Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 DIVIDE COLUMBUS SQR 06-20-05 AGENDA REPORT Agenda Item 2 Reviewed: W City Manager Finance Director ~ MEETING DATE: JUNE 20, 2005 FROM: WilLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16857 FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES SUMMARY On June 13, 2005, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Tentative Tract Map 16857 for subdivision of the 105.5-acre Columbus Square project site into fifteen (15) numbered parcels and five (5) lettered parcels for conveyance purposes located in Planning Areas 4 and 5 of the MCAS-Tustin Specific Plan (Reuse Disposal Parcel 23 and Parcel 24). Applicant! Owner: Moffett Meadows Partners, llC RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 05-77 finding that the project is within the scope of the adopted Final EIS/EIR for the MCAS Tustin Reuse and Specific Plan. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 05-78 approving Tentative Tract Map 16857 to subdivide 105.5 gross acres into fifteen (15) numbered parcels and five (5) lettered parcels for conveyance purposes in Planning Areas 4 and 5 of the MCAS- Tustin Specific Plan. FISCAL IMPACT: The Tentative Tract Map is an applicant-initiated project. The applicants have paid applicable fees for the processing of this request. BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION: The site is bounded by Edinger Avenue on the north and a future fire station site at the southwest comer of Edinger Avenue and West Connector Road, West Connector Road City Council Report Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 2 of 3 on the east, Valencia/North Loop Road on the south, and an existing industrial office complex and Severyns Road on the west. The project site is comprised of 105.5 gross acres owned by the Moffett Meadows Partners LLC, who purchased the property directly from Department of Navy through a land auction. The development applications for the site which included subdivision and construction of 1,077 residential units were approved by the City Council on February 22, 2005. The proposed tentative tract map is for conveyance purposes only. Moffett Meadows Partners LLC is the master developer for the site and the conveyance map would provide for conveyance of the proposed parcels to two home builders which include Lennar South Coast Homebuilding Division and William Lyons homes. Tentative Tract Map 16857 for Conveyance Purposes The subdivision request includes division of 105.5 acres into fifteen (15) numbered lots and five (5) lettered lots for conveyance purposes. The proposed tract map would include Lots 1 through 15, which contain areas that were previously approved for residential development with Tentative Tract Map 16581; and lots A through E which contain the park/recreational and the open space areas. All of the proposed lots have direct access to a public street and meet the development standards of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan for Planning Areas 4 and 5 and requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and City of Tustin Subdivision Ordinance. While the Moffett Meadows Partners, LLC, has taken ownership of the majority of the project site, there are areas that have been classified as hazardous waste sites (IRP-16, IRP -13W, IRP-13S and UST-268) that have not yet been conveyed to Moffett Meadows Partners, LLC by Department of Navy pending completion of environmental remediation work. Recently, the applicant has indicated that the Department of Navy is in the process of conveying two of the four parcels, IRP-16 and UST-268. The quitclaim deeds have not been signed and recorded, but given that the Navy will be conveying the two parcels within the next few weeks, the parcels are not depicted on the tentative tract map. Condition 1.8 of Resolution No. 3975 requires that prior to final map recordation, the quitclaim deeds for IRP-16 and UST-286 be executed and recorded. The project site also includes a twenty-five (25) foot Edison easement that runs north and south from Edinger Avenue to Valencia/North Loop Road recorded in 1922, which has been abandoned. However, Moffett Meadows Partners LLC has requested that Edison formally vacate the abandoned easement. Condition 1.9 requires that the Edison easement be vacated prior to approval of the final conveyance map. City Council Report Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 3 of 3 With approval of the development plans for the site, numerous conditions were included to ensure compliance with the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, the FEIS/EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program, the Subdivision Map Act, and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. All of the conditions of approval included in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3953 and City Council Resolution Nos. 05-38 and 05-40 are applicable to parcels that are included in Tentative Tract Map 16857 for conveyance purposes. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION On January 17, 2001, the City Council certified the FEISfEIR for Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin. The development plans for the projèct were approved by the Planning Commission on February 14, 2005 and the City Council on February 22, 2005. An environmental checklist and analysis was previously prepared for the proposed project, which concluded that all potential impacts of the project were addressed by the certified FEISfEIR and no additional impacts have been identified (Exhibit 1 of Resolution No. 3974). The proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only and no development is proposed. No environmental impacts are anticipated. A decision to approve the proposed project may be supported by the findings contained in Resolution Nos. 05-77 and 05-78. ~~~ Associate Planner 8~7/~d~ Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director Attachments: A - Location Map B - Tentative Tract Map 16857 C - Resolution No. 05-77 D - Resolution No. 05-78 S:ICddICCREPORlìColumbus Square - conveyance map 16857.doc ATTACHMENT A Project Location Map Project Location Map Columbus Square Tentative Tract Map 16857 for Conveyance Purposes Planning Area 4 Columbus Square ..- (0) Columbus Grove ATTACHMENT B Submitted Tentative Tract Map 16857 SHEET 1 OF 3 'M" .~..œ. """ .~" """""" "n" " """'ERED 5 "TIE"" (^~" "",..'" m^" """", LEGAL DESCRIPTION ~i~':J~¡'~:io~::1r ~~i~~t:3'!Œ~~ry;¡~£r'¿'~ ~o r~¡:æ1~gX:~ifi~~ ~£ if~!~~'¡¡;¡:,:,'~:\~,;C","' OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE W," '"' C","","W. "'"' .. ,...", ~""' - "CO" me, '~"Œ> " m'CAN"<M"W"'m""^".oo""""co",~,,m,""'^"n,"^", ""","," " ~'" "^". '" ,"ow, W~" m' """""" """ '" ~~rr:,;~J;,M=WJ',;,~~~~~,,'iC ~~,~;~~í~~f,'t'~,:,1~~~¡¡'>ii, :;¡,f¡~;¡:,~~~§,lt':;,\f¡,"~,^" :\~i~~:~,^"1:::o:,;,¡,:~n:;":¡;~~" "~"" ,,",,~,"m,"m""""5"'-"'(""""'CO""^,O"'-"W (CO"""",, ")AAE'C,""",-,OWNm""",c,,",,,,,,"" ¡r£~:1:i\]~~:~æ ':f~¡~¿:%:k¡:~~dg~l¡í:~=,:~~~~i '"'"""" """ """","'-'" """"'-'",,, "'"' "'-<"('" " ^",o;")^,o"'-",('-O,"^,o'-O",)",,,~ru'm"~"ow=" ,~, " '""' mE ""OW; """R" ""E". ",m", CO",,""" " ,~""""'^' :¡~~~n~:.:,: I:,f:~~ ':'.'¿ ;::1 :::;,'~"t~¡,;g,:' ~gN~'i:'~,io "eN'" SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT :~""~IT't',i"f~,~',',!'t~~o,~~1rorJ~',f;;;~i:¡j', """,w ""'" &./ck f'; ml'Jl1 ",c~"""q,.,,,~ "" E"'~n" "'IT '/30/" TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16857 IN THE CIT>' OF TUSTIN, COUNT>' OF ORANGE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY "IeHAEC ,,"O". PLS. 6034 TAIT & ASSOC~TES. INC. DATE OF SURVEY, JUNE 2004 LAND OWNERS: ~o6m~i'iE,1~~):'~,,¡:;ii'¡~.,si,,*,C .'1,~~:,~~~~¡';rÆ:~1')'¡~~"ifi, '; ,~:,;,,:~~~,g:g,;~O:M~ LAND OWNERS: (^d~N~:~~-,;;~::~ f~À~'::,^,",,) "omw,," "."" N^'^~5W¿~~~¡Z~~~;~:"'" PREPARED FOR: '-'NNAR COMMCN"'E' ";:i,:t'gf'~,:~t' DEDICATION & EASEMENT NOTES: '",""-COW<NG 00,""""'"' """'" ""WN "'"-" """""W""'"""C"~"CH""_""'","'" 0 ~¡¡~'¡;'iPoi~c;;¡ ~t,;,g: '""" ON m m, @ ¡g~:~~~~:¡:;~",~~,~~'1~:E:¡,::~~~nCH @ ;~¡, "::;~ ;:¡,¡:':~;~c~:~"' MHO" WM'" """" @:::,~¡~~1:1'¡o::i,¡~","","'C5<AN",^" (þ :""o~¡~f"~;o,:~:,,\:I;;,~ ,"'"N m, "'~, <Ð :oi' ,~~,,',ir;~~N!o:1,;"¡,:'~¡g~~i':N ^,;,~,"::"" @ NUMBERED LO", VICINIT>' MAP "',w,,^" """ ~ ~""""^""" ,.- :~~:~o;,'~ --== "',^""' ,œ,~", ;~::;:,::,:¡~~ ~.."'~ """'~ """"" "",,"m MA~~~E,!£",!:,~F2'R I """"",,~"'e~_J """'" "'" <D' ^ , õ õ I ~ "'" "'" "" 0'" """m" ::;:~~:;" '" ~ ¡¡¡¡¡ ¡¡¡¡¡ ¡¡¡¡¡ """ """ """ LEGEND ~'w~._, ~"""'"""'-'I'< ---"'"""'51'< ~~,,~,~ ---"""'" - - - rn"", =- - - ~œ,^" ,- - Ö - ;:,;: :;::::::::~ 0 -~""w" ~""'-"" 'u ~ro"'" ,,~ _00 m. ""'" "/w .,m~-w^, = 'IT~ruoo~,@ PREPARED BY: !¡~!~ ~ ~11'1',~, n, II ~!~i~ ~ g , .- _~IO In Ju~lh (,I ~o ~H~.~8E '11r--- "'H-i : 1 r~ !¡¡ i !'gi - ',c' 1 ~I f'.- ! lO ',ii" CO' "~ CD~>- Ii'!,' '1:6 ~;! 11'1111~ .,.... ~o 11'[:': ' i~ . ::¡"'ú \1, ,,: . ': ,,",,", 0 ~m ~ In i '~ Ii iIi O¡,\%--_-"'f¡}i~':~ z~~~ ~ kl:"¡ !i !~¡I \~\... ,I l-o!~~~I~ iHII(i'~"-~T~ll'~~I~ ",t~\~" ;~ I :¡z~~;¡w",."" .,'m,,:""'~W",'" "'(:t\"-"",,ffi,! «O:«~;¡~~ ',.,',: ); ""~ ~ .."." \';;'~¡'¡"" ¡ ~~ ~~~ k!j' 'Õ~mcèL,:, ~~'\\'v>j¡j!¡¡¡!¡ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ i ~k f~~~='"!i~=~,~======,===~5"~~if'~===='=~= W¡§H~~""" ,."I",.~",~""",..~,~;:, ,~,.,lM ',~~~, >~w~ ~,;¡.,,'" >,"Ò "~\ -:;:()~ i~' , ff Ô ,~' I- ~~ ~ '-, ' cò Ii è- \\/, « ~z ~ , , I' è- .. ü¡¡: 1 ,¡,," c: ";\ I-~O: j ::.\~~\ ZzO i '"°'<",\\ W -~ , .JW'f~~~ ';~ I- ~~ --~~-------~ 1", , 4"'" I', 10 , <i-è~ ill i~ ŒJ I ~ ",-"'...°1>' Q C') 'I : ~;:: -.;¡ 'b~ '. V'" è- '0( CD 3 CD :~¡, '~'"~ 10 Ü è- 0 m "I . '" "~o -I,,' I, ~¡, : ; ,,#, ¡¡i ¡q ;:: ~~,~g¡: m I.,-t- ".. , ,,~.~ ~¡¡ ~~=-,--,-,-"'~, '""",- --,--'- -'- '_~J:l:f "I 3nN3^V ,1IH 03" ,o,,~, I "',OM' I ~Iw I: ¡;I~ wi <I @I~ ~Iw ~I~ ",I ~I> ~'Z 'I ~.~ ~I~ , 0010 1< "'I "'I I ~ ~ ~ ~ /'~ ~ ~~m~~ ~i~a~~ '0" "!ii' ~'8~EQ' .,,-"8 6§~§~~' ~i~d'~~~ .' Q~§'g~ lim~:~ ;~~o~o"8 ~~~~::;~ ~ 8 :z~~~~~ o<".~' N~b~- ê¡ ~~Ezo". ~.~~"~~ en~' ~. " v ~ ~ ~h , W£5T c~o~'1l ~¡J ~ ~,'" <t:co\'l\'l£ .. ;¡~ ~:~¡¡ -- I......." i~""'"" ¡ !!~bH2': lii¡i¡ii¡ """", ,! I, . .,' <° ~-~ ", ~! ¡. ¡: ;- ¡~ , , : .:~ ã I ~í~8.L " ~¡J'~~~ i¡l¡n!i~m 'I I I: ä :i'" , "',"~, , I " 're~' i, '~ l:;il" ~ , ~ \ t;¡ 1 0 i~ LOTE '~1~~r¡~' ,""'-, "'~"'" "rn,", " '",-",(,'" " mo ",")"",""-".("",..,,,,")AA' TENTATIVE TRACT NO 16857 ¡t::'~~¡E=\'ò¡;',:'ó\u~~"¡SoS;,:,~',gE~~~':O . ~ii~¡¿tE~~~'~'~Y: ~;i?~:~iF'~~' ",""CO """""00 0 200 """ "" "" , , , '---" SHEET 3 OF 3 'O", ""'CE. ,oe"" ,""S ","""","" " """""O S "TIE"" (^"-""",'""'-""'"O,,""') SEE PAGE 2 OETA" "8" IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY "'CfiAEL ""ON, PL.S, 6034 TAIT. ASSOClATES, INC, DATE OF SURVEY, JUNE 2004 AT & S,F, RAILROAD RfW ------ -::-------------.