The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About75B - PH - TUSTIN AND 4TH STREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 20, 2018 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2016-156, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2018-05 TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 431 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE AND 2321 EAST FOURTH STREET, AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-08 TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTIES AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 325 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 401 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE AND 2320 EAST FOURTH STREET - RICHARD FINKEL, APPLICANT {STRATEGIC PLAN NO. 3,2) CIniMANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1n Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2n° Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER 1. Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156. 2. Adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05. 3. Adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2018-08. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION At its regular meeting on October 8, 2018, the Planning Commission by a vote of 5:0 (Mendoza and Nguyen absent) recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156, adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05, and adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2018-08 to change the land use and zoning designations of the properties generally located at the southeast and northeast corners of Tustin Avenue and Fourth Street. Concurrently with the recommendation the Planning Commission also approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18 and Variance No. 2018-10 to allow an eating establishment with drive-through service at 301 North Tustin Avenue and a service station at 325 North Tustin Avenue. The Planning Commission made no changes to the recommended actions outlined in the attached staff report (Exhibit A). 7513-1 GPA No. 2018-05 & AA No. 2018-08 November 20, 2018 Page 2 DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a general plan amendment to re -designate the property at 301 North Tustin Avenue from Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC), and amendment application to rezone the properties at 301 and 325 North Tustin Avenue from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2). The restaurant at 301 North Tustin will be demolished and a new 7,368 -square -foot multi -tenant commercial building with a drive-through window service will be constructed. The parcel at 325 North Tustin Avenue is also proposed for redevelopment. The existing automated car wash will be removed and the site will be redesigned with an 8 pump service station and a larger 2,778 -square -foot convenience store. In conjunction with the applicant's request, the City is proposing to change the designations of several properties near the development site to provide consistency between the general plan and zoning. General plan amendments are proposed for 431 North Tustin Avenue and 2321 East 4th Street to change the land use designations from Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC), and an amendment application to change the zoning of 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East 4th Street from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2) are also proposed. Table 1: Property General Plan and Zoning Information Property Address Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Proposed by Use General General Plan Zoning Zoning Plan 301 N. Tustin Ave. PAO GC P C2 Applicant Commercial Proposed 325 N. Tustin Ave. GC No Change - GC P C2 Applicant Service Station 401 North Tustin Ave. GC No Change - GC P C2 City of Santa Ana Service Station 431 N. Tustin Ave. PAO GC C2 No Change - C2 City of Santa Ana Commercial/Retail 2320 E. 4th St. GC No Change - GC P C2 City of Santa Ana Fast Food Restaurant 2321 E. 4th St. PAO GC C2 No Change - C2 City of Santa Ana Commercial/Retail F AU = Protesslonal & Administrative Uttice P = Professional zone district GC = General Commercial C2 = General Commercial zone district 75B-2 GPA No. 2018-05 & AA No. 2018-08 November 20, 2018 Page 3 Figure 3: Existina Zoning Map WM-- a I h Wh, --I Now MST Z1 ; <• C PROFESSONAL ■ C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL Note: Subject properties shown in blue. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Figure 2: Proposed General Plan „, ST • • • J 1�AO O17�PrOoss,�a.d AmmwrMt O,Cei P�Z1 � Figure 4: Proposed Zoning Map Based on the development of the properties at 301 and 325 North Tustin Avenue with a gas station and retail building, approximately $15,000 will be generated in permit fees. The full assessed value of the properties is currently approximately $3.5 million and the building improvements are estimated at $1 million. Therefore, the estimated total net taxable value for the properties is $4.5 million. The gas station and commercial businesses will also generate sales tax revenue for the City and provide employment opportunities. 75B-3 GPA No. 2018-05 & AA No. 2018-08 November 20, 2018 Page 4 In addition, the proposed project will provide additional services to residents, workers, and visitors in the area and will not negatively impact the surrounding community as the site is located away from sensitive land uses and the project has been designed to minimize impacts to sensitive land uses. Full-sized plans are available for public viewing in the Clerk of the Council Office. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #3 - Economic Development, Objective #2 (create new opportunities for business/job growth and encourage private development through new General Plan and Zoning Ordinance policies). FISCAL IMPACT There is no negative fiscal impact to the general fund associated with this action. Minh Thai Executive Director Planning and Building Agency SK:fg S: RFCA\10-16-2018\G PA18-05AA18-08 10-16-18 Exhibits: A. Planning Commission Staff Report B. Resolutions C. Ordinance 75B-4 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2018 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING — FILED BY RICHARD FINKEL FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2016- 156, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2018-05, AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-08, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2018-18 AND VARIANCE NO. 2018-10 TO ALLOW AN EATING ESTABLISHMENT WITH DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE AND A SERVICE STATION AT 325 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE (STRATEGIC PLAN NO. 3, 2) Prepared by Selena Keleher, AICP Executive Director RECOMMENDED ACTION Recommend to the City Council: PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Set Public Hearing For DENIED ❑ Applicant's Request ❑ Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO Planning ManagEF- 1. Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156. 2. Adoption of a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05. 3. Adoption of an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2018-08. Planning Commission adopt resolutions: 1. Approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18 as conditioned. 2. Approving Variance No. 2018-10 as conditioned. Executive Summary Richard Finkel, representing Russell Fischer LP, is requesting approval of a general plan amendment to re -designate the property at 301 North Tustin Avenue from Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC), an amendment application to rezone the properties at 301 and 325 North Tustin Avenue from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2), a conditional use permit to allow an eating establishment with drive-through service at 301 North Tustin Avenue, and a variance to reduce the required yards at 325 North Tustin Avenue. EXHIBIT A 75B-5 GPA No. 2018-05, AA No. 2018-08, CUP No. 2018-18 & VAR No. 2018-10 September 24, 2018 Page 3 Item: Information' : ' - South I Commercial - City of Tustin West I Professional - Service Station Property Size 39,775 SF (0.9 acres) - 301 N. Tustin Avenue 22,465 SF 0.5 acres - 325 N. Tustin Avenue Existing Site Development Eating Establishment - 301 N. Tustin Avenue Gas Service Station & Car Wash - 325 N. Tustin Avenue Development Standards Sections 41-364 through 41-374 SAMC Sections 41-377 through 41-388 SAMC Use Permissions/Amendment Application &CUP Section 41-638 and Sections 41-659 through 41-667 9 Project Description The applicant proposes to demolish the restaurant, service station, car wash, and convenience store buildings to construct a new service station, convenience store and multi -tenant commercial building on two properties at the southeast comer of Tustin Avenue and Fourth Street. The restaurant at 301 North Tustin will be demolished and a new 7,368 -square -foot multi -tenant commercial building with an outdoor dining area will be constructed. A 1,258 -square -foot eating establishment with drive-through service is proposed for one unit. The drive-through lane is designed to wrap around the entire building, with the entrance of the drive-through at the south end of the building traveling up and around the east elevation. In addition, a 35 -foot high freestanding sign will be oriented towards the SR -55 freeway along the east property line. The parcel immediately to the north at 325 North Tustin Avenue is also proposed for redevelopment. The applicant is proposing to clear the site, to eliminate the automated car wash operations, close a driveway along Fourth Street and redesign the site with a service station and larger convenience store. The service station will consist of a 2,117 -square -foot canopy with 8 pump stations and a new 2,778 -square -foot convenience store. The architecture of the new buildings, service station canopy and freestanding sign has been designed to appear as a cohesive and integrated on which includes a contemporary design style with a smooth plaster, metal canopies, ceramic wood tile and green screens. An enhanced pedestrian pathway with seating areas and landscaping will be located between the two buildings. There will be vehicular access between the two properties and a covenant to allow for reciprocal access and parking will be recorded. In addition, the Public Works Agency has determined that an 8 -foot irrevocable offer of dedication along Fourth Street and a 2 -foot irrevocable offer of dedication along Tustin Avenue are required. Tables 3A and 3B provide a detailed comparison of the project's compliance with the applicable land use and development standards. 