit to the City of Tustin a fee for the review of
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and homebuyer
notifications at the time of submittal. The review fee includes one initial check
and recheck of the document. If subsequent review is required, an hourly fee
of $190 per hour (or the rate in effect at the time of submittal) for the City
Attorney and $50 per hour (or the rate in effect at the time of submittal) for
staff review shall be submitted.
The applicant shall pay fees in lieu of parkland dedication of a minimum of
.0065 acre per dwelling unit. The value of the amount of such fees shall
be based upon the requirements of Section 9331.d.3 of the Tustin City
Code.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the
applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a
cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of forty-
three dollars ($43.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate
environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight (48)
hour period the applicant has not delivered to the Community
Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of limitations
for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination
under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be
significantly lengthened.
ATTACHMENT K
Resolution No. 04-48
RESOLUTION NO. 04-48
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 03.012 AUTHORIZING
CONSTRUCTION OF A 9,300 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING
AND TWELVE (12) LlVE.WORK UNITS AND SITE AMENITIES, AND A
REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES ON
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MAIN
STREET AND PROSPECT AVENUE
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
I.
The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A.
A proper application for Design Review 03-012 was submitted by Prospect
Village, LP, a California Limited Partnership (formerly known as Pelican
Center LLC), requesting approval to construct a 9,300 square foot
commercial building and twelve (12) live/work units and a reduction in off-
street parking requirements at the northwest corner of Main Street and
Prospect Avenue.
B.
That the Planning Commission considered Design Review 03-012 as part of
a public hearing on the project that was duly called, noticed, and held on
April 26, 2004, by the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission
approved Design Review 03-012.
C.
On May 3, 2004, the City Council appealed the Planning Commission's
decision to the City Council.
D.
That the City Council considered Design Review 03-012 as part of a public
hearing on the project that was duly called, noticed, and held on May 17,
2004, by the City Council.
E.
The proposed project is located within the General Plan "Old Town
Commercial" land use designation, which supports the development of
retail, restaurant, office, and residential uses. The site is currently within
the Central Commercial and Parking Overlay (C2-P) zoning district and
would be located within a Planned Community District and subject to the
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations, if Zone Change
03-002 is adopted by the City Council on May 17, 2004. The building
intensity, density, and design of the proposed project are consistent with
the proposed regulations of the Planned Community District.
F.
The applicant has requested approval of Tentative Tract Map 16481 in
conjunction with Design Review 03-012 to create the building sites shown on
the submitted development plans; findings and conditions of approval
related to conversion of an easement over a portion of the public alley to
fee title and construction of infrastructure improvements necessary to
support the project have been included in Resolution No. 04-47.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 2
G.
Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Municipal Code, the City Council
finds that the location, size, architectural features, and general appearance
of the proposed development will not impair the orderly and harmonious
development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the
occupancy as a whole. In making such findings, the City Council has
considered at least the following items:
1.
Height, bulk, and area of buildings: The proposed height, massing, and
size of the buildings are compatible with existing commercial buildings
surrounding the site, which include two-story commercial buildings with
flat roofs and brick parapets.
Setbacks and site planning: The proposed building setbacks are
compatible with other commercial developments in Old Town with zero
setbacks along Main Street and Prospect Avenue, which is common in
urban settings.
Exterior materials and colors: The proposed materials such as brick
veneer, dentil cornice, stone window and door heads are compatible
with existing architectural materials in existing buildings within Old
Town Tustin.
Type and pitch of roofs: The proposed architecture contains flat roofing
and parapet with a decorative cornice, similar to other commercial
buildings along Main Street.
Size and spacing of windows, doors, and other openings: The
proposed window and door styles (i.e., double hung windows with
decorative mullions, and large storefront) and window accents such as
brick/stone door and window heads, brick windows sills, awnings, and
shutters) are consistent with the features of existing buildings in Old
Town Tustin.
Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television
antennae: The proposed pyramid shape towers at the corners provide
architectural relief and interest and are integrated to accent the corners
and define the boundaries of the project.
Location, height, and standards of exterior illumination: Exterior
illumination for the project is provided by street lighting along
Prospect Avenue, Prospect Lane (public alley), and Main Street, and
by building-mounted lighting that is appropriate for the area; as
conditioned, no lighting will spill over onto other properties.
Landscaping, parking area design, and traffic circulation: Similar to
other buildings within Old Town that are located in close proximity to
the property lines, limited landscaping would be provided; however,
tenants would have the opportunity to set pots or planters in front of
the buildings to provide greenery. In addition, the developer would
be required to install street trees along the project perimeter. Parking
in the commercial building is tucked under the second floor and not
visible from Main Street. Access to live/work units is provided from the
public alley and does not impede traffic on Main Street.
Location and appearance of equipment located outside an enclosed
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 3
structure: All equipment would be located within an enclosed structure
and integrated within the building design.
10. Location and method of refuse storage: The trash enclosure of the
commercial building would be integrated into the first floor of the
building and refuse collection for the live/work units would be similar to
a residential development.
11. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the
neighborhood: The proposed commercial building is compatible with
the existing structures in that the a zero foot setback from the Main
Street right-of-way is maintained, the building is two stories in height
(approximately 34 feet) similar to commercial buildings to the west of
the site, and designed with a flat roof and brick parapet that follows
similar massing and storefront along Main Street. The LivelWork units
are three stories (ranging from 36 feet to 39 feet in height including
parapets) and designed with similar features to continue the
commercial street frontage on Prospect Avenue and a more residential
character with sloped roof for third floor along the public alley. The
project would provide a consistent urban theme compatible with the
surrounding buildings and would retain a pedestrian scale along the
storefronts.
12. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing
structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and
public thoroughfares: The proposed design features of the buildings
are consistent with the existing buildings in Old Town Tustin in that
similar height, massing, and materials are proposed along the public
thoroughfares.
13. Proposed signage: Although no sign plans have been submitted for the
project, future proposals for the signs would be reviewed in accordance
with Tustin Sign Code, which requires compatibility with the building
architecture and materials.
14. Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council:
The proposed project would implement General Plan goals and policies
and the Town Center Redevelopment Plan in that the project would
develop a vacant and underutilized site for a mixed-use project,
eliminate delay and uncertainties regarding future development of the
site, stimulate private investment and demonstrate economic viability
in the Old Town commercial area, increase the amount of specialty
retailing and commercial development in the core of the Old Town
commercial area to enhance its urban character and provide long-
term economic viability, expand the niche market character of the Old
Town commercial area by providing a balanced mix of new retail and
commercial uses, increase the number of residential units in the
Town Center Redevelopment Project Area while reflecting a high-
quality urban character, develop ground floor specialty retailing
configurations, provide a high-quality restaurant along with outdoor
patio dining to enliven the pedestrian environment along Main Street,
create a financially viable commercial mixed-used development with
minimum public subsidy, create construction jobs and permanent
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 4
II.
jobs in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area, increase the
property tax increment and sales tax revenues for ongoing economic
development activities in the Old Town commercial area including
business retention and outreach programs, façade improvement
programs, and community facility projects. The project would also be
consistent with the Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations, if adopted by the City Council, and other general
development standards contained within the Tustin City Code. In
addition, the developer would be required to obtain a Certificate of
Appropriateness prior to issuance of permits.
H.
Pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9271aa, the reduction in off-street
parking from ninety-two (92) spaces to sixty-two (62) spaces for
commercial uses to support the commercial building and live/work units,
as conditioned, is appropriate based upon the findings of the Shared
Parking Evaluation (Appendix F of FEIR), which was prepared by a
licensed traffic engineer and utilized the methodology promulgated by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The evaluation found that the
provision of three (3) on-site parking spaces and fifty-nine (59) off-site
parking spaces to be provided at the Main Street Water Facility, within 300
feet of the project, will be sufficient for the anticipated demand of the
project. As conditioned, the developer will be required to obtain a lease
from the City for fifty-nine (59) off-site parking spaces at the City's Main
Street Water Facility in accordance with Tustin City Code Section
9252j3(d)(3) or provide alternative parking to support the project.
I.
That the scope of this activity is within the scope of the Prospect Village
Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). In accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
Council has considered the FEIR and found that it is complete and
adequate and adopted Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to approving
Design Review 03-12 by adopting Resolution No. 04-45.
The City Council hereby approves Design Review 03-012, authorizing
construction of a 9,300 square foot commercial building and twelve (12) live/work
units and a reduction in off-street parking requirements, subject to the conditions
contained in Exhibit A attached hereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the
1yth day of May, 2004.
TONY KAWASHIMA
Mayor
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 04-48
SS
PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 04-48 was duly passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 1yth day of May,
2004, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
GENERAL
(1 )
1.1
(1 )
1.2
(1 )
1.3
(1 )
1.4
EXHIBIT A
DESIGN REVIEW 03-012
RESOLUTION NO. 04-48
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The proposed project shall conform with the submitted plans for the project
date stamped May 17, 2004, on file with the Community Development
Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of
Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit and City review
required pursuant to Disposition and Development Agreement for the
project. The Director of Community Development may also approve minor
modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are consistent
with the provisions of the Tustin City Code, other applicable codes, and all
requirements of the DDA.
Approval of Design Review 03-012 is contingent upon the applicant
returning to the Community Development Department a notarized
"Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing
and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a notarized "Notice of
Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms
shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and
evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development
Department.
As a condition of approval of Design Review 03-012, the applicant shall
agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from
any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City,
its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside,
challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning
Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff,
concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of
any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the
defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense,
elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition.
Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be
complied with as specified or prior to the issuance of any grading or building
permits for the project, as applicable, subject to review and approval by the
Community Development Department and City review required pursuant to
the DDA.
SOURCE CODES
(1) STANDARD CONDITION
(2) CEQA MITIGATION
(3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S
(4) DESIGN REVIEW
(5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT
(6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES
(7) PC/CC POLICY
... EXCEPTION
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 2
(1 )
1.5
(1) 1.6
(1) 1.7
(1) 1.8
(5)
(5)
(1 )
(1 )
1.9
Approval of Design Review 03-012 shall become null and void in the event
that the City Council does not approve the Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) in case of default by the developer or termination by the
City, including, but not limited to, the City's approval of any final plans not
completed at the time of default or termination.
Approval of Design Review 03-012 will become null and void in the event the
City Council does not approve Zone Change 03-002, Tentative Tract Map
16481, or if conditions of the DDA for the project are violated.
Approval of Design Review 03-012 shall become null and void in the event
that the Community Development Director does not issue a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the project.
The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for
the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is underway
within the time frames identified in the schedule of performance contained in
the DDA. All time extensions may be considered if a written request is within
thirty (30) days prior to expiration and processed in accordance with the
provisions of the DDA.
Issuance of Certificates of Use and Occupancy shall be limited to all
requirements contained in the DDA and pursuant to this entitlement
approval and all conditions incorporated herein as a condition of this
entitlement as though fully set forth herein.
1.10 This development is subject to the applicant's fulfillment of all provisions of
DDA.
1.11 The development of the project authorized by Design Review 03-012 shall
be in accordance with the FEIR Mitigation Monitoring Program, Tentative
Tract Map 16481, and Zone Change 03-002, as approved by Resolution
Nos. 04-45, 04-47, 04-48, and Ordinance No. 1284 which are incorporated
herein by reference, as though fully set forth in the DDA.
1.12 Any violation of any of the conditions imposed is subject to the payment of a
civil penalty of $100.00 for each violation, or such other amounts as the City
Council may establish by ordinance or resolution, and for each day the
violation exists, subject to the applicable notice, hearing, and appeal process
as established by the City Council ordinance.
(1 )
1.13 The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with any necessary
code enforcement action, including attorney fees, subject to the applicable
notice, hearing, and appeal process as established by the City Council by
ordinance.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 3
(1 )
1.14 Major modifications or amendments to Design Review 03-012 may be
considered by the Zoning Administrator as authorized by Section 9299 of
the Tustin City Code.
GRADING PLAN SUBMITTAL
(1 )
2.1
(1 )
2.2
(1) 2.3
(1) 2.4
(1) 2.5
Seven (7) sets of grading plans consistent with the site and landscaping
plans as prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted and shall
include the following:
. Technical details and plans for all utility installations including
telephone, gas, water, and electricity.
. Three (3) copies of a precise soils report (less than one (1) year old)
provided by a civil engineer. Expanded information regarding the levels
of hydrocarbons and ground water contamination found on-site shall
be provided in the soils report. All pavement "R" values shall be in
accordance with applicable City of Tustin standards.
. All site drainage shall be handled on-site and shall not be permitted to
drain onto adjacent properties.
. Two (2) copies of Hydrology Report.
A surety/cash bond will be required to assure work is completed in
accordance with approved plans prior to permit issuance. The engineer's
estimated cost of the grading, drainage, and erosion control shall be
submitted to the Building Official for determination of the bond amount.
Authorization of all easement holders shall be provided prior to issuance of a
rough grading permit.
The engineer of record shall submit a final compaction report to the
Building Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
The engineer of record shall submit a pad certification to the Building
Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.
WATER QUALITY
(1 )
3.1
(1 )
3.2
This development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City of
Tustin Water Quality Ordinance and all Federal, State, and Regional
Water Quality Control Board rules and regulations.
Prior to issuance of any permits, the applicant shall submit for approval by
the Community Development and Public Works Departments a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to control
predictable pollutant run-off. This WQMP shall identify the structural and
non-structural measures specified detailing implementation of BMPs
whenever they are applicable to the project; the assignment of long-term
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 4
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
maintenance responsibilities (specifying the developer, parcel owner,
maintenance association, lessee, etc.); and, reference to the location(s) of
structural BMPs.
Prior to submittal of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the
applicant shall submit a deposit of $2,700 for the estimated cost of review of
the WQMP to the Building Division. The actual costs shall be deducted from
the deposit, and the applicant shall be responsible for any additional review
cost that exceeded the deposit prior to issuance of grading permits. Any
unused portion of the deposit shall be refunded to the applicant.
Prior to issuance of any permits, the property owner shall record a Notice of
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) with the County Clerk Recorder
on a form provided by the Community Development Department to inform
future property owners of the requirement to implement the approved
WQMP.
The Community Development and Public Works Departments shall
determine whether any change in use requires an amendment to an
approved Water Quality Management Plan.
Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of
the Notice of Intent (NOI) indicating that coverage has been obtained
under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) State
General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction
Activity from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that the
NOI has been obtained shall be submitted to the Building Official. In
addition, the applicant shall include notes on the grading plans indicating
that the project will be implemented in compliance with the Statewide
Permit for General Construction Activities.
An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be submitted for review and
approval to the Building Official prior to issuance of grading permits. A
variety of best management practices as identified in the City's Best
Management Practices Handbook and devices such as desilting basins,
check dams, cribbing, rip rap, watering, and other methods shall be included
on the plan, implemented, and maintained on an ongoing basis to control
water and wind-related erosion and prevent sedimentation from entering the
storm drain system, adjacent properties, or rights-of-way.
A variety of best management practices as identified in the City's Best
Management Practices Handbook shall be implemented on an ongoing
basis during construction to protect surface waters and prevent wastes or
pollutants from moving off-site during a storm. Potential pollutants include,
but are not limited to, paints, stains, sealants, glues, fuels, oils, lubricants,
fertilizers, etc. Disposal of such materials shall occur in a specified and
controlled temporary area on-site, physically separated from potential storm
water run-off, with ultimate disposal in accordance with local, State, and
Federal regulations.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 5
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(2)
(1 )
3.9
Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall post with the
Public Works Department a minimum $2,500 cash deposit or letter of
credit to guarantee the sweeping of streets and clean-up of streets
affected by construction activities. In the event this deposit is depleted
prior to completion of development, an additional incremental deposit will
be required.
3.10 Earth, sand, gravel, rock, stone, or other excavated material or debris may
not be deposited or moved so as to cause the same to be deposited upon
or roll, blow, flow, or wash upon or over any public place or right-of-way or
the premises of another without the express written consent of the owner.
3.11 When loading or transporting any earth, sand, ground, rock, stone, or
other excavated material or debris, such material shall be prevented from
blowing or spilling onto the public right-of-way or adjacent private property.
The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining public rights-of-way in a
condition reasonably free of dust, earth, or debris attributed to the grading
operation. If any debris is deposited within the right-of-way or adjacent
property, the applicant shall be responsible for removing the material
immediately.
3.12 The applicant shall comply with all City policies regarding short-term
construction emissions, including periodic watering of the site and prohibiting
grading during second stage smog alerts and when wind velocities exceed
15 miles per hour.
3.13 A note shall be provided on final plans that a six (6) foot high chain link fence
shall be installed around the site prior to grading and building construction
stages. A nylon fabric or mesh shall be attached to the temporary
construction fencing. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter
of the site for construction vehicles.
BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTAL
(3)
(1 )
4.1
At the time of building permit application, the plans shall comply with the
latest adopted codes, City Ordinances, and State and Federal laws and
regulations. The City is currently using the 2001 California Building Code
(CBC), 2001 California Mechanical Code (CMC), 2001 California Plumbing
Code (CPC), 2001 California Electrical Code (CEC), California Title 24
Accessibility Regulations, and Title 24 Energy Regulations.
4.2
Building plan check submittal shall include the following:
. Seven (7) sets of construction plans, including drawings for
mechanical, plumbing, and electrical.
. Two (2) copies of structural calculations.
. Two (2) copies of Title 24 energy calculations.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 6
(3)
4.3
(3) 4.4
(3) 4.5
(3) 4.6
(3) 4.7
(3) 4.8
(3)
4.9
. Elevations that include all proposed dimensions, materials, colors,
finishes.
. Roofing material shall be fire rated class "B" or better.
. Note on plans that no field changes shall be made without prior
approval from the Building Official and architect or engineer of record.
. Rooftop equipment shall be installed and maintained at least six (6)
inches below the parapet so the equipment is not visible from the public
right-of-way or adjacent properties.
. Details of all proposed lighting fixtures and a photometric study showing
the location and anticipated pattern of light distribution of all proposed
fixtures.
. A letter of acceptance from Federal Disposal for location of the proposed
trash enclosures. All trash enclosures shall be constructed in accordance
with the City's standard detail and the requirements of Federal Disposal
and shall be adequately screened.
The plans submitted shall indicate that restrooms are accessible to persons
with disabilities as per State of California Accessibility Standards (Title 24).
Plumbing fixture units are required to comply with the 2001 California
Plumbing Code Chapter four (4) Table 4-1 as per type of group occupancy,
or as approved by the Building Official.
Openings in exterior walls shall not be permitted less than five (5) feet from
property lines, 2001 California Building Code (Table 5A).
Escape and rescue windows shall be provided in all sleeping rooms in
accordance with the 2001 California Building Code (Section 310.4).
The residential units shall be provided with heating facilities capable of
maintaining a temperature of 70 degrees at a point three (3) feet above the
floor in all habitable rooms, 2001 California Building Code (Section 310.11).
Vehicle parking, primary entrance to the building, the primary paths of travel,
cashier space, sanitary facilities, drinking fountain, and public telephones
shall be accessible to persons with disabilities.
Parking for disabled persons shall be provided with an additional five (5) foot
loading area with striping and ramp; disabled persons shall be able to park
and access the building without passing behind another car. At least one (1)
accessible space shall be van accessible served by a minimum 96 inch wide
loading area.
An area analysis shall be submitted for all buildings (residences and
garages). Submitted plans shall demonstrate compliance with allowable floor
areas based on 2001 California Building Code Chapter 5, Table 5-B.
4.10 Pursuant to the City of Tustin's Security Ordinance and the Uniform Fire
Code, street numbers shall be displayed in a prominent location on the
street side of all buildings. The numerals shall be no less than six (6) inches
(1 )
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 7
(3)
(3)
(3)
(***)
(3)
(3)
(1 )
in height and shall be of contrasting color to the background to which they
are attached and illuminated during hours of darkness.
4.11
All new glass doors and windows, in or adjacent to doors, shall be tempered
in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code Section 2406.4.
4.12 Water heaters shall not be installed in a closet or other confined space
opening into a bedroom.
4.13 A level floor or landing shall be provided at all commercial and retail doors.
This area shall have a minimum length of 60 inches in the direction of the
door swing and 48 inches in the opposite direction of the door swing.
4.14 No demolition permits shall be issued until building permits have been
issued for replacement structures in accordance with Section 9252(i)(3), and
the applicant shall obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness prior to issuance
of building permits.
4.15 Approval of the Orange County Fire Authority regarding access, fire lanes,
fire flows, fire hydrants, sprinkler system, and hazardous materials shall be
obtained prior to issuance of a building permit.
4.16 All information necessary to ensure compliance with requirements of the
Orange County Fire Authority shall be submitted, including information
regarding fire flows and installation of fire hydrants, and shall be subject to
review and approval by the City of Tustin Public Works Department and/or
Irvine Ranch Water District.
4.17 Parking area dimensions, locations and access shall conform to the City's
design review criteria on file in the Community Development Department.
At a minimum, live/work unit garages shall be a 20 feet by 20 feet inside
clear dimension. Automatic garage door openers and sectional rollup
doors shall be required on all live/work units. Open parking spaces in the
live/work development shall be a minimum of nine (9) feet in width by
twenty (20) feet in depth. Up to a two (2) foot overhang may be permitted
into a landscape planter or sidewalk area provided the sidewalk has
sufficient width to comply with accessibility requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
(1 )
5.1
All mitigation measures identified in the Final Environmental Impact
Report shall be implemented in accordance with the adopted Mitigation
Monitoring Program contained in Resolution No. 3910, including the
following:
a.
Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, documentation of the
buildings to be removed shall be undertaken by the developer to be
approved by the City utilizing the standards of the Historic
American Building Survey (HABS), including photo-documentation
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page B
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
and measured drawings of the East Main and Prospect Avenue
elevations. These items, together with the Historical Resource
Technical Report, shall be added to the Tustin Area Historical
Society Museum.
If buried cultural resources, such as chipped or ground stone, historic
debris, building foundations, or human remains are inadvertently
discovered during ground-disturbing activities, work will stop in that
area and within 100 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist can
assess the significance of the find, and, if necessary, develop
appropriate treatment measures. Treatment measures typically
include development of avoidance strategies, capping with fill
material, or mitigation of impacts through data recovery programs
such as excavation or detailed documentation. The contractor and
lead contractor compliance inspector will verify that work is halted
until appropriate treatment measures are implemented if cultural
resources are discovered during construction activities. Concurrence
from the City on measures to be implemented before resuming
construction activities in the area of the find will be obtained.
The applicant shall remove the clarifier on-site in accordance with
applicable local, State, and Federal regulations prior to obtaining a
grading permit.
