Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 APPROVE PLANS AND SPECS FOR THE ALLEY GROVE PROMENADEAGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2022 TO: MATTHEW S. WEST, CITY MANAGER FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR THE ALLEY GROVE PROMENADE PROJECT, CIP 20084 SUMMARY The plans and specifications for the Alley Grove Promenade, CIP No. 20084, have been substantially completed pending final approval by the City Engineer. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: 1.Appropriate $500,000 from Land Sale Proceeds Fund (Fund 189); 2.Adopt Resolution No. 22-56 approving the plans and specifications for the Alley Grove Promenade, CIP No. 20084; and 3.Authorize the City Clerk to advertise to receive bids, subject to the approval by the City Engineer. FISCAL IMPACT The FY 2022-23 Capital Improvement Program budget includes $2,500,000 for construction of the Alley Grove Promenade. The project is funded with $2,180,000 from the MCAS Backbone Infrastructure Fee Fund (Fund 187) and $320,000 from the Land Sale Proceeds Fund (Fund 189). The engineer’s estimated construction cost is $2.7 million, which has increased from an initial preliminary cost at the concept stage to the current construction document stage due to 1) additional refinement of the plans, 2) the addition of a new recreation area, and 3) inflationary escalations in material and labor costs. To fully fund the project and ensure conservative project contingency, staff is requesting an additional $500,000 appropriation from the Land Sale Proceeds Fund (Fund 189) for this project in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget for a total estimated construction cost of $3,000,000, which includes a 10% construction contingency. CORRELATION TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN The Alley Grove Promenade project contributes to the fulfillment of the City’s Strategy Plan Goal A: Economic and Neighborhood Development. Specifically, the project implementation of Strategy 1, which among other items, is to develop critical phases of Tustin Legacy and Strategy 8, create linkages between parts of the community through a variety of means, such as bike lanes and greenbelts. DocuSign Envelope ID: 4512D4FB-31FF-48B0-94B5-042F3B7A8F3A Agenda Item 8 Reviewed: City Manager ______ Finance Director DocuSign Envelope ID: F2DE604F-0EE9-4058-B6F8-1D182B4737DADocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Alley Grove Promenade, CIP No 20084 November 15, 2022 Page 2 DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND The Alley Grove Promenade project is an approximately 2.8-acre open space pedestrian walkway/multimodal connection from Armstrong Avenue to Tustin Ranch Road through Neighborhood D South at Tustin Legacy. It will link the Flight office campus to the District shopping center and also serve as a buffer between vacant property and The Landing residential project consisting of 400 homes currently under construction. The Alley Grove Promenade is named to reflect the landscape theme of the in-line stands of canopy trees that will grow perpendicular to the promenade pathway reminiscent of a grove. The promenade will be lined with townhomes and flats on the adjacent Landing development and serve as both a pedestrian walkway and a passive shaded respite area with site furniture and enhanced landscaping. The project will also include a day-use only active sports court area with two pickle ball courts, half-court basketball and a bocce ball court at the corner of Armstrong Avenue and Flight Way. The tentative schedule for construction of this project is as follows: • Authorization to Advertise for Bids ...................................................... 11/15/2022 • First Legal Advertisement .................................................................... 01/05/2023 • Second Legal Advertisement .............................................................. 01/12/2023 • Tentative Bid Opening ......................................................................... 02/07/2023 • Tentative Award of Contract ................................................................ 03/07/2023 • Tentative Start Construction ................................................................. April 2023 • Estimated Completion of Construction ........................................ December 2023 Douglas S. Stack, P.E. Christopher Koster Director of Public Works/City Engineer Director of Economic Development Attachment(s): 1. Resolution No. 22-56 2. Location Map DocuSign Envelope ID: 4512D4FB-31FF-48B0-94B5-042F3B7A8F3ADocuSign Envelope ID: F2DE604F-0EE9-4058-B6F8-1D182B4737DADocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. 22-56 DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 __________________ Resolution 22-56 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 22-56 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT THE FINAL JOINT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (MCAS TUSTIN FEIS/EIR), AS AMENDED BY SUPPLEMENT AND ADDENDUMS, IS ADEQUATE TO SERVE AS THE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR THE PROPOSED ALLEY GROVE PROMENADE PROJECT (CIP 20084), AN APPROXIMATELY 2.8-ACRE ENHANCED WALKWAY PROMENADE LOCATED WITHIN PLANNNG AREAS 8, 13, AND 14 OF NEIGHBORHOOD D, TUSTIN LEGACY SPECIFIC PLAN AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE ALLEY GROVE PROMENADE PROJECT, CIP NO. 20084, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS WHEREAS, the project would include an enhanced walkway promenade, located within an approximate 2.8-acre area, within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan boundaries and is located south of Flight Way between Armstrong Avenue and Compass Avenue in Lot 1 of Tract No. 18197 within Planning Areas 8, 13, and 14 of Neighborhood D, Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. WHEREAS, the enhanced walkway promenade is adjacent to The Landing housing development and will be lined with townhomes and flats and serve as both a pedestrian walkway and a passive shaded respite area with site furniture and enhanced landscaping and will also include a day-use only active sports court area with two pickle ball courts, half-court basketball and a bocce ball court at the corner of Armstrong Avenue and Flight Way. WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California to contract for the construction of the Alley Grove Promenade Project, CIP No. 20084; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has presented plans and specifications for the construction of said work; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin. On December 6, 2004, the City of Council adopted Resolution No. 04-76 approving a Supplement to the FEIS/EIR for the extension of Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and the future alignment of Valencia North Loop Road. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. And, on May 13, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-32 approving a second Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. On July 5, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 17- 23 approving a second Supplement to the FEIS/EIR. The 2001 FEIS/EIR document, the supplements, and addenda are collectively referred to herein as the “FEIS/EIR.” The FEIS/EIR along with its Addenda and Supplements is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEIS/EIR, Addenda and Supplements considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former MCAS, Tustin; and DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 __________________ Resolution 22-56 Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the proposed project, Exhibit A, that concluded no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the approved FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin and none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to utilities and service systems. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed; and WHEREAS, a Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program and Findings of Overriding Considerations were adopted for the FEIS/EIR and shall apply to the Project, as applicable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that 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 15162 and 15168, no new effects could occur and no new mitigation measures would be required. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that that the plans and specifications presented by the City Engineer are hereby approved as the plans and specifications for: Alley Grove Promenade Project CIP No. 20084 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for the performance of the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications; DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 __________________ Resolution 22-56 Page 3 of 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Tustin held on the 15th day of November, 2022. AUSTIN LUMBARD Mayor ATTEST: ______________________ ERICA N. YASUDA, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Erica N. Yasuda, 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 is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 22-56 was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 15th day of November, 2022 by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: _________________________________ COUNCILMEMBER NOES: _________________________________ COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: _________________________________ COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: _________________________________ ____________________________ ERICA N. YASUDA, City Clerk Exhibit A – Environmental Checklist DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 RESOLUTION NO. 22-56 EXHIBIT A ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Appendix G (Environmental Checklist Form) CITY OF TUSTIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714)573-3100 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST For Projects with Previously Certified/Approved Environmental Documents: Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin The following checklist takes into consideration the preparation of an environmental document or documents prepared at an earlier stage of the proposed project. This checklist evaluates the adequacy of the earlier document(s) pursuant to Section 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. A.BACKGROUND Project Title: Tustin Legacy Neighborhood “D” South Alley Grove Promenade Lead Agency: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Irma Huitron, Assistant Director Community Development Department – Planning Phone: (714)573-3035 Project Location: The project site is located within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan boundaries and is located south of Flight Way between Armstrong Avenue and Compass Avenue in Lot 1 of Tract No. 18197 within Planning Areas 8, 13, and 14 of Neighborhood D, Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 General Plan Land Use Designation: Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Zoning Designation: Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Project Description: The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 2 | Page Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: North: Vacant land & Residential East: Residential South: Vacant land West: Vacant land Previous Environmental Documentation: On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On December 6, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-76 approving a Supplement to the FEIS/EIR for the extension of Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and the future alignment of Valencia north loop road. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR and, on May 13, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-32 approving a Second Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. On July 5, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 17-23 approving a second Supplement to the FEIS/EIR. The 2001 FEIS/EIR document, the supplements, and addenda are collectively referred to herein as the “FEIS/EIR.” The FEIS/EIR, along with its addendums and supplements, is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEIS/EIR, addendums and supplements considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. Other public agencies whose approval is required: Orange County Fire Authority City of Santa Ana Orange County EMA District City of Irvine South Coast Air Quality Management Other Orange County Health Care Agency DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 3 | Page B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Biological Resources Greenhouse Gas Emissions Land Use / Planning Population / Housing Transportation/Traffic Mandatory Findings of Significance Agriculture and Forestry Resources Cultural Resources Energy Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Tribal Cultural Resources Air Quality Geology /Soils Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Recreation Utilities / Service Systems Wildfire DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be 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. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 4 | Page 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: Date: Irma Huitron Assistant Director of Community Development - Planning Date Justina Willkom Community Development Director DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Appendix G (Environmental Checklist Form) C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: See Attached. 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 6 | Page D. INITIAL STUDY Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis I. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rocks outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surrounding’s? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 7 | Page and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 8 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis 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) 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. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 9 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, 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? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 10 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis 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 dedicated cemeteries? VI. ENERGY Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 11 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous 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 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? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 12 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? IX. 