75B-6 GPA No. 2018-05, AA No. 2018-08, CUP No. 2018-18 & VAR No. 2018-10 September 24, 2018 Page 4 Table 3A: Land Use Standards General Commercial (C2) (SAMC Sec. 41=365, 41-365.5, 41-377 and 47-377.5) Proposed Land Use Permit Requirements Eating Establishment Allowed by Right Drive-through Window Service for an eatinq establishment Conditional Use Permit Service Station and Convenience Store Allowed by Right Table 31B: Development Standards Standard Required by General` -' 301 Noith Tustin 325)North Tustin' Commercial. C2 Zone Retail Building Site Service, Station Site " Front yard 15 feet minimum Complies; 15 feet Does not comply; 5 feet, 6 inches ' Side yard (street) 15 feet minimum Not Applicable Does not comply; 5 feet, 6 inches Side yard (interior) 0 feet minimum Complies; 3 feet, 2 Complies; 5 foot inches and 5 feet landscape yard Rear yard 0 feet minimum Complies; 2 feet Complies; 5 foot landscape yard Lot Size & Frontage 15,000 sq. ft. and 120 feet Complies; 39,775 sq. ft. Complies; 22,465 sq. ft. and 179 feet and 300 feet Building height 35 feet maximum Complies; 25 feet, 3 Complies; 21 feet, 10 inches inches Off-street Parking 61 spaces Complies; 63 spaces Complies; 63 spaces 5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of total total retail 46 spaces 9 spaces 8 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. 8 pump spaces restaurant Floor Area Ratio 0.50 FAR maximum Complies; 0.19 FAR Complies; .0.12 FAR F.A.R. 35 feet maximum height Complies; Freestanding Wall signs (deferred Signage allowed within 300 feet of a sign 35 feet Wall signs (deferred submittals) freeway exit submittals Stacking Distance 160 feet; 80 feet to menu Complies; 80 feet to Not Applicable (drive-through) board and 80 feet to pick-up menu board, 80 feet to window 1 pick-upwindow Driveway Width 35 feet maximum Not Applicable Complies; 35 feet service station 75B-7 GPA No. 2018-05, AA No. 2018-08, CUP No. 2018-18 & VAR No. 2018-10 September 24, 2018 Page 5 Protect Background and Chronoloov The property at 301 North Tustin has been developed with a restaurant since 1965. In 1996, Conditional Use Permit No. 1995-01 was approved to allow dancing and live music. Minor tenant improvements have been made to the building overtime by various operators. Currently, the building is in the process of being vacated by the tenant. In 1973, -the property at 325 North Tustin Avenue was developed with a car wash and service station. In 2006, the property was remodeled to the current configuration of the service pumps, a retail building and automated car wash. The current property owner has been operating a Chevron gas station and car wash at the site since 2015. Protect Analysis General Plan Amendment The applicant is applying for a general plan amendment in order to re -designate the properties proposed for development to General Commercial (GC). According to the General Pian, the General Commercial district applies to commercial corridors and areas that are highly visible and are critical arterial transportation corridors. Three sites that are proposed to be changed from Professional & Administrative Offices to General Commercial (301 N. Tustin Avenue, 431 N. Tustin Avenue, and 2321 E. a Street) are on arterial streets with regional access to the SR -55 freeway. Several nearby commercial properties are already designated as General Commercial. The amendment will create an approximately 4 -acre General Commercial area at the northeast and southeast comers of Tustin Avenue and Fourth Street (Exhibit 2). In addition, these properties are currently improved with commercial uses including gas stations, eating establishments, and mixed retail and service uses that provide neighborhood facilities and services to the nearby Metro East Mixed -Use Overlay zone and professional offices. The general plan amendment will provide consistency with the existing uses and will make the properties consistent with the zoning district. Amendment Application The applicant is also applying for an amendment application (zone change) to change the zoning of the properties proposed for development (301 and 325 N. Tustin Avenue) from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2). The City is also proposing to change the zoning of two nearby properties (401 N. Tustin Avenue and 2320 E. Fourth Street) to General Commercial (C2) (Exhibit 3). The C2 designation will also complement the designation of the properties to the south which are in the City of Tustin and zoned commercial (Central Commercial C2). The amendment will create a continuous block of commercial uses that will stimulate the economy in the area. The C2 zone will allow the restaurant, service stations, and services uses and will allow for commercial development that supports the nearby office environment by providing places to visit, 75B-8 GPA No. 2018-05, AA No. 2018-08, CUP No. 2018-18 & VAR No. 2018-10 September 24, 2018 Page 6 shop and dine. In addition, the General Commercial zone permits professional, administrative and business offices should the property owners elect to have office uses in the future. The proposed drive-through requires discretionary approval of a CUP and the service station yards require a variance. In order to approve a CUP or variance, the General Plan Land Use designation and the zoning designation must be consistent. Conditional Use Permit for Drive -Through Window Service at 301 North Tustin Avenue The drive-through was designed and intended to generate the least amount of impact as possible. The drive-through lane is setback approximately 100 feet from the street to reduce any spillover to the public streets. In addition, the drive-through lane meets the City's stacking requirements and will allow for approximately 15 -cars to queue without disrupting drive aisles or parking spaces on-site. The drive-through is also designed to generate minimal noise impacts; the speaker boxes are located at the rear of the site and project towards the freeway. Any potential noise generated from the idling of vehicles or the drive-through speakers is not anticipated to impact the nearby uses as they are commercial and there are no nearby sensitive land uses. Since the drive-through lane is at the rear of the property, it will produce minimal visual impact to Tustin Avenue as the new building will be the prominent view (Exhibit 4). The applicants request for a conditional use permit to allow drive-through window service will provide an added amenity to the property, for the employees who work in the vicinity and for the residents who live in the general area. Allowing the restaurant to have a drive-through window will provide a service that will help promote economic development to the area which will contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood and the community. Variance for Reduced Yards at 325 North Tustin Avenue The strict application of the zoning code requires a 15 -foot landscaped setback along both Tustin Avenue and Fourth Street. The applicant has designed the site to have landscaped yards, but in some locations the yards will be reduced to 5 feet, 6 inches requiring a variance. The Public Works Agency reviewed the proposed plans and determined that an 8 -foot dedication along Fourth Street and a 2 -foot dedication along Tustin Avenue are required to allow for the streets and sidewalks to be constructed to the ultimate width. The 15 -foot setbacks and dedication would reduce the developable area to 18,065 square -feet, which is an approximately 4,400 square -foot reduction in lot size (20%). Special circumstances related to the current location of the underground storage tanks exist. Currently, the underground tanks are located at the comer of the property. A 15 -foot landscaped yard along the street property lines would require the property owner to remove and relocate the storage tanks in order for tanker trucks to access the tanks. The relocation would cause a significant financial burden to the operator. In addition, complexities of service station fueling, stacking and circulation patterns make it difficult to create functional site plan that meets all the development standards. Furthermore, there are service stations at the other two comers of the intersection (northeast and southwest comers). These nearby service stations do not have 15 -foot 75B-9 GPA No. 2018-05, AA No. 2018-08, CUP No. 2018-18 & VAR No. 2018-10 September 24, 2018 Page 7 landscaped yards and have significantly less landscaping than the proposed project, therefore granting the variance will not be injurious to the surrounding properties or service stations (Exhibit 5). Table 3: CEQA, Strategic Plan Alignment, and Public Notification & Community Outreach Strategic Plan;Ali hment, and Public Notification,& Community Outreach CEQA . A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) with technical studies (traffic study, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions analysis, and Phase I site assessment), CEQA Type was prepared for the project. No areas of significant impact were determined from the construction or operation