Any unknown contaminated soils that could be encountered on the
project site during demolition, site clearance, or construction
activities shall be removed from the project site and disposed of off-
site. The removal and disposal of these hazardous materials would
be in accordance with guidelines specified by the applicable local,
State and Federal resources agencies, including but not limited to,
the Department of Toxics Substances Control and federal
Environmental Protection Agency.
If during any future demolition or remodeling activities additional
suspect materials are observed, bulk samples shall be collected of
these materials and analyzed for asbestos content. All suspect
materials at the property are Presumed Asbestos-containing
Materials (PACMs) until the asbestos content is confirmed or
denied by analytical testing.
The applicant shall retain a licensed abatement contractor to
properly remove and dispose of the damaged (peeling, flaking)
lead-based paint prior to obtaining a demolition permit.
The developer shall prepare a construction staging and parking
plan for review and approval by City of Tustin Public Works prior to
issuance of demolition permit. The developer or contractor shall
monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the construction
staging and parking plan during the construction phase of the
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 9
h.
project. The plan shall include one or more of the following
potential types of traffic-related mitigation measures to ensure that
temporary disruptions to the adjacent uses and circulation within
the area are minimized:
.
Construction and Employee Parking: As part of the
construction staging and parking plan, the contractor shall
submit and obtain approval of a construction parking
program which reflects the schedule of construction activities
and location of construction-related parking. Locations of
available parking would be identified.
Street Circulation and Parking Measures: The contractor
may request and obtain a permit for any temporary lane
closures that may be required for adjacent roadways. The
contractor would utilize flagmen for traffic control to minimize
inconvenience and for safety of vehicles and pedestrians.
Haul Truck Routes, Queue Areas, and Deliveries: The
contractor shall provide an estimate of truck volume and
schedule. Schedule adjustments would be made to
minimize the volume during peak traffic hours. Areas would
be designated by the developer or contractor for staging of
all trucks. All earth-moving and ready-mix trucks would be
equipped with two-way radios. The trucks would follow a
City-approved route to the project site, without unnecessary
waiting.
Hours of Excavation Hauling: Heavy truck hauling
associated with excavation shall be scheduled to minimize
interference with daytime activity in the area. The hours for
excavation hauling would be determined in conjunction with
the City as part of the construction staging and parking plan.
Pedestrian Safety Measures: The contractor shall install a
construction fence around the perimeter, complying with City
requirements before excavation begins. A flagman shall be
available at all times and would be utilized whenever trucks
entering or leaving the project site may impede the flow of
traffic.
.
.
.
The applicant shall obtain an Off-Site Parking Agreement prior to
issuance of demolition permits. If the City Council does not
approve an Off-Site Parking Agreement for fifty-nine (59) parking
spaces at the City's Main Street Water Facility, the applicant shall
present an alternative shared use agreement to the City for review
and approval prior to issuance of a demolition permit. If the City
does not approve an alternative shared use agreement, the project
shall not proceed.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 10
ARCHITECTURE
(4)
6.1
(4)
6.2
(4)
6.3
(4) 6.4
(4) 6.5
(4) 6.6
(2) 6.7
(***) 6.8
All exterior treatments shall be consistent with the submitted color/material
samples and noted on all construction plans and elevations submitted for
building permit plan check, subject to review and approval by the
Community Development Department at final inspection. The developer
shall coordinate inspections with Planning staff at the time of initial
material or color application so that staff can verify compliance with the
submitted color/material board.
Exact details of the exterior door/storefront, building parapet, and cornices
shall be provided on the construction plans.
All ground- and wall-mounted mechanical and electrical fixtures and
equipment shall be adequately and decoratively screened. All roof-
mounted equipment shall be 6" below parapet height. The screen shall be
integrated with the architectural design of the building. All telephone and
electrical boxes shall be indicated on the building plans and shall be
completely screened. Electrical transformers shall be located toward the
interior of the project, maintaining sufficient distance to minimize visual
impacts from the public right-of-way.
All exposed metal flashing or trim shall be painted to match the building.
No exterior down spouts or roof scuppers shall be permitted. All roof
drains shall utilize interior piping, but may have exterior outlets at the base
of buildings.
A master sign plan for the site shall be submitted prior to issuance of any
sign permit; sign permits shall not be issued until completion of the project
and a tenant obtaining zoning clearance and a business license.
All building and pole-mounted lighting shall be designed to provide a
minimum one (1) foot candle illumination in accordance with the City's
Security Code. The applicant shall provide details of all proposed lighting
fixtures and a photometric study showing the location and the anticipated
distribution pattern of light of all proposed fixtures. All new light fixtures
shall be designed with the architecture of the building and designed and
arranged as not to direct light or glare onto adjacent properties, including
the adjacent streets.
Construction drawings submitted for plan check shall incorporate
construction assemblies to accommodate the noise standards as required
by acoustical analysis.
LANDSCAPING
(1 )
7.1
Complete landscape and irrigation plans that comply with the City of
Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines shall be submitted at plan
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 11
(1 )
check. An irrigation plan shall be submitted which shows the location and
control of backflow prevention devices at the meter, pipe size, sprinkler
type, spacing, and coverage details for all equipment including efficient
irrigation systems which minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize
the amount of water which will reach the plant roots. Drip irrigation, soil
moisture sensors, and automatic irrigation systems shall be used to
increase irrigation efficiency.
7.2
All plant materials shall be installed in a healthy and vigorous condition,
typical to the species and shall be maintained in a neat and healthy
condition. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, support structures
(trellis, etc.), trimming, mowing, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing,
regular watering, and replacement of dead or diseased dying plants.
Unhealthy or dead trees shall be replaced within seventy-two (72) hours
upon notification by the City.
USE RESTRICTIONS
(***) 8.1
(***) 8.2
A minimum of ten (10) residential units shall be owner/proprietor-occupied
on all floors and shall be designated as "Restricted Units" on the approved
plans. Four (4) of these units shall be located in Sub-Area I (facing
Prospect Avenue) and six (6) of these units shall be located in Sub-Area
B-II (facing the public alley). Owners of restricted units may obtain
Redevelopment Agency and City approval to lease the retail or office
portion of the live-work unit, provided the owner secures additional parking
within 300 feet of the unit as required by Section 9252 of the Tustin City
Code, at the ratios identified in Condition 8.2 herein, and records an
instrument or agreement approved by the Agency and the City.
Pursuant to the Shared Parking Evaluation prepared for the project
(Appendix F of the Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report), a
total of three (3) parking spaces shall be provided within Planning Area A,
adjacent to the Main Street Commercial Building. In addition, a total of
fifty-nine (59) spaces shall be provided subject to an Off-Site Parking
Agreement between the developer and the City of Tustin, as required by
Condition 5.1 (h) herein and provided for by Tustin City Code Section
9271aa and 9252j3, to accommodate commercial uses in the commercial
building and ground floor of the live/work units. If the approved land use
mix is modified, any additional parking that is needed shall be provided in
accordance with the following ratios:
One (1) parking space per 200 square feet of retail use;
One (1) parking space per 300 square feet of office use; and,
One (1) parking space per three (3) seats for restaurant use
(including outdoor dining).
Other uses shall provide parking at rates required by the Tustin City Code
or as determined by an approved conditional use permit.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 12
(1) 8.3
(***) 8.4
(***) 8.5
(1 )
8.6
(1 )
8.7
(1 )
8.8
(1 )
8.9
A minimum of two (2) enclosed garage spaces shall be maintained for
each dwelling unit and permanently used for the purpose of parking
vehicles. In addition, a minimum of three (3) open and unassigned guest
parking spaces, at a ratio of one (1) parking space for every four (4) units,
shall be provided within the development.
Parking shall be prohibited in the 20-foot wide alley.
If in the future the City determines that a parking, circulation, or noise
problem exists, the applicant shall be required to submit a new traffic/parking
study and implement immediate interim and permanent mitigation measures
upon review and approval by the Community Development Department and
the Public Works Department.
The installation of any exterior, freestanding vending machines, such as, but
not limited to, beverage or soda machines, candy, magazine racks, and any
other retail product is prohibited.
All outdoor furniture including, seats, tables, and trash receptacles shall be
approved in writing by the Community Development Department prior to
installation. No resin or plastic furniture shall be permitted. Any change to
the approved design, material, or color of the outdoor furniture requires
written approval of the Community Development Department. Outdoor
seats, tables, trash receptacles, potted plants, or display of merchandise
shall not obstruct pedestrian and accessible access to the building.
No outdoor storage shall be permitted except as approved by the Director of
Community Development.
All construction operations, including engine warm-up and deliveries of
materials and equipment, shall be subject to the provisions of the Tustin
Noise Ordinance and shall take place only between the hours of 7:00 a.m.
and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m. on Saturday, unless otherwise determined by the Building Official.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
(1 )
9.1
A separate 24-inch by 36-inch street improvement plan, as prepared by a
California Registered Civil Engineer, will be required for all construction
within the public right-of-way for Main Street, Prospect Avenue, Third
Street, and the alley adjacent to the project site. Construction and/or
replacement of any missing or damaged public improvements will be
required adjacent to this development. Said plan shall include, but not be
limited to, the following:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Curb and gutter;
Sidewalk, including curb ramps for the physically disabled;
Drive aprons;
Signing/striping plan
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 13
j.
k.
I.
(1 )
9.2
(1 )
9.3
(***) 9.4
e.
f.
Street lighting;
Catch basin/storm drain laterals/connection to existing storm drain
system;
Street lighting
Domestic water facilities;
Sanitary sewer facilities;
Landscape/irrigation;
Underground utility connection; and,
Street paving.
g.
h.
i.
In addition, a 24-inch by 36-inch reproducible construction area traffic
control plan, as prepared by a California Registered Traffic Engineer or
Civil Engineer experienced in this type of plan preparation, will be
required.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, preparation of plans for and
construction of the following shall be required:
a.
All sanitary sewer facilities shall be submitted as required by the
City Engineer and local sewering agency.
b.
A domestic water system shall be designed and installed to the
standards of the City of Tustin Water Services Division. Plans shall
also be reviewed and approved by the Orange County Fire
Authority for fire protection purposes. The adequacy and reliability
of the water system design and the distribution of fire hydrants will
be evaluated. The water distribution system and appurtenances
shall also conform to the applicable laws and adopted regulations
enforced by the Orange County Health Department. Any required
reclaimed water system shall meet the standards as required by the
City of Tustin Water Services Department. Release/approval from
the East Orange County Water District shall be obtained prior to
receiving water service.
Prior to issuance of a precise grading permit, preparation and submittal of
a final grading plan showing all pertinent elevations as they pertain to the
public right-of-way along with delineating the following information is
required:
a.
b.
Final street elevations at key locations.
Final pad/finished floor elevations and key elevations for all site
grading. All pad elevations to be a minimum of 1.0 foot above base
flood elevation as defined by FEMA.
All flood hazards of record.
c.
Prior to issuance of a precise grading permit, a complete hydrology study
and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted for review and approval by
the City.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 14
(1 )
9.5
(***) 9.6
(***) 9.7
(***) 9.8
(***) 9.9
(1 )
Existing sewer, domestic water, reclaimed water, and storm drain service
laterals shall be utilized whenever possible.
The developer will be required to execute a drainage agreement with the
City to accept drainage from the public right-of-way which will flow onto
the private streets and into the private storm drain system. This drainage
agreement must be recorded prior to, or concurrently with, the recordation
of the final map.
Construction of catch basins, storm drain laterals, and junction structures
shall be provided to eliminate the need for cross gutter on public streets.
The applicant shall provide for the undergrounding of all existing and
proposed utility distribution facilities within the public rights-of-way
adjacent to the project as well as within the project, unless exempt per the
Development Code. The applicant shall be responsible for all associated
design and construction costs and coordination with each public utility.
All drive aprons shall be designed in accordance with the current Federal
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The maximum cross
slope of the sidewalk shall be two percent and the maximum ramp slope
of the drive apron shall be ten percent.
9.10 Both horizontal and vertical intersection sight lines shall be submitted per
City of Tustin Standard No. 510 for all affected streets. The site lines
need to be shown on the grading plan, site plan, and landscape plan. All
landscaping within the limited use area will need to comply with City of
Tustin Standard No. 510.
(***) 9.11
Stacking distance requirements in conjunction with the operation of any
security gates will need to be analyzed and submitted to the City for
review and approval. Stacking distance requirements will need to comply
with County of Orange Public Facilities and Resources Department
Standard No. 1107. Any additional stacking distance analysis shall be
prepared by a California Registered Traffic and/or Civil Engineer
experienced in this type of analysis.
(***) 9.12 This development shall be phased so that all construction access will be
taken through Third Street unless otherwise approved by the Public Works
Department. No temporary access locations will be permitted.
(1 )
(1 )
9.13 Any damage done to existing street improvements and utilities shall be
repaired before acceptance of the tract and/or issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the development on any parcel within the subdivision.
9.14 Prior to any work in the public right-of-way, an Encroachment Permit shall
be obtained from and applicable fees paid to the Public Works
Department.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 15
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
9.15 Authorization of property owners shall be provided for any work located on
adjacent properties. '
9.16 In addition to the normal full-size plan submittal process, all final
development plans including, but not limited to, parcel maps, records of
survey, public works improvements, private infrastructure improvements,
final grading plans, and site plans are also required to be submitted to the
Public Works Department/Engineering Division in computer aided design
and drafting (CADD) format. The standard file format is AutoCad Release
14 or 2000 having the extension DWG. Likewise, layering and linetype
conventions are AutoCad-based (latest version available upon request
from the Engineering Division).
The CADD files shall be submitted to the City at the time the plans are
approved and updated CADD files reflecting "as built" conditions shall be
submitted once all construction has been completed. The subdivision
bonds will not be released until the "as built" CADD files have been
submitted.
9.17 The Project Applicant/Contractor shall submit and obtain approval from
the Public Works Department of a Project Recycling Plan prior to the
issuance of any grading, encroachment, or building permit. The Project
Recycling Plan shall demonstrate recovery and recycling of at least fifty 50
percent of the total waste generated by the project and shall consist of the
following components:
. In a narrative form, describe efforts which will be utilized to minimize
the generation of waste during project construction;
. Provide an estimate of the total amount of waste to be generated for
the entire duration of project construction;
. Provide an estimate of the total amount of recyclable materials
generated by project construction, identified by recyclable material
type;
. Identify waste hauler(s) to be utilized during project construction.
Please note that the City has an exclusive waste collection franchise
with Federal Disposal Service of Santa Ana. No other haulers are to
be utilized pursuant to City Code Section 4322;
. Identify recyclable material processing facilities which will be utilized to
process materials generated by project construction;
. Demonstrate that no waste generated by the project will be sent
directly to any landfill;
. Prior to the final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy,
submit a final report to the Public Works Department detailing actual
quantities of the items listed above as well as a narrative summary of
the recycling efforts implemented during the project;
. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant is required to
submit recycling plans to the Public Works Department for each project
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 16
tenant which demonstrates recycling or diversion from landfills of at
least fifty (50) percent of the total waste anticipated to be generated by
each tenant; and,
. Prior to issuance of any grading, encroachment, or building permit, the
applicant is required to submit waste trash enclosure plans to the
Public Works Department which demonstrate the provision of the
adequate physical space to accommodate all planned tenant recycling
programs.
("') 9.18 Landscape maintenance of all on-site project landscaping shall be the
responsibility of the developer unless transferred to the individual lot
owners or a special homeowners association.
WATER SERVICE
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
10.1 Backflow devices shall be installed in accordance with applicable codes
within an easement of suitable size to allow for unobstructed access,
inspection, testing, and maintenance.
10.2 The developer shall be responsible for all costs related to the installation
of new fire hydrants. The location of new fire hydrants shall be approved
by the City of Tustin and the Orange County Fire Authority.
10.3 Hydraulic analysis of the proposed water system and ability to meet OCFA
fire flow demands shall be performed and certified by the developer.
10.4 The developer shall be responsible for all costs relating to the installation
of new domestic and fire-related water services.
10.5 The developer shall be responsible for all water connection fees.
10.6 The developer shall submit a water permit application to the East Orange
County Water District and is responsible for all applicable fees.
ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY
(5)
(5)
(5)
11.1 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain approval of
the Fire Chief for all fire protection access roads to within 150 feet of all
portions of the exterior of every structure on-site. Please contact the
OCF A or visit the OCF A website for a copy of the guidelines.
11.2 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a fire
hydrant location plan to the Fire Chief for review and approval.
11.3 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide
evidence of adequate water flow. The Orange County Fire Authority Water
Availability for Fire Protection form shall be signed by City of Tustin Water
Department and submitted to the Fire Chief for approval.
Resolution No. 04-48
DR 03-012
Page 17
FEES
Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all
applicable fees, including but not limited to, the following. Payment shall be
required based upon those rates in effect at the time of payment and are
subject to change.
(1 )
12.1
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
Building Division plan check and permit fees to the Community
Development Department based on the most current schedule.
Orange County Fire Authority plan check and inspection fees to the
Community Development Department based upon the most current
schedule.
Orange County Sanitation District No.7 Sewer Connection Fees to
the Tustin Public Works Department at the time a building permit is
issued.
East Orange County Water District fee, as established by the District
for single family residential. Proof of payment shall be provided to the
Tustin Public Works Department (Water Division) prior to domestic
water connection.
Payment of the Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fees to the Public
Works Department at the time a building permit is issued.
Transportation System Improvement Program (TSIP) Benefit Area
"A" fees in the amount of $5.53 per square foot of new or added
gross square floor area of construction or improvements to the
Community Development Department.
School facilities fee to the Tustin Unified School District subject to
any agreement reached and executed between the District and the
applicant.
New development fees in the amount of $0.10 per square foot of
gross floor area paid to the Community Development Department.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the
applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a
CASHIER'S CHECK payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
forty-three dollars ($43.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate
environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight
(48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community
Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of
limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental
determination under the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act could be significantly lengthened.
ATTACHMENT L
Resolution No. 04-49
RESOLUTION NO. 04-49
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 03-012 AUTHORIZING
ESTABLISHMENT OF ON-SITE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES IN
CONJUNCTION WITH AN APPROXIMATELY 3,000 SQUARE FOOT
RESTAURANT WITH 112 SEATS IN AN APPROXIMATELY 9,300 SQUARE
FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF MAIN STREET AND PROSPECT AVENUE
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
I.
The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A.
That a proper application for Conditional Use Permit 03-012 was
submitted by Prospect Village, LP, a California Limited Partnership
(formerly known as Pelican Center LLC) to establish on-site alcoholic
beverage sales in conjunction with up to a 3,000 square foot restaurant
with 112 seats to be located within an approximately 9,300 square foot
commercial building at the northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect
Avenue.
B.
That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said
application on April 26, 2004, by the Planning Commission and the
Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit 03-012.
C.
On May 3, 2004, the City Council appealed the Planning Commission's
decision to the City Council.
D.
That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application
on May 17, 2004, by the City Council.
E.
The proposed project is located within the General Plan "Old Town
Commercial" land use designation, which supports the development of
retail, restaurant, office, and residential uses. The site is currently within
the Central Commercial and Parking Overlay (C2-P) zoning district and
would be located within a Planned Community District and subject to the
Prospect Village Planned Community District Regulations, if Zone Change
03-002 is adopted by the City Council on May 17, 2004. Alcoholic
beverage sales are conditionally permitted by the proposed regulations of
the Planned Community District.
F.
That the proposed on-site alcoholic beverage sales in conjunction with a
restaurant use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort,
or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood,
nor be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the
neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of
Tustin, in that:
Resolution No. 04-49
CUP 03-012
Page 2
G.
1.
The proposed use is consistent with the Alcoholic Beverage Sales
Establishment Guidelines adopted by the Planning Commission on
May 14,2001.
2.
The use is in conjunction with a restaurant where food will be served
at all times when alcoholic beverages are served. As conditioned,
any ancillary cocktail lounge or bar area within the restaurant shall
function as a food and beverage service bar.
3.
As conditioned, any future restaurant tenant would be required to
submit detailed operational information demonstrating compliance
with all conditions of approval. If the future restaurant tenant cannot
comply with the conditions of approval, a modification to Conditional
Use Permit 03-012 would be required and could be considered by the
Zoning Administrator in accordance with Section 9299 of the Tustin
City Code.
That the scope of this activity is within the scope of the Prospect Village
Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). In accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
Council has considered the FEIR and found that it is complete and
adequate and adopted Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to approving
Conditional Use Permit 03-12 by adopting Resolution No. 04-45.
The City Council hereby approves the establishment of alcoholic beverage sales
in conjunction with up to a 3,000 square foot restaurant with 112 seats to be
located within a 9,300 square foot commercial building at the northwest corner of
Main Street and Prospect Avenue, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit
A attached hereto.
II.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on the
1yth day of May, 2004.
TONY KAWASHIMA
Mayor
Resolution No. 04-49
CUP 03-012
Page 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 04-48
SS
PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin,
California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 04-48 was duly passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 17th day of May,
2004, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
Pamela Stoker, City Clerk
GENERAL
(1 )
1.1
(1 )
1.2
(1 )
1.3
(1 )
1.4
(1 )
1.5
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 03-012,
RESOLUTION NO. 04-49
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The proposed project shall conform with the submitted plans for the project
date stamped May 17, 2004, on file with the Community Development
Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of
Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit and City review
required pursuant to the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) for
the project. The Director of Community Development may also approve
minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are
consistent with the provisions of the Tustin City Code, other applicable
codes, and all requirements of the DDA.
Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be
complied with as specified or prior to the issuance of any building permits for
the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development
Department and City review required pursuant to the DDA.
Approval of Conditional Use Permit 03-012 will become null and void in the
event that the City Council does not approve Zone Change 03-002 or
Tentative Tract Map 16481, or if conditions of the DDA for the project are
violated.
The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for
the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is underway
within the time frames identified in the schedule of performance contained in
the DDA. All time extensions may be considered if a written request is within
thirty (30) days prior to expiration and processed in accordance with the
provisions of the DDA.
Approval of Conditional Use Permit 03-012 is contingent upon the applicant
returning to the Community Development Department a notarized
"Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing
and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a notarized "Notice of
Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms
shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and
evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development
Department.
SOURCE CODES
(1) STANDARD CONDITION
(2) CEQA MITIGATION
(3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S
(4) DESIGN REVIEW
(5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT
(6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES
(7) PC/CC POLICY
... EXCEPTION
Resolution No. 04-49
CUP 03-012
Page 2
(1 )
(1 )
(5)
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
1.6
The entitlement authorized by Conditional Use Permit 03-012 shall be in
accordance with Zone Change 03-002 and Tentative Tract Map 16481, as
approved by Resolution Nos. 3911 and 3912, which are incorporated
herein by reference as though fully set forth in the DDA.
1.7
As a condition of approval of Conditional Use Permit 03-012, the applicant
shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from
any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City,
its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside,
challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning
Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff,
concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of
any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the
defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense,
elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition.
