HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 85-106
10
13
19
20
RESOLUTION NO. 85-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (EIR) 84-2 FOR THE TUSTIN AUTO CENTER
The City Council of the City of Tustin, California does hereby resolve as
follows:
I ·
The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A®
A. Draft EIR 84-2 and amendments were noticed, prepared, and
processed in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, State Guidelines, and the policies of the City of
Tustin for the proposed Tustin Auto Center to be located
northerly of the Santa Ana Freeway and easterly of Jamboree
Road.
Be
The Planning Commission, by
January 14, 1985, recommends
84-2, as amended.
adoption of Resolution No. 2204 on
that the City Council certify EIR
Ce
Exhibit A, attached and a. part hereof, and EIR Text identifys
mitigation measures that avoid or substantially mitigate adverse
impacts of the project; adverse impacts which cannot be feasibly
mitigated; and overriding considerations justifying the proposed
project.
II.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby certify the final
EIR 84-2 for the proposed Tustin Auto Center to consist of the Draft
EIR 84-2, amendments thereto, staff's technical report, written
comments and responses, testimony received at public hearings before
the Planning Commission and City Council and responses as contained
within the minutes, and the mitigating measures and overriding
considerations as contained herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin
the 21st day of January 1985.
City Council held on
URSULA E. KENNEDY, .... /~1
Mayor ~ I
City Clerk
EX~IT A
Environmental Impact l~indings
As Required by CE~A and the ~ity of Tustin
Tustin Auto Center EIB 84-Z
January ~1, 1985
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and in
accordance with the City of Tustin guidelines, as amended, this document presents
the findings and a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding required for
approval of the proposed project.
1. The City... Council of the City of Tustin does hereby, find that changes or
a~i{erations have been required in, o.r ine0~;p°{mted !nto, the project which
avoid or's~bst, antiall¥ mitigate the sign!fi..eant adverse impacts identifie...d'
in .t. he fi. na.!... EIR as sPeeifiea, lly itemized b...el0w.
A. Water Resources
Impacts: The site is currently subject to flooding ranging in depth from
one to three feet resulting from the inability of regional
· drainage facilities to convey 100-year flood flows.
Findings: The project includes the construction of an earthen berm
extending from an existing berm to the west of the project
site and wrapping around the project site to protect the
project from flooding. This berm will protect the site without
significantly altering existing drainage and flooding patterns
in the vicinity of the project. No increased flooding impacts
will result to adjacent properties.
Impacts: Short-term degradation of surface water quality will occur
during grading and initial construction activities.
Findings: A plan for control of onsite storm runoff from the property
during construction will be prepared and submitted to the City
of Tustin prior to the issuance of any grading permits.
Impacts: On-site runoff volumes and velocities will increase and the
on-site drainage pattern will be altered.
Findings: An on-site drainage plan will be submitted to the City of
Tustin for approval prior to the recordation of the final parcel
map. Methods for controlling the velocity and direction of
runoff will be incorporated into the project design.
Impacts: Development of the site will effect a long-term change in
runoff quality from agricultural pollutants to urban pollutants.
Findings: This impact will be partially reduced by the implementation
of appropriate storm water pollution control plans and periodic
cleaning of storm drains.
Resolution No.
Page 2
B. Land Use and Aesthetics
Impacts.' The project is not consistent with the existing general plan
and zoning designations for the site and surrounding areas.
Findings: A general plan amendment and zone change are proposed as
part of the project. The project design and performance
standards included in the Tustin Auto Center Planned
Community Regulations will ensure that the proposed project
is compatible with land uses planned for areas adjacent to and
near the project site.
Impacts: Implementation of the proposed project would result in the
introduction of high intensity night lighting in the East Tustin
area.
Findings:' The Tustin Auto Center Planned Community Regulations
contain lighting performance standards stipulating the type of
lighting which may be used, the maximum height of each
fi.xture, and the allowable wattage per square foot.' Only
sharp cut-off fixtures at a maximum height of 20 feet are
allowed, thereby localizing light and glare impacts.
C. Transpor~ation./.Cireulatio..n
Impacts: The proposed project will contribute a small increment to an
existing and projected cumulative traffic impact at several
intersections in the area. The project will generate 8,205
ADT and 845 p.m. peak hour trips. Traffic from the project
will incrementally worsen traffic conditions at the Red Hill
Avenue/I-5 ramps and the intersections of Red Hill Avenue
and Irvine Boulevard and Red Hill Avenue and Laguna Road.
Findings: Construction of the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange will
provide substantial mitigation of project related traffic
impacts by directing project related and other traffic from
Red Hill Avenue. The Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange has
been committed for construction by the City of Tustin as a
locally funded project (Tustin City Council Resolution No. 84-
65).
