Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 TTM 17026Report to the Planning Commission DATE: JUNE 26, 2006 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17026 FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY APPLICANT: TUSTIN LEGACY COMMUNITY PARTNERS OWNERS: CITY OF TUSTIN TUSTIN PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ITEM #2 LOCATION: PROJECT SITE GENERALLY BOUNDED BY EDINGER AVENUE TO THE NORTH, JAMBOREE ROAD TO THE EAST, BARRANCA PARKWAY TO THE SOUTH, AND RED HILL AVENUE TO THE WEST. GENERAL PLAN: MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING: MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, AND 15 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIS/EIR) AND ADDENDUM CERTIFIED ON JANUARY 16, 2001 AND APRIL 3, 2006, RESPECTIVELY, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE MCAS TUSTIN REUSE AND SPECIFIC PLAN, ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE. THE PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES WILL NOT HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND NO ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS WILL BE PREPARED. PROJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17026 SUBDIVIDING 805.5 ACRES INTO THIRTY-SIX (36) PARCELS FOR FINANCING AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES ONLY. That the Planning Commission: Planning Commission Report Tentative Tract Map 17026 June 26, 2006 Page 2 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4026 recommending that the City Council find that the proposed Tentative Tract Map 17026 for conveyance purposes is within the scope of the adopted FEIS/EIR for the Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin Reuse and Specific Plan and will have no environmental impacts; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 4027 recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 17026 to subdivide approximately 805.5 acres into thirty-six (36) parcels for financing and conveyance purposes only. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The project site is comprised of approximately 805.5 acres within Planning Areas 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and generally bounded by Edinger Avenue to the north, Jamboree Road to the east, Barranca Parkway to the south, and Red Hill Avenue to the west. Tentative Tract Map 17026 is also referred to as the Sector A Map which is intended to define parcels to be conveyed to the Tustin Legacy Community Partners as agreed upon in Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) 06-01 executed on May 3, 2006. Following the final approval of the said map, Sector B and Sector C Maps would be submitted to further subdivide the properties to support development. The proposed Tentative Tract Map would subdivide approximately 805.5 acres into thirty-six (36) parcels for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed with the project and therefore no environmental impacts are anticipated. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). An environmental check list was prepared for the proposed project that concluded no additional environmental impacts would occur from approval of the project (Exhibit 1 of Resolution No. 4026). No development is proposed; therefore, no environmental impacts are anticipated. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. A decision to approve the proposed project may be supported by the findings contained in Resolution Nos. 4026 and 4027. a&IA44�' , — Jus' a Willkom Senior Planner Fli�12�a z "_V a�y Elizabeth A. Binsack Community Development Director Planning Commission Report Tentative Tract Map 17026 June 26, 2006 Page 3 Attachments: A - Location Map B - Tentative Tract Map 17026 C - Resolution No. 4026 D - Resolution No. 4027 SACdd\PCREPORT12006\TTM 17026 (Conveyance Map-TLCP).doc ATTACHMENT A Location Map \� IWI- ATTACHMENT B Tentative Tract Map 17026 r y, 1�4t Y (Y�YtS {t Ip � '; alait; r6 �;dij4`(ppfeigt e:}8''Ilip��( 4rA Y �qY Itl iyhd Q kt I 8p, °PY@`YIBAI ij��A tBiA 1 Sp� { B=e { B� Sdi° 1 S 6•(Pi h d ti" pe7 r Iae Si 4IIS�(�r "ifi e•`r'Steff 4'! t >!` t 9�1 `7 fg1 tft Y V fY (4 IfY}`Yr j�9'i � i"i Y1{ f 3 heY e Y A 8 fFli Y I AAC t{SY 4r, A{. G '(? 88 I t! p a afi Yr 4, gg �9tt� T � rP�'{�� aES6ay4 If 8Y t418 •1 = ` Q4.Y tit' 1t',44t.t f 8`A t 4- tti 4` �' 1 A ;li; }t` A � � ! �AaA fi i R6i 1 Y7t( i (6 i 8t.e j� . n•= 8Yr f .j q` rii Y 6A yay $ Y pap`�f(4yy Riq e t S�. t yy{ ¢ i I441�i414I P r6 r i4P� gf�Ii rs4@ Y4(( r114 (YY([ WAS SIeBYYi 9$PIS IdPI, IYrIIiY� 4�YIg1(IY{ IP�3tY.Y 1�` p . h e it Pg 9�4II qVinE 1 t ^} 3�. '^ -�... �'�81y - �,�q �� itr '-'ea• as s.a.e.caacaa s 4 '•^`` v = i' II a� Y �� p. r� `�, � `� 1- i i;� a i i i i t t S i i i i i =;. t Ill I �'" n. _° jIPPPIP 4 4441 PP .,' I ; , 1, ..�,� � � � 444i44PtP4t4 PPP44 3 L" t t44 4 t44t i t 9 ft9 : f.if ti 1 � 1°v 1 1 1 •.z.. i ti, F t � �p J `� � Ij f"k1,�I.P ;3 NQS, _i itiyvr �wnyaM^'y�•�.�f�+y? �y�' ry) �r'i f'� 1i1�T u��"ka}i... !Y 11r -•"A-, 4 l t ��:Y9 jY ATTACHMENT C Resolution No. 4026 RESOLUTION NO. 4026 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL FIND THAT THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DISPOSAL AND REUSE OF MCAS TUSTIN ("FEIS/FEIR") AND ADDENDUM IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROJECT EIS/EIR FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17026 FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: A. That Tentative Tract Map 17026 for conveyance purposes (Planning Areas 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15) 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, an Addendum was certified on April 3, 2006. The FEIS/EIR is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The FEIS/FEIR and Addendum considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin, including the development of residential, commercial, office, and public uses within Planning Areas 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, ;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 Addendum. Il. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council find that the project is within the scope of the previously approved Program FEIS/FEIR and Addendum, and that pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15168 (c) and 15162, no new effects could occur and no new mitigation measures would be required. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. Resolution No. 4026 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 26th day of June, 2006. NATHAN MENARD Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4026duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 26th day of June, 2006. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION NO. 4026 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST For Projects With Previously Certified/Approved Environmental Documents: Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) and Addendum for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin This checklist and the following evaluation of environmental impacts (Attachment 1 of Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026) 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): Tentative Tract Map 17026 for Conveyance Purposes Lead Agency: City of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Matt West Phone: (714) 573-3118 Project Location: Planning Areas 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, MCAS -Tustin Specific Plan, generally bounded by Edinger Avenue to the north, Jamboree Road to the east, Barranca Parkway to the south, and Red Hill Avenue to the west. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Simon J. Wbitmey c/o Tustin Legacy Community Partners, LLC. 250 Commerce, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92602 General Plan Designation: MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Zoning Designation: Planning Areas 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 Project Description: Approval of Tentative Tract Maps 17026 to subdivide 805.5 gross acres for conveyance purposes only. Surrounding Uses: North: Residential and Commercial East: Residential, Commercial, and Industrial South: Commercial and Light Industrial West: Public & Institutional, and Industrial Previous Environmental Documentation: Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Program FEIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine I� Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin (State Clearinghouse #94071005) certified by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001, and an Addendum was certified by the Tustin City Council on April 3, 2006. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. Use and Planning ation and Housing oev and Soils lrology and Water Quality Quality asportation & Circulation HBiological Resources ❑Mineral Resources ❑Agricultural Resources C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑Hazards and Hazardous Materials ❑Noise ❑Public Services ❑Utilities and Service Systems ❑Aesthetics []Cultural Resources ❑Recreation ❑Mandatory Findings of Significance ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a 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 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Preparer: '"/4#11A Mat We sociate Planner Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS See Attached Date: Date 6 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS —Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? I11. 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? 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 Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ ED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ED ❑ ❑ ED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 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, venial 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? fj 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? Vl. 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 to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 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 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 Govemment Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 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? No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ M 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 OUALITY: — Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a I00 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING — Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES —Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE — Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome 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? 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excess noise levels? XII.POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ❑ No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result insubstantial 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/CRAFFIC — 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? ❑ ❑ No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact Impacts Analysis c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ❑ ❑ XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result insubstantial 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/CRAFFIC — 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? ❑ ❑ 11 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 11 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS — Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ❑ ❑ ED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ No Substantial New More Change From Significant Severe Previous Impact impacts Analysis ❑ ❑ ED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ATTACHMENT 1 TO EXHIBIT A OF RESOLUTION NO. 4026 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 17026 PLANNING AREAS 7, 8, 9,10,11, 12, 13,14, AND 15 - MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN BACKGROUND The project site is comprised of 805.5 acres (gross) within Planning Areas 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and generally bounded by Edinger Avenue to the north, Jamboree Road to the east, Barranca Parkway to the south, and Red Hill Avenue to the west. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). 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 FEIS/EIR and Addendum. The proposed project includes subdivision of the 805.5 gross acre area into thirty-six (36) parcels for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed with the project and therefore no environmental impacts are anticipated. The following information provides background support for the conclusions identified in the Environmental Analysis Checklist. I. AESTHETICS — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed subdivision is for financing and 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 FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: None Sources: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of WAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan Attachment t to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 2 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 ether 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 financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is associated with the project. The project would not convert prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland of statewide importance as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Managing and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use. Also, the property is not zoned for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract, nor does the proposed subdivision 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 and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required. No mitigation is required. Sources: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin 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? Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 3 e) Creat a objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The conveyance tentative tract map has no potential to violate air quality standards, or contribute to a cumulatively considerable increase of any criteria pollutant for the project region. The project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentration or create objectionable odor. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Tustin General Plan 1V. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: -Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 4 e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and 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 FEIS/EIR and Addendum found that implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan would not result in impacts to federally listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS 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 financing and 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. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required.• Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; these measures were included as conditions of Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 5 approval for development of the project. No mitigation measures are required for subdivision of the site for conveyance purposes. Sources: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS 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 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? c) 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 financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The FEIS/EIR and Addendum 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. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 6 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS 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? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The proposed subdivision is for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 7 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 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. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum 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? 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? Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page $ 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 financing and 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 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 muciflow. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum 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 financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. Also, the proposed project does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, or conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan. On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Reuse and Disposal of WAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). On April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin approved Zone Change 05-002, which generally adjusted Planning Area boundaries and Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17025 Page 9 redistributed and/or eliminated planned land uses within the Specific Plan area, and certified an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum. MitigationJMonitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Tustin General Plan X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The proposed subdivision is for financing and 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. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS 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? Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 10 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? fj 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 financing and 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 bome vibration, nor does the project has a potential for substantial temporary increase in ambient 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. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum 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 fuiancing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project has Attachment I to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 11 no potential to induce population growth, displace existing housing, or displace substantial number of people. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of WAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FE1S/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin MCAS Tustin Specific Plan 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 subdivision is for financing and conveyance purposes only. No development is proposed and no impacts are anticipated. The project will not impact governmental facilities or public services. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum 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? Attachment I to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 12 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 financing and 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. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan 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 proposed project is a request for subdivision of the site for financing and 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 of Attachment t to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 13 parking capacity. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Mitigation/Monitoring Required.• Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum 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: 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 financing and 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 storm drain facilities. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for MCAS Tustin. Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 14 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: FEIS/EIR and Addendum for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS 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 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 financing and conveyance purposes only. No impacts are anticipated and no impacts are anticipated. On January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Addendum, respectively, for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR). Mitigation/Monitoring Required.• Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum; 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: Field Observations FEIS/EIR and Addendum 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 Attachment 1 to Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4026 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Tentative Tract Map 17026 Page 15 CONCLUSION The summary concludes that the proposed financing and conveyance map will have no environmental impacts and all environmental effects of the development project were previously examined in the FEIS/EIR and Addendum for WAS 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. SACdd\MATIATustin Legacy\TTM 17026 (Sector A)\TCM 17026 Initial Sludy-analysis.doc ATTACHMENT D Resolution No. 4027 RESOLUTION NO. 4027 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17026 TO SUBDIVIDE 805.5 ACRES INTO THIRTY-SIX (36) LOTS FOR CONVEYANCE PURPOSES WITHIN PLANNING AREAS 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, AND 15 OF THE MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN, GENERALLY BOUNDED BY EDINGER AVENUE TO THE NORTH, JAMBOREE ROAD TO THE EAST, BARRANCA PARKWAY TO THE SOUTH, AND RED HILL AVENUE TO THE WEST. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Tentative Tract Map No. 17026 was submitted by Tustin Legacy Community Partners requesting subdivision of approximately 805.5 acres, into thirty-six (36) numbered lots for conveyance purposes within Planning Areas 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, generally bounded by Edinger Avenue to the north, Jamboree Road to the east, Barranca Parkway to the south, and Red Hill Avenue to the west; B. As conditioned, the proposed subdivision will be in conformance with the Tustin General Plan, MCAS Tustin Specific Plan; C. That the site is located in Planning Areas 7; 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan; D. That a Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum for the Reuse and Disposal of MCAS Tustin (FEIS/EIR) was prepared and certified on January 16, 2001 and April 3, 2006, respectively. E. The proposed subdivision is for conveyance purposes only. No development rights are associated with approval of this conveyance map. An Environmental Analysis Checklist has been prepared that concludes that no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. The Planning Commission has adopted Resolution No. 4026 finding that the proposed Tentative Tract Map 17026 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, Resolution No. 4027 TTM 17026 Page 2 F. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said map on June 26, 2006, by the Planning Commission. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 17026 for the subdivision of approximately 805.5 acres into thirty-six (36) lots for conveyance purposes, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 26th day of June, 2006. NATHAN MENARD Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that 1 am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4027 duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 26th day of June, 2006. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17026 RESOLUTION NO. 4027 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL (1) 1.1 While pursuant to the subdivision requirements of the Tustin Municipal Code and the State Subdivision Map Act ("Subdivision Governmental Requirements"), the subdivider would normally have up to 24 months from tentative map approval to record a Final Map; however, the subdivider shall record a Final Map in compliance with all Subdivision Governmental Requirements and all applicable conditions contained herein and within the schedule of performance and pursuant to provisions contained in Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) 06-01 dated and executed May 3, 2006. Failure to record a Final Map consistent with the provisions of DDA 06-01 shall result in Tentative Tract Map 17026 approval becoming null and void. (1) 1.2 Approval of Tentative Tract Map 17026 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. (1) 1.3 The final tract map shall be recorded in accordance with submitted maps dated June 26, 2006, 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. (1) 1.4 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. (1) 1.5 Prior to final map approval, the subdivider shall submit: A. A current title report; and, B. A duplicate mylar of the Final Map, or 8'% inch by 11 inch transparency of each map sheet and prior to Certificate of Acceptance Exhibit A Resolution No. 4027 TTM 17026 Page 2 (1) 1.6 Final Map 17026 is a Sector A Map under the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan for financing and conveyance purposes only, except as may be identified pursuant to this Resolution No. 4027. Approval of the tentative map is not an approval for conveyance of any property. Conveyance of property to the subdivider shall be pursuant to provisions of DDA 06-01, and as approved by the City. The Subdivider shall also not encumber any parcels shown on the Tentative Tract Map without having an ownership interest conveyed to the Subdivider by the City, and then only subject to the written consent of the City in its sole discretion. All mortgages shall be subject to and subordinate to DDA 06-01, the City's Right of Reversion, any Special Restrictions, and Master Association Documents, the Ground Lease and any Vertical Builder covenant, conditions and restrictions. (1) 1.7 The subdivider shall not enter into any binding sale, transfer, or rental agreement on any parcel shown on Tract Map 17026 until recordation of a Sector B Map. (1) 1.8 Tentative Tract Map or any subsequent Final Maps recorded as a result of Tentative Map or Final Map 17026, grants no development rights with the exception that deconstruction, demolition and mass grading activities on the property may be approved by the city subject to all government requirements as such are defined in DDA 06-01 dated and executed May 3, 2006, until recordation of a Sector A Map as identified in DDA 06-01 and pursuant to procedures identified in the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. (1) 1.9 Pursuant to Section 8.3.2 of DDA 06-01, subdivider shall be required to dedicate to or at the direction of the City, on each subsequent Sector B and Sector C Map, all required dedications as described in DDA 06-01 and otherwise required or approved by the City, including but not limited to the following, all as collectively referred to, in DDA 06-01 as the "Dedication Parcels": a) Provided such property has previously been conveyed to the Developer, approximately 50 acres of the Project as educational facilities, including a 40 -acre high school in Neighborhood D and a 10 acre elementary school in Neighborhood G; provided, however, that the elementary school site may be expanded, at the option of the City, by an additional five (5) acres, subject to successful negotiation between the City and Tustin Unified School District; provided further, that the Developer shall not be required to provide additional open space to accommodate such five (5) acre increase to the educational facilities. In the event that the ten (10) acre elementary school site is expanded by five (5) acres in accordance with the above Section, such five (5) acre parcel shall be Exhibit A Resolution No. 4027 TTM 17026 Page 3 accommodated out of the 5.3 acre neighborhood park located in Neighborhood G; b) Land for right-of-way areas in favor of the public for streets and utilities; c) Land for public parks, public or community facilities, open spaces, public trails and/or greenbelt areas to be publicly owned and maintained (and easements for public access and use related to portions of the Property to be privately owned and maintained for private parks, open space, trails and/or greenbelt areas pursuant to Section 8.15 of DDA 06-01); d) Land for the location of five (5) water wells, including access, pipeline and maintenance easements for the same in the approximate vicinity of Barranca Parkway pursuant to the Specific Plan; e) Land to be used as additional right-of-way for widening of the Barranca Channel and the Santa Ana Santa Fe Channel pursuant to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan; and f) Land as otherwise set forth in the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan or the Entitlements. (1) 1.10 For any subsequent dedications required by subdivider pursuant to DDA 06-01, the developer required dedications shall be in consideration of the City's entry into DDA 06-01 and there shall be no adjustment of purchase price for any phase, or requirement that the City pay any fee or other consideration in respect to dedication of the Dedication Parcels. (1) 1.11 The DDA 06-01 shall continue in full force and effect without defaults and all obligations under DDA 06-01, as applicable, shall continue to be met by Developer prior to final map approval. (1) 1.12 Prior to approval of the Final Tract Map 17026, the Subdivider shall submit closures for all parcels to verify area as shown, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. (1) 1.13 Prior to the approval of Final Tract Map 17026, the Subdivder shall re- submit Tentative Tract Map 17026 and ensure the legal descriptions shown are consistent with the approved DDA and ALTA, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. (1) 1.14 Prior to the approval of Final Tract Map 17026, the Subdivider shall execute a monumentation agreement and furnish the monumentation Exhibit A Resolution No. 4027 TTM 17026 Page 4 bond as required by the City Engineer and subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (2) CEQA MITIGATION (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODES (7) PC/CC POLICY (4) DESIGN REVIEW a a a EXCEPTION