1.8
This entitlement is subject to the applicant's fulfillment of all provisions of
the DDA. The entitlement shall become null and void in the event that the
City Council does not approve the DDA in case of default by the developer
or termination by the City, including, but not limited to, the City's approval
of any final maps not completed at the time of default or termination.
1.9
Any violation of any of the conditions imposed is subject to the payment of a
civil penalty of $100.00 for each violation, or such other amounts as the City
Council may establish by ordinance or resolution, and for each day the
violation exists, subject to the applicable notice, hearing, and appeal process
as established by the City Council ordinance.
1.10 The applicant shall be responsible for costs associated with any necessary
code enforcement action, including attorney fees, subject to the applicable
notice, hearing, and appeal process as established by the City Council by
ordinance.
1.11 Major modifications or amendments to Conditional Use Permit 03-012
may be considered by the Zoning Administrator as authorized by Section
9299 of the Tustin City Code.
PLAN SUBMITTAL
(3)
2.1
At the time of building permit application for tenant improvements, the plans
shall comply with the latest adopted codes, City Ordinances, and State and
Federal laws and regulations. The City is currently using the 2001 California
Building Code (CBC), 2001 California Mechanical Code (CMC), 2001
California Plumbing Code (CPC), 2001 California Electrical Code (CEC),
California Title 24 Accessibility Regulations, and Title 24 Energy
Regulations. The plans shall demonstrate compliance with the following:
a.
Restrooms shall be accessible to persons with disabilities as per
Resolution No. 04-49
CUP 03-012
Page 3
State of California Accessibility Standards (Title 24). Plumbing fixture
units are required to comply with the 2001 California Plumbing Code
Chapter four (4) Table 4-1 as per type of group occupancy, or as
approved by the Building Official.
b.
Vehicle parking, primary entrance to the building, the primary paths of
travel, cashier space, sanitary facilities, drinking fountain, and public
telephones shall be accessible to persons with disabilities.
c.
Openings in exterior walls are not permitted less than five (5) feet
from property lines, 2001 California Building Code (Table 5A).
d.
All new glass doors and windows, in or adjacent to doors, shall be
tempered in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code
Section 2406.4.
e.
A level floor or landing shall be provided at all commercial and retail
doors. This area shall have a minimum length of 60 inches in the
direction of the door swing and 48 inches in the opposite direction of
the door swing.
USE RESTRICTIONS
(*)
3.1
(5)
3.2
(5)
3.3
(5)
3.4
Prior to issuance of a business license for a restaurant tenant, the business
owner shall submit operational information for the restaurant which
demonstrates it will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and
comply with all conditions of approval herein. The Community Development
Director shall determine whether the proposed operations are appropriate
for the site or refer the matter to the Planning Commission for review and
approval.
The restaurant shall operate within all applicable State, County, and Tustin
City Code provisions, including the Alcoholic Beverage Sales
Establishment Guidelines adopted by the Planning Commission on May
14, 2001. Any violations of the regulations of the Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control as they pertain to the subject location, or the City of
Tustin, as they relate to the sale of alcoholic beverages, may result in the
revocation of the subject Conditional Use Permit, as provided for the
Tustin City Code.
Authorization for the on-site sales of alcoholic beverage sales (License
Type "47") is contingent upon the use of the subject premises remaining a
restaurant. Should this use change or be discontinued, authorization for
this use permit is null and void.
The applicant obtain the appropriate license from the State Department of
Alcoholic Beverages Control for the type of alcoholic sales authorized for
the site. A copy shall be provided to the City.
Resolution No. 04-49
CUP 03-012
Page 4
(1) 3.5
(1) 3.6
(1) 3.7
(5) 3.8
(5)
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
(1 )
3.9
Hours of sales of alcoholic beverages shall be limited to the hours when
food is available. Menu items shall be available in the restaurant during
business hours.
Business operations shall be in a manner that does not create a public or
private nuisance. Any such nuisance must be abated immediately upon
notice by the City of Tustin.
The menu of the restaurant shall consist of foods that are prepared on the
premises.
All persons selling alcoholic beverages shall be eighteen (18) years of age
or older and shall be supervised by someone twenty-one (21) years of age
or older. A supervisor shall be present in the same area as the point of
sale.
Alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on-site and may not be served or
consumed outside the restaurant, unless a physical barrier is approved by
the Community Development Department and the Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control.
3.10 A maximum of 112 seats shall be provided in the restaurant and may be
distributed throughout the interior and exterior portions of the restaurant.
Any change to the maximum number of indoor and outdoor seats shall
require written approval of the Community Development Department.
3.11 No sexually oriented businesses shall be conducted on the premises
without approval by the City in accordance with the Tustin City Code.
3.12 Any cocktail lounge or bar area within the restaurant shall function as a
food and beverage service bar.
3.13 All outdoor furniture including, seats, tables, and trash receptacles
associated with the restaurant shall be approved in writing by the
Community Development Department. No resin or plastic furniture shall be
permitted. Any change to the approved design, material, or color of the
outdoor furniture requires written approval of the Community Development
Department.
(1 )(3) 3.14 Outdoor seats, tables, trash receptacles, or potted plants associated with the
restaurant shall not obstruct pedestrian and accessible access to the
building.
(1 )
(1 )
3.15 The outdoor seating area shall contain trash receptacles and shall be
cleaned on a continual and daily basis to ensure timely removal of litter
and food items.
3.16 No signs or advertisements shall be placed within the outdoor seating area.
Resolution No. 04-49
CUP 03-012
Page 5
(1 )
(2)
(1 )
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(1 )
FEES
(1 )
3.17 The installation of any exterior, freestanding vending machines, such as, but
not limited to, beverage or soda machines, candy, magazine racks, and any
other retail product, is prohibited.
3.18 Public telephones shall be permitted on the inside of the establishment
and shall be modified to prevent incoming calls.
3.19 No outdoor storage shall be permitted except as approved by the Director of
Community Development.
3.20 No loitering signs shall be placed near the entrance on the outside of the
premises or in other specified locations where alcoholic beverages are
sold.
3.21 All litter shall be removed from the exterior areas around the premises
including adjacent public sidewalk areas and parking areas, no less
frequently than once each day that the business is open.
3.22 An approved live entertainment permit is required prior to establishing any
dancing or live entertainment on the premises.
3.23 Business operations shall be in a manner that does not create a public or
private nuisance. Any such nuisance must be abated immediately upon
notice by the City of Tustin.
3.24 The ambient noise for the on-site sales facility shall not exceed the
standards of the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance.
3.25 The restaurant, or any subsequent food and alcohol serving business
occupying the site, shall submit their audited financial statements at the
City's request and those statements must verify that food sales exceed sales
of alcoholic beverages.
4.1
Prior to issuance of any building permits for tenant improvements, payment
shall be made of all applicable fees, including but not limited to, the
following. Payment shall be required based upon those rates in effect at the
time of payment and are subject to change.
a.
Building Division plan check and permit fees to the Community
Development Department based on the most current schedule.
b.
Orange County Fire Authority plan check and inspection fees to the
Community Development Department based upon the most current
schedule.
c.
Other fees, as applicable, at the time of plan check submittal and
permit issuance.
Resolution No. 04-49
CUP 03-012
Page 6
d.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the
applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a
CASHIER'S CHECK payable to the County Clerk in the amount of
forty-three dollars ($43.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate
environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty-eight
(48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community
Development Department the above-noted check, the statute of
limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental
determination under the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act could be significantly lengthened.
ATTACHMENT M
Resolution No. 04-41
Exhibit A - Fair Reuse Analysis and Summary Report
RESOLUTION NO. 04-41
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
SALE OF A 1.036-ACRE PROPERTY OWNED BY THE
TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
LOCATED AT 191 AND 193-195 EAST MAIN STREET
PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
SECTION 33433
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows:
I.
The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A. The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") is engaged
in implementation of the "Redevelopment Plan" for the Town Center Area
Redevelopment Project (the "Redevelopment Project"); and
B. Section 33430 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health &
Safety Code 33000, et seq.: "CRL") authorizes the Agency to sell or lease real property
for redevelopment purposes; and
C. In order to implement the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency proposes to
enter into a certain Disposition and Development Agreement (the "DDA"), with Prospect
Village, LP, a California Limited Partnership (the "Developer") pursuant to which (a) the
Agency would sell to Developer that certain Agency-owned real property located at the
northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue and know as 191 and 193-195
East Main Street (the "Property"); (b) Developer would construct a mixed-use retail,
office and live-work housing project on the Property and, upon completion, sell at least
ten (10) of the twelve (12) live-work units for proprietor owner-occupancy and require
that such units remain proprietor owner-occupied for the period of the restrictions set
forth therein; and (c) Developer would construct certain required public improvements
(collectively the "Project"); and
D. In its current condition, the Property is a blighting influence on the
Redevelopment Project area; and
E. The Project will remove the blighting influence described above and
provide a mixed-use retail, office and live-work market rate housing project; and
F. The public improvements contemplated for the Project are of benefit to the
Redevelopment Project Area or the immediate neighborhood in which the
Redevelopment Project is located; and
rdashared\ccresolution\04-41.DOC
G. Pursuant to Section 33433 of the CAL, the City Council of the City of
Tustin after a public hearing, is required to approve an Agency sale of property acquired
in whole or in part from tax increment moneys; and
H. Agency staff has prepared, and the City Council has reviewed and
considered, a report pursuant to Section 33433(a)(2) of the CRL attached hereto as
Exhibit "An and incorporated herein by this reference, setting forth:
(a) A copy of the proposed Sale documents, i.e. the DDA; and
(b) A summary which describes and specifies all of the following:
(i) The cost of the DDA to the Agency, including land acquisition costs,
clearance costs, relocation costs, the cost of improvements to be made by
the Agency, plus the expected interest on any loans or bonds to finance the
agreements;
(ii) The estimated value of the interests to be sold to Developer, determined at
the highest and best uses permitted under the plan;
(iii) The estimated value of the interests to be sold, determined at the uses and
with the conditions, covenants and development costs required by the sale;
and
(iv) An explanation of why the sale of the property will assist in the elimination of
blight, with reference to all supporting facts and materials needed upon
making this explanation.
I. The DDA contains all of the terms, covenants, conditions, restrictions,
obligations and provisions required by state and local law; and
L. The City Council has duly considered all of the terms and conditions of the
DDA and believes that the sale under the DDA is in the best interests of the City of
Tustin and the health, safety, morals and welfare of its residents, and is in accord with
the public purposes and provisions of applicable state and local law and requirements;
and
M. Pursuant to Section 33433(a)(1) of the CRL the City Council has held a
duly noticed public hearing on the proposed DDA, at which public hearing all persons
were given an opportunity to be heard.
II. The City Council hereby finds and determines, based upon substantial evidence
provided in the record before it:
A.
That the foregoing recitals are true and correct.
B. That the City Council has received and heard all oral and written testimony
regarding the proposed sale to Developer and Developer's proposed
rdasharedlccresolutionIO4-41.DOC
development of the Property in connection therewith and to any other matters
pertaining to this transaction.
C. That the sale of the Property will assist in the elimination of blight in the
Redevelopment Project area and is consistent with the implementation plan
adopted by the Agency for the Town Center Area Redevelopment Plan pursuant
to Section 33490 of the CRL.
D. That the consideration for the Agency's sale of the Property pursuant to
the DDA is not less than the fair reuse value at the use and with the conditions,
covenants and development costs authorized by the DDA.
E. The foregoing findings are based upon the record of the joint public
hearing on the sale and approval of the DDA, and the report prepared in
accordance with CRL Section 33433 (a)(2).
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council
held on the 17th day of May, 2004.
TONY KAWASHIMA
MAYOR, CITY OF TUSTIN
PAMELA STOKER
City Clerk
Attachment: Exhibit "A" - Fair Reuse Analysis and Summary Report
rdasharedlccresolutionIO4-41.DOC
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
ORANGE COUNTY )
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 Couyncil
of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and forgoing Resolution No. 04-41 was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on May 17,
2004, by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES:
COUNCILMEMBER NOES:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
rdasharedlccresolutionl04-41.DOC
Exhibit A of Resolution No. 04-41
Fair Reuse Analysis and Summary Report
KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES INC.
ADVISORS IN.'
SOD SOUTH GRAND AveNUE. SUITE 1480
Los ANGELES. CAUfORNOA 90071
PHONEo 213/622-8095
FAX.' 213/622-5204
WWW.KEYSERMARSTON.COM
REAL ESTATE
REDEVELOPMENT
AffORDABLE HOUSING
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
Los ANGELES
Calvin E. Honis. II
Kathloen H. H.ad
Jam.. A. Rah.
Paul C. Andmon
G"."y D. Soo-Hoo
SAN DIEGO
Gould M. Tdmhl.
Paul C. Mma
To:
Mr. James Draughon, Redevelopment Program Manager
City of Tustin
SAN FRANCISCO
A. Jmy K.y'"
Timothy C. K.ny
K". Ead. Funk
D.hhi. M. Km
Roh." J. W.tmm
From:
James Rabe
Date:
April 26, 2004
Subject:
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
Pursuant to your request, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) prepared a fair reuse analysis
of Prospect Village (Project) proposed by Prospect Village LP (Developer). Specifically, the
Developer is proposing to construct 9,300 gross square feet (B,5B9 leaseable square feet) of
commercial uses and 12 owner/ proprietor live-work units. The Project is to be located in the
area bounded by Main Street, Prospect Avenue, Third Street and Prospect Lane (Site) in the
City of Tustin (City).
As proposed, the Developer will acquire the parcels comprising the Site from the Tustin
Community Redevelopment Agency (Agency). The Site is 1.04 acres and includes two vacant
buildings of approximately 6,200 square feet identified as 191 and 193 - 195 West Main Street.
NATURE OF THE ASSIGNMENT
The purpose of the KMA anàlysis is to determine the fair reuse value for the Agency-owned
parcel given the proposed scope of development and the obligations contained in the
Disposition and Development Agreement (Agreement). Fundamental to this valuation is the fact
that the Agency-owned parcel is being sold for development and not speculation. Thus, the
Agreement restricts, among other things, the scope of development, establishes the timeframe
under which the development must proceed and controls the future use of the Site.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
0404044.rUS.'J'R.'9bd
19830.001.003
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 2
DEFINITION OF FAIR REUSE VALUE
The fair reuse value can be defined as the highest value in terms of money, which a property is
expected to bring for a specific use in a competitive and open market given the conditions
established by the Agency. The fair reuse value is predicated on the assumption that the buyer
and seller are each acting prudently, knowledgeably and that the price is not affected by
external stimulus. Also, essential to an estimate of fair reuse value is the notion that the Agency
is interested in selling land for near-term development, and that the land is not sold for
speculation.
Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of the specified date, and the passing
of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:
.
Both parties are well informed and well advised, each party is acting prudently in their
own best interest.
The property will be cleared in a reasonable time.
The definition of fair reuse value is further augmented due to certain conditions imposed by the
Agency and assumptions as follows:
The seller is a public agency having definite controls over the development. Due to the
complexity of the overall development plan, the Developer must contend with a series of
regulations and controls that are not common in the conventional real estate market.
The Agency must maintain a continuing surveillance with respect to the ability of the
Developer to perform within the prescribed conditions.
The Developer is faced with various development requirements and time restrictions
imposed by the development program. This limits the pool of potential developers to
those with adequate financial and productive resources to fulfill the specific Agency
requirements. To appeal to a limited market of potential buyers, the fair reuse value
must be equated to the maximum price a restricted and limited market is warranted in
paying based upon risk and investment return factors.
A project being developed under the auspices of an Agreement may also be provided
with financial and non-financial incentives. The value enhancement created by these
incentives must also be considered in the determination of the fair reuse value for the
property.
CELEBRATING 30 YEAR.SOFSERVICE roOUR CllElm
a4a4a4'.TUS,JA""bd
19830.001.003
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Developer has proposed to construct a mixed-use project, which will include the following
uses:
3,000 square feet of restaurant space (plus 593 square feet of outdoor dining space);
773 square feet of retail space;
4,B16 square feet of second floor commercial space;
12 detached owner/proprietor multi-story live-work units;
On-site parking for the live-work units and commercial space; and
Public Improvements located adjacent to the Site within the public right-of-way and
public alley around the Site's perimeter.
DEVELOPER OBLIGATIONS
The Agreement imposes the following responsibilities on the Developer:
1.
The Developer must accept conveyance of the Site from the Agency under the terms of
the Agreement for a price of $B55,000.
2.
The Developer must demolish and remove the existing improvements on the Site.
3.
The Developer must develop a high quality mixed-use development with approximately
8,589 leaseable square feet of commercial space facing Main Street, six live-work units
facing Prospect Avenue and six live-work units facing Prospect Lane. Building
improvements and landscaping must be consistent with the terms of the Agreement.
4.
The Developer must install the Public Improvements.
5.
The Developer shall provide escrow instructions consistent with the Agreement and pay
in escrow the following:
a.
One-half of all escrow fees;
b.
Recording fees;
c.
Any state, county, city or other documentary stamps and transfer taxes; and
d.
The premium for the title insurance policy.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CUENT>
0404044.TUS'JAR'",
19630.001.003
To:
Subject:
6.
7.
B.
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 4
The Developer shall submit to the Agency evidence of obtaining the financing necessary
to undertake the Project in accordance with the Agreement.
a.
A commitment in writing from a permitted mortgage for the funding of the
improvements.
b.
Evidence satisfactory to the Agency of sources of equity capital sufficient to
cover the difference between construction cost and financing by mortgage loans.
The Developer shall begin and complete all construction and development with the times
specified in the Schedule of Performance per the Agreement.
The Developer shall be responsible for any and all costs directly or indirectly related to
the development of the Project, including but not limited to, acquisition of the Site and
construction of the Public Improvements.
AGENCY OBLIGATIONS
Under the Agreement, the Agency must complete the following responsibilities:
1.
2.
3.
4.
04O4O44.TU8.JAR.Obd
19830.001.003
The Agency shall convey the Agency-owned parcel to the Developer for $B55,000.
The Agency agrees to open an escrow for conveyance, and provide escrow instructions
consistent with the Agreement, and shall pay the following in escrow fees:
a.
One-half of all escrow fees;
b.
Costs necessary to place the title to the Agency-owned parcel in the condition for
conveyance required by the provisions of the Agreement;
c.
Cost of drawing the Grant Deed; and
d.
Notary fees.
The Agency shall timely and properly execute, acknowledge and deliver the Grant Deed,
conveying title to the Agency-owned parcel to the Developer, together with an estoppel
certificate certifying that Developer has completed all acts necessary to entitle Developer
to such conveyance in accordance with the Agreement.
The Agency will make available 65 existing parking spaces at the adjacent Tustin Water
Yard under a non-exclusive parking license agreement between the Developer and the
Agency.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SER VICE TO OUR CUENTS
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 5
5.
Agency's financial participation is expressly limited to conveying fee ownership interest
in the Agency-owned parcel to the Developer, at a price of $B55,000 as set forth in the
Agreement.
6.
The City's financial participation is expressly limited reimbursing Developer for the
installation of public improvements not-to-exceed $BBO,OOO.
ANALYSIS
To evaluate the Project's financial viability, KMA reviewed the Developer's construction cost
estimates and income projections. KMA then independently estimated the land residual value
that would be required to make the Project financially feasible. The KMA pro forma analysis for
the Project is organized as follows:
Table 1:
Table 2:
Table 3:
Table 4:
Table 5:
Table 6:
Estimated Construction Costs - Commercial
Estimated Net Operating Income - Commercial
Estimated Fair Reuse Value - Commercial
Estimated Construction Costs - Live-work
Projected Sales Revenues - Live-work
Estimated Fair Reuse Value - Live-work
KMA has not included the costs of the Public Improvements as the Agency has committed to
fund these costs.
Estimated Construction Costs. Commercial (Table 1)
Acquisition costs
The KMA analysis is a residual land value analysis; that is an analysis that establishes how
much the Developer can afford to pay for land. Typically, no land acquisition costs are included.
Direct Costs
Table 1 outlines the estimated Project costs, which are based on the following assumptions,
including that the Developer will not be required to pay prevailing wages:
1.
KMA assumed an asbestos removal allowance of $100,000.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
O404044.TU$,JAR"oo
1OB30.001.003
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 6
2.
The estimated total on-site costs are $73,000.
3.
Shell construction costs are estimated at $90 per square foot; tenant improvement
allowances are estimated at $20 per square foot for the retail space, $25 per square foot
for the second floor space and $BO per square foot for the restaurant space, for a total
cost of $1,149,000.
Total direct costs are estimate at $1,322,000.
Indirect Costs
The indirect costs are estimated as a percent of direct costs or on a per square foot basis.
1.
KMA estimated the architecture, engineering and consulting fees (6.0%); taxes,
insurance, legal and accounting costs (1.5%); development management (5.0%); and an
allowance for contingencies (5.0%) as a percentage of direct costs for a total of
$231,000.
2.
KMA assumed an allowance of $103,000 for project public permit and fees ($12.00 per
square foot based on input from City staff).
3.
KMA estimated the marketing and leasing expense at $43,000, $5.00 per square foot of
GBA.
KMA estimates the indirect costs to be $377,000.
Financing Costs
The financing costs include interest during construction and loan origination fees on the
construction and permanent financing. The interest rate on the debt and equity financing is
estimated to be 7.5%. Loan origination fees are set at 2.0 points, and are based on financing at
a 60% loan to value ration. KMA estimates the total financing/closing costs at $96,000.
Total Construction Costs
KMA estimates the total construction costs at $1 ,795,000, $209 per square foot of building.
0404044.TUS'JAR,gbd
19830.001.003
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENT>
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 7
Estimated Net Operating Income. Commercial (Table 2)
Gross Rental Income
As noted in KMA's October 2B, 2003 memorandum report, estimated rents in the area are $1.25
per square foot per month for retail space and $1.75 per square foot per month for restaurant
space on a triple-net basis. These rents and the proposed tenants are summarized in the table
below.
Proposed Tenant
Retail
Restaurant
Office
SQuare Feet
773
3,000
4,B16
Rent/SF
$15.00
$21.00
$15.00
Annual Rent
$12,000
$63,000
$72,000
Total gross annual rent is estimated at $147,000. KMA assumed a vacancy rate of 5.0% or
$7,000, which equates to an effective gross income (EGI) of $140,000.
Operating Expenses
The following summarizes the operating expenses and the underlying assumptions.
1.
KMA assumed a management fee equal to 4.0% of EGI, which equates to $6,000.
2.
KMA assumed capital reserves equal to 2.0% of effective gross income or $3,000.
The annual stabilized net operating income (NOI) is estimated at $131,000.