- EDI~~Rf~:~~::- AVENUE ~~ ~ -- ~" ,~"' O\:~ .,~' ,*~of'C,C"" -J'",( , "O:'$~:t,~"'O ~c, ¥.~,~~;'-.¡C' ,,<?~~f ,,~\' .o ""O~,~'~ V.",,>} , "'P~'.",.." "'" '00 ""O""""""'" ,.,.00 ::~:\':';: 'oo;:~~;: ,~^'" 'oo'^"" ""'" """" """" ,"mC5,""~^' , ","co," ""u",,," mm", ATTACHMENT C City Council Resolution No. 05-77 I. RESOLUTION NO. 05-77 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN THE CITY COUNCIL FINDING THAT THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DISPOSAL AND REUSE OF MCAS TUSTIN (UFEIS/FEIR") IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROJECT EIS/EIR FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16857 FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES AND ALL APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED WITH RESOLUTIONS OF APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: A. That Tentative Tract Map 16857 for conveyance purposes (Planning Areas 4 and 5) 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/EIR is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The FEIS/FEIR considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin, including development of residential uses within Planning Area 21, which were considered by the City Council on February 22, 2005 with the development application for the project area (Tentative Tract Map 16582); and, C. That an environmental checklist, attached as Exhibit A hereto, was prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the Project. The environmental analysis checklist demonstrates that the proposed conveyance map has no potential for environmental impacts and all impacts for development of the site were addressed by the certified FEIS/FEIR, and all applicable mitigation measures in the FEIS/FEIR will be implemented through the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project previously adopted with City Council Resolution 05-38. II. The City Council hereby finds that the project is within the scope of the previously approved Program FEIS/FEIR and that pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15168 (c) and 15162, no new effects could occur and no new mitigation measures would be required. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. Resolution No, 05-77 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 20th day of June, 2005. LOU BONE MAYOR PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF ORANGE) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS 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. 05-77 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 20th day of June, 2005, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION NO. 05-77 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST For Projects With Previously Certified/Approved Environmental Documents: Environmental Impact StatementfEnvironmental Impact Report (EISfEIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin This checklist and the following evaluation of environmental impacts (Attachment I to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 3949) takes into consideration the preparation of an environmental docwnent prepared at an earlier stage of the proposed project. The checklist and evaluation evaluate the adequacy of the earlier docwnent pursuant to Section 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. A. BACKGROUND Project Titie(s): Lead Agency: Tentative Tract Map 16857 City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Project Location: Minoo Ashabi Phone: (714) 573-3126 Planning Area 4 and 5, MCAS-Tustin Specific Plan, bounded by the Edinger Avenue on the north, North Loop Road on the south, existing industrial business park on the west, and West connector on the east. Moffett Meadows Partners, LLC c/o Lennar Communities 25 Enterprise, Suite 300 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Project Sponsor's Name and Address: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Low Density Residential, Planning Area 4 Mediwn Density Residential, Planning Area 5 Project Description: Approval of Tentative Tract Maps 16857 for subdivision of 105.5 acre into fifteen (15) nwnbered parcels and five (5) lettered parcels for conveyance purposes only. Surrounding Uses: North: Edinger Avenue, self-storage and retail uses and residential uses East: Vacant - MCAS Tustin Planning Area 7 - Village Service (retail uses) South: Vacant - MCAS Tustin Planning Area 6 - Urban Regional park West: Industrial Business Park - Industrial Zoning (M) Previous Environmental Documentation: Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Program FEISfEIR) 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. OLand Use and Planning OPopulation and Housing OGeology and Soils OHydrology and Water Quality OAir Quality OTransportation & Circulation OBiological Resources OMineral Resources OAgricuitural Resources OHazards and Hazardous Materials ONoise OPublic Services OUtilities and Service Systems OAesthetics OCultural Resources ORecreation OMandatory Findings of Significance C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: 0 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ~ I 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 I) 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. 