Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 GEN PLAN AM 04-001 02-22-05Agenda Item 1 Reviewed: City Manager Finance Director N/A AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2005 TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 04-001, PREZONE 04-001, AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT/ZONE CHANGE 04-001 SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment and Prezone related to the proposed annexation of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin Disposition Parcel 36, and a Zone Change/Specific Plan Amendment to establish new site development standards for MCAS Tustin Disposition Parcel 36. On February 14, 2005, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve GPA 04-001, Prezone 04-001 and Specific Plan AmendmenUZone Change 04-001. Applicant/ Owner: Moffett Meadows Partners LLC RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 05-42 finding that General Plan Amendment 04-001, Prezone 04-001, Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001, and Annexation No. 159 are within the scope of the adopted Final EIS/EIR for the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 05-43 approving General Plan Amendment 04-001 for the annexation of MCAS Tustin Disposition Parcel 36. 3. Introduce and have first reading by title only to adopt Ordinance No. 1294 approving Prezone 04-001 for the annexation of MCAS Tustin Disposition Parcel 36. 4. Introduce and have first reading by title only to adopt Ordinance No. 1295 approving Zone Change _(MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001 for MCAS Tustin Disposition Parcel 36. City Council Report February 22, 2005 GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, and ZC 04-001 Page 2 of 4 FISCAL IMPACT: The General Plan Amendment, Prezone, and Zone Change are applicant-initiated projects. The applicant has paid applicable fees for the processing of these applications. There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment, Prezone, and Zone Change. The annexation of MCAS Tustin Disposition Parcel 36 to the City of Tustin would have an insignificant fiscal impact consisting of additional property tax revenues and additional expenditures for public services. ENVIRONMENTAL: On January 17, 2001, the City Council certified the Final Environmental Impact StatemenUEnvironmental Impact Report for the Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/FEIR). The proposed density for MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36 is consistent with development intensity considered in the FEIS/FEIR. Staff has prepared a checklist that demonstrates all potential impacts of the project were addressed by the certified FEIS/FEIR and no additional impacts have been identified (Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42). In addition, a mitigation monitoring program matrix was prepared by the Community Development Department that identifies the specific mitigation measures or implementation measures identified in the FEIS/FEIR that are applicable to the project; all applicable mitigation measures in the FEIS/FEIR will be recommended as conditions of approval in the entitlements for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. The public comment period for the environmental documents was from January 13, 2005, to February 22, 2005. No comments were received during the public review period. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin was closed on July 2, 1999. The Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin is comprised of approximately 1602 acres of federal property and a 4.1 acre privately owned parcel. The majority of the site or approximately 1,511 acres in the Reuse Plan are located within the City of Tustin with approximately 95 acres within the City of Irvine. On January 16, 2001, the Tustin City Council approved General Plan Amendment (GPA) 00-001 which adopted amendments to various Elements of the General Plan needed to establish conformity with the MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan and which officially established a new "MCAS Tustin Specific Plan" General Plan designation for that portion of the Reuse Plan property within the City of Tustin. On June 7, 2004, Moffet Meadows Partners, LLC, which purchased a portion of former MCAS, Tustin from the Department of Navy, filed a landowner petition with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the reorganization of the boundary between Tustin and Irvine. The proposed reorganization includes the following actions: City Council Report February 22, 2005 GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, and ZC 04-001 Page 3 of 4 • Detachment of approximately 21.6 acres from the City of Irvine and annexation of the same 21.6 acres to the City of Tustin (MCAS Tustin Disposition Parcel 36) • Amendment to City of Irvine Sphere of Influence • Amendment to City of Tustin Sphere of Influence The boundary reorganization would improve the delivery of public services such as law enforcement and waste collection to the future residents of the annexed area. The reorganization would also place a planned residential neighborhood entirely within one city rather than split it illogically between two cities. Presently, the proposed annexation area is somewhat isolated from the rest of Irvine because it is surrounded on three sides by flood control channels or Southern California Edison property. Vehicular access to the area is from the north through the City of Tustin. The boundary change would eliminate this City of Irvine "island" and would improve the connectivity of the proposed residential neighborhood. On December 14, 2004, the City of Irvine adopted Resolution No. 04-181 supporting the proposed boundary reorganization (Attachment G). Prior to taking action on the proposed reorganization, LAFCO requires that the City of Tustin adopt a General Plan Amendment and Prezone for the territory to be annexed. In addition, the applicant is requesting a Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) for MCAS Tustin Disposition Parcel 36. General Plan Amendment 04-001 General Plan Amendment 04-001 would establish the General Plan land use designation of "MCAS Tustin Specific Plan" for the annexation of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. The proposed general plan amendment also includes the revision of some text and several maps and exhibits in the Tustin General Plan to adjust the City boundary and increase the size of the City by approximately 21.6 acres. These revisions, which are shown in Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-43, would maintain internal consistency within the General Plan. Prezone 04-001 Prezone 04-001 would prezone MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36, which is located within the City of Irvine (Attachment B), from the City of Irvine "2.3 Medium Density Residential" zoning district to the City of Tustin "MCAS Tustin Specific Plan" zoning district (SP-1 Specific Plan). The affected territory is currently undeveloped, but was previously developed with military housing for Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin. Zone Chanae (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001 Zone Change 04-001 would amend the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan to establish new site development standards for Disposition Parcel 36. Under the current MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, the site development standards from City of Irvine Planning Area 38 are applicable to Disposition Parcel 36. The proposed zone change would specifically call out the applicable development standards, which would be consistent with City of Irvine Planning City Council Report February 22, 2005 GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, and ZC 04-001 Page 4 of 4 Area 38 development standards. Development standards pertaining to landscaping, bicycle and pedestrian circulation facilities, and signage would be similar to existing MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Planning Area 21 standards. The proposed standards and related amendments to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan are shown on Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 1295. Annexation Process The annexation is one component of the project and is addressed in the environmental analysis to be considered by the City Council. The property tax exchange resolution for the proposed annexation will be brought to the City Council for consideration following the City's receipt of the County Auditor's report, which is anticipated within the next thirty days. If the City Council approves General Plan Amendment 04-001 and Prezone 04-001, LAFCO would proceed to schedule their public hearing for the annexation and sphere of influence amendments. LAFCO staff anticipates that the public hearing will take place on April 13, 2005. If the annexation is approved by LAFCO, the general plan and pre- zoning designations would become official for the property. On February 14, 2005, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the General Plan Amendment, Prezone, Zone Change/Specific Plan Amendment. A decision to approve General Plan Amendment 04-001, Prezone 04-001, and Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001 may be supported by the findings contained in Resolution Nos. 05-42 and 05-43, and Ordinance Nos. 1294 and 1295. Scott Reekstin Elizabeth A. Binsack Senior Planner Community Development Director Attachments: A. Location Map B. Area Map C. Resolution No. 05-42 (Environmental Findings) D. Resolution No. 05-43 (General Plan Amendment) E. Ordinance No. 1294 (Prezone) F. Ordinance No. 1295 (Zone Change/Specific Plan Amendment) G. City of Irvine Resolution No. 04-181 (Boundary Adjustment) S:\Cdd\CCREPORTGPA 04-001 PZ 04001 and ZC 04-001 (Lennar).doc ATTACHMENT A LOCATION MAP LOCATION MAP ATTACHMENT B AREA MAP :./ )t _ '. Tustin ''~, _ sevarn,a ; LDR Idl GV ~~ , , flaatl~' S~ VS _ / 6•A U ~ / / ~; NI ; NP ~ F l ~ MDR -'l`~~'~~ ~ ~o I ~\,~~ mwtle - - -~ CP i Hs ~~i GV POatl 1 1 ncanw ILV Ly I_ _ _ _ _ _ i T/ RP ~ GV EH / ¢• GV r'C' / NP I 1n LV V~-~ - SEE NOTE2 I/ // ~ I A - v,u ~.~ r $ ~ .. __. I CB C8 ~~ c3 ~ MC~ ~ 44~re ,,,, ~ YNa~ia ~ 2~.1 maM. aAna t Cg I =YJ m~nia CB CB C i ~W'A; ~ I I~ I J __I, rer Atl I-------- --~ `I•~l_~-_-I aaean~a Pkwy m a' a' Amry Reserve m a' ' Parcel z ~ ! ~ ~ 8 C7ty of z x a ~ ~ Irvine i LDR LOW DENSITY RESIDEMIAL (I-7 DWACAE) ES-e ELEMENTARY SCHOOL(K-a) MDR MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(6-i50WACAE)` HS HIGH SCHOOL MHOR MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(76-25 ~~~~~~~ REGIONAL RIDING AND HIKING TRAIL DU/ACAS) -"- MCAS TUSTIN BOUNDARY TlEH TRANSITONAUEMERGENCY HOUSING -~•- IRVINEliUSTIWSANTAANA BOUNDARY GV GOLF VILLAGE MILITARY (FEDERALPROPERTY) C COMMERCIAL ~ ® ADDITIONAL ROAD RIGHT-0F-WAY CB COMMERCIAL BUSINESS VS VILLAGE SERVICES Nmm: CC COMMUNITY CARE I.AaadwayellpunemsaracencaeP~- LV LEARNING VILLAGE 2 Shatletl areas ren~ent wrcePNa1 seemasva reeeway alignment areas antl in intanriange lata4laLA CP COMMUNITY PARK 9. ~Ue t7wvlsng UMb RP URBAN REGIONAL PARK a.flaads shaven imNau matl tigMat-wey. NP NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 5-MaNwn DeasM ReaitlarealtlmigrynaSon wiN rm[etteatl ~~+ES~ ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (K-B) s25 ~as~ uNta ~ am. D 2000 Feet Alternative 1 LRA Reuse Alternative ?rivate °toverN •:uaiae stcs'~~axm s carv :~~~ LoR I€ < PLANNING AREA 21 < PLANNING AREA 21 LOR < DISPOSITION PARCEL 36 ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT C RESOLUTION NO.05-42 (ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS) RESOLUTION NO. 05-42 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN FINDING THAT THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT /FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DISPOSAL AND REUSE OF MCAS, TUSTIN ("FEIS/FEIR") IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROJECT EIS/EIR FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 04-001, PREZONE 04-001, ZONE CHANGE (MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT) 04-001, AND ANNEXATION NO. 159. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That General Plan Amendment 04-001, Prezone 04-001, Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001, and Annexation No. 159 is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act. B. That the FEIS/FEIR was certified by the City Council on January 16, 2001. The FEIS/FEIR is a Program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA.") The FEIS/FEIR considered the potential environmental impacts associated with the development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. C. That an Environmental Analysis checklist, attached as Exhibit A hereto, was prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the Project. The Environmental Analysis checklist demonstrates that all potential impacts of the Project were addressed by the certified FEIS/FEIR, no additional impacts have been identified, and all applicable mitigation measures in the FEIS/FEIR will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. II. The City Council hereby finds find that this Project is within the scope of the previously approved Program FEIS/FEIR and that pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15162 and 15168(c), no new effects could occur, and no new mitigation measures would be required. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on the 22"' day of February 2005. Resolution No. 05-42 Page 2 LOU BONE, Mayor PAMELA STOKER City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF TUSTIN I, Pamela Stoker, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 05-42 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 22"d day of February 2005, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO.OS-42 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST For Projects With Previously Certi£ed/Approved Environmental Documents: Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin This checklist and the following evaluation of environmental impacts (Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. OS-42) takes into consideration the preparation of an environmental document prepared at an earlier stage of the proposed project. The checklist and evaluation evaluate the adequacy of the earlier document pursuant to Section 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. A. BACKGROUND Project Title(s): General Plan Amendment 04-001, Prezone 04-001, Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001, and Annexation 159 for MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Pazce136 Lead Agency: City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Scott Reekstin Phone: (714) 573-3016 Project Location: The site is identified as Disposition Pazcel 36 in the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The site is located within a portion of Planning Area 21 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and is bounded by the City of Tustin/City of Irvine boundary to the north, an Edison easement to the east, Peters Canyon Channel to the west, and a flood control channel and Warner Avenue to the south. