The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020ITEM #7 (it, T Y U*4sReport to the Planning Commission DATE: AUGUST 28, 2007 SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE 06-002 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17096 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024 DESIGN REVIEW 06-020 OWNER: SUNCAL- BROWNING LLC C/O SOUTHWIND REALTY GROUP LLC 18301 VON KARMAN AVENUE, SUITE 710 IRVINE, CA 92612 ATTN: JIM MAGSTADT APPLICANT: KAREN SULLY THE SULLY GROUP INC. 161 FASHION LANE, SUITE 116 TUSTIN, CA 92780 LOCATION: GENERALPLAN t483►10W ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: REQUESTS: 1972 MITCHELL AVENUE 14251-14351 BROWNING AVENUE HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR 15-25 DU/ACRE)) EXISTING: SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (R-4) PROPOSED: MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) ARTICLE 6 OF CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 14, CHAPTER 3. 1. ZONE CHANGE 06-002 TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (R-4) ZONING DISTRICT TO MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) TO REDEVELOP THE SITE WITH 77 CONDOMINIUM UNITS; Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 2 of 11 2. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17096 TO SUBDIVIDE THE 4.1 -ACRE SITE (NET AREA) INTO A 77 -UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT; 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024 TO CONSTRUCT STRUCTURES OVER 20 FEET IN HEIGHT WITHIN 150 FEET OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONING DISTRICT; AND, 4. DESIGN REVIEW 06-020 FOR APPROVAL OF BUILDING ARCHITECTURE AND SITE DESIGN AND AMENITIES OF THE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 4064 adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) as adequate for Zone Change 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096, Conditional Use Permit 06-024, and Design Review 06-020 for development of the proposed 77 residential condominium unit project. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 4065 approving Conditional Use Permit 06-024 for constructing buildings over 20 feet in height within 150 feet of Single Family Residential (R-1) zoning district and Design Review 06-020 for the architectural/site design and amenities of the proposed condominium project. 3. Adopt Resolution No. 4066 recommending that the City Council adopt the MND for Zone Change 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096, Conditional Use Permit 06-024, and Design Review 06-020 and approve Tentative Tract Map 17096 for the purpose of subdividing and developing a 4.1 -acre (net) site with 77 residential condominium units. BACKGROUND The proposed site includes a 60 -unit apartment complex known as Rancho Sierra Vista Apartments. The existing zoning designation would allow a maximum of 60 units on the existing 4.9 acre (gross) site that includes 0.82 acres to be dedicated to the City for street rights-of-way along Mitchell Avenue and Browning Avenue. The applicant has requested a zone change to rezone the property to Multiple Family Residential (R-3) to redevelop the site with condominium units. All existing units on the site are proposed to be demolished. To redevelop the site with 77 condominium units, a zone change, tentative tract map, conditional use permit, and a design review application need to be approved for subdivision of the land, the proposed increase in density, building structures over 20 feet, and approval of the site amenities and building designs. Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 2 of 11 The project site is surrounded by single family residential uses (R-1) on the south and west, Duplex residential zoning (R-2) and a condominium project (R-3) on the north, and single family residential and a mobile home park on the east (Attachment A — Location Map). The site is zoned Suburban Residential (R-4) and designated by the General Plan as High Density Residential (HDR) which provide for the development of residential condominiums. DISCUSSION The following discussion includes analyses of the project description and site plan, access, architecture, landscaping, and environmental documentation. Proiect Description and Site Plan The project would involve construction of new three-story buildings and two-story buildings with lofts. The project is designed to adhere to the proposed new zoning of Multiple Family Residential (R-3) development standards with respect to setbacks, height, parking standards, and landscaping guidelines and the City's Private Street Improvement Standards. Although the project proposes three-story structures to replace existing one-story structures, the proposed buildings have been designed to be sensitive to the existing neighboring residences. The site is a comer parcel along Mitchell Avenue and Browning Avenue that abuts single family residential neighborhoods on two sides. The proposed site plan places the buildings 10 feet from the westerly property line and 16 feet from the southerly property line. Units proposed along the single family residential property lines have been designed at two stories with a loft that are 3-4 feet lower in height than other proposed units on the site. To provide a green screen, significant landscaping in the form of upright trees is proposed on the westerly and southerly site boundaries. In addition, no balconies will be located within these areas and window openings are smaller in size and carefully placed to minimize intrusion of privacy on the adjacent existing residential properties. Site Design The project site is designed with a main drive 36 feet wide that runs parallel to Browning Avenue and secondary drives that are 24 feet wide, each providing vehicular access to 10-11 units. Adequate turn around space for emergency vehicles is provided at the terminus of the main drive. The project site is proposed to be developed with 16 buildings of four-plex, five-plex, and six-plex design. The buildings are designed in rows with entries facing one another and garages arranged back to back. Each unit is designed with a private patio at the front entrance and a balcony on the second floor. The end units along the westerly property line also have an opportunity for a private patio. Common landscape areas between the Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 3 of 11 units would also be provided with decorative walkways and landscape areas (Attachment C — Submitted Plans). Five different plans are proposed which range in size as follows: Plan Bedrooms Baths Square Footage 1 2 BR and loft 2 1,803 2 3 BR 3.5 1,863 3 3BR 3 1,997 4 213D and loft 2 1,831 5 3BR 2.5 2,068 Zone Change The site is currently zoned Suburban Residential (R-4) and is located within the High Density Residential (HDR) General Plan land use designation, which allows development of 15-25 dwellings per acre (du/acre). The current zoning would allow development with up to 14.5 du/acre or 60 units, which is less than the allowable density by the City's General Plan. The applicant has proposed to rezone the property from R-4 to Multiple Family Residential (R-3), to allow development of the site with 77 units at 18.7 du/acre density. The rezoning would also reduce the current rear yard setback of 25 feet to 16 feet. The project will comply with the development standard for the City's Multiple Family Residential (R-3) District as follows: Standards Required Proposed Density max. 25 du/acre 18.64du/acre Site Area min. 7;000 sq.ft. 179,902 (net) Minimum lot area per unit 1,750 sq.ft. 2,336 sq.ft. Building Height max. 35 feet 35 feet (average) Lot Width min. 70 feet 290 Lot Coverage max. 65 percent 65 percent Landscape Open Space min. 35 percent 35 percent (includes 2.6% decorative paving) Front Setback min. 15 feet 15 feet to the building Side Yard Setback min. 5 feet 10 feet (7 feet to the balconies) Rear Yard Setback min. 10 feet 16 feet Off-street parking min. 154 garage spaces 154 garage spaces plus 20 guest stalls plus 25 guest stalls The proposed density is within the HDR density range designated by the General Plan. Staff believes that the proposed project will improve an older neighborhood with new housing and provide for homeownership opportunities consistent with the goals and policies of the Tustin General Plan. Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 4 of 11 Conditional Use Permit Tustin City Code Sections 9226(c) and 9228(d) that refer to development standards for R-4 and R-3 properties both require approval of a conditional use permit for structures over 20 feet in height within 150 feet of R-1 zoning districts. The buildings are two stories with a loft and three stories (4, 5, or 6 attached units) that range in height from 30'-9" to 36'-9" with an average height of 35 feet (Attachment C — Height Exhibit). The proposed increase in height of V-9" for an overall height of 36'-9" is within the 10 percent allowed increase for minor adjustments and staff deemed that the proposed increase of a portion of the units would create a desired variation in building design/height and individual treatment of each unit. This project abuts R-1 on the west and south side and therefore requires a conditional use permit for the proposed height. The applicant has designed the site to include: 1) a wider than required rear setback of 10 feet from the neighboring westerly properties and 16 feet from the southerly properties, 2) limited window and door openings and no balconies facing onto the adjacent properties, and 3) lower height for the end units with a third floor loft and a reduced overall height of 32 feet. Given today's standard for condominium development, it is typical for multiple family residential structures to be 2- 3 stories in height. The proposed height is consistent and compatible with the maximum allowed height for single family residential (R-1), which is 30 feet. The applicant has indicated that the proposed increased number of units is the minimum density that would substantiate the economic feasibility of the project. Considering the proposed setbacks and stepped height design, aesthetic and livability impacts to adjacent properties are not anticipated to be substantial with respect to privacy and shade and shadow effects. Access, Circulation, Parking, and Traffic Analysis Traffic Analysis A traffic study was submitted and reviewed by the City's Engineering Division (Exhibit 2 of Mitigated Negative Declaration). The study concluded that the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 737 average daily trips, which in comparison with the existing development, would be an increase of 334 daily trips. The traffic analysis considered the traffic impacts to the Browning Avenue and Walnut Avenue intersection and concluded that there is adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed project under short-term (2008) and long-term (2025) conditions. The AM and PM peak hour volumes for the entire project are approximately 70 Vehicle per Hour (VPH), or just a little over one vehicle per minute. Based on the submitted traffic analysis, no delay with entering and exiting the site is expected during any time of day. The internal circulation system for the project is basically a "T" shaped pattern with a single entrance. The main street is 36 feet wide and provides for parking on both sides and the alleys are 25 feet wide with no parking permitted. Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 5 of 11 The site is located near an elementary school with the main entrance off of Browning Avenue. The school's morning drop-off time coincides with the AM peak hour of the project. During that time an additional 17 project vehicles will be traveling southbound on Browning Avenue. The traffic study concluded that the project -generated traffic volume is not expected to create a significant increase to traffic congestion at the school entrance and no impacts are anticipated in the PM peak hour. For development of the project, the developer will be responsible for implementing roadway improvements on Browning Avenue to provide more accessibility and visibility at the new four-way intersection of the main entrance to the project with Sandfield Place. With incorporation of the following mitigation measures on Browning Avenue, the traffic impacts for this project will be reduced to less than significant. Condition 4.1 is included to require traffic signage and striping, including turning lanes on Browning Avenue and parking restrictions adjacent to the site based on the traffic study recommendations. In addition, the developer would be required by Condition 4.3 of Resolution No. 4065 to submit a Construction Management Plan, as required under the Traffic Impact Analysis, for the site to address safety issues, such as regulating construction access to the site during children's arrival and departure from the nearby school. The applicant is also required to provide a corner cut off dedication at the corner and project entries as shown on the tentative tract map. Condition 2.1 of Resolution No. 4066 requires that the developer satisfy all dedication and easement requirements for street rights-of-way along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue and the appropriate corner cut-off on Browning Avenue as depicted on the tentative tract map. Pedestrian Circulation The project site is designed with three pedestrian accesses to Browning Avenue and one to Mitchell Avenue. Two of the access points are indirect from the courtyards to Browning Avenue. These areas are defined with a roof and step up from the street. The main driveway is designed with four foot sidewalks on both sides that lead to the front entries through the open spaces separating the building rows. Units along Mitchell Avenue and the end units along Browning Avenue are raised 3-4 steps from the existing grade at the public sidewalk. Each unit is designed with a private patio fence and gate to provide a buffer from the public right-of-way. In addition, a wheelchair access would be required through a paseo between the two buildings along Mitchell Avenue that connects the public sidewalk on Mitchell Avenue to the project site (Attachment C — Submitted Plans). Waste Management Plan To minimize trash hauler trucks backing up from the garage drives and to ensure that the trash carts do not impede site circulation, the applicant has proposed a Waste Management Plan (Attachment C — Submitted Plans) with centralized location for trash pick up. The plan proposes to use 11 of the 25 guest stalls for storing trash and recycling carts during the trash pick up days. Residents would be required to store containers next Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 6of11 to their garage during trash collection days where an employee of the homeowners association would relocate the carts into designated parking areas; the empty containers would be returned upon collection. The parking areas designated for storing trash carts would be posted with informative signage and enforcement regulations. Condition 8.2 of Resolution No. 4065 is included to require adequate signage for the waste management plan. Parkin Tustin City Code Section 9226a10) requires a minimum of two (2) covered parking spaces per unit and each unit is designed with a two -car garage. The Tustin City Code also requires a minimum of one (1) unassigned open guest parking space for every four (4) units or 20 guest parking spaces. The project site provides a total of 25 guest parking spaces including 22 parallel stalls and three standard parking stalls (Attachment C — Submitted Plans). The guest parking spaces are evenly dispersed along the main private drive within an adequate distance to all units. The private drives that provide access to garages are required to remain accessible at all times. Condition 3.20)(4) of Resolution No. 4066 will be included in the CC&Rs to require that the garage spaces be used for vehicle storage. On -street parking is also currently available on Mitchell Avenue and Browning Avenue; however, on -street parking on Browning will be affected by addition of the left turn pocket from the project. Public Improvements The existing street lighting on Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue has been determined deficient with respect to current standards. To meet the current public street requirements, the developer is required to design and construct a street light on a "Marbelite" pole served by underground conduit at the project entrance on Browning Avenue. Additional lights may be required on Mitchell Avenue and Browning Avenue to meet the Residential Collector street requirements of 5,800 lumen high pressure sodium vapor lamps with 28' mounting height on 6' arms spaced 400 feet apart along both sides of the street. The lights are to be staggered from side to side along the street, thus the spacing between lights is 200 feet with the developer responsible only for lights on the side of the street frontage developed by the project. Condition 4.1 of Resolution No. 4065 requires that all street lights to be installed per the minimum design standards and the standards of the City of Tustin and the Southern California Edison Company, and as approved by the City Engineer. Architecture The buildings are designed as contemporary style townhomes with influence from the "Hamptons," an east coast architecture using dormers, shingle siding, and simple gables. The units are staggered 2-3 feet to create an interesting street elevation. Units along Mitchell Avenue and the end units along Browning Avenue are designed with a Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 7 of 11 front porch covered by a second floor balcony. A variety of wood railing is proposed for the balconies, The courtyard between the buildings will be landscaped and designed with walkways connecting the parking areas to unit front entrances. Units with a raised finished floor (units south of the main entry, along Mitchell Avenue, and end units along Browning Avenue) have a small private patio separated by a raised brick wall. The exterior elevations are enhanced with architectural details reminiscent of the Hamptons such as dormer attic vents, wood shutters, balconies, and various siding finishes and colors to create visual interest. The roof material is proposed to be composition shingles in various designs and colors to complement the proposed architectural style and color scheme. Prior to deeming the application complete, staff communicated the following design concerns to the developer: • Providing a consistent side yard and front yard setback and street orientation on both Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue street fronts; • Adding more articulation on the street elevations; • Providing a deeper off -set and second floor projection than the proposed one foot on the Browning Avenue street frontage; and • Breaking the repetitious design on the Mitchell Avenue elevation. The developer addressed most of the issues by revising the Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue elevations. The revised design provided more variety on the balcony projections and oriented the end units on Browning Avenue with street facing porches. However, the shallow off -sets and projections, and the recommended 15 foot building setback along Browning Avenue were not addressed by the developer. The project site is a reverse corner lot where the side along Browning Avenue is wider than the front*facing Mitchell Avenue. Tustin City Code does not include provisions for reverse corner lots; however, staff believes that the same setback requirement should be applied to both street fronts. The buildings are currently proposed at 15 feet from Mitchell Avenue and 10 feet from Browning Avenue with the balconies encroaching 3 feet into the setbacks. The proposed setbacks meet the minimum development standards for R-3 front and side yard setbacks; however, staff recommends that the applicant be required to maintain the same setback on both street fronts to provide for improved streetscape design and better livability of these units with more privacy and fewer noise impacts from Browning Avenue. Additionally, the increased setback would allow for architectural relief and added articulation and landscaping along the streetscape. Condition 1.8 of Resolution No. 4065 requires that the same setback be applied on both frontages. The applicant proposes ten color schemes for the buildings. Each unit is proposed with a different color variation to create individual emphasis. The shutters, railing, and other Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 8 of 11 architectural elements are proposed with contrasting colors, Material and color sample boards for the project will be available at the Planning Commission meeting. Condition 6.2 of Resolution No. 4065 requires final approval of the colors by the Community Development Department upon submittal of construction drawings. Pool/Recreation Area A common pool/recreation area would be constructed and maintained by the homeowners association and consist of a pool/spa, restrooms for men and women, pool equipment enclosure, a shower, outdoor fireplace, and a seating area. A six foot wrought iron safety fence would enclose the pool area. The pool area is tucked in the corner and would not be visible from public rights-of-way, Landscape/Hardscape The project site is currently heavily landscaped along Mitchell Avenue with mature pine trees that are an enhancement to the streetscape. The project is proposed with Camphor trees accented with Coral trees along the main entry on Browning Avenue. A variety of Magnolias, Tipu trees, Chinese Pistache, Olive trees, and California Pepper trees are proposed within the site along the main drive and the courtyards. To provide a diverse landscape barrier to the residential neighborhood to the west and south, a variety of Chinese flame tree, Afghan pines, and Brisbane boxes are proposed. There are five courtyards throughout the site, each is proposed to be enhanced with a fountain, fireplace, and seating area. Noise Analysis The project site is located at the southwest corner of Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue, and therefore is exposed to traffic related noise. The City's General Plan recognizes that residents adjacent to major and secondary arterials are typically exposed to a Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) over 65 Decibels (dB). Table N-2 of the Tustin Noise Element identifies potential conflicts between the land uses and the noise environment. Per Table N-2, most of the project site falls within Zone A through Zone B. Zone A requires no mitigation measures for noise while Zone B requires minor soundproofing as needed. The City's noise ordinance requires a maximum 45 dB value for interior noise and 65 dB for exterior noise. An acoustical study was submitted by the applicant (Exhibit 1 of MND) that indicates that the building surfaces along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue will be exposed to noise levels of 60.7 CNEL. Therefore, these buildings require a 15.7 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the City's CNEL interior noise standards. With common construction practices, a noise reduction of up Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 9 of 11 to 20 dB could be achieved and no specific construction related mitigation required. Since the noise attenuation of a building falls about 12 dB with open windows, the noise study recommends that all units along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue be equipped with adequate ventilation with installation of air conditioning units with a summer switch for fresh air intake. Since this is a small and compact site, staff recommends that the Noise Analysis recommendation be extended to include the special A/C units for all units so that all residents would benefit from keeping the windows closed. Condition 10.1 of Resolution No. 4065 is included to require that all units are provided with A/C units and a fresh air intake option. Tenant Relocation Plan The existing 60 apartment units are currently rented at market rate, and the residents are on a month-to-month lease. The project is privately financed and no public funds are involved that would trigger relocation pursuant to state law. The applicant has submitted a Tenant Leasing and Relocation Plan. The plan indicates that a minimum 120 -day notice will be provided prior to vacation of the property, tenants would be on a month-to-month lease basis, and the last month's rent would be waived, which should provide the tenants with adequate time and monetary incentives to relocate. Public Notice A public notice for the availability of the draft mitigated declaration and the time, date, and location of the public hearings for the proposal was published in the Tustin News on August 2, 2007. Property owners within 300 feet of the site and tenants requested to be notified were notified of the hearing by mail. Public hearing signs were also posted on the site, and a notice was posted at City Hall on August 2, 2007. During the public review period, several property owners on Cloverbrook expressed their concern regarding the height and proximity of the proposed structures. In addition, staff received three emailed comments submitted to City Council (Attachment D — Submitted Public Comments). A shade and shadow study and a cross section of the proposed structures in relation to adjacent properties will be provided for pubic review at the Planning Commission meeting. Construction Phasing The applicant is proposing four phases for construction of the project (Attachment C - Phasing Plan). Phase 1 would include the model buildings (9 units) and the recreation center and the subsequent phases are proposed as follows: Phase 1 11 units along Mitchell Avenue Phase 2 20 units Phase 3 20 units Planning Commission Report August 28, 2007 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096, CUP 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 10 of 1"1 Phase 4 13 units Build -out 4 units Condition 5.1 of Resolution No. 4065 requires submittal of a model home site plan and improvement plan including a public parking area, landscaping, lighting, and construction traffic plan for the model home site. Environmental Analysis A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project (Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4064). The attached Initial Study discusses potential impact categories and appropriate mitigation measures. Any potential impacts can be mitigated to a level of insignificance and mitigation measures have been included as conditions of approval. The draft mitigated declaration was made available for public review from August 3, 2007, to August 22, 2007. Public comments received during the public review period are attached as Attachment D. Staff's response to the submitted comment letter regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration will be available at the August 28th Planning Commission meeting. C %�[ e l Minoo Ashabi ue Associate Planner Attachments: Elizabeth A. Bins cl Community Develdoment Director A. Location Map B. Land Use Fact Sheet C. Submitted Plans D. Submitted Public Comments E. Resolution No. 4064 and Exhibit A (Mitigated Negative Declaration) F. Resolution No. 4065 and Exhibit A (Conditions of Approval Conditional Use Permit 06-024, Design Review 06-020) G. Resolution No. 4066 and Exhibit A (Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 17096) S9Cdd\PCREPORT\2007\TTM 17096 (Hampton Vlilage).doc ATTACHMENT A Location Map ATTACHMENT B Land Use Fact Sheet LAND USE APPLICATION FACT SHEET 1, LAND USE APPLICATION NUMBER(S): ZONE CHANGE 06-002, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17096, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024 AND DESIGN REVIEW 06-020 2. LOCATION: SW CORNER OF MITCHELL AVENUE AND BROWNING AVENUE 3. ADDRESS: 1972 MITCHELL AVENUE AND 14251-14351 BROWNING 4. LOTS: APN(S): 432-342-30 5. PREVIOUS OR CONCURRENT APPLICATION RELATING TO THIS PROPERTY: NONE 7. SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: MITCHELL AVENUE/RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: RESIDENTIAL EAST: BROWNING AVENUE/RESIDENTIAL WEST: RESIDENTIAL 8. SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATION: NORTH: DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL (R-2) SOUTH: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) EAST: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) & MHP WEST: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) SURROUNDING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: NORTH: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 9. SITE LAND USE: A. EXISTING: APARTMENTS B. PROPOSED: MULTIPLE FAMILY CONDOMINIUMS C. GENERAL PLAN: HDR D. ZONING: SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (R-4) PROPOSED. GP: SAME PROPOSED ZONING: MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) DEVELOPMENT FACTS: 11. LOT AREA: 179902 SQUARE FEET - 4.13 ACRES WA 041 14. 15. BUILDING LOT COVERAGE: 65% MAX. PERMITTED LANDSCAPING/OPEN SPACE: 35% REQUIRED decorative hardscape) MINIMUM LOT AREA PER UNIT: 1.750 sq.ft. REQUIRED PARKING: 20 stalls REQUIRED 65 % PROPOSED 35% PROPOSED (includes 2.6 % PROPOSED: 2,336 sq.ft. 25 stalls PROPOSED 16. BUILDING HEIGHT: 35 feet max. REQUIRED Average 35 feet PROPOSED 17. BUILDING SETBACKS: REQUIRED PROPOSED FRONT: 15 feet 15 feet SIDE: 10 feet 10 feet REAR: 10 feet 16 feet OTHER UNIQUE CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED TO THE PROPERTY (I.E. SPECIAL STUDY ZONES, EASEMENTS, ETC.) None Forms: Land UseAp p licatio n FactSheet ATTACHMENT C Submitted Plans • ! § J )\!22\; \»)� /\�.If§RCCeEw� ■ /( /( z govid Q'131dON'd9 V d Q•] P, ��_ •� U 8 Nom, S o U � u •� q x 4 % ) \ )� )§\ g! SAM § ,a �\ \ IB §! f \§ \F 90 ! . / 4 ) )§\ g! SAM § §! f \§ \F 90 ! . = ! 44 MHO ° jJ h\§4 \2\ /9 \ :, \f Ell Id 6 [ )\, . .� A z \\ \(} � : $ f 4 ; $7.J�� /i , ) M ,_ �\ \(}. \ E B $ ■ ; � �§j ] � \f Ell Id 6 [ )\, . .