Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 19-32RESOLUTION NO. 19-32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONCEPT PLAN 2018-00001, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 2018-00003, DESIGN REVIEW 2018-00023 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2018-00015 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN OFFICE HEADQUARTERS CAMPUS INCLUDING 180,000 SQUARE FEET OFFICE, 5,000 SQUARE FEET CREDIT UNION BRANCH BUILDING, FOUR (4) LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 7, 9, 11 AND 14 OF THE PACIFIC CENTER EAST SPECIFIC PLAN. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application has been submitted by SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union for the project, which includes a 180,000 square foot office building, 5,000 square foot credit union branch building, four (4) level parking structure and associated site improvements on an approximate nineteen (19) acre site within Planning Areas 7, 9, 11 and 14 of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP). The City currently owns 1.8 acres of the project site and the balance is owned by the applicant. B. That the development application includes the following requests: Development Agreement (DA) 2018-00001 to facilitate the development and conveyance of an approximate 1.8 -acre site within the boundaries of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan. 2. Lot Line Adjustment (LLA) 2018-00003 to adjust parcel lines among four (4) existing properties and absorb abandoned public right-of-way to accommodate development of the proposed office building, credit union building and parking structure. 3. Concept Plan (CP) 2018-00001 to develop an office campus facility with an office building, credit union branch, parking structure and associated site improvements and ensure the overall concept of the development conforms with the Specific Plan. 4. Design Review (DR) 2018-00023 for the design and site layout of a nineteen (19) acre site into an office campus project with an office building, credit union branch, parking structure and associated site improvements. 5. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2018-00015 for the establishment of joint - use parking for 15442 Newport Ave., 15332 Newport Ave., 15222 Del Amo Resolution 19-32 Page 1 of 7 Ave., 1200 Edinger Ave. and Parcel 6 of Parcel Map 2010-127 (APN 430- _ 251-28). C. That the site is zoned as Planned Community (PC) and Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP) within Planning Areas 7, 9, 11 and 14 and designated as Planned Community Commercial/Business by the Tustin General Plan. In addition, the project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub -element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub -element. D. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on March 26, 2019, by the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission tabled the item to allow for adequate time to finalize the terms of property disposition. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on June 11, 2019, by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4380, recommending that the City Council approve the said project. E. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on July 2, 2019, by the City Council. F. That PCESP Table 4 allows for exchanges of square footage of allowed uses between Planning Areas and that in accordance with the PCESP and the project environmental impact report, the proposed square footage exchanges between Planning Areas 7, 9, 11 and 14 comply with the PCESP development capacities and trip generation allowances. That the proposed parking structure is an accessory use and does not contain building floor area. G. That LLA -2018-00003 can be supported by the following findings: 1. The LLA involves four (4) existing, adjoining parcels and absorbs existing abandoned right-of-way. 2. That no more than four (4) parcels will result from the LLA. 3. The resulting parcels from the LLA will conform to the Tustin General Plan and PCESP. H. That PCESP Section 5.3 requires the submission of a Concept Plan prior to or concurrent with the submission of a new development proposal. The project has been found to comply with the requirements of the PCESP. Specifically, the proposed project: 1. Provides a preliminary geologic and soils report that analyzed the soil Resolution 19-32 Page 2 of 7 conditions and included recommendations for grading, building design and construction; 2. Provides an overall drainage plan showing that the project will drain properly and can connect to existing storm drain infrastructure; 3. Provides a conceptual landscape plan that focuses on onsite landscaping and gateway landscaping; and 4. Includes proposed development intensity and overall parcel layout that reflects the office campus environment. That PCESP Section 4.6137 states that parking space development standards are subject to the City's design review criteria. That the applicant has requested approval of parking stall dimensions of nine (9) feet by eighteen (18) feet within the parking structure. That the approval of this request is justified in that: 1. The nine (9) feet by eighteen (18) feet parking spaces will be located within the parking structure, which is accessible only to employees. 2. That the proposed surface parking spaces, including parking spaces for visitors and credit union branch customers, provides the required nine (9) feet by nineteen (19) feet dimensions. 3. The intent of the parking regulations as stipulated in the PCESP is preserved. J. That PCESP Section 4.6A3 and Tustin City Code (TCC) Section 9264 allows shared parking facilities be used jointly among multiple properties with the approval of a CUP and can be supported by the following findings: 1. That a Joint Use Area Parking Review study dated May 3, 2019, was prepared by a licensed traffic engineer (Robert Kahn, P.E. of RK Engineering Group, Inc.) in accordance with TCC Section 9264 and PCESP Section 4.6A3. 2. That the Parking Study has been reviewed and accepted by the City's Traffic Engineer for methodology and accuracy. 3. That per the PCESP, the office headquarters campus facility would require 1,407 off-street parking spaces; 1,660 spaces are currently proposed throughout the project site; the Parking Study determined that the project site, on the whole, provides a surplus of 253 parking spaces required by PCESP and therefore exceeds the minimum parking Resolution 19-32 Page 3 of 7 requirement for office and commercial uses. 4. That the parking spaces designated for joint -use are located such that they will adequately serve the uses for which they are intended. 5. That the proposed use, as conditioned, will not have a negative effect on surrounding properties, or impact traffic on the ability of parking in that sufficient parking would be available on-site. 6. That a written agreement is required to be recorded on each property involved to ensure the continued availability of the number of parking spaces designated for joint -use and availability of reciprocal access easements. K. 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 Commission has considered at least the following items: 1. Height, bulk, and area of buildings — The height and bulk of the proposed project is compatible with surrounding buildings in that the proposed office is about fifty-eight (58) feet high, the credit union branch building is about twenty (20) feet high and the parking structure is about fifty (50) feet high, similar to other buildings in the area. 2. Setbacks and site planning — The proposed project meet the required building setbacks of thirty-five (35) feet from Newport Avenue and twenty (20) feet from Del Amo Avenue. 3. Exterior materials and colors —The proposed exterior materials and colors are appropriate for the area in that the design provides a contemporary appearance and visual statement that engages passersby and visitors with its simple lines and glass exterior. 4. Type and pitch of roofs — The proposed roof design is compatible in that it is flat with adequate parapet and equipment screening to fully screen roof top equipment. 5. Size and spacing of windows, doors, and other openings — The proposed building designs utilize the glass material for windows, walls and doors and essentially creates an inviting appearance from all angles of the buildings. Resolution 19-32 Page 4 of 7 6. Towers and roof structures — The proposed parking structure includes elevator towers and are compatible with the overall architectural designs in that the towers are designed with colors and glass material that match the office and credit union branch buildings. 7. Location, height, and standards of exterior illumination —The proposed site illumination, as conditioned, will be compatible with the building architecture and complement the site improvements and landscaping. As conditioned, the project will comply with site illumination standards and confine the lighting onto the property. 8. Landscaping, parking area design, and traffic circulation — The proposed landscaping, as conditioned, shall comply with the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance requirements and the design includes accent trees to create visual interest. The proposed parking areas and circulation have been reviewed and determined to be in substantial compliance with City requirements. 9. Location and appearance of equipment located outside an enclosed structure — As proposed and conditioned, equipment shall be fully screened with the building parapet, equipment screening or landscaping screening. 10. Location and method of refuse storage — As conditioned, the trash enclosure will provide adequate room for trash bin storage and easily allow for trash collection services. 11. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood — The proposed building locations are compatible with existing structures in the project site in that appropriate separation between the buildings are provided, creating a visual margin to showcase the new office building while being within a short walk to the other buildings in the office campus. 12. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares — The proposed buildings and structure are compatible with existing and possible future structures in that the building is contemporary in design, its circulation is integrated among all the subject properties and the building placement and landscaping will enhance the comer street view. 13. Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council — The proposed project, as conditioned, complies with development standards, improves a vacant parcel with contemporary buildings and site Resolution 19-32 Page 5 of 7 improvements, and optimizes the use of the properties. L. That on-site security measures will be installed and implemented and that the City's Police Department has reviewed the application and, as conditioned, has no concerns. M. On December 18, 1990, the Tustin City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) 90-1 for the PCESP. On May 5, 2003, the City Council approved Supplement #1 to FEIR 90-1 for the PCESP. The FEIR, along with its supplement, is a Program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEIR considered the potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the PCESP. An Environmental Checklist attached hereto as Exhibit A has been prepared and concluded that these actions do not result in any new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified significant impacts in the FEIR. Moreover, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since certification of the FEIR. II. The City Council hereby approves CP -2018-00001, LLA -2018-00003, DR -2018- 00023 and CUP -2018-00015 for Joint Use Parking, for the development of an office campus including a 180,000 square -foot office building, 5,000 square -foot credit union branch building, four (4) level parking structure and associated site improvements within Planning Areas 7, 9, 11 and 14 of the PCESP subject to the conditions attached hereto as Exhibit B. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting on the 2nd day of July, 2019. CHARLES E. PUCKETT, Mayor ATTEST: 4,.e'1A � - A OA L -J. - ERICA N. YA A, City Clerk Resolution 19-32 Page 6of7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 19-32 I, Erica N. Yasuda, 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. 19-32 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 2nd day of July, 2019, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: Puckett, Bernstein, Clark, Cooper, Lumbard (5) COUNCILMEMBER NOES: (0) COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: (0) COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: (0) ERICA N. YASU A, City Clerk Resolution 19-32 Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT A OF ATTACHMENT F (RESOLUTION NO. 19-32) PACIFIC CENTER EAST SPECIFIC PLAN FEIR: SCHOOLSFIRST PROJECT INITIAL STUDY AND CHECKLIST JOINT USE AREA PARKING REVIEW STUDY DATED MAY 3, 2019 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY DATED JANUARY 3, 2019 T' STIN SU IN NO OUR FUTURT 110N SUNG OUR PAST CITY OF TUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST For Projects With Previously Certified/Approved Environmental Documents: Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Pacific Center East Specific Plan The following checklist takes into consideration the preparation of an environmental document prepared at an earlier stage of the proposed project. This checklist evaluates the adequacy of the earlier document pursuant to Section 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. A. BACKGROUND Project Title: Lead Agency: Lead Agency Contact Person Phone: SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Office Headquarters City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92780 Edmelynne V. Huffer (714) 573-3174 Project Location: 15332 Newport Avenue (APN 430-253-13) 15442 Newport Avenue (APN 430-253-16) 15222 Del Amo Avenue (APN 430-253-18) 1200 Edinger Avenue (APN 430-253-19 and 20) Parcel 6 of PM 2010-127 (APN 430-253-28) Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Christina Quintero, SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union, 1200 Edinger Avenue, Tustin, CA 92780 General Plan Land Use Designation: Planned Community Commerical/Business Zoning Designation: Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP; SP 11) Project Description: Construct a new 180,000 sf 3 -story office building to serve as the credit union headquarters, a 921 -stall 4 -level parking structure, 5,000 sf credit union branch building and associated site improvements. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: North: Edinger Avenue, industrial 1Page East: BNSF Railroad, office, industrial South: Valencia Avenue, office and industrial uses West: Newport and Del Amo Avenues, warehouse, retail and vacantland Previous Environmental Documentation: Final EIR 90-1 for the Pacific Center East Specific Plan adopted on December 17, 1990. Supplement #1 to Final EIR 90-1 for the Pacific Center East Specific Plan adopted on May 5, 2003. Other public agencies whose approval is required: ® Orange County Fire Authority ❑ City of Santa Ana ❑ Orange County EMA District ❑ City of Irvine ❑ South Coast Air (duality Management ❑ Other ❑ Orange County Health Care Agency Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun? 2 1 P a g e B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Land Use / Planning ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Public Services ❑ Tribal Cultural Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Hydrology / Water Quality ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation ❑ Utilities / Service Systems ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ® I find that, although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature: Printed Name: �.� /�f/3LTY /$ Title:: iNd�f;-c 31 Page Date: For: _ C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: See Attached. 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance 4 1 P a g e D. INITIAL STUDY Issues: I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rocks outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST 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. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the Calffomia Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. -51 Page Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated Analysis ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Issues: Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated Analysis Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique ❑ ❑ Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for ❑ ❑ agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? C) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause ❑ ❑ rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing ❑ ❑ environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? 111. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct ❑ ❑ implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 6Page 7Page Issues: Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated Analysis b) Violate any air quality standard or ❑ E contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? C) Result in a cumulatively considerable El El net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to ❑ substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ El substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, El El either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on E any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 7Page Issues: Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated Analysis C) Have a substantial adverse effect on El ❑ federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the El El movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or El E ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an El El adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change El 19 in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change El El in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique El paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? 8Page Issues: d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 9{Page Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous ❑ Incorporated Analysis ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off- site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Not Applicable Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 10Page ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ :1 ►4 0 a 01 01 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? III Page ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ a /:/ a 0 /:/ ro ►1 121 Page Issues: Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated Analysis IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C) Substantially alter the existing El drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on -or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water E] which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade El water quality? 121 Page Issues: g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 131 Page Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated .Analysis ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Issues: Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated Analysis XI. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of ❑ (� a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of El 11 a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XII. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or El E] generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or E] El generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase El El in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or ❑ [] periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 141 Page Issues: e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of road or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 151Page Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Previous Mitigation Analysis Incorporated ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Issues: XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: I. Fire protection? ii. Police protection? iii. Schools? iv. Parks? V. Other public facilities? XV. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 161Page Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated 1❑ No Change From Previous Analysis 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ D ❑ ❑ ❑ D ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 171Page Issues: Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Previous Mitigation Analysis Incorporated XVI. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, El E ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion El management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in a change in air traffic El El patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards El El due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency 0 El ED access? 0 171Page Issues: Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Previous Mitigation Analysis Incorporated f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or El E programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Not Applicable Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or is eligible for listing in El ❑ ❑ the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). b) A resource determined by the ❑ E lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. 18Page Issues: XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment Impact With Mitigation requirements of the applicable Incorporated Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 191Page Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated Analysis ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Issues: XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects.) C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Less Than No Change Significant Significant From Impact With Mitigation Previous Incorporated Analysis ❑ ❑ n 10 101 .1 ►61 Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.05, 21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21095, and 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonofl v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.AppAth 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.AppAth at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.AppAth 656. 201 Page EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OFFICE DEVELOPMENT (SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION) 15332 NEWPORT AVE. BACKGROUND On February 19, 1991, the Tustin City Council adopted the Pacific Center East Specific Plan and on April 19, 2011, adopted Specific Plan Amendment 11-001. Pacific Center East is comprised of approximately 126 acres and is bounded on the west by the State Route 55 Freeway, on the north by the by the Santa Ana -Santa Fe Channel, on the east by Red Hill Avenue and on the south by Valencia Avenue. The Tustin City Council certified Final EIR 90-1 (FEIR) for the Pacific Center East Speck Plan on December 17, 1990 and Supplement #1 to Final EIR 90-1 for the Pacific Center East Specific Plan was adopted May 5, 2003. The FEIR is a Program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Ace ("CEQA"). The FEIR considered the potential environmental impacts associated with the development of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan. The project developer, applicant and property owner is SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union. The proposed "Project" is for a three-story office building, small service commercial use (a bank), new four -level parking structure, and associated site improvements for properties located within Pacific Center East Specific Plan Planning Areas 7, 9, 11 and 14. The project requires City approval of the following: 1) General Plan Conformity, which would determine that the associated disposition of government property is in conformity with the City's General Plan. 2) Lot Line Adjustment (LLA) 2018-00003, which would modify the parcel lines of four (4) existing parcels and absorb existing abandoned right-of-way into 3) Development Agreement (DA) 2018-00001, which would establish the terms, public benefits involved and timing of development. 4) Concept Plan (CP) 2018-00001, which identifies how the proposed project will address the overall site design, site drainage, soils conditions, circulation, landscaping, signage and project phasing. 5) Design Review (DR) 2018-00023, to assess the project's design, architectural compatibility, site layout, exterior finishes, landscaping and other improvements. 6) Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2018-00015, to establish joint use parking to accommodate shared parking and access throughout the project site. The Project involves: 1) a 180,000 square -foot, three-story office building; 2) a 5,000 square -foot retail bank building; 3) a four -level parking structure; 4) disposition of City -owned property and abandoned public right-of-way to the applicant, and 5) establishment of joint -use parking. PROJECT LOCATION The project is located on several properties with the primary property being 15332 Newport Avenue and the secondary properties are 15222 Del Amo Avenue, 15442 Newport Avenue, 1200 --- Edinger Avenue, Parcel 6 of PM 2010-127 and abandoned Del Amo Avenue. The properties are bounded by Edinger Avenue to the northeast, Newport Avenue and Del Amo Avenue to the Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 2 northwest, the BNSF .Railroad right-of-way to the southeast and Valencia Avenue to the southwest. The proposed office, bank branch and parking structure buildings would be located on an existing vacant property at 15332 Newport Avenue. The buildings located at 15442 Newport Avenue and 15222 Del Amo Avenue are existing office buildings and no changes are proposed. The existing warehouse building located at 1200 Edinger Avenue is currently used as a facility for storage and maintenance of ATMs. The associated lot line adjustment application involves properties located at 15332 Newport Avenue, 15442 Newport Avenue, 15222 Del Amo Avenue, Parcel 6 of PM 2010- 127, which is a remnant parcel, and abandoned Del Amo Avenue. Associated site improvements and additional parking spaces will be provided on the property located at 1200 Edinger Avenue, PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project involves a new 180,000 sf 3 -story office building to serve as the credit union headquarters, a 921 -stall 4 -level parking structure, 5,000 sf credit union branch building and associated site improvements. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS An Environmental Analysis Checklist has been completed and it has been determined that this Project is within the scope of the previously approved Program FEIR and that pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15162 and 15168(c), no new effects could occur, and no new mitigation measures would be required. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. The Environmental Analysis Checklist follows. AESTHETICS — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. In addition, the development associated with the Project is not located on a scenic highway nor will it affect a scenic vista. Development of the site was considered within the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1, and will have not negative aesthetic effect on the site or its surroundings when mitigation measures identified in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Development of the Project requires Design Review approval. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 3 Particular attention is paid to massing, materials, scale, color and expression of such quality for the Project to be true to the distinctive and unique elements of Tustin, the Tustin Gateway area and the PCESP. The proposed project building height and massing are compatible with existing buildings in the area. The proposed office building height is approximately sixty (60) feet, which is similar to the existing hotel buildings on Newport Avenue. The proposed bank building is approximately twenty (20) feet high, which is compatible with existing retail buildings in the area. Provisions of the PCESP ensure that all exterior lighting will be required to be designed to reduce glare, create a safe night environment, and avoid impacts to surrounding properties. The proposed project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. MitigatiortlMonitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. The project is subject to Mitigation Measure 1 and 4 of Section 3.9 regarding signage and equipment screening, respectively and have been included as conditions of approval. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Tustin General Plan Submitted Plans 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. in determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 4 e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. In addition, the Project would not convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Managing and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency to non- agricultural use. Also, the property is not zoned for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract, nor does the allowed use involve other changes to the existing environment that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. The proposed project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. MitigatiorVMonitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Tustin General Plan Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program: Important Farmland 2016 Submitted Plans III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. However, Final EIR 90-1 determined that regional ambient air quality conditions, combined with regional cumulative traffic, contribute to the exceedance of daily State and federal standards for several air pollutants. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in the FEIR to minimize these impacts. However, in approving the PCESP, Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 5 a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted by the Tustin City Council on December 17, 1990, for cumulative air quality impacts that could not be mitigated. Since the proposed Project would implement development consistent with the Specific Plan, all environmental impacts related to the project and the development of the site were considered in the adopted FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. The project is subject to Mitigation Measures 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 of Section 3.6 regarding emissions, transportation demand, street sweeping and construction parking have been included as Conditions of approval. However, the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1, also concluded that Specific Plan related operational air quality impacts were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1, was adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 5, 2003. Sources., Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Table 2, 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook Tustin General Plan IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified In local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 6 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The project is located within an urban area and would be built on vacant land with no biological resources on site. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. The FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1, found that implementation of the PCESP would not result in impacts to federally listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Mitigation/Monitoring Required., No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change In the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. However, it is possible that previously unidentified buried archaeological or paleontological resources within the project site could be significantly impacted by grading and construction activities associated with development of the site. With the inclusion of mitigation measures that require future construction monitoring, potential impacts to cultural resources can be reduced to a level of insignificance (Mitigation Measure 9 of Section 3.2 regarding archeological resources). The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 7 MitigatiorVMonitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. This project is subject to Mitigation Measure 9 of Section 3.2 regarding discovery of archeological resources during grading activities and have been included as conditions of approval. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: — Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: • Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. • Strong seismic ground shaking? • Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? • Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. However, Final EIR 90-1 identified impacts to the entire Specific Plan area related to the necessary grading activity that would occur to accommodate the various types of development and the resultant change to existing landform and topography. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in Final EIR 90-1. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 8 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. This project is subject to Mitigation Measures 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 or Section 3.2 and have been included as conditions of approval. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: — Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Prior Environmental Review did not evaluate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts because, prior to SB 97, which went into effect January 1, 2010, it was not included in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist and the City of Tustin did not have adopted thresholds at the time of preparation. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: N/A Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: —Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 9 e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The primary use of the project site is office use and would not involve hazardous material. The project side is located within an airport land use plan, however, it is located more than two (2) miles away from the airport and the proposed building heights are under the threshold requiring review and input from the airport. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. The FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1, found that implementation of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan would not result in impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. MitigationMMonkoring Required. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a mannerwhich would result in flooding on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 10 the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? 1) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. Development of the Project will include project design and construction of facilities to fully contain drainage of the site that will be required as conditions of approval for the development project. No long-term impacts to hydrology and water quality are anticipated for the development of the Project site. At this time, it is not anticipated that the proposed Project will impact groundwater in the deep regional aquifer or shallow aquifer. The proposed Project would not include groundwater removal or alteration of historic drainage patterns at the site. The Project site is not located within a 100 -year flood area and will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, nor is the project site susceptible to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Construction operations associated with development of the site would be required to comply with the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the Newport Bay watershed that requires compliance with the Drainage Area Master Plan (DAMP) and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the implementation of specific best management practices (BMP). Compliance with State, City and Water Department regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, would avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to such hazards. Final EIR 90-1 identified impacts to the entire Specific Plan area related to water and drainage. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in Final EIR 90-1 that would reduce the potential impacts of the Project to a level of insignificance. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. The project is subject to Mitigation Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 11 Measures 2, 4 and 6 of Section 3.3 regarding drainage, flood prevention and soil stability and are included in the conditions of approval. Sources. Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan FEMA Flood Map: FIRM Panel 06059CO277J (Dec. 2, 2009) Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map (2012) IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited, to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. On February 19, 1991, the Tustin City Council approved the Pacific Center East Specific Plan which established land use and development standards for development of the Development Parcels and site, and on April 19, 2011 adopted Specific Plan Amendment 11-001 implementing minor text amendments. The Project will meet the requirements of the Specific Plan. Compliance with state and City (including the Specific Plan) requirements would avoid the creation of significant land use and planning impacts. Also, the proposed Project will not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Final EIR 90-1 identified impacts to the entire Specific Plan area related to land use. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in Final EIR 90-1. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Midgafion/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. This project is subject to Mitigation Measure 2 of Section 3.1 regarding project conformance with land use standards and is included as a condition of approval. Sources. Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans DDA For SchoolsFirst Headquarters Project Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 12 Tustin General Plan X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. In addition, the proposed Project will not result in the loss of mineral resources known to be on the site or identified as being present on the site by any mineral resource plans. Final EIR 90-1 did not identify any potential impacts related to natural resources. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Mftigation/Monitodng Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established In the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase In ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Schools First Federal Credit Union Page 13 The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. However, the full build -out of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan would result in short-term roadway and freeway ramp construction noise impacts, and a less than significant permanent increase in the ambient noise levels in and around the project site due to vehicular traffic. Mitigation measures were identified in Final EIR 90-1 to minimize the short term noise impacts. The proposed Project could result in implementation activities that generate noise; however, it will not result in substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Mltigation/Mori todrig Required. Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. This project is subject to Mitigation Measures 1, 2 and 4 regarding construction noise, construction operations and building sound attenuation are included in the conditions of approval. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan Noise Impact Study dated September 18, 2018 XII. POPULATION & HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. Therefore, there is no direct increase to the City's population resulting from the project. The Pacific Center East Specific Plan has previously been determined to be consistent with the Tustin General Plan. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. MitigaddrVMonitoring Required. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 14 Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. Final EIR 90-1 identified impacts to the area including the Speck Plan area related to public services, including Fire and Police protection, schools and public facilities. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in Final EIR 90-1. Final EIR 90-1 did not identify any potential impacts related to general public services or other governmental services. Fire Protection. The proposed Project will be required to meet existing Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) regulations regarding demolition, construction materials and methods, emergency access, water mains, fire flow, fire hydrants, sprinkler systems, building setbacks, and other relevant regulations. Adherence to these regulations would reduce the risk of uncontrollable fire and increase the ability to efficiently provide fire protection services to the site. The number of fire stations in the area surrounding the site will meet the demands created by the proposed Project. Police Protection. The need for police protection services was assessed by the FEIR on the basis of resident population estimates, square footage of non-residential uses, etc. The implementation of the PCESP would increase the overall need for police protection services. The Project is expected to result in negligible increase in police projection services in that the facility will implement onsite security measures. Entitlement conditions of approval for the Project will require the developer to work with the Tustin Police Department to ensure that adequate security precautions such as visibility, lighting, emergency access, and address signage are implemented in the project at plan check. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 Schools. The proposed project is located within Tustin Unified School District (TUSD). No residential use is planned for the project and the project is not anticipated to cause a significant impact upon the district enrollment. Other aublic facilities. Other public facilities and city services within the City of Tustin would not be negatively impacted in that the proposed project will be reviewed and required modifications or upgrades to provide adequate services will be made. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 15 Mitigation/Monitoring Required. Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. The project is subject to Mitigation Measures Police 1 through 2, Fire 1 through 2, Water Services 1 through 4, Wastewater 1 through 2, Solid Waste Disposal 1 through 5, Natural Gas 1 through 2, Electrical Service 1 through 3, Telephone Service 1 through 2, Schools 1 and Cable Television 1. These mitigation measures are included in the conditions of approval. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The project design includes outdoor areas to encourage recreation and passive outdoor activities. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. Proposed development of the site would not generate a significant increase in the use of existing parks. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Midgation/Monkoring Required. No mitigation required. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 16 intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or program regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. A Traffic Impact Study dated January 3, 2019, generated by RK Engineering Group, Inc., was submitted as part of the project application for City review. The submitted Traffic Study identified that localized traffic impacts generated by the proposed project warrant the implementation of unsignalized full access to driveways on Newport Avenue and Del Amo Avenue; right -in, right -out driveway on Valencia Avenue; and right -in, right -out fire access only on Del Amo Avenue. As part of a recent review of the Project, current land uses were reviewed by the City's Public Works Department to determine the status of development by Pacific Center East phase and by generated traffic volumes. Based on this review, it was apparent that the proposed land development is within the parameters of authorized Phase I land uses and acceptable Average Daily Trip (ADT) levels of Phase I of the Pacific Center East phasing plan. Further, all of the infrastructure improvements have been completed to facilitate the Pacific Center East Phase I development. Final EIR 90-1 determined that the ultimate development of the entire Specific Plan area would generate increased traffic in the vicinity. Consequently, mitigation measures were identified in Final EIR 90-1 to minimize these impacts. A Statement of Overriding Consideration was adopted to address impacts that could not be mitigated to a level of insignificance. One mitigation measure required changes in the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan. A General Plan Amendment re -designating the classification of portions of Newport Avenue and Del Amo Avenue was approved in 1991. MitigatiorvMonitoring Required. Specific mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. The proposed project is subject to Mitigation Measure 3 of Section 3.5 regarding establishing and implementing a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan and included as a condition of approval. The FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1, also concluded that Speck Plan related traffic impacts were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 17 Consideration for the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1, was adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 5, 2003. However, a review by the City's Traffic and Development Manager have indicated that based on a review of transportation/circulation roadway improvements, there is sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed Project without the implementation of additional mitigation measures required in future Pacific Center East Specific Plan phases. Sources: Field Observation Submitted Plans FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Traffic Study Dated January 3, 2019 Parking Study Dated May 6, 2019 DDA for SchoolsFirst Headquarters Project Tustin General Plan XVI. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. The proposed building sites have been previously disturbed, historically used for agriculture and more recently was partially graded to accommodate parking lot improvements, walk ways and a plaza. However, it is possible that previously unidentified buried archaeological or paleontological resources within the project site could be significantly impacted by grading and construction activities associated with development of the site. With the inclusion of mitigation measures that require future construction monitoring, potential impacts to cultural resources can be reduced to a level of insignificance. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. The Prior Environmental Review did not analyze tribal cultural resources under a separate section impacts because, prior to AB 52, which went into effect January 1, 2015, it was not included in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist and the City of Tustin did not have adopted thresholds at the time of preparation. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 18 Sources: Field Observation Submitted Plans FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Tustin General Plan XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result In the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? f) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The proposed Project is for the construction of a new three-story office building, four -level parking structure, retail bank building and associated site improvements. The Project is consistent with the development permitted in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan (PCESP), as amended, and would not increase the overall development potential allowed by the PCESP. However, Final EIR 90-1 identified impacts to the entire Specific Plan area related to utilities. Consequently, mitigation measures identified in Final EIR 90-1 were recommended for implementation that would reduce the potential impacts to a level of insignificance. The proposed Project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated by the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. Mitigation/Monitoring Required. Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1. This project is subject to Mitigation Measures Water Services 1 through 4, Wastewater 1 through 2, Solid Waste Disposal 1 through 5, Natural Gas 1 through 2, Electrical Services 1 through 3, Telephone Service 1 through 2 and Cable Television 1 within Section 3.8 and are included as conditions of approval. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 19 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Based upon the foregoing, the proposed Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitats or wildlife populations to decrease, threaten, eliminate, or reduce animal ranges, etc. With the enforcement of FEIR mitigation and implementation measures approved by the Tustin City Council, the proposed Project does not cause unmitigated environmental effects that will cause substantial effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. In addition, the proposed Project does have air quality impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of development of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan, as amended by SPA 11-01. The FEIR previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan. The Project proposes no substantial changes to environmental issues previously considered with adoption of the FEIR. Mitigation measures were identified in the FEIR to reduce impact but not to a level of insignificance. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1, was adopted by the Tustin City Council on May 5, 2003. Mitigation/Monitoring Required. The FOR previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Specific Plan. Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIR. Sources: Field Observations FEIR, as revised by Supplement #1 PCESP, as amended Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan Evaluation of Environmental Impacts SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Page 20 CONCLUSION The summary concludes that all of the proposed Project's effects were previously examined in the FEIR, that no new effects would occur, that no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects would occur, that no new mitigation measures would be required, that no applicable mitigation measures previously not found to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and that there are no new mitigation measures or alternatives applicable to the project that would substantially reduce effects of the project that have not been considered and adopted. A Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program and Findings of Overriding Considerations were adopted for the FOR on May 5, 2003, and shall apply, as specifically applicable, to the proposed Project. JOINT USE AREA PARKING REVIEW SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION City of Tustin, California engineering group, inc. engineering group, inc. May 3, 2019 Ms. Christina Quintero SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION VP FACILITIES SERVICES 1200 Edinger Ave Tustin, CA 92780 traffic engineering & design transportation planning parking acoustical engineering air quality & ghg Subject: Joint Use Area Parking Review SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union, City of Tustin Dear Ms. Quintero: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) has completed a Joint Use Area Parking Review of the proposed SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Campus expansion project. The parking calculation and review are in accordance with the City of Tustin Code of Ordinances Section 9264a requirements for Joint Use of Parking Areas. The project is located within the Pacific Center East Specific Plan. As a result, the parking requirements consistent with the Specific Plan have been utilized to determine the number of parking spaces required for the project. The project is located at the southeast corner of Newport Avenue at Del Amo Avenue in the City of Tustin. Under existing conditions, SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union has three (3) buildings (Building RH-1,RH-3 & RH-4) consisting of approximately 197,518 square feet of general office and warehouse use with 760 parking spaces on surface parking lots. The project requires a total of 663 parking spaces. As a result, under existing conditions, the project has a surplus of 97 parking spaces based on the parking requirements. Table 1 includes the SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Existing Conditions Parking Calculation. Representatives of the project are proposing to expand the campus with a 3 -story 180,753 square feet general office building and approximately 5,003 square feet of bank use. As a result, the total campus will consist of 338,793 square feet of general office use 5,003 square feet of bank use and 39,478 square feet of warehouse use. A site plan is provided in Exhibit A. The proposed expansion will add approximately 900 parking spaces to accommodate the increase of building area. The campus expansion will reconfigure existing surface parking lots to accommodate a total of 739 parking spaces. In addition, a 4 level parking structure will also be constructed to include a total of 921 parking spaces. As ulcn a111, ill.], .! a; ):;I' nu..cart )a:,+ J ,., 92t;01 O (949) 1, t 0:1011 ® rkeng r SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION RK 14079 Page 2 a result, a total of 1,660 parking spaces will be provided on site and will be shared globally by employees and visitors for the entire campus. The project is located within the Pacific Center East Specific Plan. The parking standards and requirements for the project are identified in Table 5 of the City of Tustin Pacific Center East Specific Plan document which is included in Appendix A. The parking requirements for the project are identified below: Pacific Center East Specific Plan Parking Requirements Use Required Parking Spaces Banks, savings and loans, etc. 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA with a 6 - space minimum Offices, professional and corporate 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA for buildings other than medical of dental Warehouse, storage 1 space per 1,000 square feet of GFA for first 20,000. 1 space per 2,000 square feet of GFA for second 20,000 square feet of GFA Taking into account the proposed expansion of the SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union and the parking requirements identified in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan, the project requires a total of 1,407 parking spaces. As previously noted, the project is proposing to provide a total of 1,660 parking spaces. As a result, the campus has a total of 253 parking spaces in surplus when taking into account the parking requirements. Table 2 includes the SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union with the Proposed Campus Expansion Parking Calculation. Even though, Parcel 1 and Parcel 3 identify a deficiency in the number of required parking spaces, the remaining parking spaces located in the 4 level parking structure and surface parking lots located on Parcel 2 and Parcel 6 provide for a surplus of parking spaces for the entire campus. All of the parking spaces provided on site will be shared globally by all employees and visitors and are located within a reasonable walking distance to the buildings on campus. MMengineering r"TT7 group, ft SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION RK 14079 Page 3 Joint Use Parking Area City of Tustin, Code of Ordinances Section 9264a Due to the combining of parcels with the proposed campus expansion, the project is considered a Joint Use Parking Area by the City of Tustin. As a result, the project is subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit for parking facilities for nonresidential uses. Section 9264a of the City of Tustin Code of Ordinances indicates five (5) requirements that must be met for approval. Section 9264a is included in Appendix B. 1 A parking study prepared by a California licensed traffic engineer or civil engineer experienced in the preparation of such study 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 (ITE); Response: Based on the parking calculations provided in Table 2 of this report, the project exceeds the number of parking spaces required by 204 parking spaces. As a result, the project will have no conflicts with regards to parking demand. 