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Moffett Meadows Partners LLC c/o Lennar Communities 25 Enterprise, Suite 300 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 General Plan Designation: City of Irvine Medium Density Zoning Designation: City of Irvine 2.3 Medium Density Residential Project Description: Approval of General Plan Amendment 04-001, Prezone 04-001, Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001, and Annexation 159 for the purpose of annexing MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36 and establishing new development standazds on Pazce136. Surrounding Uses: North: Vacant -MCAS Tustin Planning Area 21 -Residential East: Southern California Edison property, Harvard Avenue and City of Irvine Planning Area 38 -Residential South: Flood control channel, Warner Avenue and Vacant -MCAS Tustin Planning Area 22 -Residential West: Peters Canyon Channel and Self Storage Previous Environmental Documentation: Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Program FEIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin (State Clearinghouse #94071005) certified by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. ^Land Use and Planning ^Population and Housing ^Geology and Soils ^Hydrology and Water Quality ^Air Quality ^Transportation & Circulation ^Biological Resources ^Mineral Resources ^Agricultural Resources ^Hazazds and Hazardous Materials ^Noise ^Public Services ^Utilities and Service Systems ^Aesthetics ^Cultural Resources ^Recreation ^Mandatory Findings of Significance C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ^ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepazed. ^ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepazed. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an eazlier document pursuant to applicable legal standazds, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the eazlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. ^ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Preparers XJ~ /\~J~.li1Cd~C.C~ Scott Reekstin, Senior Planner Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Date: ~~~'~ D cj Date ~' f 3 -d.~ See Attached EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. AESTHETICS -Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Il. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Califomia Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of [he California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Substantial New More Change From Signifrcant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 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, etcJ through direct removal, filling, hydrological intercuption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ~ Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: -Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: -Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 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 insubstantial 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 [o life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting [he use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VILHAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably Foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazazdous emissions or handle hazazdous 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 hazazdous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard m 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 aitpoR, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project azea? 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? No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: -Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standazds or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater rechazge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table ]evel (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 [he course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-yeaz flood hazazd area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazazd Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazazd delineation map? h) Place within a 100-yeaz flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING -Would the project a) Physically divide an established oommuniry? No Substantial New More Change From Signifrcant Severe Previous /mpact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ O b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES -Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE - Would the project result in a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standazds 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 azea to excess noise levels? XILPOPULATION AND ROUSING -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 constmction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Anal sis c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ~ ~ XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g, farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate pazking capacity? ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XV1. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of.a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ATTACHMENT 1 TO EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 05-42 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 04-001, PREZONE 04-001, ZONE CHANGE (MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT) 04-001, AND ANNEXATION 159 MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN DISPOSITION PARCEL 36 BACKGROUND The former Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin was officially closed on July 2, 1999, as a result of recommendations of the Federal Base Closure and Realignment Commission. The City was designated as the Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) for the reuse of MCAS Tustin and, acting as such, approved a Reuse Plan that provided for future land uses at the former MCAS Tustin. The Reuse Plan was approved in October 1996 and was subsequently amended in September 1998 ("the Reuse Plan"). The Reuse Plan was subsequently reviewed and approved by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as consistent with federal law regarding the homeless. In accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") of 1969, as amended, and the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the federal government and City prepared a Joint Final Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin. On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Final Joint Program Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the disposal and reuse of MCAS- Tustin (referenced as FEIS/EIR herein). Former MCAS Tustin is comprised of 1602 acres and is located within the boundaries of Tustin and Irvine (Attachment A). The majority of the site, or approximately 1,507 acres, is located within the City of Tustin, and approximately 95 acres is situated within the City of Irvine. On June 7, 2004, Moffett Meadows Partners, LLC, which purchased a portion of former MCAS Tustin from the Department of Navy, submitted an application to the Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to have approximately 22 acres of property on former MCAS Tustin within the City of Irvine annexed to the City of Tustin. The proposed annexation site is identified as Disposition Parcel 36 in the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The site is located within a portion of Planning Area 21 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and is bounded by the City of Tustin/City of Irvine boundary to the north, an Edison property to the east, Peters Canyon Channel to the west, and a flood control channel and Warner Avenue to the south. Access to the site is currently provided from Moffett Avenue via the Tustin portion of Planning Area 21 (Attachment B). Prior to LAFCO's consideration of the annexation, the City of Tustin must amend its General Plan and prezone the site. The applicant is also requesting a zone change consisting of an amendment to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan to establish new development standards for Disposition Parcel 36. The proposed project is a general plan amendment, prezone, zone change, and annexation that would allow for the development of up to 150 additional dwelling units within the City of Tustin and result in Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 2 up to 150 fewer dwelling units in Planning Area 21 in the City of Irvine. The development of the 150 dwelling units was analyzed in the MCAS Tustin FEIS/EIR. As part of the analysis of the MCAS Tustin FEIR/EIS for the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, the Irvine portion of Planning Area 21 was identified as a Low Density Residential (LDR) site, with a development potential of 1-7 dwelling units per acre. There were 150 existing units within the Irvine portion of Planning Area 21 (Table 3-1, MCAS Tustin Specific Plan). At the time, rehabilitation of these units was considered and therefore the total number of 150 units was included in the land use analysis included in the MCAS Tustin FEIR/EIS for the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The proposed general plan amendment, prezone, and zone change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) would retain the Low Density Residential (LDR) designation of the site, pursuant to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Related environmental impacts were addressed in the FEIS/EIR and implementation and mitigation measures were incorporated into the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The applicable mitigation measures developed in the MCAS Tustin FEIS/EIR will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. The following information provides background support for the conclusions identified in the Environmental Analysis Checklist. 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 project site is not located on a scenic highway, nor will the project affect a scenic vista. The proposed general plan amendment, prezone, zone change, and annexation would allow development that is consistent with the permitted uses identified within the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Development of low-density residential units within the Irvine portion of Planning Area 21 was considered within the FEIS/EIR and will have no negative aesthetic effect on the site when mitigation measures identified in the FEIS/EIR are included as conditions of the entitlement approvals for MCAS Tustin Disposition Parcel 36. All exterior design is required to be in compliance with Section 2.17.3(A) -Urban Design Guidelines for Residential Development of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the Landscape Concept Section 3.17.2 as they relate to the design of Harvard Avenue south of Edinger Avenue and primary street corners and project entries. Since the site is Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 3 bounded by two arterials, the Landscape/Screening standards noted in Section 3.11.12 would apply. The development of the site would include a design review, which requires that the design of the project is cohesive and in harmony with surrounding uses. All exterior lighting would be designed to reduce glare, create a safe night environment, and avoid impacts to surrounding properties in compliance with Section 2.17.3 (A) of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and the City's Security Ordinance. The proposed project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated with the certified Program FEIS/EIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; applicable measures will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 2-152 to 2-175, 3-146) Tustin Security Ordinance Tustin General Plan ii. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non- agricultural use? The proposed general plan amendment, prezone, zone change, and annexation 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 proposed use involve other changes in the existing environment that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. The project site is not zoned or used as agricultural land; consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 4 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-84) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan 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? As documented in the FEIS/EIR, the proposed general plan amendment, prezone, zone change, and annexation will accommodate development that is part of a larger project that was projected to result in air quality impacts. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Since the proposed actions would accommodate the development of up to 150 housing units, which is consistent with the Specific Plan, all environmental impacts related to the project and the development of the site were considered in the adopted FEIS/EIR. The project would not add any impacts beyond what was analyzed in the adopted FEIS/EIR. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIS/EIR. However, the FEIS/EIR also concluded that Reuse Plan related operational air quality impacts were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-143 through153, 4-207 through 4-230 and pages 7-41 through 7~2) Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 5 Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-33 through 3- 37). 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) Intertere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? The FEIS/EIR found that implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would not result in impacts to federally listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species. The proposed general plan amendment, prezone, zone change, and annexation will accommodate development that is consistent with the scope of development considered with the analysis of the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR determined that implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan could impact jurisdictional waters/wetlands and the southwestern pond turtle or have an impact on jurisdictional waters/wetlands. The project site is not located in an area that would affect the southwestern pond turtle or have an impact on jurisdictional waters or wetlands. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 6 Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-75 through 3-82, 4-103 through 4-108, and 7-26 through 7-27) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). 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? Numerous archaeological surveys have been conducted at the former MCAS Tustin site. In 1988, the State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) provided written concurrence that all open spaces on MCAS Tustin had been adequately surveyed for archaeological resources. Although one archaeological site (CA- ORA-381) has been recorded within the Reuse Plan area, it is believed to have been destroyed. It is possible that previously unidentified buried archaeological or paleontological resources within the project site could be significantly impacted by grading and construction activities associated with future development of the site. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; applicable measures will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36 Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-68 through 3-74, 4-93 through 4-102 and 7-24 through 7-26) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). Tustin General Plan Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 7 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 FEIS/EIR indicates that impacts to soils and geology resulting from implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would "include non-seismic hazards (such as local settlement, regional subsidence, expansive soils, slope instability, erosion, and mudflows) and seismic hazards (such as surface fault displacement, high-intensity ground shaking, ground failure and lurching, seismically induced settlement, and flooding associated with dam failure." However, the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin concluded that compliance with state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, would avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to such hazards. No substantial change is expected for the future development of the project site from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: As identified in the FEIS/EIR, compliance with existing rules and regulations would avoid the creation of potential impacts. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-88 through 3-97, 4-115 through 4-123 and 7-28 through 7-29) Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 8 Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). Tustin General Plan VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: -Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 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 project will not create a significant hazard to the public through the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, nor are there reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions at the property. In addition, future construction and residential uses resulting from the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions within a quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The Navy has approved a Finding of Suitability to Transfer (POST) determining that the Quitclaim portions of the project are suitable for reuse as planned within the Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin and as shown in the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. In addition, the project site is located within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan; Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 9 however, it is at least four (4) miles from John Wayne Airport and does not lie within a flight approach or departure corridor and thus does not pose an aircraft-related safety hazard for future residents or workers. The project site is not located in a wildland fire danger area. Compliance with all federal, state, and local regulations concerning handling and use of these hazardous substances will reduce potential impacts to below a level of significance. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: As identified in the FEIS/EIR, compliance with existing rules and regulations would avoid the creation of potential impacts. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages (3-106 through 3-117, 4-130 through 4-138 and 7-30 through 7-31) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154) Finding of Suitability to Transfer (POST), MCAS Tustin Tustin General Plan. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: -Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 10 f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities? I) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from post-construction activities? m) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? n) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? The proposed general plan amendment, prezone, zone change, and annexation will allow development that would increase runoff. However, the project will not result in additional impacts beyond what was analyzed in the adopted FEIS/EIR. The project design and construction of facilities to fully contain drainage of the site would be required as conditions of approval of the future development project. No long-term impacts to hydrology and water quality are anticipated for the future development of the project site. The proposed future development will not impact groundwater in the deep regional aquifer or shallow aquifer. The proposed future development 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 future 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 Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 11 implementation of specific best management practices (BMP). Compliance with state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, would avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to such hazards. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: As identified in the FEIS/EIR, compliance with existing rules and regulations would avoid the creation of potential impacts. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-98 through 3-105, 4-124 through 4-129 and 7-29 through 7-30) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154) FEMA Map (August 9, 2002) Tustin General Plan IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited, to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The City of Tustin is the controlling authority over implementation of the Reuse Plan for the Tustin portion of the former base, such as land use designations, zoning categories, recreation and open space areas, major arterial roadways, urban design, public facilities, and infrastructure systems. On February 3, 2003, the Tustin City Council approved the Specific Plan for MCAS Tustin that established land use and development standards for development of the site. The proposed general plan amendment, prezone, zone change, and annexation will allow development that meets the density requirements of Table 3-2 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The proposed general plan amendment, prezone, and zone change would retain the Low Density Residential (LDR) designation of the site, pursuant to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Compliance with state and local regulations and standards 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. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 12 Consequently, no change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The proposed project is consistent with the density requirements of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan as identified by the adopted FEIS/EIR. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-3 to 3- 17, 4-3 to 4-13 and 7-16 to 7-18) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). 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? Chapter 3.9 of the FEIS/EIR indicates that no mineral resources are known to occur anywhere within the Reuse Plan area. 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. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-91) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). Tustin General Plan XI. NOISE: Would the project: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 13 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? Future development allowed by the proposed project could result in implementation activities that generate noise. The FEIS/EIR indicates that full build-out of the base will create noise impacts that would be considered significant if noise levels experienced by sensitive receptors would exceed those considered "normally acceptable" for the applicable land use categories in the Noise Elements of the Tustin General Plan. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the approved FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. However, the City of Tustin will ensure that construction activities associated with future development of the site comply with the City's Noise Ordinance and the housing units are designed with adequate noise attenuation (i.e., window design, sound walls) to meet the allowable noise levels as required by Tustin City Code for residential use. The future development project would be sound attenuated against present and projected noise so as not to exceed an exterior noise standard of 65 d6 CNEL in outdoor living areas and an interior standard of 45 dB CNEL in all habitable rooms to reduce noise-related impacts to a level of insignificance. Compliance with adopted mitigation measures and state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, will avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to such hazards. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; applicable measures will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-154 to 3- 162, 4-231 to 4-243 and 7-42 to 7-43) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). Tustin General Plan Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 14 XII. POPULATION 8~ 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 general plan amendment, prezone, zone change, and annexation will allow development that would include up to 150 new residential units on a site that once included 150 military housing units. The proposed project will not displace people or necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The maximum number of allowable residential units is consistent with the density that was previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. It is anticipated that the total number of units for Planning Area 21 upon completion of the entire planning area would be consistent with the number of units considered in the FEIS/ElR for MCAS Tustin. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-18 to 3- 34, 4-14 to 4-29 and 7-18 to 7-19) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). 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 general plan amendment, prezone, zone change and annexation will allow development of the site that would require public services such as fire and police protection services, schools, libraries, recreation facilities, and biking/hiking trails. If the proposed project is approved, police protection services and recreation facilities for the area identified as Disposition Parcel 36 would be provided by the City of Tustin rather than the City of Irvine. All of the other services listed below would be provided by the same agencies. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 15 Fire Protection. The development of the site allowed by 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 areas surrounding the site will meet the demands created by the proposed project. Police Protection. The need for police protection services is assessed on the basis of resident population estimates, square footage of non-residential uses, etc. Development of the site accommodated by the proposed project would increase the need for police protection services. The developer, as a condition of approval for the future development of the site, would be required 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. Schools. The proposed project is located within the Irvine Unified School District (IUSD). The implementation of the Reuse Plan provides fora 20-acre school site to IUSD to serve the growing student population within its district. As a condition of approval for the future development of the site, the developer would be required to pay applicable school fees to IUSD prior to issuance of the building permit. Other Public Facilities (Libraries). Implementation of the entire Reuse Plan would only result in a library demand of up to approximately 2,500 square feet of library space. This relatively small amount of space is well below the library system's general minimum size of 10,000 square feet for a branch library and would not trigger the need for a new facility. General Implementation Requirements: To support development in the reuse plan area, the Reuse Plan/Specific Plan requires public services and facilities to be provided concurrent with demand. The proposed project will be required to comply with FEIS/EIR implementation measures adopted by the Tustin City Council. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the approved FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin for fire protection, police protection, schools, or other public facilities. Mitigation/Monitoring Required.' Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; applicable measures will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 16 Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-47 to 3- 57, 4-56 to 4-80 and 7-21 to 7-22) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). 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 Reuse Plan provides for a new 84.5-acre Regional Park, a 24-acre Community Park, two (2) Neighborhood Parks of at least five-acres each, and bicycle trails, and riding and hiking paths traversing the property connecting to the regional bikeway/trail system, play areas associated with schools, and child care facilities. Since the Reuse Plan process included the accommodation of public conveyance of approximately 35 acres of city parks and 85 acres of Urban Regional Park, individual developers were relieved of the requirement to dedicate land for park purposes. However, pursuant to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, the developers are required to provide in-lieu fees or public accessible park space (where approved by the City). The future residential development allowed by the proposed project would not generate an increase in the use of existing neighborhood parks since a park site would be included in the site. However, a negligible increase in the use of regional parks or other recreational facilities may be experienced prior to development of the entire MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; applicable measures will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS 57, 4-56 to 4-80 and 7-21 to 7-22 Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan 154) Tustin pages 3-47 to 3- (Pages 3-144 through. 3- Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 17 Tustin Parks and Recreation Services Department Tustin General Plan XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The project site would be accessed from Moffett Drive and Harvard Avenue via Planning Area 21 within the City of Tustin. Internal circulation of the site would be managed through private streets designed in compliance with the roadway standards of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Section 2.5.2(B) related to major arterials and private streets standards. The FEIS/EIR indicates that transportation and circulation impacts would be created through the phased development of the approved Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. A projected 216,445 Average Daily Trips (ADT) would be generated by full redevelopment of the base by year 2020 that, if left unmitigated, would overburden existing roadways and intersections surrounding the base property. The FEIS/EIR indicates that traffic circulation activities at MCAS Tustin generated a baseline of 12,400 ADT when the base was fully operational (1993). As a military facility, the FEIS/EIR considered the traffic impact and developed a mitigation program to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance. The project site will be conditioned to participate in its fair share responsibility for both on-site and off-site circulation mitigation and implementation measures. In addition, construction activities are required to be meet all Transportation related FEIS/EIR Implementation and Mitigation Measures (e.g., lane closures, street/utility construction, construction vehicle traffic, etc.). The FEIS/EIR implementation and mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 18 the traffic and circulation system to a level of insignificance. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the approved FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; applicable measures will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. Sources: Field Observation FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-118 through 3-142, 4-139 through 4-206 and 7-32 through 7~1) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). 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? 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? h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and odors)? Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 19 The FEIS/EIR analyzed low-density residential development on the proposed site, which is consistent with the proposed project. Development of Planning Area 21 would require Developer on-site improvements and off-site infrastructure improvements to utilities and roadway systems, including final design and construction of Moffett Avenue from Harvard Avenue to Peters Canyon Wash Bridge. Improvements to Moffett Avenue would include design and installation of a Class II bike trail, a new domestic water line if required by the Irvine Ranch Water District, a new brine line, a new reclaimed water line if required by the Irvine Ranch Water District, a new sanitary sewer line if required by the Irvine Ranch Water District, and a storm drain with adequate capacity to accommodate runoff from the proposed development. The developer will also be responsible for their fair share contribution to the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Improvement Program which includes, but is not limited to, roadways, water and sewer systems, and backbone underground dry utilities (electric, gas, cable TV, telephone, etc). In addition, development of the site is required to meet federal, state, and local standards for design of wastewater treatment. The number of allowable residential units can be supported by the Irvine Ranch Water District for domestic water and sewer services. Improvements to Peters Canyon Channel adjacent to Parcel 36 will be the responsibility of the developer, including all jurisdictional wetland mitigation, subject to the provisions of a Cooperative Agreement between the developer and the City of Tustin. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; applicable measures will be recommended as conditions of entitlement approvals for development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 3-35 through 3-46, 4-32 through 4-55 and 7-20 through 7-21) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). Tustin General Plan Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 20 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 or threaten, eliminate, or reduce animal ranges, etc. With the enforcement of FEIS/EIR 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 the reuse and redevelopment of the former MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The project proposes no substantial changes to environmental issues previously considered with adoption of the FEIS/EIR. Mitigation measures were identified in the FEIS/EIR to reduce impact but not to a level of insignificance. AStatement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and would be included in the project as applicable. Sources: Field Observations FEIS/EIR for Disposal through 5-11) and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 5-4 Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Pages 3-144 through 3- 154). Tustin General Plan Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-42 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPA 04-001, PZ 04-001, ZC 04-001, Annexation 159 Page 21 CONCLUSION The summary concludes that all of the proposed project's effects were previously examined in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin, that no new effects would occur, that no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects would occur, that no new mitigation measures would be required, that no applicable mitigation measures previously not found to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and that there are no new mitigation measures or alternatives applicable to the project that would substantially reduce effects of the project that have not been considered and adopted. A Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program and Findings of Overriding Considerations were adopted for the FEIS/EIR on January 16, 2001 and shall apply to the proposed project, as applicable. S:\Cdd\SCOTT\Tustin Legacy\Lennar Annexation Initial Study Evaluation.doc ATTACHMENT D RESOLUTION NO. 05-43 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPROVAL) RESOLUTION NO. 05-43 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 04- 001 TO ESTABLISH THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF "MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN" FOR THE ANNEXATION OF MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN DISPOSITION PARCEL 36. The City Council does hereby resolve as follows: I. The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for General Plan Amendment 04-001 was submitted by Moffet Meadows Partners, LLC. B. That Moffet Meadows Partners, LLC has filed a landowner petition with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the reorganization of the boundary between Tustin and Irvine, including the detachment of approximately 21.6 acres from the City of Irvine and annexation of the same 21.6 acres to the City of Tustin. C. Prior to taking action on the proposed reorganization, LAFCO requires that the City of Tustin adopt a General Plan Amendment for the territory to be annexed. D. That on December 14, 2004, the City of Irvine adopted a resolution supporting the proposed boundary reorganization involving the detachment of 21.6 acres from the City of Irvine and the corresponding annexation of 21.6 acres to the City of Tustin. E. Prior to annexation, a general plan amendment is required. F. The annexation of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36 will improve the delivery of public services for future residents within the subject territory. G. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on January 24, 2005, and continued to February 14, 2005, by the Planning Commission and was recommended for approval. H. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on February 7, 2005, and continued to February 22, 2005, by the City Council. I. That General Plan Amendment 04-001 is consistent with and implements the following policies of the General Plan: Resolution No. 05-43 Page 2 Policy 1.4: Consider modification of present City boundaries in unincorporated areas within the City of Tustin's sphere where they are irregular and create inefficiencies. Although General Plan Amendment 04-001 would modify the City's boundaries with the adjacent City of Irvine rather than an unincorporated area, the modification would improve the provision of public services to the residents of the affected territory. Policy 13.2: Encourage a development pattern that offers a connectedness between buildings and uses, and has a strong sense of place through architectural styles and creative landscape design. Policy 13.5: Promote high quality architecture, landscaping, signage, open space design, circulation patterns, and landscape patterns distinct from surrounding areas. II. The City Council hereby approves approve General Plan Amendment 04-001 to establish the General Plan land use designation of "MCAS Tustin Specific Plan" for the annexation of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36 as identified in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 22"d day of February, 2005. LOU BONE Mayor PAMELA STOKER City Clerk Resolution No. 05-43 Page 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 05-43 PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 05-43 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 22"d day of February, 2005, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER City Clerk EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO.05-43 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 04-001) INTRODUCTION TO THE GENERAL PLAN The City of Tustin is located in central Orange County and encompasses an area of ~~ 1 I_08 square miles. The City is bounded on the south by the cities of Irvine and Santa Ana, on the north by the unincorporated portions of the County of Orange and the City of Orange, and on the east by unincorporated County territory and the City of Irvine. Within the context of the larger Southern California region, Tustin is located approximately two miles north of Orange County's John Wayne Airport and is transected by two maj or regional freeways: the I-5 (Santa Ana) Freeway, divides the City into north and south; and the SR-55 (Costa Mesa) Freeway, divides westerly portions ofthe City. The City continues to be a discernible entity, characterized physically by its strategic crossroads location, the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin, (closed in July 1999), hillside azeas which offer sweeping panoramic views of the Pacific Coast and Saddleback Mountains, prime commercial, industrial, and residential development, and one of the oldest historical "old towns" in Orange County. These significant natural and man-made characteristics provide a commonly acknowledged basis fora "sense of place". Together, they act as a foundation for Tustin's Future...a functional desirable and attractive community to live, work or visit. CITY OF TUSTIN INTRODUCTION GENERAL PLAN ~ FEBRUARY 7.2005 TUSTIN PLANNING AREA The Tustin Planning Area consists of approximately ~~ 17_26 square miles as shown on Figure I-1. This area includes all of the land within the City's incorporated boundazies (~2 11_08 square miles), as well as the City of Tustin's existing "sphere of influence" (an additional 6.2 square miles of unincorporated county area) located immediately adjacent to the City's northerly boundazies and approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission as Tustin's probable ultimate physical boundaries and service area. Two smaller additional areas of approximately 115 acres located adjacent to the City of Tustin's southeasterly boundary are also included in the Tustin Planning Area. Currently within the corporate limits ofthe City of Irvine, a modification to the City's existing "sphere of influence" and a municipal reorganization would be necessary to make them a part of the City of Tustin. CITY OF TUSTIN INTRODUCTION GENERAL PLAN 2 FEBRUARY 7. 2005 /% / // N i T ~-;- ~~~~~ Figure €-~ Tustin Planning Area ° For amendment of the General Plan associated with the reuse of MCAS Tustin, a public "Open House" was held to review the Draft Amendment, followed by public hearings held before the City's Planning Commission and City Council. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS As amendments to the General Plan are considered and adopted by the City, a general description of each should be identified and added as an attachment to the Introduction to the Plan. Amendment of Table 1-2 as an attachment to the Introduction Chapter below will not require an amendment to the General Plan. Table I-2 below identifies each amendment and the General Plan elements affected. TABLE I-2 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS Amendment Date of Affected Amendment Description Name Ado tion Elements 04-001 2-07-04 All e~xce t ouH sm and Resolution OS- rowt 1Ciana ement MCAS Tustin All Planning policies and programs for Specific Plan/ future development of MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan roe followin base closure 99-001 3-1-00 Circulation Resolution 99-22 15500 Tustin Villa e Wa Land Use 98-002 1-19-99 Circulation Resolution 99-10 15580 Tustin Villa e Wa Land Use 96-003 7-21-97 Land Use Resolution 97-59 Lot 27 Tract 13627; Commercial to Residential 96-002 5-6-96 Land Use Resolution 96-48 1062-1082 Wass St; Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential 95-001 1-2-96 Land Use Resolution 96-3 Wamer/Jamboree; Military to Industrial _ 94-001 11-20-95 Land Use Resolution 95-114 Lot 6, Tract 12870; P&I to PCR Portion of Lot 27 Tract 13627 PCCB to PCR CITY OF TUSTIN INTRODUCTION GENERAL PLAN 10 FEBRUARY 7.2005 SUMMARY OF ISSUES, NEEDS, OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS The Land Use Element establishes policy which is reflected in all the other General Plan elements. The following land use issues, needs, opportunities, and constraints have been identified in Tustin, and are addressed in the goals and policies which follow in the next section. BALANCED DEVELOPMENT IN TUSTIN ° There is a lack of commercial services in certain geographic areas, such as the Irvine Business Center, which warrants consideration of additional commercial designations. ° Land use patterns encourage Tustin residents to rely on the automobile to commute to work and shopping. ° The City has the opportunity to purchase surplus freeway parcels and develop them with uses which capitalize on their freeway accessibility. ° Following the closure of MCAS Tustin the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan will guide future development on approximately'~c, ,r 1 533 acres in the City of Tustin. ° The annexation of certain areas in North Tustin could establish more logical City boundaries. ° Hillside areas within the City's sphere of influence may be subject to slope instability. In the event of annexation, significant infrastructure deficiencies, where they exist, shall be mitigated to the extent feasible. COMPATIBLE AND COMPLEMENTARY DEVELOPMENT ° The intermixing of land uses in some areas without adequate buffering has resulted in land use incompatibilities, such as those related to LAND USE ELEMENT CITY OF TUSTIN FEBRUARY 7, 2005 GENERAL PLAN S Land Use Policy Map ©o©®©© MCAS1Ustin Planned Community MCAS Ii,atin Specific Plan Planned Community 0 PC Residential PC CommerclaVSusiness PC Pubiic/lnafitullonal TABLE LU-2 DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY/DENSITY STANDARDS MAJOR MAXIMUM EFFECTIVE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION LAND USE DWELLING DWELLING GROUPINGS UNITS PER UNITS PER ACRE OR ACRE OR MAXIMUM AVERAGE FLOOR AREA FLOOR AREA RATIO (a) RATIO (b) RESIDENTIAL 1-7 5.61 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -Detached single family dwellings which allows up to 7 dwelling units per net acre with an average of 3.25 persons per dwelling unit 8-15 15.00 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL- Multi-family dwellings including duplexes, condominiums, townhomes, and apartments. Allows up to 15 dwelling units per net acre with an average of 2.73 persons per dwelling unit. 15-25 21.53 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -Multi family dwellings including duplexes, condominiums, townhomes, and apartments. Allows up to 25 dwelling units per net acre with an average of 2.15 persons per dwelling unit. 1-10 6.31 MOBILE HOME PARK -Mobile Home Park development which allows up to 10 dwelling units per acre with an average of 2.15 persons per dwelling unit. COMMERCIAL 0.5:1 0.4:1 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL -Includes retail, professional office, and service-oriented business activities serving acommunity-wide area and population. 1.0:1 0.5:1 OLD TOWN COMMERCIAL -Includes retail, professional office, and service-oriented business activities serving Old Town and surrounding areas. (May also include high density residential). 0.8:1 0.4:1 PROFESSIONAL -Primarily single tenant or multi-tenant offices that include legal and medical services, financial institutions, corporate and government offces, and other supporting uses. INDUSTRIAL 0.6:1 0.5:1 INDUSTRIAL - A mix of industrial and office uses such as wholesale businesses, light manufacturing, storage, distribution and sales, research and development laboratories, and service wmmercial business. PUBLIC 0.6:1 0.2:1 PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL -Public and private uses such as schools, churches, City Hall, flood control channels, reservoirs, communication, utility substations, and recreation/open spaces such uses as parks, golf courses, and designated open spaces. 0.25:1 0.1:1 MILITARY -Federal government military operations. PLANNED (c) (c) PC RESIDENTIAL -Includes low, medium, and high density COMMUNITY residential described above with respective averages of 3.15, 2.45, and 2.05 persons per dwelling unit. 1.5:1 0.4:1 PC COMMERCIAUBUSINESS -Mix of commercial and office uses such as hotel/motels, wmmercial centers, research and development, and professional offices. 