0 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 I) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Preparer: ~~ Minoo Ashabi, A oclate Planner :?,¿; "m~:ll ßß,~ Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director Date: ~-tP.t>S- Date ¿. "I; . ð5" D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS See Attached EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous I, AESTHETICS - Would the project: Impact Impacts Analysis a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 ~ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? 0 0 ~ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality ofthe site and its sUIToundings? 0 0 ~ d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 0 0 i:8J 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? 0 0 i:8J b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 0 0 ~ c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 0 0 ~ III. AIR OUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 0 0 i:8J b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 0 0 ~ 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)? 0 0 ~ d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 0 0 ~ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 0 0 ~ - ---------'-. 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 ofFish 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 ofFish and Game or U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064,5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: New SignifICant Impact More Severe Impacrs No Substantial Change From Previous Analysis 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 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- D D IZI ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? D D [8] iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? D D IZI iv) Landslides? D D [8] b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? D D IZI 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 D [8] d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-I-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? D D [8] e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 0 0 [8] 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? 0 0 [8] 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? D D [8] 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 D [8] d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 0 0 [8] e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? D D [8] 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? 0 0 [8] -----~------ --------------------- --------------- ------,---------- No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an Impact Impacts Analysis adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 0 0 ~ h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk ofloss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 0 0 ~ VIII, HYDROLOGY AND WATER OUALITY: - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 0 0 ~ 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 dTOp to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 0 0 ~ c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? 0 0 ~ 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? 0 0 ~ 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? 0 0 ~ f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 0 0 ~ g) Place housing within a IOO-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 0 0 ~ h) Place within a IOO-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 0 0 ~ i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure ora levee or dam? 0 0 ~ j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 0 0 ~ IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 ~ No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or Impact Impacts Analysis 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? 0 0 ~ c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 0 0 ~ 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? 0 0 ~ 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? 0 0 ~ XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 0 0 ~ b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? 0 0 ~ c) A substantial pennanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 0 0 ~ d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 0 0 ~ 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? 0 0 ~ t) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excess noise levels? 0 0 ~ XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infTastructure)? 0 0 ~ b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 0 0 ~ 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, RECREA nON - 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. TRANSPORTATIONrrRAFFIC - 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? t) Result in inadequate parking capacity? No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis 0 0 ¡g¡ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ¡g¡ ¡g¡ ¡g¡ ¡g¡ ¡g¡ 0 0 ¡g¡ 0 0 ¡g¡ 0 0 ¡g¡ 0 0 ¡g¡ 0 0 ¡g¡ 0 0 ¡g¡ 0 0 ¡g¡ 0 0 ¡g¡ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e,g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis 0 0 ~ XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 0 0 ~ b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 0 0 ~ 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? 