2. 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; Response: The project exceeds the number of parking spaces required and is sufficient to meet the parking demands for typical general office and bank uses during all hours of operation. The parking structure and surface parking lots are conveniently located on campus for employees and visitors to utilize. 3. Parking spaces designated for joint use shall be located so that they will adequately serve the uses for which they are intended; Response: All of the joint -use parking spaces within the campus are conveniently located near the general office and bank buildings for which they are intended for. 4. A written and recorded agreement shall be drawn to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and Community Development Director 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. Response: Representatives of the project will provide a written document identifying the joint -use parking area and will be reviewed by the City of Tustin. ®engineering group, Inc. rr �n•Li1@er.COM SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION RK 14079 Page 4 5. Zoning Administrator approval of a minor Conditional Use Permit is required for parking areas serving structures totaling less than thirty thousand (30, 000) square feet. Planning Commission approval of a Conditional Use Permit is required for all other parking areas with joint -use parking. Response: The project with expansion will consist of approximately 383,274 square feet of building area. As a result, the project is subject to approval by the Planning Commission for the Conditional Use Permit for joint -use parking. RK has completed the review of the parking requirements and Joint Use Area parking review based on the City of Tustin Pacific East Center Specific Plan and Section 9264a of the City of Tustin Code of Ordinances. The project has a surplus of 253 parking spaces per the parking requirements found in the Pacific East Center Specific Plan. In addition, the proposed project meets all of the requirements in Section 9264a as indicated in this parking review. Respectfully submitted, RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. Rogier Goedecke President Attachment RG: sllrk 14079. doc JN: 2672-2018-01 Robert Kahn, P.E. Founding Principal Quo Q�pFESSfOyq�F n No, 0555 *� Exp. 12J31/19 �* st TRAFFIC .P _rF Of CAL�F�Q� engineering group, inc. Il .: ;m Exhibits r Exhibit A Site Plan ol eA �8!{ IF If ,}� fir_-r�'�,> ;, :• ,._ �'' a4 '; - '" /�{�`. •� � mow. 1'" 1i �. %✓. y' , N 2672-2018-01 engineering JOINT USE AREA PARKING REVIEW SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, City of Tustin, CA arouo. inc. Tables Table 1 SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Existing Conditions Required Parking City of Tustin, California Building /Parcel Use S.F. 2 Pacific Center East Specific Plan Parking Requirements' Number of Parking Spaces 15442 Newport Avenue (RH-1) Existing Building (Parcel 2) General Office 97,828 1 space for each 250 sq.ft 392 Number of Parking Spaces Provided Parcel 1 (Surface Lot) 392 Number of Parking Spaces Deficient per Code for Parcel 1 0 Parcel 3 Garage Parking Lot Number of Parking Spaces Provided Parcel 2 145 15222 Del Amo Avenue (RH-3) Existing Building (Parcel 4) General Office 60,212 1 space for each 250 sq.ft. of gross floor area 241 . Number of Parking Spaces Provided Parcel 3 223 Number of Parking Spaces deficient per Code for Parcel 3 -18 1200 Edinger Avenue (RH-4 Existing Building) (Parcel 7) Warehouse, Storage 39,478 1 space per 1,000 sq.ft for first 20,000. 1 space per 2,000 for second 20,000 sq,ft. 30 Total Building Square Feet (RH-1,RH-3 & RH-4) 197,518 Total Number of Parking Spaces Required 663 Total Number of Parking Spaces Provided for Existing Buildings Parcels 1,2 & 3 (RH-1, RH-3 & RH-4) 760 Total Number of Parking Spaces in Surplus of Code for Existing Buildings Parcels 1,2 & 3 (RH-1& RH-3) +97 Percent of Surplus Parking Spaces per Parking Requirements 15% 1 Parking Standards obtained from City of Tustin, Pacific Center East Specific Plan (Table S Parking Standards) 2 S.F. Square Feet Gross Floor Area Table 2 SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Campus Proposed Expansion Required Parking City of Tustin, California Building !Parcel Use S.F. = Pacific Center East Specific Plan Parking Requirements' Number of Parking Spaces 15442 Newport Avenue (RH-1) Existing Building (Parcel 2) General Office 97,828 1 space for each 250 sq.ft 392 Number of Parking Spaces Provided On -Site Parcel 1 (Surface Lot) 220 Number of Parking Spaces Deficient per Code -172 15222 Del Amo Avenue (RH-3) Existing Building (Parcel 4) General Office 60,212 1 space for each 250 scift of gross floor area 241 Number of Parking Spaces Provided On -Site Parcel 3 (Surface Lot) 231 Number of Parking Spaces Surplus per Code 10 1200 Edinger Avenue (RHS Existing Building) (Parcel 7) Warehouse, Storage 39,478 1 space per 1,000 sq.ft for first 20,000. 1 space per 2,000 for second 20,000 sq,ft. 30 Total Number of Parking Spaces Required for Existing Buildings Parcels 1 & 3 (RHA, RH-3 & RH-4) 663 Total Number of Parking Spaces Provided for Existing Buildings Parcels 1 & 3 (RH-1, RH-3 & RH-4) 760 Total Number of Parking Spaces Deficient Per Code for Existing Buildings Parcels 1 & 3 (RH-1,RH-3 & RH-4) +97 15332 Newport Avenue (RH-2) Proposed Building (Parcel 1) General Office 180,753 1 space for each 250 sq.ft 724 Bank 5,003 1 space for each 250 sq.ft 20 Total Building Square Feet 185,756 Subtotal Required Parking 744 Number of Parking Spaces Provided On -Site Parcel 6 (RH-2 Surface Lot) 46 Number of Parking Spaces Provided On -Site Parcel 2 (3 Level Parking Structure) 921 Number of Parking Spaces Provided On Site Parcel 2 & 6 (RH-2 & RH-4) 693 Total Campus Square Feet 363,274 Total Campus Parking Spaces Required 1,407 Total Number of Parking Spaces Provided On -Site 1,660 Total Number of Parking Spaces in Surplus of Parc Center East Specific Plan Parking Requirements +253 Percent of Surplus Parking Spaces per Parking Requirements 18% r Parking Standards obtained from City of Tustin, Pacific Center East Specific Plan (Table 5 Parking Standards) 2 S.F. Square Feet Gross Floor Appendices Appendix A Table 5 of the City of Tustin Pacific Center East Specific Plan City of Tustin as environmental mitigation or by the Air Quality Management District. Where required, the plan and monitoring data shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. 4. Maintenance - All required off-street parking spaces (Table 5) shall be available permanently and marked and maintained permanently for parking purposes. Off-street parking areas shall not be used for the sale, display or repair of motor vehicles or the storage of materials or other goods and services. Any repair or restriping of parking areas shall not change the configuration, size or location of parking spaces and landscaping unless approved by the Community Development Department. Table 5 PARKING STANDARDS Requiree Use Parking SO= Appliance, hardware store 1 space per 500 square feet of GFA Service stations Banks, savings and lbens, etc. Barber, beauty salons Business supply and support services Cafeterias Cocktail lounges and bars Coffee houses and cafes Commercial, ancillary Dance floor Daycare center, preschools Delicatessens Dry cleaners 6 GFA - gross floor area 52 2 spaces plus four for each service bay 1 space per 250 scfscare feet of GFA with a 6 -spate minimum I space per 200 square feet of GFA 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA 1 space per 75 square feet of GFA 1 space for each 3 seats 1 space for each 3 seats 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA 1 space per 7 square feet of dance floor area 1 space per employee and 1 space per five students 1 space per 200 square feet of GFA 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA Pacific Center East Specific Plan Table 5 (cont'd) PARKING STANDARDS Required Use Parking Spaces Health clubs and spas 1 space per 100 square feet of GFA (swim- ming pools shall be included in square footage) Racquetball/handball 13 spaces for each court plus spaces for additional uses onsite and for employees on maximum shift Home improvement/furnishings 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA Hotels 1 space per unit plus accommodations for resident manager and space for other uses onsite Laundromats 1 space per 3 machines or 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA, whichever is greater Manufacturing, assembly 1 space per 500 square feet of GFA but not less than 2 spaces per 3 employees. If there is more than 1 shift, the number of employees on the largest shift shall be used. Medical clinics or offices, dental clinics or offices 1 space per 150 square feet of GFA Offices, professional and corporate other than medical or dental 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA for buildings Research and development 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA for all office use and 1 space per 500 square feet of GFA for manufacture or assembly (but not less than 2 spaces per 3 employees on maximum shift) Restaurants, fast food 1 space per 100 square feet of GFA plus minimum stacking area of seven (7) cards where a service window is located Restaurants with drive-through 1 space per 100 square feet of GFA plus minimum stacking area of seven (7) urs where a service window is located 7 GFA = gross floor area 53 City of Tustin Table 5 (cont'd) PARKING STANDARDS Required$ Use Parking Spaces Retail businesses except as specified otherwise Service businesses, general unless otherwise specified Supermarkets, grocery stores, convenience stores Theaters, movies Tire sales and service Training, technical schools Warehouse, storage Wholesale establishments and warehouses not used exclusively for storage Other light industrial use a GFA = gross floor area 54 1 space per 200 square feet of GFA 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA 1 space per 200 square feet of GFA 1 space per 3 seats plus 5 spaces for em- ployees 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA of sales area and 4 spaces per service bay 10 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA 1 space per 1,000 square feet of GEA up to 20;000 square feet. 1 space per 2,000 square feet of GFA for second 20,1100 square feet. 1 space per 4,000 square feet in excess of 40,000 square feet plus space for other uses onsite. 1 space per 1,000 square feet of GFA; less that area devoted to office or sales which shall be calculated at 1 space per 250 square feet of GFA 1 space per 500 square feet of GFA Appendix B Joint Use Parking Area City of Tustin, Code of Ordinances Section 9264a 9264 - REDUCTION OF OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS a joint Use of Parking Areas. With the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, parking facilities may be used jointly for nonresidential uses with different peak hours of operation. Requests for a minor Conditional Use Permit for shared parking shall meet all of the following requirements: 1. A parking study prepared by a California licensed traffic engineer or civil engineer experienced in the preparation of such study 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 (ITE); 2. The number of parking spaces which maybe 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; 3. Parking spaces designated for joint use shall be located so that they will adequately serve the uses for which they are intended; 4. A written and recorded agreement shall be drawn to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and Community Development Director 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. 5. Zoning Administrator approval of a minor Conditional Use Permit is required for parking areas serving structures totaling less than thirty thousand (30,000) square feet. Planning Commission approval of a Conditional Use Permit is required for all other parking areas with joint -use parking. b Historic Resource Residential Parking. When associated with a recognized historic resource, as identified in this Section, the number of required off-street parking spaces may be decreased by one (1) garage or parking space upon Zoning Administrator approval of a minor adjustment per Section 9299 (Zoning Administrator). Approval of a minor adjustment can be made when all the following circumstances are found to apply: 1. The adjusted decrease is for parking that serves a residence that is currently listed or is qualified to be listed in the City's Historical Resources Survey. 2. A minimum one -car garage is provided on-site. 3. Providing anew garage space or access to anew garage could result in the significant alteration or demolition of any historic structure or resource listed or eligible to be listed in the City's Historical Resources Survey including historic garages that contribute to the listing of the structure or resource. 4. New increases in square footage would not exceed one hundred fifty (150) percent of the square footage of the structure that legally existed as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance; and, the total gross floor area of the residence does not exceed two thousand (2,000) square feet, including any detached habitable space (e.g. guest house, etc.). 5. The required number of parking spaces can be accommodated off-street outside of a fully enclosed garage within an existing legal driveway, tandem space, carport, etc. 6. The adjusted decrease is granted as a means to preserve the integrity of the historic structure. 7. That the design of the modification to the historic resource will be a positive contribution to the community. 8. The adjusted decrease is not associated with the addition of an accessory dwelling unit as authorized in this Code. (Ord. No. 1479, Sec. 11, 4-4-17) c Reduction in parking due to American Disabilities Act (ADA) upgrade. When required solely as a need to upgrade existing parking facilities to comply with Title 24, Title III and California Code of Regulations (CCR), or other California Access Codes or requirements, the total number of required parking spaces may be reduced at the discretion of the Community Development Director. The property owner shall demonstrate that by bringing the site into conformity with State and Federal ADA, required nonaccessible parking spaces will be unavoidably lost and shall submit a parking lot site plan that clearly identifies the entire onsite parking area showing that the loss of required nonaccessible parking spaces is unavoidable by parking space redesign. The Community Development Director may require appropriate parking lot redesign options that maintains any portion of the number of required nonaccessible parking spaces. (Ord. No. 1354, Sec. II, 11-4-08) SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY City of Tustin, California - engineering group, inc. SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY City of Tustin, California Prepared for: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION VP FACILITIES SERVICES 1200 Edinger Ave Tustin, CA 92780 Prepared by: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 4000 Westerly Place, Suite 280 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Alex Tabrizi, P.E., T.E. Jethro Jay Narciso, E.I.T I ti W TR 2722 lsa�� FAA OF January 3, 2019 JN: sl/rk 13090. doc JN: 2672-2017-01 Table of Contents Section Page 1.0 Introduction........................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of Report & Study Objectives 1-1 1.2 Site Location & Project Description 1-1 1.3 Traffic Study Area & Analysis Scenarios 1-3 2.0 Analysis Methodologies, Performance Criteria, & Thresholdsof Significance..................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Intersection Peak Hour Level of Service Analysis Methodology 2-1 2.2 Study Intersection ICU Methodology — City of Tustin Signalized Intersections & County of Orange Congestion Management Program (CMP) Signalized Intersections 2-3 2.3 Study Intersection HCM Methodology — Caltrans Study Intersections & City of Tustin Unsignalized Intersections 2-4 2.4 Study Intersection Level of Service Performance Criteria & Thresholds of Significance 2-5 3.0 Existing Traffic Volumes & Circulation System ..................................... 3-1 3.1 Existing Traffic Controls & Intersection Geometrics 3-1 3.2 Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes 3-1 3.3 City of Tustin General Plan Circulation Element 3-1 4.0 Projected & Future Traffic Volumes ...................................................... 4-1 4.1 Project Traffic Conditions 4-1 4.1.1 Project ITE Trip Generation 4-1 4.1.2 Project ITE Trip Generation Compared to Currently Approved Uses 4-1 4.1.3 Project Trip Distribution 4-3 4.1.3 Modal Split 4-4 4.1.4 Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes/Assignment 4-4 4.2 Existing Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes 4-4 4.3 Background Traffic 4-4 4.3.1 Method of Projection 4-4 4.3.2 Cumulative Projects Traffic 4-5 4.4 Opening Year Without Project Conditions Traffic Volumes 4-6 4.5 Opening Year With Project Conditions Traffic Volumes 4-6 Table of Contents (continued) Section Page 5.0 MUTCD Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ................................................ 5-1 6.0 Traffic Analysis....................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Existing Conditions Level of Service 6-1 6.2 Existing Plus Project Conditions Level of Service 6-1 6.3 Opening Year Without Project Conditions Level of Service 6-2 6.4 Opening Year With Project Conditions Level of Service 6-3 7.0 HCM 95th Percentile Vehicular Queue Analysis ...................................... 7-1 8.0 Valencia Avenue Project Access Gate Stacking Analysis ....................... 8-1 9.0 Findings, Recommendations & Conclusions ......................................... 9-1 9.1 Proposed Project 9-1 9.2 Project Trip Generation 9-3 9.3 Study Area & Conditions 9-3 9.4 Peak Hour Signal Warrant Analysis Summary 9-5 9.5 LOS Analysis & Significant Impact Summary 9-5 9.6 HCM 95th Percentile Vehicular Queue Analysis Summary 9-8 9.7 Valencia Avenue Project Access Gate Stacking Analysis Summary 9-9 9.8 Site Access Recommendations 9-10 9.9 Area -Wide Recommendations 9-10 List of Attachments Exhibits LocationMap........................................................................................................... 1-1 SitePlan................................................................................................................... 1-2 Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Controls.............................................................. 3-1 Existing Traffic Volumes........................................................................................... 3-2 City of Tustin Circulation Element.............................................................................. 3-3 City of Tustin Roadway Cross -Sections ................................. Inbound Project Trip Distribution.............................................................................. 4-1 Outbound Project Trip Distribution............................................................................ 4-2 Project Traffic Volumes............................................................................................. 4-3 Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes.......................................................................... 4-4 Cumulative Projects Location Map............................................................................. 4-5 Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes.......................................................................... 4-6 Opening Year Without Project Conditions Traffic Volumes ......................................... 4-7 Opening Year With Project Conditions Traffic Volumes .............................................. 4-8 Opening Year With Project Conditions Valencia Avenue Project Access Gate Stacking Analysis.................................................................................................................... 8-1 Recommendations.................................................................................................... 9-1 List of Attachments (continued) Tables Project ITE Trip Generation Rates............................................................................... 4-1 Proposed Project Trip Generation.............................................................................. 4-2 Planning Area Maximum Square Footage Allowed per Specific Plan & Unconstructed Balance.................................................................................................................... 4-3 ITE Trip Generation Rates for Currently Approved Land Uses ...................................... 4-4 Planning Areas 7, 9, 11, and 14 Trip Generation of Undeveloped Land Use Balance .. 4-5 Proposed Project Net Trip Generation........................................................................ 4-6 Related Projects Trip Generation................................................................................ 4-7 Newport Avenue/ Project Driveway 2 Study Intersection MUTCD Peak Hour Signal Warrant Analysis Summary ................................................ 5-1 Existing Conditions Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary .................................... 6-1 Existing Plus Project Conditions Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary .................. 6-2 Opening Year Without Project Conditions Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary.. 6-3 Opening Year With Project Conditions Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary....... 6-4 HCM 95th Percentile Peak Hour Vehicular Queue Analysis Summary Project Opening Year Conditions............................................................................... 7-1 List of Attachments (continued) Appendices ApprovedScope of Work.......................................................................................... A Existing Traffic Count Worksheets............................................................................ B MUTCD Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets............................................................. C Existing Conditions Intersection Analysis Worksheets ................................................ D Existing Plus Project Conditions Intersection Analysis Worksheets .............................. E Opening Year Without Project Conditions Intersection Analysis Worksheets .............. F Opening Year With Project Conditions Intersection Analysis Worksheets ................... G Crommelin Gate Stacking Analysis Methodology...................................................... H 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of Report & Study Objectives The purpose of this traffic study is to assess the traffic impacts of the proposed SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union development. 1.2 Site Location & Project Description The proposed Schools First Federal Credit Union project site is currently vacant and is bounded by Del Amo Avenue to the north, existing property to the east, existing property to the south, and Newport Avenue to the west. The project site currently consists of two (2) general office buildings that are part of the SchoolsFirst headquarters and additional vacant land. The proposed project is planned to consist of the following land uses: • 180,000 square feet of General Office and 5,000 square feet of Bank. A second potential 117,957 square feet general office building is planned as a future phase to be located at the southwest corner of Edinger Avenue at Del Amo Avenue. The second site currently consists of a wholesale commercial building currently owned by the client. The building will be removed and replaced with a general office building for the Client's use. The buildout timeline for this building has not yet been determined and the traffic impact study will not analyze the second general office building of the proposed project. Access for the proposed project is planned via the following: • One (1) existing unsignalized full access driveway on Valencia Avenue. This access is planned to be gated with card reader system to allow for entry. • One (1) existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue. This access is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. ®engineering group, inc. rkenginoerrom • One (1) unsignalized full access driveway on Del Amo Avenue. An existing driveway to the west of this driveway is currently restricted to right-in/right-out movements based on the pavement striping. However, based on existing traffic counts collected at this location, a significant number of vehicles are performing left -turn maneuvers in and out of this driveway. The proposed project is reconfiguring the driveway as a fire emergency access. City of Tustin Planning Area 11 & Currently Approved Land Uses: The project site is designated as Planning Area 11 and is part of the larger block bound by the Railway, Edinger Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, Newport Avenue, and Valencia Avenue. This block contains the following Planning Areas: • Planning Area 7: Currently approved for 113,300 square feet of office use; • Planning Area 9: Currently approved for 64,500 square feet of R&D/light industrial use; • Planning Area 11: Currently approved for 132,000 square feet of office and 8,000 square feet of restaurant use; and • Planning Area 14: Currently approved for 119,929 square feet of office use. Based on information provided by City staff, the following land uses are currently constructed in these planning areas: • Planning Area 7: Currently 32,400 square feet of office use constructed; • Planning Area 9: Currently 60,212 square feet of R&D/light industrial use constructed; • Planning Area 11: Currently vacant; and • Planning Area 14: Currently 97,828 square feet of office use constructed. The location of the project site is presented on Exhibit 1-1. The site plan is shown on Exhibit 1-2. engineering + group, Inc. 1-2 The project will be evaluated in a single phase and is planned to open in 2021. This traffic study has been prepared in accordance with the traffic study guidelines, requirements, and thresholds of significance for the City of Tustin, the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP), and Caltrans. This study is prepared in accordance with the scope of work approved by the City of Tustin staff. A copy of the approved scope of work is contained in Appendix A. 1.3 Traffic Study Area & Analysis Scenarios Exhibit 1-1 illustrates the site location map and traffic analysis study area. The study area consists of the following intersections: The analysis evaluates traffic conditions of the study intersections for the following scenarios in accordance with the City of Tustin and Orange County and the approved scope of work contained in Appendix A: • Existing Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); • Forecast Existing Plus Project Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); • Opening Year Without Project Conditions: Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Project (EAC) Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); and ®engineering group, Inc. 1-3 North-South Street East-West Street 1. SR -55 SB Ramps Edinger Avenue 2. Newport Avenue Edinger Avenue 3. Del Amo Avenue Edinger Avenue 4. Newport Avenue SR -55 NB Ramps — Del Amo Avenue 5. Newport Avenue Valencia Avenue 6. Red Hill Avenue Valencia Avenue 7 Red Hill Avenue Edinger Avenue 8. Project Driveway 1 Valencia Avenue 9. Newport Avenue Project Driveway 2 10. Del Amo Avenue Project Driveway 3 11. Del Amo Avenue Project Driveway 4 The analysis evaluates traffic conditions of the study intersections for the following scenarios in accordance with the City of Tustin and Orange County and the approved scope of work contained in Appendix A: • Existing Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); • Forecast Existing Plus Project Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); • Opening Year Without Project Conditions: Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Project (EAC) Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); and ®engineering group, Inc. 1-3 • Opening Year With Project Conditions: Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Projects With Project (EACP) Conditions (AM & PM peak hour). As requested by the City of Tustin, the traffic analysis also includes evaluation of the vehicular queuing analysis of the full access project driveways on Newport Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, and Valencia Avenue for on-site and off-site based on opening year conditions. I:j engineering 1� group, Inc. 1-4 Exhibit I - I Location Map Legend: Sway Area Intersection I= Project Site N 26n-2017-01 engineering SchooisFirst Federal Credit Union Traftk Impact Sally, City of Tustin, CA group, Inc. engineenng arouo. inc. 2.0 Analysis Methodologies, Performance Criteria, & Thresholds of Significance This section of the report presents the methodologies used to perform the traffic analyses summarized in this report in accordance with the City of Tustin, Orange County, and Caltrans requirements. This section also discusses the agency -established applicable performance criteria and thresholds of significance for the study facilities. 