0.6:1 0.2:1 PC PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL -Same as PubliGlnstitutionalsbove. MCAS TUSTIN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - low densi detached and CITY OF TUSTIN LAND USE ELEMENT GENERAL PLAN 29 FEBRUARY 7, 2005 TABLE LU-2 DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY/DENSITY STANDARDS MAJOR MAXIMUM EFFECTIVE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND SUMMARY DESCRIPTION LAND USE DWELLING DWELLING GROUPINGS UNITS PER UNITS PER ACRE OR ACRE OR MAXIMUM AVERAGE FLOOR AREA FLOOR AREA RATIO (a) RATIO (b) MCAS TUSTIN (d) (d) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -Low density detached and SPECIFIC PLAN attached dwellings at a maximum of 7 dwelling units per acre with an average of 3.25 persons per dwelling unit. MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -Medium density detached and attached dwellings at a maximum of 8-15 dwelling units per acre with an average of 2.73 persons per dwelling unit. MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL -medium-high density dwellings of i6-25 dwelling units per acre with an average of 2.12 persons per dwelling unit. TRANSITIONAUEMERGENCY HOUSING -Adaptive reuse of military dormitory type structures for emergency housing, single occupancy housing, or congregate care with an average of 32 persons per acre. COMMERCIAL AND BUSINESS - A variety of industrial, research and development, professional office, retail, commercial recreation, and specialized employment and merchandising uses at an average floor area ratio of .35:1 which can be increased under special circumstances. Residential uses are permitted at 16-25 dwelling units per acre with an average of 2.12 persons per dwelling unit. INSTITUTIONAL/RECREATIONAL USES -A wide range of public and quasi-public uses including educational facilities, public and private schools, colleges, neighborhood, community and regional parks, child care centers, and governmental/social service facilities. TRANSPORTATION --- --- TRANSPORTATION -Consists of major and primary arterial roadways and railroads. (a) Maximum allowable level of development standard for individual parcels of land. (b) Assumed overall standard level of development. Since the development which has occurred to date has not reached the maximum allowed level of density or intensity, future development is expected to be less than the maximum. Therefore, an effective level of density/intensity is used when projecting total future dwelling units/population for residential development and future square footage for non-residential development where floor area is used as a measurement of building intensity. (c) Maximum density in dwelling units per acre is prescribed by individual Planned Community documents. Effective dwelling units per acre for low, medium, and high density residential is 4.485, 11.834, and 17.39, respectively. (d) Maximum and effective dwelling units per acre and floor area ratio described in MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (1996) and Errata (1998). CITY OF TUSTIN LAND USE ELEMENT GENERAL PLAN 30 FEBRUARY 7, 2005 chazacter of surrounding development and within the development azea itself, the specific location of land use types, density and building intensity standards will be governed by a Specific Plan, as authorized by the California Government Code. The Specific Plan designation, however, would allow for a number of the following uses. Low Density Residential uses at a maximum density of 7 dwelling units per acre will provide for development of low density attached and detached dwellings and accessory uses and buildings. A wide range of accommodations including single family units, patio homes, and multiple family dwellings such as condominiums, townhouses, cooperatives and community apartments would be permitted. Uses such as public/institutional facilities, child care facilities and others which are determined to be compatible with, and oriented towards the needs of these neighborhoods may also be allowed. The average population for this permitted land use is approximately 3.25 per dwelling unit which represents a population density range of 3 to 23 persons per acre. ° Medium Density Residential uses at a density range of 8-15 dwelling units per acre will provide for development of medium density attached and detached dwellings and accessory uses and structures. A wide range of accommodations including single family units, patio homes, and multiple family dwellings such as condominiums, townhouses, cooperatives and community apartments would also be permitted. Uses such as public/institutional facilities, child care facilities and others which aze determined to be compatible with, and oriented towards the needs of these neighborhoods may also be allowed. The average population for this permitted land use is approximately 2.73 persons per dwelling unit representing a population density range of 22 to 41 persons per acre. Medium-High Density Residential uses at a density range of 16-25 dwelling units per acre. The designation to provide for development of multiple family dwellings at a higher density may include rental apartments, condominiums, and townhouses. The average population for this permitted land use is approximately 2.12 persons per dwelling unit representing a population density range of 34 to 53 persons per acre. TransitionaVEmergency Housing uses would be permitted to accommodate the adaptive use of existing military dormitory type structures for emergency housing, single occupancy housing, or CITY OF TUSTIN LAND USE ELEMENT GENERAL PLAN 39 FEBRUARY 7, 2005 a -. ~N y~y~''11 eTI ~J eey G~ /~/''~ ems' r-H f? e~ fir' s~ fti' M H ~T~ n~ Q ~~ R9 ~/ N O E ~ c .~ 5 c ~° M N o n g r w n e vii m O ~ U N P C P o U a ~ ~ ~ m fi ~ C ~ 'V ~ o O N N W ° N ~ O C ^ m C 8 E .~ a o = e V . N r N _O _ _ h N P ~ ~ U o C ~ ~ tv y~1 P N M 8 b r b 'T' y V 6 v l O ~ N m ~ O~ O R - O v i O P ~+ -hFF u o ~ e N W q a Y y {o O Q j li] ~ m S 8 P N tea ~ v 1 O V T V v i r m ^ 5 c" rv .: o f. d d n o -' ro 3 a 0 a p V O S C p ` P N O N y O C r = N O ^ ~p E - O ~ N ¢ O N N N P O C ~ P y _ u] y O L n ... O G C ~` P O O O O V NI ~ N O Q N N {y c 6 C O y .o m itl ~ a N o ~ ~ ~ r ' a ~ ° N ~ P R e a{: O N N ` d O O ` C E O qq CT o H o_ ~ C o o ~ o° 1 o V N a pp . N C - . v C M w N N e~ ~y ~ m r p p y 3~ N1 N N N N N a v 6 o O W H } $ 0 O R 0 p^p Q N vl [Y ~ p r V 0 O M en ON r 17 V; r/~i p O I-+ ~ 0 ~ N . en _ N _ e~ ~'' a S O N r P p O ~ ••~ N V ] O LL e ~ O G en ° ~ ~~ o v n N m N M N o ~ e w °rr~ ~ ~ LL he t` N N N ~ C 'c o .e ~ ~ ~ ~° o o ~ g$ a o ~ M - D 1- ~< d ~ o d d e e 6 o a g T1 ~ O aW O O O O V h R N y v R b P V N Q t` 0 O c C ~ V CJ r 0 ~ 0 v P O P Vi N O ~ cr t11 P [V V Nl O r ~ V m - m Ni O C N O~ 0 ~, ID O ~ g Q, CC 8 m vi ~ r ~ r b o r m r W a m m N - ~n r P e P r N a C GG Hl N V l O~ P = O 4' R _ V v L ~ en O O O O O O O r O V N O P m en m d M C C OO O O O v_i ~ C ~ N m ~ 0 ~ N o e o O U c 5 ~ . } ~ w ~ r r o m n m r m r v~ P P m ~0 y y 6 ~{ , ~ P NI ~ W b r a m N ~ W N w O ti 0 0 1M! - '''~"IIFF'I V~ V r" 0 J m a ~ 4 N C ~ G ~ n ~ y ~ m ~ A G 9 n y U~ g 3 L ~ G ~ C pt _ A O ro V 6 0 9 0 ~ C C ~ ~ N V ~ ~ (Yi ° ~ i' ' i o E ° ~ E d~' ~ ~ ~ ° ~ '~ . a7 ~ . ce a ' E ~ v ~ ~ ~ e ~ y y E ~ 'c e e t ~ o 5 ~ ~ a ' v 0 ~ : >, Y ~ ~ ? U o ~ Q 5 ~ ~ ::]] ~ d ~ ~ = ~ E ~ ~~ .. ~E 5 ~ o ~ 3 ~i m o y g $ `o ~ a o ~ 3 O ~ E o ~ V ~ a .S ° '~ S U a. ` a ; '~ m o e E o o a a a ( j n ' ~ ~ ~ a 3 ~ s ~ ~ S o ~ S ~ i ~ 5 'w d a d a ~ F F _ x ~ f K e ~$ H 3 a ~ 9 c d ~ ~ , ~' ~ ~ ~ 6 ~ 9 ~ F .~ g ~ o c E c ~a ~ r ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ u z ~ a ~ o c r t t a a a~ 9 B ~. ~~ 5 a Fi O _ L = 6 ~ ~ "u m u ~ a S a vKi v = 3 P ; e 3 ~ ~ E ~ '~ I ~ ` 3 3 g _ ~ z~ 3 „. ~ G yg o G c m y, F- a• m ~ - E ~ ~ o e c i ~ y uL~. e q a C _ „ 'n 8 p ~~ E y 'x v o~ X LJ Q c z` 4 t W ~ r a" ~~ .~ 5 ~ a x u ' `' c 3 _ 9 n c Y .E 3 - s E _ ~ _ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ° E ~ g S W a a ~ a 2 ~~ r ~ a a E~~ 8.a ~ c o a $~-'~ ~ @ 'F- ° ~ ~ ' g ~ - o ~ ~ ~ 3 F 3 ~ J g ~ e o € .~ ~ 'o S r A ro~= d C Z a ~ t~ O O e" n _ ~ ~~~ ~ F a 3 t E ? 3 ~ ~ E a s ~ o t X ~~ w~ g~ x ~ 0 3 z ~ y ~ '~ £ °u o z ~ E _ ~ .~ ~ ~ _ _ 5 ` ~ ;_ ° 7 b~F v `o E o ~ ~ v ti ~ , $ 9 3 '~ ° F F d m G ~ ' ° _ ~ w ~ S 2 ~ $ e '9 ~ G . S s c ° ,a ~ ° ` ~ ~ ~ S •• ~ ~ ~ _ c a v ° ~ ~ ~ E m y ~ O L 3 a ,p ~ ~ a &' 2~ r ' ` ~ ~ ~ yX ~ 5 'e ~ ~ 9~ ~ ~ y~y 9 y C' C s~ ~~ W 9~ d m~$=o~ rr~~ ~ A 'd ~ A c ~g'~~h~~ `~ m ~~ S ~8 g8 a ~ ~88~?~ ~ ° ~ ` 33 g ° .s 5 ~+ ~ c E ~"~ ~ E e N a O ~ '' 0 0 ~ - ~, a ~ ~ a 5 ~ ~ ~, m U D u~ u. U S _ // // c E T ~_ scab m reel SOURCE: City of Tustin ~~~® Figure LU-~ Planning Subareas TABLE LU-4 PLANNED LAND USE COMPOSITION SUMMARY FOR PLANNING SUBAREAS Major Land Use Groupings and Gross Acres of Land by Subarea Total by U Land Use Designations Land se 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Designation Residential Low Density Residential (1-7 du/ac) 422.9 120.3 72.9 20.0 221.1 3,203.6 4,000.8 Low Medium Density Residential (8-15 du/ac) 4.8 29.5 1.5 35.8 High Density Residential (15-25 du/ac) 68.2 415.6 0.6 134.1 618.5 Mobile Home Park (1-10 du/ac) 3.5 62.8 18.4 84.7 Commercial Community Commercial 33.2 60.0 75.5 168.7 Old Town Commercial 72.0 72.0 Professional Otfice 48.5 1.9 5.2 55.6 Industrial Industrial 11.0 169.7 180.7 Public Publidlnstitutional 68.4 94.2 52.2 105.9 165.7 486.4 MCAS Tustin Specific Plan 3;482,6 29.4 ,~„ 1 504.2 1 5~ 32.6 Planned Community (PC) PC Residential 20.2 0.0 331.5 1,215.8 1.8 392.0 1,961.3 205.3 959.4 PC Commercial/Business 136.6 188.6 403.0 370.9 19.3 6.6 391.7 PC Public/Institutional 20.8 Transportation Transponation 706.3 97.4 54.1 81.1 383b 30.7 40.3 593-4 187.3 597.2 Total by Subarea 995.6 881.7 7-;886 929.1 38935 595.1 3,829.0 3148 11 96.6 1 999.3 11.145.4 CITY OF TUSTIN LAND USE ELEMENT GENERAL PLAN 44 FEBRUARY 7, 2005 maximum permitted density/ intensity all have an impact on the level or intensity of development within a particular land use designation. However, a maximum level of development may occur on individual pazcels of land where minimal constraints exist or where a project's exceptional design quality or important public amenities/benefits warrant development at maximum density/intensity. The second concept of development capacity is referred to as "effective development capacity" which assumes that under realistic circumstances, all development will not be at maximum density or intensity based on appraisal of development constraints in the City which would restrict development to less than that shown by the maximum density/ intensity ofthe Land Use Plan. For example, in some zoning districts, the level of development permitted may be based on the size of a lot; smaller lots may only be authorized to develop at densities/intensities substantially less than permitted by a maximum density/intensity standard. Table LU-3 provides a breakdown of land uses within the City and total Planning area for purposes of identifying the effective development capacity of the Land Use Plan for both dwelling units/population and square footage of non-residential uses. In arriving at effective development capacity for population growth and the number of units possible under build-out conditions, the effective permitted units by each specific residential land use designation was multiplied by the average household size estimated for each residential land use designation. For non-residential uses, the effective level of intensity (the average floor area factor shown in Table LU-2) was used to determine the level of expected future squaze footage of development. The degree to which plan capacity exceeds projected population is refereed to as "overage". Some overage is desirable to make allowance for inevitable small pockets of undevelopable land, to allow for difficulty in recognizing development trends in completely vacant areas, to allow for an unforeseen need for public utilities, and to recognize that some owners will maintain their land in an undeveloped state beyond the time span of the Plan. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has recommended that plan capacity overage not exceed approximately 20 to 25 percent of the projected population. The measurement of overage is accomplished by dividing the maximum population capacity of the plan by the projected population. For the Tustin Planning Area, the maximum population capacity of the Plan is ,''~ 129,655, and the projected population is -1939-~ 104,312 resulting in an overage of approximately 24 percent. CITY OF TUSTIN LAND USE ELEMENT GENERAL PLAN 4g FEBRUARY 7, 2005 i ' // // // // 11 // // // 11 11 ©w. ;r o eoo tmo ~~ emb N teat ~QO SPECIFIC PLANS ® First Street ® East Tustin Pacific Center East North Tustin • • MCAS Tustin Figure LU-4 Special Management Areas Specific Plans ~, ,~ ,. ,, 1. ~/ , / / / / / / / / / / / ! / / / / / / O 1/ %r~ TOWN CENTER REDEV, PROJECT / / / / / / / / / / / j '' ~ SOUTH/CENTRALREDEV. PROJECT / / / / / / y , / / / / / / / / / / / / / / NORTHTUSTIN(unincorporated) / / ,/ / / / / 7 / / / ®OTHER AREAS ~ / ~ ~ / / / ' //// ~FUTUREMCAS-TUSTIN/ADJOINING / ',~!~/ AREA REDEV. PROJECT / / cwmrwt / .. _ . SOURCE: City of Tustin - An Updete on Redevelopment, March 1990 Figure LU-5 ~ ~ ~ ~ Special Management Areas GENERAL PLAN ~ Redevelopment Project Areas/ North Tustin/Other Areas is located primarily within Tustin with the exception of 9~ 73 acres located within the City of Irvine. One privately owned parcel of approximately 4.1 acres is immediately adjacent to the northeasterly boundary of the base and will be included in any planning for reuse of the base. Following closure, the MCAS Tustin property is under the jurisdictional authority of the cities of Tustin (approximately '~ 1533 acres) and Irvine (approximately 93- 73 acres), and will be subject to requirements of a Specific Plan/Reuse Plan on the former military base and the 4.1 acre privately owned site. The overall goal of the Specific Plan should be to translate community values into the most important qualities or characteristics of the future uses and overall design and seek to create results that are very special, worthy of the site's present and historical importance to the City of Tustin and the region. A variety of land uses will be permitted by the Plan, including residential, commercial business, and institutional/ recreational activities. Through the federal disposition process, certain portions of the property will be available to federal, state, homeless, and local agencies through public benefit conveyances. Property will also be offered to the Local Reuse Authority (e.g., the City of Tustin) in the pursuit of job creation and economic development. Property not transferred as a public benefit conveyance or transferred to the Local Reuse Authority will be sold by the Department of the Navy. Future Specific Plan Study Areas To achieve General Plan goals and objectives, other portions of the planning area may be identified as Specific Plan study areas for specific plans. If specific plans are adopted in these areas, amendment to the Special Management Areas Policy Maps is not necessary. Redevelopment Project Areas State Redevelopment Law provides the mechanism whereby cities and counties, through the adoption of an ordinance, can establish a redevelopment agency. The Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency was created in 1976 and is made up of the City Council who are elected at large by popular vote. Redevelopment law enables the Agency to undertake community projects designed to improve certain areas within the City which have suffered economic decline, deterioration of improvements, or which have been unable to attract and promote new private investments to enhance the quality of life CITY OF TUSTIN LAND USE ELEMENT GENERAL PLAN 51 FEBRUARY 7, 2005 ~~~~ Figure G2 Arterial Highway Pian 28 T NORTH not to scale SOURCE: Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. i.. ~., ~ • ~ - _- ~ _ _ _ ~~ ~ fApeYa1 ALE * g : e R ~` * f ' s ~, • ~ SAMA sNN• : ~ LL Ni •• • .1RA ~Y 7 eW(£ A\E .. ~ ~ c G: • • PA1NDi 1NY ~ . • ~ _. I' ~ qIX ~ ~ ~ !