D. Noise
Impacts: Activities at the auto center facilities will increase overan
ambient noise levels in the area by a few decibels. The
number of individually audible and potentially intrusive traffic
noise events win increase as a result of the auto center
development.
Resolution No.
Page 3
Findings: The Tustin Center Planned Community Regulations contain
operational performance standards whieh win mitigate noise
impacts to an insignificant level. Other recommended
operational and site planning measures win also reduce
project impacts.
Impacts: Short-term noise impacts will oeeur during project
construction.
Findings: Compliance with city noise standards regarding hours of
operation and the use of muffled construction equipment win
minimize eonstruetion noise impaets.
Impacts: The project site is exposed to noise impaets from the Santa
Aha Freeway. Over one-half of the project site is exposed to
freeway noise levels in excess of the City of Tustin's noise
objective of 65 CNEL for eommereial land uses.
Findings: The project design incorporates a wan of at least eight feet in
height along this edge. This wan will serve to attenuate noise
from the freeway and win reduce on-site noise levels to
acceptable levels.
E. Air Quality_
Impacts: Short-term increases in dust and exhaust emission will occur
in the vicinity of the project during construction.
Findings: Compliance with Rule 403 of the SCAQMD Rules and
Regulations and wetting of graded areas will mitigate fugitive
dust emissions during construction.
Impacts: Long-term regional increases in mobile and stationary-source
emissions will result due to the increase in motor vehicle and
energy usage.
Findings: The proposed project includes bicycle and pedestrian facilities
provided to reduce motor vehicle usage. Sidewalks will be
provided along Jamboree and Laguna Road and on all internal
roads. All roadways being constructed as a part of the project
have sufficient width to allow for bicycle lanes. No further
mitigation measures are feasible to reduce motor vehicle air
quality emissions.
Resolution No.
Page 4
2. The City C0uneil of the .City of Tustin further finds., tha. t ..al. though ehanffes,
alterations, or conditions have been ineorporat, ed into t..he, project which will
substantially r~itigate Or av.'Oid significant ,effects identified in the final EIR,
Certain ~f the 'sign!fica'ut ie.ff~ets ean~not be mit..igat, ed ii~'~ fu~l. y aC, eePtable
levels. The remaini...ng impacts identified...b..elo.,w may continue to be of
~ignificant adverse i.mPaet' even when"all known feasible and identifie~l
mitigation measUr~s"are applied. ' ..............
A. Project implementation will result in the termination of on-site
agricultural production and the loss of 60 acres of "Farmland of Statewide
Importance" as identified by the California State Department of
Conservation.
Findings: The project is currently committed to non-agricultural use.
The Tustin General Plan Land Use Element currently
designates the site for urban (residential) land use. The
existence of an Irvine Ranch Water District improvement
finance district and the issuance of bonds to finance urban
level water and sewer improvements for the project site and
surrounding areas further indicates the existing commitment
to urban development of this area. There are no economically
or physically feasible measures available to mitigate this
impact.
B. The proposed project will generate approximately 8,205 ADT and 845 P.M.
peak hour trips. Traffic from the project win incrementally worsen traffic
conditions at the Red Hill Avenue/I-5 ramps and the intersections of Red
Hill Avenue and Irvine Boulevard, and Red Hill Avenue and Laguna Road.
Findings: Construction of the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange will
provide substantial mitigation of project related traffic
impacts by diverting project related and other traffic from
Red Hill Avenue. The Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange has
been committed by the City of Tustin as a locally funded
project (Tustin City Council Resolution No. 84-65). Prior to
construction of the interchange, the State Department of
Transportation must approve connection of the interchange to
the state freeway system and the City of Tustin must select
and institute a mechanism to finance construction of the
interchange. Until such time as these approvals and actions
are taken and the interchange is constructed, traffic
generated by the project will adversely impact operating
conditions at the Red Hill Avenue/I-5 ramps and the
intersections of Red Hill Avenue and Irvine Boulevard, and
Red Hin Avenue and Laguna Road.
Resolution No.
Page 5
C. The project site is located within the Eastern Corridor study area and
approval and construction of the auto center project prior to completion of
the route location study could influence the study by eliminating some
potential alternative alignments of the corridor.
Findings: The City of Tustin will participate in the Eastern
Transportation Corridor Study and cooperate with the County
of Orange and the other local agencies involved and affected
by the study. It is not considered economically feasible to
delay approval and implementation of the project until the
corridor study is completed.
D. Short-term construction equipment emissions and long-term mobile and
stationary emissions will occur with project implementation creating an
adverse impact on the air quality of the South Coast Air Basin.