0 0 ~ d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 0 0 ~ e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 0 0 ~ f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 0 0 ~ g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 0 0 ~ XVII. MANDATORY FINpINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality ofthe 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? 0 0 ~ b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project 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)? 0 0 ~ c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 0 0 ~ -..--.----- ,--------..--.-..... -...-......-..,-........---.---...-... ..".o.. -,.-.... ATTACHMENT 1 TO EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 05-77 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 16857 FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES (MCAS TUSTIN DISPOSITION PARCELS 23& 24) PLANNING AREAS 4 & 5 - MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN BACKGROUND The project site is comprised of 105.5 acres (gross) within a Planning Areas 4 & 5 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and generally bounded by the Edinger Avenue on the north, North Loop Road on the south, existing industrial park on the west, and West connector on the east. Access to the site is provided mainly from Edinger Avenue Tentative Tract Map 16581 for development of the site with 1,077 residential units was approved by City Council on February 22, 2005. On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact StatementJEnvironmental Impact Report for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEISÆIR). An environmental check list was prepared for the development of the site that concluded no additional environmental impacts for the project than the impacts considered and addressed in the FEISÆlR. The proposed project includes subdivision of a 105.5-acre site area into fifteen (15) numbered parcels and five (5) lettered parcels for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed with the project and therefore no environmental impacts are anticipated. The following infonnation provides background support for the conclusions identified in the Environmental Analysis Checklist. I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development plan is proposed with the subdivision and therefore the project will have no substantial adverse effects on a scenic vista, The proposed project has no potential for substantially damaging scenic resources, degrade the existing visual character, or create a new source of substantial light or glare. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. --,-- ---------------- ------.---- ---- II, III. Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 2 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan 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 subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development is associated with the project. The project would not convert prime fannland, unique fannland or fannland of statewide importance as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Fannland 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 subdivision involve other changes in the existing environment that could result in the conversion of fannland 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 FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan 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 Attachment I to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 3 ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project has no effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, or a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The conveyance map will not interfere with movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. The FEISÆIR 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. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the site. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific 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) Inteñere 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? Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 4 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? t) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anctiicpated. The project has no effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, or a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The conveyance map will not interfere with movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. The FEISfEIR 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. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: FEISfEIR for Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan v. CULTURAL RESOURCES: - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project has no potential to change the significance of a historical resource, or destroy a unique paleontological resource. The environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected fÌ'om the analysis previously completed in the FEISfEIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISfEIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. ----- --------"" Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 5 Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: . Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Strong seismic ground shaking? . . Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? . b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-I-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The FEISÆIR 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." In addition, since no development is proposed, the project has no potential to result in soil erosion, development on expansive soil, or expose people to risk of loss or injury involving rupture of an earthquake fault or liquefaction. An environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Attachment I to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 6 Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan 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? t) 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 ofloss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only, No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. Environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. 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, the project site is located within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan; however, it is at least four (4) miles from John Wayne Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 7 Airport, and does not lie within a flight approach or departure corridor and thus does not pose an aircraft-related safety hazard for future resid~nts or workers. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISfEIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? t) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a tOO-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 tOO-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? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated, The proposed project will not impact groundwater in the deep regional aquifer or shallow aquifer. The project is not Attachment I to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 8 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 proposed project susceptible to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Consequently, no substantial change is expected ITom the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Consequently, no substantial change is expected ITom the analysis previously completed in theFEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISfEIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan 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 proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project will not divide an established community, and does not modify Tentative Tract Map 16581 as approved by the Tustin City Council on February 22, 2005. Also, the proposed project does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, or conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan. Environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISfEIR for Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 9 a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The proposed project will not result in the loss of known mineral resources. An environmental analysis for development plans was prepared with the proposal and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected ITom the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan XI. NOISE: Would the project: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? t) 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? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no noise impacts are anticipated. The proposed project will not expose person to noise levels in excess of local standards, or excessive ground borne vibration, nor does the project has a potential for substantial temporary increase in ambient Attachment I to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 10 noise levels. In addition, the project site is located within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan; however, it is at least four (4) miles from John Wayne Airport, and the site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, The environmental analysis for development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan XII. POPULATION & HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes oJÙY. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project has no potential to induce population growth, displace existing housing, or displace substantial number of people. The environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Attachment I to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page II 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 subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project will not impact governmental facilities or public services. The environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISIEIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISIEIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISIEIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project will not increase use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or require construction of recreational facilities. The environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22,2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISIEIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISIEIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISIEIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin Parks and Recreation Services Department Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 12 Tustin General Plan xv. TRANSPORTATIONffRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is suhstantial 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? t) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? supporting alternative The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project has no potential to cause an increase in traffic, or result in inadequate emergency access or parking capacity. The environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISÆIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISÆIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes, Sources: FEISÆIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 13 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? The proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project has no impacts on waste water treatment facilities, nor does the project require construction of new water, waste water and stonn drain facilities. The environmental analysis for development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEISfEIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISfEIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEISfEIR for Disposal and Reuse ofMCAS Tustin Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 05-77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 16857 Page 14 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? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes only. No impacts are anticipated and no impacts are anticipated. The environmental analysis for the development plans was prepared and adopted by the City Council on February 22, 2005. Consequently, no substantial change is expected nom the analysis previously completed in the FElSfEIR for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEISfEIR; these measures were included as conditions of approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FE1SfEIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 5-4 through 5-11) Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (pages 3-145 through 3-154). Tustin General Plan CONCLUSION The summary concludes that the proposed conveyance map will have no environmental impacts and all environmental effects of the development project were previously examined in the FEISfEIR for MCAS Tustin, and 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. S:ICddIMINOOIMCAS Tustin\Planning Area - Lennar&William LynnlConveyance Map SquarelColumbus Square-Initial Study,doc ATTACHMENT D City Council Resolution No. 05-78 RESOLUTION NO. 05-78 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16857 TO SUBDIVIDE 105.5 ACRES INTO FIFTEEN (15) NUMBERED LOTS AND FIVE (5) LETTERED LOTS FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY (MCAS TUSTIN REUSE PLAN PARCEL 35 AND PARCEL 36) The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. A. The City Council finds and determines as follows: That a proper application for Tentative Tract Map No. 16857 was submitted by Moffett Meadows Partners LLC requesting subdivision of a 105.5-acre site, into fifteen (15) numbered lots and five (5) lettered lots for conveyance purposes within Planning Areas 4 and 5 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan on MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan (Disposal Parcels 23 and Parcel 24), generally bounded by Edinger Avenue on the north, West Connector Road to the east, an industrial office park to the west, and Valencia/North Loop Road to the south; B. As conditioned, the proposed subdivision will be in conformance with the Tustin General Plan, MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Code; C. That the site is located in Planning Areas 4 and 5 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, which is designated for Low Density and Medium Density Residential on MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan Disposal Parcel 23 and Parcel 24. The site was found to be physically suitable for the type of development and density of development at the time of approval for Tentative Tract Map 16581; D. That a Final Environmental Impact Statement!Environmental Impact Report for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR) was prepared and certified, which considered the development of low density development within Planning Areas 4 and 5. An Environmental Analysis Checklist was prepared for the proposed development of the site, which was adopted by City Council on February 22, 2005 that found that all potential impacts of the project were addressed by the certified FEIS/EIR and no additional impacts were identified; all applicable mitigation measures in the FEIS/EIR for development of the site were conditions of approval for Tentative Tract Map 16581; E. The proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed with the project. An Environmental Analysis Checklist has been prepared that concludes that no Resolution No, 05-78 TIM 16857 Page 2 substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. The City Council has adopted Resolution No. 05-77 finding that the proposed Tentative Tract Map 16857 for conveyance purposes will have no environmental impacts and that the FEIS/EIR for the MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan and Specific Plan adequately addressed all potential impacts related to the project; and, F. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said map on June 13, 2005, by the Planning Commission and on June 20,2005 by the City Council. II. The City Council herby approves Tentative Tract Map 16857 for the subdivision of a 105.5 (gross) acre site into fifteen (15) numbered lots and five (5) lettered lots for conveyance purposes, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council held on the 20th day of June, 2005, LOU BONE MAYOR PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF ORANGE) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS 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. 05-78 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 20th day of June, 2005, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER CITY CLERK --.- ----,------- --.----,-------------.-- --------- - --- ------ --- -------- ---------------- GENERAL (1 ) 1.1 (1) 1.2 (1) 1.3 (1 ) 1.4 (1) 1.5 EXHIBIT A - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16857 RESOLUTION NO. 05-78 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Within 24 months from tentative map approval, the subdivider shall record with appropriate agencies, a final map prepared in accordance with subdivision requirements of the Tustin Municipal Code, the State Subdivision Map Act, and applicable conditions contained herein unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 9335.08 of the Tustin Municipal Code. Approval of Resolution No. 05-78 is contingent upon the applicant returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk-Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval" form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. The final tract map shall be recorded in accordance with submitted maps dated June 2, 2005, and all applicable requirements of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, Tustin City Code, and applicable policies and guidelines. All conditions of approval herein, as applicable, shall be satisfied prior to recordation of a final map or as specified herein. The subdivider shall comply with all applicable requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act, and the City's Subdivision Ordinance, the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, the Tustin City Code, applicable City of Tustin guidelines and standards and applicable mitigation measures identified in the certified FEIS/EIR, and other agreements with the City of Tustin unless otherwise modified by this Resolution. Prior to final map approval, the subdivider shall submit: A. B. A current title report; and, A duplicate mylar of the Final Map, or 8% inch by 11 inch transparency of each map sheet and "as built" grading, landscape, and improvement plans prior to Certificate of Acceptance SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (2) CECA MITIGATION (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (4) DESIGN REVIEW (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (7) PC/CC POLICY ..* EXCEPTION Exhibit A Resolution No, 05-78 TIM 16857 Page 2 (1 ) (*) (*) (*) (*) 1.6 1,7 1.8 1,9 The applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project or from any potential flooding impacts from the adjacent Peters Canyon Flood Control Channel. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. All conditions related to development of the site as approved by Planning Commission Resolution No. 3953 and City Council Resolution Nos. 05-38 and 05-40 remain applicable for development of any portions of the site shown by Tentative Tract Map 16857 for conveyance purposes. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall provide recorded quitclaim deeds for conveyance of IRP-16 and UST-268, Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall provide documents in form of a recorded quitclaim deed or a letter from SCE that the twenty- five (25) foot easement has been formally vacated. All reference to the abandoned easement outside tract boundaries on adjoining parcels shall be removed prior to approval of the final map, 1,10 "As noted in Condition 2.4 of Resolution No. 05-40, prior to recordation of the first final map including a conveyance map, or first building permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant (Moffett Meadows Partners, LLC) shall enter into a Housing Agreement with the City to ensure implementation of the Affordable Housing requirements of the Specific Plan, the City's Density Bonus Ordinance, the City approved "Affordable Housing Plan, Density Bonus Application," and the City's affordable Housing Policy and compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 33413(b)(2). The development shall include 266 affordable units in Planning Areas 4 and 5 including twenty-five (25) affordable units transferred from Planning Area 21 to Planning Area 5. In addition, prior to City approval of the first final conveyance map, Moffett Meadows Partners, LLC (applicant) shall enter into a City-approved Assignment Agreement with each builder/purchaser, which Assignment Agreement shall be recorded immediately after the final map is recorded and effective upon transfer of title to each builder/purchaser. Exhibit A Resolution No, 05-78 TIM 16857 Page 3 GRANTS IN FEE AND DEDICATIONS (1 ) 2.1 The proposed tentative tract map is for conveyance purposes only and requires no dedication; however all easements and dedications applicable with approval of Tentative Tract Map 16581 would be required with development of this site.