of the proposed project with the implementation of the mitigation measures for cultural resources, hazards, and tribal and cultural resources. The 30 -day public review period began on August 13 and ended September 11, 2018. The draft MND was circulated to interested parties and the State Public Notification Clearinghouse, the notice of intent was published in the Orange County Register and posted with the County of Orange Clerk. The draft MND was available for public review at the Santa Ana City Hall, Main Library, and on the project web a e on the City's website Exhibit 6 & 7). -Caltrans commented in regards to incorporating complete streets measures and encroachment permits, the comment does not result in findings of a significant impact. -The City of Irvine commented in regards to clarifications needed in the traffic Comments analysis, the clarifications would not result in findings of a significant impact. Received -Orange County Fire Authority stated they have no comment. -South Coast Air Quality Management District commented in regards to clarifications needed in the air quality analysis, the clarifications would not result in findings of a significant impact. -The State Clearinghouse acknowledged that no state agencies submitted comments!,. =J1 ,' " Strate ic�Plan'Ali nmentY. u' Goal(s), Policy or 3, 2 (create new opportunities for business/job growth and encourage private Policies development through new General Plan and Zoning Ordinance policies). Public Notification:&' Communit :Outreach Site posting A public noticed was posted on the project site on September 14, 2018. Notification by mail was mailed to all property owners and Public Hearing Notification by mail occupants within 500 feet of the project site on September 14, 2018. Newspaper posting Newspaper posting was published in the Orange County Register on September 14, 2018. Sunshine Meeting A Sunshine Ordinance Community Meeting was held on December 13, 2016 at 5:30 p.m. in accordance with the provisions of the City's Sunshine Ordinance. A total of 3 members of the public attended. The applicant provided all the required information to the City after the meeting Exhibit 8). 75B-10 GPA No. 2018-05, AA No. 2018-08, CUP No. 2018-18 & VAR No. 2018-10 September 24, 2018 Page 8 StrateS lic Plan Alignment, and Public Notification &.Community Outreach Additional Measures At the time this report was printed, no issues of concern were raised regarding this application. Conclusion Based on the analysis provided within this report, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 and Amendment Application No. 2018-08. Further, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18 as conditioned and Variance No. 2018-10 as conditioned. �Av Se ena Kelaher, AICP Associate Planner SK:sb Iolpka ing CO M11391O4 Exhibits: 1. Vicinity Zoning & Aerial View 2. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration Resolution 3. Draft General Plan Resolution 4. Draft Amendment Application Ordinance 5. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 6. Variance Resolution 7. Mitigated Negative Declaration 8. Traffic Study 9. Sunshine Meeting Minutes 10. Site Plan 11. Elevations 75B-11 918/2018 -_ _ 0 7n1a ninital Man PmdIn15. All riahtc r mpd. http://apps.spatialstream.com[production/dashboard/8/9/0/CurmntBuildYf fi 4.21 1/1 LS 9.24.18 RESOLUTION NO. 2018-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO. 2016-156 AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM RELATIVE TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2018-05, AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-08, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2018-18 AND VARIANCE NO. 2018-10 FOR THE PROJECT LOCATED AT 301 AND 325 N. TUSTIN AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant, Richard Finkel, representing Russell Fischer Partnership LLC, is requesting approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05, Amendment Application No. 2018-08, Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18 and Variance No. 2018-10 in order to facilitate construction of a new multi -tenant commercial building with ancillary drive-through service at 301 North Tustin Avenue and a service station at 325 North Tustin Avenue. B. The provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq., as amended, require the evaluation of environmental impacts in connection with proposals for discretionary projects. C. Pursuant to Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, an Initial Study relative to the proposed project concluded that implementation of the project could result in potentially significant effects on the environment and identified mitigation measures that would reduce the significant effects to a less -than -significant level. D. The City of Santa Ana prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), Environmental Review No. 2016-156 for the proposed project which reflects the City's independent judgement and analysis as lead agency for the project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that the project would have a less than significant environmental impact with implementation of mitigation measures. Mitigation measures are included to address cultural resources, hazards, and tribal and cultural resources. EXHIBIT 2 75B-13 E. On August 13, 2018, Notice of Intent to adopt the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156 was published in the OC Register newspaper, circulated to interested parties, and the State Clearinghouse. F. The documents related to the Mitigated Negative Declaration were made available for a 30 -day public review and comment period at the Santa Ana City Hall, the Main Library, and on the project webpage on the City's website. G. Comments received were addressed in a Response to Comments document that provides sufficient information to demonstrate that the environmental conclusions and mitigation measures remain valid as disclosed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. H. The mitigation measures set forth in Mitigated Negative Declaration are fully enforceable and will be implemented using the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by reference. I. On September 24, 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing and voted to recommend that the City Council approve a resolution to adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156 and the related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project. J. On October 16, 2018, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing to consider all testimony, written and oral, related to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156, and the related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project, at which time all persons wishing to testify were heard, the project was fully considered, and all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution occurred. Section 2. The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the information contained in the Initial Study and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156, prepared with respect to this project. The City Council has, as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, the MND adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this project. On the basis of this review, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Section 3. The City Council hereby adopts and approves the MND and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and directs that the Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County of Orange in 75B-14 the manner required by law. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Council Action dated October 16, 2018, and exhibits attached hereto; and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 4. Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations (CCR) § 735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential for any significant adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon which wildlife resources depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human activity. However, pursuant to Fish and Game Code § 711.2 and Title XIV, CCR § 735.5, the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees in conjunction with this project is at the discretion of the State of California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Section 5. The Applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officials, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability, claims, actions or proceedings that may be brought arising out of its approval of this project, and any approvals associated with the project, including, without limitation, any environmental review or approval, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence of the City of Santa Ana. Section 6. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6. The Planning and Building Agency shall give direct notice to the Applicant of the City Council's decisions and these findings. ADOPTED this day of , 2018. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor 75B-15 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney By: Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2018 -XXX to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on 2018. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 75B-16 EXHIBIT A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 75B-17 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tustin Avenue Retail Project MND SCH# 2018081033 City of Santa Ana 75B-18 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Authority and Purpose Pursuant to, and in accordance with California Public Resources Code, Section 21081.6 (AB 3180), a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the City of Santa Ana's Tustin Avenue Retail Project Mitigated Negative Declaration (BIND) SCH# 2018081033 has been prepared. The purpose of this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is to ensure compliance with and effectiveness of the mitigation measures set forth in the Tustin Avenue Retail Project MND. Section 15074(d) of the CEQA Guidelines states that, when adopting a mitigated negative declaration, the lead agency shall adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes that it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to reduce or avoid significant environmental effects. Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines require a public agency to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring the implementation of required mitigation measures applied to proposed projects. Monitoring Program List of Mitigations The City of Santa Ana's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Tustin Avenue Retail Project consists of a list of mitigation conditions and/or verifications required for incremental implementation of the project. The following provides information regarding the purpose and procedures for each individual significant impact and related mitigation measures. For each significant impact and corresponding set of mitigation measures, the party responsible for mitigation implementation and monitoring is identified. The required timing for implementation of each measure is also specified. 75B-19 75B-20 C a v � a ro C u N u O 'O 7 O G A u 0 v 77 en o`u •G C C v no W v c a v0.0 Y v w k .�> u ° c m l0 w a� ;<, v CC m u k V] 'p 'Z'U. O C w v v •q > q � ° W ro u bn � •� ' .� H ro .c a O u p euzo 60 .gp 0 n o U v o uu o y� ,� v u o y � 0 U .-M o cG °nEcp u bO 0o 'D avu u wwK a u bb � 0 Uv �u p u 0 0 bU X u .UaOn Oy 0 U.S W a v.o a °ao0vo.n ° S u F o WnC y u oumW v W 5 o .v °v'p� ? p �p is n C '7 y u $ O cd y `pa p n b. .5 Q Q O ..>". u %. y U ,� O 7 0. v n a v 4Sv 0Gvw0 ~vaOE O u v ' 0 o vOuC 0.2n' w a Owu -o� bee?LoU o uu Fes abv aO °:o o ov u O x' f 'n o v a a o$ �, • G en'ed .3 o 0 u o .av 'G' 0 o .�y U o> o a v 'n E v aoc ^6 a '° u u v 0 C W o v a� >y cs v v v v? o p uV7U I v::.5 O^O ^ai C pw..�....0 u p v v aa ° B v C aai N ° n 8,ed2 Ca° I vC v p v �, mu ' ,C v U v Ca &t v o E 'o OU n u U as p p'q a v O'J C O.O O'r' a a v d m o$ v" v v G4- v W 0U roU ' aaai a 'G v u U w U a u ,� ❑❑ NaN O cL Oa U .O g v c o u 75B-20 75B-21 u B0 u @ }} @ƒ\ u ! +s Q ƒ/) p / §§\ \u 2 ))}$ { //\k§) § § ))e(+aBa%3 ®§*%i} ) \\'�\\}\)] \ :&J{])\ E )ƒ/u§!§<m�� ucl # A . §f71§*}))/ ]j}\ 7 , Z0 /!$ x \\/�i�u d80 M i cxm ■ %cl,*)a!°®gu E2>e§;2§ .ƒ!7) �292u \}}\) ))2`! \ \/\j\, \)%\�E ) . , (; — \p0uo ) R :32\ � \\\/\�} w !=&luau 75B-21 C u c 5 Z z mo d t° o 96UU .c a O evAN O g 0 v U �s Q 0 d C3 v" {x� U yep ? m o en N G d O C9 Q OA O w , a v u o A O •O v d O C .0 W a m C v v vU] cs°P40 v o•i Ri o .y Q c 0 °' a v O ° oo 0 v .S v v o 0 r-C+ o o a p v U v C N 41 QfT T u W o u C C) . w 9 v .3 0 E v 0 y y y v x u a T °z� c 0 op, haw �'n u� ao N '4 v�+ K N 'O v 0 C q y a o ro $ UW o vqw v v� cw •,xs o 'o x'C 5 0 ..`l a v0 v 0, D .v0 2-5 G TSU �v v u N'L 4 F YO ti N 3 2 u v d Q a ro y a v R E U •� a a 0 O .a u W 4 q $� E 8 U `v V ".9a o. a a� ab ,O WN0O 4 MZ u'a UNN�1tl4>. C o 0 m 0 a v � a 0 u 'G Jz c � v �L dNt 0 c N en u v ❑ a ro W O U U b N O C y 4 L 0 F a v W a v o o •n E• N ; a 4�r 9 0 u a 5 QOM 75B-22 75B-23 ac. � c SO � P. K U'� u 2�w � Tto'� q U &o i p eo CQ v b •o 4 f G GA aua b � SO � �'O U'� u' ?+' � c ra Q W o g ro E p go �•d � � C .O C F O O C L Q C b •O � o w '0A G v ap u i y� o vv u O O PQ. v •O o R �n w a o"°°d•' .��.[ -COG' .cC oo wu 'vvv so 5voa b'7v ° P•nOOFrU Uv. o C. `«osO °° - :wvm Yuwa Nv Oc Amo a >O o .aO ao ° u R '] p 'a "i! O O y i C r aca v U L�°au u O p" .1 q .A L p w rC-i u " O p y 'O IGO� Y1 kaRV . CJV U W ii C o ° •a N° (C Fy 4 ari .M' N 0. y H" w cC G Y p mac.' w N 'a .A gyp! Q1 Ci .a 4 •� 0. Nu c � � � E as n, � a P: o o m_ v o b � .b -O C C v w C :.' G O 'w iO ,O O U .A "� 0 K V7 C a= O E x O u y d r. �cd [i' (O N Z a y wp </) n p u CT Q W04 O 4: 4O ro G u v °n u c c.°c' E d 2 g� � o.a.. uvEo6'umEa rouro u�7 u.0 oa �wtisn.a�wvOOa v�hroA°Ao.9'aay 0 0 [ ro a o y o y A o a mF u cU m al 9.4 o v c�a N a K S 3 a m 'A v q a tE y C v O O a u O v b u o o F u G R �Or%LL� 75B-23 75B-24 LS 9.24.18 RESOLUTION NO. 2018-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2018-05 FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 431 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE AND 2321 EAST FOURTH STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Richard Finkel (Applicant), representing Russell Fischer LP, is requesting approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 to amend the General Plan land use designation of the property at 301 North Tustin Avenue from Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC) and to plot ext p rtien the CikLan ect this change in er to cil to cc ructa n multi-tena commercial building wit, ancilla, m. a thr. ah rat O forth u, tin Avenue and a B. In MMEM, therCity of'Sb to Ana `is l oposing to Ehange the land use designation of the properties at 431 North Tustin Avenue and 2321 East 4t' Street from Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC) and to update text portions of the City's Land Use Element to reflect this change. C. On June 12, 2018, pursuant to Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52, the City mailed consultation letters to all tribes listed on the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Tribal Consultation List. D. On September 24, 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing and voted to recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156 and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05. E. On October 16, 2018, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing to consider all testimony, written and oral, related to General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05, at which time all persons wishing to testify were heard, the project was fully considered, and all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution occurred. EXHIBIT 3 75B-25 F. General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 has been filed to amend the General Plan to change the land use designation of the property at 301 North Tustin Avenue from Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC). In addition, the City of Santa Ana is proposing to change the land use designation of the properties at 431 North Tustin Avenue and 2321 East 4t' Street from Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC) and to update text portions of the City's Land Use Element to reflect this change. 1. The existing General Plan land use designation for the project area is Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) which are typically in areas that are in close proximity to freeways allow for professional and/or administrative offices, with floor area ratio intensity ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. 2. The proposed General Plan land use designation for the project area is General Commercial (GC) which applies to commercial corridors and major arterial roadways in the City, allows for facilities and services including shopping, recreation, cultural and entertainment activities and the floor area ratio intensity ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. 3. The general plan amendment will support several goals and policies f e era - an, i ding nT ent, Economic Dev I p nt E en i culato ElemUrban Design Ele a t. a ific, en I P dent Goal 1 to pro •te a bala • o s addresmunity needs. y 1 0 to rage t tion ocial centers at arterial roadway intersections in commercial districts. Land Use Element Goal 2 to promote land uses that enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability. Policy 2.4 supporting pedestrian access with an enhanced pedestrian walkway. Furthermore, the project is consistent with Policy 2.8, to promote rehabilitation of commercial properties, and encourage increased levels of capital investment. Policy 2.9 supporting developments that create a business environment that is safe and attractive. Policy 5.5 to encourage development that is compatible with and supporting of surrounding land uses. The commercial center and its operations are compatible with the surrounding commercial and professional businesses. Economic Development Goal 2 to maintain and enhance the diversity of the City's economic base. Specifically, Policy 2.3 to encourage the development of mutually beneficial and supportive business clusters within the community. Economic Development Goal 4 to expand the tax base of local government to improve and maintain the level of public services. Policy 4.1 to target business attraction and retention resources towards firm with high positive net revenue implications for local government, particularly those engaged in business -to -business taxable sales transactions. 75B-26 Circulation Element Goal 2 to promote design and construction that facilitates safe utilization of the City's transportation system. Policy 2.1 to limit the number of driveways on arterial streets to reduce vehicular conflict, and facilitate traffic flow. Urban Design Goal 1 to improve the physical appearance of the City through development of districts that project a sense of place, positive community image and quality environmental. Specifically, Policy 1.5 to include enhanced architectural forms, textures, colors, and materials are expected in the design of all projects and Policy 1.6 to include plazas, open spaces, and courtyards connecting to public right-of-way to encourage public interaction. G. The City Council has weighed and balanced the General Plan's policies, and has determined that based upon this balancing that General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 is consistent with the purpose of the general plan. Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance rezoning the real properties located at 301, 325 and 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East Fourth Street and Amended Sectional District Map number 9-5-9 showing the above described change in use district designation (AA No. 2018 0 i eco mend ion is sed u i ubmitted at the above said hea ' g, w ' h ncludes but ' t lim't d to: the quest for Planning Commission an Coun I A�tAr� d t ber 18 an October 16, 2018, respectively an xhibit tt hed ere • e • ublic testim y, all of which are incorporated heE), r rence Section 3. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the initial study and the mitigated negative declaration (MND), Environmental Review No. 2016-156, prepared with respect to this project. The City Council has, as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, the MND adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this project. On the basis of this review, the City Council finds that there is no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment Section 4. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana after conducting the public hearing hereby approves General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05. The amendments to the Land Use Element are attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Council Action dated October 16, 2018, and exhibits attached hereto; and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. 75B-27 Section 5. This Resolution shall not be effective unless and until Ordinance No. NS- (AA No. 2018-08) becomes effective. If said ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or otherwise does not go into effect for any reason, then this resolution shall be null and void and have no further force and effect. Section 6. The Applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officials, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability, claims, actions or proceedings that may be brought arising out of its approval of this project, and any approvals associated with the project, including, without limitation, any environmental review or approval, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence of the City of Santa Ana. Section 7. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6. The Planning and Building Agency shall give direct notice to the Applicant of the City Council's decisions and these findings. ADOPTED this day of , 2018. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers 75B-28 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2018 -XXX to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on 2018. Date: Clerk of the Coun City of Santa Ana DRAFT 75B-29 City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element 1998 City of Santa Ana Planning Division Adopted February 2, 1998 (Reformatted January 2010) The following is a chronology of the approved general plan amendments that have been incorporated into this document since the comprehensive update of the General Plan Land Use Element adopted by the Santa Ana City Council February 2, 1998 (GPA 1997- 05): GPA 2016-05 (Pending) GPA 2018-02 (May 15, 2018) GPA 200 01 (May 15, 2018) GPA 2017.02 (December 19,2017) GPA 2017-01(June20, 2017) GPA 201603 (February 21, 2017) GPA 201692 (May 17, 2016) GPA 201601 (Ap 119, 2016) GPA 201503 (February 2, 2016) GPA 201402 (October 21, 2014) GPA 2014-01(June3, 2014) GPA 2011-03 (March 19, 2012) GPA 2010-01 (June 7, 2010) GPA 200602 (Jury 20, 2009) GPA 2007-03 (May 18, 2009) GPA 200601 (May 5, 2000) GPA 200403 (February 2, 2009) GPA 2007-02 (June 18, 2007) GPA 2007-01 (March 19, 2007) GPA 2006-01 (October 2, 2006) GPA 2005 01 5, 200; GPA 2005-02 (October 17, 2005) GPA 2001.02 GPA 2004-01(Apol 5, 2005, as passed by GPA 200009 the voters of SantaAna) GPA2000-00 GPA 2004-04 (July 19,2004) GPA 200093 GPA 2004-06(July6, 2004) GPA2000-02 GPA 2003-02 (June 16, 2003) GPA 1999-02 GPA 2003-01 (February 18, 2003) GPA 199001 GPA 2002-01 (September 3, 2)02) GPA 199604 GPA 2002-03 (August 19, 2002) GPA 1998-05 GPA 2001-03(February19, 2002) GPA 199601 EXHIBIT A 75B-30 1998) k 75B-31 f ` |$§ CL ■!;'!; 60 WO � nm■■■)■n■■$■ � 75B-31 \ ) 75B-32 Commercial The Land Use Plan identifies three land use designations that encourage a variety of office, retail and commercial enterprises to serve the community. The Professional/Administrative Office (PAO) designation applies to those areas where professional and/or administrative offices are predominant, or where such development is being encouraged. Land included in this designation is found primarily near the Civic Center, and along the First Street and Tustin Avenue Corridors in close proximity to freeways. There are other smaller PAO areas in the City such as along North Broadway and along portions of east and west Seventeenth Street. A total of 612.4 609.6 acres is included in this land use designation. The floor area ratio intensity standard applicable to this land use designation ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. The Professional and Administrative Office areas are intended to provide a unique environment for office development in those areas of the City where office uses are the predominant land use. The purpose for maintaining and supporting these areas exclusively for office and office -related uses is to encourage major employment centers at locations which significantly lessen the impact to the City's local street system. The First Street/Tustin Avenue office corridor between the Santa Ana (I-5) and Costa Mesa (SR -55) Freeways serves this purpose. In addition, the orderly, well-maintained quality of existing development supports a continuation of these areas as functional office/employment centers. The Professional and Administrative Office designation includes a range of floor area ratios to differentiate development intensity and character in relation to adjacent land uses. The areas with a FAR of 0.5 are not major office centers, but rather have an established character of lower intensity garden office and professional service uses. These areas are typically adjacent to low density residential neighborhoods, or are converted residential office uses. Office development along East Fourth Street, between Grand Avenue and the Santa Ana Freeway, is typical of this low-rise office character. The PAO area located adjacent to the Civic Center contains a range of office development intensity which supports the City's functional role as the government center of the County. The types of uses typically located in the PAO district include the following: • Professional and administrative offices/office parks; • Service activities such as copy centers, courier services, travel agencies, and restaurants when such uses are an integral component of planned office development; and • Professional uses such as accountants, attorneys, doctors, engineers, and insurance brokers. 75B-33 The General Commercial (GC) district applies to commercial corridors in Santa Ana including those located along Main Street, Seventeenth Street, Harbor Boulevard, and other major arterial roadways in the City. The intensity standard applicable to this designation is a floor area ratio of0.5 -1.0, though most General Commercial districts have a FAR of 0.5. A total of88-S.8 888.7 acres of land is included in this designation. General Commercial districts are key components in the economic development of the City. They provide highly visible and accessible commercial development along the City's arterial transportation corridors. In addition, General Commercial land uses provide important neighborhood facilities and services, including shopping, recreation, cultural and entertainment activities, employment, and education. The districts also provide support facilities and services for industrial areas includingoffice and retail, restaurants and various other services. The General Commercial development standards are based upon the character and intensity of development, as well as the degree of access and market demand for these properties. The relationships to adjacent land uses, are also considered. Uses typically located in this district are: • Business and professional offices; • Retail and service establishments; • Recreational, cultural, and entertainment uses; and • Vocational schools. General Commercial Districts have a floor area ratio of0.5 with the exception of the Mid -town area which has an floor area ratio of up to 1.0. One Broadway Plaza District Center is a separate land use designation as it has an F.A.R. of2.9, which exceeds the typical District Center intensity limit. Additionally, it does not include a residential component. One Broadway Plaza is envisioned as a landmark professional office complex that will be a focal point in the Downtown Redevelopment area serving the Civic Center complex, Downtown, and Midtown urban areas. The City's District Centers and major development areas are shown in Exhibit A-5. 75B-34 Table A-4 Land Use Plan Build-aut Capacities FAR=0oor area ratio; d.u.=dwelling unit; s.f.=square feet (of floor area). Acreage shown In taole Goes not mctuaa roans in ngnt-or-way. 1 Effective capacity for non-residential development assumes development possible under the lower range of FAR Intensity standards with the exception of the Metro East District Center, Transit Village District Center, Downtown District Center, Heritage District Center, and Urban Neighborhood areas. The Harbor Corridor District Center, Metro East District Center, Transit Village District Center, Downtown District Center, and Urban Neighborhood areas allow a range of Intensity for mixmne of residential and non-residential development based on the zoning development standards. Residential effective capacity was calculated by adding the 21,256 units passible in the District Center and Urban Neighborhood with the existing 74,588 (Census 2000) housing units. P Land use designation permits both residential and non-residential development. Build -out assumes 90% of land area will be developed as commercial and 10% will be developed as residential; with the exception of Town and Country Manor project intended for continuum of care and housing senlam. 