~ ST •• u • • •, ' YN • ~ ~ • . : • - •• : •N•« . ., . . _ rnsr ~ • • ~ i • • ~ s s ~... • ~ i ~ ~ • f' '~:~• .y ... ~~ .. •... ,: ~. • ~» •.. ':'' „~ ~• b.~ /, ~~1 T NORTH not to scale '. SOURCE: Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. ~~~~~ L LEGEND Clnae [ •«« City Houadnry ~ Clnen II Planaing Aren ~ Claq ~ * School Sita County Ragionnl 'h-n11 Figure C-4 Existing Bikewa}~s 40 ~o~~ Figure C-5 faster Bikeway i'ian 4l T NORTH not to scale SOURCE: Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ri ~~ a 11 n u u ~~~ ~a ii ii ii ii SOURCE: Petleral Emergency Management Agency FIooA Insurance Rate Map antl MCAS Master Plan (1988) ~~~ ii 700-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN -,'~~~.'~.' "30GYE7~R:FLOOD PLAIN HIGH LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ^ PROBABLE BEDROCK LANDSLIDES Figure C~J~R- Hazard Planning Areas 29 ... ~n,.,,.s T o aoo teoo -~ ry. M r..t SOURCE: Natural Resource Conservation Services (1999); Cel'rfornie Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monttodng Program (1990), City of Tustin, Aerial Photographs, John Minch & Associates, January (1991), Tierra Madre Consultams (1994) ~~~~~ ~f~ ~ ~ I { ~ p HI4H PALEONTALOt31C SEN~$ITIVITY ~ ' ~ OPEN SPACE ? ;; , j. LOWER PETERS CANYON p,ETARDiNG BASIN ~~' •~• EUCALYPTUS WINDROW ~.REdYVOOD LiIaOVE ~ . qt RIDGELINE .;,. AGRICULTURE P PRIM s sTaTEVUIC~ I-u+oara~ICE u uNfou~ .Figure COSR-2 important Natural Resources __ i Ave 13711 Yorba St t . 14302 Yorba 1 14332 Yorba S1 14372 Yorba St 14402 Prospect Ave Zielian Residence 14611 Prospect Ave Cheney ResidenC _:t _'_ , ~r r Cultural :~ .,d .w :~~ fi ,. ~~ "; ~i •. ,... ,i, ~' t<~~ /j u // ;~~ // ~' 11 f. ~ %1 ~~ 11r1 ~~ !I ~ ~ /% Y ~~ ¢~~/ Y ~// ~ // / 1252 Irvino Blvd ~/ -1331. Bryan Ave 1681 Mitchell Ave Bowman Residence /iii ~~ ., 4S a~ v Lighter-Than-Air Blimp Hangars Tustin Station s,, .a ~~9Wni<NIMUSeWImMrie MS ~\ \\ / ~ClfyolT~ln wma--.rr xonm ~ , ~ a 1a woe ~Ae •- -T-- ~. ,~~\, SOURCE:' City of Tustin. Tuatfn Station Speci(~ Plan /Reuse Plan (1995) ®:©~ GENERAL PLAN Figure CO~R-3 Historic Resources ~ ii ii // s$r?.~?+ ~NISTORIC RESOURCE AREAS --.,.- 0` egw.aam.~mi.~x,on„ apaiuan aoa~x • q IY .~.~"~ SOURCE: Cfty of Tuatln, Reneetlonal Resources In the Tuatln Area (1980), MCAS TusBn Specific PIanlReuse Plan (189 ®©©oo© RAL Figure COSR-5` Recreation Plan z. ~ ~' :~Y~u~ // ~nyon ., • ~+ •' ~~ . ,; Park ~~,4 i' ~/ ~' II .y tij4 '(.• •. ~ 111 // lL. ' 11 ;,,~~~ 11 ~,_.,, ~~ ' / ~/ ~/ y~..`h ~~ _ // . ~ // // /// // 1/ IXISTING SCHOOL PROPOSED LOCAL SCHOOL ® EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITY ,'%a`~ ' ;EXISTING PUBLIC PARK 1~ r, ~4:~~; PROPOSED PUBLIC PARK EXISTING PRIVATE RECREATION IXISTING BICYCLE ROUTES. REGIONAL MULTI-USE TRAIL // // // 11 ~~ SOURCE City of Tustin Police Depertrnant (1991). ~~~~~~ Figure PS-1 Evacuation Routes /1 /! ~~ ~~ /~ ~~ ED 6pMx ©~~nai xoem .r ®.~. SOURCE: J.J. Van Houten & Asacciates, July 1993 NOTE: Noise contours deplAed wlthln MCAS Tustin Specific Plen mey change based on final roadway allgnmente selected. _0®®©®® Figure N-1 Future (2010) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) Contours for the Tustin Planning Area ,~ ATTACHMENT E ORDINANCE 1294 (PREZONE APPROVAL) ORDINANCE NO. 1294 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, ADOPTING PREZONE 04-001 PREZONING MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN DISPOSITION PARCEL 36 FROM THE CITY OF IRVINE "2.3 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" ZONING DISTRICT TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN "MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN" ZONING DISTRICT (SP-1 SPECIFIC PLAN.) The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. FINDINGS The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Prezone 04-001 was submitted by Moffet Meadows Partners, LLC. B. That Moffet Meadows Partners, LLC has filed a landowner petition with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the reorganization of the boundary between Tustin and Irvine, including the detachment of approximately 21.6 acres from the City of Irvine and annexation of the same 21.6 acres to the City of Tustin. C. Prior to taking action on the proposed reorganization, LAFCO requires that the City of Tustin adopt a Prezone for the territory to be annexed. D. That on December 14, 2004, the City of Irvine adopted a resolution supporting the proposed boundary reorganization involving the detachment of 21.6 acres from the City of Irvine and the corresponding annexation of 21.6 acres to the City of Tustin. E. Prior to annexation, a prezoning is required. The prezoning would become the official zoning of the affected territory upon annexation. F. The annexation of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36 will improve the delivery of public services for future residents within the subject territory. G. That the proposed prezoning is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation "MCAS Tustin Specific Plan," which provides for low density residential development on MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. The project has been reviewed for consistency with the Air Quality Sub- Ordinance No. 1294 Page 2 element of the City of Tustin General Plan and has been determined to be consistent with the Air Quality Sub-element. H. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on January 24, 2005, and continued to February 14, 2005, by the Planning Commission. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Prezone 04-001. I. That a public hearing was dully called, noticed, and held on Prezone 04-001 on February 7, 2005, and continued to February 22, 2005, by the City Council. Section 2. The City Council hereby adopts Prezone 04- 001 for Annexation 159 by prezoning MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36 from the City of Irvine "2.3 Medium Density Residential" zoning district to the City of Tustin "MCAS Tustin Specific Plan" zoning district (SP-1 Specific Plan.) Section 3. SEVERABILITY All of the provisions of this ordinance shall be construed together to accomplish the purpose of the regulations. If any provision of this part is held by a court to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall apply only to the particular facts, or if a provision is declared to be invalid or unconstitutional as applied to all facts, all of the remaining provisions of this ordinance shall continue to be fully effective. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the day of , 2005. LOU BONE Mayor PAMELA STOKER City Clerk Ordinance No. 1294 Page 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1294 PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is 5; that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 1294 was duly and regularly introduced at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 22nd day of February, 2005 and was given its second reading, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of , 2005 by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER City Clerk ATTACHMENT F ORDINANCE 1295 (ZONE CHANGE/SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT APPROVAL) ORDINANCE NO. 1295 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, ADOPTING ZONE CHANGE (MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT) 04-001 TO AMEND SECTIONS 3.9.4 AND 3.13.2 OF THE MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN TO ESTABLISH NEW SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN DISPOSITION PARCEL 36. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. FINDINGS The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. That Moffet Meadows Partners, LLC submitted a proper application for Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001 to amend Sections 3.9.4 and 3.13.2 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan to establish new site development standards for MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36. B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on January 24, 2005, and continued to February 14, 2005, by the Planning Commission. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001. C. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held on said application on February 7, 2005, and continued to February 22, 2005, by the City Council. C. MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36 is located within Planning Area 21 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and is bounded by the City of Tustin/City of Irvine boundary on the north, the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan boundary on the east, Peters Canyon Flood Control Channel on the west, and Warner Avenue on the south. D. The proposed zone change supports and is consistent with the Tustin General Plan. The Land Use Element includes the City's goals and policies for the long-term growth, development, and revitalization of Tustin. Based on the summary of issues, needs, opportunities, and constraints described in the Tustin Land Use Element, ten goals are identified which include the following: Ordinance No. 1295 Page 2 1. Achieve balanced development. 2. Ensure that compatible and complementary development occurs. 3. Revitalize older commercial, industrial, and residential development. _ 4. Improve city-wide urban design. 5. Promote economic expansion and diversification. 6. Coordinate development with provision of adequate public facilities and services. 7. Ensure that the development character of East Tustin is compatible with the surrounding man-made and natural environment. 8. Strengthen the development character and mixture of uses in the Old Town/First Street area. 9. Promote an integrated business park character for the Pacific Center East area. 10. Implement a reuse plan for MCAS Tustin which maximizes the appeal of the site as a mixed-use, master-planned development. These goals establish the framework for policies related to allocation of land use in the City, and the implementation policies reflect the direction and image the City seeks for the future. The proposed Zone Change support several General Plan goals and policies, including the following: 1. The project will implement policies under the goal to achieve balanced development including: a. Policy 1.10 -Ensure that the distribution and intensity of land uses are consistent with the Land Use Plan and classification system. b. Policy 6.2 -Encourage and promote high quality design and physical appearance in all development projects. c. Policy 6.4 -Preserve and enhance the City's Special residential character and "small town" quality by encouraging and maintaining Tustin's low density residential neighborhoods through enforcement of existing land use and property development standards and the harmonious blending of buildings and landscape. 2. The project will implement policies under the goals and policies for future development of MCAS Tustin Specific Plan including: a. Policy 13.2 - Encourage a development pattern that offers a connectedness between buildings and uses, and has a strong sense of place through architectural styles and creative landscape design. Ordinance No. 1295 Page 3 b. Policy 13.5 -Promote high quality architecture, landscaping, signage, open space design, circulation patterns, and landscape patterns distinct from surrounding areas. Section 2. The City Council hereby adopts Zone Change (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Amendment) 04-001 ("Zone Change") to amend Sections 3.9.4 and 3.13.2 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan to establish new site development standards for MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Disposition Parcel 36, as identified in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Such Zone Change shall not become effective until Annexation 159 for the annexation of MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan Disposition Parcel 36 becomes effective. Section 3. SEVERABILITY All of the provisions of this ordinance shall be construed together to accomplish the purpose of the regulations. If any provision of this part is held by a court to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall apply only to the particular facts, or if a provision is declared to be invalid or unconstitutional as applied to all facts, all of the remaining provisions of this ordinance shall continue to be fully effective. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the day of , 2005. LOU BONE Mayor PAMELA STOKER City Clerk Ordinance No. 1295 Page 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN 1 CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1295 PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is 5; that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 1295 was duly and regularly introduced at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 22"d day of February, 2005 and was given its second reading, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of , 2005 by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER City Clerk EXHIBIT A OF ORDINANCE 1295 (ZONE CHANGE 04-001) Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations 3.9.4 Planning Area 21 -Low Density Residential A. Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Uses The following uses shall be permitted by right where the symbol "P" occurs or by conditional use where the symbol "C" occurs. 1. Residential uses: • Condominiums and cooperatives P • Multiple-family dwelling units (apartments) in C accordance with tenure provisions in Section 3.9.4.I • Patio homes C • Single-family attached dwelling units and duplexes P • Single-family detached dwelling units P • Transitional housing (maximum of 36 12 units ~»Ii;~ P 2. Public/Institutional uses: • Community care facilities for six or fewer persons P • Family care facility for elderly for six or fewer persons P • Large family day care for seven to twelve children on P single family detached lots in accordance with the Tustin City Code • Residential care facility for elderly, for six or fewer P persons • Small family day care for less than seven children on P single family detached lots City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments Page 1 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations B. Accessory Uses and Structures cic'1~a Accessory uses and structures are permitted when customarily associated with and subordinate to a permitted use on the same site and would include: • Carports • Garages • Home occupations subject to provisions of the Tustin City Code • Patio covers/trellises • Swimming pools, spas, Jacuzzis • Tennis courts, basketball courts and other multi-purpose courts, recreation and community buildings A,... e......«., .... e.. ....A .. a....,.a..«e.. F«..... T«..:..e Dl.,....:.... A«o~ Z4 7.~noa ....1:,...l.le ice,.a:,.., v c Qzo m C. Unlisted Uses Those uses not specifically listed are subject to a determination by the Community Development Director as either permitted, permitted subject to a conditional use permit or prohibited consistent with the purpose of the land designation of this planning area and the Specific Plan. Decisions of the Director are appealable to the Planning Commission. D. Site Development Standards - (a''a°~--~~ Reuse Plan Disposition Parcel 36 Only) c:ae .1,...,.1.......o..a tea.....]„«a.. r«,.... T._..:.,o Dl.......:.... n«e., ~o A L.' T F »: :a.. ...: a4.:.. aL..~ Li ,. " a,.a,.l ...1.er ~ F al TP[IICT't]pR2p[1-p1-[C ._ . cT I .: ,, Dl A 0. 11 a A 7 G!1 `..: a.. T« CCp~IZQ}RI1TC6-ITIOCC OSIP II [IOC O]Cev.. .