Fair Reuse Value - Commercial (Table 3)
The fair reuse land value for the commercial portion of the Project is equal to the difference
between the amount of private investment supported by the Project and the estimated
development costs. The amount of private investment that can be obtained is dependent upon
the NO! projected to be generated, in combination with threshold returns that will be required by
the lender, the equity provider, and the Developer to compensate for the inherent risk
associated with the investment.
KMA estimates that the commercial portion of this type project requires a 10.5% return on cost
to create a viable project. As shown in Table 3, the $131,000 of NOI will support $1,24B,000 of
private investment assuming the 10.5% return requirement. Considering construction costs of
$1,795,000, the fair reuse value for this portion of the Project is a negative $547,000.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIElm
D404D44.TU8,JAR'",
19B3D.DD1.DD3
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page B
Estimated Construction Costs - Live-work (Table 4)
Acquisition costs
The KMA analysis is a residual land value analysis; that is an analysis that establishes how
much the Developer can afford to pay for land. Typically, no land acquisition costs are included.
Direct Costs
Table 4 outlines the estimated residential project costs, which are based on the following
assumptions including that the Developer will not be required to pay prevailing wages:
1.
On-site costs are estimated at $26,000 per unit, $312,000.
2.
Building shell construction costs are estimated at $95 per square foot of gross building
area, $2,733,000. This cost is high but reflects a high quality of improvement as
requested in the Agreement.
Total direct costs are estimate at $3,OB5,000.
Indirect Costs
The indirect costs are estimated as a percent of direct costs or on a per square foot basis.
1.
KMA estimated the architecture, engineering and consulting fees (6.0%); taxes,
insurance, legal and accounting costs (3.0%); and an allowance for contingencies
(5.0%) as a percentage of direct costs for a total of $432,000.
2.
KMA assumed an allowance of $21B,000 for project public permit and fees ($1B,200 per
unit based on information provided by City staff).
3.
KMA estimated the marketing and sales office expense at $9,000 per unit, $10B,000.
4.
Development management is estimated at 3.0% of gross sales, $207,000.
KMA estimates the indirect costs to be $965,000.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CliENTS
0404044.TUS,JAR'Obd
10830.001.003
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 9
Financing Closing Costs
The financing costs include interest during construction, loan origination fees, closing costs and
warranties,
1,
KMA has assumed a 14-month construction and absorption schedule for the residential
portion of the Project. Based on this, KMA estimated interest costs at $312,000.
2,
Loan origination fees are estimated at $4,100 per unit, $49,000.
3.
Commissions, closing costs and warranties are estimated at $34,300 per unit, $411,000.
KMA estimated total financing/closing costs at $772,000.
Total Construction Costs
KMA estimates the total construction costs at $4,B22,000, $401 ,BOO per unit.
Projected Sales Revenue - Residential (Table 5)
The projected sales prices for the live-work units are summarized below:
Unit Size ¡SF)
PricelSF
Price Der Unit
Prospect Avenue
Prospect Lane
2,B31
2,034
$221,00
$25B.00
$625,000
$525,000
Total sales revenues for the Project are estimated at $6,900,000.
Fair Reuse Value - Live-work (Table 6)
The fair reuse land value for the Project is equal to the difference between the sales revenue
generated by the residential portion of the Project, the estimated development costs and a
reasonable developer profit. The developer's profit compensates it for the inherent risk
associated with the acquisition, construction and sales of the units. KMA has reviewed a
number of residential projects in Southern California. For these projects, the developers have
typically required a profit equal to 10% of project sales revenue. Given the nature of the
proposed Project and its location within the City, KMA believes that a reasonable developer
profit is 10% of sales revenues.
CELERRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CliENTS
0404044,TUS,JARgOd
19830.001.003
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 10
The sales revenues projected to be generated by the Project total $6,900,000. When this is
reduced by KMA's $4,B22,000 development cost estimate and a threshold developer profit of
$6BB,000 (10% of sales), the fair reuse value for the residential portion of the Project is
$1,390,000.
PROJECT FAIR REUSE VALUE
The fair reuse value for the Project is the combination of the fair reuse value of the two
components. Thus, as shown below, the fair reuse value for the Project is $843,000.
Fair Reuse Value - Commercial
Fair Reuse Value - Residential
Project Fair Reuse Value
($547,000)
$1,390,000
$B43,000
LIMITING CONDITIONS
The conduct of any valuation is necessarily guided, and its results influenced, by the terms of
the assignment and the assumptions, which together form the basis of the study. The following
conditions and assumptions, together with the lesser assumptions embodied in this report,
constitute the framework of our analysis and conclusions.
The estimate of fair reuse value for the propose Project assumes compliance with the following:
1.
The Developer is responsible for acquisition of the Site.
2.
The Project must include approximately B,5B9 square feet of retail, restaurant and office
uses and 12 owner/proprietor occupied live-work units.
3.
The development must conform to the requirements of the Agreement.
It is assumed that the property is in good and marketable condition; no title search has been
made, nor have we attempted to determine the ownership of the property. The value estimate
is given without regard to any questions of title, boundaries or encroachments. It is also
assumed, that all assessments, if any, are paid.
No legal description of the property was furnished. In-lieu of the legal description, our
understanding of the property was illustrated by the plot plans and tract maps provided to us by
the redevelopment agency.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
O404044.TU8"ARo,b'
19830.001.003
To:
Subject:
Mr. James Draughon, City of Tustin
Fair Reuse Analysis - Prospect Village
April 26, 2004
Page 11
We assume that the development of the Site will be in conformance with the applicable zoning
and building ordinances.
Information provided by such informed local sources as governmental agencies, financial
institutions, realtors, buyers, sellers and others was weighed in the light in which it was supplied,
and checked by secondary means. However, no responsibility is assumed for possible
misinformation.
Attachments
CELEBRATING30 YEARSOFSERVlCE TO OUR CUEIm
04O4044.TUSoJARogbd
19830.001.003
TABLE 1
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST - COMMERCIAL
VILLAGE PROJECT
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Land Acoulsltlon
Land Acqulsllion $0 Allowance 10
$0
II. Direct Costs
Site Costs
Asbestos Removal 1100,000 Allowance 1100,000
On-Site Work 7,286 Square Feet 110.00 ISf 73,000
Total Site Casts $173,000
Building Costs' Shell TI
Main 51. Retall- Preservation 0 Square Feet 190.00 ISf 125.00 ISf 10
Main 51. Retail- New 773 Square Feet 190.00 ISf 120.00 ISf 85,000
Main SI. Restauranl- New 3,000 Square Feel 190.00 ISf 180.00 ISf 510,000
Main Street Office- New 4.816 Square Feet 190.00 ISf - 125.00 ISf 554,000
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail 0 Square Feet 190.00 ISf 120.00 ISf 0
Prospect Lane Office 0 Square Feet 190.00 ISf $25.00 ISf
Total Shell & TI Casts f,149,000
Total Direct Costs $1,322,000
III. Indirect Costs
Architecture & Engineerln9 6.00% Direct Costs 79,000
Permits & Fees 112.00 ISq. Foot 8,589 Sf 103,000
Txs.llns.lLgl.lAcctng. 1.50% Direct Costs 20,000
Leasing Commission 15.00 ISq. Fool 8,589 Sf 43,000
Development Management 5.00% Direct Costs 66,000
Contingency 5.00% Direct Costs 66,000
Total Indirect Costs $377,000
IV. Flnancino Casts
Buitdlng Interest' $1,795,000 Financed 7.50% Interest 18f,000
Financing Fees' 1749.000 Financed 2.00 Points 15,000
Total Financing Costs 196,000
V. Total Construction Casts (Excluding Land) $1,795,000
1 Estimated casts based an KMA's experience with similar prolects in the region.
2 Assumes 1.0 year building period and 60% average outstanding toan balance.
3 Assumes 60% loan to value ratio.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Fitename:Urt Juice!- Village Project - reuse;KMA Retail;4/27/2004;8:47 AM;kee
TABLE 2
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME - COMMERCIAL
VILLAGE PROJECT
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Income
Mein 51. Retail- Preservation
Main 51. Retail- New'
Main 51. Restaurant- New'
Main SI. Office- New'
Prospect Ave. Commercial Retail'
Prospect Lane Office'
Gross Income
0 Sf
773 Sf
3,000 Sf
4,816 Sf
0 Sf
0 Sf
$0.00 ISf
$IS.00 ISf
$21.00 ISf
$15.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0.00 ISf
$0
12.000
63,000
72,000
0
0
$147,000
(7.000)
$140,000
($6,000)
(3,000)
($9,000)
$131,000 I
(Less): Vacancy & Collection
Effective Gross Income
5.00% Retail & Office Space Income
II.
Operaflno Expenses
Managemenl Fee
Reserves
Total Expenses
4.00% Effective Gross Income
2.00% Effective Gross Income
1/11.
Net Ooeratino Income
, Triple net rent.
, Office rents are net of expenses equal to $4.00 per square fool.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:Utt Juicel- Village Project - reuse;KMA Retail;412712004;8:47 AM;kee
TABLE 3
ESTIMATED FAIR REUSE VALUE
VILLAGE PROJECT
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Net Operatina InCome
Retail Net Operating Incoma
Ratall Threshold Return on Investment
Retail Supportable Debt/Equity Investment
$131,000
10.50%
$1,248,000
II,
Total Devalaoment Costs
($1,795,000)
III,
Residual Land Value
Value Par Square Foot
($547,000)
($75.08
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename:UII Julce1, Vlllage PrOject, reuse;KMA Ratail;4/27/2004;8:47 AM;kee
TABLE 4
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS - RESIDENTIAL
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
VILLAGE PROJECT
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
I. Oirect Costs"
On-Sites Costs
Parking
Buiiding Sheil
12 Units
0 Sf GBA
29,190 SfGBA
Total Direct Costs
II. Indirect Costs
Architecture, Eng. & Consulting
Permits & Fees/Impact Fees'
Taxes, Ins, Legai & Acctg
Marketing/Sales Office
Design Center Profit
Development Management
Contingency Ailowance
6.0% Direct Costs
12 Units
3.0% Direct Costs
12 Units
$0 Allowance
3.0% Sales
5.0% Direct Costs
Total Indirect Costs
III. Financinc¡/Closinq Costs
Interest During Construction/Abs. '
Loan Origination Fees
Closing Costs/WarrantiesO
12 Units
12 Units
12 Units
Total Financing/Closing Costs
IV. Total Construction Cost
Construction Cost Per Unit
Construction Cost Per Square Foot
$26,000 /Unit
$9500 /Sf
$95.00 /Sf
$18,200 /Unit
$9,000 /Unit
$26,000 /Unit
$4,100 /Unit
$34,300 /Unit
$312,000
0
2,773,000
$3,085,000
$185,000
218,000
93,000
108,000
0
207,000
154,000
$965,000
$312,000
49,000
411,000
$772,000
$4,822,000
$401,800
$165.19
, Based on KMA's experience with similar projects in the region.
2 Assumes 8.0% interest rate.
3 Assumes commissions of 3.5% of sales, closing costs of 1.5% of sales and warranties of $5,500.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: UtI Juice1- Village Project - reuse; ResCosl; 4/27/2004
TABLE 5
PROJECTEO SALES REVENUES - RESIDENTIAL
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
VILLAGE PROJECT
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA
Price/Unit
Number of Units Unit Size Base Premium Total
I. Market Rate Units
Prospect Avenue 6 Units 2,831 /Unit $625,000 $0 /Unit $3,750,000
Pros peel Lane 6 Units 2,034 /Unit $525,000 $0 /Unil 3,150,000
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unil $0 $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 12 2,433 /Unit $575,000 /Unit $6,900,000
II. Affordable Units
Prospect Avenue 0 Units 2,831 /Unit $0 /Unit $0
Prospect Lane 0 Units 2,034 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 3 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 4 0 Unils 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 5 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 6 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Plan 7 0 Units 0 /Unit $0 /Unit 0
Total/Average 0 0 /Unrt $0 /Unit $0
IIl.lTotal Sales Revenues $6,900,000 I
Prepared by- Keyser Marston Assodales, Inc.
File name: UtI Juice1- Village Project - reuse; ResRevenues; 4/27i2004
TABLE 6
ESTIMATED FAIR REUSE VALUE. RESIDENTIAL
12 MARKET RATE UNITS & 0 MODERATE INCOME UNITS
VILLAGE PROJECT
TUSTIN. CALIFORNIA
I. Sales Revenues .,
Market Rate Units
Affordable Units
Total Sales Revenues
II, Construction Costs
Construction Costs L
Developer Profit>
10.0% Revenues
Total Construction Cost
III. Supportable Land Value
PerUnil
Per Square Foot
$6,900,000
0
$6,900,000
$4,822,000
888,000
$5,510,000
$1,390,000
$115,800
$38.60
, SeeTA8LE5
L SeeTABLE4
, Reflects threshold Developer return identified in the Developer's pro forma.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File neme: Urt Julce1. Village Project. reuse; ResLndVI; 4/27/2004
SUMMARY REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 33433
OF THE
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
ON A
OWNER PARTICIPATION AND DISPOSITION AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN THE
TUSTIN COMMUNITY REDVELOPMENT AGENCY
AND
PROSPECT VILLAGE LP
The following Summary Report has been prepared pursuant to Section 33433 of the California
Health and Safety Code. The report sets forth certain details of the proposed Disposition and
Development Agreement (Agreement) between the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
(Agency) and Prospect Village LP (Developer). The purpose of the Agreement is to effectuate
the Redevelopment Plan for the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area (Redevelopment
Plan).
The Agreement requires the Agency to convey approximately 1.04 acres of Agency-owned
parcels located at 191 and 193-195 West Main Street (Site) in the City of Tustin (City) to the
Developer. The Developer is required to construct a mixed-use project comprised of
approximately B,5B9 leaseable square feet of retail, restaurant and office space and 12
owner/proprietor occupied live-work units (collectively, the Project).
The following Summary Report is based upon information contained within the Agreement, and
is organized into the following seven sections:
I.
Salient Points of the Agreement: This section summarizes the major responsibilities
imposed on the Developer and the Agency by the Agreement.
II.
Cost of the Agreement to the Agency: This section details the total cost to the
Agency associated with implementing the Agreement.
III.
Estimated Value of the Interests to be Conveyed Determined at the Highest Use
Permitted under the Redevelopment Plan: This section estimates the value of the
interests to be conveyed determined at the highest use permitted under the Site's
existing zoning and the requirements imposed by the Redevelopment Plan.
IV.
Estimated Reuse Value of the Interests to be Conveyed: This section summarizes
the valuation estimate for the Site based on the required scope of development, and the
other conditions and covenants required by the Agreement.
04O4O4'.TUg,JAR,bd
19830.001.00:>'05107104
V.
VI.
VII.
Consideration Received and Comparison with the Established Value: This section
describes the compensation to be received by the Agency, and explains any difference
between the compensation to be received and the established highest and best use
value of the Site.
Blight Elimination: This section describes the existing blighting conditions on the Site,
and explains how the Agreement will assist in alleviating the blighting influence.
Conformance with the AB1290 Implementation Plan: This section describes how the
Agreement achieves goals identified in the Agency's adopted AB1290 Implementation
Plan.
This report and the Agreement are to be made available for public inspection prior to the
approval of the Agreement.
I.
A.
SALIENT POINTS OF THE AGREEMENT
Project Description
The Scope of Development defined in the Agreement includes a mixed-use project of
approximately B,5B9 square feet of retail, restaurant and office uses and 12 live-work units
(Private Improvements). The commercial space is allocated 773 square feet for retail space,
3,000 square feet for restaurant space and 4,B16 square feet of second floor office space. In
addition, there is 593 square feet of outdoor dining space.
Also the Project must include 12 owner/proprietor occupied live-work units. Six of the units will
front on Prospect Avenue and six units will front on Prospect Lane. The Prospect Avenue
residential units shall have two levels of residential space above 913 square feet of ground floor
retail space; the Prospect Lane residential units shall have two levels of residential above 431
square feet of ground floor retail or office space.
The Scope of Development also includes the construction of the Public Improvements. The
Public Improvements include:
.
Full improvement to the public alley to the west of the Site
Full widening and improvement to the west side of Prospect Avenue between Main
Street and Third Street
Undergrounding all overhead utility poles and lines
All directly related design and construction costs associated with the Public
Improvements to be reimbursed by City.
2
O404045.TUS,JA"'",
19830.001.00,,"5107104
B.
Developer Responsibilities
The Agreement requires the Developer to accept the following responsibilities:
1.
The Developer must accept conveyance of the Site from the Agency under the terms of
the Agreement for a price of $B55,OOO.
2.
The Developer must demolish and remove the existing improvements on the Site.
3.
The Developer must develop a high quality mixed-use development with approximately
B,589 square footage of commercial space facing Main Street, six live-work units facing
Prospect Avenue and six live-work units facing Prospect Lane. Building improvements
and landscaping must be consistent with the terms of the Agreement.
4.
The Developer must install the Public Improvements with the construction of the Private
Improvements.
5.
The Developer shall provide escrow instructions consistent with the Agreement and pay
in escrow the following:
a.
One half of all escrow fees;
b.
Recording fees;
c.
Any state, county, city or other documentary stamps and transfer taxes; and
d.
The premium for the title insurance policy.
6.
The Developer shall submit to the Agency evidence of obtaining the financing necessary
to undertake the Project in accordance with the Agreement.
a.
A commitment in writing from a permitted mortgagee for the funding of the
improvements.
b.
Evidence satisfactory to the Agency of sources of equity capital sufficient to
cover the difference between construction cost and financing by mortgage loans.
7.
The Developer shall begin and complete all construction and development within the
times specified in the Schedule of Performance per the Agreement.
B.
The Developer shall be responsible for any and all costs directly or indirectly related to
the Development, including but not limited to, acquisition of the Site and construction of
Private Improvements.
3
O404045.TU8,JA"'"",
19830.001.003105107104
c.
Agency Responsibilities
Under the Agreement, the Agency must complete the following responsibilities:
1.
The Agency shall convey the Agency-owned parcel to the Developer for $B55,OOO.
2.
The Agency agrees to open an escrow for conveyance, and provide escrow instructions
consistent with the Agreement, and shall pay the following fees in escrow:
a.
One-half of escrow fees.
b.
Costs necessary to place the title to the Agency-owned parcel in the condition for
conveyance required by the provisions of the Agreement;
c.
Cost of drawing the Grant Deed; and
d.
Notary fees.
3.
The Agency shall timely and properly execute, acknowledge and deliver the Grant Deed,
conveying title to the Agency-owned parcel to the Developer, together with an estopple
certificate certifying that Developer has completed all acts necessary to entitle Developer
to such conveyance in accordance with the Agreement.
4.
The City will make available 59 existing parking spaces at the adjacent Tustin Water
Yard under a non-exclusive parking license agreement between the Developer and the
City.
5.
Agency's financial participation is limited to conveying fee ownership interest in the
Agency-owned parcel to the Developer, at a price of $B55,000 as set forth in the
Agreement.
6.
The City's financial participation is limited to reimbursing Developer for the construction
of the Public Improvements not-to-exceed $BBO,OOO.
4
0404045.TUS,JARgbd
19830.001.00""5107104
II.
COST OF THE AGREEMENT TO THE AGENCY
The Agency costs to implement the Agreement include the previous acquisition of the Site. The
Agency acquired the Site for $B55,000. As shown below, the total cost to the Agency is
$B55,000.
Site Acquisition Cost
Total Agency Cost
($ B55.000)
($ B55,OOO)
$ 855,000
$1.144.000
$1,999,000
Land Payment at Closing
Present Value of Tax Increment
Total Agency Revenues
Net Agency Cost (Revenue)
$1,144,000
The Agency costs are offset by the land payment received at closing and tax increment
revenues received by the Agency. At closing, the Agency will receive $855,000 acquisition of
the Site. The Agency receives tax increment revenues for affordable housing and general use.
Over the remaining term of the Project Area, the Agency is projected to receive nearly $2.1
million of tax increment revenues, which has a present value, discounted at 6.0%, of
$1,144,000.
Deducting the $B55,000 Agency costs from the $1,999,000 Agency revenues, results in net
revenues to the Agency of $1,144,000.
Under the Agreement, the City will reimburse the Developer up to $8BO,000 for installation of
the Public Improvements that are already a part of its capital improvement program.
III.
ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE INTERESTS TO BE CONVEYED DETERMINED AT
THE HIGHEST USE PERMITTED UNDER THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Section 33433 of the California Health and Safety Code requires the Agency to identify the
value of the interests being conveyed at the highest use allowed by the Agency Site's zoning
and the requirements imposed by the Redevelopment Plan. The valuation must be based on
the assumption that near-term development is required, but the valuation does not take into
consideration any extraordinary use, quality and/or income restrictions are being imposed on
the development by the Agency.
The Agency retained Integra Realty Services to prepare an appraisal of the property. The
appraiser determined that the highest and best use of the Site is to subdivide the Site into
smaller parcels and to develop owner occupied improvements consistent with zoning
regulations. The appraiser concluded that the sales comparisons utilized provided an adequate
framework from which to gauge expectable value and that the Site has a present value equal to
its estimated value as though vacant and less the cost to demolish with asbestos abatement.
5
0404045.TUS,JARgbd
19830.001.003105107104
The appraiser determined that the Site in its present condition has a hypothetical market value,
as of April 5, 2004, of $7BO,000 or $1B.35 per square foot.
IV.
ESTIMATED REUSE VALUE OF THE INTERESTS TO BE CONVEYED
KMA, the Agency's real estate advisor, prepared a reuse valuation analysis of the Project dated
April 26, 2004, based on the financial terms and conditions imposed by the Agreement. Taking
into account the covenants, conditions and restrictions imposed by the Agreement, it is
concluded that the fair reuse value of the Site is $843,000.
V.
CONSIDERATION RECEIVED AND COMPARISON WITH THE ESTABLISHED
VALUE
The Agreement requires the Agency to convey the Agency-owned parcel to the Developer at a
price of $B55,OOO.
As previously mentioned, the KMA analysis concluded that the Agency-owned parcel has a fair
reuse value of $B43,OOO, which is less than $B55,000 to be paid at closing. Further, the fair
market value of the Site is estimated to be $7BO,000, which is also less than the amount to be
paid to the Agency. Thus, the consideration to be received by the Agency is equal to or greater
than the established fair reuse value and the fair market value.
VI.
BLIGHT ELIMINATION
The Site currently characterized by the following blighting conditions that will be alleviated by
the Project:
.
Unsafe/dilapidated/deteriorated buildings
Physical conditions that limit economic viability and use of lots and buildings (age and
obsolescence)
Inadequate public infrastructure/facilities
Depreciated or stagnant property values and/or impaired private investments
The development of the mixed-use project will eliminate the current physical blighting
conditions. Thus, the proposed development fulfills the blight elimination requirement.