� A z \\ \(} � : $ f 4 ; $7.J�� /i , ) M ,_ �\ \(}. \ E B $ \(} � §}! P( f=! /i i M \\/ \(}. ; ; [ § r vy 81 ; . � \\ �� tm § a ` � \ : / § §;( ) \2 § ., F ; J. ( e. . § � ) / .\ y. _ ! s> mom. -nil 2 § ) § \ ) §� }§( g\ \ \ ».y 6»r m B \\ § \ ) §� }§( g\ \ \ m B \\ \!{- , . 21F $ § � � ) §� }§( g\ $ \ \\ \!{- 21F \// /■■| a Mo /\7; HOE \\ /! ( : c m' —a K Y c F D12 4 6F ' ♦o r7• N. �m J i g w Qtr `o� E e5 ° p. J6 ]FQu. � � J O �C (f gp LL \ CC u g w Qtr `o� OJ e5 � p. J6 ]FQu. � � J N [�Gi��i 2 gp �ipFy! {Uy �¢1� ZZ CC �O �U U FNw N Z o N •� ��. � H F � �QN w x aH W p P � p. J6 ]FQu. o, N �2 Q Sz�2ru � J [�Gi��i 2 gp �ipFy! {Uy �¢1� ZZ CC �O �U FNw Z ; / ! | ! � » e } } / 6 \� �\ .. rj /.% ° � m / , ., )• } / 6 \� �\ .. rj /.% ° � m / , \ ~� l\ } / 6 \� �\ rj /.% ° � m / -1 z � DBC JI � c7 u W I (19, E EE a V H �� —� a x pq f xz8s�e` z � DBC JI � c7 u W I (19, O EE a V H �� —� a M, O c7 u W d 6] � x pq � U � J W E 8 P'n f� to iF� a w N r T r� F -I � Liz SIL C5 w P > G G I o w a w N r N r� F -I � C5 w P > , aEP o w w s� - a w N r N r� F -I � C5 a w N k r� F -I � C5 w P > aEP o s� rg.� x pq k w P rg.� N W 2 1-1 PL4 w ` ƒ�� § ; \ / � / \\� pq 0 6iEd5' iQ 9..Cc�f �§ � E g• PP it d m W I � a 0 Nd m W I � a o C3 I P4 EQ .� •;, ° � H x P I I PI IL V7 rrT- V7 *r7 -rM pq ELL PI IL V7 rrT- V7 *r7 -rM pq � J � + a \g% \ j P=@ 14 ; n |22 ° � G! �gggn : �� CD � J � + a \ ` ± % \ ° � G! : �� CD tm j r � \ ° � r �0 m I a -- w y I � � o I� a x A w y n r n v x F m 3 Ys'+. N � V V Q z o� � H x J- ,, M A Fq 9 11 \ ƒ _� k = $ OEM k� mp, 0 [+C M1 �.. �� J.l+� �, t - `�' 4�\ 1M ��I � yam'.. .. f 1 � i � ,` 1 i � ,. _.. ` S �' i� Y ai �� . y }t�J :=. 'A�1 � �9 j I � ` /, T• h 1 J .' j� ��.� �;� �s. 'r �;< ' .� .- � N � ,�, a� �?. .jF.; ��Y.� � ._ a� i � �� i � � ��. � i � �� '= ��' t ;.: .� `' ,, 1 .�� j• _: I r 1 � � �II ��`� _� 'i `r�-- -.. W . y. ,r H I �1 I I - .ct o££ 3(1H3AV 773H91/W �- - t H s` H e s 441' 3In 1 p ¢EE{xgg I�� s 'ri a rRra� R, R eriR �INN { x 9IR��' Rl6�gRR°UoR3'R �Rj9tRi;aR� �R�RRI�I�41e1a �p0a,, iPY�g[ � iii ex a e x e i IC— I,I y r II EJ t s` e s 441' 3In 1 p ¢EE{xgg I�� s 'ri a rRra� R, R eriR �INN { x 9IR��' Rl6�gRR°UoR3'R �Rj9tRi;aR� �R�RRI�I�41e1a �p0a,, iPY�g[ � iii ex a e x e i IC— I,I y r II EJ I , �I •& r iavk s Ara s A9'a r hYld r M'a r HM r Ara r AYa i xnd s M'a r M'a I , , � � � p Y 1 Ilj g '3 � e ➢ M'a z Nlb i � z NVId t �� r`dl a i ,Md a urw i A'nd a �. s � � � �� . !�� f.1 Ic .I., s'iritl awu iir� w'iu r m^. a � 1 a 1A p C T `�- ti.0 I 15 M'Id L M/k tmM'a L NYIE F k j�' � p. = r d s .md zixwv , z wva c Nim •a { i � f'Yr i M'a Z M'Id I M'a E M!a a I i I � � Plow .... " I LEN �'!�ow 5Fpp5p� g A Y Ld E a xl'"Ii er �I k••••• � aaaGd'sa a 4 aa.„ Raj gSg33 Spa � ` Sq ! ' }Rig [3 ! y ,tl!lAalts�klgq.. �!!l!!!!�?gt�p" 1 y { t° ;4 AY k�4, psa ��z4,:=gs � 2 B y"3 It "A.A ,w E I Y� 1, al 12, �g rr � d `�- q4. xvu sirid i kra r �wid I T { I i I � � Plow .... " I LEN �'!�ow 5Fpp5p� g A Y Ld E a xl'"Ii er �I k••••• � aaaGd'sa a 4 aa.„ Raj gSg33 Spa � ` Sq ! ' }Rig [3 ! y ,tl!lAalts�klgq.. �!!l!!!!�?gt�p" 1 y { t° ;4 AY k�4, psa ��z4,:=gs � 2 B y"3 It "A.A ,w E I Y� 1, al 12, �g rr r : e ,Gl.md. JAI . .. = _ ,. , � �� , , \ee% •-u \| � $ ,Gl.md. JAI . .. = _ ,. % yA� \ee% •-u \| 8 JI w JAI . .. = _ ,. % yA� \| � $ /1 8-1 O) P-1 m z � • 0 �v Z IoW sU ° KD o � Wx J J C H C �y Q 5y6pj^-gj, m O C. 5 N u 0 | ! seo e0Gaea6sa@8me ) q \ \ I �{ | F-] , A m »\�� M z , a � •- � 0 �/=d c $ ` � ° •� � « f � F-] , oh 0x0000000 iV y a� V � VVV z� ^Q x Fl n +NAAVIUHUN c e ! ! { P, n ! , \\ \! | ( § { ! `® . ` w» n � � ( n Cl 7m 11 0 LI U J J 8 W �C2GCj EI z7z15 0 jW§ N =F �[ Ll I I Fl Sg | ! § [ � ( || /^ k ❑ 3e ❑ MN3AvnNO11W �I 43 Ank 13 oz- G^J aa%p:p n n 0 0 �9 CD M ❑ ❑ m V" �dsdm�3S�€ eon ZO r Y P � x s H til �rvni. on nmm� ❑ ❑ m V" �dsdm�3S�€ eon ZO r E8z6�Em$fl $. z �� til �rvni. on nmm� ❑ ❑ I , I -1 1, , I 3f1H3/.V 113HO11W NEW CO WI -a Ii I F H:.LY Y:ca. T - - eat -a9 �a N = bl> CCL �j m'. � CO � a �� •C vc bY— n 3 E�ovy3wgr ea'�1�� swm��voo�p V•C-yV pa qq—�y$ a Wyu6N� - L GL yy > C U'JIOlb I cAyyyy co � — C'y;�� 6 _ 3 rF-Eu q 3<LYsy ESEuS, a>Eu�' 3f1H3/.V 113HO11W NEW CO WI -a Ii I F H:.LY Y:ca. .. fill& W; --1" 1' -,1 I —.,, I eu_,il 4 ir' '—wF a 4s I•, r ,i 1 r 3 ?4 S I eu_,il 4 ir' '—wF a 4s I•, r ,i 1 r I �—;' Lam_` t p �� x 77f7 ` ` }ao—I �jo � �YI`t�Yve�t�a4�S�E��Ftl�P�¢��i�Yg3k�p F � g ,i 77f7 ` ` }ao—I �jo � �YI`t�Yve�t�a4�S�E��Ftl�P�¢��i�Yg3k�p F � g r I �—;' Lam_` ♦. �� x I gg pp ,I MlED d. u Z 0 m 30"d aiaiaad s w @ 111'311Ip01.i 11 'ii ; 111 II es I. i !; ' 1 ; al4p@ kl ppl 8p o @ mlp,lt 11111 l,lt� I F;Ia III pql 1, 191 lag1 IF 1 •,t 9e S [ m pIF. (e•� i,iltl 1p1 it 111'11 'pI•F i 1 @al' Iia( II 1 ei a011 h i I I[( lel ItYI Ipt¢111[ IF Ili ,111 i `F[a [:I [ aei II1111'a II Iii 11p ,m 1 . ZQ Pp: @ i II .la "'09 II rPp� 1rI FII i pea PI i 1 F4 Y P9pi;p� ii i'I91 'pKj? 1 IEi ' If m a p P I; • F m `5i m I s Ipad k C i ime. N m i e� mr.k6lali l �e R s 11 p 6I' ( tg°8 R.e ., $ g 66° a $p. I f I p I p I �IY [ I' I i•; I' i ; SII' .1!,,711 @' • I iiii' i �f III {'p�i 1 0 p1!' IR i t f [tt q a l�.[.( ' 1•I I Il I9', YI'ii+ i+i iil=i ii 1 (f! ,{� me. i[ ii II 1 p I�,11 i ii 111(111' 1 Mi IaI l I..aiy�I1 .1 l`'{'id aFl 1i J a.. Y�.- d' g am& g l'i m y�'. II ,ap OFe p ;III I:i re f M9 1 Ip p1 I mm p�6p y[� Y per F irY ly@1 °F"[ 6e69Y lyl ii ii;'E A!° I 1$ °@ '° f I€ � m . I3. i mq 11611 p it S ¢II ,a pal k. �Ipi�1P�iflpPi `? No;el:€'ep!;Iia �6 iB $.i k YIP �l'C Ept 1 p 9 1'e p F 1 �9P ' p i "'1: IjI' " ea 1 ilI 11111 I fit•,• [ef iii I (Ia i I it O� It111i� I°I �2ip I9 pIi9 I �il5pl l° •111' 1 p"i i �l i 1 tfl�`' IT F {1 IIIP pli II I l:i �: � w ; Z pp 1 1pl ,�pP lix °@Il iil> � � itli{i IeI ki , it i1 i 1x41 il; SYI..SpaPkpll9:lxi+e..am8lip:A it iwlpilau nr .v:eke.[c xa aYisc oo iii l;ili it N lat.i�il :1 {I mi Pii a.i.lil1,eli[ a @t.111111m111 1.z � 1'�� [ 1t711i1111111 I! t1 ��' � � . II.m. pLL . n al 4 fill p i 116 '11 1 m ii Ij, i RE ii {�li�' 1 ! t iEI lit @.'rip )IiI Pi ` ,i'I i EEE I6 Il111 g. o 11 ifI raj=s\ e ` b 91Yy4•gl 1 6-ip g s NMC t5c II I p zl { I. sim Iig �i11 tlpli I all i dti al if II t %I X11 [ � 3flN3AV I13H011WAr'1 f 1 ® i1 I I"p a 1 I Mill o p�a89i H� ii 1 vI "h'II I s oh1 io i II [ �❑ tll FFmm 1l is � [l 0 JR all --1® - aeamYSYeeo'¢' x ["• nxexman undrta ,5 _ [wdrFox _ [ �pl<ia p1 99999!99 e elelea '" Jm�kP 1 y /1 w i i—1till' H9 II e!!9!S!! & ++ :6 II 9 9 ilp mp� i p 1� 6f9 w Fsa»rmuan ____��. emnormddo' mdv.ox uwa-- _ _ 3 m 1 ppmf(aa 9 a 9 9 9 lit i� I 1' 1 Y�II l�ia Y1;p Cp C''p! ip (YV^�+• g ©^I. • to i k � 111�" 1! 191 NVIO01pao-". • ti h it 11 I ;i S 5 sl 1 -------- Pr - o p11 ,j ---- 1 �® �fi ° I � lid 1 9 ilii a5'p9 ml IF1Y z p 19ii1 jijBl I�i�l m If m 1 � W ^— z vJ U W [� mm3aanmeN -C qg k II 9 pi 911' �� • ' 9 ipi y 1 il. f 111!1111 o WLIJ �� i e e7 9 �pAiCilli i a �a Z 1119iP!iItl 1�a11ilE� �I \ai LL �Qui r a j 530N30163a AIIWVd 310NIS DMISIX3 ATTACHMENT D Submitted Public Comments From: Jack & Kay Shafer [ma ilto:j.kay@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 3:59 PM To: retiredpucketts@aol.com Cc: Al Murray Subject: Development at corner of Browning & Mitchell Avenues Dear Mr. Puckett, I am writing to you concerning the three story townhouses that are planned for the corner of Browning & Mitchell Ave.. I am so downhearted to see the kind of developments that are going on in Tustin in the last year or so, and I am particularly disappointed in this project. Our single family home, which we have lived in for 37 years, backs up to this property. However the difference between what is there now, and what is proposed is dramatic and chilling. The density is going from 60 units to 77 units, and the height is going from one and a couple two stories, to three stories. Now, I understand the property is zoned for high density, which I am told would accommodate 71 units. However, the developer wants to rezone so they can stick in 77 units. Also, I do not understand how one could put in 3 stories next to single family homes, and stick them within 10 feet of the back yards of these homes. I am so disappointed in what the city is doing to the beauty of Tustin. I don't care how beautiful the builder thinks his development is it just does not do this city justice. We, the homeowners who back up to this monstrosity will have a 32 foot wall at our back that will obstruct the morning sun, and bock the skyline, not to mention restrict airflow. The density of the project will cause traffic congestion, and other human service problems. All we are asking is that you consider the height and density of this project and give us a fair hearing so that our quality of life is not negated in exchange for the dollars from big developers and developments. In final I would like to ask you, one and all, how you would like to have this 3 story wall put up 10 feet behind your yard. We are just asking for some modifications. Thank you for reading this. We will see you at the Planning meeting. Sincerely, Jack & Kay Shafer From: HERRON320@aol.com [mailto:HERRON320@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 4:30 PM To: John Nielsen Subject Townhouse Development at Mitchell/Browning As residents of Cloverbrook Dr. since 1975, we are concerned with the pending plans for the townhouse development. This project will abutt our property and negatively impact our home value, privacy, and be incompatible with the surrounding single family homes. This development will have a set -back of 10 feet from our property line. Initially we were told that the perimeter units would be two story but now the plans show that the perimeter units will be two story and a loft, making them 32 feet high. The interior units will go up to 36 feet. We would like a more compatible development that would not block the morning sun, limit privacy, and destroy the beauty of our home. We hope that you will take this into consideration and vote accordingly. Sincerely, James and Julie Herron 14292 Cloverbrook Dr. Tustin Toby B. Moore, PhD 14451 Pinebrook Drive Tustin, CA 92780 August 22, 2007 VIA FACSIMILE 714-573-3113 &EMAIL mashabi@tustinca.org Minoo Ashabi Associate Planner, Community Development Department City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 RE: COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR HAMPTON VILLAGE TOWN HOMES, TRACT 17069 (AKA SUNCAL- BROWNING LLC, APN 432-342-30) LOCATED AT 1972 MITCHELL AVE AND 14251-14351 BROWNING AVENUE IN THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. Ashabi: The initial study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Hampton Village Town Home project (SunCal-Browning LLC) prepared by the City and approved by the Community Development Department on August 2, 2007 is not adequate in three areas and should be addressed prior to City approval of this study. These impacts if not mitigated could have critical impacts to the residents of Tustin in the vicinity of the project and, more importantly, to the safety of our children as they play and walk to/from the adjacent elementary school located on Browning Avenue (W.R.Nelson Elementary). The three areas are: 1. Impacts by Hazardous Materials; 2. Impacts by increased traffic; and, 3. Impacts by reduced street parking. Section VH - Hazardous Materials: The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration document indicates that no storage or transport of hazardous materials is anticipated. However, the study fails to address the potential for existing building materials to contain such materials which may have exposure pathways to surrounding residents, to site workers during site demolishing activities, or to school children walking to or playing at Nelson Elementary which is located across the street from the site. The existing buildings have Proposition 65 placards located in three locations at the areas of ingress/regress, one on Browning and two on Mitchell, which Ms. Minoo Ashabi August 22, 2007 Comments to Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, Hampton Village Town Home Page'2 indicate that the exiting buildings contain asbestos and other potentially hazardous materials. Mitigation measures should be put in place regarding these items. Prior to demolition and grading activities, it is recommended that a licensed asbestos inspector be retained to determine the presence of asbestos -containing materials (ACMs) within the existing structures and underground piping. If such ACMs are present, the developer shall comply with all applicable Federal and State ACM abatement procedures for their proper removal and disposal. Prior to demolition and grading activities, it is recommended that a licensed lead-based paint (LBP) inspector be retained to determine the presence of any LBPs. Any residential structure constructed before 1978 may have LBP. If any LBP is present, the developer shall comply with all applicable Federal and State LBP abatement procedures for their proper removal and disposal. This removal should be completed prior to any demolition activity that would create lead dust. Removal should be performed in accordance with CCR Title 8 regulations which include limits to exposure, exposure monitoring, respiratory protection and the like. Section XV — Transportation/Traffic: A traffic study was included as an appendix to the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. The study is inadequate and failed to take into account several key factors. I would like to address several of those factors and provide my personal observations and concerns as a resident on Pinebrook Drive which is a cul-de-sac adjacent to this project and directly across from Nelson Elementary School. Pedestrian circulation patterns and safety and impact to Nelson School and neighborhood children should be evaluated. The study determined that a projected 737 average daily trips will be attributable to the project which is an increase of 334 trips or 83% more trips from the current conditions. Such an increase in daily traffic is a significant increase to the existing land use and could severely impact traffic and child pedestrian safety due to the increased traffic immediately in front of one of Tustin's elementary schools. Currently, substantial traffic exists on Browning Avenue and Pinebrook Drive, the adjacent cul-de-sac, during morning rush which coincides with school drop-off activities at Nelson Elementary School. A crosswalk is located at the intersection of Browning and Pinebrook Drive. There are no stop signs so the crosswalk is monitored by a crossing guard during school drop-off and pick-up periods during the week while school is in session. As such, Pinebrook Drive has become the main parking and turnaround for the school. As traffic builds up behind the crosswalk for traffic traveling south along Browning toward Walnut, traffic diverts and results in illegal turn activity and increase traffic on the small cul-de-sac. This results in increased impacts to the residents of Ms. Minoo Ashabi August 22, 2007 Comments to Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, Hampton Village Town Home Page 3 Pinebrook Drive as well to increase safety concerns for the children using this area as a drop-off or the children on Pinebrook walking to school. The traffic study failed to consider traffic onto Pinebrook Drive at all or directly into the school driveways on Browning Avenue. There were projections of traffic into the school at one location. However the study states that "traffic volumes at the school driveway are not being analyzed as part of this analysis." Flow and impacts to both the school and Pinebrook Drive should be analyzed and mitigation measures implemented. The current property has three locations for ingress/regress. One is located on Browning Avenue and accounts for approximately 20%n of the parking and street access and two are located on Mitchell Avenue accounting for 80% of the, parking and street access. The proposed project will have only one driveway for access and will be located along Browning Avenue. The study estimates that 95% of the project traffic will utilize the stretch of road along Browning to Walnut which passes the school and Pinebrook Drive. No analysis was performed to determine how mush of the current site uses Mitchell as a through fare to Red Hill and does not utilize the Browning/Walnut corridor. No analysis was reported for traffic along Mitchell in the study. In addition, the study incorrectly assumes that the project as proposed will have the same age/occupation makeup as the current apartment complex. Such an assumption is faulty since the proposed project will likely have a larger percentage of younger professionals who can afford home ownership as opposed to the current population which may have a higher percentage of retired, non- working residents. This factor will also impact any traffic analysis performed. Any analysis without considering such items is flawed and any projected trips will be incorrect. This should be included in any study of environmental impact. It should also be noted that the Tustin City Council has recently decided to draft a letter to city of Irvine expressing concern that a Irvine project at the intersection of Jamboree and Interstate 405 will generate considerable vehicle traffic in the City of Tustin. This increased traffic was not considered in recent traffic studies such as the "Red Hill Avenue" traffic study and I presumed in this study as well. The "Red Hill Avenue" traffic study was used in another SunCal development that the city recently approved in the vicinity of this project at the intersection of Walnut and Red Hill. It was relayed in an article in the Orange County Register on August 13, 2007 that the Scott Reekstin, Tustin Senior Planner was quoted as saying "Given the proposed traffic increases and proposed/planned change of uses... there needs to be a comprehensive evaluation of the amount of additional development activity that can actually be supported by the existing infrastructure." As such, a new traffic study is warranted prior to any approval of an environmental study under CEQA. Parking is another item that was not adequately addressed in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. While the project will include 154 covered parking spaces and an additional 26 uncovered spaces on-site, it will eliminate all parking along Browning Avenue in front of the site. The document incorrectly assumes that all on -street parking Ms. Minoo Ashabi August 22, 2007 Comments to Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, Hampton Village Town Home Page 4 currently in front of the project belongs to the residents of the project. A quick count shows that approximately 25 parking spaces are currently in use in front of the project. Mitchell Avenue has many multi-residental properties and it is highly likely that other's use this area for parking. Without any analysis, it is unknown as to how many spots on average can be attributed to other residential properties. The elimination of these 25 spots will result in increase demand in the surrounding arca such as on the neighboring side streets such as Pinebrook Drive. Currently, several vehicles are observed to be regularly parked overnight on Pinebrook Drive and their owners do not reside on Pinebrook drive. Several are observed to be picked up and dropped off by others using other vehicles, an indication that parking is scarce in the area. This activity will only increase with the new project and the impacts should be evaluated and mitigated. In conclusion, the Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared by City Staff is inadequate as it pertains to hazardous materials, traffic, parking. Additional study and/or mitigation measures are warranted under CEQA. If these items cannot be adequately mitigated, a full EIR should be commissioned and approved prior to project approval or conditional use approval. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments during this comment period and please enter my letter as part of the administrative record. Sincerely, Toby B. Moore, PhD Cc via email: Mr. Brett Floyd, Chair, Planning Commission, City of Tustin Mr. Lou Bone, Mayor, City of Tustin Mr. Jerry Amante, Mayor Pro Tem, City of Tustin Mr. Doug Davert, Councilmember, City of Tustin Mr. Tony Kawashima, Councilmember, City of Tustin Mr. Jim Palmer, Councilmember, City of Tustin Mr. Richard Bray, Superintendent, Tustin Unified School District Mr. John Launch, Principal, W.R. Nelson Elementary School ATTACHMENT E Resolution No. 4064 and Exhibit A (Mitigated Negative Declaration) RESOLUTION NO. 4064 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTING THE FINAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR ZONE CHANGE 06-002, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17096, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024 AND DESIGN REVIEW 06-020, A PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP AN EXISTING 60 -UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH A NEW 77 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED AT 1972 MITCHELL AVENUE AND 14251-14351 BROWNING AVENUE The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. The applicant (Sun -Cal Browning LLC) has requested to rezone and subdivide a 4.1 acre (net area) property currently developed with 60 apartment units for development of a new 77 -unit condominium project. The properties are located at 1972 Mitchell Avenue and 14251-14351 Browning Avenue; B. That the requested zone change, conditional use permit, tentative tract map, and design review are considered a "project' subject to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources Code §21000 et. seq.); C. That City staff prepared an Initial Study to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with Zone Change 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096, Conditional Use Permit 06-024, and Design Review 06-020 that concluded, with mitigation measures, potential significant impacts can be reduced to a level of insignificance and a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared; D. That a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published and the Negative Declaration and Initial Study were made available for a 20 -day public review and comment period from August 3, 2007, to August 22, 2007, in compliance with Sections 15072 and 15105 of the State CEQA Guidelines; E. Public comments were received and a Final Negative Declaration with response to submitted comments was prepared; E. That the City Council is the final authority for the project and will consider the MND prior to action on Zone Change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17080; and, Resolution No. 4064 Page 2 F. The Planning Commission considered the Initial Study and the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit A) and finds it sufficient for the proposed Zone Change 06-002, Conditional Use Permit 06-024 Tentative Tract Map 17096, and Design Review 06-020. II. The Planning Commission hereby adopts Final Mitigated Negative Declaration attached hereto as Exhibit A and Mitigation Monitoring Report attached hereto as Exhibit B for Zone Change 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096, Conditional Use Permit 06-024, and Design Review 06-020 for the subdivision and development of 77 condominium units on properties located at 1972 Mitchell Avenue and 14251-14351 Browning Avenue. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 28th day of August, 2007. JOHN NIELSEN Chair Pro Tem ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4064 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day August, 2007. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary Exhibit A Planning Commission Resolution No. 4064 Mitigated Negative Declaration INITIAL STUDY I:1�:1:C�;(eT: r ns17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 Project Title: Hampton Village (TTM 17096) Zone Change 06-002 Conditional Use Permit 06-024 Design Review 06-020 Lead Agency: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, California 92780 Lead Agency Contact Person: Minoo Ashabi Phone: (714) 573-3126 Project Location: 1972 Mitchell Avenue 14251-14351 Browning Avenue Project Sponsor's SunCal-Browning LLC Name and Address: c/o Southwind Realty Group 18301 Von Karman, Suite 710 Irvine, CA 92612 General Plan Designation: High Density Residential Zoning Designation: Existing - Suburban Residential (R-4) Proposed - Multiple Family Residential (R-3) Project Description: A request to demolish an existing apartment complex containing 60 units on a 4.1 -acre (net area) site and redeveloping the site with 77 three story condominium units Surrounding Uses: Noah: Residential (R-2) East: Residential (R-1) & MHP South: Residential (R-1) West: Residential (R-1) Other public agencies whose approval is required: M Orange County Fire Authority ❑ City of Irvine ❑ Orange County Health Care Agency ❑ City of Santa Ana ❑ South Coast Air Quality Management ❑ Orange County District EMA ❑ Other B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Section D below. ❑Land Use and Planning ❑Population and Housing ❑Geological Problems ❑Water ❑Air Quality ❑Transportation & Circulation []Biological Resources ❑Energy and Mineral Resources C. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑Hazards ❑Noise [-]Public Services ❑Utilities and Service Systems ❑Aesthetics ❑Cultural Resources ❑Recreation ❑Mandatory Findings of Significance ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Z 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 l) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Preparer: Minoo Ashabi Title Associate Planner Date ?. 7.0;Pr- Elizabeth A. Binsack, Community Development Director 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? 11. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland Would the project: a) Convert Prune Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which excece quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ❑ Less Than ❑ Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Signfeant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Z ❑ 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? 0 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: - Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064:5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Less Than ❑ IR Significant ❑ Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Ibnpact Incorporation Impact No Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ IR ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ IR ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 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 (2001), creating substantial risks to life or property? 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? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on 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 for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ❑ Less Than ❑ ❑ Significant ❑ Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ 19 ❑ ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ Z g) hnpair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: —Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b)Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing laud uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on - or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stomlwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 0 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities? Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Signifcant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1) Potentially impact storrawater runoff from post - construction :activities? m) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading, docks or other outdoor work areas? n) Result in a potential for discharge of stomiwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING — Would the project a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES'—Would the project a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE — Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Less Than ® ❑ Significant ❑ Poteniial7v With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 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? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excess noise levels? XILPOPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII, PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result insubstantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities"? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ IR ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ Less Than ® ❑ ❑ Significant ® ❑ Potentially With Less Than ❑ Significant Mitigation Significant ❑ Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ M ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ IR ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ XIV. RECREATION— a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC — Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e, result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS— Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ❑ Less Than 0 ❑ Significant ❑ Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 9 d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and Local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ll; BdNINWIRW Hill CmdWRW !fill Tow h wm - initiolanidy.da ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Less Than ❑ Significant ❑ Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Irnpact ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ z ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ i EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17096 DESIGN REVIEW 06-020 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024 ZONE CHANGE 06-002 HAMPTON VILLAGE TOWN HOMES BACKGROUND The property is located within the Suburban Residential (R-4) zoning district and High Density Residential land use designation. The project site is located at the southwest comer of Mitchell Avenue and Browning Avenue and surrounded by single family residential units on the south and west, Browning Avenue, single family residential units and a mobile home park to the east and Mitchell Avenue, and duplexes and apartment units to the north. The proposed 4.9 -acre site (gross area) is currently developed with a 60 -unit apartment complex known as Rancho Sierra Vista Apartments. All existing units at the site are proposed to be demolished. The existing zoning designation would allow a maximum of 71 units on the existing 4.9 acre (gross) site that includes property to be dedicated to the City for a street right-of-way. The applicant has requested a zone change to rezone the property to Multiple Family Residential (R-3) to redevelop the site with 77 condominium units. As previously indicated, the proposal would also include dedication of property along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue, which would reduce the net site area to 4.1 acres. The proposed rezone would allow development of the site with a density of 18.8 du/acre, consistent with the current general plan High Density Residential designation of 15-25 du/acre, In addition, for subdivision and development of the site a tentative tract map, design review, and conditional use permit applications are required. Approval of the design review would address the site and architectural design of the site. Approval of a conditional use permit is required to construct structures over 20 feet in height adjacent to single family residential uses (Tustin City Code Section 9226c). This analysis evaluates the environmental impact of the proposed 77 -unit condominium project in comparison to the existing 60 -unit apartment complex. The site is proposed to include one 6-plex, eleven 5-plex buildings, and four 4-plex buildings designed as town homes with garage access through private alleys. Ten of the 5-plex buildings are connected with a covered breezeway. Units along Mitchell Avenue have direct access to the street by raised stoops and the units located along Browning Avenue are accessed by the breezeway from the street and from the interior green courts. The units are designed as three stories and two stories with a loft and include 2-3 bedrooms that range in size from 1,803 square feet to 2,068 square feet. The main entry drive to the project curves to the south as it provides access to the private alleys. The pool and recreation area are nestled between buildings located south of the project entrance on Browning Avenue, I. Items a, & b — No Impact: The subject property is not located on a scenic vista. The property is a 4.1 -acre parcel currently developed with one story apartment buildings and is surrounded by developed parcels. Significant landscaping in the form of mature pine trees exists along the Mitchell Avenue right-of-way that will continue to be maintained. Additional trees are Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 2 proposed along the perimeter and interior of the site with emphasis at the corner and project entry. For redevelopment of the site, the existing on-site trees are proposed to be removed and new landscaping will be installed. The proposed project would not disturb any rock outcroppings or historical buildings, and the site is not located on a State scenic highway. Items c & d — Less than Significant Impact: The project would involve construction of new three-story and two-story with loft structures that would change the visual character of the area. The existing one-story apartments were developed in the 1960s and appear dated; therefore, redevelopment of the site would enhance the visual characteristics of the area with new contemporary structures and new landscaping. The project is designed to adhere to the Multiple Family Residential development standards with respect to setbacks, height, parking standards, and landscaping guidelines and the City's Private Street Improvement Standards. Although the project proposes three-story structures to replace existing one-story structures, the proposed buildings have been designed to be sensitive to the existing neighboring residences. The site abuts a single family residential neighborhood on two sides. The applicant has placed the buildings 10 feet from the westerly property line and 16 feet from the southerly property line. Units proposed along the single family residential property lines have been designed at two stories with a loft that are 2-5 feet lower in height than other proposed units on the site. To provide a green screen, significant landscaping in the form of upright trees is proposed on the westerly and southerly site boundaries. In addition, no balconies will be located within these areas and window openings are smaller in size and carefully placed to minimize intrusion of privacy on the adjacent existing residential properties. The proposed buildings are set back 15 feet from Mitchell Avenue and 10 feet from Browning Avenue. The proposed setbacks meet the minimum development standards for front and side yard setbacks; however, since the primary streetscape is oriented along Browning Avenue, the applicant will be required to maintain the same setback on both street fronts to provide for improved streetscape design and better livability of these units with more privacy and fewer noise impacts from Browning Avenue. Additionally, the increased setback would allow for architectural relief and added articulation along the streetscape. The proposed condominium complex would generate new light sources with the installation of new exterior lighting for streets, alleys, landscape areas, patios, and parking areas. In addition, the developer would be required to install additional street lights on Browning Avenue to meet the City's standards for public streets. However, the new sources of light would not adversely affect day- or night-time views in the area since the number of lights would be compatible with a typical residential project and would be required to comply with the City's security code standards. In addition, all lights would be required to be arranged so that no direct rays would shine onto adjacent properties. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-.002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 3 Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Section 8103(w)15 Private Street Standards Tustin Security Ordinance IL AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Items a, b & c — No Impact: The project site is currently improved with residential buildings and surrounded by other developed residential buildings. The proposed project will have no impact on any farmland, nor will it conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. The proposed project will not result in the conversion of farmland to a non- agricultural use. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Tustin General Plan Field Inspection Submitted Plans III. AIR OUALTTY Items a, b, c, d & e — Less Than Significant Impact: The project will temporarily increase the amount of short-term emissions to the area due to the proposed demolition, grading, and construction activities at the property. Since the site is relatively flat, only minor grading will be required. Redevelopment of the site would result in 17 additional residential units that are well below the thresholds of significance established by Tables 6-2 (operation thresholds) and 6-3 (construction thresholds) of the Air Quality Management District's CEQA Air Quality Handbook, which notes that construction of fewer than 297 condominium units is not considered a significant impact. In addition, cumulative construction within the area does not exceed the established AQMD thresholds. Less than significant short-term emissions associated with demolition, grading, construction, and operation of the proposed project will comply with the regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the City of Tustin Grading Manual, which include requirements for dust control. As such, the proposed project will not create a significant impact related to air quality. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules & Regulations Air Quality Management District's CEQA Air Quality Handbook City of Tustin Grading Manual Project Application Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 4 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Items a, b, c, d, e & f—No Impact: The project site is currently improved with residential buildings and surrounded by other developed residential buildings. The site is not inhabited by any sensitive species of animals and would have no impacts on animal populations, diversity of species, or migratory patterns. No wetlands exist within the project site. No impacts to any unique, rare, or endangered species of plant or animal life identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would occur as a result of this project. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Field Inspection Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Items a — No Impact: The project site is currently improved with residential buildings built in the 1960s and surrounded by other developed residential buildings. The property is not located in an area where any cultural or historic resources have been previously identified on the site. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Items b, c & d - Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation The proposed project is redevelopment of an existing residential site and is not located in an area with undisturbed land. However, as a standard grading condition of approval, if buried resources are found during grading within the project area, a qualified archaeologist would need to assess the resource and recommend appropriate mitigation. The Native American viewpoint would be considered during this process. With the mitigation measures listed below, potential impacts to archeological resources would be reduced to less than significant. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: If buried resources are found during grading within the project area, a qualified archaeologist would need to assess the site significance and perform the appropriate mitigation. The Native American viewpoint shall be considered during this process. This could include testing or data recovery. Native American consultation shall also be initiated during this process. Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 5 Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS Items a -ii, a -iii, b & d — Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed buildings will be located within an area of the City that is Imown to contain expansive soils which may subject people or structures to strong seismic ground shaking and seismic -related ground failure including liquefaction. However, a soils report is required to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits per the 2001 California Building Code to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 18, which requires proper excavation and fills for buildings, structures, foundations, and retaining structures, and appropriate construction techniques to ensure seismic stability in sites depending on their soils or geological concerns. No significant impact is anticipated since the project must comply with the 2001 Uniform Building Code related to Chapter 18. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required Sources: Tustin General Plan Tustin Grading Manual 2001 California Building Code Chapter 16 and 18 Items a -i, a -iv, c, & e — No Impact: The project site is not located within an area identified as a fault zone on the Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. However, a soils report is required to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits per the 2001 California Building Code to demonstrate compliance with Chapter 18, which requires proper excavation and fills for buildings, structures, foundations, and retaining structures, and appropriate construction techniques to ensure seismic stability in sites depending on their soils or geological concerns. The project will be required to be engineered to withstand unstable soils, possible landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse as they relate to the this specific site. Since all new buildings in the City are required to operate on the existing sewer system, the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems will not be necessary. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required Sources: Tustin General Plan Tustin City Code 2001 California Building Code Chapter 16 and 18 California Seismic Hazard Zone Map, Tustin Quadrangle, January 17, 2001 Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 6 Items a, b, c, d, e, f, Q, and h — No Impact The proposed project involves construction of 77 condominium units. No storage or transport of hazardous materials is anticipated from the proposed residential development. The project would not result in exposure to hazardous substances other than the possibility of household hazardous waste which residents could properly dispose of at approved County drop-off locations. A residential project is not anticipated to store or emit hazardous materials which could create a hazard to adjacent properties, schools, or the general public if released into the environment. The scope and location of the project has no potential to interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The site is in an urbanized area and has no potential to expose people or structures to a significant risk due to wildland fires. All grading and construction is subject to compliance with all applicable Uniform Building and Fire Codes. As such, the project is not anticipated to result in any significant hazards. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan Approved Fire Master Plan Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required VIII. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY Items a, b, f, g, h, i, j, and p — No Impact: The project site is relatively flat, and the proposed project will continue to maintain a relatively flat site with improved site drainage and additional landscaping. A significant amount of stormwater received on-site will percolate into the soil where landscaping is provided and the remaining stormwater will be conveyed through a fossil filter prior to entering a City stormdrain. City stromwater infrastructure is currently available to accommodate storm water from the project. The applicant must provide a drainage and hydrology report to the City and demonstrate that the private storm water drainage system will be able to handle the capacity of any storm water directed into the system. Best Management Practices are required to be implemented during construction to deter water from flowing off-site. Best Management Practices will also be implemented to ensure that, once the project is constructed, storm water leaving the site will be filtered prior to entering the storm drain. As such, the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degrade water quality in the area. The project by nature would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project is located within Zone X (areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood), as mapped on a Flood Insurance Rate Map. Accordingly, the project will be designed and graded with an appropriate drainage system to avoid any potential flood hazards. The project site will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, or Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 7 by inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Nor would the project increase significant erosion at the project site or surrounding areas. Mitigation Measures/MonitoringRequired: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code 4900 et al Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map 06059CO281H, February 18, 2004 Items c, d, e, k,1, in, n & o — Less Than Significant Impact The project site is relatively flat, and the proposed project will continue to maintain a relatively flat site with improved site drainage, including drive aisles, curbs and gutters, and additional landscaping. With new construction, there is the potential to impact stormwater runoff from construction and post -construction activities with stormwater pollutants from landscaped areas and trash enclosures. There is also the potential for the discharge of stormwater that could affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters and changes in the flow velocity or volume of stoma water runoff. However, the project is required to comply with the City's Water Quality Ordinance and most recently adopted NPDES permit (Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Order R8- 2002-0010), thus reducing any potential impacts to a level of insignificance. Together, these regulations minimize water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into local waters. As such, the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degrade water quality in the area. Mitigation Measures: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required Sources: Field Verification Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Section 4900 et a] IX. LAND USE PLANNING Items a & e —No Impact: The proposed project would not divide an established community since it includes construction on an existing site that is already improved with multiple -family residences. The proposed project is not located in a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable conservation plan. Item b — Less Than Significant Impact: Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 8 The property is designated by the General Plan Land Use Map as High Density Residential and is currently located within the Suburban Residential (R-4) zoning district. The proposed 4.9 -acre site (gross area) is currently developed with a 60 -unit apartment complex. The existing zoning designation would allow a maximum of 71 units on the 4.9 acre site including the street right-of-way. To redevelop the site with 77 condominium units, the applicant has requested a zone change to rezone the property to Multiple Family Residential (R-3). The proposal would also include a right-of-way dedication along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue, which would reduce the net site area to 4.1 acres. The proposed rezone would allow development of the site with a density of 18.8 du/acre, consistent with the allowable general plan residential density of 15-25 du/acre. If approved, the proposed project would increase the percentage of ownership housing consistent with Goal 3 of the City's Housing Element, the project is accessible through the City's current street system, and the project could be supported with existing transportation and public facilities. Mitigation Measures Required: The development exceeds the allowable number of units under the current zoning requirements. Approval of a zone change by Tustin City Council to rezone the property from Suburban Residential (R-4) zoning district to Multiple Family Residential (R-3) is required for development of the proposed project. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan Tustin Zoning Code Tustin Zoning Map X. MINERAL RESOURCES Items a & b — No Impact: The proposed project is not located on a mineral resource recovery site. The construction of a condominium project on a lot which is improved with existing apartment buildings will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XI. NOISE Item a — Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation The project site is located at the southwest comer of Browning and Mitchell Avenues, and therefore is exposed to significant traffic related noise. The City's noise ordinance requires a maximum 45 dB value for interior noise and 65 dB for exterior noise. The City's General Plan recognizes that residents adjacent to major and secondary arterials are typically exposed to a CNEL over 65 dB. Table N-2 of the Tustin Noise Element Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 9 identifies potential conflicts between the land uses and the noise environment. Per Table N-2, most of the project site falls within Zone A through Zone B. Zone A requires no mitigation measures for noise while Zone B requires minor soundproofing as needed. An acoustical study was submitted by the project proponent, which indicated that the private outdoor living areas along Browning Avenue would be exposed to a maximum unmitigated traffic noise of 60.7 CNEL and 59.7 CNEL along Mitchell Avenue. The proposed project would meet the City's noise requirement for outdoor areas; therefore, no mitigation will be required. To meet the interior noise standards, the buildings along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue would require a noise reduction of 15.7 dB to achieve a maximum interior 45 dB value. With construction practices common in California, residential buildings achieve outdoor to indoor noise reduction of at least 20dB. The noise analysis also indicates that the noise attenuation of a building falls about U dB with windows open and recommends mitigation measures to provide adequate ventilation for homes along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue (Exhibit - Noise Analysis). The noise reduction technique recommended by the acoustical analysis would be implemented and required as a condition of approval. With the mitigation measures listed below, potential noise impact would be reduced to less than significant. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: All units along Browning and Mitchell Avenue as indicated in the attached noise analysis shall be equipped with air conditioners with a summer switch for fresh air intake to allow adequate ventilation and noise attenuation. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code 4611 et al Tustin General Plan Acoustical Study (Exhibit 1) Items b, c & d— Less Than Significant Impact: Although the grading and construction of the site may result in typical temporary construction noise impacts, the Tustin Noise Ordinance only allows construction activities to occur during the daytime on Monday through Saturday. The proposed project will not create excessive ground vibrations, nor will it create a permanent increase in the existing ambient noise levels beyond the City's established standards. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Section 4611 et al Tustin General Plan Item e & f—No Impact: Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CLIP 06-024 Page 10 The site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two (2) miles of a public or private airport/airstrip. The proposed project is three stories in height consistent with the City's maximum height limit and similar to other structures in the vicinity. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XII. POPULATION & HOUSING Items a. b. and c — No Impact: The project involves the proposed construction of a condominium project on a site that is currently improved with apartment complexes including 60 units known as Rancho Sierra Vista Apartments. The proposed project would remove and replace the existing 60 units with 77 units that would not result in significant population growth in the area. The existing apartment units are rented at market rate (not considered as affordable units) and the existing residents are on a month-to-month lease. While there will be displacement of existing residents as a result of the proposed project, the displacement would not be substantial nor necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere since the impact could be absorbed by the local rental market. The project is privately financed and no public funds are involved that would trigger relocation pursuant to state law. However, the applicant has submitted a Tenant Leasing and Relocation Plan that indicates that a minimum 120 -day notice will be provided prior to vacation of the property, tenants would continue to be on a month-to-month lease basis and the last month's rent would be waived, which should provide the tenants with adequate time and monetary incentives to relocate. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Item a— Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project is in an existing urbanized area where fire and police protection are currently provided. While police patrols to the area may be needed from time to time to ensure safety, no new additional police protection would be required as a result of the proposed project. The Police Department has recommended measures to reinforce safety and effectively patrol the area, which will be included as conditions of approval. The project would utilize existing infrastructure and is not anticipated to increase the need for new streets, public services, or infiastructure. Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 11 The proposed project is located within the Tustin Unified School District (TUSD). The proposed 17 additional units are not anticipated to cause a significant rise in the number of students served by local schools. The TUSD will receive its statutory school impact fees per Senate Bill 50 from the residential developer as a condition of approval for the project prior to issuance of the building permit. Other Public Facilities (Libraries). Implementation of the project would only result in a minor library demand which can be accommodated with the existing library facilities. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code XIV. R)FCREATION Items a & b —No Impact: The project would include a private community pool recreation area to benefit the residents of the project. However, since the size of the recreation area does not comply with the minimum criteria for parkland dedication, the project would be conditioned to pay in lieu fees for parkland dedication in accordance with Section 9331 of the Tustin City Code. The developer has indicated that they will pay in lieu fees to comply with Tustin City Code. While the residents of the project may use existing City parks, the increased use of these parks would not be such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated, nor does the project propose recreational facilities that would have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay parkland in lieu fees based on Tustin City Code Section 933 Ld.3 Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Items a — Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation: A traffic study was submitted and reviewed by the City's Engineering Division (Exhibit 2). The study concluded that the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 737 average daily trips, which in comparison with the existing development, would be an increase of 334 daily trips. The traffic analysis considered the traffic impacts to the Browning Avenue and Walnut Avenue intersection and concluded that there is adequate Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 12 capacity to accommodate the proposed project under short-term (2008) and long-term (2025) conditions. The project does not create a significant impact under the City of Tustin's performance criteria. The AM and PM peak hour volumes for the entire project are approximately 70 vph, or just a little over one vehicle per minute. Based on the submitted traffic analysis, no delay with entering and exiting the site is expected during any time of day. The internal circulation system for the project is basically a "T" shaped pattern with a single entrance. The main street is 36 feet wide and provides for parking on both sides and the alleys are 25 feet wide with no parking permitted. The site is located near an elementary school with the main entrance off of Browning Avenue. The school's morning drop-off time coincides with the AM peak hour of the project. During that time an additional 17 project vehicles will be traveling southbound on Browning Avenue. The traffic study concluded that the project -generated traffic volume is not expected to create significant increase to traffic congestion at the school entrance and no impacts are anticipated in the PM peak hour. For development of the project, the developer will be responsible for implementing roadway improvements on Browning Avenue to provide more accessibility and visibility at the new four-way intersection of the main entrance to the project with Sandfield Place. With incorporation of the following mitigation measures on Browning Avenue, the traffic impacts for this project will be reduced to less than significant: Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: • The traffic signage and striping plan shall incorporate all requirements outlined in the traffic impact analysis, including turning lanes on Browning Avenue and parking restrictions adjacent to the site. • Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit a Construction Management Plan, as required under the Traffic Impact Analysis, for the site to address safety issues, such as regulating construction access to the site during children's arrival and departure from the nearby school. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 2) Items b, c, d, e, and g — No Impact: The project will not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. The proposed project will not induce substantial population or growth, result in changes to air traffic patterns, or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation such as bus turnouts or bicycle racks. Seventy-seven units are proposed, which require a two -car garage per unit and 20 guest parking spaces at one guest parking space for every four units. In accordance with the R-3 requirements, Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 13 the project provides 25 on-site parking spaces, which is sufficient parking to comply with current parking requirements for the proposed use. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: None Required Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Item f - Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation: In accordance with Tustin City Code Section 9226, all units include a two -car garage and 25 guest parking spaces are provided. The on-site street layout results in a short T intersection that may be inadequate for access and circulation of disposal service trucks; therefore, the applicant has submitted a Waste Management Plan that includes storing trash and recycling carts within I1 parking spaces during trash pick up days. To minimize the anticipated parking impact, the plans indicate that the emptied carts are quickly returned to garage alleys by an employee of the homeowners association. With the submitted plan any temporary impacts to the projects on-site parking is expected to be reduced an insignificant level. Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Residents are required to store their trash and recycling carts within the area designated within the garage. Prior to collection day, the residents need to move the carts to an area immediately outside their garage, where a homeowner association employee will be in charge of relocating them to the designated parking stalls that are marked and designated accordingly. The carts shall be placed in the common drives no earlier than noon on the day before scheduled collections and removed within twelve (12) hours of collection. Any changes or modifications to the approved waste management plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Items a, b, c, d, e, f & e — No Impact: The proposed project will not exceed the requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board or require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. If approved, the proposed project will utilize the existing sewer and storm drain systems and thus will not require construction of a new storm water drainage facility or solid waste facility. The project proponent would be required to submit a hydrology report to ensure proper grading, drainage, and connection of planned sewer systems. The project will be served by the City's existing trash hauler contract, thus will not require a new trash hauler. Adequate water supply from existing resources will be available to serve the proposed project. Hampton Village Town Homes TTM 17096, ZC 06-002, DR 06-020, CUP 06-024 Page 14 Mitigation Measures/Monitoring Required: Compliance with existing rules and regulations is not mitigation under CEQA. Consequently, no mitigation is required. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin City Code Tustin General Plan XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Items a, b & c — No Impact: The site is located in the Suburban Residential (R-4) zoning district and currently improved with 60 apartment units. The project includes redevelopment of the site with 77 condominium units. The proposed project design, construction, and operation will comply with applicable City codes and regulations. The project, by nature of its location and as designed, does not have the potential to: degrade the quality of the environment, reduce the habitat of 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. The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of the long-term. The proposed project does not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable or that would cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings. Sources: Submitted Plans Tustin General Plan &.\CddW N00\Hampma Village\Hanrymn - No analysis.doc Exhibit 1 Noise Analysis NOISE ANALYSIS FOR HAMPTON VILLAGE TOWNEHOMES CITY OF TUSTIN Report #06-320 December 11, 2006 Prepared For: Sun Cal — Browning, LLC 2392 Morse Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Prepared By: Fred Greve, P.E. Bill Vasquez Mestre Greve Associates 27812 El Lazo Road Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Phone(949)349-0671 FAX (949) 349-0679 NOISE ANALYSIS FOR HAMPTON VILLAGE TOWNEHOMES CITY OF TUSTIN Report #06-320 December 11, 2006 Prepared For: Sun Cal — Browning, LLC 2392 Morse Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 Prepared By: Fred Greve, P.E. Bill Vasquez Mestre Greve Associates 27812 El Lazo Road Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Phone(949)349-0671 FAX (949) 349-0679 Mestre Greve Associates Report #06-320 Page 2 of 9 SUMMARY NOISE ANALYSIS FOR HAMPTON VILLAGE TOWNEHOMES CITY OF TUSTIN EXTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION The project must comply with the City's 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. For the exterior living areas which are exposed to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL, some form of noise mitigation is required. An effective method of reducing the traffic noise to acceptable levels is with a noise barrier. Representative cross-sections along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue (see the Appendix for analysis data) were analyzed utilizing the FHWA Model to determine the necessary noise barrier locations and heights. The results indicate that observers in private outdoor living areas along Browning Avenue would be exposed to a maximum unmitigated traffic noise level of 60.7 CNEL. The first floor exterior observers along Mitchell Avenue would be exposed to a maximum unmitigated traffic noise level of 59.7 CNEL. Therefore, the project will meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard, noise barriers will not be required along Browning Avenue or Mitchell Avenue. INTERIOR NOISE LEVELS The project must comply with the City of Tustin indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. To meet the interior noise standard, the buildings must provide sufficient outdoor to indoor building attenuation to reduce the noise to acceptable levels. The outdoor to indoor noise reduction characteristics of a building are determined by combining the transmission loss of each of the buildin- elements that make up the building. Each unique building element has a characteristic transmission loss. For residential units, the critical building elements are the roof, walls, windows, doors, attic configuration and insulation. The total noise reduction achieved is dependent upon the transmission loss of each element, and the surface area of that element in relation to the total surface area of the room. Room absorption is the final factor used in determining the total noise reduction. Mestre Greve Associates Report #06-320 Page') of 9 Building surfaces along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue will be exposed to noise levels of 60.7 CNEL. Therefore, these buildings will require 15.7 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the City's 45 CNEL interior noise standard. With construction practices common in California, residential buildings achieve outdoor to indoor noise reductions of at least 20 dB. Therefore, all rooms along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue are projected to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard without budding upgrades, ADEQUATE VENTILATION Since the noise attenuation of a building falls to about 12 dB with windows open, all buildings exposed to noise levels greater than 57 CNEL will meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard only with windows closed. In order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve this required attenuation, adequate ventilation with windows closed must be provided per the applicable Uniform Building Code. Adequate ventilation will be required for those homes Listed in Table S 1 and shown in Exhibit S 1. The acceptability of using air conditioners to meet adequate ventilation requirement varies by municipality. The local jurisdiction and the mechanical engineer for the project should be consulted. Table Sl VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS BUILDING Along Browning Avenue Units in Buildings 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 Along Mitchell Avenue Units in Buildings 8,9 E u ME OP W 15 NOISE ANALYSIS FOR HAMPTON VILLAGE TOWNEHOMES CITY OF TUSTIN 1.0 INTRODUCTION Mestre Greve Associates Report #06-320 Page 4 of 9 The purpose of this report is to demonstrate compliance of the "Hampton Village Townhomes" Project with the noise related `Conditions of Approval' placed on the project by the City of ,Tustin. The project calls for the development of multi -family homes. The project is located in the City of Tustin, as shown in Exhibit 1. The project will be impacted by traffic noise from Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue. In addition, aircraft noise from the John Wayne Airport will be addressed. This report specifies any mitigation measures necessary to meet the. 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. Site plan and grading information was obtained from the grading plans for "Site Plan T.T. No. 17096 for Condominium Purposes" by Hunsaker & Associates, December 4, 2006. Building construction details were obtained from the architectural drawings for the project by the KTGY Group, Inc., December 5, 2006. 2.0 CITY OF TUSTIN NOISE STANDARDS The City of Tustin specifies outdoor and indoor noise limits for traffic noise levels at residential land uses. Both standards are based upon the CNEL index. CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) is a 24-hour time weighted annual average noise level based on the A - weighted decibel. A -weighting is a frequency correction that correlates overall sound pressure levels with the frequency response of the human ear. Time weighting refers to the fact that noise that occurs during certain noise -sensitive time periods is given more significance because it occurs at these times. In the calculation of CNEL, noise occurring in the evening time period (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) is weighted by 5 dB, while noise occurring in the nighttime period (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) is weighted by 10 dB. These time periods and weighting factors are used to reflect increased sensitivity to noise while sleeping, eating, and relaxing. The City of Tustin has adopted an exterior noise standard of 65 CNEL and an interior noise standard of 45 CNEL for residential. do �� PROJECT LOCATION �p G� J� Exhibit 1 -Vicinity Map MESTTtE GREVE ASSOCIATES Mestre Greve Associates Report #06-320 Paae 5 of 9 3.0 METHODOLOGY The traffic noise levels projected in this report were computed using the Highway Noise Model published by the Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model", FHWA-RD-77-108, December 1978). The FHWA Model uses traffic volume, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute the "equivalent noise level". A computer code has been written which computes equivalent noise levels for each of the time periods used in CNEL. Weighting these noise levels and summing them results in the CNEL for the traffic projections used. Mitigation through the design and construction of a noise barrier (wall, berm, or combination wall/berm) is the most common way of alleviating traffic noise impacts. The effect of a noise barrier is critically dependent upon the geometry between the noise source, the barrier, and the observer. A noise barrier effect occurs when the "line of sight" between the noise source and the observer is interrupted by the barrier. As the distance that the noise must travel around the noise barrier increases, the amount of noise reduction increases. 4.0 NOISE EXPOSURE The existing traffic volumes for Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue were obtained from Mr. Terry Lutz at the City of Tustin on December 5, 2006. The projected (year -2026) traffic volumes were calculated from the existing (year -2006) ADT's using an overall 10% growth factor. The traffic volumes, vehicle speeds, and roadway grades used in the CNEL calculations are presented below in Table 1. Table 1 FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES, SPEEDS, AND ROADWAY GRADES ROADWAY Browning Avenue Mitchell Avenue TRAFFIC VOLUME SPEED GRADE 4,840 35 <3% 6,160 30 <3% The traffic distributions for Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue that were used in the CNEL calculations are listed below in Table 2. This arterial traffic distribution estimate was compiled by the Orange County Environmental Management Agency, and is based on traffic counts at 31 intersections throughout the Orange County area. Arterial traffic distribution estimates can be considered typical for arterials in Southern California. Mestre Greve Associates Report #06-320 Page 6 of 9 Table 2 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PER TIME OF DAY IN PERCENT OF ADT VEHICLETYPE DAY EVENING NIGHT Automobile 75.51 12.57 9.34 Medium Truck 1.56 0.09 0.19 Heavy Truck 0.64 0,02 0.08 Using the assumptions presented above, the future noise levels were computed. The results are listed in Table 3 in terms of distances to the 60, 65, and 70 CNEL contours. These represent the distances from the centerline of the roadway to the contour value shown. Note that the values given in Table 3 do not take into account the effect of intervening topography that may affect the roadway noise exposure. Table 3 DISTANCE TO NOISE CONTOURS FOR FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ROADWAY Browning Avenue Mitchell Avenue DISTANCE TO CONTOUR (Fr) -70 CNEL- -65 CNEL- -60 CNEL- RW 26 56 RW 24 51 KW — indicates noise contours falls within Roadway right of way m - Contour distances in this table are based on the centerline of the roadway representing the noise source. The site plan (Exhibit 2) indicates that exterior observers along Browning Avenue would be exposed to a maximum unmitigated traffic noise level of 60.7 CNEL. The exterior observers along Mitchell Avenue would be exposed to a maximum unmitigated traffic noise level of 59.7 CNEL FEI m uL — aLIL, cz f� a J Mestre Greve Associates Report #06-320 Page 7 of 9 4.1 Aircraft Noise Exposure The project is located northeast of the John Wayne Airport. The future CNEL noise contours were acquired from the "EIR 508/EIS — John Wayne Airport and Land Use Compatibility Program". The project is located 5 miles from the John Wayne Airport and 3 miles from the 60 CNEL contour. Analysis of the project location indicates that worst-case aircraft noise levels at the project site will be far less than 60 CNEL. Therefore, aircraft noise will not significantly impact the project site. 5.0 EXTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION The project must comply with the City's 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. For the exterior living areas which are exposed to noise levels greater than 65 CNEL, some form of noise mitigation is required. An effective method of reducing the traffic noise to acceptable levels is with a noise barrier. Representative cross-sections along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue (see the Appendix for analysis data) were analyzed utilizing the FHWA Model to determine the necessary noise barrier locations and heights. The results indicate that observers in private outdoor living areas along Browning Avenue would be exposed to a maximum unmitigated traffic noise level of 60.7 CNEL. The first floor exterior observers along Mitchell Avenue would be exposed to a maximum unmitigated traffic noise level of 59.7 CNEL. Therefore, the project will meet the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard, noise barriers will not be required along Browning Avenue or Mitchell Avenue. 6.0 INTERIOR NOISE LEVELS The project must comply with the City of Tustin indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. To meet the interior noise standard, the buildings must provide sufficient outdoor to indoor building attenuation to reduce the noise to acceptable levels. The outdoor to indoor noise reduction characteristics of a building are determined by combining the transmission loss of each of the building elements that make up the building. Each unique building element has a characteristic transmission loss. For residential units, the critical building elements are the roof, walls, windows, doors, attic configuration and insulation. The total noise reduction achieved is dependent upon the transmission loss of each element, and the surface area of that element in relation to the total surface area of the room. Room absorption is the final factor used in determining the total noise reduction. Mestre Greve Associates Report #06-320 Page 8 of 9 Building surfaces along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue will be exposed to noise levels of 60.7 CNEL. Therefore, these buildings will require 15.7 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the City's 45 CNEL interior noise standard. With construction practices common in California, residential buildings achieve outdoor to indoor noise reductions of at least 20 dB. Therefore, all rooms along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue are projected to meet_ the 45 CNEL interior noise standard without building upgrades. 7.0 ADEQUATE VENTILATION Since the noise attenuation of a building falls to about 12 dB with windows open, all buildings exposed to noise levels greater than 57 CNEL will meet the 45 CNEL interior noise standard only with windows closed. In order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve this required attenuation, adequate ventilation with windows closed must be provided per the applicable Uniform Building Code. Adequate ventilation will be required for those homes listed in Table 4 and shown in Exhibit 3. The acceptability of using air conditioners to meet adequate ventilation requirement varies by municipality. The local jurisdiction and the mechanical engineer for the project should be consulted. Table 4 VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS BUILDING Along Browning Avenue Units in Buildings 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 Along Mitchell Avenue Units in Buildings 8,9 Fol C Lil ILJ amu! J i M 34 4 n 7 Mestte Greve Associates Report #06-320 Page 9 of 9 APPENDIX CALCULATION SPREADSHEETS DATA USED TO DETERMINE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS § \ ¥- 7 ;,»Smle,q,ke!!= &;7/;;f;7 /#! „aF-iGs \ ¥- 7 &;7/;;f;7 \ ¥- 7 g : 7 ;g 2; cs ); q :2 !» & t# :» d d 2\ ;# l«: EMMMIE {I2Ia�»I4 }\ �} Q\ �} - ° g : 7 ;g 2; cs ); q :2 !» & t# :» d d 2\ ;# l«: EMMMIE {I2Ia�»I4 }\ �} Q\ �} :! ■ t$ G /k@m■;@22■@G#@; ■ t$ G 7 I a __ \ ` :{)Z{I! } k- ] �_);;!l;iI7;I;1*I ) \» 2 $ 7 I a __ \ ` :{)Z{I! } ] 7 I a __ Exhibit 2 Traffic Analysis 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Draft CITY OF TUSTIN BROWNING & MITCHELL TOWN HOME PROJECT Traffic Analysis June 2007 ®r®A!/ST/N FOUST SSSSOC14 reS, /NC. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I Draft CITY OF TUSTIN BROWNING & MITCHELL TOWN HOME PROJECT Traffic Analysis Prepared by: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2223 East Wellington Avenue Santa Ana, California 92701-3161 (714)667-0496 June 14, 2007 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................... ......... .......................................................... ..... I ANALYSIS SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY .......................................... ,................. ^............................. l CRITERIA.................................................................................................................... 4 PROJECTDESCRIPTION ................................ ...................................... ..... .... .... .... °^..^,,^...... ,.......... 4 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ....... :................................... ~`-^~ ..................................................... 8 PROJECTIMPACT ANALYSIS .................... ........... ............................. ....... :...................................... 8 PROJECT ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION ...--.........^.....~°-°^.~-..lV SCHOOLIMPACTS........................................................................ ^........................................................ 2l CMEPANALYSIS ......................... ............................................................................................................ 23 PARKING......._...�~'~�~°.--^...~......~.~.-,._.~.....��.-.~.-.~..-.~-...Z4 , � � `..,.+^�v.^`,,S.-'-_~^~°^-,^'~~"_^.^_^^'.~.,`^_—_-`^^^^^^^^~^^~^~~. � .,�.~�4 ~ REFERENCES ~^^~,.."°~.~~°—^-'.~~....'-.`~^°°"-^^~..`.~°°^^...~~~~-..~.~.~~.25 � APPENDICES A: Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheets ]0:Delay Calculation Worksheets U LIST OF FIGURES I ' 1 Project Location............................................................................................................................ 2 2 Proposed Site Plan ........................................................................................................................ 3 ' 3 4 Peak Hour Intersection Volumes — 2006...................................................................................... Project Distribution..................................................................................................................... 9 11 5 Peak Hour Intersection Volumes — Project-Generated............................................................... 12 ' 6 Peak Hour Intersection Volumes — 2008 No Project .................................................................. 14 ' 7 Peak Hour Intersection Volumes — 2008 With Project............................................................... 15 8 Peak Hour Intersection Volumes — 2025 No Project ............................................ .. .......... 17 9 Peak Hour Intersection Volumes — 2025 With Project............................................................... 18 1 1 1 1 LIST OF TABLES ' 1 Level of Service Descriptions — Signalized Intersections............................................................. 5 2 City of Tustin Performance Criteria.............................................................................................. 6 ' 3 4 Land Use and Trip Generation Summary — Proposed Project ...................................................... Level of Service LOS Summar Existing ............................................................. 7 10 5 Level of Service (LOS) Summary — 2008 No Project and With Project .................................... 16 ' 6 7 Level of Service (LOS) Summary — 2025 No Project and With Project .................................... Traffic Delay and Queuing Survey Results — W.R. Nelson Elementary School ........................ 20 22 8 Parking Code Criteria................................................................................................................. 24 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 BROWNING & MITCHELL TOWN HOME PROJECT Traffic Analysis This report presents the results of a traffic analysis performed for the proposed construction of 77 residential town homes in the City of Tustin. It has been prepared for submittal to the City in support of the project application and proposed zoning amendment (to allow two and three-story town home products). The report contains documentation of the methodology and assumptions used in the analysis, and presents the results and findings of the traffic impacts of the proposed project. INTRODUCTION The proposed project is located on a 4.1 -acre site in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue in the City of Tustin. The project location is illustrated in Figure 1' and the proposed site plan is shown in Figure 2. The site is currently occupied by the Rancho Sierra Apartment complex, which contains 60 residential units. The proposed project consists of redevelopment of the site with 77 residential town homes. Access to the project will be via a driveway on Browning Avenue around 500 feet south of Mitchell Avenue. ANALYSIS SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY The study area consists of the intersections of Browning Avenue at Walnut Avenue, and Browning Avenue at Sandfield Place. Intersections beyond these locations would not meet the one percent impact criteria used by the City for traffic studies such as this. Existing (2006) peak hour intersection tum movement volumes are first presented. The project is then analyzed under two time frames, a short-range representing project buildout and a long-range representing City General Plan buildout. The short-range time frame used in this analysis represents the amount of growth that is projected to occur by the time the proposed project is built out in the next two years, and is referred to as year 2008. Year 2008 No Project volumes were formulated using the 2006 traffic volumes as a base, and applying a one percent annual growth factor for two years (two percent total). Project -generated traffic was then added to the 2008 No Project volumes, resulting in the 2008 With Project traffic volumes. Browning & Mitchell Town Home Prciect 1 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.dcc Figure 1 PROJECT LOCATION I Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 2 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001-figl.dwg 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 m .6, Orf 3AN3AY r`I r I A � y � r„r I r mro I rnv r rn+' i�� I r� r rru rnv i rnw r wuI � I I ml r - rmv sx+•rs xw aMTr�rxrw �' rxw swrr less rmvrrm+a. ' I I I III, rxrvllrrxu r`�I rmw rxry ivv"ie rruir e+'u y "F � :v nrr.r my eiv � I r xcv 1 • f � r 9 M•NMTI I x•Tr I k/4 2 xM C Jil• � I [ xVv r M•4 I �,i IMid r MN y .• _. I `p O I ,axw lrxn �xw ' rxw rinisxw!rxru �'' _i„ wwlr rswlr�nur b _i G y0r u:i� - Ys •, 3.9Y7a1 �I1 771 1 I ri g a2 1s Yi * r iia f..• 'i ;: ! C 1' �s x IIS$ N m I Buildout (2025) volumes without the proposed project were derived from 2025 Irvine Transportation Analysis Model (ITAM) ADT forecasts and assume the southward eitension of Tustin Ranch Road to Barranca Parkway southeast of the project (see Reference I). Project -generated traffic volumes were then added to these volumes to give the 2025 With Project volumes. PERFORMANCE CRITERIA i The traffic analysis utilizes a set of performance criteria for evaluating intersection capacity to ' determine potential project impacts. Traffic level of service (LOS) is designated "A" through "F" with LOS "A" representing free flow conditions and LOS "F" representing severe traffic congestion. Table 1 summarizes the general LOS descriptions. The intersection capacity analysis examines AM and PM peak hour volumes and intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values at the intersection of Browning Avenue and Walnut Avenue. Since this ' intersection is currently signalized, ICU methodology is used. The methodology used at the intersection of Browning Avenue and Sandfield Place is consistent with Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) procedures for unsignalized intersections. The performance criteria for each is summarized in Table 2. The City of Tustin has determined that Level of Service "D" is the minimum acceptable level of service ' for peak hour operation. ' PROJECT DESCRIPTION ' The proposed project is located on a 4.1 -acre site in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue in the City of Tustin. The site is currently occupied by the Rancho Sierra Apartment complex, which contains 60 residential units. The proposed project consists of the redevelopment of the site with 77 residential town homes, resulting in a net increase of 17 residential units. 1 Table 3 summaries the existing and proposed land uses and the corresponding trip generation ' estimates. As shown, redevelopment of the project site results in a net increase of 334 average daily trips (ADT), with 27 of these occurring in the AM peak hour and 40 occurring in the PM peak hour. This increase has been used for the impact analysis results presented here. Browning & Mitchell Town Horm Project 4 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rptdoc 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 Table 1 LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS — SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS DELAY PER VOLUME -TO - VEHICLE CAPACITY ,OS DESCRIPTION (secs) RATIO A LOS "A" describes operations with low control delay, up to 10 seconds per < 10 0—.60 vehicle. This LOS occurs when progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Many vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may tend to contribute to low delay values. B LOS 'B" describes operations with control delay greater than 10 and up to 10-20 .61-30 20 seconds per vehicle. This level generally occurs with good progression, short cycle lengths, or both More vehicles stop than the LOS "A",. causing higher levels of delay. i C LOS "C" describes operations with control delay greater than 20 and up to 20-35 .71-.80 35 seconds per vehicle. These higher delays may result from only fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both, Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. Cycle failure occurs when a given green phase does not serve queued vehicles, and overflows occur. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping. D LOS "D" describesoperations with control delay greater than 35 and up to 35-55 55 seconds per vehicle. At LOS 'D", the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop,. and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. E LOS 'B" describes operations with control delay greater than 55 and up to 55-80 80 seconds per vehicle. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent F LOS "F" describes operations with control delay in excess of 80 seconds > 80 per vehicle. This: level, considered unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with oversaturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of lane groups. It may also occur at high VIC ratios with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also contribute significantly to high delay levels. Source: 13ighway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council .81 - .90 .91-1.00 > 1.00 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 5 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.dw I I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 Table 2 CITY OF TUSTIN PERFORMANCE CRITERIA V/C Calculation Methodology (Signalized Intersections) Level of service to be based on peak hour intersection .capacity utilization (ICU) values calculated using the following assumptions: Saturation Flow Rate: 1,700 vehicles/hour/lane Delay Calculation Methodology (Unsignalized Intersections) Level of service to based on peak hour intersection delay (seconds per vehicle) based on Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. Ideal Saturation Flow Rate: 1,900 vehicles/hour/lane Performance Standard Level of Service "D" Signalized Intersection Peak hour ICU less than or equal to .90. Unsignalized Intersection Peak hour delay less than or equal to 35 seconds. Project Impact Signalized Intersection - Project causes an increase in ICU of greater than .01, when the "With Project" ICU is more than .90 (LOS `E" or "F ). Unsignalized Intersection - Project causes an increase in delay of greater than 2 seconds, when the "With Project" delay is more than 35 seconds (LOS `E" or "F"'). Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project Traffic Analysis Austin -Foust Associates, hie. 1067001rpt.doc Table 3 LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Proposed Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Amount In Out Total In Out Total ADT Trip Generation Town Home (Project)' 77 DU 15 43 58 49 28 77 737 Apartment (Existing Use) 60 DU 6 25 31 24 13 37 403 Increase 17 DU 9 18 27 25 15 40 334 Trip Rates Town Home DU 17 .50 .67 .45 .33.78 7.89 Apartment' DU .10 .41 .51 .40 .22 .62 6.72 Single -Family Detached DU .19 .56 .75 .64 .37 1.01 9.57 'ITE Land Use Category 231. (Given as a reference only. The Single -Family Detached trip rate was used to calculate the project trip generation. 2ITE Land Use Category 220 3Town Home ADT rate was interpolated between the ITE Single -Family Detached (land use category 210) and Apartment (land use category 220) ADT rates. 4ITE Land Use Category 230 5Because of the size of the town home product type, the project trip generation was calculated using the higher Single -Family Detached trip rates to assume a worst-case scenario. Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 7 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.doc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The existing arterial highway system in the vicinity of the project consists of Browning Avenue, Mitchell Avenue and Walnut Avenue. Browning Avenue is a two-lane secondary roadway in the project vicinity and carries approximately 4,500 vehicles per day. Walnut Avenue is a four -lane secondary arterial located south of the project and currently carries approximately 19,500 vehicles per day. Existing (2006) peak hour volumes are illustrated in Figure 3, and the intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values and delay (for the highest stopped leg) for these volumes are summarized in Table 4. ICU worksheets can be found in Appendix A and Delay calculation worksheets can be found in Appendix B. The target LOS for intersections is LOS "D". According to this criteria, the study area intersections are well below the target LOS for existing conditions. Traffic volumes at the school driveway are not being analyzed as part of this analysis but are included in the graphics to give the reader a complete understanding of the intersection volumes north and south of the school entrance that are part of the analysis. For purposes of this analysis, traffic volumes at the school were estimated based on an elementary school of about 300 students using ITE trip generation rates. (A discussion on "School Impacts" is provided later in this document.) PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS Distribution of project -generated traffic was based on prevailing traffic patterns at the study area intersections and is illustrated in Figure 4. The project -generated traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 5 and are representative of the "net increase" of 17 units on the project site as discussed earlier. However, the `total' project -generated volumes are given at the project driveway to calculate capacity. Short -Range (2008) Project Impacts The short-range time frame used in this analysis represents the amount of growth that is projected to occur at the time this project is built out in the next two years, and is referred to as year 2008. Year 2008 No Project volumes were formulated using the 2006 traffic volumes as a base, and applying a one Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 8 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.doc I 1 1 I I LJ I I I I I Legend Project Location Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project Traffic Analysis Figure 3 PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES -2006 9 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 1067001-fig3.dwg I I Browning & Mitchell Towo Home Project Traffic Analysis 10 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 1067001rpt.doc Table 4 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) SUMMARY - Existing Signalized Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU I LOS 1. Browning Ave. & Walnut Ave. .53 A .48 1 A Unsignalized Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Dela LOS DelaLOS 2. Browning Ave. & Sandfield 19.2 C 12.3 B Place/Project Driveway Note: 'Seconds per vehicle average. Abbreviations: ICU — intersection capacity utilization LOS — level of service Level of service ranges (ICUs): .00 - .60 A .61- .70B .71 - .80 C .81 - .90 D .91-1.00 E Above'l.00 F Level of service ranges (Delay): <10 A 10-15 B 15-25 C 25-35 D 35-50 E > 50 F Browning & Mitchell Towo Home Project Traffic Analysis 10 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 1067001rpt.doc Legend Figure 4 Project Location PROJECT DISTRIBUTION Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 11 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001-fig4.dwg Legend Figure 5 Project Location PEAK HOUR INTBRSECPION VOLUMES 19 Net Project Increase -Project-Generated (19) Total Project Volume Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 12 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc, Traffic Analysis 1067001-Hg5.dwg I 1 I percent annual growth factor for two years (two percent total). The 2008 No Project traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 6 and include the existing use on the site (60 apartment units). Project -generated volumes, representative of the net increase of 17 units on the project site, were then added to the 2008 No Project traffic volumes resulting in the 2008 With Project volumes. These are illustrated in Figure 7. Table 5 summarizes the corresponding peak hour ICU values at the intersection of Browning Avenue at Walnut Avenue. As shown, the intersection operates at an acceptable level of service under both scenarios. ICU worksheets can be found in Appendix A and Delay calculation worksheets can be found in Appendix B. Buildout (2025) Project Impacts Peak hour buildout (2025) volumes without the proposed project were derived from 2025 Irvine Transportation Analysis Model (ITAM) ADT forecasts and assume the southward extension of Tustin Ranch Road to Barranca Parkway southeast of the project. Growth factors, derived from base year (2000) and 2025 TTAM forecasts at the three mid -block approaches to the study area intersection, were applied to the 2006 volumes used in this analysis to represent a 2025 time frame. The ADT volumes show no increase on ,Browning Avenue, and an increase from 26,240 to 27,000 between 2006 and 2025 (three percent) on Walnut Avenue. The 2025 No Project volumes are illustrated in Figure 8 and include the existing use on the site (60 apartment units). Project -generated volumes, representative of the net increase of 17 units on the project site, were then added to the 2025 No Project traffic volumes resulting in the 2025 With Project volumes. These are illustrated in Figure 9. Buildout of the proposed project has been assumed in both the 2008 and 2025 analysis, As such, 2008 and 2025 project -generated traffic volumes entering/existing the site are the same. Likewise, no future development is anticipated in the existing Sandfield Place residential neighborhood and volumes entering/exiting the neighborhood are also the same in both time frames. Brovming & Mitchell Traffic Analysis Austin -Foust Associates, Iuc. 1067001rpt.doc I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 Cl 1 1 Legend Figure 6 Project Location PEAK HOUR IIVIBRSEGTION VOLUMES - 2008 No Project ' Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 14 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001.5g6.dwg 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I Legend Fide 7 Project Location PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES - 7008 With Project Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 15 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001-5g7.dwg I 1 11 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 Table 5 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) SUMMARY - 2008 No Project and With Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Browning Ave. & Walnut Ave. No Project .53 A .50 A With Project .55 A .50 A Increase Due to Project .02 .00 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection Dela LOS Dela LOS 2. Browning Ave. & Sandfield Place Project Driveway No Project 19.7 C 12.4 B With Project 22.3 C 14.1 B Increase Due to Project 2.6 1 1.7 Note: [Seconds per vehicle average. Abbreviations: ICU — intersection capacity utilization LOS — level of service Level of service ranges (ICUs): .00 - .60 A .61 - .70 B .71 - .80 C .81 - .90 D .91-1.00 E Above 1.00 F Level of service ranges (Delay): <10 A 10-15 B 15-25 C 25-35 D 35-50 E > 50 F ' Browaing & Mitchell Town Home Project 16 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001 rpt.doc 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 Legend Figure g SAI Project Location PEAK HOUR INTERSEGITON VOLUMES - 2025 No Project ' Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 17 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001-figg.dwg Legend Figure 9 Project Location PEAK DOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 2025 With Project Browning & Mitchell Town home Project 18 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001-fig9.dwg I 1 I Because the TTAM ADT volumes used to derive the future peak hour intersection volumes for this analysis showed no increase (see discussion above) and because of the built -out nature of the adjacent land uses, no increase is assumed for the through volumes on Browning Avenue. The through volumes on Walnut Avenue, however, were increased three percent based on the 1TAM ADT volume increase between 2000 and 2025 at this location. Table 6 summarizes the peak hour ICU values for the 2025 No Project and With Project conditions and shows that the intersection of Browning Avenue at Walnut Avenue operates at an acceptable level of service under both scenarios. ICU worksheets can be found in Appendix A and Delay calculation worksheets can be found in Appendix B. PROJECT ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION The existing apartment complex on the proposed project site has vehicular access to both Mitchell Avenue and Browning Avenue. Sole access to the proposed project will be taken via a driveway on Browning Avenue located around 500 feet south of Mitchell Avenue opposite Sandfield Place. The'total project -generated volumes at this intersection were given previously in Figure 9. Since this intersection does not meet a signal warrant with the inclusion of project -generated traffic, the driveway will operate as an unsignalized full movement access point. With an ADT volume of 4,500 and most project driveway movements being right turns, no significant delays to existing traffic on Browning Avenue or Sandfield Place are anticipated. Currently, Browning Avenue is striped as a two-lane roadway with left tum lanes in the center median. Upon completion of the project with its new entrance driveway oriented directly opposite Sandfield Place, the existing double -double yellow median should be converted to a left tum lane to accommodate left turns into the project. Virtually all project traffic (about 95 percent) is expected to utilize the segment of Browning Avenue southerly of the site to Walnut Avenue. This will result in a northbound left tum volume entering the main driveway of 14 vehicles per hour (vph) in, the AM peak hour and 47 vph in the PM peak hour. Conversion of the existing double -double yellow median south of Sandfield Place to a left tum lane will effectively provide a 200 -foot long left tum storage lane on Browning Avenue at the project entrance which will be more than adequate to accommodate a maximum peak arrival of 47 vph northbound on Browning Avenue. The AM and PM peak hour volumes for the entire project are approximately 70 vph, or just a little over one vehicle per minute. With such limited Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 19 Austin -Foust Associates, Me. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.doc n Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 20 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.doc Table 6 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) SUMMARY 2025 No Project and With Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Signalized Intersection ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Browning Ave. & Walnut Ave. No Project .54 A .50 A With Project .55 A .50 A Increase Due to Project .01 .00 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection Dela LOS Dela LOS 2. Browning Ave. & Sandfield Place/Pro'ect Driveway No Project I 19.7 C 12.4 B With Project 22.3 C 14.1 B Increase Due to Project 2.6 1.7 Note: 'Seconds per vehicle average. Abbreviations: ICU — intersection capacity utilization LOS — level of service Level of service ranges (ICUs): .00 - .60 A .61- .70B .71 - .80 C .81 - .90 D .91 — 1.00 E Above 1.00 F Level of service ranges (Delay): <10 A 10-15 B 15-25 C 25-35 D 35-50 E > 50 F Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 20 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.doc traffic there is not expected to be any delay associated with entering or exiting the site during any time of the day. The internal circulation system for the project is basically a "T" shaped pattern with a single entrance off the stem of the "T". In effect, the circulation plan is essentially a main cul-de-sac street with shorter cul-de-sacs along the main spline. The main street is 36 feet wide with 25 -foot wide "alley" type driveways each serving about four or five residential units. Parking is permitted on the main 36 -foot wide spline, but no parking is permitted on the 25 -foot alley driveways. With a total peak hour two-way volume of less than 70 vph at the entrance and progressively less as one proceeds into the development, no traffic safety, circulation or delay issues are anticipated. The internal traffic situation will be calm with virtually no opportunity for excessive speeds or congestion as long as cars are not parked on the 25 - foot wide alleys. SCHOOL IMPACTS An existing public elementary school is located nearby the proposed project in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Browning Avenue and Walnut Avenue. The main entrance to the school is located on Browning Avenue and serves pedestrians, and those arriving by car or bicycle. The school's morning drop-off time for students coincides with the AM peak hour on the adjacent circulation system During that time, an additional eight project vehicles will be traveling northbound on Browning Avenue, and an additional 17 project vehicles will be traveling southbound on Browning Avenue. These project - generated volumes are not expected to create any significant increase to traffic congestion at the school entrance and the public safety requirements related to schools already enforced at this location will apply to the project traffic as well. No impacts are anticipated in the PM peak hour. During the construction phase, a Construction Management Plan should be implemented that would address safety issues. This would give the City the ability to regulate construction traffic by limiting (or prohibiting) access to the project site during the time frames when children are arriving at and departing the school. A traffic delay and queuing survey was conducted in May 2007 to document the operational characteristics of traffic on Browning Avenue in the project vicinity during the school's morning drop-off and afternoon pick-up times. The results are summarized in Table 7. Browning & Mitchell Town Horne Project 21 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rptdoc I 1 1 Browning ,& Mitchell Town Home Project 22 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001tpt.doc Table 7 TRAFFIC DELAY AND QUEUING SURVEY RESULTS - W.R. NELSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SOUTHBOUND VEHICLES ON BROWNING AVENUE Variable Morning Observation Results School starts: 8:00 AM Total I I Peak Afternoon Observation Results School dismissal: 2:14 PM Total Peak Survey Time 7:30 am - 8:20 am 7:40 am- 8:00 am 1:30 pm - 3:00 pm 2:00 - 2:30 pm n 50 minutes 20 minutes 90 minutes 30 minutes ehicles 0 7 0 0 ehicles 24 24 14 14 hicles p 7 16 4 10 VEHICLES EXITING SANDFIELD PLACE Variable Morning Observation Results Afternoon Observation Results School starts: 8:00 AM School dismissal: 2:14 PM Total I Peak Total I Peak ISurvey Time 7:30 am - 8:20 am 7:40 am- 8:00 am 1:30 pm - 3:00 pin 2:00 m- 2:30 pm Surve Duration 50 minutes 20 minutes 90 minutes 30 minutes Vehicles Exiting Sandfield Place 44 23 53 29 Maximum Delay 1 40 seconds 40 seconds 40 seconds 40 seconds Maximum Delay Occurrence 3 times 3 times 3 times 3 times Average Delay 11 seconds 15 seconds 9 seconds 8 seconds Browning ,& Mitchell Town Home Project 22 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001tpt.doc I CJ 1 11 I I 1 I 1 I The distance between the Browning Avenue crosswalk north of the school's exit -only driveway to the centerline of Sandfield Place is approximately 250 feet. The total number of 'vehicles traveling southbound on Browning Avenue and "stacking" from the crosswalk to beyond Sandfield Place (interfering with that neighborhood's ability to exit) were counted in five minute increments during the school's peak periods. The number of vehicles exiting Sandfield Place, and the delay in seconds, was also observed. As indicated, the worst-case maximum number of vehicles stacked on southbound Browning beginning at the crosswalk is 24 in the morning, with an average of about 16 vehicles during the school's peak traffic period (7:40 AM — 8:00 AM). However, it should be recognized that this traffic "queue" was, in reality, a "rolling" or "creeping" queue whereby most simply slowed to a crawl speed and proceeded to creep past the school. Motorists existing the side streets were able to enter this rolling queue or tum across it with little delay encountered. During the same peak traffic period for the school, 23 vehicles exited the Sandfield Place neighborhood. The maximum delay experienced by any driver was 40 seconds due to the southbound traffic queue on Browning Avenue and this only occurred three times. The average delay for motorists exiting Sandfield Place was 15 seconds. As stated earlier, the proposed project will add 17 southbound vehicles to BrowningAvenue in the AM peak hour. Because the PM peak hour of residential uses occur much later than the afternoon dismissal time for a school, only minimal project trips will affect the afternoon school -related congestion. It can be anticipated that approximately half of the 17 project -generated trips (nine) would occur prior to the school -related congestion which begins at approximately 7:40 AM and half (nine) would occur during the school -related congestion. It can be concluded that he addition of nine project -generated vehicles to the southbound traffic queues will not produce any measurable increase in delay to vehicles exiting Sandfield Place. CMP ANALYSIS State legislation creating the Congestion Management Program (CMP) requires that local governments analyze the impacts of their land use decisions on the regional transportation system. The Orange County CMP requires that land use projects analyze their traffic impacts to any intersection identified on the CMP Highway System. Projects with the potential to create an impact of more than three percent of LOS "E" capacity on CMP Highway System links, or generate 2,400 or more daily trips Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 23 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.doc are required to prepare a CMP analysis. If a project has direct access to a CMP link, the threshold is reduced to 1,600 or more daily trips. The proposed project does not meet these requirements, there are no CMP intersections in the project study area and therefore no CMP analysis is required. IPARKING I 1 The City of Tustin has established parking space requirements to ensure that new developments provide adequate parking for their use. They vary by land use type and number of units, and the criteria is summarized in Table 8. As shown, based on the proposed project's occupancy of 77 units, a total of 174 parking spaces are required under the City's parking code. The proposed project will provide 154 parking garages and 26 open parking spaces (total of 180 spaces) to fulfill these requirements. Also, 11 on -street parking spaces are provided on Mitchell Avenue (but do not count towards meeting the on-site parking requirements). No on -street parking will be allowed on Browning Avenue along the project frontage. This entire section should be red -curbed to comply with the City of Tustin's sight distance standards. CONCLUSIONS The study area intersection, Browning Avenue at Walnut Avenue, has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed project land use under short-term (2008) and buildout (2025) conditions, and the proposed project does not create a significant impact at this location under the City of Tustin's performance criteria. To fulfill the City's parking code requirements, the proposed project will also provide 154 parking garages and 26 open parking spaces. Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project Traffic Analysis Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 1067001rpt.doc Table 8 PARKING CODE CRITERIA Type _:�T:::City Requirement Project Requirement Resident Space 2 spaces per unit 154 Visitor Space 1 space per 4 units 20 Total 174 As shown, based on the proposed project's occupancy of 77 units, a total of 174 parking spaces are required under the City's parking code. The proposed project will provide 154 parking garages and 26 open parking spaces (total of 180 spaces) to fulfill these requirements. Also, 11 on -street parking spaces are provided on Mitchell Avenue (but do not count towards meeting the on-site parking requirements). No on -street parking will be allowed on Browning Avenue along the project frontage. This entire section should be red -curbed to comply with the City of Tustin's sight distance standards. CONCLUSIONS The study area intersection, Browning Avenue at Walnut Avenue, has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed project land use under short-term (2008) and buildout (2025) conditions, and the proposed project does not create a significant impact at this location under the City of Tustin's performance criteria. To fulfill the City's parking code requirements, the proposed project will also provide 154 parking garages and 26 open parking spaces. Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project Traffic Analysis Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 1067001rpt.doc I The project will be responsible for implementing roadway improvements on Browning Avenue ' that will provide increased visibility and accessibility at the new four-way intersection with Sandfield Place (project driveway). These consist of striping changes and additions that will provide both a ' southbound right turn lane and a northbound left tum lane into the project. Currently, Browning Avenue is striped as a two-lane roadway with left tum lanes in the center ' median. The project will convert the existing double -double yellow median to a left tum lane to accommodate left turns into the project. Conversion of the existing double -double yellow median south ' of Sandfield Place to a left tum lane will effectively provide a 200 -foot long left tum storage lane on Browning Avenue at the project entrance which will be more than adequate to accommodate a maximum ' peak arrival of 47 vph northbound on Browning Avenue. ' The project will also provide a southbound right tum lane on Browning Avenue into the project driveway. Approximately 100-110 feet of on -street parking will be eliminated to accommodate this improvement. REFERENCES ' 1. "City of Irvine Planning Areas 30 and 51, Heritage Fields GPA/Zone Change, Traffic Study", September 2006. 2. "2005, Orange County, Congestion Management Program," OCTA, November 2005. 3. "Highway Capacity Manual 2000," Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2000. I 1 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project 25 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis 1067001rpt.doc I ' Appendix A Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheets I I 1 I I 1 1 I I This appendix summarizes information pertaining to the intersection analysis presented in this traffic report. ICU Calculation Methodology The ICU calculation procedure is based on a critical movement methodology that shows the amount of capacity utilized by each critical movement at an intersection. A capacity of 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane is assumed together with a .05 clearance interval. A "de -facto' right -tum lane is used in the ICU calculation for cases where a curb lane is wide enough to separately serve both through and right - turn traffic (typically with a width of 19 feet or more from curb to outside of through -lane with parking prohibited during peak periods). Such lanes are treated the same as striped right -turn lanes during the ICU calculations, but they are denoted on the ICU calculation worksheets using the letter "d" in place of a numerical entry for right -turn lanes. The methodology also incorporates a check for right -tum capacity utilization. Both right -tum -on - green (RTOG) and right -tum -on -red (RTOR) capacity availability are calculated and checked against the total right -tum capacity need. If insufficient capacity is available, then an adjustment is made to the total capacity utilization value. The following example shows how this adjustment is made. Example for Northbound Right 1 Right -Turn -On -Green (RTOG) If NBT is critical move, then: RTOG = V/C (NBT) Otherwise, RTOG = V/C (NBL) + V/C (SBT) - V/C (SBL) 2. Right -Turn -On -Red (RTOR) If WBL is critical move, then: RTOR = V/C (WBL) Otherwise, RTOR = V/C (EBL) + V/C (WBT) - V/C (EBT) Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis A-1 1067001rpt.doc i I 11 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 3. Right -Tum Overly Adjustment If the northbound right is assumed to overlap with the adjacent westbound left„adjustments to the RTOG and RTOR values are made as follows: RTOG = RTOG + V/C (WBL) RTOR = RTOR - V/C (WBL) 4. Total Right -Turn Capacity (RTC) Availability For NBR RTC = RTOG + factor x RTOR Where factor = RTOR saturation flow factor (0% for County intersections, 75% for intersections in all other jurisdictions within the study area) Right -tum adjustment is then as follows: Additional ICU = V/C (NBR) — RTC A zero or negative value indicates that adequate capacity is available and no adjustment is necessary. A positive value indicates that the available RTOR and RTOG capacity does not adequately accommodate the right -tum V/C, therefore the right -turn is essentially considered to be a critical movement. In such cases, the right -tum adjustment is noted on the ICU worksheet and it is included in the total capacity utilization value. When it is determined that a right -tum adjustment is required for more than one right -tum movement, the word "multi” is printed on the worksheet instead of an actual right -tum movement reference, and the right -tum adjustments are cumulatively added to the total capacity utilization value. In such cases, further operational evaluation is typically carried out to determine if under actual operational conditions, the critical right -turns would operate simultaneously, and therefore a right -turn adjustment credit should be applied. Shared Lane V/C Methodology For intersection approaches where shared usage of a lane is permitted by more than one tum movement (e.g., left/through, through/right, left/through/right), the individual tum volumes are evaluated to determine whether dedication of the shared lane is warranted to any one given tum movement. The following example demonstrates how this evaluation is carried out: Example for Shared Left/Through Lane 1. Average Lane Volume (ALV) ALV = Left -Turn Volume + Through Volume Total Left + Through Approach Lanes (including sare ane) Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis A-2 1067001rpt.doc I I 1 1 1 IJ I I 2. ALV for Each Approach ALV (Left) = ' Left -Tum Volume Left Approach Lanes (including shared lane) ALV (Through) = Through Volume Through Approach Lanes (including shared lane) 3. Lane Dedication is Warranted If ALV (Left) is greater than ALV then full dedication of the shared lane to the left -turn approach is warranted. Left -tum and through V/C ratios for this case are calculated as follows: V/C (Left) = Left -Turn Volume Left Approach Capacity (including shared lane) V/C (Through) = Through Volume Through Approach Capacity (excluding shared lane) Similarly, if ALV (Through) is greater than ALV then full dedication to the through approach is warranted, and left -tum and through V/C ratios are calculated as follows: V/C (Left) = Left -Turn Volume Left Approach Capacity (excluding shared lane) V/C (Through) = Through Volume Through Approach Capacity (including shared lane) 4. Lane Dedication is not Warranted 1 i Brown Traffic If ALV (Left) and ALV (Through) are both less than ALV, the left/through lane is assumed to be truly shared and each left, left/through or through approach lane carries an evenly distributed volume of traffic equal to ALV. A combined left/through V/C ratio is calculated as follows: V/C (Left/Through)= Left -Tum Volume +Through Volume Total Left + Through Approach Capacity (including shared lane) This V/C (Left/Through) ratio is assigned as the V/C (Through) ratio for the critical movement analysis and ICU summary listing. If split phasing has not been designated for this approach, the relative proportion of V/C (Through) that is attributed to the left -tum volume is estimated as follows: If approach has more than one left -turn (including shared lane), then: V/C (Left) = V/C (Through) & Mitchell Town Home A-3 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 1067001rpt.doc I 1 I I I I I I I If approach has only one left -turn lane (shared lane), then: V/C (Left) = Left -Tum Volume Single Approach Lane Capacity If this left -tum movement is determined to be a critical movement, the V/C (Left) value is posted in brackets on the ICU summary printout. These same steps are carried out for shared through/right lanes. If full dedication of a shared through/right lane to the right -tum movement is warranted, the right -tum V/C value calculated in step three is checked against the RTOR and RTOG capacity. When an approach contains more than one shared lane (e.g., left/through and through/right), steps one and two listed above are carried out for the three tum movements combined. Step four is carried out if dedication is not warranted for either of the shared lanes. If dedication of one of the shared lanes is warranted to one movement or another, step three is carried out for the two movements involved, and then steps one through four are repeated for the two movements involved in the other shared lane. Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Analysis A4 1067001 rpt.doc 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. Browning Ave 6 Walnut Ave Existing Count (2006) AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY AM PI HOUR PM PK HOUR NBL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C MEL 0 0 0 V/C 0 V/C MET 0 0 0 0 HER 0 0 0 .15* 0 .11* SBL 1 1700 240 ,14* 177 .10* SET 0 0 0 .15 0 .05 SBR 1 1700 243 .14 57 .05 EBL 1 1700 148 .09* 65 .05* EBT 2 3400 700 .21 662 .19 EBR 0 0 0 .21 0 .20 MEL 0 0 0 .31* 0 .34* WET 2 3400 787 .30* 937 .33* WBR 0 0 228 .30* 183 .34* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 .48 2008 With Project TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 ,50 2025 No Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 AM PK HOUR 0 HOUR NET 0 0 0 V/C 0 V/C NBR 0 0 0 0 SNL 1 1700 254 .15* 192 .11* BHT 0 0 0 0 SBR 1 .1700 256 .15 61 .05 EBL 1 1700 154 .09* 71 .05* EBT 2 3400 714 .21 675 .20 EBR 0 0 0 .09* 0 .05* WBL 0 0 0 .21 0 .20 WET 2 3400 803 .31* 956 .34* WBR 0 0 238 206 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 ,50 2025 No Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LAMES 2008 No Project V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR NET LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NEI 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 .14* 0 .11* HER 0 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 245 .14* 181 .11* SET 0 0 0 .09* 0 .05* SBR 1 1700 248 .15. 58 .05 EBL 1 1700 151 .09* 66 .05* EBT 2 3400 714 .21 675 .20 EBR 0 0 0 .31* 0 .34* WBL 0 0 0 0 NET 2 3400 603 .30* 956 .34* WBR 0 0 233 187 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .53 ,50 2025 No Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .55 .50 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .54 .50 A-5 AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LAMES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 HER 0 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 245 .14* 181 .11* SET 0 0 0 0 SBR 1 1700 248 .15 58 .05 EBL 1 1700 151 .09* 66 .05* EBT 2 3400 721 .21 6B2 .20 EBR 0 0 01 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 NET 2 3400 811 .31* 965 .34* WBR 0 0 233 167 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .55 .50 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .54 .50 A-5 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. Browning Ave 6 Walnut Ave 2025 With Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .55 .50 A-6 n AM PR HOUR PH PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 1 1700 254 ,15* 192 .11* SBT 0 0 0 0 SHE 1 1700 256 .15 61 .05 EBL 1 1700 154 .09* 71 .05* EBT 2 3400 721 .21 682 .20 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 2 3900. 811 .31* 965 .34* WBR 0 0 238 206 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .55 .50 A-6 n Appendix B Delay Calculation Worksheets Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project Traffic Analysis B-1 Associates, loc. 1067001rpt.doc I 11 1 1 1 1 1 �I 1 1 1 I 1 I 2006 - AM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browning 4N .01 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR, SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Free " Free, Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (ueh/h) 0 0 0 22 '0 1 0 .:361: 8" 0 46.6. 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 0 0 23 0 1 0 380 8 0 491 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (fit) Walking Speed (fUs) PercentBieckage Right turn flare (veh) Median type . None N;orie Median storage veh) Upstream signaFfft) pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting.veluma 872 879 491 875 875 384 491 398 , vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol' vCu, unblocked vol 872 879 491 675 875 384 491 388 6;5 6.2` 7:1 6'„5 6.2>; 4.1, tC, 2 stage (s) t s) 35 4:9 3.3: `.. 3.5 . 4,.0 .8:.:; .i2,2 0 ° p q free /° 100 100 100 91 100 100 100 100 cM'capacity{yehlh) 271 286 578 _ %270' 288 ' 6fi3;. 1073 1170' Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 0 24 0' 398 0 491' Volume Left 0 23 0 0 0 0 Volume -Right 0 1, 0 8 10 '0 cSH 1700 277 1700 1706 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0,09 0.00 0.23 O:00 0.29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 7 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 19:2 0.0 0:& 0.0 0!.0 Lane LOS A C Approach Qelay•(s-) -0.0 19.-2 OyO' 0:0 Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 34.5% ICU Level :pf Service: A Analysis Period (min) 15 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Traffic Analysis B-2 Austin -Foust Associates, inc. Synchro 6 Report IB6141 1 I 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 2006 - PM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browning FRI_ FRT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR 1 SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 4+ 0 0 4# 0 Volume Right 1� ' I 0 Control .- 0 Stop. cSH 1700 Stop 1700 1700 free 1700 ,'I'+ =ree . Grade 0.03. 0% '0:15 0:00 0% Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 0% 0 0% Volume (veh/h)' 0 0 0 14 i0 1 "0 "223 25 1 'F "220 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0'.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate, (vph) 0 0 0 15 0 1 0` 235 26; 1" 232 0 Pedestrians Lane.N/idth (ft) Walking Speed (fUs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) M'edfan;type: None None Median storage veh) UpWi am signal;(ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, cgnflicting;volume 469 495 232z 482 482 248 :23,2-- 261. , vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2;:stage 2 cohf;vol vCu, unblocked vol 469 495 232 482 482 248 232 261 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6,2 4.:1 4:1 ; tC, 2 stage (s) 3.5 4:0 3:3: :'.3.5 4:0 3.3 .,Z'2 2:2 - p0 queue free %100 100 100 97 100 100 100 100 clvtaa,pacity (vehSh•) 503. 470" 8Q8 `4495' 484 79'1:. , 1336 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WS 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volal TOIL -imp Total 0 1'6' 0 `151 T. 232 Volume Left 0 15 0 0 1 0 Volume Right 0 1 0 26 .- 0 p cSH 1700 507 1700 1700 1303 1700 Volume to,Capacity 0:00 0.03. 0.001' '0:15 0:00 0:14 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 2 0 0 0 0 Control De(ay(s) 0.0 12.3: '0.0: 0.6 7:8 O.Q ' Lane LOS A B A Approachbel* (s) 0.0 1213'.; 0;0; l)'0 Approach LOS A B Average Delay ' Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 1 1 1 I 0.4 23.3% 'ICU Level of Service A 15 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Traffic Analysis B-3 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Synchro 6 Report [B614] 1 2008 No -Project - AM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browning -,.* m t4� t �► 1 _10. f-~ Movement EBL' EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations + Sign`Control Stop istop Free " Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 0 0 0- 22 0 T 0 -':369 .8 0':' 476 .: 0, ' Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly.flowrade,j(uph) 0 0 0` 2,3 0 1 0' 388 8 0 501 0 ' Pedestrians Lane.Width,(ft) Walking Speed (fUs) Percent' Blockage Right turn flare (veh) t Medan typpi None None Median storage veh) UpsEreare signal (ft) ' pX platoon unblocked vc, cooicting uolume 891 898_, 501 094 .894 . 393 501 397 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2; stage 2 eontvdP t vcu, unblocked vol 891 898 501 894 894 393 501 397 tC,, single (s) .: , 7.1 '15:6: 02 7.1' fi.5 6.2� . 4.1` .; 11 ' tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s') 3,5 4i0 3:3.:'.' 3.8 40' 3.3;.' 252. 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 91 100 100 100 100 cM capaci,Ry (Veh/h) 283 279i 570 ; 262 ,2,81 658 , 1063; ' Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total:, 0 24 0 39/ Volume Left 0 23 0 0 0 0 Volume Rigfit 0 A 0 8 0 1.0' ' cSH 1700 269 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.09' 0.00' 0:23 0.00 0:29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 7 0 0 0 0 ' Control Delay (s) 0.0 49:7 U 0:0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A C Approach Delay (s) 0.0 19;7. 0:0 00 ' Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 ' lnt'etge"etion Capacity Utilization. 351 % ICU' Level of Service A: Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Austin -Foust Associates, inc. Traffic Analysis Synchro 6 Report [6614] B.4 2008 No -Project - PM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browninq Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Austin -Foust Associates, inc. Traffic Analysis Synchro 6 Report [B614] s-5 ' --V 4- •-- t t/'D- ti 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR' SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4* Sigrrcohteo( Stop Stop :Free Free . Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 1i 0 -228 25. 1 :: 225 :0' Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0"95 Hourly flow rato,(uph) 0 t) 0 ." 15 0 1, 0 :240 26 1 237 ` `;0 Pedestrians Lahel,Widtki (h); ; , Walking Speed (fUs) Per�ent�Blb•.¢kage Right tum flare (veh) Median4' None None Median storage veh) Upsfream sigh, iv(ft). pX, platoon unblocked vC,confficting•Volume 480 505 237 492 492: i237 266 vC1, stage 1 conf vol V02,`s..tage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 480 505 237 492 492 253 237 266 tC, single (sj< 7.1 6.5 6.2: ` 1.1 ' '6;5 6.2- , 4.1 , Av1- tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s). 3.5 4:0 33.". 3.5 40 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 97 100 100 100 100 cM capacity (vehlh) !495 469' 802 487 477 7$6; T33A 1298'' Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Voiarve Total 0 16 0• - 266 1 47 Volume Left 0 15 0 0 1 0 Volume Right ,; 0 1' 0 ',26 ;0 0. cSH 1700 499 1700 1760 1248 1706 Volume4o Capacity, 0':00 0:03 0:00 ,; 0.16 , 0:00 0:1,9 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 2 0 0 0 0 Control -Dela `(s) 0.0 12x4 0.0 ' Q.0 7.;8 10" Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay (s) 0.0 12:4 0.0 Qro Approach LOS A B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization °215% ICU :Level of Seryice A Analysis Period (min) 15 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Austin -Foust Associates, inc. Traffic Analysis Synchro 6 Report [B614] s-5 I 1 1 1 1 2008 With -Project - AM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browning Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR' SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *T* tir Sigri;Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volurlie-(veh/h) 2 6 41 22 0 1 14 "363• 8 0 452 1. Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly,flow rate (vph) 2 .0 43 23 0 1 15 387 8 0' 4,6 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type- None None Median storage veh) Upstrearnsigna,1i(ft) ; pX, platoon unblocked vC,,confticting.Golume `889 896. 470; 935 893 38'6' 477 391 vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2,`stage 2 conf vol. vCu, unblocked vol 889 896 476 935 893 386 477 391 td, single (s) 7.1 65 6,2::: 7.1 65 62 4.1 :4, 1', ` tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s)= 5.5 4Yd 3:3. 3.5_, ''4.!0 33 2.2 2.2 2.2 '„ pO queue free % 99 100 93 90 100 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 261 276` 58$ `' 225 2.77 fi62-;" 1085 9168 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 45. 24 15 ° 391 0 4771: volume Left 2 23 15 0 0 0 Volume Right 43 1' 0, 8. 0 1s. cSH 556 232 1085 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.10 MI 0.23 O:QO 0.28' Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 9 1 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) ' 12.0 22:3 8.4 0.0 0;0 0:0 . Lane LOS B C A Approach Delay;(s). 12.0 22.3 0.3 0;0 Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary ' Intersection Q6pacity Analysis Period (min) 1 I I 1.3 38.5% 15 ICU Level of Service- P Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Synchro 6 Report [86141 Austin -Foust Associates, inc. B-6 I I I I__1 1 1 I I 2008 With -Project - PM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browning Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Conf Grade Volume (vehlh)' Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians LaneVi'dth.(ft)r Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent.Bloekage Right turn flare (veh) Median' ,ype Median storage veh) Upstreanlrsignal l( .A) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2 stage2 c©nf Vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 4+ 4-;0 a,3 4 *:0 3,:3!- 2:2 T� p0 queue free %100 Volpfne Right ` 100 Stop 96 100 Stop 100 cM capacity (veh/h) Flee 417 Free 398 0%. ,810:: 1,4,3 1324i`,.: 0% EB 1 WB 1 0% NB 2 0°70 1 0 127:`, 14 i'0} 49r 47 . z05 25t 1 ;'=^ 212 2 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1 0 28 15. : 0 1 49 2116 26 1. : 223 2 11.3 0;0 Approach LOS A B Intersection Summary h, None None ' Intersection Caacity Utilization 33:1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 542 567 224 ' 582 555 229" 225 242': 542 567 224 582 555 229 225 242 7..1 6.5 6.2 . •7.1 6:5 6.2, 4.1 4:1J tF (s) 3.5 4-;0 a,3 3.5 *:0 3,:3!- 2:2 u p0 queue free %100 Volpfne Right ` 100 97 96 100 100 96 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 43t) 417 815 -.'. 398 ..4Q3, ,810:: 1,4,3 1324i`,.: Direction Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SBI SB 2 :01. 10 Volume Tptal' 29 16 49r 242 1 2255` 0 I Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Synchro 6 Report [B614] Austin -Foust Associates, inc. 1 B-7 1 Volume Left 1 'Ib 4a u 1 u Volpfne Right ` 28 1 ;0 26 0 2 . ` ' cSH 791 412 1343 1700 1324 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.04 .0.04 0.04 " ':0.14 0:00 :01. 10 Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 3 3 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) . 9:7 141.1 7.8 0-.0 7.7 0:0' Lane LOS A B A A Apprvaeh,DelaY:(s)' 9.7 14.1:.. 11.3 0;0 Approach LOS A B Intersection Summary Average Delay, 1.6 ' Intersection Caacity Utilization 33:1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 I Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Synchro 6 Report [B614] Austin -Foust Associates, inc. 1 B-7 1 I 1 2025 No -Project - AM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browning 4- t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR' SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0 4, 0 0 + 0 Volume,Right [+ 1 0'^ Sign Conlrol 0 Stop cSH 1700 Stop 1700 1700 Free 1700 Free Grade 0.09 0% 0.23 0,60 0% Queue Length 95th (ft) 0. 0% 0 0% Volume (veh/h.)' 0 0 D 22 " `0 1'^ 0 369 S -° 0 , , 476 p Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly ftow-rate(vph) 0 0 .0 23 0 1 0 `388 8 0 501`' 0 Pedestrians Average Delay 0.5 Lane Width (ft) 35.1%' ICU Level of'Service: A Analysis Period (min) 15 Walking Speed (fUs) Percent- Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) U pstream,sigria'l'00. pX, platoon unblocked vC, e6nflict1ng491ume 891 898, 501. 894 ' 804 393 ' 501' 3:07 .7 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vc2 ,stage Z Q9W v61' vCu, unblocked vol 891 898 501 894 894 393 501 397 tC, single (S9' " 7 1 6:8 '6.2 _' 7.1 6.. 6:2�' 4.1 4A ; tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s): 3.5 4;0; 3;3 3.5 4;;0 , . 3:3^ . 2.2 2,2J;•, pO queue free % 100 100 100 91 100 100 100 100 cKcapacity (veh/h) 263' 279. 5170 2,62, ° 2&1 ' 66fi; :1063 1°16 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Totau 0 .r,2t4,0,' .�'3 - 0 .5T1T'" Volume Left 0 23 0 0 0 0 Volume,Right 0 1 0'^ 8 0 0' cSH 1700 269 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.23 0,60 0:29 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0. 7 0 0 0 0 Control Delay (s) 0.0 19.7 0:0 0.0 &0 0.0 Lane LOS A C Approach delay (s) 0.0 1:9.7 0:0 0:0 Approach LOS A C Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection'Ga'pacity Utilization' 35.1%' ICU Level of'Service: A Analysis Period (min) 15 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Austin -Foust Associates, inc. Traffic Analysis Synchro 6 Report [6614) s -s I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 2025 No -Project - PM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browning Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR' SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4* 4* T+ I V, T* Sign Control Stop Stop 'Free Free, Grade 0% 0% 0°/a 0% Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 14 0 1 0 228 25 '''' 1 225: ' '. 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 b.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate'(vph) 0 0'' 0 15 0. 1 0 240 26 1 237 0 Pedestrians Lar4Width •(ft) Walking Speed (f /s) Perdg'nt•Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type No 'None Median storage veh) Ups[Eeam sighal ({f) pX, platoon unblocked vC,-conflicting;volume 480 505 237 492 '492 253 237 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2'; stZI,2 confvol .. vCu, unblocked vol 480 505 237 492 492 253 237 266 tC,'single (s)', 7.1 6.5, 6.2 7.1 6':5 6 2 .: 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4;0 3:3 3.5 4:0 3.3._s pO queue free % 100 100 100 97 100 100 100 160 cM capafity (veh/h) 495 469 802, 487 477 786r 1330 1298 ', Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total' 0 1'6 p '. 268 1 28T Volume Left 0 15 0 0 1 0 Volume Right 0 1 0 26 ,0 '0, cSH 1700 499 1700 1700 1298 1700 Volurpe to Gepa, ity 0,00 GM 0.011 -11.16 0,00 ,0.14 ` Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 2 0 0 6 0 Control.l]'elay (s) O,fl 1-2A 0;01; _ 0.0 7:8 QiO , Lane LOS A B A App?oath Delay (s) 0.0 12.4 0.0 0:_0 Approach LOS A B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection •Capacity Utilization 23.5%a, ICU Leve1•of Service: A Analysis Period (min) 15 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Austin -Foust Associates, inc. Traffic Analysis Synchro 6 Report IB6141 B-9 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 2025 With -Project - AM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browninq Volume Left 2 23 15 0 0 0 Volume Right 43 1 p. 8. Q cSH 556 232 1085 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0!10 0:01, 0.23 Movement EBL' EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 0;0 0.0' Lane LOS B r� A Approach Delay (s) 12.0 22:3 Sigm: Control; Stop Approach LOS Stop C 'Free Free " Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Intersection -Capacity Utiliza.'tion Volume (veh%h) 2 0 41 22 0 1, 14 363 '8 0 ,}' 452 1. Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 0 43 23 0 1 1'5 . 382 8. 0` ; 476 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type: None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft), locked PC, confl ctingoon volume 889 896 476' 935 893 366 ' 477 %- 39.1. vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2; stage 2 •cornf vol - vCu, unblocked vol 889 896 476 935 893 366 477 391 IC, siiigre (s). , 7.1 6-5. 6. 7.1 6:5 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) 3.5 4!A' 3.3•' 3.5 4'0 3:3:; =2.2 2.3 p0 queue free % 99 100 93 90 100 100 99 1 o0 cM-cejpdcit9 (uetl/h) 261 216,. `5'89' ', 225. 7 662'-"1085 1168 !, Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 45 24 1$ ' 391 0 4:77 Volume Left 2 23 15 0 0 0 Volume Right 43 1 p. 8. Q cSH 556 232 1085 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.08 0!10 0:01, 0.23 0.00 0.28 Queue Length 95th (ft) 7 9 1 0 0 0 Control Delay('s) 12,0 22.3 BA 0.0 0;0 0.0' Lane LOS B C A Approach Delay (s) 12.0 22:3 0,3 0':0 Approach LOS B C Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.3 Intersection -Capacity Utiliza.'tion 38.5% . ICU Leyel of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Synchro 6 Report [6614) Austin -Foust Associates, inc. S-10 2025 With -Project - PM Peak Hour 1: Sandfield & Browning Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR 1 SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Sign Control. Grade Volurne'(veh/i ) Peak Hour Factor Hourly, flow: rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane :Uyidth (ft) Walking Speed (fUs) ' Right turn flare (veh) Ntediara�type Median storage veh) vC cp(iflrctin§-volume 542 567` :224 '582. 555 Stop Stop Free Free 0% 0% 0% 0% 1 ;0, 27 1'4 0 :1 :'�: 47 , :205, 25 ?4,,2',' �2 0.95 0.95 0.95 0:95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1 0 28_ 15 0 1 49 ;216 26+ 1 '+ 2,2.3 ' 2 Nope None .6:,5 6.2 7.1 6 6 vC cp(iflrctin§-volume 542 567` :224 '582. 555 224 225 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2,rs.'tvage-2,conf vol .. vCu, unblocked vol 542 567 224 582 555 229 225 242 tic, single (s) 7.1 .6:,5 6.2 7.1 6 6 6:2 4.1 41: " tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3:5 4i0 3.3 3.5 .0 31 ! -2,2 PO queue free % 100 100 97 96 100 100 96 100 cM oap'acity (veh1h) 438 417 81.5 ",398 4.23 -890 .11'343 132 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total "' 29 1"6 -49 742 °°'I 225 Volume Left 1 1549 0 1 0 V6lUmJ6,Rght 28 1 0.. 26 0 2, cSH 791 412 1343 1700 1324 1700 Volume to Capacity 0t04 0:04 0:04 .0.14 0.00 0.1''.3 Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 3 3 0 0 0 ControLDelay.(:s) 9:7 14:1 7:;8 0:0 7:7 0;0 Lane LOS A B A A Approach Delay (s) +9;7 14,4', 1,3 00 Approach LOS A B Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.6 Intersection Capacity Utilization'',' 33.1°/.` ICU' Levet of Service: A Analysis Period (min) 15 Browning & Mitchell Town Home Project (1067.001) Synchro 6 Report [B6141 Austin -Foust Associates, inc. MM ITIPTV� Planning Commission Resolution No. 4064 Mitigation Monitoring Report 5 z 4ci U La U La CF3 ^ y U U U U as b O b U d a o 0 a � U d o U UU Q �) Fy iV U O m _ W Y JG w �j O pO U G bn3�5p 00 zi Om y W � cOd OO uv L9 0Cd N E P T ry R1 H N U w z W 00 U +' q T JyO. bA o O o ca N O �'y�b F. N Upb .b N Tj O U bqO O G O cCd yy R' U ro.S o U° O U N U S U w b ..� J7 r7 O U 4H P S [7 U O p 5 N a 2 O z 6 9 r4 .S .S G q y La ro Ca a �p a. b Q y> p y U u v o^ v o^ a• U v o^ coi q O a'p 0 a m •" b ro avi o o m op °OC t� ro o d �' o a� a� o o �' 0 3 w R OQ N 5 N y p ,qy •� y� b y N h U N fa -I. a' 7+ •V O y b f.1 "� a,. "Cl s abi q 3 0 °�b b L o q>3 pl. o0 6 o a 0 y o � gY 3 n.�o� >vw > 10 b 3b C+ .i7 U •d" ,bOA 0-0 O O rn C7 y `L7 U Y G O O � v' U 'U .❑C N p y �\ � -O ro U X� ro N b y W U vi C1 y 3 0 �"° �� Awa 3v5 Pw s y •3 H �, � .� LL a o, S ro cve �k7 �i v ° ° ,� N � a � � w w � H ,.o �1 0 > vi a. S v ATTACHMENT F Resolution No. 4065 and Exhibit A (Conditions of Approval Conditional Use Permit 06-024, Design Review 06-020 RESOLUTION NO. 4065 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024 AND DESIGN REVIEW 06-020 AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 77 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT ON A 4.1 -ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 1972 MITCHELL AVENUE AND 14251-14351 BROWNING AVENUE The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Conditional Use Permit 06-024 and Design Review 06-020 was submitted by Sun -Cal Browning LLC requesting authorization to demolish 60 apartment units and construct a 77 -unit condominium project located at 1972 Mitchell Avenue and 14251-14351 Browning Avenue (APN 432-342-30); B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for said application on August 28, 2007, by the Planning Commission; C. That the site is located in the High Density Residential (HDR) General Plan land use designation and Suburban Residential (R-4) Residential zoning district; D. That the project proposed zone change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17096 are pending approval by the City Council. If approved, as conditioned, the proposed subdivision and development will be in conformance with the Tustin Area General Plan, zoning regulations, State Subdivision Map Act, and the City's Subdivision Code; E. The site is a reverse corner lot, where the longer side yard dimension is along Browning Avenue. As conditioned, units along Browning Avenue would be provided with a 15 -foot building setback consistent with the site's required front yard setback for improved livability of these units and to provide an enhanced streetscape; F. That the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the proposed use will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, nor be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood of the subject property, or to the general welfare of the City of Tustin in that: Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 2 a) The buildings are located on their sides along most of the R- 1 adjoining properties 10 feet from the westerly property line and 16 feet from the southerly property line. Units proposed along the single family residential property lines have been designed at two stories with a loft that are 3-4 feet lower in height than other proposed units on the site. b) No balconies will be located within these areas and window openings are smaller in size and carefully placed to minimize intrusion of privacy on the adjacent existing residential properties. c) The proposed height is consistent and compatible with the maximum allowed height for single family residential (R-1), which is 35 feet. d) The buildings are two stories with a loft and three stories that range in height from 30'-9" to 36'-9" with an average height of 35 feet. The proposed increase in height of 1'-9" for an overall height of 36'-9" is within the 10 percent allowable increase for minor adjustments. Given today's standard for condominium development, it is typical for multiple family residential structures to be 2-3 stories and the increase in height would create a desirable variation in building design/height and individual treatment of each unit. e) Considering the provided setbacks and stepped height design, aesthetic and livability impacts to adjacent properties are not substantial with respect to privacy and shade and shadow effects. G. Pursuant to Section 9272 of the Tustin Municipal Code, the Planning Commission finds that the location, size, architectural features, and general appearance of the proposed development will not impair the orderly and harmonious development of the area, the present or future development therein, or the occupancy as a whole. In making such findings, the Commission has considered at least the following items; 1, Height, bulk, and area of buildings. 2. Setbacks and site planning. 3. Exterior materials and colors. 4. Type and pitch of roofs. 5. Size and spacing of windows, doors, and other openings. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 3 6. Towers, chimneys, roof structures, flagpoles, radio and television antennae. 7. Location, height, and standards of exterior illumination. 8. Landscaping, parking area design, and traffic circulation. 9. Location and appearance of equipment located outside an enclosed structure. 10. Location and method of refuse storage. 11. Physical relationship of proposed structures to existing structures in the neighborhood. 12. Appearance and design relationship of proposed structures to existing structures and possible future structures in the neighborhood and public thoroughfares. 13. Proposed signage. 14. Development Guidelines and criteria as adopted by the City Council. H. The buildings along Mitchell Avenue, main entry and end units on Browning Avenue are designed with balconies that provide protection over the front entries, offer a usable exterior open space for the residents, and create a variety of architectural features along the street rights-of-way. It was determined that provisions of Tustin City Code Section 92710) can be applied to the balconies allowing them to encroach a maximum of three feet into the required side yard setback along Browning Avenue which results in a 7 -foot setback from Browning Avenue without compromising the setback requirements from other structures. I. The project includes dedication in fee along Mitchell Avenue and Browning Avenue for existing right-of-way as depicted on Tentative Tract Map 17096. J. That the applicant has requested approval of Zone Change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17096 in conjunction with the application for Conditional Use Permit 06-024 and Design Review 06-020, and findings and conditions of approval related to site design, street design, open space and park site design, dedication of necessary rights-of-way, and provision of necessary infrastructure improvements have been included in Resolution No. 4066 recommending City Council approval of Zone Change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17096. K. That a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by Resolution No. 4064 for the proposed development. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 4 ll. The Planning Commission hereby approves Conditional Use Permit 06- 024 and Design Review 06-020 for development of a 77 -unit condominium project on a 4.1 -acre site located at 1972 Mitchell Avenue and 14251- 14351 Browning Avenue, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 28th day of August, 2007. JOHN NIELSEN Chair Pro Tem ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4065 duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of August, 2007. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024 DESIGN REVIEW 06-020 RESOLUTION NO. 4065 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall conform with the Tustin City Code and Tustin Design Guidelines and standards and be consistent with submitted plans for the project date stamped August 28, 2007, on file with the Community Development Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are consistent with the provisions of the Tustin City Code and other applicable codes. (1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, the conditions contained in this Exhibit shall be complied with as specified or prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. (1) 1.3 Resolution No. 4065 shall become null and void in the event that Resolution No. 4066 approving Zone Change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17096 are not approved by the Tustin City Council. (1) 1.4 The subject project approval shall become null and void unless permits for the proposed project are issued and substantial construction is underway within 24 months. All time extensions may be considered if a written request is received within thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. (1) 1.5 Approval of Conditional Use Permit 06-024 and Design Review 06-020 is contingent upon the applicant returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing and recording with the County Clerk -Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval' form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (2) CEQA MITIGATION (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (7) PC/CC POLICY (4) DESIGN REVIEW *** EXCEPTION Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 2 (1) 1.6 The development of the project described in Conditional Use Permit 06-024 and Design Review 06-020 shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Tentative Tract Map 17096 application as approved by Resolution No. 4064 and mitigated negative declaration and Resolution No. 4066 which are incorporated herein by reference. (1) 1.7 As a condition of approval of Conditional Use Permit 06-024 and Design Review 06-020, the applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. (*) 1.8 The project site shall provide a 15 -foot side yard building setback along Browning Avenue to improve the livability of these units for safety and noise impacts from the adjacent right-of-way. The setback is sufficient to allow a 3 -foot projection of balconies, porches and other similar architectural features that provide a usable open space for the residents. GRADING PLAN SUBMITTAL (1) 2.1 Four (4) sets of final grading plans, including a site plan, and consistent with the landscaping plans, as prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted and shall include the following: A. Technical details and plans for all utility installations including telephone, gas, water, and electricity. B. Three (3) copies of a precise soils report provided by a civil engineer and less than one (1) year old. Expanded information regarding the levels of hydrocarbons and ground water contamination found on-site shall be provided in the soil report. All pavement "R" values shall be in accordance with applicable City of Tustin standards. C. All site drainage shall be handled on-site and shall not be permitted to drain onto adjacent properties. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 3 D. Drainage, vegetation, circulation, street sections, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and storm drains shall comply with the on- site Private Improvement Standards. E. Two (2) copies of a hydrology report. F. Building and landscape setback dimensions and dimensions for all drive aisles, back up areas, each covered parking stall, and open parking stalls. (1) 2.2 The engineer of record must submit a final compaction report to the Building Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (1) 2.3 The engineer of record must submit a pad certification to the Building Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. (1) 2.4 A surety/cash bond will be required to assure work is completed in accordance with approved plans prior to permit issuance. The engineer's estimated cost of the grading, drainage, and erosion control shall be submitted to the Public Works Department and Building Official for determination of the bond amount. (1) 2.5 A note shall be provided on the final plans indicating that a six (6) foot high chain link fence shall be installed around the site prior to grading. A nylon fabric or mesh shall be attached to the temporary construction fencing. Gated entrances shall be permitted along the perimeter of the site for construction vehicles. BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTAL (3) 3.1 At the time of building permit application, the plans shall comply with the 2001 California Building Code (CBC), 2001 California Mechanical Code (CMC), 2001 California Plumbing Codes (CPC), 2001 California Electrical Code (CEC), California Title 24 Accessibility Regulations, Title 24 Energy Regulations, City Ordinances, and State and Federal laws and regulations. It is expected that a new set of California Codes will take effect on January 1, 2008. Please note that the current conditions are based on current codes that maybe subject to change with adoption of new codes. (3) 3.2 Building plan check submittal shall include the following: • Four (4) sets of construction plans, including drawings for mechanical, plumbing, and electrical. • Two copies of structural calculations. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 4 • Two copies of Title 24 energy calculations. • The location of any utility vents or other equipment shall be provided on the roof plan. • Details of all proposed lighting fixtures and a photometric study showing the location and anticipated pattern of light distribution of all proposed fixtures. All new light fixtures shall be consistent with the architecture of the building. All exterior lighting shall be designed and arranged as not to direct light or glare onto adjacent properties, including the adjacent streets. Wall - mounted fixtures shall be directed at a 90 -degree angle directly toward the ground. All lighting shall be developed to provide a minimum of one (1) foot-candle of light coverage, in accordance with the City's Security Ordinance. • A note shall be provided on the plans that "All parking areas shall be illuminated with a minimum of one (1) foot-candle of light, and lighting shall not produce light, glare, or have a negative impact on adjacent properties." • Noise attenuation features as required by Condition 10.1 of this Resolution. • Note on plans that no field changes shall be made without prior approval from the Building Official and architect or engineer of record, (1) 3.3 Sufficiently sized concrete pad in front of mailbox structures shall be provided to allow mail carrier to place mail and homeowner to retrieve mail without standing in the street or landscape area. (3) 3.4 Submitted plans shall comply with 2001 California Building Code Chapter 3, Chapter 5, and minimum egress requirements in Table 10A or the latest adopted codes at the time of plan check submittal. (3) 3.5 Area of third floors exceeding 550 sq. ft. shall have at least two means of egress per CBC Section 1007.7.1 and as modified by the City of Tustin Building Division Policy #C6. (3) 3.6 All buildings shall be within maximum allowable floor area per Table 5- B of the 2001 CBC or the latest adopted codes at the time of plan check submittal. (3) 3.7 Escape or rescue windows shall be provided in all sleeping rooms, in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code (Section 310.4). (1) 3.8 The clear and unobstructed interior garage dimensions for each parking space shall be a minimum of 10 feet in width and 20 feet in length and shall be shown on the plans. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 5 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (1) 4.1 Prior to issuance of any Building Permit, a separate 24" x 36" street improvement plan, as prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer, shall be required for all construction within the public right- of-way. Construction and/or replacement of any missing or damaged public improvements shall be required adjacent to this development. The developer shall remove and replace the damaged trees and damaged sidewalk along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue. Said plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a) Curb and gutter f) Domestic water facilities b) Sidewalk, including curb ramps g) Sanitary sewer facilities for the physically disabled h) Landscape/irrigation c) Drive aprons i) Underground utility connections d) Street Lighting j) Traffic signage and striping plan e) Catch basin/storm drain laterals connection to existing storm drain system The traffic signage and striping plan shall incorporate all requirements outlined in the traffic impact analysis, including turning lanes on Browning Avenue and parking restrictions adjacent to the site. In addition, a 24" x 36" reproducible construction area traffic control plan, as prepared by a California Registered Traffic Engineer or Civil Engineer experienced in this type of plan preparation, shall be required. (1) 4.2 Prior to issuance of any permit, the developer shall provide video of existing storm drain along project frontage to the Public Works Department for review. (1) 4.3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit a Construction Management Plan, as required under the Traffic Impact Analysis, for the site to address safety issues, such as regulating construction access to the site during children arrival and departure from the nearby school. (1) 4.4 Street Lights adjacent to the site: The developer shall design and construct a street light on a "Marbelite" pole served by underground conduit at the project entrance on Browning Avenue. • Street lights on Mitchell Avenue (if required to meet design criteria) shall meet the Residential Collector street requirements: 5,800 lumen high pressure sodium vapor lamps with 28' Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 6 mounting height on 6' arms spaced 400 feet apart along both sides of the street. The lights are to be staggered from side to side along the street, thus the spacing between lights is 200 feet with developer responsible only for lights on the new development side of the street. • Street lights on Browning Avenue shall meet the Secondary Arterial Highway requirements: 16,000 lumen high-pressure sodium vapor lamps with 30' mounting height on 8' arms, spaced at 240' along both sides of the street. The lights are to be staggered from side to side, thus spacing between lights is 120 feet with the developer responsible only for lights on the new development side of the street. • All street lights shall be installed per the minimum design standards and the standards of the City of Tustin and the Southern California Edison Company, and as approved by the City Engineer. (1) 4.5 The developer shall remove the handicap street parking along Mitchell Avenue. (1) 4.6 Preparation of a sedimentation and erosion control plan for all work related to this development shall be required. (1) 4.7 Prior to issuance of encroachment permit, the sanitary sewer facilities plans shall be submitted as required by the City Engineer and local sewering agency for review and approval. ('1) 4.8 Prior to issuance of any permit, a complete hydrology study and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted for review and approval by the City. (1) 4.9 Permission from property owners shall be required for any work located on adjacent properties. (1) 4.10 Adequate horizontal and vertical intersection sight line shall be provided. In general a 25' x 25' limited use area triangle provides adequate sight at typical driveways. Additional sight evaluation, however, could be required to satisfy City of Tustin Standard Drawings and Design Standards for Public Works Construction No. 510 for all affected streets. The sight lines would be shown on the grading plan and landscape plan. If detailed analyses are requested, all landscaping within the limited use area would need to comply with City of Tustin Standard Drawings and Design Standards for Public Works Construction No. 510. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 7 (1) 4.11 Existing sewer, domestic water, reclaimed water, and storm drain service laterals shall be utilized whenever possible. Prior to issuance of any permit, the applicant shall contact and coordinate the project with the appropriate utility agency. (1) 4.12 On-site flows shall be diverted into an approved storm drain system, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. (1) 4.13 Any damage done to existing street improvements and utilities shall be repaired before acceptance of the tract and/or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the development on any parcel within the subdivision. (1) 4.14 Prior to any work in the public right-of-way, an Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from and applicable fees paid to the Public Works Department. (1) 4.15 In addition to the normal full size plan submittal process, all final development plans including, but not limited to: tract maps, parcel maps, right-of-way maps, records of survey, public works improvements, private infrastructure improvements, final grading plans, and site plans are also required shall be submitted to the Public Works Department/Engineering Division in computer aided design and drafting (CADD) format. The standard file format is AutoCAD Release 2004 having the extension DWG. Likewise, layering and linetype conventions are AutoCAD -based (latest version available upon request from the Engineering Division). in order to interchangeably utilize the data contained in the infrastructure mapping system, CADD drawings shall be in AutoCAD "DWG' format (i.e., produced using AutoCAD or AutoCAD compatible CADD software). The most current version of AutoCAD is Release 2004. Drawings created in AutoCAD Release 2000 are compatible and acceptable. (1) 4.16 The CADD files shall be submitted to the City at the time the plans are approved and updated CADD files reflecting "as built' conditions shall be submitted once all construction has been completed. The subdivision bonds will not be released until the "as built" CADD files have been submitted. (1) 4.17 Prior to issuance of any Building permit, the applicant shall submit a site plan and obtain a new address from the Engineering Division. (1) 4.18 This development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City of Tustin Water Quality Ordinance and all Federal; State, and Regional Water Quality Control Board rules and regulations. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 8 (1) 4,19 Project Recycling Requirement — The City of Tustin is required to comply with the recycling requirements contained in the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. To facilitate City compliance with this law, the Project Applicant is required to comply with Section 4327 of the Tustin City Code which details requirements for developing and implementing a Waste Management Plan. (1) 4.20 Multi -Family Recycling: The Applicant, Property Owner, and/or tenant(s) are required to participate in the City's recycling program. (1) 4.21 Prior to issuance of any permit the applicant shall submit the improvement plans to the Orange County Fire Authority for fire protection review and approval. The adequacy and reliability of water system design and the distribution of fire hydrants will be evaluated. The water distribution system and appurtenances shall also conform to the applicable laws and adopted regulations enforced by the Orange County Health Department. (1) 4.22 Prior to issuance of any Building Permit, release/approval from the East Orange County Water District shall be obtained prior to receiving water service. Backflow prevention devices must be installed in accordance with applicable standards and codes and shall be installed within an easement of suitable size to allow for unobstructed access, inspection, testing, and maintenance. The developer shall submit a water permit application to the East Orange County Water District and is responsible for all applicable and water connection fees. (1) 4.23 The location of fire hydrants shall be approved by the City of Tustin and the Orange County Fire Authority. (1) 4.24 Fire hydrant connections to the water mains shall be per City Standard Drawing No. 1004. (1) 4.25 Hydraulic analysis of the proposed water system and ability to meet OCFA fire flow demands and requirements shall be performed and certified by the developer. (1) 4.26 Blow off at dead end locations of water main shall be per City Standard Drawing No. 1007. (1) 4.27 Water meter and the connection to water main shall be per City of Tustin Standard Drawing No. 1001. (1) 4.28 If the buildings are sprinkled then water meters with reduced pressure backflow prevention device per City of Tustin Standard Drawing No. 1109 shall be used. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 9 (1) 4.29 The developer is responsible for all costs related to the relocation of existing fire hydrants and the installation of new fire hydrants if any. (1) 4.30 The developer is responsible for all costs related to the abandonment, at the water main, of all existing potable water and fire service connections if any. (1) 4.31 The developer shall be responsible for all costs related to the installation of new potable and fire related water services. (1) 4.32 Approval from the City's Water Services Division is required for permitting or construction of any new service connections, abandonment or relocation of existing services, or improvements that will affect City's water facilities. Water system improvements plan shall be designed by a licensed Civil Engineer in accordance with the requirements and standards of the City of Tustin Department of Public Works or American Water Work Association. A separate on- site water plan for improvements outside the street right of ways and within private property will be required for on-site improvements to be maintained by the City. Title block per Engineering Services Division's conditions is available from Engineering at (714)573-3164. Any easements for construction of City's facilities within private property shall be recorded. Submittals of improvement plan and design specification digital (PDF) files in entirety to Water Services Engineer are needed. These items are mandatory requirements prior to sign -off by the Water Services Manager. (1) 4.33 Prior to issuance of a demolition, precise/rough grading, and/or building permit with valuation of $50,000 or greater, the applicant shall submit for approval by the City of Tustin, Construction & Demolition (C&D) debris collection, disposal, and diversion information on the City -prescribed forms. (1) 4.34 At least 50 percent of the construction debris shall be diverted from landfill to the recycling plants. A security deposit in the amount of $50 per ton (not to exceed $5,000 per project) for a C&D security deposit will be collected prior to issuance the permit. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall submit to the City of Tustin documents (i.e. receipt from vendor) showing actual weight or volume of each material of C&D diverted to the recycling center. (City Ordinance 1281) (1) 4.36 Prior to issuance of any permits, the applicant shall submit for approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to control predictable pollutant run-off. This WQMP shall identify the: structural and non-structural measures specified detailing implementation of Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 10 BMPs whenever they are applicable to the project; the assignment of long-term maintenance responsibilities (specifying the developer, parcel owner, maintenance association, lessee, etc.); and, reference to the location(s) of structural BMPs. (1) 4.37 Prior to submittal of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the applicant shall submit a deposit of $2,700.00 for the estimated cost of review of the WQMP to the Building Division. The actual costs shall be deducted from the deposit, and the applicant shall be responsible for any additional review cost that exceeded the deposit prior to issuance of grading permits. Any unused portion of the deposit shall be refunded to the applicant. (1) 4.38 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the Notice of Intent (NO]) indicating that coverage has been obtained under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) State General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that the NO] has been obtained shall be submitted to the Building Official. In addition, the applicant shall include notes on the grading plans indicating that the project will be implemented in compliance with the Statewide Permit for General Construction Activities. (1) 4.39 The following requirements shall be defined on permit plan cover sheets as either general or special notes and the project shall be implemented in accordance with the notes: • Construction sites shall be maintained in such a condition that an anticipated storm does not carry wastes or pollutants off the site. • Discharges of material other than storm water are allowed only when necessary for performance and completion of construction practices and where they do not: cause or contribute to a violation of any water quality standard; cause or threaten to cause pollution, contamination, or nuisance; or contain a hazardous substance in a quantity reportable under Federal Regulations 40 CFR Parts 117 and 302. • Potential pollutants include, but are not limited to: solid or liquid chemical spills; wastes from paints, stains, sealants, glues, limes, pesticides, herbicides, wood preservatives, and solvents; asbestos fibers, paint flake or stucco fragments; fuels, oils, lubricants, and hydraulic, radiator or battery fluids; fertilizers, vehicle/equipment wash water and concrete wash water, concrete, detergent or floatable wastes; wastes from any engine equipment steam cleaning or chemical degreasing; and chlorinated potable water line flushings. During construction, Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 11 disposal of such materials should occur in a specified and controlled temporary area on site, physically separated from potential storm water run-off, with ultimate disposal in accordance with local, State, and Federal requirements. • Dewatering of contaminated groundwater or discharging contaminated soils via surface erosion is prohibited. Dewatering of non -contaminated groundwater requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit from the California State Regional Water Quality Control Board. (1) 4.40 The applicant shall comply with all City policies regarding short-term construction emissions, including periodic watering of the site and prohibiting grading during second stage alerts and when wind velocities exceed 15 miles per hour. MODEL HOME PLAN AND CONSTRUCTION PHASING (1) 5.1 A site plan, street improvement plan including a public parking area, landscape plans, lighting plans, and striping plan for the model home complex shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community Development Department. The project construction shall follow the construction phasing proposed with the submitted phasing plan unless approved by the Community Development Department. All required improvements for streets, landscaping, ADA compliance, emergency access, security lighting, etc. shall be installed prior to final inspection for the model homes and the sales office. (1) 5.2 The recreation area (pool/spa, pool buildings, etc.), all perimeter block walls including a new 6' 8" block wall along the westerly and northerly property lines, landscaping, and infrastructure shall be installed with the first phase of development. (1) 5.3 Temporary construction fencing shall be permitted to encroach into required travelways of private streets or drives once constructed and shall be removed prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for the model homes. (1) 5.4 The developer shall close and convert the model homes to occupancy within 90 days from the last home sale of the same style home. Prior to issuance of building permits for the model homes, the developer shall submit a bond to ensure the conversion. ARCHITECTURE (4) 6.1 Window trims, surrounds, and mullions shall be provided on all elevations consistent with the architectural treatment and of the Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 12 buildings subject to final approval of the Community Development Department. (4) 6.2 All exterior colors and textures shall be submitted to review and approval of the Community Development Department and final inspection. Colors, materials, and textures shall be coordinated with the architectural styles and noted in construction plans. (4) 6.3 All mechanical and electrical fixtures and equipment shall be adequately and decoratively screened. The screen shall be included as an element of the overall design of the project and blend with architectural design of the building. All telephone and electrical boxes shall be identified on the construction plans. Electrical transformers shall be located toward the interior of the project to minimize visual impacts. LAN DSCAPING/HARDSCAPE (1) 7.1 Submit at plan check complete detailed landscaping and irrigation plans for all landscaping areas, including the model complex, consistent with adopted City of Tustin Landscaping requirements. The plans shall include the following: • Include a summary table identifying plan materials. The plant table shall list botanical and common names, sizes, spacing, location, and quantity of the plant materials proposed. • Show planting and berming details, soil preparation, staking, etc. The irrigation plan shall show location and control of backflow prevention devices, pipe size, sprinkler type, spacing, and coverage. Details for all equipment must be provided. • Show all property lines on the landscaping and irrigation plans, public right-of-way areas, sidewalk widths, parkway areas, and wall locations. ■ The Community Development Department may request minor substitutions of plant materials or request additional sizing or quantity of materials during plan check. • Add a note that coverage of landscaping and irrigation materials is subject to inspection at project completion by the Community Development Department. ■ Turf is unacceptable for grades over 25 percent. A combination of planting materials shall be used. On large areas, ground cover alone is not acceptable. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 13 ■ Shrubs shall be a minimum of five (5) gallon size and shall be placed a maximum of five (5) feet on center. ■ Ground cover shall be planted eight (8) to twelve (12) inches on center. ■ Fences, wall, and equipment areas shall be screened with walls, vines, and/or trees. ■ All plant materials shall be installed in a healthy vigorous condition typical to the species and shall be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, trimming, weeding, removal of litter, fertilizing, regular watering, and replacement of diseased or dead plants. ■ Major points of entry to the project, private streets, and private drives and internal circulation shall receive specimen trees to create an identifying theme. ■ All trees shall be minimum 24 -inch box in size. Trees along the westerly and southerly property lines shall be a variety of at least 24 -inch and 36 -inch boxes to create a mature tree lining on these boundaries. (4) 7.2 On-site walls and fences shall be noted on the plans with specific materials, colors, and decorative treatments. Interior wall/fences shall be made of durable materials subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department. (4) 7.3 The applicant shall replace all existing walls along the westerly and southerly boundaries of the site with a 6 -foot tall decorative block wall within their property (including the footing). The color and material of the wall is subject to approval by the Community Development Department. USE RESTRICTIONS (4) 8.1 Parallel guest parking spaces, parking stalls, and driveway parking spaces shall be maintained as shown on the approved "Site Plan" and "Waste Management Plan." Any changes to the number, location, or size of parking spaces shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. (') 8.2 Trashcans shall be placed only in the locations identified on the approved "Waste Management Plan." Residents are required to store their trash and recycling carts within the area designated within the garage. Prior to collection day, the residents need to move the Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06.020 Page 14 carts to an area immediately outside their garage, where a Homeowner Association Employee will be in charge of relocating them to the designated parking stalls that are marked and designated accordingly. The carts shall be placed in the common drives no earlier than noon on the day before scheduled collections and removed within twelve (12) hours of collection. Any changes or modifications to the approved waste management plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. Adequate signs that post the Waste Management Plan and designated parking spaces shall be provided subject to final approval of the Community Development Department. (1) 8.3 No outdoor storage shall be permitted during grading or building stages, except as approved by the Tustin Community Development Director. (1) 8.4 During construction, permission from adjacent property owners shall be required for any work located on adjacent properties. (1) 8.5 All on-site signs (i.e. stop signs, no parking signs) shall be designed with decorative posts complementary to the light posts throughout the site. ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY (5) 9.1 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence of adequate fire flow. The "Orange County Fire Authority Water Availability for Fire Protection" form shall be signed by the applicable water district and submitted to the Fire Chief for approval. (5) 9.2 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit plans for the required automatic fire sprinkler system in all structures to the Fire Chief for review and approval. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 573-6100 to request a copy of the "Orange County Fire Authority Notes for New NFPA 13 Commercial Sprinkler Systems." Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, this system shall be operational in a manner meeting the approval of the Fire Chief. (5) 9.3 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit plans and obtain approval from the Fire Chief for fire lanes on required fire access roads less than 36 feet in width. The plans shall indicate the locations of red curbs and signage and include a detail of the proposed signage including the height, stroke and colors of the lettering and its contrasting background. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 573-6100 or visit the OCFA website to obtain a copy of the "Guidelines for Emergency Access Roadways and Fire Lane Requirements." Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 15 Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy, the fire lanes shall be installed in accordance with the approved fire master plan. The CC&Rs or other approved documents shall contain a fire lane map, provisions prohibiting parking in the fire lanes and a method of enforcement. (5) 9.4 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit architectural plans for the review and approval of the Fire Chief if required per the "Orange County Fire Authority Plan Submittal Criteria Form." Please contact the OCFA at (714) 573-6100 for a copy of the Site/Architectural Notes to be placed on the plans prior to submittal. (5) 9,5 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, plans for the fire alarm system shall be submitted to the Fire Chief for review and approval. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 573-6100 or visit the OCFA website to obtain a copy of the "Guideline for New and Existing Fire Alarm Systems," This system shall be operational prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. (5) 9.6 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit a fire hydrant location plan to the Fire Chief for review and approval. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit evidence of the on-site fire hydrant system to the Fire Chief and indicate whether it is public or private. If the system is private, it shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Chief prior to building permit issuance, and the applicant shall make provisions for the repair and maintenance of the system in a manner meeting the approval of the Fire Chief. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 573-6100 or visit the OCFA website for a copy of the "Guidelines for Private Fire Hydrant and/or Sprinkler Underground Piping." Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy, all fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the hydrant location on the street as approved by the Fire Chief, and must be maintained in good condition by the property owner. Please contact the OCFA at (714) 573-6100 or visit the OCFA website for a copy of the "Guideline for Installation of Blue Dot Hydrant Markers." NOISE (*) 10.1 For adequate ventilation without windows open, all units shall be equipped with A/C units with a summer switch (fresh -air intake). Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 16 ENVIRONMENTAL (*) 11.1 If buried resources are found during grading within the project area, a qualified archaeologist would need to assess the site significance and perform the appropriate mitigation. The Native American viewpoint shall be considered during this process. This could include testing or data recovery. Native American consultation shall also be initiated during this process. POLICE DEPARTMENT (*) 12.1 The pool access gates need to be equipped with a knox box for emergency access. *) 12.2 Landscaping should be designed with surveillance opportunities for residents and police personnel in patrol vehicles. O 12.3 Security devices such as double locking deadbolts, strike plates, with 1 1/2 inch screws and pin locks on windows and sliders shall be installed minimizing the potential for criminals to access the units. FEES (1)(5) 13.1 Prior to issuance of any building permits, payment shall be made of all applicable fees, including but not limited to, the following. Payment shall be required based upon those rates in effect at the time of payment and are subject to change. a. Building plan check and permit fees to the Community Development Department based on the most current schedule at the time of permit issuance. b. Engineering plan check and permit fees to the Public Works Department based on the most current schedule at the time of plan check and permit issuance. C. Orange County Fire Authority plan check and inspection fees to the Community Development Department based upon the most current schedule at the time of permit issuance. d. Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fees to the Tustin Public Works Department based on the most current schedule at the time of building permit issuance. e. Transportation System Improvement Program (TSIP), Benefit Area 'B" fees in the amount of $3,31 per square foot of new or added gross square floor area of construction or improvements to the Community Development Department. Resolution 4065 Conditional Use Permit 06-024, DR 06-020 Page 17 f. Water and sewer connection fees to City of Tustin Water Services. g. New development tax is $350.00 per unit. h. School facilities fee in the amount as required by Tustin Unified School District. Applicable parkland in -lieu fees as required by Resolution No. 4066. (1) 13.2 Within forty-eight (48) hours of final approval of the project, the applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department, a CASHIER'S CHECK payable to the County Clerk in the amount of fifty dollars ($50.00) to enable the City to file the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. If within such forty- eight (48) hour period that applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department the above -noted check, the statute of limitations for any interested party to challenge the environmental determination under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act could be significantly lengthened. ATTACHMENT G Resolution No. 4066 and Exhibit A (Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 17096) RESOLUTION NO. 4066 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND) FOR ZONE CHANGE 06-002, TENTATIVE TRACT 17096, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-024, AND DESIGN REVIEW 06- 020 AND APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 06-002 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 17096 TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING PARCEL CONTAINING 60 APARTMENT UNITS WITH A 77 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED AT 1972 MITCHELL AVENUE AND 14251-14351 BROWNING AVENUE The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows: A. That a proper application for Zone Change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17096 was submitted by Sun -Cal Browning LLC requesting approval to rezone and subdivide a 4.9 -acre (gross area) parcel for development of a 77 -unit condominium complex on properties located at 1972 Mitchell Avenue and 14251-14351 Browning Avenue; B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held for zone change 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096, Conditional Use Permit 06-024, and Design Review 06-020 on August 28, 2007, by the Planning Commission; C. If the site is approved for a zone change to rezone the property from R-4 to R-3 by the City Council, the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tustin General Plan land use designation of High Density Residential (HDR) and Multiple Family Residential (R-3) zoning district in that these designations provide for the development of residential condominium units, D. The site is a reverse corner lot, where the longer dimension is along Browning Avenue. As conditioned, units along Browning Avenue would be provided with a 15 -foot building setback consistent with the front setback for better livability of these units with more privacy and fewer noise impacts from Browning Avenue. E. As conditioned, the map would be in conformance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Tustin City Code Section 9323 (Subdivision Code); F. That the Public Works Department has reviewed the tentative map and determined that it is technically correct; Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096 August 28, 2007 Page 2 G. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density and type of development; H. That the design of the subdivision or the types of improvements proposed are not likely to cause serious public health problems; The proposed subdivision is not located within a 100 -year flood plain according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency map for the area dated February 18, 2004; J. That development of the site will require the developer to dedicate in fee title property to the City of Tustin including a 33 -foot dedication in fee along Mitchell Avenue and 40 -foot dedication in fee along Browning Avenue for public rights-of-way previously dedicated as public easements. K. That the Building Official has considered and approved deviations to the Private Improvement Standard to allow turning radii of less than 25 feet for private drives accessing private garages; L. That the parcel map or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat; and, M. That a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was published and the Draft Negative Declaration and Initial Study were made available for a 20 -day public review and comment period from August 3, 2007, to August 22, 2007, in compliance wfth Sections 15072 and 15105 of the State CEQA Guidelines and the Planning Commission adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration related to Conditional Use Permit 06-024 and Design Review 06-020 by adopting Resolution No. 4064. II. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Zone Change 06-002, and Tentative Tract Map 17096 to rezone and subdivide a 4.9 -acre (gross area) parcel for development of a 77 -unit condominium project located at 1972 Mitchell Avenue and 14251-14351 Browning Avenue, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit A attached hereto. Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, Tentative Tract Map 17096 August 28, 2007 Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission held on the 28th day of August, 2007. JOHN NIELSEN Chair Pro Tem ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH A. BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 4066 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 28th day of August, 2007. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 4066 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL (1) 1.1 The proposed project shall substantially conform with the submitted improvement plans on file, and the Zone Change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17096, dated August 28, 2007, on file with the Community Development Department, except as herein modified, or as modified by the Director of Community Development in accordance with this Exhibit. The Director of Community Development may also approve minor modifications to plans during plan check if such modifications are to be consistent with the provisions of the Tustin City Code and other applicable codes. (1) 1.2 Approval of the Zone Change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17096 is contingent upon the applicant returning to the Community Development Department a notarized "Agreement to Conditions Imposed" form and the property owner signing_ and recording with the County Clerk -Recorder a notarized "Notice of Discretionary Permit Approval and Conditions of Approval' form. The forms shall be established by the Director of Community Development, and evidence of recordation shall be provided to the Community Development Department. (1) 1.3 As a condition of approval of Zone Change 06-002 and Tentative Tract Map 17096, the applicant shall agree, at its sole cost and expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents, and consultants, from any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third -party against the City, its officers, agents, and employees, which seeks to attack, set aside, challenge, void, or annul an approval of the City Council, the Planning Commission, or any other decision-making body, including staff, concerning this project. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim or action filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action. The City may, at its sole cost and expense, elect to participate in defense of any such action under this condition. (1) 1.4 Within twenty-four (24) months from tentative map approval, the subdivider shall record with appropriate agencies a Final Map prepared in accordance with subdivision requirements of the Tustin Municipal Code, the State Subdivision Map Act, and applicable conditions contained herein unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 9323 of the Tustin Municipal Code. Time extensions may be considered if a written request is received by the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days prior to expiration. SOURCE CODES (1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REQUIREMENT (2) CEQA MITIGATION (6) LANDSCAPING GUIDELINES (3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (7) PC/CC POLICY (4) DESIGN REVIEW *** EXCEPTION Exhibit A Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096 Page 2 (1) 1.5 The subdivider shall conform to all applicable requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act, the City's Subdivision Ordinance, and the City's zoning regulations. (1) 1.6 Prior to Final Map approval by the City Council, the subdivider shall execute a hold -harmless agreement and provide a Certificate of Insurance pursuant to Section 9325 of the Tustin City Code. (1) 1.7 Prior to Final Map approval, the subdivider shall submit: A. A current title report; and, B. A duplicate mylar of the Final Map or 8'/z inch by 11 inch transparency of each map sheet prior to Final Map approval and "as built" grading, landscape, and improvement plans prior to Certificate of Acceptance. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (1) 2.1 All dedication and easement requirements for street rights-of-way along Browning Avenue and Mitchell Avenue and the appropriate corner cut-off on Browning Avenue shall be satisfied as depicted on the tentative tract map. (1) 2.2 The subdivider shall satisfy grant in fee, dedication and/or reservation requirements as applicable; including but not limited to, dedication of all required street and flood control right-of-way easements, vehicular access rights, sewer easements, and water easements defined and approved as to specific locations by the City Engineer and other agencies. (1) 2.3 Subdivider's execution of a subdivision and monumentation agreement and furnishing the improvement and monumentation bonds as required by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the Final Map. (1) 2.4 Preparation and recordation of a final subdivision map shall be required. (1) 2.5 In addition to the normal full size plan submittal process, all final development plans including, but not limited to: tract maps, parcel maps, right-of-way maps, records of survey,. public works improvements, private infrastructure improvements, final grading plans, and site plans are also required to be submitted to the Public Works Department/Engineering Division in computer aided design and drafting (CADD) format. The standard file format is AutoCAD Release 2004 having the extension DWG. Likewise, layering and linetype conventions are AutoCAD -based (latest version available upon request from the Engineering Division). In order to interchangeably utilize the data contained in the infrastructure mapping system, CADD drawings must be in AutoCAD "DWG" format (i.e., produced using AutoCAD or AutoCAD compatible CADD software). The most current version of AutoCAD is Exhibit A Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096 Page 3 Release 2004. Drawings created in AutoCAD Release 2004 are compatible and acceptable. The CADD files shall be submitted to the City at the time the plans are approved and updated CADD files reflecting the "as built" conditions shall be submitted once all construction has been completed. The subdivision bonds will not be released until the "as built" CADD files have been submitted. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS (CC&Rs) (1) 3.1 All organizational documents for the project including any covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development Department and the City Attorney's Office. Costs for such review shall be borne by the subdivider. The approved CC&Rs shall be recorded with County Recorder's Office at the same time as recordation of the Final Map. A copy of the final documents shall be submitted to the Community Development Department after recordation. (1) 3.2 No dwelling unit in the development shall be sold or a Certificate of Occupancy issued, unless a homeowners association has been legally formed with the right to assess all these properties which are jointly owned or benefited to operate and maintain all other mutually available features of the development including, but not limited to, open space, amenities, landscaping, slope maintenance/landscaping, private streets, and utilities. No dwelling unit shall be sold unless all approved and required open space, amenities, landscaping, or other improvements, or approved phases thereof, have been completed or completion is assured by a development agreement or financing guarantee method approved by the City. The CC&Rs shall include, but not be limited to, the following provisions: A. The City shall be included as a party to the CC&Rs for enforcement purposes of those CC&R provisions in which the City has interest as reflected in the following provisions. However, the City shall not be obligated to enforce the CC&Rs. B. The requirement that association bylaws be established. C. Provisions for effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair, and maintenance of all common areas and facilities including recreational buildings and amenities, landscaped areas and lots, walls and fences, private roadways (i.e., walks, sidewalks, trails), parkland facilities and bikeways, and open space areas. D. Membership in the homeowners association shall be inseparable from ownership in individual units. Exhibit A Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096 Page 4 E. Architectural controls shall be provided and may include, but not be limited to, provisions regulating exterior finishes, roof materials, fences and walls, accessory structures such as patios, sunshades, trellises, gazebos, awnings, exterior mechanical equipment, television and radio antenna, consistent with the Tustin City Code. F. Maintenance standards shall be provided for applicable items listed in Section C above in CC&Rs. Examples of maintenance standards are shown below. 1. All common area landscaping and private areas visible from any public way shall be properly maintained such that they are evenly cut, evenly edged, free of bare or brown spots, debris, and weeds. All trees and shrubs shall be trimmed so they do not impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Trees shall be pruned so they do not intrude into neighboring properties and shall be maintained so they do not have droppings or create other nuisances to neighboring properties. All trees shall also be root pruned to eliminate exposed surface roots and damage to sidewalks, driveways, and structures. 2. All private roadways, sidewalks, and open space areas shall be maintained so that they are safe for users. Significant pavement cracks, pavement distress, excessive slab settlement, abrupt vertical variations, and debris on travel ways should be removed or repaired promptly. 3. Common areas shall be maintained in such a manner as to avoid the reasonable determination of a duly authorized official of the City that a public nuisance has been created by the absence of adequate maintenance such as to be detrimental to public health, safety, or general welfare. G. Homeowners association approval of exterior improvements requiring a building permit shall be obtained prior to requesting a building permit from the City of Tustin Community Development Department. All plans for exterior improvements shall conform to requirements set forth by the City and the CC&Rs. H. Private open space areas within the common area shall be illustrated on a "Private Open Space Exhibit' and shall be made part of the CC&Rs and shall specify those portions of the common open space area that are allocated for private use and public use and access rights in perpetuity. The CC&Rs shall include a separate 8'/2 inch by 11 inch dimensioned site plan for each unit that is allocated private open space. Exhibit A Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096 Page 5 The approved site plan showing the dedication areas and provisions for maintenance of these areas by the homeowners association. J The approved "Site/Parking Plan Exhibit" and "Waste Management Plan Exhibit" shall be made part of the CC&Rs and shall be enforced by the homeowners association. In addition to the exhibit, provisions regarding parking shall be included in the CC&Rs, including the following: 1. All units are required to maintain a two -car garage. 2. The project site provides 25 parking spaces. Twenty spaces are required to remain as unassigned guest parking spaces that shall be permanently maintained in locations shown on the "Site/Parking Exhibit." 3. Residents shall not store or park any non -motorized vehicles, trailers or motorized vehicles that exceed 7 feet high, 7 feet wide, and 19 feet long in any parking space, driveway, or private street area except for the purpose of loading, unloading, making deliveries or emergency repairs except that the homeowners association may adopt rules and regulations to authorize exceptions. 4. Residents shall park vehicles in garage spaces. Storage of personal items may occur in the garages only to the extent that vehicles may still be parked within the required garage spaces. 5. The homeowners association shall be responsible for monitoring and enforcing all parking and traffic regulations on private streets. The proposed CC&Rs shall include provisions requiring the association to develop and adopt an enforcement program for parking and traffic regulations within the development which may include measures for fire access and enforcement by a private security company. 6. The private yards for units along the westerly property line shall be only improved with landscaping and hardscaping. No trellis or accessory structure is permitted. K. Provisions for enforcing the "Waste Management Plan" to minimize backing into private streets. Trashcans shall be placed only in the locations identified on the approved "Waste Management Plan." Residents are required to store their trash and recycling carts within the area designated within the garage. Prior to collection day, the residents need to move the carts to an area immediately outside Exhibit A Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096 Page 6 their garage, where a Homeowner Association Employee will be in charge of relocating them to the designated parking stalls that are marked and designated accordingly. The carts shall be placed in the common drives no earlier than noon on the day before scheduled collections and removed within twelve (12) hours of collection. Any changes or modifications to the approved waste management plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. L. Television and radio antennas shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of the Tustin City Code. M. The homeowners association shall be required to file the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of at least one member of the homeowners association Board and, where applicable, a manager of the project before January 1st of each year with the City of Tustin Community Development Department for the purpose of contacting the association in the case of emergency or in those cases where the City has an interest in CC&R violations. N. The homeowners association shall be responsible for establishing and following procedures for providing access to public utilities for maintenance of their facilities within the project area, subject to those agencies' approval. O. No amendment to alter, modify, terminate, or change the homeowners association's obligation to maintain the common areas and the project perimeter wall or other CC&R provisions in which the City has an interest, as noted above, or to alter, modify, terminate, or change the City's right to enforce maintenance of the common areas and maintenance of the project perimeter wall, shall be permitted without the prior written approval of the City of Tustin Community Development Department. P. No delivery and or moving trucks larger than 40 feet shall be permitted on the private drives of the condominium projects with less than 25 foot radius turns. HOMEBUYER NOTIFICATION (1) 4.1 Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the subdivider shall submit to the Community Development Department for review and approval a homebuyer notification document that includes the notifications listed below. The notification document shall be signed by each homebuyer prior to final inspection and occupancy, and a copy of the signed notification shall be provided to the Community Development Department prior to final inspection and/or issuance of each Certificate of Occupancy. Exhibit A Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096 Page 7 A. A notice for roadway noise from Mitchell Avenue and Browning Avenue that may impact the subdivision. B. A notice, to be reviewed by the City of Tustin and the Tustin Unified School District, regarding the location of existing and proposed elementary, middle, and high schools which will serve the subdivision (text and map). C. A notice regarding units that are adjacent to aboveground utilities or structures (such as light standards and fire hydrants) identifying the type of structure and their locations. D. A notice indicating that any use of a residence for a business shall be subject to the City's Home Occupation Ordinance and may require zoning clearance and a business license. E. A notice explaining the easements, facilities, amenities, and dedications that will be provided on lettered lots and indicating all on- site streets, alleys, paseos, and common areas are to be maintained by the homeowners association. F. A notice, to be approved by the City Attorney, indicating that neither the site, nor the project nor any part thereof any street or sidewalk, alleyway, or paseo thereon shall be privately gated, provided however that any swimming pool and/or spa facility within the common area and any indoor common area improvements, including any clubhouse and bathrooms, may be gated or locked and made available solely to residents of the project and their guests. G. A notice stating trash bins shall be placed in designated areas as shown on the approved "Waste Management Exhibit" no earlier than noon on the day before scheduled collections and removed within twelve (12) hours of collection. H. A notice indicating that surrounding properties may be developed in accordance with City ordinances in a manner which may partially or totally obstruct views from the owner's unit and that the City of Tustin makes no claim, warranty, or guarantee that views from any unit will be preserved as development of surrounding properties occurs. A notice explaining and providing a copy of a "Private Open Space Exhibit" and separate 8'/z inch by 11 inch dimensioned site plan for each unit that is allocated private open space within the common area. Exhibit A Resolution No. 4066 ZC 06-002, TTM 17096 Page 8 J. A notice explaining and providing a copy of the approved "Site/Parking Exhibit"and related CC&R provisions. K. A notice explaining the phasing of construction within the subdivision and that activity may be disruptive. L. The developer shall notify all homebuyers that future Assessment/Maintenance Districts may affect the property. M. A notice stating that on -street parking currently available Browning Avenue may be restricted in the near future and upon construction of the project. N. A notice indicating that the private yards for units along the westerly property line shall be only improved with landscaping and hardscaping. No trellis or accessory structure is permitted. FEES (1) 5.1 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the subdivider shall submit in - lieu parkland dedication fees in an amount and form as required by the Director of the Parks and Recreation Department. (1) 5.2 The applicant shall submit all fees required by the City and other agencies as identified in Resolution No. 4065. (1) 5.3 The applicant shall reimburse the City of Tustin for the actual cost incurred to the City by the City Attorney for review of the CC&Rs and homebuyer notification per City Council Resolution 06-85.