Findings: As with any urban development project, air quality impacts
cannot be completely mitigated. In approving the project,
· subject to the conditions and mitigation measures set forth,
the city has done all that is technically and reasonably
· possible at the municipal level.
E. Increased demand for limited regional water resources.
Findings: The project necessitates increased water use and, therefore,
increased demand for regional imported water. This impact
cannot be mitigated on an individual project basis although
the city will require implementation of all feasible
conservation measures.
F. Increased long-term demand for finite fossil fuel resources resulting from
project electrical and natural gas requirements.
Findings: The project necessitates an increased cumulative demand for
finite fuel resources. Although servicing agencies anticipate
adequate fuel supplies for the project, the long-term demand
for fossil fuel resources will be unavoidably increased.
3. The City Council of the City o.f Tu.s. tin d.oe..s' hereby find that certain changes or
alterations (e...g., mi~iga.{iOn ..m. eaSur..es),required in or in~orp, gr~ed into.the
project m'e within the responsibility and jurisdiction of a public ageneT, other
than the City qf T~Stin ind can..Or shoul.d be .ad. gPte. d by .t.he re~eet, ive agen.'eY
as itemized below:
i ~ i i
A. California Department of Transportation: Approval of the connection of
the Jamboree Road/I-5 interchange to the state freeway system.
Resolution No.
Page 6
4. The City Council of the City of Tustin has weighed.the benefits of the proposed
proieet against ii~s unavoidable enviro~imental risks in' detei;mining whether to
approve said project. ~he 'Cii~ council does hereby further .find' deter.mine,
and. state, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15093 of the state CEQA,
Ouidelines~ that the Oeeurrenee of the certain Significant environmental
effects identified in the final' 'EIR and set forth in psra~'aph,~.,ab0ve~ have been
evaluated agains~ the following 0v.e. rriding consideration.s.:
A. The project will result in the following substantial economic, social, and
environmental benefits to the City of Tustin and surrounding areas:
(1) At build-out, the project is anticipated to yield a positive annual
fiscal surplus of $1,306,200 to the city's general fund. Total annual
revenues are projected at $1,414,700 and total costs at $108,500.
(2) The consolidation of auto dealerships in one location will result in less
vehicle miles traveled than would be typical of a strip pattern of auto
dealerships. This fact is reflected in the trip generation rates for the
Irvine Auto Center, a similar type of development, which are
considerably lower per acre than the observed rates for individual
auto dealers.
(3) The proposed project will provide improvements to the local
circulation system consisting of the extension of Laguna and
Jamboree Roads.
B. The following economic and social considerations make the project
alternatives identified in the final EIR infeasible.
(1) The "No Project" alternative is rejected because it fails to meet the
objectives set forth for the project, particularly the objectives of
providing an increased revenue base to the city and creating a
development which provides for a range of auto-related uses to serve
the City of Tustin and surrounding communities.
(2) The "Existing General Plan" alternative is rejected because it fails to
meet the objectives set forth for the project, particularly .the
objectives of providing an increased revenue base to the city and
creating a development which provides for a range of auto-related
uses to serve the City of Tustin and surrounding communities.
Residential use of the site is considered less desirable than the
proposed commercial use given the site's proximity to the I-5 freeway.
(3) The "Residential Development at Ten Dwelling Units to the Acre"
alternative is rejected because it fails to meet the objectives set
forth for the project, particularly the objectives of providing an
increased revenue base to the city and creating a development which
provides for a range of auto-related uses to serve the City of Tustin
and surrounding communities. Residential use of the site is
Resolution No.
Page 7
(4)
considered less desirable than the proposed commercial use given the
site's proximity to the I-5 freeway.
The "Alternative Locations" alternative is rejected because
development of the proposed project on the other available sites in
the city would result in greater environmental impacts than would
development of the project on the proposed site. The potential
alternative sites would result in greater impacts to existing residents
or would require substantially increased site improvement costs than
would the currently proposed site. The proposed site offers the best
combination of distance of existing residents, freeway visibility, and
freeway access.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) §
CITY OF TUSTIN )
MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of
Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of
the City Council of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing
Resolution No. 85-10 was duly and regularly introduced, passed and adopted at a
regular meeting~he City Council held on the ~ls~ day of Ja.nua.ry, .198~, by the
fol lowing vote'
AYES · COUNCILPERSONS' Edgar, Greinke, Hoesterey, Kennedy, Saltarelli
NOES · COUNCILPERSONS' None
ABSENT' COUNCILPERSONS' None
MA'R'Y E. WYNN~X~Ci ty C1 erk i\
City of Tusti~f, Cal i forni~U