6
O404045.TUS,JA"'O"
19830.001.003/05IQ7AJ4
VII.
CONFORMANCE WITH THE AB1290 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The Project conforms with several of the objectives defined in the Five Year Implementation
Plan adopted by the Agency in March 2000. Pertinent goals and objectives that are satisfied by
the Project are as follows:
To create a mixed-use Town Center area that combines commercial, office residential
and public uses, which will serve the needs of the community as well as encourage the
healthy growth of the area;
To encourage residential development by actively seeking private development in the
redevelopment area;
To increase the level of capital improvements such as the development of the
Columbus-Tustin Park, parking facilities, sidewalk and street landscaping, street
improvements, and related public improvement projects; and
To revitalize and develop amenities in the Project Area, both publicly and privately
financed, as a means of aiding the revitalization of the EI Camino Real section of the Old
Town district in particular.
7
0404045.TUS,JA"'OOO
19830.001.003105107104
A TT A CHMENT N
RDA Resolution No. 04-01
Exhibit A - Final Environmental Impact Report
Exhibit B - Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Exhibit C - Mitigation Monitoring Program
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 04-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA,
ACCEPTING THE PROSPECT VILLAGE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AS CERTIFIED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, MAKING FINDINGS,
ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM FOR THE DISPOSITON AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND PROSPECT VILLAGE, loP.
The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency (the "Redevelopment Agency") does
hereby resolve as follows:
I.
The Redevelopment Agency finds and determines as follows:
A.
B.
The Redevelopment Agency is a responsible agency authorized to accept
the Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) as certified
by the City Council pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
Guidelines (Title 14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Section 15096) for the
purpose of approving the Disposition and Development Agreement
between the Redevelopment Agency and Prospect Village, loP.
The FEIR analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with
the project. The FEIR evaluates the proposed project, which includes: the
rezoning of a 1.036 acre property located at the northwest corner of Main
Street and Prospect Avenue from "Central Commercial-Parking Overlay
(C2-P) to "Planned-Community (P-C)"; subdivision of the property into
thirteen (13) numbered lots and one (1) lettered lot; construction of an
approximately 9,300 square foot commercial building and twelve (12)
live/work units; and sale of the property by the Agency to Prospect Village,
L.P. pursuant to a Disposition and Development Agreement. In addition to
a "No Project Alternative", the FEIR also evaluates a range of project
alternatives, including the following:
1.
Full Reuse Alternative: The Full Reuse Alternative entails
rehabilitation and reuse of the existing Utt Juice buildings in
accordance with the Secretary's Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating,
Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, 1995, Weeks and
Redsharedlrdaresolutionl04-0 1
Resolution No. RDA 04-01
Page 2
C.
D.
Grimmer ("Secretary's Standards and Guidelines"). This
Alternative also entails new construction of retail building addition
on the vacant pad area immediately west of the 191 Main Street
building ("191 Building"). The remaining northerly portion of the site
would be developed with ten (10) live/work units.
2.
Partial Reuse Alternative: This Alternative would rehabilitate and
reuse the 191 Building and partially rehabilitate and reuse the 193,
195 Building (to a depth of sixty) in accordance with the Secretary's
Standards and Guidelines. This Alternative also entails
construction of a new two story building to a depth on the pad area
immediately west of the 191 Building. The remaining northerly
portion of the site would be developed ten (10) residential live/work
units.
3.
Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only) Alternative: This Alternative
would partially rehabilitate and reuse the front forty five feet of the
193, 195 Buildings in accordance with the Secretary's Standards
and Guidelines. The 191 Building would be demolished. This
Alternative also entails construction of a new two story retail
building on the remaining pad area west of the 193, 195 Building.
Similar to the proposed project, the remaining northerly portion of
the site would be developed with twelve (12) live/work units.
4.
Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative: The Full Reuse Under
Existing Zoning Alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the existing
structures in accordance with the Secretary's Standards and
Guidelines. The alternative also entails construction of a new
abutting 2,200 square feet single story retail building on the vacant
site immediately west of the 191 Building. The remaining northerly
portion of the site would be developed with a two-story retail and
professional office building.
5.
Façade Reuse Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation and
reuse of all or a portion of the façade of the 193, 195 Building as
may be technically feasible, which would be incorporated into a
new two story Main Street building. All other project components
would be similar to the proposed project.
A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), including responses to
written public comments was prepared and made available for public
review on April 16, 2004.
On May 17, 2004, public testimony was provided to the City Council and
Redevelopment Agency on the FEIR. The City Council found that the
Redsharedlrdareso I uti on \04-0 1
Resolution No. RDA 04-01
Page 3
G.
FEIR is complete and adequate under CEQA for all aspects of the project.
The REIR is described in Exhibit A, and is incorportated herein by this
reference.
E.
Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15091 of the
State CEQA Guidelines require that the Redevelopment Agency make one
or more of the following findings prior to approving or carrying out a project
for which an EIR has been prepared identifying one or more significant
effects of the project, together with a statement of facts in support of each
finding:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction
of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted
by that other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the
EIR.
F.
State Guidelines Section 15093(b) require that, where the decision of the
Redevelopment Agency allows the occurrence of significant effects which
are identified in an FEIR, but are not at least substantially mitigated, the
Redevelopment Agency must state in writing the reasons to support its
action based on the FEIR or other information in the record;
State Guidelines Section 15093(a) requires the Redevelopment Agency to
balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other
benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in
determining whether to approve the project; and
H.
A responsible agency that makes findings on significant effects in an EIR
must also adopt a program for reporting or monitoring mitigation measures
that are made conditions of project approval.
The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin does hereby find and determine
that Prospect Village FEIR was reviewed and considered by the Redevelopment
Agency before considering approval of the Disposition and Development
Agreement Project.
II.
III.
The Redevelopment Agency finds that the project involves no potential for any
adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources and
Redsharedlrdaresol ution\O4-0 1
Resolution No. RDA 04-01
Page 4
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
makes a De Minimis Impact Finding related to AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes
of 1990.
The Redevelopment Agency hereby finds that changes have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that will mitigate or avoid potentially significant
adverse effects related to hazards, short term construction traffic, and parking
identified in the FEIR and that all mitigation measures contained in the FEIR are
adopted and included as conditions of approval of the Project, as described in
attached Exhibit B, incorporated herein by this reference.
The Redevelopment Agency hereby finds that the unavoidable significant
environmental effects of the project related to cultural resources and land use are
outweighed by the economic, social, and other benefits of the project, as set forth in
the Statement of Overriding Considerations in attached Exhibit B, incorporated
herein by this reference.
The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin does hereby adopt a Mitigation
Monitoring Reporting Program is set forth in Exhibit C, incorporated herein by this
reference, which provides a checklist of mitigation measures identified in the
FEIR to monitor the progress of each measure. The following information is
identified for each measure listed in the checklist:
1.
The text of the measure is provided which contains the criteria for mitigation,
either in the form of adherence to certain adopted regulations or
identification of the steps to be taken as mitigation.
2.
The timing of the implementation of the mitigation measures is indicated.
3.
The table lists the appropriate responsible or supervising party or agency to
perform or enforce the mitigation measure or implementation measure.
The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin does hereby find and certify that
the Prospect Village FEIR has been completed in compliance with the requirements
of CEQA and the State Guidelines and certifies the Prospect Village Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) as complete and adequate pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act for the purpose of approving the Disposition
and Development Agreement between the Tustin Community Redevelopment
Agency and Prospect Village, LP.
Redsharedlrdaresolution\O4-0 1
Resolution No. RDA 04-01
Page 5
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Community Redevelopment
Agency held on the 17th day of May, 2004.
TONY KAWASHIMA
Chairperson
PAMELA STOKER
City Clerk
Attachments
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
ORANGE COUNTY )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Tustin Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the
members of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin is five;
that the above and forgoing Resolution No. RDA 04-01 was duly passed and adopted at
a regular meeting of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency, held on May 17,
2004, by the following vote:
BOARDMEMBER AYES:
BOARDMEMBER NOES:
BOARDMEMBER ABSTAINED:
BOARDMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
Redsharedlrdaresolution\O4-0 1
EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. RDA 04-01
PROSPECT VILLAGE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SEE VOLUMES 1 AND 2 SEPARATELY BOUND
EXHIBIT B OF RESOLUTION NO. RDA 04-01
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Exhibit B of Resolution No. RDA 04-01
Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Prospect Village Final Environmental Impact Report
Prospect Village Project
Disposition and Development Agreement
Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Prospect Village FEtR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Page
INTRODUCTION
4
THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
4
PURPOSE OF FINDINGS
5
INCORPORA TION OF MITIGATION MEASURES INTO PROJECT DESIGN 6
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNA VOIDABLE
ADVERSE IMPACTS
6
Cultural Resources (Historical Resources)
Land Use
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT ARE
REDUCED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS BY
MITIGATION MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT
7
Cultural Resources (Archaeological Resources)
Hazards
Traffic/Parking
FINDINGS CONCERNING LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
13
Aesthetics
Air Quality
Hazards
Noise
Traffic
VIII. FINDINGS OF FACT CONCERNING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Introduction
Reasonable Range of Alternatives
Summary of Comparison of Alternatives
Project Objectives
IX.
21
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Summary of Overriding Considerations
Adoption of Overriding Considerations
34
Prospect Village FEIR
TABLES
Table
Page
Table I
Summary Comparison of Land Development and
Buildout Characteristics of Alternatives
32
Table 2
Key Differentiating Factors Between Alternatives
33
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15091, the Tustin
Community Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") of the City of Tustin, based upon its review of
the Final Environmenta1 Impact Report (FEIR), including the comments and responses therein, and
all the infonnation and evidence in the record, hereby makes the Findings of Fact and adopts of the
Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth herein:
I.
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, an Initial StudylNotice of Preparation (NOP) to
prepare an EIR was distributed on April 17, 2003, to regulatory agencies, local jurisdictions, and
pub1ic service providers, among others, for a 30-day comment period.
This Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") evaluates the potential environmental effects of
the proposed Prospect Village Project ("Project"), which is located on an approximately one-acre
parce1 in the City of Tustin, County of Orange. This EIR has been prepared pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (California Public Resources Code Section 21000
et seq.) and State Guidelines for the imp1ementation of the CEQA (California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). The FEIR consists of two volumes entitled "Volume 1, Draft
Environmental Impact Report for Prospect Village Project" and "Volume 2, Responses to Public
Comments."
The FEIR recommends mitigation measures to avoid significant environmental impacts of the project
or reduce them to less than significant levels. Specifically, the FEIR identified mitigation measures
to avoid or reduce Project impacts re1ating to unknown archaeological resources, hazards, short tenn
construction traffic and parking impacts to a less than significant level. While feasible mitigation
measures are a1so identified to reduce Project impacts on historical resources, the FEIR concludes
that this impact would be significant and unavoidable. The FEIR also concludes that Project impacts
relating to Land Use are significant and unavoidab1e despite imp1ementation the recommended
mitigation measure.
II.
THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
CONTENTS OF THE RECORD
The following infonnation is incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these
findings and the actions taken by the Agency in accepting the FEIR and approving the project:
1.
The FEIR, Draft EIR and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference in the FEIR
or Draft EIR.
2.
All testimony, documentary evidence and all correspondence submitted to or delivered to the
City in connection with the meetings, workshops, and public hearings at which the Draft EIR
FEIR was considered by the City.
Page 4
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
3.
Any other documents specified by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e).
LOCATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
The City of Tustin is the custodian of the administrative record, including all CEQA documents and
the other background documents and materials, which constitute the record of the proceedings upon
which the Agency decisions to accept the FEIR and approve the project are based. The
administrative record is located at the Tustin Community Development Department at the City of
Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780.
III.
PURPOSE OF FINDINGS
The FEIR, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , evaluates
the significant adverse environmental impacts that could result from the project. Section 15091 of
the CEQA Guidelines requires that the public agency approving or caITying out the project shall
make written findings for each significant impact identified in the EIR. These findings include one
of the following:
1.
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as defined in the EIR.
2.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision
of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
These findings accomplish the following:
1.
They address the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR for the approved
project.
2.
They incorporate all mitigation measures associated with these significant impacts identified
in the EIR.
3.
They indicate whether a significant effect is avoided or reduced by the adopted mitigation
measures to a less than significant level, or remain significant and unavoidable, either
because there are no feasible mitigation measures or because, even with implementation of
mitigation measures, a significant impact will occur.
The conclusions presented in these findings are based on the FEIR and other substantial evidence in
the record of proceedings. Each of the effects that remain potentially significant and unavoidable is
considered acceptable by the Agency based on a determination that the benefits of the project
outweigh the risks of the potentially significant environmental effect, as set forth in the Statement of
Oveniding Considerations contained herein.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 5
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
IV.
INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES INTO PROJECT DESIGN
The mitigation measures identified in the FEIR as feasible and within the Agency's responsibility
and jurisdiction to implement are hereby incorporated into the design of the project as required by
CEQA. The Agency shall implement these measures during project implementation.
V.
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT UNA VOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS
The FEIR concludes that the project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact on
historical resources and land use. As described below in the findings for the significant and
unavoidable impacts, there are either no feasible mitigation measures or the feasible mitigation
measures would only partially mitigate the impact and the residual effect would remain significant.
As set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations herein, the Agency finds that the impacts
to cultural resources and land use are acceptable in light of the project's benefits.
CULTURAL RESOURCES (FEIR SECTION 3.3)
IMPACT:
SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE CHANGE IN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A HISTORICAL
RESOURCE AS DEFINED IN §15064.5
1.
Facts
The Project entails demolition of two buildings on-site that were determined to be eligible for listing
in the California Register of Historical Resources. As discussed in Section 3.3. of the DraftEIR, the
Historic Resources Technical Report, Utt Juice Redevelopment Project, dated July 14, 2003
concluded that the 193, 195 E. Main Street Building is a resource of regional significance under
California Register of Historic Resources Criteria 1 (association with significant events or trends), 2
(association with historically important people); and 3 (embodying distinctive characteristics of a
type of construction method). The report also concluded that the 191 E. Main Building is a resource
of local significance under California Register of Historic Resources Criteria 1 (association with
significant events or trends), and 2 (association with historically important people). Therefore, the
proposed demolition of these buildings is considered a significant environmental impact under
CEQA.
This impact can be reduced, but not to a level of insignificance, by adopting a mitigation measure
that requires documentation of the buildings to be removed shall be undertaken by the City of Tustin
utilizing the standards of the Historic American Building Survey (RABS), including photo-
documentation and measured drawings of the East Main and Prospect Avenue elevations. These
items, together with the Historical Resource Technical Report, shall be added to the Tustin Area
Historical Society Museum. See Mitigation Measure CR-l on p. 3.3-10 of the Draft EIR.
2.
Finding
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 6
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
This Agency finds this impact to be significant and unavoidable; the measure listed above is adopted
and will reduce this impact but not to a level of insignificance. This impact is overridden by project
benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations.
LAND USE (SECTION 3.5)
IMPACT:
THE PROJECT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES THAT
PROMOTE PRESERVATION AND REHABILITATION OF HISTORIC
RESOURCES
1.
Facts
While the Project is consistent with the majority of the General Plan goals, objectives and policies
relating to development of the Old Town, the Project is inconsistent with three policies that promote
restoration and preservation of historically significant structures. The following policies are
described in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and are designed to avoid and minimize a
project's potentially significant impacts on historical resources:
Policy 5.3 - Encourage the rehabilitation of existing commercial facades and signage.
Policy 5.5 - Encourage the restoration and rehabilitation of properties eligible for inclusion
on the National Register of Historic Places according to the rehabilitation guidelines and tax
incentives of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.
Policy 6.5 - Preserve historically significant structures and sites, and encourage the
conservation and rehabilitation of older buildings, sites and neighborhoods that contribute to
the City's historic character.
The Project will demolish the historic Utt Juice Buildings. Therefore, contrary to the above
policies, the Project does not entail restoration, rehabilitation or preservation of these historical
resources. The mitigation measures CR-l is intended to reduce Project impacts on these historical
resources. However, this mitigation measure will not reduce the impact to a less than significant
level. For purposes of the above policies, only restoration, rehabilitation or preservation would
reduce Project impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, similar to the Project cultural
resources impacts, the Project's inconsistency with these General Plan policies, which have been
adopted to avoid and minimize Project impacts on historical resources, is considered significant and
unavoidable.
Finding:
The Agency finds this impact to be significant and unavoidable; the measure listed above is adopted
and will reduce this impact but not to a level of insignificance. This impact is overridden by project
benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations.
VI.
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANTIMPACTS THAT ARE REDUCED TO A
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL BY MITIGATION MEASURES
INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT
Page 7
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CULTURAL RESOURCES (FEIR SECTION 3.3
IMPACT:
DISTURBANCE OF UNKNOWN BURIED CULTURAL RESOURCES ON SITE.
1.
Facts
Because the project site has been previously disturbed due to excavation, grading, paving and
construction of buildings, the probability of archaeological resources, paleontological resources, or
Native American remains being present is considered low. Nonetheless and to ensure that no
previously undocumented or unknown buried cultural resources on site will be adversely affected by
the project, the Draft EIR recommends Mitigation Measure CR-2, which provides a mechanism
whereby construction work would be halted if buried cultural resources are discovered. The measure
further requires an archaeologist to assess the find and develop appropriate mitigation measures to
ensure the find is not damaged.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds that Mitigation Measure CR-2 is adopted as stated in paragraph IV of the
certification resolution. This measure will reduce Project impacts to unknown buried cultural
resources to a less than significant level.
HAZARDS (SECTION 3.4.1 OF FEIR)
IMPACT:
DISPOSAL AND REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALS, LEAD
BASED PAINT, AND EXISTING INOPERABLE CIARIFIER
1.
Facts
a.
As discussed in Section 3.4, pages 3.4-5 through 3.4-7 of the Draft EIR, the Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment revealed no evidence of recognized environmental
conditions in connection with the property, except for the presence of a clarifier on-site, the
presence of asbestos containing material (ACM), and lead based paint (LBP) which is typical
of older structures.
The Phase I Report could not determine from the available information whether the clarifier
has been officially closed or abandoned. Information concerning the past use and current
status of the clarifier was similarly not available. In order to reduce the potential for an
unauthorized discharge and depending on the future use of the Property, the Draft EIR
recommends Mitigation Measure H-I, which requires the applicant to abandon or remove the
clarifier in accordance with applicable local, State, and Federal regulations.
The Draft EIR also recommends as a precautionary measures, Mitigation Measure H-2,
which requires the removal of any unknown contaminated soils that could be encountered on
the project site during demolition, site clearance, or construction activities. The removal and
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 8
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
disposal of these hazardous materials would be in accordance with guidelines specified by
the applicable local, State, and Federal resources agencies, including but not limited to, the
Department of Toxics Substances Control and federal Environmental Protection Agency
b.
The Phase I Report also disclosed the presence of ACMs on-site, including the following
materials:
.
Approximately 300 square feet of floor texture coat located in the 195 building. It was
difficult to assess the material due to the large amount of dust and debris on the floor.
Approximately 20 square feet of 9x9 green vinyl floor tile ànd mastic exists in the 195
building.
The Phase I Report identified approximately 500 square feet of exterior stucco as decorative inlays
as asbestos containing construction material (ACCM). The ACCM should be handled as an ACM;
however, disposal as asbestos waste is not required.
The Draft EIR recommends implementation of Mitigation Measures H-3 and concludes that this
measure would reduce any potential asbestos impacts to a less than significant level. This measure
provides that if during any future demolition or remodeling activities additional suspect materials are
observed, bulk samples shall be collected of these materials and analyzed for asbestos content. All
suspect materials at the Property are Presumed Asbestos-containing Materials (PACMs) until the
asbestos content is confinned or denied by analytical testing
c.
The EPA and BUD have defined a LBP at 0.5 percent by weight. The Phase I Report
identified the following paints as containing greater than 0.5% lead:
.
Exterior white paint on the doors and door frames (approximately 300 square feet).
.
Interior white paint on the doors, door frames, windows, and window frames (approximately
300 square feet).
.
Interior cream paint on the walls, doors, and windows in the front portion of the 191 building
(approximately 600 square feet).
.
Interior red paint on the walls and doors in the rear portion of the 195 building
(approximately 400 square feet).
According to the Draft EIR, Mitigation Measure H-4 would reduce any lead based paint impact to a
less than significant level. This measure requires the applicant to retain a licensed abatement
contractor to properly remove and dispose of the damaged (peeling, flaking) lead-based paint prior to
obtaining a demolition permit
2.
Finding
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 9
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Agency finds that the recommended mitigation measures (H-I through H-4) relating to the
removal of the clarifier on site and potentially contaminated soils, the handling of asbestos, and the
handling of lead based paint are adopted as stated in paragraph N of the certification resolution.
These measures will mitigate these impacts to a less than significant level.
TRAFFIC (SECTION 3.7 FEIR)
IMPACT: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTNITY WOULD GENERATE SHORT TERM
TRAFFIC TRIPS
1.
Facts
The Draft EIR discusses short term traffic impacts during construction in Section 3.7 on pages 3.7-7
to 3.7-8. Construction related traffic would be associated with workers arriving and leaving the
project site, and truck and construction vehicle traffic. According to the Draft EIR, Project generated
construction worker trips and haul trips are potentially significant but would be reduced to a less than
significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measure T-I. This measure requires the
developer to prepare a construction staging and parking plan for review and approval by City of
Tustin Public Works prior to issuance of a demolition permit. The developer or contractor must
monitor the implementation and effectiveness ofthe construction staging and parking plan during the
construction phase of the project. The plan will include one or more of the following potential types
of traffic-related mitigation measures to ensure that temporary disruptions to the adjacent uses and
circulation within the area are minimized:
.
Construction and Employee Parking: As part of the construction staging and parking plan,
the contractor would submit and obtain approval of a construction parking program which
reflects the schedule of construction activities and location of construction-related parking.
Locations of available parking would be identified.
Street Circulation and Parking Measures: The contractor may request and obtain a permit for
any temporary lane closures that may be required for adjacent roadways. The contractor
would utilize flagmen for traffic control to minimize inconvenience and for safety of vehicles
and pedestrians.
Haul Truck Routes, Queue Areas, and Deli veries: The contractor would provide an estimate
of truck volume and schedule. Schedule adjustments would be made to minimize the volume
during peak traffic hours. Areas would be designated by the developer or contractor for
staging of all trucks. All earth-moving and ready-mix trucks would be equipped with two-
way radios. The trucks would follow a City-approved route to the project site, without
unnecessary waiting.
Hours of Excavation Hauling: Heavy truck hauling associated with excavation would be
scheduled to minimize interference with daytime activity in the area. The hours for
excavation hauling would be determined in conjunction with the City as part of the
construction staging and parking plan.