-.v.v. ~.. City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific P/an/Reuse Plan Amendments Page 2 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations 1. Maximum dwelling units - 7.0 dwelling units per Bross acre average (150 units maximum) 2. Minimum lot area - 2,400 square feet 3. Minimum lot width - no minimum 4. Maximum building height - 40 feet 5. Minimum site landscaping - 30 percent. Minimum site landscaping shall apply to attached residential and may include sidewalks and paseo/bikewa~paths within the~roject azea. 6. Minimum building setbacks fromt,as a) Harvard Avenue - 42 feet b) Warner Avenue - 42 feet c) Local Street (Private or Public) - 10 feet minimum, 15 feet average d) Private Drives - 10 feetZ e) Interior side yard adjacent to residential use3 - 10 feet f) Interior side yazd adiacent to non-residential use - 10 feet g) Interior rear yazd adjacent to residential use3 - 10 feet h) Interior rear yazd adjacent to non-residential use - 10 feet i) Southern California Edison Easement - 100 feet j) Building to building - 10 feet 7. Landscaping ~a) Areas not devoted to buildings, parking areas, hardscape, and roads, shall be landscaped. b) Compliance with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines c) Compliance with the Landscape Design Guidelines in Section 2.17 of this Specific Plan 8. Bicvcle and pedestrian circulation facilities shall provide connections within the Planning Area, to adjacent Planning Areas, and to citywide Bicvcle trails where applicable. 9. Other General Development Regulations (refer to Section 3.11 as applicable) 10. menage (refer to Section 3.12 as applicable) 11. Off-street pazking (refer to Section 3.13 as applicable) Notes for Section 3.9.4.D: 1. Building setbacks aze measured from the curb face correspondin¢ to the ultimate right-of-way. 2. The following Qazase and carport setbacks requirements shall apply: 3 foot minimum setback from the travelwav. If a living area is provided above a garage the living area shall be setback a minimum of 7 fee[ from [he travelwav. The travelwav is the portion of the roadway for the movement of vehicles, exclusive of shoulders, curb sections and auxiliazv lanes. 3. Ten (101 feet plus 2 feet for every 5 feet in height over 30 feet Non-conforming building and landscape setbacks will be permitted tD remain where existing buildings and structures are not in future right-of-way. MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments Cify of Tustin Page 3 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations E. Site Development Standards - (~'"-;n Reuse Plan Disposition Parcels 34 and 35) Single Family Detached 1. Maximum dwelling units - 7 dwelling units per acre 2. Minimum lot area - 3,000 square feet 3. Minimum lot width - 35 feet 4. Maximum building height - 35 feet 5. Maximum lot coverage - 50 percent of lot area. Covered areas shall include all aeeas under roof except trellis aeeas, roof overhangs, and covered porches outside the exterior wall. 6. Minimum building setbacks46 a) Harvard Avenue - 42 feet b) Edinger Avenue - 40 feet c) Moffett Avenue - 10 feet d) Local public street - 10 feet e) Private street or private drive - 5 feet f) Interior side yazd - 3 feet minimum with aggregate requirement of 10 feet for both side yazds g) Rear yard - 10 feet 7. Landscape setbacks a) Edinger Avenue - 30 feet b) Harvard Avenue - 30 feet c) Moffett Avenue - 20 feet 8. Landscaping a) Areas not devoted to buildings, parking aeeas, hardscape, and roads, shall be landscaped. b) Compliance with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines c) Compliance with the Landscape Design Guidelines in Section 2.17 of this Specific Plan 9. Bicycle and pedestrian circulation facilities shall provide connections within the Planning Area, to adjacent Planning Areas, and to citywide bicycle trails where applicable. 10. Other General Development Regulations (refer to Section 3.11 as applicable) 11. Signage (refer to Section 3.12 as applicable) 12. Off-street pazking (refer to Section 3.13 as applicable) F. Site Development Standards - (~'"-~;;a Reuse Plan Disposition Parcels 34 and 35) Single Family Attached 1. Maximum dwelling units - 7 dwelling units per acre 2. Minimum lot area per family unit - 3,000 squaze feet 06 Landscape setbacks are measured from [he back of the curb and are a combination of parkway, sidewalk, and planting areas. Building setbacks are measured from future right- of-way. Non-conforming building and landscape setbacks will be permitted to remain where existing buildings and structures are not in future right-of-way. City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Speci/ic Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments Page 4 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations 3. Minimum lot area per development project - 10 acres 4. Minimum lot width - no minimum 5. Maximum building height - 40 feet 6. Maximum lot coverage - 100 percent less required setbacks and open space areas 7. Common open space. - 400 square feet per dwelling unit located within common, designated recreational areas. Private attached ground level patios may be credited if open on three sides. Areas not available for open space credit include all structures, streets, driveways, landscape setbacks, and parking lots. 8. Private outdoor open space -minimum private outdoor open space shall be increased to 400 square feet for existing units. 9. Minimum gross floor area per dwelling unit, excluding the garage a) Bachelor - 450 square feet b) 1 Bedroom - 550 square feet c) 1 Bedroom with den - 700 square feet d) 2 Bedrooms - 750 square feet e) 2 Bedrooms or more with den - 900 square feet 10. Minimum building setbacksa~ a) Harvard Avenue - 42 feet b) Edinger Avenue - 40 feet c) Moffett Avenue - 10 feet d) Local public street - 10 feet e) Private street or private drive - 5 feet f) Interior side yard - 3 feet g) Rear yard - 10 feet h) Distances between principal structures - 10 feet i) Distances between accessory structures - 5 feet 11. Landscape setbacks a6 a) Edinger Avenue - 30 feet b) Harvard Avenue - 30 feet c) Moffett Avenue - 20 feet 12. Landscaping a) Areas not devoted to buildings, parking areas, hardscape, and roads, shall be landscaped. b) Compliance with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines c) Compliance with the Landscape Design Guidelines in Section 2.17 of this Specific Plan °~ Landscape setbacks are measured from the back of the curb and are a combination of parkway, sidewalk, and planting areas. Landscape setbacks may be reduced to accommodate existing walls or buildings. Building setbacks are measured from future right-of-way. MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments City of Tustin Page 5 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations 13. Bicycle and pedestrian circulation facilities shall provide connections within the Planning Area, to adjacent Planning Areas, and to citywide bicycle trails where applicable. 14. Other General Development Regulations (refer to Section 3.11 as applicable) 15. Signage (refer to Section 3.12 as applicable) 16. Off-street parking (refer to Section 3.13 as applicable) G. Site Development Standards - (''"°~ t=n Reuse Plan Disposition Parcels 34 and 35) Condominiums and Multiple Family Dwellings L Maximum dwelling units - 7 dwelling units per acre 2. Minimum development site - 10 acres 3. Maximum building height - 40 feet 4. Maximum lot coverage - 65 percent, less the required building and landscape setbacks 5. Common open space - 400 square feet per dwelling unit located within common, designated recreational areas. Private attached ground level patios may be credited if open on three sides. Areas not available for open space credit include all structures, streets, driveways, landscape setbacks, and parking lots. 6. Minimum gross floor area per dwelling unit, excluding the garage a) Bachelor - 450 square feet b) 1 Bedroom - 550 square feet c) 1 Bedroom with den - 700 squaze feet d) 2 Bedrooms - 750 square feet e) 2 Bedrooms or more with den - 850 squaze feet 7. Minimum building setbacksas a) Harvard Avenue - 42 feet b) Edinger Avenue - 40 feet c) Moffett Avenue - 10 feet d) Local public street - 10 feet e) Private street or private drive - 5 feet f) Interior side yard - 3 feet g) Rear yazd - 10 feet h) Distances between principal structures - 10 feet i) Distances between accessory structures - 5 feet 8. Lan dscape setbacks49 48 Building setbacks are measured from future right-of-way. Nonconforming building and landscape setbacks will be permitted to remain where existing buildings and structures are not in future right-of-way. 49 Landscape setbacks are measured from the back of the curb and are a combination of parkway, sidewalk, and planting areas. Landscape setbacks may be reduced to accommodate existing walls or buildings. Building setbacks are measured from future right-of-way. City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Speci/ic Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments Page 6 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations a) Edinger Avenue - 40 feet b) Harvard Avenue - 30 feet c) Moffett Avenue - 20 feet 9. Landscaping a) Areas not devoted to buildings, parking areas, hardscape, and roads, shall be landscaped. b) Compliance with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines c) Compliance with the Landscape Design Guidelines in Section 2.17 of this Specific Plan 10. Bicycle and pedestrian circulation facilities shall provide connections within the Planning Area, to adjacent Planning Areas, and to citywide bicycle trails where applicable. 11. Other General Development Regulations (refer to Section 3.11 as applicable) 12. Signage (refer to Section 3.12 as applicable) 13. Off-street parking (refer to Section 3.13 as applicable) H. Site Development Standards - (''~'°~-tin Reuse Plan Disposition Parcels 34 and 35) Patio Homes 1. Maximum dwelling units - 7 dwelling units per acre 2. Minimum lot azea -none, refer to Section 3.9.4.I below 3. Building site requirements -patio home subdivisions shall be designated as a development unit on a tentative map. 4. Maximum building height - 35 feet 5. Maximum lot coverage - 100 percent, less required building and landscape setbacks 6. Common open space - 400 square feet per dwelling unit located within common, designated recreational azeas. A minimum of 150 square feet may be for private use if located on ground level and open on three sides. Areas not available for open space credit include all structures, streets, driveways, landscape setbacks, and pazking lots. 7. Minimum gross floor area per dwelling unit, excluding the garage - 900 square feet 8. Maximum number of four bedroom units - 30 percent 9. Minimum building setbacks°S a) Harvard Avenue - 42 feet b) Edinger Avenue - 40 feet c) Moffett Avenue - 10 feet d) Local public or private street -The minimum building setback shall be 10 feet from a public or private street. An attached or detached garage may be setback a minimum of 5 feet from a public or private street. If living areas are provided above gazages, garage setbacks shall apply provided that no more than 75 percent of the MCAS Tustin Speci/ic Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments City of Tustin Page 7 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations units along the street frontage have living space over a garage with less than a 10 foot setback. All units located along both sides of a street segment shall be included when calculating the above 75 percent determination, regardless of whether they front, side, or rear load on that section of a street. A gazage shall not be setback between 9 feet and 19 feet from the right-of-way line. Garages setback 9 feet or less shall be equipped with an automatic garage opener. e) Private drives and courts - The minimum building setback shall be 7 feet in a private court or on a private drive not located within a court. An attached or detached garage may be setback a minimum of 3 feet provided that no more than 50 percent of the length of the building frontage over the total length of the drive or court is setback less than 7 feet. In calculating the total length of the drive or court and the length of building frontage, the length of building and street frontage on both sides of the drive or court shall be used. If living areas are provided above gazages, gazage setback shall apply. The minimum 3 foot garage setback shall be increased where necessary to accommodate required sidewalks. A garage shall not be setback between 9 feet and 19 feet from the right-of- way line. Gazages setback 9 feet or less shall be equipped with an automatic gazage opener. A minimum distance of 40 feet shall be maintained between ground floor living areas on units across from each other in a court, on a drive, or on a shared driveway. f) Minimum distance between buildings -The minimum horizontal distance between adjacent buildings shall be 10 feet. The minimum distance between buildings may be reduced to 6 feet for no more than a maximum length of 25 feet of a building elevation, provided that there aze no windows on one elevation for that portion of the building elevation with less than a 10 foot setback. If living azeas aze provided above garages, gazage setbacks shall apply. g) Tract boundary -The minimum building setback from any tract boundazy shall be 10 feet. If the tract boundazy is adjacent to a park or other permanent open space, the minimum building setback shall be 5 feet. 10. Landscape setbacksso so Landscape setbacks aze measured from the back of the curb and are a combination of pazkway, sidewalk, and planting azeas. Landscape setbacks may be reduced to accommodate existing walls or buildings. City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific P/an/Reuse Plan Amendments Page 8 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations a) Harvard Avenue - 30 feet b) Edinger Avenue - 30 feet c) Moffett Avenue - 20 feet 11. Landscaping a) Compliance with the City of Tustin Landscape and Irrigation Guidelines b) Compliance with the Landscape Design Guidelines in Section 2.17 of this Specific Plan 12. Bicycle and pedestrian circulation facilities shall provide connections within the Planning Area, to adjacent Planning Areas, and to citywide bicycle trails where applicable. The facilities shall incorporate vistas into the golf course where possible and provide for convenient bicycle and pedestrian access from the Planning Area to the Tustin Commuter Rail Station. 13. Other Genera] Development Regulations (refer to Section 3.11 as applicable) 14. Signage (refer to Section 3.12 as applicable) 15. Off-street pazking (refer to Section 3.13 as applicable) I. Special Development or Reuse Requirements 1. Concept plan approval shall be required for development in Planning Area 21 (refer to Section 4.2.1 of this Specific Plan). 2. Prior to any interim or permanent reuse of facilities or property on a parcel, or prior to any development on a parcel, any party receiving property from the Department of Defense or Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) shall be required to enter into an agreement with the LRA. The purpose of the Agreement is to: 1) identify the planning goals of the Agency receiving property and the City or LRA for the site; 2) identify the scope and schedule for short range improvements and long range development plans for the property; 3) establish a process for meaningful consultation on development and operational issues of mutual concern; 4) identify capital infrastructure improvements, roadway dedications, and environmental impact report mitigation that will be required of the Agency receiving or leasing property; and 5) identify necessazy procedures to implement the agreement. 