2.1 Intersection Peak Hour Level of Service Analysis Methodology Level of service (LOS) is commonly used as a qualitative description of intersection operation and is based on the capacity of the intersection and the volume of traffic using the intersection. The definitions of level of service for uninterrupted flow (flow unrestrained by the existence of traffic control devices) are: • LOS A represents free flow. Individual users are virtually unaffected by the presence of others in the traffic stream. • LOS B is in the range of stable flow, but the presence of other users in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively unaffected, but there is a slight decline in the freedom to maneuver • LOS C is in the range of stable flow, but marks the beginning of the range of flow in which the operation of individual users becomes significantly affected by interactions with others in the traffic stream. • LOS D represents high-density but stable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted, and the driver experiences a generally poor level of comfort and convenience. 2-1 engineering group, Inc. I Tr 1111 • LOS E represents operating conditions at or near the capacity level. All speeds are reduced to a low, but relatively uniform value. Small increases in flow will cause breakdowns in traffic movement. • LOS F is used to define forced or breakdown flow. This condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which can traverse the point. Queues form behind such locations. The following shows the jurisdiction of each study intersection and the level of service methodology that will be utilized to evaluate the intersection: # Study Intersection Jurisdiction Analysis Method c cD M< V tn V = V 1. SR -55 SB Ramp/ Edinger Ave X X X X X 2. Newport Ave / Edinger Ave X X X 3. Del Amo Ave / Edinger Ave X X 4. Newport Ave / SR -55 NB Ramp — Del Amo Ave X X X X X 5. Newport Ave / Valencia Ave X X 6. Red Hill Ave / Valencia Ave X X 7. Red Hill Ave / Edinger Ave X X 8. Project Driveway 1 / Valencia Avenue X X 9. Newport Avenue / Project Driveway 2 X X 10. Del Amo Avenue/ Project Driveway 3 X X 11. Del Amo Avenue/ Project Driveway 4 X X ®engineering group. Inc. i k,etttlncrirnul 2-2 2.2 Study Intersection ICU Methodology — City of Tustin Signalized Intersections & County of Orange Congestion Management Program (CMP) Signalized Intersections The Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis method is utilized by the City of Tustin and County of Orange CMP to determine the operating LOS of signalized intersections. To calculate the ICU, the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared with the capacity of the intersection. ICU is usually expressed as a ratio. This ratio represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity. The ICU analysis methodology utilizes the following parameters consistent with the governing agencies' requirements and guidelines: The ICU analysis methodology describes the operation of an intersection using a range of LOS from LOS A (free-flow conditions) to LOS F (severely congested conditions), based on the corresponding ranges of volume -to -capacity at intersections. The following thresholds are used in assigning a letter value to the resulting Levels of Service. ICU Intersection LOS & V/C Ranges LOS CRITICAL VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO A 0.00-0.60 B 0.61 -0.70 C 0.71 -0.80 D 0.81 - 0.90 E 0.91 - 1.00 F >1.00 Level of service based on peak hour ICU values will be calculated using the following assumptions: • Saturation Flow Rate: 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane • Clearance Interval: 0.05 2-3 I7 engineering i group, inc. 0: Oil • Right -Turn -On -Red Utilization Factor*: 0.75 * "De -facto" right -turn lane is assumed in the ICU calculation if 19 feet from edge to outside of through -lane exists and parking is prohibited during peak periods. For this study, the ICU level of service grades will be determined utilizing the Traffix analysis softwa re. 2.3 Study Intersection HCM Methodology — Caltrans Study Intersections & City of Tustin Unsignalized Intersections The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology is the adopted methodology for evaluation of State Highway facilities by The State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). This methodology is also utilized for evaluation of unsignalized study intersections and driveways in the City of Tustin. The HCM methodology defines level of service as a qualitative measure which describes operational conditions within a traffic stream, generally in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. The criteria used to evaluate LOS (Level of Service) conditions vary based on the type of roadway and whether the traffic flow is considered interrupted or uninterrupted. For signalized intersections and all -way stop -controlled intersections, average control delay per vehicle is used to determine the level of service. For intersections and driveways with stop control on the minor approach only, the calculation of level of service is dependent on the occurrence of gaps occurring in the free-flow traffic movement of the main street, and the level of service is determined based on the worst individual movements on the stop - controlled minor approach or movements sharing a single lane on the stop -controlled minor approach. The HCM analysis methodology describes the operation of an intersection using a range of LOS from LOS A (free-flow conditions) to LOS F (severely congested conditions), based on the corresponding ranges of stopped delay experienced per vehicle for signalized and unsignalized intersections. The following thresholds are used in assigning a letter value to the resulting Levels of Service. M engineering group, inc. i �.rncprr �r roro 2-4 HCM Intersection LOS & Delay Ranges For this study, the HCM level of service grades will be determined utilizing the HCM 2010 Methodology and the Synchro analysis software. All analysis parameters utilized in this analysis are in accordance with the City of Tustin and Caltrans Traffic Study Guidelines. Default saturation flow rates of 1,900 vehicles per hour of green (vphg) for all lanes have been assumed for Existing and Opening Year (2021) scenarios. Existing conditions peak hour factors have been calculated based upon the traffic counts collected at the study area intersections. Existing peak hour factors have been used for Project Opening Year (2021). 2.4 Study Intersection Level of Service Performance Criteria & Thresholds of Significance City of Tustin & Orange Count CMP Performance Standard • CMP intersections in the City of Tustin: Level of Service E (peak hour ICU less than or equal to 1.00). • All other intersections: Level of Service D (peak hour ICU less than or equal to 0.90). 41 engineering group, Inc. r:,wgin.:ei.ronj 2-5 Average Control Delay Per Vehicle (Seconds) LOS Signalized Unsignalized A 0.00- 10.00 0.00-10.00 B 10.01 - 20.00 10.01 - 15.00 C 20.01 - 35.00 15.01 - 25.00 D 35.01 - 55.00 25.01 - 35.00 E 55.01 - 80.00 35.01 - 50.00 F >80.00 >50.00 For this study, the HCM level of service grades will be determined utilizing the HCM 2010 Methodology and the Synchro analysis software. All analysis parameters utilized in this analysis are in accordance with the City of Tustin and Caltrans Traffic Study Guidelines. Default saturation flow rates of 1,900 vehicles per hour of green (vphg) for all lanes have been assumed for Existing and Opening Year (2021) scenarios. Existing conditions peak hour factors have been calculated based upon the traffic counts collected at the study area intersections. Existing peak hour factors have been used for Project Opening Year (2021). 2.4 Study Intersection Level of Service Performance Criteria & Thresholds of Significance City of Tustin & Orange Count CMP Performance Standard • CMP intersections in the City of Tustin: Level of Service E (peak hour ICU less than or equal to 1.00). • All other intersections: Level of Service D (peak hour ICU less than or equal to 0.90). 41 engineering group, Inc. r:,wgin.:ei.ronj 2-5 City of Tustin & Orange County CMP Mitigation Requirement For ICU greater than the acceptable level of service, mitigation of the project contribution is required to bring intersection back to no -project conditions or better if project contribution is greater than 0.03 at CMP locations in the City of Tustin (the impact threshold specified in the CMP), or 0.02 or greater for all other intersections in the study area. State HighwaV (Caltrans) Performance Standard Level of Service D (average delay less than or equal to 55 seconds for signalized intersections, 35 seconds for unsignalized intersections). State Highway (Caltrans) Mitigation Requirement For average delays greater than the acceptable level of service, mitigation of the project contribution is required to bring intersection back to no -project conditions or better If project contribution is 2 seconds or greater. engineering ? group, inc. 2-6 3.0 Existinq Traffic Volumes & Circulation System This section provides a discussion of existing study area conditions and traffic volumes. 3.1 Existing Traffic Controls & Intersection Geometrics Exhibit 3-1 identifies the existing roadway conditions for the study area roadways. The number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and the existing intersection controls are identified. 3.2 Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes Existing conditions intersection level of service calculations are based upon manual AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts taken in May 2018. The AM peak hour traffic volumes were determined by counting the two-hour period between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM. Similarly, the PM peak hour traffic volumes were identified by counting the two-hour period between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. The traffic count worksheets are included in Appendix B. Existing traffic volumes for the study area intersections are shown on Exhibit 3-2. 3.3 City of Tustin General Plan Circulation Element Exhibit 3-3 shows the City of Tustin General Plan Roadway Network and Circulation System. As shown in Exhibit 3-3, Newport Avenue is classified as a six -lane major arterial roadway and Del Amo Avenue is classified as a four -lane secondary arterial roadway. Exhibit 3-4 shows the City of Tustin General Plan Roadway Cross Sections. engineering group, inc, r1'.�i)uts:rr,inn 3-1 Exhibit 3-1 Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Controls Legend: e = Traffic Signal --RTO = Right Turn Overlap = Free Right Turn = Project Site N 26n-2017-01 engineering SdoohFnt Frdoral Credit Union Traffic Impact Study, City of Tusun. CA group, inc. 1. SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 2. Newport Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 4. Newport Ave. (NS) & SR -55 NB Ramps (EW) NO, j " —2�B86 410/102! I S. Project Dwy. I (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) N Edinger Avenue 55 3. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 5. Newport Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EWA 9. Newport Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 2 (EW) Exhibit 3-2 Existing Trafifc Volumes O Valencia Ue Legend: 10/20 = AM/PM Peak Hour Volumes = Project Site 6. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EWA 10. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 3 (E" 7. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 11. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 4 (EW) 2672-2017-01 engineering SdaoisFirst Federal Credit Union Traffic Impact Surly, City of Tustin, CA group, inc. Exhibit 3-3 City of Tustin Circulation Element 16, J 641 IU • 0 a 41 og ft ST te '0 Site EmsLem Trozin "C-1- -1 -0 gn, jj dor ati .'Z* in 0 diaArommotic only. A st (I laves) Mijsr (6 Urzs) N NIM ified Major (6 t 11ri) V A i� PrinjAry (4 hivs) NILKlilied hirrogy (4 bnc.%) Sec%ipdary (11 or 2 laiwi) iiOiE� Aqwcwcd Rmidmiyi City tkoind.gry Minrikiii; Arca liouWAry 2672-2017-01 engineering SchoolsFbv Federal Credit Union Traft Impact Study, City of TuWN CA group, Inc. Exhibit 3-4 City of Tustin Roadway Cross -Sections MOr AWMIM •W �fl w NOPOW AIRIM& I W " M= MW N 0C1t 8 MM) 2672-2017-01 engineering SdioolsFirst Federal Credit Union Traffic Impact Study, City or Tustin, CA aroun. Inc. 4.0 Projected & Future Traffic Volumes This section provides a discussion on methodologies utilized to derive future traffic volumes for the study area. 4.1. Prooect Traffic Conditions 4.1.1 Project ITE Trip Generation Trip generation represents the amount of traffic that is attracted and produced by a development. Trip generation for the proposed project is determined based on ITE 10`h Edition trip generation rates for the proposed land uses as shown in Table 4-1. As previously noted, the proposed project consists of constructing a general office building (180,000 square feet) and bank (5,000 square feet). Utilizing the ITE trip generation rates shown in Table 4-1, Table 4-2 summarizes the daily and peak hour trip generation for the proposed project. As shown in Table 4-2, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 2,363 daily trips which include approximately 322 AM peak hour trips and approximately 268 PM peak hour trips. 4.1.2 Project ITE Trip Generation Compared to Currently Approved Uses As previously noted, the project site is designated as Planning Area 11 and is part of the larger block bound by the Railway, Edinger Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, Newport Avenue, and Valencia Avenue. This block contains the following Planning Areas: • Planning Area 7: Currently approved for 113,300 square feet of office use; • Planning Area 9: Currently approved for 64,500 square feet of R&D/light industrial use; Mengineering group, Inc. rt, .;iiipn,w :oip 4-1 • Planning Area 11: Currently approved for 132,000 square feet of office and 8,000 square feet of restaurant use; and • Planning Area 14: Currently approved for 119,929 square feet of office use. Based on information provided by City staff, the following land uses are currently constructed in these planning areas: • Planning Area 7: Currently 32,400 square feet of office use constructed; • Planning Area 9: Currently 60,212 square feet of R&D/light industrial use constructed; • Planning Area 11: Currently vacant; and • Planning Area 14: Currently 97,828 square feet of office use constructed. Table 4-3 summarizes the balance of land uses between what has been constructed and what is approved for each planning area. As shown in Table 4-3, the balance between the constructed uses versus the approved uses for the block containing Planning Areas 7, 9, 11, and 14 is as follows: • Planning Area 7: Balance of 80,900 square feet of office use allowed for construction; • Planning Area 9: Balance of 4,288 square feet of R&D/light industrial use allowed for construction; • Planning Area 11: Balance of 132,000 square feet of office and 8,000 square feet of restaurant use allowed for construction; and • Planning Area 14: Balance of 22,101 square feet of office use allowed for construction. engineering group, Inc. 4-2 To determine the trip generation potential for the undeveloped balance of land uses for Planning Areas 7, 9, 11, and 14, the ITE 10" Edition trip generation rates are utilized as shown in Table 4-4. Utilizing the trip generation rates from Table 4-4, Table 4-5 summarizes the trip generation potential of the undeveloped balance of land uses for the block containing Planning Areas 7, 9, 11, and 14. As shown in Table 4-5, the undeveloped balance of land uses for Planning Area 7, 9, 11, and 14 have the potential to generate approximate 3,207 daily trips which include approximately 355 AM peak hour trips and approximately 350 PM peak hour trips. Table 4-6 shows the net difference between the trip generation of the undeveloped land uses within the block containing Planning Areas 7, 9, 11, and 14 and the proposed project. As shown in Table 4-6, when compared to the undeveloped balance of land uses allowed in this block, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 844 fewer daily trips which include approximately 33 fewer AM peak hour trips and approximately 82 fewer PM peak hour trips. It should be noted, the project impact analysis evaluated in this traffic study is based on the project's trip generation of 2,363 daily trips, 322 AM peak hour trips, and 268 PM peak hour trips. 4.1.3 Project Trip Distribution Trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the project. Trip distribution is heavily influenced by the geographical location of the site, the location of retail, employment, recreational opportunities, and the proximity to the regional freeway system. The directional orientation of traffic was determined by evaluating existing and proposed land uses and highways within the community. Forecast trip distribution for the proposed project has been developed through discussions with the City during the scoping process. ®englneering group. Inc. ch,aulii!c°c�in 4-3 Exhibit 4-1 shows the inbound trip distribution for the proposed project. Exhibit 4- 2 shows the outbound trip distribution for the proposed project. 4.1.4 Modal Split Modal split denotes the proportion of traffic generated by a project that would use any of the transportation modes, namely buses, cars, bicycles, motorcycles, trains, carpools, etc. The traffic reducing potential of public transit and other modes is significant. However, the traffic projections in this study are conservative in that public transit and alternative transportation may be able to reduce the traffic volumes, but, no modal split reduction is applied to the projections. With the implementation of transit service and provision of alternative transportation ideas and incentives, the automobile traffic demand can be reduced significantly. 4.1.5 Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes/Assignment The assignment of traffic from the project site to the adjoining roadway system has been based upon the project's trip generation, trip distribution, and proposed arterial highway and local street systems that this traffic study assumes would be in place by the time of occupancy of the site. Project traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-3. 4.2 Existing Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes Existing Plus Project Conditions traffic volumes are derived by adding the project traffic volumes shown in Exhibit 4-3 to the existing traffic volumes shown in Exhibit 3-2. Existing Plus Project Conditions traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 4-4. 4.3 Backciround Traffic 4.3.1 Method of Projection To assess future conditions, project traffic is combined with existing traffic, area - wide growth, and cumulative projects' traffic. ®engineering group, in& rteuunex.cJill MI For opening year (2021) conditions, to account for area wide/ambient growth in the study area, an annual growth rate of one percent (1 %) has been applied to existing traffic volumes over a three-year period, as directed by City Staff. 4.3.2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Information on future projects in the vicinity of study area has been obtained from the City of Tustin and includes project sin the City of Tustin as well as the City of Santa Ana for inclusion in this analysis and shown in Table 4-3. "Probable future projects" include projects that have been filed with the City but are not yet approved or projects that the City reasonably anticipates will be submitted in the foreseeable future. Table 4-3 shows the proposed land uses for the nearby cumulative projects provided by City staff. Exhibit 4-5 shows the location of the cumulative projects. Table 4-3 also shows the peak hour and daily trip generation for the cumulative projects. Cumulative Projects traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-6. In reality, some of the cumulative projects may be downsized or may not be developed by project opening year (2021). In addition, many of the related projects have been or will be subject to a variety of mitigation measures that will reduce the potential environmental impacts associated with those projects. However, those mitigation measures have not been taken into account in projecting the environmental impact of the related projects. Therefore, the cumulative analyses set forth below are conservative and could result in greater impacts than actually anticipated. Additionally, the analysis utilizes a growth rate of one (1) percent per year for project opening year (2021) conditions, which would already capture and account for most projects in the area. The growth rate methodology is considered conservative since it is applied to all movements of the study intersections. ®engineering group, inc. rx�agin :r� cum 4-5 4.4 Opening Year Without Project Conditions Traffic Volumes Opening Year Without Project Conditions traffic volumes consist of existing traffic volumes and a 3% growth rate (to account for three years of annual growth at 1%) and also the traffic associated with cumulative projects in year 2021 as discussed in Section 4.3.2. Opening Year Without Project Conditions traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-7. 4.5 Opening Year With Project Conditions Traffic Volumes Opening Year With Project Conditions traffic volumes consist of existing traffic volumes and a 3% growth rate (to account for three years of annual growth at 1%), the traffic associated with cumulative projects in year 2021 as discussed in Section 4.3.2, and also the traffic generated by the proposed project. Opening Year With Project Conditions traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-8. 0 0 0 M. engineering group. inc. Edinger Avenue Legend: I 10 =Percent to Zone * = Project Site N 2672-2017-01 20 SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Traffic Impact Study, City or Tustin, CA Exhibit 4-1 Inbound Project Trip Distribution . -- "d Avenue engineering group, inc. Exhibit 4-2 Outbound Project Trip Distribution J� k5P I0o Edinger Avenue `-55 20 30 10 30 15 5 45* 25 55 Fa,� 5 �oQo^ 15 10 e 5 Valencia Avenue 0 ,��J �5 'R�!Oa Legend: I10 =Percent from Zone )� = Project Site N 2672-2017-01 SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Traffic Impact Study, City of Tustin, CA engineering group, inc. 1. SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 2. Newport Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 4. Newport Ave. (NS) & SR -55 NB Ramps (EW) I B. Project Dwy. I (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) N Edinger Avenue 55 3. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 5. Newport Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) 9. Newport Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 2 (EW) Exhibit 4-3 Project Trafifc Volumes 40 Q°�T -P �� o Valencia Legend: 10/20 = AM/PM Peak Hour Volumes =Project Site 6. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) 10. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 3 (EW) 7. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 11. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 4 (EW) 2672-2017-01 engineering SchoolsFkst Federal Credit Union Traffk Impact Study, City of Tustin, CA group, Inc. 1. SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 2. Newport Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) —37gR/5 p 69 f-10/10 1' 2 4. Newport Ave. (NS) & SR -55 NB Ramps (EW) 1� 14-114/18 . -292/886 172- 428/ Exhibit 4-4 Existing Plus Project Trafifc Volumes Edinger Avenue�Q°� -e j �� o 2 0� 55 t 80 `394/397 967/124 67/12 �7— 6 87/96- C o, 3. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 5. Newport Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) (► q-16 18/702 .o N I 8. Project Dwy. I (NS) & 9. Newport Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) Project Dwy. 2 (EW) N 2672-2017-01 SchoolsFi st Federal Credit Union Traffic Impact Surly, City of Tustin, CA Veen" oue Legend: 10/20 = AM/PM Peak Hour Volumes = Project Site 6. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) 10. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 3 (EW) tee,. q�e 7. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EV) —0/0134 f-170/62 11. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 4 (EWA engineering group, inc. lui 1. SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 2. Newport Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 4. Newport Ave. (NS) & SR -55 NB Ramps (EW) Exhibit 4-6 Cumulative Projects Trafifc Volumes Edinger Avenuejk 0 o" 55 3. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) S. Newport Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) Valente Iue Legend: 10/20 = AM/PM Peak Hour Volumes =Project Site N LnW 4-144/54 i 1, f-37/17 6. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) ' 8. Project Dwy. I (NS) & 9. Newport Ave. (NS) & 10. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) Project Dwy. 2 (EW) Project Dwy. 3 (EW) N 2672-2017-01 SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Traffic Impact Study, City of Tustin, CA 20/515 77/ 122 \moo o.ao 7. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 11. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 4 (EW) engineering group, inc. I. SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 2. Newport Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 4. Newport Ave. (NS) & SR -55 NB Ramps (EW) N 338//930 I 8. Project Dwy. I (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) N Exhibit 4-7 Opening Year Without Project Conditions Trafifc Volumes — Edinger Avenue 3, Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 5. Newport Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) 9. Newport Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 2 (EW) Valencia A "�-_ hue LCgCI IY. 10120 = AM/PM Peak Hour Volumes = Project Site 6. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) 10. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 3 (EW) 7. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 11. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Project Dwy. 4 (EW) 2672-2017-01 engineering ScImIsFi st Federal Creft Union Traflk Impact Study, City of Tustin, CA group, inc. 1308% 242 111f 367/288 --*1 o. o N �O 1. SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EUV) 2. Newport Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) 276/73-! '� } 198/33- 243/26-1 98/33 243/26 �o^ N- 4. Newport Ave. (NS) & SR -55 NB Ramps (EW) Q �I16/18 t. 3381930 h� Exhibit 4-8 Opening Year With Project Coditions Traffic Volumes P Edinger Avenue j e�Q0 Pe 0 2 55 3. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EUV) �cia&enue Legend: 10/20 = AWPM Peak Hour Volumes * = Project Site 5. Newport Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) 6. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EUV) 441— 777/ 4— 265/263--� 7. Red Hill Ave. (NS) & Edinger Ave. (EW) —N %am CM51136 a /0 J i t., i--17//63 8. Project Dwy. I (NS) & 9. Newport Ave. (NS) & 10. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & 11. Del Amo Ave. (NS) & Valencia Ave. (EW) Project Dwy. 2 (EW) Project Dwy. 3 (EUV) Project Dwy. 4 (EM N 2672-2017-01 engineering SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union Traffic Impact Study, City of Tustin, CA On group, inc. TABLE 4-1 Project ITE Trip Generation Rates' Land Use Unitsz ITE Code AM PM Daily In Out Total In Out Total General Office TSF 710 1.00 0.16 1.16 0.18 0.97 1.15 9.74 Walk -In Bank TSF 911 11.72 10.82 22.54 1 5.34 6.79 12.13 1 121.30 1 Source: 201717E Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition) Z TSF = Thousand Square Feet i s l rk tab/eAK 13090T8. x/sr 1N:2672-2017-01 Table 4-2 Proposed Project Trip Generation' Land Use (ITE Code) Quantity Units2 AM PM Daily In Out Total In Out Total General Office (710) 180.000 TSF 180 29 209 33 174 207 1,753 Walk -In Bank (911) 5.000 TSF 59 54 113 27 34 61 610 Total 1 239 83 322 60 208 268 2,363 1 Source: 2017 ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition) ' TSF = Thousand Square Feet is /rktables1RK 13090T8.xlsx 1N:2672-2017-01 Table 4-3 Planning Area Maximum Square Footage Allowed per Specific Plan & Unconstructed Balance PACIFIC CENTER EAST - SCHOOLSFIRST PROPERTY Actual Acreage FAR Sq. Footage/FAR Sq. Footage Proposed/Actual Planning Area Allowed Built Balance P/anningArea 7 a "' 119 3U0 32;400 : 80 00 z^4-a� A:fi5 77 105,436' Planning Area 9 64,500 60,212 4,288 3.28 0.40 57,081 60,212 PfvnningEtrEa" 13.; ** 10,000 - 14U;000 6:53 0.65 184,862; 185,000 Planning Area 14 119,929 97,828 22,101 5.082 0.40 88,549 97,828 437,729190440 247;89 a 14;05 `448,476 448,476 `" *Under the Sq. Footage Proposed/Actual, Planning Areas 9 & 14 have been built, and Planning Area 11 is proposed (180,000 sf - office + 5,000 sf - bank). With the allowed development capacity of 448,476, that leaves 105,436 sf available for Planning Area 7. The Development Capacity outlined in the blue section of the table is determined by Actual Acreage, which is based on information provided by SchoolsFirst **Per the footnotes in table 4 of the Pacific Center East Specific Plan, there is an assumption that PA 11 would have 8,000 square feet of restaurant. The trip count for this square footage needs to be converted to "walk in bank" in order to accurately account for the trips being generated. i_/rktableslRKI3090TB.xl9c IN_2672-2017-01 Table 4-4 ITE Trip Generation Rates for Currently Approved Land Uses' Land Use UnitS2 ITE Code AM PM Daily In 7 Out Total In Out Total General Light Industrial TSF 110 0.62 0.08 0.70 0.08 0.55 0.63 4.96 General Office TSF 710 1.00 0.16 1.16 0.18 0.97 1.15 9.74 High Turnover Sit -Down Restaurant TSF 932 5.47 4.47 9.94 6.06 1 3.71 9.77 112.18 1 Source: 2017 ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition) TSF = thousand square feet j: /rkta6les1RK 13090TB.xlsx JN:2672-2017-01 Table 4-5 Planning Areas 7, 9, 11, and 14 Trip Generation of Undeveloped Land Use Balance' Land Use (ITE Code) Quantity Units2 AM ?M Daily In Out Total In Out Total General Light Industrial (110) 4.288 TSF 3 0 3 0 2 2 21 General Office (710) 235.001 TSF 234 38 272 43 227 270 2,289 High Turnover Sit -Down Restaurant (932) 8.000 TSF 44 36 80 48 30 78 897 Total 1 281 1 74 355 91 259 350 1 3,207 1 Source: 2017 ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition) TSF = Thousand square feet. j:1rktab1es1RK 13090T6.xlsx IN.•2672-2017-01 Table 4-6 Proposed Project Net Trip Generation' Land Use AM PM Daily In Out Total In Out Total Proposed Project 239 83 322 60 208 268 2,363 Planning Areas 7, 9, 11, and 14 Trip Generation of Undeveloped Land Use Balance -281 -74 -355 -91 -259 -350 -3,207 Net Trip Generation -42 1 9 -33 1 -31 -51 -82 -844 j: /rkta bles/RK 13090 TB. xl sx IN:2672-2017-01 TABLE 4-7 Related Projects Trip Generation' Jurisdiction Project Land Use ITE Trip Code Quantity Units' Peak Hour Daily AM PM In Out Total In Out Total TAZ 1 Tustin Pacific Center East Service Station with Convenience Market 945 8 VFP 51 49 100 57 55 112 1,643 TAZ 1 Total 51 49 100 57 SS 112 1,643 TAZ 2 Heritage Elementary School Elementary School 520 26 SU 9 8 17 2 2 4 49 Tustin Legacy Magnet School Middle/Jr. High School 522 700 [STTU 219 187 406 58 61 119 1,491 TAZ 2 Total 228 195 423 60 63 123 1,540 TAZ 3 Tustin The Village at Tustin Legacy Hospital 610 69.569 1 TSF 42 20 62 22 46 68 746 TAZ 3 Total 42 20 62 22 46 68 746 TAZ 4 Tustin Tustin Army Reserve Center General Office 710 35.369 1 TSF 35 6 41 7 34 41 344 TAZ 4 Total 35 6 41 7 34 41 344 TAZ S Santa Ana The Heritage Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) 220 1,221 DU 129 432 561 431 253 684 8,938 Shopping Center 820 12.900 TSF 8 5 13 24 26 50F32,843 Fast Food w/ Drive Thru 934 5.500 TSF 113 108 221 93 86 179 General Office 710 56.000 TSF 56 9 65 10 54 64 Tustin Flight at Tustin Legacy Shopping Center 820 870.000 TSF 507 311 818 1,591 1,724 3,315 Aker 105/6 Trip Reduction-' 456 280 736 1,432 1,552 2,984 29,559 TAZ 5 Total 762 1 834 1,596 1,990 1,971 3,961 42,119 TAZ 6 Tustin Levity at Tustin Legacy Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) 220 161 DU 17 57 1 74 57 33 90 1,179 Single Family Homes 210 57 DU 1 t 3Z 43 36 21 57 538 TAZ 6 Total 28 89 117 93 54 147 1,717 Cumulative Developments Total Trip Generation 1,146 1,193 2,339 2,229 2,223 4,452 48,109 I Cumulative Developments provided by the City of Tustin and the City of Santa Ana. ' TSF = Thousand Square Feet DU = Dwelling Units VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions Per the Draft Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Update Tratk Impact Study (March 2016) , a 10% trip reduction rate was applied to all projects within Tustin Legacy to account for internal capture. i:1rkta bles1RK 13090T8.x/sr W-2671-1017-01 5.0 MUTCD Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis As noted earlier, the existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. The existing unsignalized study intersection has been evaluated for signalization based on the peak hour warrants and procedures contained in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). Table 5-1 summarizes the results of the MUTCD peak hour signal warrant analysis at the Newport Avenue / Project Driveway 2 unsignalized study intersection for the analysis scenarios evaluated as part of this report; detailed MUTCD signal warrant analysis sheets are contained in Appendix C. As shown in Table 5-1, the Newport Avenue / Project Driveway 2 unsignalized study intersection does not satisfy the MUTCD peak hour traffic signal warrants for any of the analysis scenarios evaluated as part of this report. It should be noted. for Onenina Year With Proiect Conditions, the intersection is forecast to have 236 vehicles in the hour on the minor street approach and is very close to meeting the warrants durina the PM peak hour. With the addition of 21 peak hour trips (increase from 236 to 257 vehicles) the intersection would be warranted for a traffic signal during the PM peak hour. Although a traffic signal is not currently warranted, the intersection should continue to be monitored for additional area -wide growth as traffic may warrant a traffic signal in the future. engineering group, inc. r'<r�nqu���er cnm 5-1 TABLE 5-1 Newport Avenue / Project Driveway 2 Study Intersection MUTCD Peak Hour Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Analysis Scenario Peak Hour Signal Warrant Satisfied? AM Peak Hour No Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour No AM Peak Hour No Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour No AM Peak Hour No Opening Year Without Project Conditions PM Peak Hour No AM Peak Hour No Opening Year With Project Conditions PM Peak Hour No i:lrktables/RK 13090TB.xlsx 1N: 2631-2017-05 6.0 Traffic Analysis This section provides a discussion on the study intersection peak hour level of service analysis and findings. 6.1 Existing Conditions Level of Service Existing Conditions Level of Service (LOS) calculations for the study intersections are shown in Table 6-1 and are based upon manual peak hour turning movement counts compiled for RK in May 2018 and shown in Exhibit 3-2 and the existing geometry shown in Exhibit 3-1. As shown in Table 6-1, all study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better for CMP intersections and LOS D or better for all other intersections) during the peak hours for Existing Conditions. Detailed LOS analysis sheets for Existing Conditions are contained in Appendix D. 6.2 Existing Plus Project Conditions Level of Service Existing Plus Project Conditions Level of Service (LOS) calculations for the study intersections are shown in Table 6-2 and are based upon the Existing Plus Project Conditions traffic volumes shown in Exhibit 4-4 and the existing geometry shown in Exhibit 3-1. As shown in Table 6-2, all study area intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better for CMP intersections and LOS D or better for all other intersections) during the peak hours for Existing Plus Project Conditions with the exception of the following study intersection which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS (LOS E or F): • Newport Avenue / Project Driveway 2 (PM peak hour only). Based on agency -established thresholds of significance, the proposed project is forecast to result in a significant traffic impact at the above listed intersection for Existing Plus Project Conditions. Detailed LOS analysis sheets for Existing Plus Project Conditions are contained in Appendix E. engineering group. Inc. i:wn 6-1 As noted earlier, this existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. It should be noted, the Newport Avenue approach of this intersection is free flow and the vehicles traveling on Newport Avenue are not impeded or delayed by any stop signs. The intersection's overall delay is 7.6 seconds (equivalent to HCM LOS A for unsignalized conditions). The delay reported in the analysis and deficient operation is only related to vehicles approaching the intersection from the project site driveway and waiting at the stop sign to make a left turn or right turn onto Newport Avenue. Even though there is excessive delay and deficient operation reported for vehicles waiting at the stop sign, as previously shown in Section 5.0 of this report, the traffic volumes approaching from the project site driveway are still not substantial enough to satisfy installation of a traffic signal and the traffic flow on Newport Avenue. Installation of a traffic signal will be required to achieve acceptable operation for the project site driveway approach in this case and mitigate the deficient operation. Table 6-2 summarizes Existing Plus Project Conditions peak hour LOS of the study intersection assuming implementation of the traffic signal. As shown in Table 6-2, assuming implementation of the traffic signal at this intersection, the impacts are reduced to a level considered less than significant for Existing Plus Project Conditions. 6.3 Opening Year Without Project Conditions Level of Service Opening Year Without Project Conditions Level of Service (LOS) calculations for the study intersections are shown in Table 6-3 and are based upon the Opening Year Without Project Conditions traffic volumes shown in Exhibit 4-7 and the existing geometry shown in Exhibit 3-1. Opening Year Without Project Conditions does not assume implementation of the improvements identified in the previous sections of this report. ®engineering group, inc. ,x;,,1:1„, 6-2 As shown in Table 6-3, all study area intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better for CMP intersections and LOS D or better for all other intersections) during the peak hours for Opening Year Without Project Conditions. Detailed LOS analysis sheets for Opening Year Without Project Conditions are contained in Appendix F. 6.4 Opening Year With Project Conditions Level of Service Opening Year With Project Conditions Level of Service (LOS) calculations for the study intersections are shown in Table 6-4 and are based upon the Opening Year With Project Conditions traffic volumes shown in Exhibit 4-8 and the existing geometry shown in Exhibit 3-1. Opening Year With Project Conditions does not assume implementation of the improvements identified in the previous sections of this report. As shown in Table 6-4, all study area intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better for CMP intersections and LOS D or better for all other intersections) during the peak hours for Opening Year With Project Conditions with the exception of the following study intersection which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS (LOS E or F): • Newport Avenue / Project Driveway 2 (PM peak hour only). Based on agency -established thresholds of significance, the proposed project is forecast to result in a significant traffic impact at the above listed intersection for Existing Plus Project Conditions. Detailed LOS analysis sheets for Opening Year With Projects Conditions are contained in Appendix G. As noted earlier, this existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. It should be noted, the Newport Avenue approach of this intersection is free flow and the vehicles traveling on Newport Avenue are not impeded or delayed by any stop signs. The Fengineering LA group, inc. [':-M " w !. lin 6-3 intersection's overall delay is 8.7 seconds (equivalent to HCM LOS A for unsignalized conditions). The delay reported in the analysis and deficient operation is only related to vehicles approaching the intersection from the project site driveway and waiting at the stop sign to make a left turn or right turn onto Newport Avenue. Even though there is excessive delay and deficient operation reported for vehicles waiting at the stop sign, as previously shown in Section 5.0 of this report, the traffic volumes approaching from the project site driveway are still not substantial enough to satisfy installation of a traffic signal and the traffic flow on Newport Avenue. Installation of a traffic signal will be required to achieve acceptable operation for the project site driveway approach in this case and mitigate the deficient operation. Table 6-4 summarizes Opening Year With Project Conditions peak hour LOS of the study intersection assuming implementation of the traffic signal. As shown in Table 6-2, assuming implementation of the traffic signal at this intersection, the impacts are reduced to a level considered less than significant for Opening Year With Project Conditions. engineering group, inc. 0;IQI • TABLE 6-1 Existing Conditions Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary Intersection Traffic Control` Intersection Approach Lane(s)' 6dsting Conditions Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R Delay= (Sea) HCM LOS V/C3 Ratio ICU LOS Delayz (Secs) HCM LOS WO Ratio ICU LOS 1 SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 1.5 0.5 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1>> 2.0 2.5 0.5 37.7 D 0.535 A 35.6 D 0.548 A 2 Newport Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0! 0.0 1.0 3.0 1 > 1.0 3.0 1.0 - - - - 0.438 A - - - - 0.413 A 3 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 1.5 0.5 1 > 0.0 1.01 0.0 1.0 2.5 0.5 2.0 2.5 0.5 - - - 0.348 A - - - 0.432 A 4 Newport Avenue (NS) / SR -55 NB Ramps - Del Amo Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 1 1 > 2.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 23.4 C 0.435 A 34.8 C 0.607 B 5 Newport Avenue (NS) / Valencia Avenue (EW) TS 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 2> - 0.189 A - - - - 0.272 A 6 Red Hill Avenue (NS) / Valencia Avenue (EW) TS 1.0 4.0 1> 1.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 0.465 A -- -- 0.441 A 7 Red Hill Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 3.0 1> 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 1> 2.0 3.0 1.0 0.578 A -- -- 0.756 C 8 Project Driveway 1 (NS) / Valencia Avenue (EW) CSS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1! 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.5 11.8 B -- - - 19.9 C -- -9 9 Newport Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 2 (EW) CSS 0.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 9.9 A - - - - 16.1 C - 10 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 3 (EW) CSS 0.0 1.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 12.0 B - - - 9.5 A - - - - 11 I Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 4 (EW) CSS 1.0 1 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 0.0 1.01 0.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 10.4 B - - - - 10.6 B - - - - When a right turn lane is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right tum lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the thru lanes. Where '1' is indicated for the thru movement and 10's are indicated for R/L movements, the R and/or L turns are shared with the through movement. L = Left; T = Thru; R = Right; 1.01 = Shared LefVThrLAght; > = Right Tum Overlap; >> = Free Right Tum; Bold = Deficiency; Italics = Improvement 2 Analysis Software: Delay based on HCM 2010 Methodology and Synchro analysis software (Version 10). V/C based on Traffnr, Version 8.0. 3 V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio. It should be noted that the V/C is not calculated for unsignalized intersections. ° TS = Traffic Signal CSS = Cross -Street Stop is lrktableslRK 13090TB.xl vc JN.2631-2017-05 TABLE 6-2 Existing Plus Project Conditions Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary Intersection Traffic Controls Intersection Approach Lane(s)' Existing Plus Project Conditions Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R Dela (Sea) HCM LOS V/C3 Ratio ICU LOS Dela (Secs) HCM LOS V/Cs Ratio ICU LOS 1 SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 1.5 0.5 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1>> 2.0 2.5 0.5 40.6 D 0.556 A 36.5 D 0.565 A 2 Newport Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 1.0 3.0 1 > 1.0 3.0 1.0 - - - 0.448 A - - - - 0.430 A 3 Del Amo Avenue (NS)/Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 1.5 0.5 1> 0.0 1.0! 0.0 1.0 2.5 0.5 2.0 2.5 0.5 -- -- 0.380 A -- -- 0.446 A 4 Newport Avenue (NS) / SR -55 NB Ramps - Del Amo Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 1 > 2.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 23.9 C 0.441 A 36.4 D 0.622 B 5 Newport Avenue (NS) /Valencia Avenue (EW) TS 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 2> -- -- 0.196 A -- -- 0.272 A 6 Red Hill Avenue (NS) / Valencia Avenue (EW) TS 1.0 4.0 1 > 1.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 - 0.485 A - - - - 0.443 A 7 Red Hill Avenue (NS)/Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 3.0 1> 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 1> 2.0 3.0 1.0 -- - 0.592 A -- -- 0.768 C 8 Project Driveway 1 (NS) f Valencia Avenue (EW) CSS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.5 9.7 A - - - - 12.5 B -- -9 9 Newport Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 2 (EW) CSS 0.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 13.1 B -- - 38.8 E - - - With Traffic Signal TS 0.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0/ 0.0 -- -- 0.210 A -- -- 0-377 A 10 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 3 (EW) CSS 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 A - - - 0.0 A - - - - 11 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 4 (EW) CSS 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 0.0 1.01 0.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 12.3 B s- - - 12.5 B - - When a right turn lane is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the thru lanes. Where 'l' is indicated for the thru movement and 'Us are indicated for R/L movements, the R and/or L turns are shared with the through movement L= Left; T = Thru; R = Right; 1.0! =Shared Left/ThruAight; > =Right Turn Overlap; >>= Free Right Turn; Bold= Deficiency; Italia -Improvement 2 Analysis Software: Delay based on HCM 2010 Methodology and Synchro analysis software (Version 10). V/C based on Traffix Version 8.0. 3 V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio. It should be noted that the V/C is not calculated for unsignalized intersections. ` TS = Traffic Signal CSS = Cross -Street Stop j:/rktables/RK 13090TB.xlsr JN:2631-2017-05 TABLE 6-3 Opening Year Without Project Conditions Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary Intersection Traffic Control` Intersection Approach Lane(s)' Opening Year Without Project Conditions Northbound Southbound Eastbound i Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R L T R L T R Delays (Sea) HCM LOS V/Cs Ratio ICU LOS Delays (Sea) HCM LOS V/C' Ratio ICU LOS 1 SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 1.5 0.5 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1>> 2.0 2.5 0.5 47.9 • D 0.595 A 39.4 D 0.594 A 2 Newport Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 1.0 3.0 1> 1.0 3.0 1.0 - - - 0.467 A - - - 0.455 A 3 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 1.5 0.5 1> 0.0 1.0! 0.0 1.0 2.5 0.5 2.0 2.5 0.5 -- - - 0.384 A - - - 0.491 A 4 Newport Avenue (NS) / SR -55 NB Ramps - Del Amo Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 1 > 2.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 26.7 C 0.471 A 42.5 D 0.656 B 5 Newport Avenue (NS) /Valencia Avenue (EW) TS 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 2> - - 0.209 A - - - - 0.283 A 6 Red Hill Avenue (NS) /Valencia Avenue (EW) TS 1.0 4.0 1> 1.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 - - 0.538 A - - - - 0.573 A 7 Red Hill Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 3.0 1 > 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 1 > 2.0 3.0 1 1.0 - - 0.661 B - - 0.849 j D 8 Project Driveway 1 (NS) /Valencia Avenue (EW) CSS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.5 12.3 B - - - 21.3 C - - 9 Newport Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 2 (EW) CSS 0.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 10.1 B - - 16.8 C - 10 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 3 (EW) CSS 0.0 1.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 12.3 B - - - 9.6 A 11 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 4 (EW) CSS 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 0.0 1.0! 0.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 10.6 B - - - 11.0 B - - When a right tum lane is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right tum lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the thru lanes. Where '11' is indicated for the thru movement and '0's are indicated for R/L movements, the R and/or L turns are shared with the through movement L = Left•, T = Thru; R = Right; 1.0! = Shared LeftMni/Right; > = Right Tum Overlap; >> = Free Right Tum; Bold = Deficiency-, lta% = Improvement z Analysis Software: Delay based on HCM 2010 Methodology and Synchro analysis software (Version 10). V/C based on Traffa, Version 8.0. 3 V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio. It should be noted that the V/C is not calculated for unsignalized intersections. TS = Traffic Signal CSS = Cross -Street Stop j:/rktab1es1RK1309078x1v JN:2631-2017-05 TABLE 6-4 Opening Year With Project Conditions Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary Intersection Traffic Control` Intersection Approach Lane(s)' Opening Year With Project Conditions Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L T R L T R I L T R L T R Delays (Sea) HCM LOS V/C3 Ratio ICU LOOS Delays (Secs) HCM LOS V/C3 Ratio ICU LOS 1 SR -55 SB Ramps (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 1.5 0.5 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1>> 2.0 2.5 0.5 54.9 D 0.617 B 42.3 D 0.610 B 2 Newport Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 1.0 3.0 1 > 1.0 3.0 1.0 - - - - 0.478 A - - - 0.473 A 3 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 1.5 0.5 1 > 0.0 1.01 0.0 1.0 2.5 0.5 2.0 2.5 0.5 - - - 0.417 A - - - 0.505 A 4 Newport Avenue (NS) / SR -55 NB Ramps - Del Amo Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 1 > 2.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 27.1 C 0.477 A 44.6 D 0.671 B 5 Newport Avenue (NS) /Valencia Avenue (EW) TS 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 2> -- -- 0.216 A -- -- 0.283 A 6 Red Hill Avenue (NS) /Valencia Avenue (EW) TS 1.0 4.0 1> 1.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 -- -- 0.557 A -- -- 0.580 A 7 Red Hill Avenue (NS) / Edinger Avenue (EW) TS 2.0 3.0 1 > 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 1 > 2.0 3.0 1.0 - - - - 0.675 B - - - - 0.861 D 8 Project Driveway 1 (NS) /Valencia Avenue (EW) CSS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.5 9.9 A - - - - 12.8 B -- -9 9 Newport Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 2 (EW) CSS 0.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 13.8 B - - 46.8 E - - - - With Traffic Signal TS 0.0 2.5 0.5 1.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.01 0.0 - - - - 0.173 8 - - 0.353 B 10 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 3 (EW) CSS 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 A - - -- 0.0 A - - - - 11 Del Amo Avenue (NS) / Project Driveway 4 (EW) CSS 1.0 1.5 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.5 0.0 1.01 0.0 0.0 1.0! 0.0 12.6 B - - 13.2 B - - When a right turn lane is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right tum lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the thru lanes. Where"" is indicated for the thru movement and "0"s are indicated for R/L movements, the R and/or L turns are shared with the through movement. L =Left, T = Thru; R = Right; 1.0! =Shared Left/lhru/Right; > = Right Turn Overlap; >>= Free Right Tum; Bold= Deficiency, Italia = Improvement z Analysis Software: Delay based on HCM 2010 Methodology and Synchro analysis software (version 10). V/C based on Traffic, Version 8.0. 3 V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio. It should be noted that the V/C is not calculated for unsignalized intersections. a TS = Traffic Signal j: Jrktables/RK73090TB.xlsx JN:2631-2017-05 7.0 HCM 95" Percentile Vehicular Queue Analysis As requested by the City of Tustin, the traffic analysis also includes evaluation of the vehicular queuing analysis of the full access project driveways on Newport Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, and Valencia Avenue for on-site and off-site based on opening year conditions The vehicular queue analysis has been prepared for the AM and PM peak hours of the Opening Year Without and With Project scenarios which are the most trip -intensive analysis scenarios evaluated in this report. The Synchro LOS analysis worksheets include the 95`h percentile queue lengths in number of vehicles per lane for exclusive turning movements. For lanes with shared movements, the shared queue length has been reported. These values have been rounded up to the nearest whole vehicle. Table 7-1 summarizes the results of the HCM 95" percentile vehicular queueing analysis. As noted earlier, the existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. Hence, the vehicular queues at the southbound approach of the Newport Avenue / Valencia Avenue intersection are of significant importance. The analysis evaluates if the queues reach beyond the project driveway on Newport Avenue which is proposed to be converted to full access. Currently, the distance between the Newport Avenue / Valencia Avenue intersection and the project access on Newport Avenue which is planned to be converted to full access is approximately 350 feet. As shown in Table 7-1, the vehicular queue for the southbound Newport Avenue approach is forecast to be approximately 250 feet (occurring on the southbound left -turn movement). Hence, based on the 95th percentile vehicular queue analysis, the southbound vehicular queues of the Newport Avenue approach are forecast to not reach and block the project site access driveway on Newport Avenue. engineering group, Inc. C<axpa ;r> i:uni 7-1 As also shown in Table 7-1, for Opening Year With Project Conditions, all of the evaluated locations are forecast to continue to have adequate storage capacity to accommodate the forecast traffic volumes with the exception of the vehicles exiting the Project Driveway 2 on Newport Avenue which is forecast to experience a vehicular queue of approximately 165 feet during the PM peak hour. However, the identified queue storage deficiency at this location is not expected to adversely impact the public roadway and right-of-way since the vehicles will be queuing on the project site and waiting to exit. engineering group, Inc. 7-2 TABLE 7-1 HCM 95th Percentile Peak Hour Vehicular Queue Analysis Summary Project Openinq Year Conditions Study Intersection Movement Storage Length (Feet) Vehicular Queue (Feet) Opening Year Without Project Conditions Opening Year With Project Conditions Change in Queue Length AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour Traffic Volume AM Peak PM Peak our Hour Vehicular Queue AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour Adequate Storage Available? AM Peak PM Peak o Hour Traffic Volume AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour Vehicular Queue AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour equate Storage Available? AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour 4. Newport Ave (NS) / SR -55 NB Ramps - Del Amo Ave (EW) N8 Left -Tum 330 240 740 #117 #313 Yes Yes 249 761 #121 0320 Yes Yes 4 7 5. Newport Ave (NS) / Valencia Ave (EW) NB Left -Tum 50 0 0 0 0 Yes Yes 0 0 0 0 Yes Yes 0 0 NB Shared Thru-Right 8 18 15 24 Yes Yes 8 18 15 24 Yes Yes 0 0 SB Left -Tum 250 469 106 #235 56 Yes Yes 488 177 #250 84 Yes Yes 15 28 SBThru 930 16 2 #230 56 Yes Yes 16 2 #244 86 Yes Yes 10 30 SB Right -Tum 250 23 1 0 0 Yes Yes 23 1 0 0 Yes Yes 0 0 EB Left -Tum 100 3 26 8 32 Yes Yes 6 26 12 32 Yes Yes 4 0 EB Shared Thru-Right 315 3 19 4 13 Yes Yes 0 19 4 13 Yes Yes 0 0 WB Left -Tum 65 9 4 16 10 Yes Yes 9 4 16 10 Yes Yes 0 0 WBThru 260 15 3 22 7 Yes Yes 15 3 22 7 Yes Yes 0 0 WB Right -Turn 260 311 937 19 24 Yes Yes 311 937 19 24 Yes Yes 0 0 9. Newport Ave (NS) / Project Driveway 2 (EW) NB Shared Thru-Right 335 319 935 0 0 Yes Yes 322 935 0 0 Yes Yes 0 0 SB Left -Tum 50 72 12 8 3 Yes Yes 132 27 18 8 Yes Yes 10 5 WB Shared Left Thru-Right 40 6 103 0 28 Yes Yes 49 124 10 165 Yes No ` 10 138 11. Del Amo Ave (NS) / Project Driveway 4 (EV) NB Left Tum 50 0 6 0 0 Yes Yes 0 8 10 40 Yes Yes 10 40 NB Shared Thru Right 480 196 86 0 0 Yes Yes 231 75 0 0 Yes Yes 0 0 SS Left -Tum 50 46 2 3 0 Yes Yes 193 193 15 28 Yes Yes 13 28 S8 Shared Thru-Right 690 387 612 0 0 Yes Yes 359 612 0 0 Yes Yes 0 0 EB Shared Left-Thru-Right 25 0 4 0 0 Yes Yes 0 4 0 0 Yes Yes 0 0 WB Shared Left-Thru-Right 25 4 55 0 8 1 Yes I Yes 52 1 199 1 0 1 0 Yes Yes 0 8 1 NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; EB = Eastbound; WB = Westbound. 