Pedestrian Safety Measures: The contractor would install a construction fence around the
perimeter, complying with City requirements before excavation begins. A flagman would be
.
.
.
.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 10
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
available at all times and would be utilized whenever trucks entering or leaving the Project
site may impede the flow of traffic.
2.
Findings
The Agency finds that Mitigation Measure T-l, which requires the applicant to prepare a
construction staging and parking plan, is adopted as stated in paragraph IV of the certification
resolution. This measure will mitigate short term traffic impacts during construction to a less than
significant level.
IMPACT:
THE PROJECT WOULD INCREASE PARKING DEMAND IN THE AREA.
The Draft EIR addresses parking impacts in Section 3.7 on pages 3.7-11 through 3.7-13. As
discussed in the Draft EIR, the City retained Sasaki Transportation Services to evaluate the Project's
peak parking demand. The Parking Study concluded that the twenty-seven (27) off-street parking
spaces would be adequate to serve the residences and is consistent with the City of Tustin parking
code requirements.
The Parking Study also anaJyzed the shared use parking needs for the commercial component based
on the different peak hours of operation. According to the Parking Study, the shared parking demand
for the commercial portion of the Project was sixty-two (62) spaces, which wouJd be satisfied by the
use of fifty-nine (59) spaces at the City of Tustin Main Street Water faciJity ("Water Facility")
parking lot and three (3) on-site spaces. The Water facility parking Jot is Jocated across Prospect
Avenue, immediately east of the Project site. The three additional spaces are provided on-site,
immediately west of and adjacent to the E. Main Street building. The anaJysis was based on the ITE
"Shared Parking Planning Guidelines."
The Parking Study concluded that the Project's proposed mix of commerciaJ uses (retail, office, and
restaurant) would be conducive to a shared parking arrangement. According to the study, the peak
parking demands for office, retail, and restaurant uses occur at different times of the day. For
example, the office parking peaks occur during the day on week days, while the retail peak is on the
weekend. Restaurants are typically busy on Friday and Saturday evenings when retail and office uses
are not at their peaks.
In order to satisfy the City's shared use requirements, the developer must enter into an agreement
with the City of Tustin to use the Water Facility parking Jot. In conjunction with consideration of
project entitlements, the City of Tustin City Council shall consider an Off-Site Parking Agreement
for the provision of fifty-nine (59) parking spaces at the City's Main Street Water facility. If, for
some reason, the City Council rejected such an agreement, Project parking impacts would be
significant unless the City authorized some alternative arrangement. The Draft EIR recommended
Mitigation Measure T-2 to reduce the Project's potential parking impact to a less than significant
level. This measure states that if the City CounciJ does not approve the Off-Site Parking Agreement,
the applicant must present an alternative shared use agreement to the City for review and approvaJ
prior to issuance of a demolition permit. If the City does not approve an alternative shared use
agreement, the Project shall not proceed.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 11
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2.
Finding
The Agency finds that the Mitigation Measure T -2, which requires that the City Council to approve
an off site parking agreement or some alternative shared use agreement for the project to proceed, is
adopted as stated in paragraph IV of the certification resolution. This measure will mitigate parking
impacts to a less than significant level.
IMPACT:
DISPOSAL AND REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALS, LEAD
BASED PAINT, AND EXISTING INOPERABLE CLARIFIER
The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment revealed no evidence of recognized environmental
conditions in connection with the property, except for the presence of a clarifier on-site, the presence
of asbestos containing material (ACM), and lead based paint (LBP) which is typical of older
structures. A clarifier is a tank that is used to treat water, whereby solid particles suspended in the
water agglomerate and settle at the bottom of the tank. The solids resulting from the settling are
removed as sludge.
The Phase I Report could not determine from the available information whether the clarifier has been
officially closed or abandoned. Information concerning the past use and current status of the clarifier
was simjJarly not available. In order to reduce the potential for an unauthorized discharge and
depending on the future use of the Property, the clarifier would be abandoned or removed in
accordance with applicable local, State, and Federal regulations as required by mitigation measure H-
I.
The Phase I Report also disclosed the presence of ACMs on-site, including the following materials:
.
Approximately 300 square feet of floor texture coat located in the 195 bujJding. It was
difficult to assess the material due to the large amount of dust and debris on the floor.
.
Approximately 20 square feet of 9x9 green vinyl floor tile and mastic exists in the 195
bujJding.
The Phase I Report identified approximately 500 square feet of exterior stucco as decorative inlays
as asbestos containing construction material (ACCM). The ACCM should be handled as an ACM;
however, disposal as asbestos waste is not required.
The EP A and HUD have defined a LBP at 0.5 percent by weight. The Phase I Report identified the
following paints as containing greater than 0.5% lead:
.
Exterior white paint on the doors and door frames (approximately 300 square feet).
.
Interior white paint on the doors, door frames, windows, and window frames (approximately
300 square feet).
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 12
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
.
Interior cream paint on the walls, doors, and windows in the front portion of the 191 building
(approximately 600 square feet).
Interior red paint on the walls and doors in the rear portion of the 195 building
(approximately 400 square feet).
Any potential hazards impact resulting from the environmental conditions described above can be
reduced to a level of insignificance with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures
described below.
Mitigation Measures
H-l
The applicant shall remove the clarifier on-site in accordance with applicable local, State,
and Federal regulations prior to obtaining a grading permit.
VII.
FINDINGS CONCERNING LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
AESTHETICS (FEIR SECTION 3.1)
IMPACT:
VISUAL IMPACT
1.
Facts
The Draft EIR analyzes the Project's visual impact in Section 3.1 on pages 3.1-13 through 3.1-15.
As discussed in the Draft EIR, while the Project would increase the height and bulk the existing
structures and would be taller than some of the sUiTOunding structures, due to the proposed three
story live/work units, these design characteristic would not "degrade" the existing visual character of
the site or its suIToundings. The intent of the Project design is to retain the historic look and feel of
the existing buildings with references to the unique VictorianlMain Street architectural character that
cuITently exists in the vicinity of the Project site. To ensure that the Project compliments the
suITounding area, the buildings would be characterized by details and colors similar to the existing
buildings at 191-195 East Main Street.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds the Project impacts on visual quality would be less than significant based on the
analysis contained in Section 3.1 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
IMPACT:
LIGHT AND GLARE
1.
Facts
The project site is cuITently vacant and no light is generated on the site. While the project would
increase the ambient light in the area, the incremental increase is not considered a new source of
substantial light and glare. Given the relatively small scale of the project and the fact that the
Prospect Village FEJR
Page 13
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
project site is within an urban area that currently generates ambient light, Project impacts relating to
light and glare are considered less than significant.
2.
Findings
The Agency finds the Project impacts on light and glare would be less than significant based on the
analysis contained in Section 3.1 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
The project development will incrementally contribute to changes in the aesthetic quality of the Old
Town area. However, the changes are considered less than significant due to the City's stringent
design review and cultural resources review process.
2.
Findings
The Agency finds the Project's cumulative aesthetic impact would be less than significant based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.1 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
AIR QUALITY (FEIR SECTION 3.2)
IMPACT:
SHORT- TERM CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS AND LONG- TERM OPERATIONAL
EMISSIONS
1.
Facts
As reflected in Table 3.2-5 of the Draft EIR above, the Project's estimated construction emissions
would be below the AQMD' s significance thresholds. Therefore, Project construction activity would
have a less than significant air quality impact. As shown on Table 3.2-7, project air quality
emissions once operational are similarly insignificant. The Project's projected stationary and mobile
source emissions would not exceed the AQMD's significance thresholds.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds the Project's cumulative aesthetic impact would be less than significant based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.1 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
1.
Facts
Page 14
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
As documented on pages 3.2-10 and 3.2-11, the Project will have a less than significant cumulative
air quality impacts. Giving the timing of each of the cumulative projects, Project construction
emissions would not be cumulatively significant.
From an operational standpoint, all three projects combined with the Project will increase vehicular
and stationary source emissions in.the region. However, as described above, Project operational
emissions, which include vehicle emissions, are well below the AQMD significance thresholds. The
Project operational emissions combined with the other projects are not considered cumulatively
significant and no mitigation is required.
2. Findings
The Agency finds the Project's cumulative air quality impact would be less than significant based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.2 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
CULTURAL RESOURCES (FEIR SECTION 3.3)
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
While the Project will have a significant and unavoidable direct impact on two historical resources
within the Old Town commercial area, none of the other current projects in Old Town Tustin will
have an adverse impact on historical resources. In addition, while there may be other projects within
the Old Town commercial area at some point in the future, no other projects are currently planned or
proposed that would affect any historical resources in Old Town.
2,
Findings
The Agency finds the Project's cumulative cultural resources impact would be less than significant
based on the analysis contained in Section 3.3 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
HAZARDS (SECTION 3.4 OF FEIR)
IMPACT:
LAND USES THAT ROUTINELY USE NON-HA7ARDOUS JANITORIAL
SUPPLIES AND CLEANING RELATED MATERIALS
1.
Facts
The project entails a combination of commercial, office, restaurant, and residential uses, which do
not involve the routine transport, storage, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Any hazardous
materials used by future occupants of the proposed uses would generally be limited to those
associated with janitorial, maintenance, and repair activities, such as commercial cleansers,
lubricants, paints, etc. The transport, storage, use, and disposal of these materials would be subject
to Federal, State, and local health and safety requirements.
Based on the anticipated nature and use of hazardous materials at the project, as described above,
Page 15
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
there are no reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions that would create a significant
hazard to the public due to the release of hazardous materials. In the unlikely event of such an
occulTence, State law requires prompt reporting to local and State agencies to ensure the public
health and safety would not be jeopardized. No significant impacts related to release of hazardous
materials from upset and accident conditions are anticipated to occur.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds the Project would have a less than significant impact relating to the possible
release or upset of hazardous materials on site based on the analysis contained in Section 3.4 of the
Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
IMPACT:
USE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DURING CONSTRUCTION
1.
Facts
Project grading and construction would be short-term in nature and would be subject to Federal,
State, and local health and safety requirements relating to storage, use, and disposal of hazardous
materials. No significant impacts related to this issue area are expected to occur during project
construction.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds the Project's short term use of limited quantities of construction equipment related
fluids would be a less than significant hazards impact based on the analysis contained in Section 3.4
of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
The Project requires the limited transportation of demolition materials that contain asbestos and lead-
based paint during construction activity. All transportation and storage of these materials will be
handled in accordance with Federal, State, and local regulations. Therefore, Project impacts are
considered less than significant. Aside from this limited and common remediation activity, the
Project does not involve the storage, use, or transport of any other hazardous materials or other
substances, nor does any environmental condition exist on the Project site that would be exacerbated
by Project construction or operation. Therefore, even assuming that there is culTently a cumulative
hazards and hazardous materials impact, the Project does not create any impact that would be
cumulatively considerab]e. Because the Project does not result in any hazards and hazardous
materials impacts, the Project would not create any potential cumulative impact on the environment.
2.
Finding
Page 16
Prospect Village PEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Agency finds the Project would have a less than significant cumulative hazards impact based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.4 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 17
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
LAND USE (SECTION 3.5)
IMPACT:
THE PROJECT REQUIRES A REZONE FROM "C-2" OR "CENTRAL
COMMERCIAL" TO "PLANNED COMMUNITY" TO ACCOMMODATE THE
RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE PROPOSED LIVE/WORK UNITS.
1.
Facts
The approximately one-acre Project site is currently designated "Old Town Commercial" in the
City's General Plan and zoned "C-2" or "Central Commercial District." The "C-2" designation
allows primarily commercial uses, including retail uses, and professional and general office uses
provided certain requirements are satisfied. Residential uses are not currently permitted or
conditionally permitted within this zone. Implementation of the Project requires a rezone to
accommodate the twelve (12) proposed live/work units behind the proposed commercial retail/office
building. The Project site would be rezoned from its underlying "C-2" zoning and overlay zones to
Planned Community ("P-C").
In conjunction with the proposed rezone, "Prospect VilJage Planned Community District
Regulations" is hereby adopted. The proposed "Prospect Village Planned Community District
Regulations" divide the Project site into two planning areas. Planning Area A is identified as
"commercial" and includes an approximately 9,300 square foot area of commercial and office related
uses. Planning Area B is approximately 32,900 square feet and is identified as "Live/Work." Six of
the twelve live/work units are planned to accommodate 913 square feet of retail space for a total of
5,478 square feet ofretail. The remaining six units are planned to include 431 squarefeet of either
commercial or retail uses for a total of 2,586 square feet. Therefore, while the property will be
rezoned "Planned Community" the Project would retain approximately 17,000 square feet of
commercial retail and office space. Moreover, the permitted and conditionally permitted uses in
these spaces are either identical to or similar to the uses allowed under the Project site's existing "C-
2" zoning.
The Project also includes a considerable amount of commercial retail and office uses that are
identical or similar to the uses contemplated under the existing C-2 zoning designation. The mixed
use nature of the Project would be consistent with the General Plan's vision for the Old Town
Commercial area. The City of Tustin General Plan specifically contemplates an increase in
residential uses in the Old Town area, thus acknowledging the compatibility of such uses with other
existing uses in Old Town. Policy 10.2 of the Land Use Element provides "review and consider the
possible development of residential uses in the Old Town area both as individual residential projects
and integrated aboveground floor retail and office uses." This is precisely the type of residential
product contemplated here. In addition, the General Plan's discussion of the "Old Town
Commercial" area specifically states that "uses (such as residential uses) which support this land use
may be pennitted subject to the discretion of the City." Therefore, even though the Project would
require a rezone, the Draft ERI concludes that this would not be a significant land use impact.
Prospect Vitlage FEIR
Page 18
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2.
Finding
The Agency finds the Project's impact on land use due to the need for a rezone would be less than
significant based on the analysis contained in Section 3.5 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole
record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
The only potentially significant land use impact of the Project is its inconsistency with the
preservation policies of the City' sGeneral Plan. However, none of the cumulative projects listed in
FEIR (Page 2-15) required the demolition or alteration of any historical resources. Therefore, there
would be no cumulative loss of historical resources or cumulative project inconsistency with the
historical resource preservation policies of the City's General Plan.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds the Project would have a less than significant cumulative land use impact based
on the analysis contained in Section 3.5 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
NOISE (SECTION 3.6)
IMPACT:
SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS
1.
Facts
Land uses near the Project site include primarily commercial and institutional uses with some limited
residential north of the Project site along Prospect Avenue, at the northeast corner of Third Avenue
and Prospect A venue, and east of the Project site along Third A venue. During construction, it is
anticipated that land uses in the vicinity of the construction area would be exposed to noise generated
by various pieces of construction and demolition equipment operating within the project site. As
discussed in Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR, temporary noise levels adjacent to the construction area
could be 72 to 93 dBA depending on the distance the receptor is from the source of noise. However,
construction noise impacts during the loudest construction phases, including demolition, grading,
and utilities installation would be temporary, lasting only approximately two to three months. Due to
the temporary nature of the loudest phases of construction activity and the Noise Ordinance
requirements which restrict construction activity to the least noise sensitive daylight hours, Project
construction noise impacts are considered less than significant impacts.
2
Findings
The Agency finds the Project would have a less than significant short tenD construction noise impact
based on the analysis contained in Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
Page 19
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
IMPACT: PERIODIC INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS DURING OUTDOOR PATIO
DINING AND OUTDOOR ENTERTAINING ON RESIDENTIAL DECKS.
1.
Facts
The Project includes a 593 square foot outdoor dining area that will be located along East Main
Street. During the hours of restaurant operation people eating outdoors could periodically increase
ambient noise levels. However, any increase in noise Jevels would largely impact the other non-
noise sensitive uses, such as the commercial and office uses that currently exist on either side of East
Main Street. As discussed above, noise sensitive residential land uses are located north and northeast
of the Project site. However, these residential uses would be unaffected by the outdoor dining area
which faces E. Main Street. The live/work units located behind the new commercial retail office
building would function as a noise buffer between the restaurant and the residential uses located
north and north east of the Project site. Therefore, any potential increase in ambient noise levels
from the restaurant would be less than significant.
In addition to the outdoor dining area, each of the twelve (12) proposed live/works unit would have a
small approximately 80 square foot outdoor deck overlooking either Prospect Avenue or new
Prospect Lane (currently a public alley). While a certain level of noise may be generated by one or
more people standing on these decks, due to the small size of the balcony, the amount of people on
the deck at any gi ven time would be limited and any corresponding noise level would be less than
significant.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds that noise generated by the proposed outdoor dining area of the restaurant and the
residential balconies would be less than significant based on the analysis contained in Section 3.6 of
the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
IMPACT: THE PROJECT WOUW GENERATEADDITIONAL TRAFFIC TRIPS THAT
WOUW INCREASE AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS.
1.
Facts
Currently, Prospect Avenue (between Main & First St.) experiences a daily traffic volume of
approximately 4,100 trips per day, while E. Main Street between Newport and El Camino Real
experiences about 9,000 trips per day. The project would result in a six percent (6%) increase in
traffic trips along Prospect Avenue, which is negligible and would not substantially increase
pennanent ambient noise levels.
A noise level of 60 dB CNEL is considered an acceptable exterior residential noise level. Therefore,
while Project generated traffic would increase ambient noise levels in the area, these increases fall
within the acceptable range and are therefore considered less than significant.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 20
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2.
Findings
The Agency finds the Project would have a less than significant traffic noise impact based on the
analysis contained in Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
According to Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR, the proposed project in conjunction with other past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would have a less than significant short-term
cumulative construction and operational noise impact. Each of the three (3) projects identified in
section 2.5 of the EIR are far enough from the project site that cumulative construction noise
levels would not be significant. In addition, construction activity at each of the Project sites
would be staggered. Similarly, the project would have a less than significant cumulative
operational noise impact.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds the Project would have a less than significant cumulative noise impact based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR and in light of the whole record.
TRAFFIC (SECTION 3.7)
IMPACT:
ONCE OPERATIONAL, THE PROJECT WOUW GENERATE 600 TRAFFIC TRIPS
THAT WOULD BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE SURROUNDING ROADWAYS AND
INTERSECTIONS.
1.
Facts
According to the Draft EIR, which is based on the Prospect Village Traffic Impact Analysis, dated
December 12, 2003 and prepared by Sasaki Transportation Services, the project would generate
approximately 600 traffic trips per day at build-out, including 23 inbound and 15 outbound trips
during the A.M. peak hour and 24 inbound and 26 outbound in the P.M. peak. The Traffic study
prepared for the project analyzed whether Project generated traffic would have a significant impact
on the roadways and intersections within the study area. As demonstrated on Pages 3.7-8 and 3.7-9
of Draft EIR and in the Traffic Study, the Project would not have a significant impact on roadway or
intersection operation. With the addition of Project traffic, each roadway in the study area would
operate at an acceptable LOS D or better.
2.
Finding
The Agency finds the Project would have a less than significant operational traffic impact based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.7 of the Draft EIR, the Traffic Study and in light of the whole
record.
Page 21
Prospect Village FElR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
-CUMULATIVE IMPACTS:
1.
Facts
The Traffic Study analyzed potential traffic impacts with and without the Project. The Traffic Study
first detennined future traffic conditions without the Project, which was based on cumulative traffic
forecasts that were perfonned in conjunction with the environmental studies for the MCAS Tustin
Disposal and Reuse Plan. The Traffic Study also added a one percent growth factor through the year
2020. Project traffic was then added to the "without" project conditions and impacts were assessed
accordingly. The Traffic Study concluded that Project traffic when combined with future traffic
forecasts for the area would not result in any significant impacts on intersections and roadways
within the study area.
The Project would also not create any significant cumulative parking impact in conjunction with the
other related projects identified in the FEIR (Page 2-15). With respect to each of these projects, the
City detennined that the City's off-street parking requirements had been satisfied.
2.
Finding
The Agecny finds the Project would have a less than significant cumulative traffic impact based on
the analysis contained in Section 3.7 of the Draft EIR, the Traffic Study, and in light of the whole
record.
VIII. FINDINGS OF FACT CONCERNING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Because the Project will cause unavoidable significant environmental effects, the Agency must
consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternative to the proposed project. As
discussed in the Draft EIR, the Project would have potentially significant impacts relating to
historical resources and land use.
The objectives for the proposed Prospect Village project are generally based on those in the City of
Tustin General Plan, Housing Element and Town Center Redevelopment Plan, as discussed in
Section 4.2 of the FEIR, and are as follows:
.
To develop the vacant and underutilized site within the next 2 to 3 years to capitalize on the
current favorable private development financing conditions for mixed-use projects;
To eliminate delay and uncertainties regarding future development of the site;
To stimulate private investment and demonstrate economic viability in the Old Town
commercial area.
To increase the amount of specialty retailing and commercial development in the core of the
Old Town commercial area in order to enhance its urban character and bolster the
commercial area's revitalization and long-tenn economic viability;
To expand the niche market character of the Old Town commercial area by providing a
balanced and complementary mix of new retail and commercial uses;
.
.
.
.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 22
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
.
To increase the number of residential units in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area,
while reflecting a high-quality urban character;
To develop ground floor specialty retailing configurations consistent with CUITent market
condition requirements;
To provide a minimum 3,000 square foot high-quality restaurant along with outdoor patio
dining to enliven the pedestrian environment along Main Street in the Old Town commercial
area;
To create a financially viable commercial mixed-used development with minimum public
subsidy;
To create construction jobs and pennanent jobs in the Town Center Redevelopment Project
Area;
To increase the property tax increment and sales tax revenues in the Project Area, which will
be eannarked for ongoing economic development activities in the Old Town commercial area
including business retention and outreach programs, façade improvement programs, and
community facility projects; and,
To achieve the Old Town commercial area redevelopment goals and objectives of the City's
General Plan and the Town Center Redevelopment Plan.
.
.
.
.