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 reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 13 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 14 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i. Result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site; ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity or existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 15 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis e) Conflict with or obstruct implantation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? XII. 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? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 16 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis XIII. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) 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? XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of road or other infrastructure)? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 17 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i. Fire protection? ii. Police protection? iii. Schools? iv. Parks? v. Other public facilities? XVI. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 18 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis 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? XVII. TRANSPORTATION Would the project: a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 19 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k). b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 20 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c. Result in a determination by the waste water 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? d. Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XIX. WILDFIRE If located in or near state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Would the project: a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 21 | Page Issues: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated No Change From Previous Analysis c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to substantially 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, substantially 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? Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.05, 21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21095, and 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 INITIAL STUDY City of Tustin 22 | Page DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TUSTIN LEGACY NEIGHBORHOOD “D” SOUTH ALLEY GROVE PROMENADE PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION On January 16, 2001, the City of Tustin certified the Program Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) for the reuse and disposal of MCAS Tustin. On December 6, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 04-76 approving a Supplement to the FEIS/EIR for the extension of Tustin Ranch Road between Walnut Avenue and the future alignment of Valencia North Loop Road. On April 3, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 06-43 approving an Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. On May, 13, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13-32 approving a second Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. On July 5, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 17-23 approving a second Supplement to the FEIS/EIR in conjunction with Specific Plan Amendment 2016-01 (Ordinance 1482) for the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (formerly MCAS Tustin Specific Plan). The FEIS/EIR, along with its addendums and supplements, is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplements considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. The FEIS/EIR along with its Addendums and Supplements is a program EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplements considered the potential environmental impacts associated with development on the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. The FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplements analyzed the environmental consequences of the Navy disposal and local community reuse of the MCAS Tustin site per the Reuse Plan and the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (referred to in this document as the Specific Plan). The CEQA analysis also analyzed the environmental impacts of certain “Implementation Actions” that the City of Tustin and City of Irvine must take to implement the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. The Tustin Legacy Specific Plan proposed and the FEIS/EIR analyzed a multi-year development period for the planned urban reuse project (Tustin Legacy). When individual discretionary activities within the Specific Plan are proposed, the lead agency is required to examine the individual activities to determine if their effects were fully analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The agency can approve the activities as being within the scope of the project covered by the FEIS/EIR. If the agency finds that pursuant to Sections 15162, 15163, 15164, and 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines no new effects would occur, nor would a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects occur, then no supplemental or subsequent EIR is required. PROJECT LOCATION The project site is located within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan boundaries and is located south of Flight Way between Armstrong Avenue and Compass Avenue in Lot 1 of Tract No. 18197 within Planning Areas 8, 13, and 14 of Neighborhood D, Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 2 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS An Environmental Analysis Checklist has been completed and it has been determined that this Project is within the scope of the Prior Environmental Review and that pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15162 and 15168(c), there are no substantial changes in the project requiring major revisions to the Prior Environmental Review, no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions to the Prior Environmental Review, or any new information which was not known and could not have been known at the time the Prior Environmental Review was certified showing that: (1) the project will have any new significant effects; (2) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe; (3) mitigation measures or alternatives previously determined to be infeasible will now be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the City declined to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (4) mitigation measures or alternatives considerably different from those previously analyzed would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the City declined to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Accordingly, no new environmental document is required by CEQA. 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 project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half -court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. There are no designated scenic vistas in the project area; therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The development of pedestrian paseos within Planning Areas 8, 13, and 14 were considered within the FEIS/EIR and will have no negative aesthetic effect on the site. The proposed project will result in no substantial changes to the environmental impacts previously evaluated with the certified Program FEIS/EIR, the Supplements and Addendums. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to aesthetics. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previous ly identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 3 to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No new impacts or substantially more severe aesthetic impacts would result from the adoption and implementation of the Project; therefore, no new or revised mitigation measures are required for aesthetics and visual quality. No refinements related to the Project are necessary to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no new mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplements. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-58 through 3-67) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-35 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forestland to non-forest use? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. As documented in the FEIS/EIR, the project site is part of Tustin Legacy Specific Plan that contained 702 acres of farmland. The FEIS/EIR concluded that there would be no viable long-term mitigation to off-set the impact of converting farmland on MCAS Tustin to urban uses. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 4 Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to agricultural resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIS/EIR. However, the FEIS/EIR also concluded that Reuse Plan related impacts to farmland were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-83 through 3-87, 4-109 through 114) and Addendums (Page 5-3 through 5-8) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-43 through 5-47) 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) 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)? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. As documented in the FEIS/EIR, the project is part of a larger reuse project at Tustin Legacy that was projected to result in air quality impacts that cannot be fully mitigated. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. The site is presently not in use. Therefore, no significant impact beyond what was analyzed in the adopted FEIS/EIR is anticipated. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 5 to air quality. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Specific mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in certifying the FEIS/EIR. However, the FEIS/EIR also concluded that Reuse Plan related operational air quality impacts were significant and impossible to fully mitigate. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-143 through153, 4-207 through 4-230 and pages 7-41 through 7-42) FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.1-1 through 5.1- 32) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Table 2, 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook Tustin General Plan IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 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? DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 6 The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The FEIS/EIR found that implementation of the Reuse Plan and Tustin Legacy Specific Plan would not result in impacts to federally listed threatened or endangered plant or animal species. The proposed project is within the scope of development considered with the analysis of the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements and Addendums for MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR determined that implementation of the Reuse Plan and Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (including the proposed project) could impact jurisdictional waters/wetlands and the southwestern pond turtle or have an impact on jurisdictional waters/wetlands. The project site has been surveyed, and turtles were captured and moved off the site to another location as directed and overseen by the California Department of Fish and Game. Since that time, all former Marine Corps base drainage channels in the area were removed and graded by the former owner of the property with the required 401, 404 and 1601 permits issued by Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, and Regional Water Quality Control Board. Consequently, the proposed project would not affect the southwestern pond turtle or have an impact on jurisdictional waters or wetlands. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to biological resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No new impacts or substantially more severe biological resources impacts would result from the adoption and implementation of the Project; therefore, no new or revised mitigation measures are required for biological resources. No refinements related to the Project are necessary to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no new mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures were adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR, Addendums and Supplements. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-75 through 3-82, 4-103 through 4-108, and 7-26 through 7-27) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 7 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) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. It should be noted that the former MCAS Tustin contained two National Register listed blimp hangars, and several concrete or asphalt blimp landing pads that were considered historically or culturally significant, pursuant to the federal Section 106 process conducted at the site. Through the Section 106 process, these facilities were identified as part of a discontiguous Historic District. The Navy, State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO), and Advisory Council executed a Memorandum of Agreement (attached as part of the EIS/EIR) with City of Tustin and County of Orange as invited signatories that allowed for the destruction of the blimp pads. The EIS/EIR noted that it may not be financially feasible to retain the blimp hangars and there may be irreversible significant impacts. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Consistent with the above referenced agreement, the previous owner of the property removed the blimp pad from the project site and leveled the property. However, no portion of the previously existing blimp landing pads nor the existing blimp hangars are located within the project site boundary. Numerous archaeological surveys have been conducted at the former MCAS Tustin site. In 1988, the State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) provided written concurrence that all open spaces on MCAS Tustin had been adequately surveyed for archaeological resources. Although one archaeological site (CA-ORA-381) has been recorded within the Reuse Plan area, it is believed to have been destroyed. It is possible that previously unidentified buried archaeological or paleontological resources within the project site could be significantly impacted by grading and construction activities. With the inclusion of mitigation measures that require construction monitoring, potential impacts to cultural resources can be reduced to a level of insignificance. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to cultural resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 8 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures would be included as conditions of approval for the project. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-68 through 3-74, 4-93 through 4-102 and 7-24 through 7-26) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan VI. ENERGY – Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. Construction of the proposed project would involve on-site energy demand and consumption related to use of oil in the form of gasoline and diesel fuel for construction worker vehicle trips, hauling and materials delivery truck trips, and operation of off-road construction equipment. In addition, diesel-fueled portable generators may be necessary to provide additional electricity demands for temporary lighting, welding, and for supplying energy to areas of the sites where energy supply cannot be met via a hookup to the existing electricity grid. The Program EIS/EIR for MCAS-Tustin does not specifically provide an analysis of energy usage, however, potential impacts are indirectly addressed, and the development would not result in any impacts beyond those identified in the Program EIS/EIR for MCAS-Tustin. The project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases and does not differ from the existing standards within the City Code or General Plan. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No further mitigation measures would be required beyond those identified in the Program EIS/EIR for MCAS-Tustin, which are hereby incorporated by reference. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.2-1 through Pages 5.2-29) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 9 a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil or loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The FEIS/EIR indicates that impacts to soils and geology resulting from implementation of the Reuse Plan and Tustin Legacy Specific Plan would “include non-seismic hazards (such as local settlement, regional subsidence, expansive soils, slope instability, erosion, and mudflows) and seismic hazards (such as surface fault displacement, high-intensity ground shaking, ground failure and lurching, seismically induced settlement, and flooding associated with dam failure.” However, the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin also concluded that compliance with state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, would avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to such hazards. No substantial change is expected for development of the project from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to geology and soils. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 10 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: As identified in the FEIS/EIR, compliance with existing rules and regulations would avoid the creation of potential impacts. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-88 through 3-97, 4-115 through 4-123 and 7-28 through 7-29) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The FEIS/EIR did not evaluate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts because, prior to SB 97, which went into effect January 1, 2010, it was not included in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist and the City of Tustin did not have adopted thresholds at the time of preparation. The City has prepared the Final Supplemental EIR (FSEIR), which was adopted in June 2017 in conjunction with the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Modified Project). The FSEIR analyzed the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (Adopted Specific Plan) would have generated GHG emissions at levels that would exceed the thresholds established by Southern California Air Quality Management District. The supplemental FSEIR concluded that the Modified Project would contribute through direct emission of GHG from onsite area sources and vehicle trips and indirectly through offsite energy production required for onsite activities, water use and waste disposal. However, the Modified Project would generate GHG emissions at a reduced rate than the rate GHG emissions would have been produced under the Adopted Specific Plan. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures would be included as conditions of approval for the project. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.2-1 through Pages 5.2-29) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project: DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 11 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) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 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 would not emit hazardous emissions within a quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. 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. The project site is also not located in a wildland fire danger area. Compliance with all federal, state and local regulations concerning handling and use of household hazardous substances will reduce potential impacts to below a level of significance. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to hazards and hazardous materials. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 12 Mitigation/Monitoring Required: As identified in the FEIS/EIR, compliance with existing rules and regulations would avoid the creation of potential impacts. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages (3-106 through 3- 117, 4-130 through 4-138 and 7-30 through 7-31) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST), MCAS Tustin Tustin General Plan. X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? 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 through the alteration of the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii. Substantially in crease the rate or amount of surface runoff in flooding on- or off-site; iii. 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; or iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The project design and construction of facilities to fully contain drainage of the site, would be required as conditions of approval of the project. No long-term impacts to hydrology and water quality are anticipated for the proposed project. The proposed project will also not impact groundwater in the deep regional aquifer or shallow aquifer. The proposed project would not include groundwater removal or alteration of historic drainage patterns at the site. The project 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 mudflow. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 13 A revised Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Sub Area Master Plan (TLSP SAMP) dated June 28, 2019 was submitted in conjunction with the adjacent proposed Tentative Tract Map 19103 residential development to serve as an addendum and provide a hydraulic analysis relative to the proposed residential project’s proposed changes to the potable water, sewer and non- potable water systems. Materials have been reviewed for consistency with the intent of the original SAMP and the residential project was determined to meet all Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) operational criteria. Additionally, the off-site potable water, non-potable water, and wastewater systems will not experience any adverse impacts due to the project. Construction operations would be required to comply with the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the Newport Bay watershed that requires compliance with the Drainage Area Master Plan (DAMP) and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the implementation of specific best management practices (BMP). Compliance with state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, would avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to such hazards. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to hydrology and water quality. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: As identified in the FEIS/EIR, compliance with existing rules and regulations would avoid the creation of potential impacts. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-98 through 3- 105, 4-124 through 4-129 and 7-29 through 7-30) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan ((Pages 5-34 through 5-68) FEMA Flood Map: FIRM Panel 06059C0279J(Dec. 2, 2009) Tustin General Plan Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map (2011) XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 14 court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The City of Tustin is the controlling authority over implementation of the Reuse Plan for the former base, such as land use designations, zoning categories, recreation and open space areas, major arterial roadways, urban design, public facilities, and infrastructure systems. On July 18, 2017, the Tustin City Council approved the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan for the Tustin Legacy project area that established land use and development standards. Compliance with state and local regulations and standards would avoid the creation of significant land use and planning impacts. Also, the proposed Project will not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Consequently, no change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to land use and planning. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The proposed project is consistent with the development standards of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan as identified by the adopted FEIS/EIR. No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-3 to 3-17, 4-3 to 4-13 and 7-16 to 7-18) FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Page 5.2-1 through Page 5.2-27) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan XII. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. Chapter 3.9 of the FEIS/EIR indicates that no mineral resources are known to occur anywhere within the Reuse Plan area. The proposed project will not result in the loss of DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 15 mineral resources known to be on the site or identified as being present on the site by any mineral resource plans. Consequently, no substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to mineral resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-91) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan XIII. NOISE – Would the project: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not had not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. A Preliminary Noise Analysis Report dated May 15, 2019, and addendum dated July 8, 2019, were submitted in conjunction with the proposed adjacent Tentative Tract Map 19103 residential project. The noise report analyzed the proposed adjacent residential project for compliance with Tustin’s exterior and interior noise standards for single-family and multi-family residential. Mitigation measures were included as conditions of approval for the proposed adjacent residential project. The FEIS/EIR indicates that full build-out of the former military base will create noise impacts that would be considered significant if noise levels experienced by sensitive receptors would exceed those considered “normally acceptable” for the applicable land use categories in the Noise Elements of the Tustin General Plan. For interior noise DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 16 mitigation, N-3 identified in the FEIS/EIR requires plans demonstrating noise regulation conformity be submitted for review and approval prior to building permits being issued. Compliance with adopted mitigation measures and state and local regulations and standards, along with established engineering procedures and techniques, will avoid unacceptable risk or the creation of significant impacts related to such hazards. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to noise. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures would be included as conditions of approval for the project. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-154 to 3-162, 4- 231 to 4-243 and 7-42 to 7-43) FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.4-1 through 5.4- 28) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned 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 people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. Additionally, the proposed project site is vacant and will not displace people or necessitate construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to population and housing. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 17 Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-18 to 3-34, 4-14 to 4-29 and 7-18 to 7-19) FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.5-1 through 5.5- 15) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan XV. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The proposed project will not directly 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. The FEIS/EIR, its Supplements, and Addendums have determined that such impacts could only occur as a result with the planned build-out of the Tustin Legacy project. The proposed project will in fact create a beneficial impact for access for fire and police protection in the project area. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the approved FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to public services. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 18 substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Pages 3-47 to 3-57, 4-56 to 4-80 and 7-21 to 7-22) FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.6-1 through 5.6- 12) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan XVI. 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 consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The proposed project will not directly impact recreation services and will not increase the use of other existing neighborhood or regional parks such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the approved FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to recreation. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR. Sources: Field Observations DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 19 Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin pages 3-47 to 3-57, 4-56 to 4-80 and 7-21 to 7-22 Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin Parks and Recreation Services Department Tustin General Plan XVII. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project: a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guideline section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The FEIS/EIR and Supplements identified the trip generation resulting from implementation of the original Specific Plan and Addendum to create an overall Average Daily Trip (ADT) of 239,797 trips. The Specific Plan also established a trip budget tracking system for each neighborhood to analyze and control the amount and intensity of non- residential development by neighborhood. The tracking system ensures that sufficient ADT capacity exists to serve the development and remainder of the neighborhood. A focused traffic study, dated June 11, 2019, was provided for the Tustin Legacy Neighborhood D South area, which is adjacent to the project area. This report was reviewed by Tustin Public Works, Traffic Division for compliance with these requirements. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the approved FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to traffic. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR. Sources: Field Observations DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 20 Submitted Plans FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Page 5.7-1 through Page 5.7-34) FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.7-1 through 5.7- 33) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES: a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i. Listed or is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The project would not cause substantial adverse change in a tribal cultural resource in that the project site does not contain historical cultural resources and the proposed use and modifications would not result impacts to historical or cultural resources. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures would be included as conditions of approval for the project. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (Page 3-68 through 3-74, 4-93 through 4-102 and 7-24 through 7-26), Addendum (Page 5-40 through 5-45) and Addendum 2 (Page 36 through 37) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Page 3-36 through 3-39) Tustin General Plan XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 21 telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? c) 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? d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. The proposed improvements support the development within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. A revised Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Sub Area Master Plan (TLSP SAMP) dated June 28, 2019 was submitted in conjunction with the proposed adjacent Tentative Tract Map 19103 residential development to serve as an addendum and provide a hydraulic analysis relative to the proposed adjacent residential project’s proposed changes to the potable water, sewer and non-potable water systems. Materials have been reviewed for consistency with the intent of the original SAMP and the proposed adjacent residential project was determined to meet all Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) operational criteria. No substantial change is expected from the analysis previously completed in the approved FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures exist with regard to utilities and service systems. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effects or mitigation measures or alternatives that were not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR, the Supplements or Addendums were certified as completed. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR; these measures would be included as conditions of approval for the project. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 3-35 through 3-46, 4-32 through 4-55 and 7-20 through 7-21) DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 22 FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.8-1 through 5.8- 27) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan XX. WILDFIRE: If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of wildfire? c) Require the installation of maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structure to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? The proposed project consists of the construction and operation of an enhanced walkway promenade with landscape, hardscape and picnic areas; it includes a half-court basketball court, 2 pickle-ball courts and a bocce ball court. No above ground structure other than fencing is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire and Resource Assessment Program, the project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. In addition, the site is located on a relatively flat surface and in an urban area. The surrounding area includes commercial and residential land uses. Thus, the proposed project would not cause change in substantial risk or hazards related to wildfires. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: No mitigation is required. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FSEIR for Tustin Legacy Specific Plan Amendment (Pages 5.2-1 through Pages 5.2-29) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan XXI. 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 DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Neighborhood D South Alley Grove Promenade Page 23 effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Based upon the foregoing, the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitats or wildlife populations to decrease or threaten, eliminate, or reduce animal ranges, etc. With the enforcement of FEIS/EIR mitigation and implementation measures approved by the Tustin City Council, the proposed project does not cause unmitigated environmental effects that will cause substantial effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. In addition, the proposed project does have air quality impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the reuse and redevelopment of the former MCAS Tustin. The FEIS/EIR, the Supplements and Addendums previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Reuse Plan and Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. The project proposes no substantial changes to environmental issues previously considered with adoption of the FEIS/EIR. Mitigation measures were identified in the FEIS/EIR to reduce impact but not to a level of insignificance. A Statement of Overriding Consideration for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the Tustin City Council on January 16, 2001. Mitigation/Monitoring Required: The FEIS/EIR previously considered all environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Reuse Plan and MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Mitigation measures have been adopted by the Tustin City Council in the FEIS/EIR and would be included in the project as applicable. Sources: Field Observations Submitted Plans FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pages 5-4 through 5-11) Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (Pages 5-34 through 5-68) Tustin General Plan CONCLUSION The summary concludes that all of the proposed project’s effects were previously examined in the FEIS/EIR for MCAS Tustin, that no new effects would occur, that no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects would occur, that no new mitigation measures would be required, that no applicable mitigation measures previously not found to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and that there are no new mitigation measures or alternatives applicable to the project that would substantially reduce effects of the project that have not been considered and adopted. A Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program and Findings of Overriding Considerations were adopted for the FEIS/EIR on July 5, 2017 and shall apply to the proposed project, as applicable. DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 ATTACHMENT 2 Location Map DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16 City of Tustin Project Name: Alley Grove Promenade Project, CIP No. 20084 DocuSign Envelope ID: A79378CC-A72C-493A-BDC4-3BD95374DB16