2 Queue reported is the 95th percentile queue per lane. 3 Queue analysis based on Synchro, Version 10. `The identified queue deficiency is for vehicles exiting the project driveway and queueing on the project site. The identified queue storage deficiency is not on the public roadway and right-of-way. Deficient queue shown in bold underline "95th Percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. i.)?ktabAWRK130907B-Vjx IN:2631-2017-05 8.0 Valencia Avenue Project Access Gate Stacking Analysis As previously noted, the Valencia Avenue project access is planned to be gated with card reader system to allow for entry. A request has been made to evaluate gate queuing at this project access to determine amount of vehicle storage required behind the gate to avoid vehicles from backing onto the public right of way. As requested by the City, RK has utilized the Robert W. Crommelin methodology for determining the potential queuing at this access location. The methodology is based on the volume of vehicles expected to enter the gated access and the hourly service rate which is based on the type of the gated control implemented. A copy of the W. Crommelin methodology is contained in Appendix H. The analysis is based on the following: • Forecast AM peak hour traffic volume of 116 vehicles per hour entering the access for Opening Year With Project Conditions as shown previously in Exhibit 4-8. • Forecast PM peak hour traffic volume of 18 vehicles per hour entering the access for Opening Year With Project Conditions as shown previously in Exhibit 4-8. • Crommelin methodology Design Service Rate of 305 vehicles per hour for a gated access conservatively assuming a ticket dispenser and sharp turn at entry. • 95" Percentile confidence rate and occurrence probability. Exhibit 8-1 shows the results of the gate stacking analysis. As shown in exhibit 8-1, based on the 95`h percentile confidence rate, a storage length of two vehicles is required for vehicles entering the project access on Valencia Avenue. engineering group, Inc. Exhibit 8-1 Opening Year With Project Conditions Valencia Avenue Project Access Gate Stacking Analysis RESERVOIR NEEDS VS TRAFFIC INTENSITY W .to 1J 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 .0 TRAFFIC INTENSITY1 k551,'MnOti� (AVERACE ARRIVA WE / AVERAGE SEWCE RATE) ARRPAILS f0�_C1( A POS_J'. C1S"RIeUilOFI 2 S--Pv C= RATE CAV GE FEr-RES=NTG By AN EXFO!�ENWL P903ABIi TV FUNCT104 3 FLOW 5 EQUAL' DVC(C 8:°N_EN EACH LApI: F %15PE IRAN GNE S AVA LARLr. Traffic Intensity (Peak Hour Traffic Volume Divided by Service Rate of 305 Vehicles Per Hour) AM 305 = 0.380 PM 305 = 0.059 Number of vehicles expected at the gate I(95% of the time not exceed) N 2672-2017.01 engineering SchoobFb-xt Fe" Credit Uri«, Trek Irnp.a Secy, Oty a(Twdn, CA group, inc. I! I .I I lr r� �trl� HOT FX"f-Dfl, -WE Q/ l 1 T Pi 100 • \ , NOT ExCE'l 5 TIMES I .N 00 AVE RACE QUEUE LENGTH 1J 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 .0 TRAFFIC INTENSITY1 k551,'MnOti� (AVERACE ARRIVA WE / AVERAGE SEWCE RATE) ARRPAILS f0�_C1( A POS_J'. C1S"RIeUilOFI 2 S--Pv C= RATE CAV GE FEr-RES=NTG By AN EXFO!�ENWL P903ABIi TV FUNCT104 3 FLOW 5 EQUAL' DVC(C 8:°N_EN EACH LApI: F %15PE IRAN GNE S AVA LARLr. Traffic Intensity (Peak Hour Traffic Volume Divided by Service Rate of 305 Vehicles Per Hour) AM 305 = 0.380 PM 305 = 0.059 Number of vehicles expected at the gate I(95% of the time not exceed) N 2672-2017.01 engineering SchoobFb-xt Fe" Credit Uri«, Trek Irnp.a Secy, Oty a(Twdn, CA group, inc. 9.0 Findings, Recommendations & Conclusions The purpose of this traffic study is to assess the traffic impacts of the proposed SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union development. 9.1 Proposed Project The proposed Schools First Federal Credit Union project site is currently vacant and is bounded by Del Amo Avenue to the north, existing property to the east, existing property to the south, and Newport Avenue to the west. The project site currently consists of two (2) general office buildings that are part of the SchoolsFirst headquarters and additional vacant land. The proposed project is planned to consist of the following land uses: • 180,000 square feet of General Office and 5,000 square feet of Bank. A second potential 117,957 square feet general office building is planned as a future phase to be located at the southwest corner of Edinger Avenue at Del Amo Avenue. The second site currently consists of a wholesale commercial building currently owned by the client. The building will be removed and replaced with a general office building for the Client's use. The buildout timeline for this building has not yet been determined and the traffic impact study will not analyze the second general office building of the proposed project. Access for the proposed project is planned via the following: • One (1) existing unsignalized full access driveway on Valencia Avenue. This access is planned to be gated with card reader system to allow for entry. • One (1) existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue. This access is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. • One (1) unsignalized full access driveway on Del Amo Avenue. An existing driveway to the west of this driveway is currently restricted to right-in/right-out movements based on the pavement striping. However, based on existing traffic counts collected engineering group, inc. lM at this location, a significant number of vehicles are performing left -turn maneuvers in and out of this driveway. The proposed project is reconfiguring the driveway as a fire emergency access. City of Tustin Planning Area 11 & CurrentlyApproved Land Uses: The project site is designated as Planning Area 11 and is part of the larger block bound by the Railway, Edinger Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, Newport Avenue, and Valencia Avenue. This block contains the following Planning Areas: • Planning Area 7: Currently approved for 113,300 square feet of office use; • Planning Area 9: Currently approved for 64,500 square feet of R&D/light industrial use; • Planning Area 11: Currently approved for 132,000 square feet of office and 8,000 square feet of restaurant use; and • Planning Area 14: Currently approved for 119,929 square feet of office use. Based on information provided by City staff, the following land uses are currently constructed in these planning areas: • Planning Area 7: Currently 32,400 square feet of office use constructed; • Planning Area 9: Currently 60,212 square feet of R&D/light industrial use constructed; • Planning Area 11: Currently vacant; and • Planning Area 14: Currently 97,828 square feet of office use constructed. The location of the project site is presented on Exhibit 1-1. The site plan is shown on Exhibit 1-2. The project will be evaluated in a single phase and is planned to open in 2021. engineering group, inc. 9-2 This traffic study has been prepared in accordance with the traffic study guidelines, requirements, and thresholds of significance for the City of Tustin, the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP), and Caltrans. 9.2 Project Trip Generation The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 2,363 daily trips which include approximately 322 AM peak hour trips and approximately 268 PM peak hour trips. When compared to the undeveloped balance of land uses allowed in this block, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 844 fewer daily trips which include approximately 33 fewer AM peak hour trips and approximately 82 fewer PM peak hour trips. It should be noted, the project impact analysis evaluated in this traffic study is based on the project's trip generation of 2,363 daily trips, 322 AM peak hour trips, and 268 PM peak hour trips. 9.3 Study Area & Conditions This traffic study has been prepared in accordance with the traffic study guidelines, requirements, and thresholds of significance for the City of Tustin, the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP), and Caltrans. This study is prepared in accordance with the scope of work approved by the City of Tustin staff. A copy of the approved scope of work is contained in Appendix A. 9-3 The study area consists of the following intersections: The analysis evaluates traffic conditions of the study intersections for the following _ scenarios in accordance with the City of Tustin and Orange County and the approved scope of work contained in Appendix A: • Existing Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); • Forecast Existing Plus Project Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); • Opening Year Without Project Conditions: Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Project (EAC) Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); and • Opening Year With Project Conditions: Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Projects With Project (EACP) Conditions (AM & PM peak hour). As requested by the City of Tustin, the traffic analysis also includes evaluation of the vehicular queuing analysis of the full access project driveways on Newport Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, and Valencia Avenue for on-site and off-site based on opening year conditions ,i b�Q group. Inc ineerin9 !rnwi. r i;ir i • " North-South Street East-West Street 1. SR -55 SB Ramps Edinger Avenue 2. Newport Avenue Edinger Avenue 3. Del Amo Avenue Edinger Avenue 4. Newport Avenue SR -55 NB Ramps — Del Amo Avenue 5. Newport Avenue Valencia Avenue 6. Red Hill Avenue Valencia Avenue 7. Red Hill Avenue Edinger Avenue 8. Project Driveway 1 Valencia Avenue 9. Newport Avenue Project Driveway 2 10. Del Amo Avenue Project Driveway 3 11. Del Amo Avenue Project Driveway 4 The analysis evaluates traffic conditions of the study intersections for the following _ scenarios in accordance with the City of Tustin and Orange County and the approved scope of work contained in Appendix A: • Existing Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); • Forecast Existing Plus Project Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); • Opening Year Without Project Conditions: Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Project (EAC) Conditions (AM & PM peak hour); and • Opening Year With Project Conditions: Existing Plus Ambient Growth Plus Cumulative Projects With Project (EACP) Conditions (AM & PM peak hour). As requested by the City of Tustin, the traffic analysis also includes evaluation of the vehicular queuing analysis of the full access project driveways on Newport Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, and Valencia Avenue for on-site and off-site based on opening year conditions ,i b�Q group. Inc ineerin9 !rnwi. r i;ir i • " 9.4 Peak Hour Sinal Warrant Analysis Summary As noted earlier, the existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. The existing unsignalized study intersection has been evaluated for signalization based on the peak hour warrants and procedures contained in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). The Newport Avenue / Project Driveway 2 unsignalized study intersection does not satisfy the MUTCD peak hour traffic signal warrants for any of the analysis scenarios evaluated as part of this report. It should be noted, for Opening Year With Project Conditions, the intersection is forecast to have 236 vehicles in the hour on the minor street approach and is very close to meeting the warrants during the PM peak hour. With the addition of 21 peak hour trips (increase from 236 to 257 vehicles) the intersection would be warranted for a traffic signal during the PM peak hour. Although a traffic signal is not currently warranted, the intersection should continue to be monitored for additional area -wide growth as traffic may warrant a traffic signal in the future. 9.5 LOS Analysis & Significant Impact Summa►y Existing Conditions: All study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better for CMP intersections and LOS D or better for all other intersections) during the peak hours for Existing Conditions. Existing Plus Project Conditions: All study area intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better for CMP intersections and LOS D or better for all other intersections) during the peak hours for Existing Plus Project Conditions with the exception engineering group, Inc. 9-5 of the following study intersection which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS (LOS E or F); • Newport Avenue/ Project Driveway 2 (PM peak hour only). Based on agency -established thresholds of significance, the proposed project is forecast to result in a significant traffic impact at the above listed intersection for Existing Plus Project Conditions. As noted earlier, this existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. It should be noted, the Newport Avenue approach of this intersection is free flow and the vehicles traveling on Newport Avenue are not impeded or delayed by any stop signs. The intersection's overall delay is 7.6 seconds (equivalent to HCM LOS A for unsignalized conditions). The delay reported in the analysis and deficient operation is only related to vehicles approaching the intersection from the project site driveway and waiting at the stop sign to make a left turn or right turn onto Newport Avenue. Even though there is excessive delay and deficient operation reported for vehicles waiting at the stop sign, as previously shown in Section 5.0 of this report, the traffic volumes approaching from the project site driveway are still not substantial enough to satisfy installation of a traffic signal and the traffic flow on Newport Avenue. Installation of a traffic signal will be required to achieve acceptable operation for the project site driveway approach in this case and mitigate the deficient operation. Assuming implementation of the traffic signal at this intersection, the impacts are reduced to a level considered less than significant for Existing Plus Project Conditions. Opening Year Without Project Conditions: All study area intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better for CMP intersections and LOS D or better for all other intersections) during the peak hours for Opening Year Without Project Conditions. engineering group, inc. Opening Year With Project Conditions: All study area intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS E or better for CMP intersections and LOS D or better for all other intersections) during the peak hours for Opening Year With Project Conditions with the exception of the following study intersection which is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS (LOS E or F): • Newport Avenue / Project Driveway 2 (PM peak hour only). Based on agency -established thresholds of significance, the proposed project is forecast to result in a significant traffic impact at the above listed intersection for Existing Plus Project Conditions. As noted earlier, this existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. It should be noted, the Newport Avenue approach of this intersection is free flow and the vehicles traveling on Newport Avenue are not impeded or delayed by any stop signs. The intersection's overall delay is 8.7 seconds (equivalent to HCM LOS A for unsignalized conditions). The delay reported in the analysis and deficient operation is only related to vehicles approaching the intersection from the project site driveway and waiting at the stop sign to make a left turn or right turn onto Newport Avenue. Even though there is excessive delay and deficient operation reported for vehicles waiting at the stop sign, as previously shown in Section 5.0 of this report, the traffic volumes approaching from the project site driveway are still not substantial enough to satisfy installation of a traffic signal and the traffic flow on Newport Avenue. Installation of a traffic signal will be required to achieve acceptable operation for the project site driveway approach in this case and mitigate the deficient operation. Assuming implementation of the traffic signal at this intersection, the impacts are reduced to a level considered less than significant for Opening Year With Project Conditions. r -, "l engineering group, inc. r;<a:yinrd,:� �:rull 9-7 9.6 BCM 95th Percentile Vehicular Queue Analysis Summary As requested by the City of Tustin, the traffic analysis also includes evaluation of the vehicular queuing analysis of the full access project driveways on Newport Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, and Valencia Avenue for on-site and off-site based on opening year conditions The vehicular queue analysis has been prepared for the AM and PM peak hours of the Opening Year Without and With Project scenarios which are the most trip -intensive analysis scenarios evaluated in this report. The Synchro LOS analysis worksheets include the 9511 percentile queue lengths in number of vehicles per lane for exclusive turning movements. For lanes with shared movements, the shared queue length has been reported. These values have been rounded up to the nearest whole vehicle. As noted earlier, the existing unsignalized right-in/right-out/left-in driveway on Newport Avenue is planned to be converted to a full -access driveway as part of the proposed project. Hence, the vehicular queues at the southbound approach of the Newport Avenue / _ Valencia Avenue intersection are of significant importance. The analysis evaluates if the queues reach beyond the project driveway on Newport Avenue which is proposed to be converted to full access. Currently, the distance between the Newport Avenue / Valencia Avenue intersection and the project access on Newport Avenue which is planned to be converted to full access is approximately 350 feet. For Opening Year With Project Conditions, the vehicular queue for the southbound Newport Avenue approach is forecast to be approximately 250 feet (occurring on the southbound left -turn movement). Hence, based on the 95' percentile vehicular queue analysis, the southbound vehicular queues of the Newport Avenue approach are forecast to not reach and block the project site access driveway on Newport Avenue. engineering group, inc, 9.7 Valencia Avenue Project Access Gate Stacking Analysis Summary As previously noted, the Valencia Avenue project access is planned to be gated with card reader system to allow for entry. A request has been made to evaluate gate queuing at this project access to determine amount of vehicle storage required behind the gate to avoid vehicles from backing onto the public right of way. As requested by the City, RK has utilized the Robert W. Crommelin methodology for determining the potential queuing at this access location. The methodology is based on the volume of vehicles expected to enter the gated access and the hourly service rate which is based on the type of the gated control implemented. A copy of the W. Crommelin methodology is contained in Appendix H. The analysis is based on the following: • Forecast AM peak hour traffic volume of 116 vehicles per hour entering the access for Opening Year With Project Conditions as shown previously in Exhibit 4-8. • Forecast PM peak hour traffic volume of 18 vehicles per hour entering the access for Opening Year With Project Conditions as shown previously in Exhibit 4-8. • Crommelin methodology Design Service Rate of 305 vehicles per hour for a gated access conservatively assuming a ticket dispenser and sharp turn at entry. • 95th Percentile confidence rate and occurrence probability. Exhibit 8-1 shows the results of the gate stacking analysis. As shown in exhibit 8-1, based on the 95' percentile confidence rate, a storage length of two vehicles is required for vehicles entering the project access on Valencia Avenue. engineering group, Inc. 9.8 Site Access Recommendations I. Ensure adequate sight distance is provided at each project access location per the City of Tustin. Sight distance at all project access points should be reviewed with respect to City of Tustin sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans. II. Provide appropriate signage and pavement markings at the project site driveways, including stop bars and stop signs and restrict project access through clear signage and other means as follows: • One right-in/right-out unsignalized driveway on Valencia Avenue serving inbound and outbound vehicular traffic (Project Driveway 1); • One full access unsignalized driveway on Newport Avenue serving inbound and outbound vehicular traffic (Project Driveway 2); • One right-in/right-out unsignalized driveway on Del Amo Avenue serving as a fire access (Project Driveway 3); and • One full access unsignalized driveway along Del Amo Avenue serving inbound and outbound vehicular traffic (Project Driveway 4). 9.9 Area -Wide Recommendations As part of the proposed project, the existing right-in/right-out/left-in driveway at the intersection of Newport Avenue at Project Driveway 2 is planned to be converted into a full access driveway. Although a traffic signal is not currently warranted, the intersection should continue to be monitored for additional area -wide growth as traffic may warrant a traffic signal in the future. A summary of identified mitigation measures and recommendations is included in Exhibit 9-1. engineertg groom Inc. 9-10 Exhibit 9-1 Recommendations Site Access Recommendations I. Ensure adequate sight distance is provided at each project access location per the City of Tustin. Sight distance at all project access points should be reviewed with respect to City of Tustin sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans. II. Provide appropriate signage and pavement markings at the project site driveways, including stop bars and stop signs and restrict project access through clear signage and other means as follows: • One right-in/right-out unsignalized driveway on Valencia Avenue serving inbound and outbound vehicular traffic (Project Driveway 1); • One full access unsignalized driveway on Newport Avenue serving inbound and outbound vehicular traffic (Project Driveway 2); • One right-in/right-out unsignalized driveway on Del Amo Avenue serving as a fire access (Project Driveway 3); and • One full access unsignalized driveway along Del Amo Avenue serving inbound and outbound vehicular traffic (Project Driveway 4). 26n-2017-01 SchoohFirst Feral Cradle Union Tral k knpact Surly, a4' of Tusdn. CA 71. Area- Wide Recommendations I. As part of the proposed project, the existing right-in/right-out/left-in driveway at the intersection of Newport Avenue at Project Driveway 2 is planned to be converted into a full access driveway. Although a traffic signal is not currently warranted, the intersection should continue to be monitored for additional area -wide growth as traffic may warrant a traffic signal in the future. Legend: 0 = Project Driveway Location — - Install Stop Bar, Stop Legend, and Stop Sign engineering group, inc. EXHIBIT B RESOLUTION NO. 19-32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONCEPT PLAN (CP) 2018-00001, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (LLA) 2018-00003, DESIGN REVIEW (DR) 2018-00023, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) 2018-00015 PRIMARY ADDRESS: 15332 NEWPORT AVENUE SECONDARY ADDRESSES: 15442 NEWPORT AVENUE, 15222 DEL AMO AVENUE, 1200 EDINGER AVENUE AND PARCEL 6 OF PARCEL MAP 2010-127 (APN 430-251-28) [;FNFRAI (1) 1.1 The proposed use shall substantially conform with the submitted plans for the project date stamped July 2, 2019, 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 during plan check if such modifications are to be consistent with the provisions of the Tustin City Code (TCC) and other applicable codes. (1) 1.2 This approval shall become null and void unless substantial construction is underway within twelve (12) months of the date of this Exhibit unless a longer period is authorized by Development Agreement (DA) 2018-00001. All time extensions may be considered by the Community Development Director if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. (1) 1.3 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with as specified, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.4 Approval of Concept Plan (CP) 2018-00001, Lot Line Adjustment (LLA) 2018-00003, Design Review (DR) 2018-00023 and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 2018-00015 is contingent upon the applicant and property owner signing and returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk -Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval' form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (2) CEQA MITIGATION (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (7) PC/CC POLICY (4) DESIGN REVIEW *** EXCEPTION evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. (1) 1.5 Any violation of any of the conditions imposed is subject to issuance of an administrative citation pursuant to TCC 1162(a). (1) 1.6 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) 1.7 If in the future the City's Community Development Director, Police Chief, and/or Public Works Department determine that a parking and/or traffic problem exists on the site or in the vicinity as a result of the facility, the Community Development Director, Police Chief, and/or Public Works Department may require that the applicant prepare a parking demand analysis and/or traffic study and the applicant shall bear all associated costs. If said study indicates that there is inadequate parking or a traffic problem, the applicant shall be required to provide measures to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department, Police Chief, and/or Public Works Department. Said measures may include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Implement staggered work hours. b. Provide additional parking. c. Implement traffic control measures. (1) 1.8 As a condition of approval of DA -2018-00001, LLA -2018-00003, CP -2018- 00001, DR -2018-00023 and CUP -2018-00015, 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. . *** 1.9 This approval shall become null and void if the associated Disposition and Development Agreement is not approved and executed. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 2of31 *** 1.10 The applicant shall comply with executed DA -2018-00001 and associated Disposition and Development Agreement. ARCHITECTURE AND SITE DESIGN (2), 2.1 The project site is allowed a maximum development capacity of 451,715 (4) square feet of building floor area in accordance with the development capacity for Planning Areas 7, 9, 11 and 14 as determined in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan. The project site shall not exceed the development capacity unless required revisions, amendments, analyses are conducted and City approvals are obtained. (1) 2.2 Project materials shall substantially comply with those identified in the approved plans (as such, plans may be modified pursuant to the Conditions of Approval). Additional color and material samples may be requested by City staff at the time of plan check. Substitutions to the approved materials may occur subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. Enhancements to the architectural detailing may be required at the time of plan check based on the proposed materials. (1) 2.3 All roof access shall be provided from inside the building. (1), 2.4 No exterior downspouts shall be permitted. All roof drainage shall utilize (4) interior piping and may have exterior outlets into landscape areas at the base of the building and/or vehicular areas at the curb face. Alternative design and locations shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department. Any roof scuppers shall be installed with a special lip devise so that overflow drainage will not stain the walls. (4) 2.5 All exposed metal flashing or trim shall be painted to match the building. (4) 2.6 All rooftop mounted equipment shall be installed so as not to be visible from the public right-of-way and parking lot areas and in accordance with approved plans. No rooftop mounted equipment shall be visible from public view. Compliance with this condition shall be verified at plan check and at field inspection. (4) 2.7 Backflow devices and double detector checks shall be painted to match surrounding landscaping when in planters or painted to match the building when located adjacent to buildings. Landscaping shall be utilized to screen the devices where possible. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 3of31 (1), 2.8 Utility meters located outside of the building shall be screened with (4) landscaping to the greatest extent possible. Electrical transformers shall be in areas with room for landscape screening to be planted outside the required access space. (1) 2.9 No outdoor storage shall be permitted except as approved by the Community Development Director. (1) 2.10 Dual use loading area/parking spaces shall have signage indicating the time periods in which the area is reserved for loading and unloading, and parking is prohibited. *** 2.11 Freestanding walls and fencing shall be treated with graffiti -resistant coating. MASTER SIGN PLAN (4) 3.1 The applicant shall submit a master sign plan that addresses center identification, business identification and wayfinding for the project that is in accordance with the PCESP and/or the TCC. Said plan shall be designed in accordance with both documents and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development and/or Planning Commission. The Director of Community Development may approve modifications to the master sign plan that are consistent with the intent of the Tustin City Sign Code. Such modifications shall be accompanied with findings to support said decision. (1) 3.2 A sign permit shall be applied for and obtained from the Community Development Department prior to constructing, erecting, altering, replacing, moving, or painting any sign, except for signs exempt from a permit according to the Tustin Sign Code. Permit applications shall be accompanied by information as required for a standard sign plan or master sign plan, pursuant to the Tustin Sign Code. (1) 3.3 All signs shall conform to the approved Master Sign Plan and revert to the City of Tustin Sign Code for any issues that remain silent in said Plan. (1) 3.4 All signs shall be structurally safe and maintained in good condition at all times. The Community Development Director shall have the authority to order repair, replacement, or removal of any signs which constitute a hazard or nuisance to the safety, health, or public welfare by reason of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, or obsolescence. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 4 of 31 (1), 3.5 All signs shall be constructed of a non -corrosive, rust -resistant finish so (4) as not to degrade in adverse weather conditions. (1) 3.6 The locations for any signs shall comply with the City of Tustin Guidelines for Determining Sign Location Visual Clearance and Public Safety Areas. Signs shall not be placed in a manner that will obstruct or inhibit sight distance or visibility for the motorist. At plan check submittal, all signs shall be clearly identified on plans as to the exact locations. Any signs in proximity to the public right-of-way that could impact driver sight shall be shown at a larger scale that will be adequate for plan check purposes. LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE (1), 4.1 Landscaping design shall comply with the Tustin City Code, Water (6) Efficient Landscape Ordinance and Pacific Center East Specific Plan. (1), 4.2 At plan check, the applicant shall provide complete detailed landscaping (6) and irrigation plans for all landscaping areas consistent with adopted City of Tustin Landscaping requirements. The plans shall include the following: a. Include a summary table identifying plant and hardscape materials. The plant table shall list botanical and common names, plant symbol legend, sizes, spacing, location, and quantity of the plant materials proposed. b. Show planting and berming details, soil preparation, staking, etc. The irrigation plan shall show location and control of backflow prevention devices, pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing, and coverage. Details for all equipment must be provided. c. Show all property lines on the landscaping and irrigation plans, public right-of-way areas, sidewalk widths, parkway areas, and wall locations. d. Trees shall be minimum 24 -inch box sized trees. Trees in the landscape setbacks adjacent to public rights-of-way shall be provided in a variety of sizes to ensure initial maturity along project perimeter. e. Shrubs shall be a minimum of five (5) gallon size and be placed a maximum of five (5) feet on center. Other sizes and spacing may be permitted subject to approval of the Community Development Department. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 5of31 f. Ground cover shall be planted eight (8) to twelve (12) inches on center, or as approved by the Community Development Department. g. Equipment areas shall be screened with walls, vines, and/or trees, subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department. h. Tree planter details including material, color and design, are subject to review and approval by Community Development Department. (6) 4.3 The Community Development Department may request minor substitutions of plant materials or request additional sizing or quantity of materials during plan check. (1), 4.4 The landscape plans shall note that coverage of landscaping and (6) irrigation materials is subject to inspection at project completion by the Community Development Department. (1), 4.5 All plant materials shall be installed in a healthy vigorous condition typical (6) to the species and shall be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, trimming, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing, regular watering, and replacement of diseased or dead -- plants. (6) 4.6 Root barriers shall be installed as needed in areas where trees are planted in close proximity to hardscape and/or structures. JOINT -USE PARKING (1) 5.1 A minimum of 1,407 parking spaces within the project area (bounded by Valencia Avenue, Newport Avenue, Del Amo Avenue, Edinger Avenue and BNSF Railroad right-of-way) shall be maintained at all times. Any reduction of on-site parking, change of tenant spaces/uses, modification of parking lot and/or circulation shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. *** 5.2 Surface parking spaces shall have minimum dimensions of nine (9) feet wide by nineteen (19) feet long, including maximum two (2) feet overhang. Parking spaces within the parking structure shall have minimum dimensions of nine (9) feet wide by eighteen (18) feet long. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 6of31 (1) 5.3 Prior to issuance of permits, a recorded reciprocal access and parking agreement shall be drawn to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and Community Development Director and executed by all property owners prior to final inspection. The agreement shall be recorded on all parcels subject to the agreement. *** 5.4 Vehicles queuing to enter the gated parking lot areas shall not result in vehicle queuing in the public right-of-way. If peak times result in queuing impacts to the public rights-of-way, the applicant shall keep gates open to mitigate the impact during peak times. (5) 5.5 Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall submit a parking management plan that addresses parking lot access, security, visitor parking, and credit union branch parking. (1) 5.6 CUP -2018-00015 may be reviewed on an annual basis, or more often if necessary, by the Community Development Director. The Community Development Director shall review the use to ascertain compliance with conditions of approval. If the use is not operated in accordance with CUP - 2018 -00015, or is found to be a nuisance or negative impacts are affecting the surrounding tenants or neighborhood, the Community Development Director shall impose additional conditions to eliminate the nuisance or negative impacts, or may initiate proceedings to revoke the CUP. (2), 5.7 Prior to building final, the applicant shall submit a Transportation Demand (5) Management (TDM) plan for review and approval by Public Works Department. IMPROVEMENTS AND USE RESTRICTIONS FOR 1200 EDINGER AVENUE *** 6.1 The building located at 1200 Edinger Avenue is currently used as a storage facility with ancillary offices and is a legal nonconforming use. Any vacancies of the building shall trigger the requirement for a conforming use pursuant to the Pacific Center East Specific Plan. (5) 6.2 The applicant, tenant and/or property owner shall be prohibited from subleasing the property to a Specific Plan nonconforming use. Any subleases shall be a Specific Plan conforming use. *** 6.3 Proposals to redevelop the property shall be designed to comply with applicable City, State and federal requirements at the time of entitlement application submittal, permit application submittal and/or permit issuance. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 7 of 31 (5) 6.4 Landscaping on 1200 Edinger Avenue shall be installed within three (3) years of the Effective Date of DA -2018-00001. Landscaping shall consist of above ground planters on Del Amo Avenue and in -ground landscaping along Edinger Avenue. (5) 6.5 The building shall be painted and improved in accordance with DA -2018- 00001 within three (3) years of the Effective Date of the DA. The paint scheme and colors shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to implementing improvements. PLAN SUBMITTAL (1), 7.1 At the time of building or encroachment permit application, the plans shall (3) comply with the latest edition of the codes, City Ordinances, State, Federal laws, and regulations as adopted by the City Council of the City of Tustin. (1), 7.2 All architectural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing and structural plans (3) shall be submitted as one package at time of permit application submittal. Six (6) sets of plans, two (2) copies of structural calculations, two (2) copies of Title 24 and two (2) copies of soils reports are required. Four (4) copies of grading plans are required. Additionally, provide a copy of grading plans with the building plans for reference. (1) 7.3 Pursuant to the Tustin Security Code, walkway areas shall have minimum 0.25 -foot candle illumination and parking surfaces and private drives shall have minimum 1 -foot candle illumination. (3) 7.4 Electric Vehicle Charging: [CGBC 5.106.5.3] a. Provide charging space requirements per 5.106.5.3.1 or 5.106.5.3.2. b. Provide amount of spaces per Table 5.106.5.3.3. c. Provide identification per CGBC 5.106.5.3.4. d. Where electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) are provided, they shall comply with CBC 11 B- 812 and Table 11 B-228.3.2.1. (3) 7.5 At plan check submittal, the applicant shall show that the project complies with TCC Section 8104(r) regarding "Emergency responder radio coverage". Prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant/developer shall provide evidence that the project complies with TCC Section 8104(r). Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 8 of 31 (3) 7.6 All new structures shall provide adequate radio coverage for City emergency service workers operating on the 800 MHz Countywide Coordinated Communication System. Further, the applicant/owners or tenants shall maintain a reasonable standard of reliable radio communication within their buildings and structures once a certificate of occupancy is issued or a final inspection is conducted. For the purposes of this section, adequate radio coverage shall include those specifications in the City of Tustin Public Safety Radio System Coverage Specifications set forth in Chapter 10, Section 8958 of the TCC, even if the project is exempt from Section 8958 (City of Tustin Public Safety Radio System Coverage Specifications). GRADING AND DRAINAGE (1) 8.1 All private on-site design and construction of improvement work shall be designed and performed in accordance with the applicable portions of the City of Tustin's "Grading Manual" and "Construction Standards for Private Streets, Storm Drain and On -Site Private Improvements," except as otherwise approved by the Building Official. Said plans shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Curbs and gutters on all streets; b. Sidewalks on all streets, including curb ramps for the physically disabled; all sidewalks, pathways, paseos, and trails shall comply with the provisions of the American with Disabilities Act; c. Drive aprons; d. Signing/striping plan; e. Street lighting; Street and drive aisle paving; all drive aisles, and curb return radius shall be consistent with the City's design standards for private street improvements, unless otherwise approved by the Building Official, and all roadway and driveway widths and parking area widths (and lengths where appropriate) shall be dimensioned on the plans; g. Catch basin/storm drain laterals/connections to the public storm drain system with approval of the City of Tustin; h. Domestic water facilities: The domestic water system shall be designed and installed to the standards of the City of Tustin. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 9 of 31 Improvement 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; i. Sanitary sewer facilities: All sanitary sewer facilities must be submitted as required by the Building Official and East Orange County Water District (EOCWD). These facilities shall be consistent with the standards of the EOCWD; j. Underground utility connections: All utility lines shall be placed underground by the developer; k. Fire hydrants; Telecommunications facilities including, but not limited to, telephone and cable television facilities. Developer is required to coordinate design and construction of cable television facilities with a City -franchised system operator and shall not place an undue burden upon said operator for the provision of these facilities. m. The applicant shall be responsible for connection of the project to public utility systems. The applicant shall provide applicable easements for any new utilities on private property *** 8.2 At the time of grading and building permit application, the plans shall incorporate recommendations identified in the Geotechnical Investigation report dated May 15, 2017, produced by Sladden Engineering. (1) 8.3 Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a final grading plan, prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted and approved. The grading plan shall be consistent with the approved site and landscaping plans. (1) 8.4 Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, 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 Quality Control Board. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 10 of 31 (1), 8.5 Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a grading bond (on a form (5) acceptable to the City) will be required. The engineer's estimate, which covers the cost of all work shown on the grading plan, including grading, drainage, water, sewer and erosion control, shall be submitted to the City for approval. (5) 8.6 Preparation of a sedimentation and erosion control plan for all work related to this development shall be required. (1) 8.7 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 fifteen (15) miles per hour. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (1), 9.1 This development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City (5) of Tustin Water Quality Ordinance and all Federal, State, and Regional Water Quality Control Board rules and regulations. (1) 9.2 Prior to issuance of any permits, the applicant shall submit for approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, a Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The Final WQMP shall identify Low Impact Development (LID) principles and Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to retain storm water and treat predictable pollutant run-off. The Priority WQMP shall identify: the implementation of BMPs, the assignment of long-term maintenance responsibilities (specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessees, etc.), and reference to the location(s) of structural BMPs. (1) 9.3 Prior to issuance of any permits, the applicant shall record a "Covenant and Agreement Regarding O & M Plan to Fund and Maintain Water Quality BMPs, Consent to Inspect, and Indemnification" with the County Clerk -Recorder. This document shall bind current and future owner(s) of the property regarding implementation and maintenance of the structural and non-structural BMPs as specified in the approved WQMP. STREET IMPROVEMENTS (1) 10.1 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 19-32 Exhibit Page 11 of 31 (1) 10.2 Prior to issuance of an Encroachment Permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department 24" x 36" reproducible street improvement plans, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer, for approval. The plans shall clearly show existing and proposed surface and underground improvements, including construction and/or replacement of any missing or damaged public improvements adjacent to this development. (1) 10.3 Prior to issuance of an Encroachment Permit for construction within the public right-of-way, a 24" x 36" construction area traffic control plan, as prepared by a California Registered Traffic Engineer, or Civil Engineer experienced in this type of plan preparation, shall be prepared and submitted to the Public Works Department for approval. (1) 10.4 Current Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements shall be met at all driveways and sidewalks adjacent to the site. City of Tustin standards shall apply, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. *** 10.5 The applicant shall be responsible for designing and constructing the following public improvements: TRAFFIC SIGNAL Facility # Description 1 Traffic signal at intersection of Property driveway and Newport Ave. with associated apparatus 2 Left turn pocket on Newport Ave. into Property 3 Double left turn pocket on Newport Ave. into APN 430- 251-23 4 Driveway improvements on APN 430-251-23 5 Relocation of catch basin on Newport Avenue, installation of new 24" RCP storm drain line 6 Re -design of existing medians on Newport Ave. due to signal and turning enhancements MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS Facility # Description 7 Landscaping (incl. irrigation and laterals) of Newport Ave. medians adjacent to Property 2 total 8 Landscaping (incl. irrigation and laterals) of Newport Ave. medians adjacent to APN 430-251-25 2 total 9 Landscaping (incl. irrigation and laterals) of Del Amo Ave. median 1 total Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 12 of 31 SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS Facility # Description 10 New sidewalk and landscaping on Newport Avenue from Valencia to Del Amo 11 New sidewalk on Del Amo from Newport Ave to SchoolsFirst driveway WATER IMPROVEMENTS Facility # Description 12 Water laterals (domestic and fire) from point of connection in Newport Ave. and Del Amo Ave. to private property. WATER IMPROVEMENT (1) 11.1 Proposed water improvements must follow the latest City of Tustin Water Standards and the American Water Works Association (AWWA) guidelines. In case of a conflict, the City of Tustin Water Standards shall prevail. (1) 11.2 In accordance with the plans, a backflow prevention device is required to protect the public water system from cross connections. a. A double check detector assembly (DCDA) is required and an easement for public utility access purposes shall be dedicated to the City of Tustin. The easement shall start from the public right- of-way up to the DCDA with a minimum distance of five (5) feet all around the DCDA to allow for unobstructed access, inspection, testing, and maintenance. b. The applicant shall provide a backflow prevention device at his or her expense to prevent cross contamination between the buildings' and parking structure's fire sprinkler system and the public water system. c. If the applicant proposes to use a landscape irrigation system, then a separate water meter may be required. If this is the case, a reduced pressure principle assembly (RPPA) shall be required to prevent cross -connection with the public water system. (1) 11.3 Any easements for construction and maintenance of public water facilities within private property shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department prior to recordation with the Orange County Clerk -Recorder. The applicant shall submit a legal description and sketch of the area to the Public Works Department for review and Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 13 of 31 approval, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer or California Licensed Land Surveyor. (1) 11.4 The applicant is responsible for all costs related to the installation, upgrade, alteration, relocation or abandonment of all existing City of Tustin public water facilities affected by the proposed project. (1) 11.5 The applicant's project is within the East Orange County Water District (EOCWD) service area. A release/approval from the EOCWD shall be obtained prior to receiving water service from the City of Tustin. The applicant shall submit a water permit application to EOCWD and is responsible for all application, connection and other EOCWD fees. (1), 11.6 The adequacy of a proposed water system plan for a proposed (5) development project, including the number, size and distribution of fire hydrants, must be reviewed by the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). Plans meeting OCFA fire protection requirements must be stamped and approved by that agency. (1) 11.7 The proposed domestic water system plans must conform to all applicable regulations enforced by the Orange County Health Department. SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING (1) 12.1 Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling and Reduction Plan (WRRP). a. The applicant/contractor is required to submit a WRRP to the Public Works Department. The WRRP must indicate how the applicant will comply with the City's requirement (City Code Section 4351, et al) to recycle at least 65 percent of the project waste material or the amount required by the California Green Building Standards Code. b. The applicant will be required to submit a $50.00 application fee and a cash security deposit. Based on the review of the submitted Waste Management Plan, the cash security deposit in the amount of 5 percent of the project's valuation as determined by the Building Official, rounded to the nearest thousand. The deposit amount will be collected in accordance with the Tustin City Code. c. Prior to issuance of any permit, the applicant shall submit the required security deposit in the form of cash, cashier's check, Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 14 of 31 personal check, or money order made payable to the "City of Tustin". (1) 12.2 Facility Solid Waste Collection and Recycling Plan a. The applicant, property owner, and/or tenant(s) are required to participate in the City's recycling program. b. Waste and Recycling collection facilities shall be equally and readily accessible by the property owner(s) or tenant(s). c. Waste and Recycling collection facilities must be placed in a location that can be easily and safely accessed by the solid waste hauler while utilizing either front loader or side loading equipment. d. Adequate collection capacity shall be provided to ensure that collection frequency shall not exceed four (4) times per week for commercial customers. e. All trash enclosures shall be designed with roof and be able to accommodate at least two (2) 4 -yard bins, with at least one (1) bin reserved for recyclable materials. f. Prior to the approval of a site plan or the issuance of a building permit, the Public Works Department shall review and approve the number of trash enclosures required to service the project site. g. Businesses that will be large generators of organic waste such as food scraps, must also have room for a 35 -gallon, 60 -gallon or 2 - cubic yard collection receptacle as part of the State required organics diversion program. NOISE (1) 13.1 All activities, including construction -related noise activities, shall comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. (1) 13.2 All rooftop mounted HVAC equipment should be fully shielded or enclosed from the line of site of adjacent residential uses. Shielding/parapet wall should be at least as high as the equipment. (2) 13.3 The project shall comply with Calgreen Building Standards Code requirements of California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11, Section 5.507.4.1.1: "Buildings exposed to a noise level of 65 dB Leq-1-hr during any hour of operation shall have building, addition or alteration exterior Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 15 of 31 wall and roof -ceiling assemblies exposed to the noise source meeting a composite STC rating of at least 45 (or OITC 35), with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 (OITC 30)." *** 13.4 Construction vehicles/equipment engine idling time for all trucks to five (5) minutes or less. (1) 13.5 Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property must take place 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, excluding City observed federal holidays. (1) 13.6 Trucks, vehicles and equipment that are making or are involved with material deliveries, loading or transfer of materials, equipment service, maintenance of any devices or appurtenances to any construction project in the City shall not be operated on or adjacent to said sites outside of the approved hours for construction activity. *** 13.7 No impact pile driving activities shall be allowed on the project site. *** 13.8 During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devises and equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. Idling equipment should be turned off when not in use. *** 13.9 The contractor shall locate staging area, generators and stationary construction equipment as far from the adjacent office buildings as reasonably feasible. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (1) 14.1 The applicant shall satisfy dedication and/or reservation requirements as applicable, including, but not limited to, dedication in Fee Title of all required street rights-of-way; dedication of all required flood control right- of-way easements; and dedication of vehicular access rights, sewer easements, and water easements defined and approved as to specific locations by the City Engineer (at no cost to the City) and/or other agencies. (5) 14.2 Prior to issuance of a Building Permit(s), the applicant shall provide written approval from the EOCWD for sanitary sewer service connections. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 16 of 31 (1) 14.3 Any damage done to existing public street improvements and/or utilities shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the City Engineer before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the development on any parcel within the project site. (5) 14.4 Construction vehicular/equipment operations shall be scheduled to minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes on Valencia Avenue, Del Amo Avenue and Newport Avenue. POLICE DEPARTMENT *** 15.1 Prior to final occupancy, the applicant shall provide a security plan to the Police Department for review. ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY (5) 16.1 Prior to issuance of a precise grading permit or a building permit, if a grading permit is not required, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval for the following: a. Fire master plan (service code PR145). b. Temporary fire access (PR150) - if phasing fire access during construction. (5) 16.2 Prior to issuance of a precise grading permit or a building permit, if a grading permit is not required, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval for the following: a. Gates (service code PR180) — if not included in the fire master plan. b. Underground piping for private hydrants and fire sprinkler systems (service code PR470-PR475). c. Architectural (service code PR200-PR208). d. Battery systems (service code PR375) — for UPS or electric carts/cart charging if over 50 gallons aggregate of electrolyte or 1,000 pounds of lithium -ion. e. Storage of flammable/combustible fuel (service code PR300) — Generator fuel tank, if over sixty (60) gallons. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 17 of 31 (5) 16.3 Prior to concealing interior construction, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval for the following: a. Fire alarm system (service code PR500-PR520) b. Fire sprinkler system (service code PR420-PR440) c. Standpipe systems (service code PR460) d. Hood and Duct fire extinguishing systems. (5) 16.4 Specific submittal requirements may vary from those listed above depending on actual project conditions identified or present during design development, review, construction, inspection, or occupancy. Standard notes, guidelines, submittal instructions, and other information related to plans reviewed by the OCFA may be found by visiting www.ocfa.org and clicking on "Business 4 Planning & Development Services" in the menu bar at the top of the screen. (5) 16.5 Temporary/Final Occupancy Inspections: Prior to issuance of temporary or final certificate of occupancy, all OCFA inspections shall be completed to the satisfaction of the OCFA inspector and be in substantial compliance with codes and standards applicable to the project and commensurate with the type of occupancy (temporary or final) requested. Inspections shall be scheduled at least five (5) days in advance by calling OCFA Inspection Scheduling at (714) 573-6150. (5) 16.6 Preconstruction Meeting: Before commencement of construction, the applicant or responsible party shall attend a pre -construction meeting with an OCFA inspector. Call OCFA Inspection Scheduling at (714) 573- 6150 at least five (5) days in advance to schedule and pay for the pre - construction meeting. (5) 16.7 Lumber -drop Inspection: After installation of required fire access roadways and hydrants, the applicant shall receive clearance from the OCFA prior to bringing combustible building materials on-site. Call OCFA Inspection Scheduling at (714) 573-6150 with the Service Request number of the approved fire master plan at least five days in advance to schedule the lumber drop inspection. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS & RESTRICTIONS (CC&RS) (5) 17.1 All organizational documents for the project including any deed restrictions, covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Department, Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 18 of 31 City Attorney's Office, and Special Counsel. Costs for such review shall be borne by the applicant. The approved CC&Rs shall be recorded with County Recorder's Office prior to issuance of building permits. A copy of the final documents shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within five (5) days of recordation. (5) 17.2 Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, all organizational documents for the project including any deed restrictions, covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Department and City Attorney's Office. Costs for such review shall be borne by the applicant. CC&Rs shall include but not be limited to the following provisions: a. The City shall be included as a party to the CC&Rs for enforcement purposes of those CC&R provisions in which the City has interest, as reflected in the following provisions. However, the City shall not be obligated to enforce the CC&Rs. b. The requirement that a property owners committee be established. c. Provisions for effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and facilities including landscaped areas, walls and fences, and hardscape areas. d. Membership in any Property Owners Committee shall be inseparable from ownership in individual parcels. e. Maintenance standards shall be provided in the CC&Rs. Examples of maintenance standards are shown below: 1. All common area and private landscaping 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 pedestrian traffic along the walkways. 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 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 and landscape 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 Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 19 of 31 created by the absence of adequate maintenance such as to be detrimental to public health, safety, or general welfare. 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 mechanical equipment, television and radio antenna, and signs, consistent with the TCC and PCESP zoning district. g. Property Owners Committee 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. h. In order to achieve the appropriate balance of harmonious and diverse design within the project, all plans for exterior improvements shall conform to requirements set forth by the City and the CC&Rs. The CC&Rs shall provide for an adequate means of ensuring compliance with this requirement, such as, by way of example only, property owner association approval of exterior improvements prior to requesting a building permit from the Community Development Department. i. All utility services serving the site shall be installed and maintained underground. j. The Association shall be responsible for establishing procedures for providing entry gate access to the public utilities for maintenance of their facilities within the project area, subject to those agencies' approval. k. No amendment to alter, modify, terminate or change the Committee's obligation to maintain the common areas and the project perimeter wall (include if the wall is located on private property) 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. I. Provisions for effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair, and maintenance of all common areas and facilities including buildings and amenities, trash enclosures, landscaped areas, walls and fences, private drives and walkways, etc. Maintenance standards shall also be provided. m. Provision for a Parking Management Plan to include a "Parking and Circulation Exhibit" shall be made part of the CC&Rs and shall be enforced by the property owners association. In addition to the Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 20 of 31 exhibit, provisions regarding parking shall be included in the CC&Rs, including the following: 1. The continued availability of the minimum 1,407 parking spaces designated for common use and the availability of reciprocal access easements ensuring access to the public rights-of-way. 2. Permanent reciprocal parking, reciprocal access and parking enforcement. 3. Parking controls shall be provided and may include, but not be limited to, provisions regulating vehicle and truck deliveries, vehicle and truck parking, shared parking, loading areas, etc. 4. Assigned and unassigned parking spaces shall be permanently maintained in locations shown on the "Parking and Circulation Exhibit." n. The property association shall be required to file the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of at least one member of the property association Board and, where applicable, a manager of the project before January 1 st of each year with the 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. (1) 17.3 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. All trees shall also be root pruned to eliminate exposed surface roots and damage to sidewalks, driveways, and structures. *** 17.4 The CC&Rs shall include provisions that reference the property owner obligations to establish and maintain a Water Quality Management Plan (see Conditions 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3) and Transportation Demand Management Plan (see Condition 18.1d). ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION (2) 18.1 The applicant and project shall be subject to the following Pacific Center East Draft Environmental Impact Report (August 1990) and Final Environmental Impact Report (November 1990) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures from the Final Environmental Impact Report are distinguished in italics: Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 21 of 31 a. Section 3.1 — Land Use Mitigation i. Measure 2: Community Development shall review each site to ensure that it conforms to ensure that it conforms to the approved development standards and land use concepts included in the specific plan. b. Section 3.2 — Geology/Soils Mitigation i. Measure 1: A comprehensive geotechnical and soils investigation shall be performed by any developer on each individual building site to develop preliminary soils engineering design data to be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department. ii. Measure 2: The Community Development Department shall review grading plans to assure a minimum of 2.0 feet of compact fill soil beneath the bottom of proposed foundations is provided for one- and two-story structures. iii. Measure 3: The Community Development Department shall review building plans to assure that foundation depths of one- to three-story structures are 24 inches below grade due to the expansive soil conditions within the majority of the parcels. The depths of foundations for structures shall be commensurate on the maximum loads generated. iv. Measure 4: The Community Development Department shall require that all foundations include reinforcement, as shall slabs on -grade and concrete flatwork. A bearing value on the order of 2,000 pounds/square foot (with increases as applicable) will be anticipated for proportioning conventional foundation design. V. Measure 6: The Community Development Department shall review the proposed pavement 'R' values, if possible, toward the end of grading operations when the upper 2.0 feet of the soil are identified. The reason is due to the variety of soils encountered within the parcels and the possibilities of soils being blended or imported during grading operations. vi. Measure 7: All structures will be developed in accordance with the seismic design provisions of the Uniform Building Code and monitored during plan check and consideration by the Community Development Department. vii. Measure 8: Prior to issuance of grading permits, any developer shall submit a pesticides/toxicity report acceptable to the Community Development Department which identifies any pesticide "hot spots" and recommends procedures for necessary soil mixing or removal. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 22 of 31 viii. Measure 9: If any archeological remains are uncovered during excavation or construction, work in the affected area shall be suspended. In such an event, a recognized specialist from an established institution (e.g. the UCLA Department of Archeology) shall be hired by the applicant to conduct a survey of the affected area. All actions taken under this measure will be in accordance with Appendix K of the State CEQA Guidelines. c. Section 3.3 — Hydrology Mitigation i. Measure 2: Final grading shall conform to the drainage concept of the specific plan to ensure that project storm runoff does not exceed the capacity of local storm drain systems. ii. Measure 4: Onsite flooding shall be prevented by redirecting the flow to locations with adequate drainage facilities and by pumping during peak events. iii. Measure 6: Soil on graded slopes shall be strengthened by planting in accordance with landscape concept plan presented in the specific plan. Straw, wood chips, or plastic should be used as stabilizing agents in the interim period before the groundcover takes hold. d. Section 3.5 — Transportation/Circulation Mitigation; i. Measures 3: Each development subject to regulation shall submit a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program conforming with the California State Air Quality Management District's (AQMD) Regulation 15 to the AQMD and to the City, prepared by a qualified ride -share coordinator. This sets forth the actions employers must take to promote employee participation in a trip reduction and ridesharing program. These programs are intended to reduce emissions from vehicles and to increase the average vehicle ridership (AVR) for commuting between home and the work site. The TDM program shall be carried out by an onsite transportation coordinator who shall have a permanent mailing address, daytime telephone and office within the employment center. Increased AVR may be achieved by various strategies, of which the following are examples: • Direct financial incentives for ridesharing; Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 23 of 31 • Establishment of carpool, buspool, or vanpool programs; • Full or partial subsidization of parking for ridesharing employees; • Full or partial subsidization of carpools, vanpools, buspools, shuttle or use of public transit; • Provisions of an allowance for employees to utilize company-owned fleet vehicles for ridesharing purposes; • Preferential parking for vehicles using ridesharing; • Facility improvements which provide preferential access and/or egress for ridesharing employees; • Facility improvements to encourage use of bicycles (showers, bike racks, etc.); • Active use of a computerized rideshare matching service such as the Orange County Transportation Authority Rideshare program, or an effective in- house rideshare matching service; • Compressed work weeks such as a 4/10 or 9/80 work schedule where employees work 40 hours in fewer than five days in one week or 80 hours in fewer than ten days in two weeks; • Work hours that facilitate employee ridesharing. • Telecommuting or work at home; • Provisions for the construction and/or placement of a transit waiting shelter, bus shelter, transit stop or bus stop at the public right-of-way on established transit routes adjacent to the project, including granting of any easement necessary to accommodate the shelter; • Provisions for bus or transit turnouts along a bus, tram or transit route; • Before or after work programs such as a meal, exercise, educational, entertainment, and rest facilities. In addition to any AQMD, Regulation XV requirements and prior to issuance of building permits for any phase of a development within the specific plan and generating more than 100 employees, the applicant shall develop a TDM program for the entire development site proposed including any anticipated phasing and submit such plan to the City of Tustin. The TDM must be designed to reduce trips to achieve 1.5 average vehicle ridership (AVR) and may Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 24 of 31 include but is not limited to those measures cited in mitigation measure #3 above. a. Single-phase development projects shall achieve TDM objectives within five years of issuance of any certificate of occupancy. Multi -phased projects shall achieve the objectives for each phase within three years of the issuance of any certificate of occupancy. b. An applicant may perform the TDM programs through tenants or lessees in the project. However, agreements that tenants or lessees will so perform shall not relieve applicant or its successors of that duty to perform or require performance. d. An applicant shall submit an annual status report on the TDM program to the City of Tustin beginning a year after the issuance of any certificate of occupancy. The report shall be prepared in the form and format designated by the City of Tustin which must either approve or disapprove the program within 60 days. The TDM Performance Reports shall focus on ridesharing and trip reduction incentives offered by the project and shall consist of a report that: 1) estimates AVR levels attained; 2) verifies that the plan incentives have been offered; 3) describes use of those incentives offered by employers; 4) evaluates why the plan did or did not work, and an explanation of why the revised plan is likely to achieve the AVR target levels; and, 5) lists additional incentives which can be reasonably expected to correct deficiencies. In the event that TDM objectives contained in this mitigation measure are not met, the City of Tustin shall notify the property owner (in writing) of failure to comply. If the TDM performance objectives are not satisfied, the property owner shall either: 1) Submit to the city within 30 days of notification by the city a list of TDM measures that will be implemented to meet the TDM objectives within 180 days of written notification by the City of Tustin. At the end of the 180 -day period, the property owner shall submit a revised performance report to determine compliance with TDM objectives. No further measures will Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 25 of 31 be necessary if the TDM objectives are met. 2) Should the TDM objectives not be satisfied by the end of the 180 -day period, the property owner(s) shall pay a TDM penalty fee to the City of Tustin in an amount determined by the city. Said penalty fee shall be used to improve street capacity through construction of physical improvements to be selected by the City of Tustin from the list of areawide improvements identified in the Pacific Center East Specific Plan EIR. 3) Penalty fee per item number 1) above. e. Appeal of any discussion regarding TDM — Mitigation measures contained herein may be brought forward to the City Council for resolution. e. Section 3.6 — Air Quality Mitigation i. Measure 1: Upon grading plan review, the Community Development Department shall indicate to the developer when construction periods are prohibited. The impact of short-term construction -generated emissions shall be reduced to the extent feasible by the following measures: • Construction -related dust shall be reduced, particularly during the driest summer months, by periodically watering and by paving the area proposed for parking as soon as practical. • No grading shall take place when wind velocity in the vicinity exceeds 15 miles per hour. • Grading shall be prohibited during second -stage smog alerts. ii. Measure 2: Development of the project shall comply with all existing SCAQMD rules and regulations. SCAG and AQMD shall monitor compliance. iii. Measure 3: In order to reduce motor vehicle emissions, project employers with over 100 employees shall prepare a TDM program as required by SCAQMD Regulation XV. In addition, all employers with 50-100 employees shall participate in a mandatory TDM after 1995 and may participate in a voluntary TDM program required of the applicant prior to 1995. However, changes in Rule XV may supersede these requirements. Additional TDM mitigations are required in Section 3.5. SCAG and Public Works are responsible for monitoring compliance. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 26 of 31 iv. Measure 4: As well as preparation of a TDM program, the following measures shall be implemented in accordance with SCAQMD Regulation XV to reduce motor vehicles emissions. • Preferential parking for vanpools in parking structures. V. Measure 7: The applicant shall operate street sweepers on paved roads adjacent to the site, based on guidelines provided by Public Works. vi. Measure 8: Construction parking shall be contiguous to minimize traffic interference. f. Section 3.7 — Acoustic Environment Mitigation i. Measure 1: Construction and demolition activities will take place only during the hours and at the levels specified in the City of Tustin Noise Ordinance. Construction equipment servicing and maintenance will be permitted onsite during these hours provided that such servicing and maintenance is not in close proximity to residential areas. ii. Measure 2: Construction equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000 feet of a dwelling unit shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained muffler exhaust systems. iii. Measure 4: When building permits are submitted, all applications shall be reviewed by Community Development for compliance with the most recent John Wayne Airport noise regulation. g. Section 3.8 — Public Services Mitigation Measures (as applicable to the current utility provider) i. Police 1: If determined to be necessary by the Tustin Police Department, onsite security personnel will be required. ii. Police 2: The Community Development Department shall assure project design includes requirements of the Uniform Security Code as amended by the City, including provision of proper lighting to reduce darkened areas, adequate building addressing, sensitive review of landscaping to ensure it does not provide dense cover, and buildings which have passive and/or over surveillance opportunities. iii. Fire 1: If uses are proposed onsite which include storage or use of toxic materials, all handling and storage of toxic materials shall comply with Orange County Fire Authority and City regulations for hazardous and toxic materials. Community Development Department and the Orange County Fire Authority shall assure compliance. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 27 of 31 iv. Fire 2: All development shall be required to comply with all OCFA requirements related to fire flow, installation where required of fire hydrants and compliance with all requirements related to construction. V. Water Services i. Measure 1: Landscaping irrigation systems should be controlled automatically to ensure watering during early morning or evening hours to reduce evaporation losses. ii. Measure 2: Plumbing fixtures to reduce water usage and loss should be utilized (i.e., low volume toilet tanks, flow control devices for faucets, etc.) in accordance with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. iii. Measure 3: Drought -tolerant plants should be incorporated into project design from the plant palette in the specific plan whenever possible. iv. Measure 4: The onsite water system improvements including 12 -inch mains in Edinger Avenue and Newport Avenue and fire hydrants, meters and back-flow prevention devices, if required, shall be installed by each development at developer's expense and in conformance with plans and specifications approved by the City of Tustin Water Services Division. vi. Wastewater i. Measure 1: Efforts should be made in cooperation with the City of Tustin and other agencies to reduce flows to the [East Orange County Water District] facilities in order to ensure set discharge limits for biochemical oxygen demand and suspended solids are not exceeded. ii. Measure 2: The City will require any developer to pay for any wastewater system improvements necessitated by any proposed development project. Such payment could be subject to reimbursement by other developers benefitting from such improvements. vii. Solid Waste Disposal i. Measure 1: Access for garbage trucks, locating stationary trash compactors in individual buildings in order to minimize waste hauling demand, and providing and maintaining solid waste storage areas in accordance with City of Tustin requirements. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 28 of 31 ii. Measure 2: Project design should provide for recycling containers in close proximity to other refuse containers. iii. Measure 3: Concurrent with review of certificate of occupancy application, tenants occupying more than 50,000 square feet shall file a waste reduction plan with the Public Works Department. iv. Measure 4: Proposed design should include means to reduce waste materials generated during construction (e.g., recycling cardboard/paper, recycle or reuse scrap lumber). v. Measure 5: Provisions for trash enclosures for all purposes is required by the specific plan. viii. Natural Gas i. Measure 1: Individual developments should consult with Southern California Gas Company to incorporate energy conserving systems and design features into their projects. ii. Measure 2: Community Development shall review plans to assure all buildings shall comply with standards contained in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. ix. Electrical Service i. Measure 1: The project developer will be responsible for the construction of any street lighting, underground facilities, or other structures required by the Public Works Department for the project. ii. Measure 2: Community Development shall review all plans to assure all structures are designed in accordance with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. iii. Measure 3: Individual developments should consult with Southern California Edison to incorporate energy conservation measures into the project. X. Telephone Service i. Measure 1: Pacific Bell [or applicable utility provider] shall review plans to assure appropriate easements will be provided for any new telephone facilities required. ii. Measure 2: Service provided will be in accordance with the rules and regulations on file with the Public Utilities Commission. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 29 of 31 A. Schools: i. Measure 1: Any development is required to participate in funding of school facilities through the existing school facility fee program, or execution of some other voluntary agreement with the school district as a condition of issuance of building permits. The agreement shall be filed with Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. xii. Cable Television i. Measure 1: Cable television franchises shall review plans to assure appropriate easements will be provided for any new cable television facilities required and submitted concurrent with street improvement plans. h. Section 3.9 — Aesthetics i. Measure 1: Community Development shall review plans for compliance with the Signage Concept in the specific plan to ensure project lighting is not directed into adjacent residential areas. ii. Measure 4: All mechanical equipment shall be screened. FEES (1) 19.1 Within forty-eight (48) hours of approval of the subject project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a cashier's check payable to the COUNTY CLERK in the amount of fifty dollars ($50.00) 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. (1), 19.2 Prior to issuance of building and/or encroachment permits, payment shall (5) be made of all applicable fees, including but not limited to, the following: a. Building and Planning Plan Check and Permit Fees b. Public Works Fees c. Orange County Fire Authority Fees d. East Orange County Water District Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 30 of 31 e. New Development Fees f. School District Fees (1), 19.3 Prior to issuance of a Building Permit(s), payment of the most current (5) Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fees (for the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA)) to the City of Tustin (through the Public Works Department) shall be required. The fee rate schedule automatically increases on July 1St of each year. (1) 19.4 The applicant shall make the required deposits for plan check and permit issuance in accordance with the City's most recent fee schedule, or as otherwise required by DA -2018-00001. Resolution 19-32 Exhibit Page 31 of 31