3. Affordability -the following minimum affordable housing production objectives are intended to reflect the intention of the City of Tustin to create a redevelopment project area (Community Redevelopment Law, section 33000) and as needed to meet Regional Housing Allocation needs as identified in the Housing Element of the Tustin °~a General Plan through the provision of housing for households at very low, low, and moderate incomes levels. Specific MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments City of Tustin Page 9 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations housing requirements will be established for specific sites at the time of development project approval to ensure uniformity with the Housing Element of the General Plan and other applicable provisions of California Law and to achieve the following ~ ~ °°°'- - °°*~°° °~~°• a) ~'~'°~~ ofr~~ Disposition Parcel 36 only: Prior to issuance of a certificate of use and occupancv the developer shall enter into a legally binding aereement with the Citv of Irvine to provide in Plannine Area 22 the affordable housine units that would have been reauired on Disposition Parcel 36 pursuant to the Citv of Irvine Affordable Housine Implementation Procedure (Chapter 2-3 of the Irvine Zoning Codel, and aeree to deed restrictions on tazgeted affordable housing units that are bindine on propertv upon sale or transfer. Said aereements shall address the followine: 1) Number of units by tvpe, location, bedroom count 21 Standards for aualifving income and maximum rents or sales prices 3) Parties responsible for sales prices and incomes If the reauired affordable housine units are not provided in Plannine Area 22 then the develoner shall comply with eeneral affordability reauirements applicable to Disposition Parcels 34 and 35, and the followine number of affordable units shall be provided: 1) At least 9 units for initial occupancy by very low income level households 2) At least 7 units for initial occupancy by low income level households 3) At least 7 units for occupancy by moderate income level households b) ~e€~t3sEi~x Reuse Plan Disposition Pazcels 34 and 35: 1) At least 15% of units for initial occupancy by very low income to moderate income households for redevelopment with 6% (or 40%) of these units affordable to very low income households. Developer compliance with the Homeless Accommodation Plan described in Section 2.3.6 and 2.4 shall be required. 2) At least 10 additional units for initial occupancy by low income level households. 3) At least 20 additional units for initial occupancy by moderate income level households. 4) Restricted affordable housine units shall be reasonably dispersed throughout a proiect and shall be compatible with the desien and use of mazket City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments Page 4 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations rate units in appearance, use of materials, and finished quality. Restricted units shall be affordable for at least the minimum period required by state law, or longer if required by a construction or mortg~e financing assistance_program. 5) Prior to issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy. a developer shall enter into a legally binding agreement with the Citv of Tustin, its Redevelopment Agency, and agree to deed restrictions on targeted affordable housing units that aze binding on property upon sale or transfer. Said agreements shall address the following: a) Number of units b~t}~e, location, bedroom count b) Standards for qualifying income and maximum rents or sales prices c) Parties responsible for sales prices and incomes 6) The City of Tustin reserves the right to ne og tiate transfer of a developer's obli ag tion pursuant to this section off-site as a creditfor affordable units which cannot be reasonably feasible to provide on-site which shall be at the City's sole and absolute discretion. To ensure comparable equivalent value of an off-site option or exchange for not providing on-site affordable units, a financial affordability gap analysis will be conducted by the City, at developer's cost, to compaze the value of the off- site option and the affordability gap cost of providing on-site affordable housing. \ D r,,,l ..FF,.«A nl.le 1.......:., .. ...:rte .. L, nll l.e «o .. n1.1.. 6~ iccJCCSOCOR o...b ...... ........ .... ...... .I:.,..e«.. e.] rl.«.... ,.1.,..,• .. e..rNn...J ..1, nll Ho n ......~..-J ....r:l.le .,«e .., .. 1, I, ,1 ~..: ,.., .,a ,.F n«Lor «nre . ,. .:.., .« ___ __ ____ ____a__ _. _ __ _. _.. ..F .., nre.: nl.. ...7 F;,~~1.,,.1 ... .nl: r., D ..a ~l.nll 1.,. .. FF,.«,J..L`le F..« L.. y.....~. .,.r rl.e •nhe ln.,,• w' 1~ Or 'v o ri = • ` ~ ~ ~~ ` ~ a=~£ - 7 jC2[CG-I~ rr ixim¢xir P crrv¢-- r o~ u r~ c ert a e- t ~i w d S g g -~-ir-~as T~ze ee ; e ~esc:: t - €- f~i t ~ d =g c:c c r s,>uat~ee~c-a e e ttse~ a )- e>=- ~, .,: rl. rl.e !': r. ..F T....ti« :r.. De.7e..e1....... o..r A.... .,,... , " > i :«. ..F T«. A.,e F,.«.. «e«r:e~ ...:rl,:., T«,,;..e n.. rl. ! d ~ e 1,... ,. e T.:., a:.,,. ,. ..e«r... ..nlo „« r«n.,~r„ « c..:,l MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments City of Tustin Page 11 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations 1 \ ~Aul.~..~.nl.~n« ..F ..«an l.v }v..e l..r nti..« L.v A«....m r ..h IV'"[IL'TO~FEPiS S \ D hn F .rt: F: F A e~~is,~;aee~r--~e~a~rea~e~r~so-;~aesan~rn An..nl n..n« nl.nll n«hn« :..hn n lnnnll.. 1.:«A:«.. n n..h ..: }l, h6n !`: h., nF T..nti« .. :hn DnAn..nl n.....n«h Ann«.... }«n«nFn« Cn:.~l n nr.hn nl.nll n.l.~l.-nnn R.n F..l l.....:.. n~ ~b-~IiEes• 2\ Dn«h: nn « na.ln f..« nnlnn .. ..A (~: }., ..F T..nh:r. « n hl.n «. nl.h hn n ~ti n}u }«ne aFn« n: }.. «n A:} F..« nFF..«Anl.ln «:hn ...1.: n1. ~.} 1.., tke~TS "'~roio--Qix~aosekxio-vissfetiv^i~'~'6-e8s~-a ..n6 n.. n.. F..« ..,.} ., :A:..n n n:hn nFFn«Anl.ln ...: hn A...... n: nl nFFn«A nl.a:h., n «nl..n:n ...:11 l.n n.....l.,rooA'h., }L.n ~:k. nh !ln uln nh hi. tl.n nl. ..F kEfu ,.FF n:}e .a «A hl.n nFFn«Anl.a:h. n} ..F « .: A: 4. Tenure -Reuse/development of Planning Area 21 shall be encouraged to be ownership tenure. Development of apartments is a discretionary action requiring approval of a conditional use permit. Consideration of a conditional use permit should include the City's preference for ownership tenure, and in any event, no more than 25 percent of the total number of units permitted •°'«'~:~ ~:}l,o« }l,n T..nh:.. ,.« r«..:..,. may be approved for apartments. 5. Existing structures to be reused shall be brought into conformance with applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code, as amended by the City's of Tustin or Irvine (as applicable), State of California Title 24 Access Compliance (handicapped provisions), and requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 6. Utility metering modifications and provision of independent utility services shall be committed to by agreement between the Clty of Tustin °«a n:«., nF r«..:..n iF,.« .. ..n«h:nn .,.:hl.:., r.n,:,.o\ and those agencies receiving property in Planning Area 21 prior to use and occupancy of existing buildings and new development. City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific PIaNReuse Plan Amendments Page 12 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations J. Development or Reuse Guidelines 1. Wall and streetscape upgrades along Harvard Avenue should be designed to create greater compatibility with Village 38 theme walls and streetscape on the east side of Harvard Avenue. A combination of walls, landscaping, and berms may be utilized to achieve required noise standards in both Tustin and Irvine. 2. Existing housing units shall be aesthetically upgraded through architectural and landscape improvements to appear consistent in quality with private market housing in the surrounding neighborhoods of Tustin and Irvine, in the event of reuse. Such improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of use and occupancy permits. The improvements may include, but aze not limited to, the following: a) Upgraded facade treatments, including use of plaster, wood siding, brick, stone, and other approved materials b) Upgraded window types and treatments (i.e., trim) c) Upgraded roofing materials and extension of roof overhangs d) Updated color scheme for buildings and walls e) Enlazgement and enhancement of private patios and balconies f) Upgraded appearance of unit entrances, including doorways, walkways, decorative paving g) Improved landscape design of front yards and common aeeas h) Consistent landscape treatment along local roads i) Extensive planting of trees and shrubs throughout the site j) Decorative treatment of all exposed site walls k) Upgraded driveways 1) Decorative paving and other hardscape amenities for pedestrian paths in common areas m) Improvements to common recreational areas including provision of shelters, lighting, and refurbishing of facilities n) Creation of project entryways through signage and landscape design o) Upgraded and consistent signage, including project identification, addressing, and directional signs p) Enhance lighting scheme for units, common areas, paths, and parking areas q) Application of defensible space techniques in landscaping and lighting 3. Demolition of structures may be required by Tustin to be undertaken under the following conditions: 1) where MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments City of Tustin Page 13 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations information determines the need for demolition to eliminate public health and safety risks, 2) to improve the appearance of the Planning Area, 3) to accommodate the completion of major roadway improvements, and 4) to properly implement the permanent land use intent of this Planning Area. A summary of the key design guidelines for Planning Area 21 is provided in Figure 3-9. City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments Page 14 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations provided with such designated spaces being not less than 8 feet by 17 feet. Up to 20% of the required pazking spaces of the site may be designated for compact cars, upon the approval of the Community Development Director. L. Parking Requirements: The requirement for any uses not listed in Sections 3.13.2, 3.13.3, and 3.13.4 shall be determined by the Community Development Director on the basis of the requirements for similar uses. 3.13.2 Residential Off-Street Parking Requirements Table 3-4 defines the off-street pazking requirements for residential uses in the City of Tustin portion of the Specific Plan area. Refer to the Irvine Parking Ordinance for applicable standards within the City of Irvine. TABLE 3-4 RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS ALL REUSE PLAN DISPOSITION PARCELS EXCEPT PARCEL 36 Number of Number of Spaces Covered/Assigned Unassigned Housing Type Required Spaces per Unit Guest Spaces Detached Sin le-Famil 2.0 2 Gara e .5 er unit Attached Single-Family Studio 1.0 1 Garage .25 per unit 1 Bedroom 1.5 1 Garage .25 per unit 2 Bedroom 2.0 2 Garage 25 per unit 3 Bedroom 2.0 2 Garage .25 per unit 4 Bedroom 2.5 2 Gara e .25 er unit Condominium and Multiples Family Units Studio 1.0 1 Garage or carport .25 per unit 1 Bedroom 1.5 1 Garage or carport .25 per unit 2 Bedroom 2.0 2 Garage or carport .25 per unit 3 Bedroom 2.0 2 Garage or carport 25 per unit 4 Bedroom 2.5 2 Gara e or c ort .25 er unit Patio Homes 2.0 2 Gara e 0.5 er unit ~ 50 percent of the ues[ s ace re aired maybe fulfilled with on-street arking. City of Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Amendments Page 15 Chapter 3 • Land Use and Development/Reuse Regulations TABLE 3-4 (CONTINUED) RESIDENTIAL OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS REUSE PLAN DISPOSITION PARCEL 36 ONLY Number o Number o Spaces Covered/Assigned Unassigned Housin T e Re uired S aces er Unit Guest S aces Detached Single-Family 1 Bedroom 2.0 2 Garaee Public/Private 2 Bedroom 2_0 2 Garaee Street frontage' 3 Bedroom 2_0 2 Garaee 4 or more Bedroom 3.0 2 Gara e Attached Development. Ownershiu3 Studio 1_0 1 Covered .7 spaces/unit if 1 Bedroom 1_5 1 Covered a¢ rages 2 or more Bedroom 2.0 1 Covered .4 spaces/unit if ca orts 'Resident spaces may be tandem. z If on-street parkin is no[ permitted or is resuic[ed on the unit's street frontage then 1 visitor garkine space shall be required for each affected unit. This visitor space shall be located no[ more Otan 100 fee[ from the unit's street fronage. This space cannot be tandem ' On-street parkinp~may count toward fulfilling visitor oarkinp requirements if on a private street Tandem arkin ma no[ couut towazd f¢Ifillin visitor arkin re uirements. 3.13.3 Commercial Shopping Center Off-Street Parking Requirements Table 3-5 defines the off-street parking requirements for the commercial centers in the Specific Plan. TABLE 3-5 COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER OFF-STREET PARKING RE UIREMENTS Plannin Area/Use T e Parking Spaces per Square Foot o Gross Floor Area PA 7 Villa e Services i s ace/225 s uare feet PA 9 Commercial 1 s ace/225 s uare feet PA 18 Commercial 1 space/200 squaze feet PA 19 Commercial 1 space/225 square feet MCAS Tustin Specific P/an/Reuse Plan Amendments City of Tustin Page 16 ATTACHMENT G CITY OF IRVINE RESOLUTION NO. 04-181 (BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT) 01/18/2005 09:36 FA% CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 04-181 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRVINE SUPPORTING AN APPLICATION FOR A CORPORATE BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT FOR THE DETACHMENT OF A PORTION OF PLANNING AREA 38 FROM THE CITY OF IRVINE AND ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TUSTIN ~jooz WHEREAS, the City of Irvine has received a request from Marble Mountal i Partners, LLC for the detachment from the City of Irvine of certain uninhabite i territory owned by Marble Mountain Partners, LLC, known as Moffet Meadow , being a portion of Planning Area 38, located on the former MCAS Tustin site, an i described more particularly in Exhibits A and B attached hereto and incorporate t herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the City of Tustin has indicated a willingness to annex th > territory; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Irvine has considered informatia i presented by the Community Development Department, the landowner, are i concerned citizens at a public hearing on December 14, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Irvine DOES HEREB ' RESOLVE as follows: Section 1. The proposal by Marble Mountain Partners, LLC for detachme t from the City of Irvine to the City of Tustin is made pursuant to the Cortese-Kno: - Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. Section 2. The proposed change consists of the detachment c f approximately 21 acres from the City of Irvine and annexation to the City of Tustir , described more particularly in Exhibits A and B attached hereto. Section 3. A petition/application for detachment has been submitted to th ; Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) by Marble Mountain Partners, LLC: , the property owner. Section 4. The City Council of the City of Irvine supports the detachmenY~ f the subject property from the City of Irvine and annexation to the City of Tustin. Section 5. The Local Agency Formation Commission is hereby requeste i to undertake detachment proceedings in the manner provided by the Cortese-Kno: - Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. 01/18/2005 09:36 FAX r~ooa PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Irvine at a spec; tl meeting held on the 140' day of December 2004. 'nn ^ - U Y Vv~ M YO OF THE CITY OF IRVIN ATTEST: F THE CITY OF VINE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF IRVINE ) I JERI L. STATELY, City Clerk of the City of Irvine, HEREBY DO CERTIF ' that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a special meeting of the Cii ~ Council of the City of Irvine, held on the 14"' day of December 2004. AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Agran, Choi, Kang, Shea and Krom NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None OF THE CITY O RVINi 2 CC RESOLUTION 04-18'