The project objectives are consistent with the Redevelopment Plan's goals, objectives, and proposed
activities to assist in eliminating conditions of physical and economic blight identified in the
Redevelopment Plan for the Town Center Area Redevelopment Project and further the City's goals
for the development of a viable Old Town Commercial district
A primary purpose of the Redevelopment Plan for the Town Center Area Redevelopment Project is
to eliminate and prevent the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area. To eliminate and
prevent the spread of blight and deterioration, the Redevelopment Plan identified activities proposed
by the Agency to include the following:
1. Providing for participation by owners and residents presently located in the Project Area;
2. Rehabilitation of structures and improvements by present owners, their successors, or the
Agency;
3. Redevelopment of land by private enterprise or public agencies for uses in accordance with
the plan;
4. Installation, construction, or reconstruction of streets, utilities, and other public
improvements;
5. Acquisition of certain real property for public improvements or to help expedite private
development;
6. Relocation assistance to displaceçl residential and non-residential occupants should the need
arise;
7. Demolition or removal of certain buildings and improvements;
8. Management of any property acquired under the ownership and control of the Agency; and
9. Disposition of any property acquired by the Agency for uses in accordance with the Plan.
The goal for the Old Town commercial area is to create a sustainable and competitive 24-hour
district that will serve a broad segment of the City's business and residential population.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 23
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Development of a compact eight-block commercial-retail core at the heart of the Old Town
commercial area would serve as the primary specialty retail area. The project's development
programming and design approach is consistent with the recommendations in the "Visions of Old
Town," a planning study that was prepared in 1991 and coordinated by the Regional/Urban Design
Assistance Team (RIUDA T) through the American Institute of Architects (AIA). As described in the
RlUDA T study, the commercial-retail core needs to be filled with new restaurants, retail stores, and
offices that will introduce a mix of commercial activities which will be competitive with the
surrounding strip commercial centers located along Newport A venue. It is important to long-term
economic viability of the Old Town commercial area to re-establish the area in the near future as the
"town center" for the City of Tustin by intensifying private commercial retail development and
providing a viable alternative to the traditional neighborhood strip centers and community shopping
centers found on nearby Newport A venue and other areas of the City.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED, BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION
CEQA provides that an EIR should identify any alternatives that the lead agency considered but
rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead
agency's determination.! Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed
consideration in an EIR are: (1) failure to meet most ofthe basic objectives, (2) infeasibility, or (3)
inability to avoid significant environmental effects? Consistent with this requirement, this section
identifies three (3) alternatives that the City of Tustin considered, but rejected as infeasible during
the scoping process, and provides a brief explanation of the reasons for their exclusion.
El Camino Real/6th Street Site Alternative
This alternative site is approximately 1.7-acres and is located in the Old Town Commercial area at El
Camino Real and 6th Street. The alternative site is a portion of a larger 4-acre subdivision. Over the
past five (5) years, the Agency has referred several private developers, who expressed an interest in
developing the site, to the property owners.3 However, in each case, the property owners failed to
engage the developers in any level of meaningful negotiations. Instead, the property owners sought
to develop the site in accordance with their own investment objectives. Because the Agency does not
own the alternative site and based on the historic recalcitrance of the property owners to sell the site,
the Agency has determined that it is not feasible to pursue redevelopment of this site. Moreover, this
alternative would not meet several of the most basic project objectives including the need to develop
a mixed use project within the next two to three years and to eliminate delay and uncertainty
regarding future development of the site. Pursuing and ultimately developing this site against the
wishes of the property owner would take far longer than the two (2) to three (3) year redevelopment
period and substantially increase the uncertainty of a redevelopment project. The timing of the
project is critical in light of the favorable financing and market conditions, which could worsen over
1 14Ca1. Code Regs §15126.6(c)
2 Ibid.
3 These developers included: Warmington Homes (developer of the 38 single family homes at Ambrose Lane located
across Sixth Street); the Olson Company (one of the nation's largest residential infill developers); CIM Group (a
highly experienced retaiVresidential mixed-use infill developer); and Pacific Gulf Development (a large-scale senior
citizen and multifamily rental housing developer).
Page 24
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
time. Based on past experiences with the property owner, pursuing this site and negotiating an
acceptable agreement would be difficult and time consuming.
W. First St. Site Alternative
This alternative site is approximately 1.2 acres and is located at 137 W. First Street. This alternative
site is located outside the Old Town Commercial area and outside the Town Center Redevelopment
Project Area. Due to its location outside the Old Town commercial area and the Town Center
Redevelopment Project Area, the site would not meet the most basic project objective, which is to
revitalize Old Town with a mixed use commercial/residential project. In addition, this alternative
site is a less attractive redevelopment option because the site has a limited amount ofretail window
frontage on First Street. Thus, the ability to find viable retail tenants would be jeopardized. Finally,
the Agency would have to acquire this site from the current property owner, which, like the above
alternative site, would take far longer than the two (2) to three (3) year development period identified
in the project objectives.
Relocating the Utt Juice Buildings
The Agency also considered relocating the existing structures to an undeveloped site in the Old
Town Commercial Area. This alternative was rejected as infeasible for several reasons. First,
transporting the masonry structures, which are constructed on concrete slab foundations, without
significantly damaging the structures, would be difficult. Second, assuming the structure were not
significantly damaged during transit, relocating the structures to another part of Old Town would not
necessarily substantially lessen or avoid the Project's significant impact on historic resources. The
Historic Resources Technical Report in Appendix C of the EIR noted the historical significance of
these structures at their existing location:
"The UTI Juice Buildings also derive significance because of their location at a
prominent corner of Old Town Tustin. In fact, the Buildings provide an
"introduction" to Old Town as the first of its historic buildings one encounters when
traveling west on Main Street. Their elimination... would significantly affect the
visitor's initial historic view of Old Town.,,4
Therefore, relocating the structure would not reduce the Project's significant and unavoidable impact
on historical resources.
RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES AND REASONING FOR SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES
The EISIEIR analyzed a reasonable range of alternatives by identifying alternatives that could
potentially attain the project objectives while avoiding or substantially lessening the significant
effects of the proposed project. As documented in the EIR, the Project would have a significant and
unavoidable direct impact on historical resources and would be inconsistent with General Plan
policies that promote rehabilitation and reuse of historical structures. Therefore, the City developed
4 Historic Resources Technical Report at p. II
Page 25
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
a range of Project alternatives that focus on varying levels of rehabilitation and reuse of the existing
structures in accordance with the Secretary's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with
Guidelinesfor Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, 1995,
Weeks and Grimmer ("Secretary's Standards and Guidelines"). The Secretary's Standards and
Guidelines provide, among other things, that construction of adjacent buildings or additions to the
existing structures should: (a) be limited in size and scale in relationship to the existing structure, (b)
be located at or on non-character-defining building elevations of the existing structures, and (c) avoid
rooftop additions which would not be set back from the wall plane of the existing structures.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Six (6) Project alternatives, including a "No Project" alternative and five (5) Project alternatives
were evaluated, as listed below.
1.
Full Reuse Alternative: This alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the existing historic
buildings, construct a new retail structure on E. Main SI., and construct ten (10) live/work
units;
2.
Partial Reuse Alternative: This alternative would rehabilitate and reuse the existing
structures, except for the rear portion ofthe 193, 195 Building, which would be demolished.
This alternative also includes a new retail building on E. Main SI., and ten (10) live/work
units;
3.
Partial Reuse (193, 195 Building Only) Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation
and reuse of a portion of the 193, 195 Building, demolition of the 191 building and
construction of a new retail building on E. Main Street and twelve (12) live/work units.
4.
Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse of
the existing historic buildings and development of the remaining portions of the site in
accordance with the existing C-2 zoning designation.
5.
Facade Reuse Alternative: This alternative entails rehabilitation and reuse of only the façade
of the 193, 195 Building, construction of a new two story retail/office building on E. Main
Street and twelve (12) live/work units.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 26
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FINDINGS
The Agency finds that the "No Project" Alternative is infeasible within the meaning of PRC §
21O81(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or other considerations as
follows:
1.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of providing for near tenn
implementation of development on the Project site since no activity would take place and the
existing buildings are unsafe to occupy and likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future.
2.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of intensifying and expanding
commercial development and specialty retailing in the Old Town commercial area since no
activity would take place and the existing buildings on the site are unsafe to occupy and
likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future.
3.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of creating a balanced and
complementary mix of retail and commercial uses since no activity would take place and the
existing buildings on the site are unsafe to occupy and likely to remain vacant for the
foreseeable future.
4.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of adding additional residential
units since no activity would take place and the existing buildings are unsafe to occupy and
likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future. In addition, the existing zoning does not
pennit residential uses nor would the existing buildings accommodate residential uses.
5.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of providing ground floor
specialty retailing depths of 45 feet consistent with current market conditions and
recommendations since no activity would take place and the existing buildings are unsafe to
occupy and likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future.
6.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of providing a minimum 3,000
square foot restaurant use since no activity would take place and the existing buildings are
unsafe to occupy and likely to remain vacant for the foreseeable future.
7.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of creating a financially viable
mixed use development with a minimum public subsidy since no development would occur.
8.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of creating increased property tax
increment in the Project Area to assist in funding economic development acti vities in the Old
Town commercial area since no development would occur.
9.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of creating employment
associated with construction and new commercial activities since no development would
occur.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 27
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
10.
The No Project Alternative would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment
in the Old Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since no
development, or investment, would occur. In addition, the lack of new development in Old
Town would contribute to general uncertainties in the Old Town commercial area caused by
a delay in development of the site.
The Agency finds that "Alternative 1 (Full Reuse Alternative)" is infeasible within the meaning of
PRC § 21O81(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or other
considerations as follows:
I.
Alternative 1 would fail to meet the objective of providing for near tenn implementation of
development on the project site since no developers have indicated full rehabilitation is
feasible or practical. As documented in Draft EIR (p. 2-6) and extensively in the Response to
Comments (Response 8.7-8), the City has negotiated with five different developers and all
the developers have been unable to determine the feasibility of preserving and reusing the
structures. Given the City's inability to find a developer willing to reuse these structures for
a redevelopment project, adopting this alternative would cause delay and uncertainty in the
development of the site. The City would need to find a developer that is willing to
rehabilitate the existing buildings and able to secure the necessary private investment
funding.
2.
Alternative 1 would diminish the objective of intensifying and expanding commercial
development and specialty retailing in the Old Town commercial area. In comparison the
proposed project, which would add 16,653 square feet of retail and office space, this
alternative would result in only 14,780 square feet, which is an 11.2 percent reduction in the
amount of retail and office space planned for the site.
3.
Alternative 1 would diminish the objective of creating a balanced and complementary rrrix of
retail and commercial uses. In comparison to the project, which would add 9,251 square feet
(55%) of retail and 7,402 squarefeet of office (45%), Alternative 1 would add 12,625 square
feet (85%) of retail and 2,155 (15%) square feet of office, which does not balance the
provision of retail and office uses as well as the project.
4.
Alternative 1 would dirrrinish the objective of adding additional residential units since only
ten (10) units would be provided in comparison to the project, which would provide twelve
(12) units.
5.
Alternative 1 would fail to meet the objective of providing ground floor specialty retailing
depths of 45 consistent with CUITent market conditions and recommendations since full
rehabilitation would result in oddly configured building depths of sixty (60) to ninety (90)
feet and a restaurant space that is inconsistent with CUITent market conditions and
recommendations.
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 28
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
6.
Alternative 1 would diminish the objective of providing a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant with outdoor patio dining since no outdoor dining area would be provided with full
rehabilitation of the existing buildings.
7.
Alternative 1 would fail to meet the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy. According to the independent economic
feasibility study conducted by the firm Keyser Marston Associates Inc., October 28, 2003,
this alternative would reflect a negative supportable land value of -$390,000, requiring a
minimum subsidy of $1,245,000 (based on the difference between the Agency's cost of
acquisition, which was $855,000, and the supportable land value) as opposed to no public
subsidy to support the proposed project5 In other words, the construction costs to
rehabilitate the structures in a manner suitable for reuse would exceed the value of the
project As documented in the KCM Group report, the increase in construction costs is
predominantly driven by the rehabilitation and reuse costs, which far exceed the cost of new
construction. For example, under the full reuse scenario, the probable cost of rehabilitation
of the buildings to a shell condition is approximately 196.44 per square feet6 On the other
hand, the probable cost of constructing new structures to a shell condition is about $116 per
square feet less or approximately $80 per square feet?
In addition, the KMA Report concludes that the preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space.8 The existing buildings are broken into smaller spaces that are less useful
than newly developer retail and restaurant spaces. Thus from a marketability standpoint,
space in the preserved building is not as attractive and has a negative impact on the overall
value of the project for a prospecti ve developer. According to the KMA Report, preserved
retail space is projected to rent for $13 per square foot, as opposed to $15 per square foot for
new space, while preserved restaurant space is projected to rent for $15 per square foot
versus $21 per square foot for new restaurant space.9
8.
Alternative 1 would diminish the objective of creating increased property tax increment in
the Project Area to assist in funding economic revitalization and development activities in
the Old Town commercial area since the proposed project is anticipated to generate $85,000
annually whereas Alternative 1 is anticipated to generate $70,500 annually, which is 17.4
percent less in revenues than the proposed projectlO
9.
Alternative 1 would diminish the objective of creating employment associated with new
commercial activities since it would generate thirty-three (33) percent less permanent jobs
than the proposed project
5 Evaluation of CEQA Altematives- Proposed Prospect Village Project, Lames Rabe and Kevin Engstrom, Keyser
Marston Associates Inc. October 28, 2003, p. 3-4 ("KMA Report")
6 Utt Juice Building Rehabilitation Estimates, Gordon Kovturn, KCM Group, October 10, 2003; KMA Report,
Alternative 2Scenario,Table lA
7 KMA Report, Prospect Village Project Scenario, Table lA
8 KMA Report, p. 4
9 KMA Report, p. 3-4
10 KMA Report at p. 7
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 29
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
10.
Alternative 1 would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of $1,245,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within the Old Town
commercial area.
The Agency finds that" Alternati ve 2 (Partial Reuse Alternative)" is infeasible within the meaning of
PRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or other
considerations as follows:
1.
Alternative 2 would fail to meet the objecti ve of providing for near term implementation of
development on the project site since no developers have indicated rehabilitation and
reconfiguration of the existing buildings is feasible or practical. While this alternative entails
only partial, instead of full reuse, based on the City's prior experiences with developer, there
is considerable uncertainty as to whether the City could successfully find a developer willing
to implement this or any type of reuse alternative. As documented in the City's economic
feasibility studies, rehabilitating and reusing any portion of the existing structures
significantly increases construction costs and increase the amount of the public subsidy. I I
Adopting this alternative would cause delay and uncertainty in the development of the site
since a developer would need to be identified that is willing to rehabilitate the existing
buildings and able to secure the necessary private investment funding.
2.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of intensifying and expanding commercial
development and specialty retailing in the Old Town commercial area. In comparison the
proposed project, which would add 16,653 square feet of retail and office space, this
alternative would result in only 15,160 square feet, which is a 9 percent reduction in the
amount of retail and office space planned for the site.
3.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objecti ve of creating a balanced and complementary mix of
retail and commercial uses. In comparison to the project, which would add 9,251 square feet
(55%) of retail and 7,402 square feet of office (45%), Alternative 2 would add 11,405 square
feet (75%) of retail and 3,755 (25%) square feet of office, which does not balance the
provision of retail and office uses as well as the Project.
4.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of adding additional residential units since only
ten (10) units would be provided in comparison to the Project, which would provide twelve
(12) units.
5.
Alternative 2 would fail to meet the objective of providing ground floor specialty retailing
depths of 45 consistent with current market conditions and recommendations since full
rehabilitation would result in an oddly configured building depth of sixty (60) feet and a
restaurant space that is inconsistent with current market conditions and recommendations.
11 KCM Report; KMA Reporl
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 30
6.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
7.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of providing a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant with outdoor patio dining use since no outdoor dining area would be provided with
full rehabilitation of the existing buildings.
Alternative 2 would fail to meet the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy since rehabilitation under this alternative would
reflect a negative supportable land value of -$437,000, requiring a minimum subsidy of
$1,292,000 (based on the difference between the Agency's cost of acquisition, which was
$855,000, and the supportable land value) as opposed to no public subsidy to support the
proposed project.12 The negative supportable land value is based on the increased
construction costs for the rehabilitation effort combined with the loss oftwo residential units.
In addition, the KMA Report concludes that the preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space. 13 The existing buildings are broken into smaller spaces that are less useful
than newly deveJoper retaiJ and restaurant spaces. Thus from a marketability standpoint,
space in the preserved building is not as attractive and has a negative impact on the overall
value of the project for a prospective developer. According to the KMA Report, preserved
retail space is projected to rent for $13 per square foot, as opposed to $15 per square foot for
new space, while preserved restaurant space is projected to rent for $15 per square foot
versus $21 per square foot for new restaurant space.14
8.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of creating increased property tax increment in
the Project Area to assist in funding economic revitalization and development activities in
the Old Town commercial area since the proposed project is anticipated to generate $85,000
annually whereas Alternative 2 is anticipated to generate $71,100 annually, which is 16.6
percent less in revenues than the proposed project.15 .
9.
Alternative 2 would diminish the objective of creating employment associated with new
commercial activities since this alternative wouJd generate twenty-three (23) percent less
permanent jobs less than the proposed project.
10.
Alternative 2 would faiJ to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of $1 ,292,000 over the proposed project, and thus, wouJd contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within in the OJd Town
commercial area.
11.
While Alternative 2 would increase the level of rehabilitation and reuse, it would still cause
a significant and unavoidable impact on the historic Utt Juice BuiJding. According to the
City's Historic Resources Report, the impact on these structures wouJd only be reduced to a
less than significant leveJ if the project retained all historic resources on site with reuse
12 KMA Report. p. 5
13 KMA Report. p. 4
14 KMA Report. p. 3-4
15 rd. at p. 7
ProspecI Village FEtR
Page 31
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
dictated by what alterations and additions are possible under the Secretary of Interior
Standards.16 Because this alternative entails demolition of the rear portion one of the
structures, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
The Agency finds that "Alternative 3." is infeasible within the meaning ofPRC § 21081 (a) (3), due to
economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or other considerations as follows:
1.
Like Alternatives 1 and 2, Alternative 3 would fail to meet the objective of providing fornear
tenn implementation of development on the project site since no developers have indicated
rehabilitation and reconfiguration of the existing buildings is feasible or practical. While this
alternative entails only partial, instead of full reuse, based on the City's prior experiences
with developer, there is considerable uncertainty as to whether the City could successfully
find a developer willing to implement this or any type of reuse alternative. As documented
in the City's economic feasibility studies, rehabilitating and reusing any portion of the
existing structures significantly increases construction costs and increase the amount of the
public subsidy.17 Adopting this alternative would cause delay and uncertainty in the
development of the site since a developer would need to be identified that is willing to
rehabilitate the existing buildings and able to secure the necessary private investment
funding.
2.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of intensifying and expanding commercial
development and specialty retailing in the Old Town commercial area. In comparison the
proposed project, which would add 16,653 square feet of retail and office space, this
alternative would result in only 15,044 square feet, which is a 9.7 percent reduction in the
amount of retail and office space planned for the site.
3.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of creating a balanced and complementary mix of
retail and commercial uses. In comparison to the project, which would add 9,251 square feet
(55%) of retail and 7,402 squarefeet of office (45%), Alternative 3 would add 9,746 square
feet (65%) of retail and 5,298 (35%) square feet of office, which does not balance the
provision of retail and office uses as well as the project.
4.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of providing a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant with outdoor patio dining use since no outdoor dining area would be provided with
full rehabilitation of the existing buildings.
5.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy since rehabilitation under this alternative would
reflect a supportable land value of $112,000, requiring a minimum subsidy of $738,000
(based on the difference between the Agency's cost of acquisition, which was $855,000, and
the supportable land value) as opposed to no public subsidy to support the proposed project.18
16 Historic Resources Technical Report, Utt Juice Redevelopment Project, Tim Gergory, July 14, 2003, p. 13
17 KCM Report; KMA Report
18 KMA Report, p. 6
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 32
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
In addition, the KMA Report concludes that the preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space. 19 The existing buildings are broken into smaller spaces that are less useful
than newly developer retail and restaurant spaces. Thus from a marketability standpoint,
space in the preserved building is not as attractive and has a negative impact on the overall
value of the project for a prospective developer. According to the KMA Report, preserved
retail space is projected to rent for $13 per square foot, as opposed to $15 per square foot for
new space, while preserved restaurant space is projected to rent for $15 per square foot
versus $21 per square foot for new restaurant space20
6.
Alternative 3 would diminish the objective of creating employment associated with new
commercial activities since this alternative would generate seventeen (17) percent less
permanent jobs less than the proposed project.
7.
Alternative 3 would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of $738,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within in the Old Town
commercial area.
8.
While Alternative 3 would increase the level of rehabilitation and reuse, it would still cause a
significant and unavoidable impact on the historic Utt Juice Building. According to the
City's Historic Resources Report, the impact on these structures would only be reduced to a
less than significant level if the project retained all historic resources on site with reuse
dictated by what alterations and additions are possible under the Secretary of Interior
Standards.2J Because this alternative entails demolition of the rear portion one of the
structures, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
The Agency finds that "Alternative 4 (Full Reuse (Existing Zoning) Alternative)" is infeasible within
the meaning ofPRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or
other considerations as follows:
1.
Like the other alternatives, Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of providing for
near term implementation of development on the project site since no developers have
indicated full rehabilitation is feasible or practical. As documented in Draft EIR (p. 2-6) and
extensively in the Response to Comments (Response 8.7-8), the City has negotiated with five
different developers and all the developers have been unable to determine the feasibility of
preserving and reusing the structures. Given the City's inability to find a developer willing
to reuse these structures for a redevelopment project, adopting this alternative would cause
delay and uncertainty in the development of the site since a developer would need to be
identified that is willing to rehabilitate the existing buildings and able to secure the necessary
private investment funding.
19 KMA Report, p. 4
20 KMA Report, p. 3-4
21 Historic Resources Technical Report, UtI Juice Redevelopment Project, Tim Gergory, July 14,2003, p. 13
Prospect Village FEtR
Page 33
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2.
Alternative 4 would diminish the objective of creating a balanced and complementary mix of
retail and commercial uses. In comparison to the Project, which would add 9,251 square feet
(55%) of retail and 7,402 square feet of office (45%), Alternative 5 would provide 19,120
square feet (68%) of retail and 9,000 (32%) square feet of office, which does not balance the
provision of retail and office uses as well as the Project.
3.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of adding additional residential units since no
residential units would be provided in comparison to the Project, which would provide
twelve (12) units.
4.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of providing ground floor specialty retailing
depths of 45 consistent with CUITent market conditions and recommendations since full
rehabilitation would result in oddly configured building depths of sixty (60) to ninety (90)
feet and a restaurant space that is inconsistent with CUITent market conditions and
recommendations.
5.
Alternative 4 would diminish the objective of providing a minimum 3,000 square foot
restaurant with outdoor patio dining use since no outdoor dining area on Main Street would
be provided with full rehabilitation of the existing buildings.
6.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy since full rehabilitation would reflect a
negative supportable land value of -$1,813,3000, requiring a minimum subsidy of
$2,668,000 (based on the difference between the Agency's cost of acquisition, which was
$855,000, and the supportable lane value).22
In addition, the KMA Report concludes that the preserved space is not as efficient as newly
developed space.23 The existing buildings are broken into smaller spaces that are less useful
than newly developer retail and restaurant spaces. Thus from a marketability standpoint,
space in the preserved building is not as attractive and has a negative impact on the overall
value of the project for a prospective developer. According to the KMA Report, preserved
retail space is projected to rent for $13 per square foot, as opposed to $15 per square foot for
new space, while preserved restaurant space is projected to rent for $15 per square foot
versus $21 per square foot for new restaurant space."
7.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objecti ve of creating increased property tax increment in
the Project Area to assist in funding economic revitalization and development activities in
the Old Town commercial area since the proposed project is anticipated to generate $85,300
annually whereas Alternative 4 is anticipated to generate $37,200 annually, which is 56.4
percent less in revenues than the proposed project25
22 KMA Repört, p. 6-7
23 KMA Report, p. 4
" KMA Report, p. 3-4
25 KMA Report, p. 7
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 34
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
8.
Alternative 4 would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of $2,668,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within in the Old Town
commercial area.
The Agency finds that "Alternative 5 (Facade Reuse Alternative)" is infeasible within the meaning of
PRC § 21081(a) (3), due to economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, or other
considerations as follows:
1.
Alternative 5 would fail to meet the objective of providing for near term implementation of
development on the project site since no developers have indicated facade preservation is
feasible or practical. Adopting this alternative would cause delay and uncertainty in the
development of the site since a developer would need to be identified that is willing to
preserve the façade of existing buildings and able to secure the necessary private investment
funding. In addition, special design and construction techniques would be necessary to reuse
the existing façade within a new development. Adding a second floor above the existing
façade would be problematic in terms of achieving architectural compatibility and
functionality of second floor areas.
2.
Although Alternative 5 would provide twelve residential units similar to the proposed
Project, these units would need to be designed to complement the existing façade and
architecture, which may add to the construction cost. Adopting this alternative would cause
delay and uncertainty in the development of the site since a developer would need to be
identified that is willing to design and build residential units that are compatible with the
façade of existing buildings.
3.
Although Alternative 5 could provide for a 3,000 square foot outdoor dining area
opportunity, it would need to be integrated within the existing façade, which may result in a
less than desirable outdoor dining area in comparison with the Project.
4.
Alternative 5 would diminish the objective of creating a financially viable mixed use
development with a minimum public subsidy since façade preservation would reflect a
supportable land value of $198,000, requiring a minimum subsidy of $657,000, compared to
no public subsidy to support the proposed project.
5.
Alternative 5 would fail to meet the objective of stimulating private investment in the Old
Town commercial area with the least amount of public funding since it would reflect a
necessary public subsidy of $657,000 over the proposed project, and thus, would contribute
to general uncertainties regarding the feasibility of development within in the Old Town
commercial area.
IX.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 35
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a deCision-maker to balance the benefits
of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in detennining whether to approve
the project. If the Planning Commission, Tustin City Council, or Tustin Community Redevelopment
Agency allows the occulTence of significant effects through approval of a project, it must state its
specific reasons for so doing in writing. Such reasons are included in the "statement of oveniding
considerations."
Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines establishes the following requirements for a statement of
oveniding considerations:
(a.)
(b)
(c)
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal,
social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the
unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be
considered "acceptable."
When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occulTence of significant
effects, which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the
agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR
and/or other information in the record. The statement of oveniding considerations shall be
supported by substantial evidence in the record.
If an agency makes a statement of oveniding considerations, the statement should be
included in the record of the Project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of
detennination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings
required pursuant to Section 15091.
The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin adopts and makes the
following statement of oveniding considerations regarding the remaining unavoidable impacts
identified within the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEISÆIR) for the Prospect Village Project.
In adopting Resolution No. 3910, the Agency acknowledges that it has weighed the benefits of the
identified the Project against the adverse significant impacts that have not been avoided or
substantially lessened to less than significant levels through mitigation.
The Agency hereby determines that the benefits of the project outweigh the unmitigated adverse
impacts and the Project should be approved. The Agency finds that to the extent that the identified
significant adverse impacts have not been avoided or substantially lessened, there are specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations which support approval of the project.
Page 36
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNIFICANT UNA VOIDABLE IMPACTS
Unavoidable or potentially unavoidable significant environmental effects of the project identified in
the Final EIRIEIS and Findings of Significant Impacts include the following:
.
The project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of historical resources
as defined in Section 150064.5.
The project would be inconsistent with General Plan policies that promote preservation and
rehabilitation of historic resources.
.
ADOPTION OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Agency specifically adopts this Statement of Oveniding Considerations and finds that: a) as part
of the approval provi sions, the Project has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects
on the environment where feasible; b) mitigation measures to mitigate the effects associated with the
Project are within the jurisdiction of the Agency, and, c) the remaining unavoidable impacts of the
Project are acceptable in light of the environmental, economic, legal, social, technological, and other
considerations set forth herein, because the benefits of the Project outweigh the significant and
adverse impacts.
The Agency finds that each of the oveniding considerations set forth below constitutes a separate
and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the Project: 1) outweigh its significant
adverse environmental impacts, and 2) is an oveniding consideration warranting approval of the
Project. These matters are supported by substantial evidence in the record.
FINDINGS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the Prospect Village project ("the Project")
identified two closely related significant adverse unavoidable Project impacts associated with land
use and cultural resources. The Project will cause: 1) a significant unavoidable adverse land use
impact due to a conflict with a limited number of General Plan policies relating to the preservation of
historical resources as a result of the proposed demolition of the Utt Juice Buildings, and 2) a
significant unavoidable adverse cultural resources impact due to the permanent loss of the
historically significant Utt Juice Buildings.
The Project, however, will create substantial benefits for the City of Tustin, the Town Center
Redevelopment Project Area, and specifically the Old Town commercial area. The Agency has
balanced the Project's benefits against the Project's significant unavoidable land use and cultural
resources impacts. The Agency finds that the Project's benefits outweigh the Project's significant
unavoidable impacts, and the impacts are therefore considered acceptable in light of the Project's
benefits. The Agency finds that each of the following benefits is an oveniding consideration,
independent of the other benefits, that warrant approval of the Project as designed, notwithstanding
the Project's significant and unavoidable land use and cultural resources impacts:
1.
The Project will eliminate delays and uncertainties regarding redevelopment oltke site
Page37
Prospect Village FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Since 1998 when the Agency acquired the property, the Agency has actively marketed the
Project site. However, as documented in the Response to Comments portion of the Final
EIR, up until now, the Agency has been unsuccessful in its efforts to find a developer willing
to redevelop the Project site. (See Final EIR, Section 2.0 Response to Comments, Response
8.7-8) One developer initially expressed interest but failed to complete the proposal process.
After approximately 16 months of negotiations with another entity consisting of a partnership
between two developers, the Agency was unable to reach a mutually acceptable agreement on
the amount of the substantial public subsidy to make the project viable and a commitment to
implementation. The Agency encountered similar issues with three other developers. This
Project finally removes the uncertainties sUlTOunding build-out of this site and makes
redevelopment of the site a reality.
2.
The Project will stimulate private investment and demonstrate economic viability of the Old
Town commercial area
The Project site has not been in active and consistent pennanent commercial use since 1973.
The project site was included in the Town Center Redevelopment Project Area because of
economic deterioration and physical blight. The Project with its exceptional design and its
mix of office, commercial, restaurant, and residential uses represents further progress in the
revitalization of the Old Town area. The Project will demonstrate to developers and other
private investors that Old Town can be a viable location for future commercial, retail, and
residential uses. The Project will increase the residential presence in Old Town and replace
the cuITently vacant Utt Juice buildings with a large street level restaurant and retail use
thereby enlivening this area of Old Town.
The Project would be consistent with the recommendations in the "Visions of Old Town," a
broad community-based planning study that was prepared in 1991 and coordinated by the
Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team (RIUDAT) through the American Institute of
Architects (AlA). As described in the R/UDA T study, the commercial-retail core needs to be
filled with new restaurants, retail stores, and offices that will introduce a mix of commercial
activities which will be competitive with the suITounding strip commercial centers located
along Newport Avenue. It is important to long-tenn economic viability of the Old Town
commercial area to re-establish the area in the near future as the "town center" for the City of
Tustin by intensifying private commercial retail development and providing a viable
alternative to the traditional neighborhood strip centers and community shopping centers
found on nearby Newport A venue and other areas ofthe City.
This Project with its retail, restaurant, and office component will also achieve the City's
General Plan land use goals, which promote economic expansion and diversification. These
goals include: to "Broaden the City's tax base by attracting businesses which will contribute
to the City's economic growth and employment opportunities..." (General Plan, Land Use
Element, Policy 7.1); and to "Focus retail development into consolidated, economically
viable and attractive centers of adequate size and scale which offer a variety of retail goods
and amenities. (General Plan, Land Use Element, Policy 7.5).
Page 38
PmspectVillage FEIR
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
3.
The Project will add to the City's supply of residential units and improve the jobs to housing
ratio in Old Town
Implementation of the Project would increase the inventory of residential uses in the Old
Town area. Specifically, the Project would create twelve (12) new residential units and is
consistent with General Plan goals to develop character of the Old TownlFirst Street area
including "possible development of residential uses in the Old Town area both as individual
residential projects and integrated above ground floor retail and office uses." (General Plan,
Land Use Element, Policy 10.2). These new units will also be occupied by the owners and
proprietors of the retail and office uses that will be below each unit. Thus, the Project will
allow residents to live above their businesses and offices thereby eliminating commuting and
associated traffic congestion and air quality impacts.
4.
The Project would implement the General Plan's overall vision for development of the site
The Project's mix of residential, office, retail, and restaurant (with outdoor dining area) uses
achieves the General Plan's vision for future build-out of the Old TownlFirst Street area.
The Project's restaurant and outdoor dining patio is consistent with the General Plan policy
which encourages outdoor pedestrian spaces, such as courtyards, arcades, and open landscape
passages to be integrated into new development. (General Plan, Land Use Element, Policy
10.3). The Project's approximately 6,200 square feet of ground floorretail, 3,500 square foot
restaurant (includes the outdoor dining area) and another 2,500 square feet of ground floor
retail/office spaces accessible from public sidewalks would be consistent with the General
Plan policy, which encourages high-quality pedestrian oriented building frontages which
open onto these pedestrian spaces and public sidewalks. (General Plan, Land Use Element,
Policy 10.6). Moreover, as noted above, the General Plan specifically envisions the Project's
live/work or residential component for Old Town.
5.
The Project would implement the Town Center Redevelopment Plan's vision for the site
The Project implements the goals and objectives of the Town Center Redevelopment Plan
Area ("Area"). The Redevelopment Plan goals and objectives for the Area include the
creation of a mixed use town center thatcombines commercial, office, residential, and public
uses. The Redevelopment Plan also encourages residential development by actively seeking
private development in the redevelopment area. The Project's mix of retail, office, restaurant
and residential is consistent with these goals and objectives.
6.
The Project will generate property and sales tax revenues for the Agency and City
The Project will create a new source of property and sales tax revenue for the City and the
Agency. The City will receive sales tax revenue for the retail sales that occur on-site, and the
Agency will receive tax increment revenues from the property taxes paid.26 According to
26 KMA Report, p.26 "Evaluation of CEQA Alternatives - Prospect Village," James Rabe & Kevin Engstrom,
Keyser Marston Associates. Inc., October 28,2003, p. 7
Prospect Village FEIR
Page 39
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
the feasibility study, property tax revenues for the Project would total approximately $85,300
and sales tax would total $10,500.27
7.
The Project will assist in the elimination of blight in the Town Center Redevelopment Plan
Area ("Area")
The Project will assist in eliminating blight as identified under Sections 33031 and 33031 of
the California Redevelopment Law and in the Second hnplementation Plan for the Town
Center and South Central Redevelopment Areas (January 2000) including the following:
.
UnsafelDilapidated/Deteriorated Buildings characterized by conditions caused by
serious building code violations, dilapidation or deterioration.
Physical Conditions that Limit Economic Viability and Use of Lots and Buildings
characterized by conditions that can be caused by substandard design, inadequate size
given present standards and market conditions, lack of parking, or similar factors.
Depreciated/Stagnant Property Values or hnpaired Investments characterized, but not
necessarily limited to properties containing hazardous waste or other conditions that
require the use of agency authority.
High Business Turnovers and VacancieslLow Lease Rates/Abandoned
Building/Vacant Lots within an area developed for urban use and served by utilities.
.
.
.
"¡d.
Pwspect Village FEIR
Page 40
EXHIBIT C OF RESOLUTION NO. RDA 04-01
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Measure
Cultural Resources 1:
Prior to issuance of a demolition permit,
documentation of the buildings to be removed
shall be undertaken by the developer to be
approved by the City utilizing the standards nf
the Historic American Building Survey
(HABS), including photo-documentation and
measured drawings of the East Main and
Prospect Avenue elevations. These items,
together with the Historical Resource Technical
Report, shall be added to the Tustin Area
Historical Society Museum.
Cultural Resources 2:
If buried cultural resources, such as chipped or
ground stone, historic debris, building
foundations, or human remains are
inadvertently discovered during ground-
disturbing activities, work will stop in that area
and within 100 feet of the find until a qualified
archaeologist can assess the significance of the
find, and, if necessary, develop appropriate
treatment measures. Treatment measures
typically include development of avoidance
strategies, capping with fill material, or
mitigation of impacts through data recovery
programs such as excavation or detailed
documentation.
The construction coníractor and lead
contractor compliance inspector will verify
that work is halted until appropriate treatment
measures are implemented if cultural resources
are discovered during construction activities.
Concurrence from the City on measures to be
implemented before resuming construction
activities in the area of the find will be
obtained.
Exhibit C of RDA Resolution No. 04-01
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Timing and Implementation
Mitigation
Monitoring and
Enforcement
Responsibility
Mitigation
Compliance
Responsibility
Prior to issuance of a demolition permit
City of Tustin
Community Development
Department
During construction
City of Tustin
Community Development
Department
Hazards I:
The applicant shall remove the clarifier on site
in accordance with applicable local, state and Prior to issuance of grading pennits City of Tustin Community Development
federal regulations prior to obtaining a grading Department
pennit.
Hazards 2:
Any unknown contaminated soils that could be
encountered on the project site during During construction City of Tustin Community Development
demolition, site clearance, or construction
activities shall be removed from the project site Department
and disposed of off-site. The removal and
disposal of these hazardous materials would be
in accordance with guidelines specified by the
applicable local, state and federal resources
agencies, including but not limited to the
Department of Toxics Substances Control and
federal Environmental Protection Agency.
Hazards 3:
If during any future demolition or remodeling
activities additional suspect materials are During demolition or remodeling City of Tustin Community Development
observed, bulk samples shall be collected of Department
these materials and analyzed for asbestos
content. All suspect materials at the Property
are Presumed Asbestos-containing Materials
(PACMs) until the asbestos content is
confinned or denied by analytical testing.
Hazards 4:
The applicant shall retain a licensed abatement
contractor to properly remove and dispose of Prior to issuance of a demolition City of Tustin Community Development
the damaged (peeling, flaking) lead-based pennit Department
paint prior to obtaining a demolition pennit.
Traffic I:
The developer shall prepare a construction Prior to issuance of a demolition pennit City of Tustin Public Works Department
staging and parking plan for review and
approval by City of Tustin Public Works prior
to issuance of demolition pennit. The developer
Exhibit C ofRDA Resolution No. 04-01
Page 2
or contractor shall monitor the implementation
and effectiveness of the construction staging
and parking plan during the construction phase
of the project. The plan shall include one or
more of the following potential types of traffic-
related mitigation measures to ensure that
temporary disruptions to the adjacent uses and
circulation within the area are minimized:
.
Construction and Employee
Parking: As part of the construction
staging and parking plan, the
contractor would submit and obtain
approval of a construction parking
program which reflects the schedule of
construction activities and location of
construction-related parking.
Locations of available parking would
be identified.
Street Circulation and Parking
Measures: The contractor may
request and obtain a penuit for any
temporary lane closures that may be
required for adjacent roadways. The
contractor would utilize flagmen for
traffic control to minimize
inconvenience and for safety of
vehicles and pedestrians.
Haul Truck Routes, Queue Areas,
and Deliveries: The contractor would
provide an estimate of truck volume
and schedule. Schedule adjustments
would be made to minimize the
volume during peak traffic hours.
Areas would be designated by the
developer or contractor for staging of
all trucks. All earth-moving and
ready-mix trucks would be equipped
with two-way radios. The trucks
would follow a City-approved route to
the project site, without unnecessary
waiting.
Hours of Excavation Hauling:
Heavv truck hauling associated with
.
.
.
Exhibit C ofRDA Resolution No. 04-01
Page 3
excavation would be scheduled to
minimize interference with daytime
activity in the area. The hours for
excavation hauling would be
detennined in conjunction with the
City as part of the construction staging
and parking plan.
0 Pedestrian Safety Measures: The
contractor would install a construction
fence around the perimeter,
complying with City requirements
before excavation begins. A flagman
would be available at all times and
would be utilized whenever trucks
entering or leaving the project site
may impede the flow oftralllc.
Parking 1:
If the City Council does not approve the Off-
Site Parking Agreement, the applicant must
present an alternative shared use agreement to
the City for review and approval prior to
issuance of a demolition pennit. If the City
does not approve an alternative shared use
agreement, the Project shall not proceed.
Exhibit C ofRDA Resolution No. 04-01
Page 4
Prior to issuance of a demolition permit
City of Tustin
Community Development
Department
ATTACHMENT 0
RDA Resolution No. 04-02
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 04-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE TUSTIN COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING A
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
FOR A 1.036-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 191
AND 193-195 EAST MAIN STREET
The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin does hereby
resolve as follows:
I. The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") finds and
determines as follows:
A. The Agency is engaged in implementation of the "Redevelopment Plan"
for the Town Center Area Redevelopment Project (the "Redevelopment Project"); and
B. Section 33430 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health &
Safety Code 33000, et seq.: "CRL") authorizes the Agency to sell or lease real property
for redevelopment purposes; and
C. In order to implement the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency proposes to
enter into a certain Disposition and Development Agreement (the "DDA"), with Prospect
Village, LP, a California Limited Partnership (the "Developer") pursuant to which (a) the
Agency would sell to Developer that certain Agency-owned real property located at the
northwest corner of Main Street and Prospect Avenue and know as 191 and 193-195
East Main Street (the "Property"); (b) Developer would construct a mixed-use retail,
office and live-work housing project on the Property and, upon completion, sell at least
ten (10) of the twelve (12) live-work units for proprietor owner-occupancy and require
that such units remain proprietor owner-occupied for the period of the restrictions set
forth therein; and (c) Developer would construct certain required public improvements
(collectively the "Project"); and
D. In its current condition, the Property is a blighting influence on the
Redevelopment Project area; and
E. The Project will remove the blighting influence described above and
provide a mixed-use retail, office and live-work market rate housing project; and
F. The public improvements contemplated for the Project are of benefit to the
Redevelopment Project Area or the immediate neighborhood in which the
Redevelopment Project is located; and
rdasharedlrdareso I uti on 104-02. DOC
G. No other reasonable means of financing the public improvements are
available to the community, and the payment of funds for the construction of the public
improvements will assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions inside the
Redevelopment Project area and is consistent with the implementation plan adopted
pursuant to Section 33490 of the CRL;
H. Pursuant to Section 33433 of the CRL, the Agency is authorized to sell or
lease property acquired in whole or in part from tax increment moneys for development
pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan with the approval of the City Council of the City of
Tustin after public hearing;
I. Agency staff has prepared, and the City Council has reviewed and
approved a report pursuant to Section 33433 (a)(2) of the CRL in connection with the
DDA setting forth:
(a) A copy of the proposed sale documents, i.e. the DDA;
(b) A summary which describes and specifies all of the following:
(i) The cost of the DDA to the Agency, including land acquisition costs, clearance
costs, relocation costs, the cost of improvements to be made by the Agency, plus
the expected interest on any loans or bonds to finance the agreements; and
(ii) The estimated value of the interests to be sold to Developer, determined at the
highest and best uses permitted under the plan; and
(iii) The estimated value of the interests to be sold, determined at the uses and with
the conditions, covenants and development costs required by the sale; and
(iv) An explanation of why the sale of the property will assist in the elimination of
blight with reference to all supporting facts and materials needed upon making this
explanation.
J. The DDA contains all of the terms, covenants, conditions, restrictions,
obligations and provisions required by state and local law; and
L. The Agency has duly considered all of the terms and conditions of the
DDA and believes that the Project is in the best interests of the City of Tustin and the
health, safety, morals and welfare of its residents, and is in accord with the public
purposes and provisions of applicable state and local law and requirements; and
M. Pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law the Agency
has held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed DDA, at which public hearing all
persons were given an opportunity to be heard.
II. The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency hereby finds and determines,
based upon substantial evidence provided in the record before it:
rdasharedlrdaresa 1 titian \04-02.DOC
A.
That the foregoing recitals are true and correct.
B. That the Agency has received and heard all oral and written testimony to
the proposed Agreement and to Developer's proposed development of the
Property in connection therewith and to any other matters pertaining to this
transaction.
C. That the sale of the Property will assist in the elimination of blight in the
Redevelopment Project area and is consistent with the implementation plan
adopted by the Agency for the Town Center Area Redevelopment Plan pursuant
to Section 33490 of the CRL
D. That the consideration for the Agency's disposition of the Property
pursuant to the DDA is not less than the fair reuse value in accordance with
conditions, covenants and development costs required by the DDA.
E.
That the sale of the Property is for more than its fair market price.
F. That no other reasonable means of financing the cost of the installation
and construction of public improvements, which are publicly owned either within
or without the Redevelopment Project Area are available to the community and
hereby consents to the payment for the public improvements by the Agency.
G. The foregoing findings are based upon the record of the joint public
hearing on the DDA, the record of the joint public hearings for the adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan (including amendments thereto), the report prepared in
pursuant to CRL Section 33433(a)(2) , the reasons expressed herein, the
Prospect Village FEIR, the Findings, the Statement of Overriding Considerations
and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan approved in connection therewith.
III. The DDA, a copy of which is on file with the Office of the City Clerk, is hereby
approved with such minor changes, additions or deletions as may be approved by the
Agency's Executive Director and City Attorney.
IV. The Executive Director is hereby also authorized to take such actions and
execute such documents and instruments, as deemed necessary or desirable for
implementation of the DDA.
rdasharedlrdaresol ulion 104-02. DOC
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agency held on the 17th day of May, 2004.
TONY KAWASHIMA
Chairperson
PAMELA STOKER
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
ORANGE COUNTY )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Tustin Community
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole
number of the members of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Tustin is five; that the above and forgoing Resolution No. RDA 04-02 was duly passed
and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency,
held on May 17, 2004, by the following vote:
BOARDMEMBER AYES:
BOARDMEMBER NOES:
BOARDMEMBER ABSTAINED:
BOARDMEMBER ABSENT:
PAMELA STOKER
CITY CLERK
rdasharedlrdaresol uti on 104-02. DOC