9 Land use designation permits high Intensity office development with ancillary retail use. This table has been revised to correspond with the GIS land Use Map illustrated in Exhibit 2. 75B-35 Intensity/ Effective Buildout' Theoretical Land Use Acres Dens& Buildout 45,198 du Low Density Residential LR -7 6,466.9 7 du/ac Low Medium Density Residential LMR -11 420.6 11 du/ac 4,627 du Medium Density Residential MR -15 370.1 15 du/ac 5,551du Subtotal 7,267.6 Non Res 95,844 dui Rm Non -Res. 55,624 du Res. Mixed Use District Center Other2 DC 309.5 90 du /ac 11,955,583 at 3,017 du 23,764,534 sf 3,017 du FAR 1.0-2.0 Heritage DC 18.8 FAR 1.7 54,090 sf 1,221 du 54,090 at 1,221 du Downtown DC 62.5 FAR 3.0 2,057,824 at 1,661 du 2,057,824 at 1,661 du Metro East DC 98.3 FAR 3.0 3,245,185 sf 5,551 du 3,245,185 at 5,551 du Transit Village DC 51.4 FAR 5.0 402,864 sf 2,761 du 402,864 s 2,761 du Harbor Corridor DC 125.0 FAR 5.0 1,836,155 at 2,029 du 1,836,155s 2,029 du Urban Neighborhood UN 276.9 FAR 0.5-3.0 876,546 at 5,016 du 876,546 s 5,016 du Subtotal 944.6 20,428,42 sf 21,256 du 32,237,371 sl 21,256 du Cominerc Professional &Admin. Office PAO 609.64 FAR 0.5-1.0 13.275,99 16 676 1 A 4 26.551.998st General Commercial GC 99" 888 7 FAR 0.5-1.0 19,294,44449 19.354.797sf 38.709.594st One Broadway Plaza District Girl OBPDG 4.3 FAR 2.9 543,193 at 543,193 at Subtotal 1,502.5 33,173,989 sf 65,804,785 at 42,199,991 sf Industrial IND 1 Z15Z81 FAO 0.45 42,199,991 sf Other Institutional INS 800.6 FAR 0.2-0.5 1 6,974,740 at 17,436,850 sf Open Space OS 1,010.9 FAR 0.2 1 8,806,961 sf 8,806,961 at Subtotal 1,811.5 1 1 15,781,701 sf 26,243,811 at FAR=0oor area ratio; d.u.=dwelling unit; s.f.=square feet (of floor area). Acreage shown In taole Goes not mctuaa roans in ngnt-or-way. 1 Effective capacity for non-residential development assumes development possible under the lower range of FAR Intensity standards with the exception of the Metro East District Center, Transit Village District Center, Downtown District Center, Heritage District Center, and Urban Neighborhood areas. The Harbor Corridor District Center, Metro East District Center, Transit Village District Center, Downtown District Center, and Urban Neighborhood areas allow a range of Intensity for mixmne of residential and non-residential development based on the zoning development standards. Residential effective capacity was calculated by adding the 21,256 units passible in the District Center and Urban Neighborhood with the existing 74,588 (Census 2000) housing units. P Land use designation permits both residential and non-residential development. Build -out assumes 90% of land area will be developed as commercial and 10% will be developed as residential; with the exception of Town and Country Manor project intended for continuum of care and housing senlam. 9 Land use designation permits high Intensity office development with ancillary retail use. This table has been revised to correspond with the GIS land Use Map illustrated in Exhibit 2. 75B-35 LS 9.24.18 ORDINANCE NO. NS-XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-08 REZONING THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 325 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 401 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, AND 2320 EAST FOURTH STREET FROM THE PROFESSIONAL (P) TO THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C2) ZONING DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: a Richard Finkel (Applicant), representing Russell Fischer LP, has filed Amendment Application No. 2018-08 with the City of Santa Ana to change North Tustin in order to )uilding with nd a service B. In addition, the City of Santa Ana is proposing to amend the zoning designation of 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East Fourth Street from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2). C. General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 was filed concurrently with the Amendment Application for consistency with the General Plan. D. On September 24, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and voted to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2018-08 which is consistent with the General Plan, as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05. E. The City Council has reviewed applicable general plan policies and has determined that this proposed rezoning is consistent with the purpose of the general plan. F. The City Council, prior to taking action on this ordinance, held a duly noticed public hearing on October 16, 2018. EXHIBIT 4 75B-36 G. The City Council also adopts as findings all facts presented in the Request for Council Action dated October 16, 2018 accompanying this matter. H. For these reasons, and each of them, Amendment Application No. 2018- 08 is hereby found and determined to be consistent with the intent and purpose of Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, thus changing the zoning district is found to be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Santa Ana and otherwise justified by the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare. Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance rezoning the real properties located at 301, 325 and 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East Fourth Street and Amended Sectional District Map number 9-5-9 showing the above described change in use district designation (AA No. 2018-08). This recommendation is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission and Council Action dated September 24, 2018 and October 16, 2018, respectively and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 3. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the d N eclar ' • (En ' No. 2016-156) prepared with spect h s pro e t. City ouncil has as a result of its consideration of t e rec r� s le a th vid has at the hearings on this matter, det mined a , as uir an to the Cali rnia Environmental Quality Act (CE a ate = Guidel nvironmen I Review No. 2016- 156 meets all the reouirements of CEQA Section 4. The zoning designation of the real properties located at 301 North Tustin Avenue, 325 North Tustin Avenue, 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East Fourth Street is hereby reclassified from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2). An amended Sectional District Map, showing the above described changes in use district designation, is hereby approved and attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. Section 6. This ordinance shall not be effective unless and until Resolution No. 2018- (Environmental Review No. 2016-156 and General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05) is adopted and becomes effective. If either resolution and/or ordinance are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or otherwise does not go into effect for any reason, then this ordinance shall be null and void and have no further force and effect. Section 7. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, 75B-37 sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 8. The Applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officials, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability, claims, actions or proceedings that may be brought arising out of its approval of this project, and any approvals associated with the project, including, without limitation, any environmental review or approval, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence of the City of Santa Ana. ADOPTED this day of , 2018. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney By: Lisa Storck Assistant Cit ttorn mA F T AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers 75B-38 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the attached Ordinance No. NS- to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on , 2018 and that said ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana DRAFT 75B-39 dye 45-9 P 2 45-9 :i 17TH ST °-------- 1 z m sr 'c+ i w � i - r. R ff� � NflLNG}g1 PV ' 1 Jim rl. rllil/161111' Ilr� d11A111U7 Wri_I_ill. Imils11= 1� i ill rrl�� sr 'a Z 1 G Ra P 1 p ® 1 PI bt - 1 flX Sf 1 P/ON P/OF1 Pu—� ry cM PIOF1 ! n 4TH ST IhVINE BLVD S ' OWN! P/ozi — 1 SSe N/a Pnix, o„c: os.asne N/A �IP ZONING DISTRICTS Al GENERALAGRICULTURAL CSM SOUTH MAN STREEI"COMMERCIAL DIST. R2 TNN-FAMLYRESIOENCE -B PARKING MODIFICATION C1 COMMUNTTYCOMMERCIAL GC GOVERNMENTCENTER R3 MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENCE -OZ OVERLAYZONE C1MD COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL - MUSEUM DIST. M1 LIGHTNDUSTRAL R4 SUBURBANAPARTMENT ` PLANNEDRESIDENTIAL C2 GENERALCOMMERCIAL M2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL RE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE PRO DEVELOPMENT C4 PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER 0 OPEN SPACE SO SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT -HD2 HEIGHT DISTRICT II C5 ARTERIALCOMMERCIAL P PROFESSIONAL SP SPECIFIC PLAN CR I COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL R1 SINGLE-FAMLY RESIDENCE SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP: 9-5-9 e CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA Exhibit: A 75B-40 LS 9.24.18 RESOLUTION NO. 2018-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2018-18 AS CONDITIONED TO ALLOW A DRIVE-THROUGH FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant, Richard Finkel, representing Russell Fischer LP, is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18 to allow drive-through window service for a restaurant use in the General Commercial (GC) zoning district at 301 North Tustin Avenue. B. Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) Section 41-377.5 (a) and Section 41- 365.5 (e) require approval of a conditional use permit for eating establishments with drive-through window service. C. Pursuant to SAMC Section 41-638, the Planning Commission is authorized to review and approve the conditional use permit for this project to as set forth by the Santa Ana Municipal Code. D. On September 24, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing for Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18. E. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana has considered the information and determines that following findings, which must be established in order to grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18, for drive-through window service, have been established as required by SAMC Section 41-638: 1. That the proposed use will provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community. 3 The proposed eating establishment with drive-through window service will provide a service to persons that are working or residing in the area. The drive-through lane will support the eating establishment and allow for a variety of service uses to be provided on-site within the multi -tenant building. The site EXHIBIT 5 75B-41 will be redeveloped with a new building with a contemporary design with smooth plaster finishes, metal canopies, ceramic tile, an outdoor dining area, and an enhanced pedestrian walkway with landscaping and seating areas contributing to the aesthetics of the area. 2. That the proposed use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The proposed drive-through will not be detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of those residing or working in the vicinity. The site plan was designed so the multi -tenant building is the primary view from the street and the drive- through lane meets the City's stacking requirements and provides for queuing of approximately 15 vehicles. In addition, the drive-through lane was placed at the rear of the site to reduce the chance for overflow vehicular queuing onto any public streets. The menu board and speaker will be oriented towards the SR -55 freeway to reduce any noise impacts to the nearby commercial uses. In addition, there are no nearby sensitive (residential) land uses. 3. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area. The drive-through will not adversely affect the economic stability or future economic development of properties in the surrounding area. Since 1965, the property has been a restaurant use. The site will be redeveloped with a new building with a contemporary design and water efficient landscaping. An eating establishment with drive-through service will provide an additional service and eating opportunities for the area and will provide a commercial business that will generate sales tax revenue for the City. 4. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use. The proposed use complies with the regulations and conditions in Chapter 41 including building heights, yards, parking and landscaping. A condition of approval has been added to the conditional use permit for a property maintenance agreement to be recorded against the property which will ensure that the property and all improvements are properly maintained. 75B-42 5. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the General Plan of the city or any specific plan applicable to the area of the proposed use. The proposed eating establishment with drive-through service will not adversely affect the General Plan. The project is located in a General Commercial (GC) General Plan land use which allows for commercial uses such multi -tenant buildings with retail, service and eating establishment uses. The project is consistent with several goals and policies of the General Plan, including the Economic Development Element, Land Use Element, and Urban Design Element. Land Use Element Goal 1 to promote a balance of land uses to address basic community needs, specifically Policy 1.10 to encourage the location of commercial centers at arterial roadway intersections in commercial districts. Land Use Element Goal 2 to promote land uses that enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability. Furthermore, the project is consistent with Policy 2.8, to promote rehabilitation of commercial properties, and encourage increased levels of capital investment. The drive-through will contribute to the viability of the commercial center in which it is located. Policy 2.9 supports developments that create a business environment that is safe and attractive. The Condition of Approval for property maintenance will maintain a safe and attractive environment in the community. Policy 5.5 encourages development that is compatible with and supporting of surrounding land uses. The commercial center and its operations are compatible with the surrounding commercial and professional businesses. Economic Development Goal 2 to maintain and enhance the diversity of the City's economic base. Policy 2.3 to encourage the development of mutually beneficial and supportive business clusters within the community. Urban Design Goal 1 to improve the physical appearance of the City through development of districts that project a sense of place, positive community image and quality environmental. Specifically, Policy 1.5 to enhance architectural forms, textures, colors, and materials are expected in the design of all projects and Policy 1.6 to include plazas, open spaces, and courtyards connecting to public right-of-way to encourage public interaction. Section 2. Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Review No. 2016- 156) and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared with respect to this project. The Planning Commission has, as a result of its consideration of the record as a whole and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State 75B-43 CEQA Guidelines, Environmental Review No. 2016-156 meets all the requirements of CEQA and recommends City Council approval. Section 3. Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18 shall not be effective until the City Council reviews and approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental Review No. 2016-156, General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 and Amendment Application No. 2018-08. If said approvals are held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or otherwise denied, then this conditional use permit shall be null and void and have no further force and effect. Section 4. The Applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officials, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability, claims, actions or proceedings that may be brought arising out of its approval of this project, and any approvals associated with the project, including, without limitation, any environmental review or approval, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence of the City of Santa Ana. Section 5. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana after conducting the public hearing hereby approves Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18, as conditioned in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein for the project located at 301 North Tustin Avenue. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the, abovesaid hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated September 24, 2018, and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 24t' day of September, 2018. AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney Mark McLoughlin Chairperson 75B-44 Rv- Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, SARAH BERNAL, Recording Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2018-xx to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on September 24, 2018. Date: Recording Secretary City of Santa Ana 75B-45 EXHIBIT A Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit No 2018-18 Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code, and all other applicable regulations. In addition, they shall meet the following conditions of approval: The Applicant must comply with each and every condition listed belowrip or to exercising the rights conferred by this conditional use permit. condition may result in the revocation of the conditional use permit All proposed site improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review (DP No. 2016- 45) and the staff report exhibits. 2. The Applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Measures within the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the project. 3. Any amendment to this conditional use permit must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the conditional use permit must be amended. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a reciprocal access and parking agreement shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney & Planning Manager and recorded against the property. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape and irrigation plan is to be submitted for review and approval. The landscape plan shall conform to the commercial landscape standards, Citywide Design Guidelines and the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a Property Maintenance Agreement must be recorded against the property. The agreement will be subject to review and applicability by the Planning and Building Agency, the Community Development Agency, the Public Works Agency, and the City Attorney to ensure that the property and all improvements located thereupon are properly maintained, Developer (and the owner of the property upon which the authorized use and/or authorized improvements are located if different from the Applicant) shall execute a maintenance agreement with the City of Santa Ana which shall be recorded against the property and which shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City Attorney. The maintenance agreement shall contain covenants, conditions and restrictions relating to the following: 75B-46 (a) Compliance with operational conditions applicable during any period(s) of construction or major repair (e.g., proper screening and securing of the construction site; implementation of proper erosion control, dust control and noise mitigation measure; adherence to approved project phasing etc.); (b) Compliance with ongoing operational conditions, requirements and restrictions, as applicable (including but not limited to hours of operation, security requirements, the proper storage and disposal of trash and debris, enforcement of the parking management plan, and/or restrictions on certain uses, (c) Ongoing compliance with approved design and construction parameters, signage parameters and restrictions as well as landscape designs, as applicable; (d) Ongoing maintenance, repair and upkeep of the property and all improvements located thereupon (including but not limited to controls on the proliferation of trash and debris about the property; the proper and timely removal of graffiti; the timely maintenance, repair and upkeep of damaged, vandalized and/or weathered buildings, structures and/or improvements; the timely maintenance, repair and upkeep of exterior paint, parking striping, lighting and irrigation fixtures, walls and fencing, publicly accessible bathrooms and bathroom fixtures, landscaping and related landscape improvements and the like, as applicable); (e) If Developer and the owner of the property are different (e.g., if the Applicant is a tenant or licensee of the property or any portion thereof), both the Applicant and the owner of the property shall be signatories to the maintenance agreement and both shall be jointly and severally liable for compliance with its terms. (f) The maintenance agreement shall further provide that any party responsible for complying with its terms shall not assign its ownership interest in the property or any interest in any lease, sublease, license or sublicense, unless the prospective assignee agrees in writing to assume all of the duties and obligations and responsibilities set forth under the maintenance agreement. (g) The maintenance agreement shall contain provisions relating to the enforcement of its conditions by the City and shall also contain provisions authorizing the City to recover costs and expenses which the City may incur arising out of any enforcement and/or remediation efforts which the City may undertake in order to cure any deficiency in maintenance, repair or upkeep or to enforce any restrictions or conditions upon the use of the property. The maintenance agreement shall further provide that any unreimbursed costs and/or expenses incurred by the City to cure a deficiency in maintenance or to enforce use restrictions shall become a lien upon the property in an amount equivalent to the actual costs and/or expense incurred by the City. 75B-47 (h) The execution and recordation of the maintenance agreement shall be a condition precedent to the issuance of final approval for any construction permit related to this entitlement. Il. The following are requirements that will need to be addressed and/or approved by the Police Department prior to issuance of a building permit: 1. Submitted plans must indicate that all structures and parking lots comply with the provisions of Chapter 8, Article II, Division 3 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (Building Security Ordinance). All applicable sections must be printed verbatim on the submitted set of plans. III. The following are requirements that will need to be addressed and/or approved by the Public Works Agency prior to issuance of a building permit: 1. The site plan shall include all improvements as indicated in the Site Plan Review (DP No. 2016-45) plans dated July 6, 2018. 2. The site plan shall depict and note all easements listed in the title reports for both properties, with Assessor Parcel Number 400-032-02 and 400-032-03. 3. The site plan shall depict all public utilities. 4. Any mitigation measure identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis study shall be depicted and noted on the site plan prior to approval. 5. The site plan. shall depict and note a 15 foot by 15 foot sight distance triangle at all driveway entrances. 6. The site plan shall depict and note a 25 foot by 25 foot site distance triangle at all street corners. 7. Separate public water meters shall be installed for individual commercial areas and irrigation systems. The site plan shall have a note for the reviewer indicating so and depict all improvements. 8. A public sewer main shall be constructed along Fourth Street to accommodate the sewer discharge needs of the project. The size, location and limits are to be determined during plan check, including size and location of sewer laterals. The site plan shall have a note for the reviewer indicating so and depict all improvements. 75B-48 LS 9.24.18 RESOLUTION NO. 2018-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2018-10 AS CONDITIONED TO ALLOW FOR REDUCED YARDS FOR A SERVICE STATION AT 325 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant, Richard Finkel, representing Russell Fischer LP, is requesting approval of Variance No. 2018-10 as conditioned, to allow for reduced front and street side yards for a service station and convenience store at 325 North Tustin Avenue. B. Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) Sections 41-368 and 41-380 require a 15 foot minimum front yard and Sections 41-369 and 41-381 require a 15 foot minimum street side yard. The Applicant is proposing front and side yards that are 5 feet, 6 inches. C. Pursuant to SAMC Section 41-638, the Planning Commission is authorized to review and approve the variance for this project as set forth by the Santa Ana Municipal Code. D. On September 24, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing for Variance No. 2018-10. E. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana has considered the information and determines that the following findings, which must be established in order to grant Variance No. 2018-10, for reduced yards, have been established as required by SAMC Section 41-638: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this Chapter. There are special circumstances related to the property being a corner lot, required street dedications, the proposed use and existing on-site improvements. An 8 -foot dedication is required along Fourth Street and a 2 -foot dedication is required along Tustin Avenue therefore reducing the usable EXHIBIT 6 75B-49 size of the property. Furthermore, the site is a corner lot which requires yards on both street frontages which further compromises the developable area. In addition, the Applicant is proposing to use the existing underground storage tanks that are already on site. In order to prevent traffic disruption to the public streets and sidewalks, tanker trucks fill storage tanks by parking on the property, these trucks require a large turning radius and due to the existing location of the underground tanks a 15 -foot setback would not allow for a tanker truck to circulate on-site. Relocating the underground storage tanks would be a significant financial burden to the property owner. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one (1) or more substantial property rights. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. A service station is a permitted use in the General Commercial zone. The property is currently a service station, car wash and convenience store with minimal landscaping. The proposed development will have more landscaping than what is currently on site and will allow for continued operations. Approving a variance for reduced landscape setbacks would allow the property owner to make building improvements to the site and continue the service station use. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. Granting this variance will not be detrimental to the public or surrounding properties. The proposed project will eliminate the car wash operations and reduce the number of driveways to the site. In addition, the building has been designed to incorporate high quality materials, enhanced landscaping and will continue to provide a service to the nearby community and public. The surrounding uses are commercial and professional uses and will not be impacted by the reduced yards. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the city. The variance for reduced yards will not adversely affect the General Plan. General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 will amend the land use designation for the subject property to General Commercial (GC) which allows service stations and commercial uses. The project is consistent with several goals and policies of the General Plan, including the Circulation Element, Economic Development Element, Land Use 75B-50 Element, and Urban Design Element. Land Use Element Goal 2, to promote land uses that enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability. Furthermore, the project is consistent with Policy 2.8, to promote rehabilitation of commercial properties, and encourage increased levels of capital investment. The condition of approval for property maintenance will maintain a safe and attractive environment in the community. Policy 5.5 encourages development that is compatible with and supporting of surrounding land uses. The service station and its operations are compatible with the surrounding commercial and professional businesses. Economic Development Goal 2 to maintain and enhance the diversity of the City's economic base. Policy 2.3 to encourage the development of mutually beneficial and supportive business clusters within the community. Circulation Element Goal 2 to promote design and construction that facilitates safe utilization of the City's transportation system. Policy 2.1 to limit the number of driveways on arterial streets to reduce vehicular conflict, and facilitate traffic flow. Urban Design Goal 1 to improve the physical appearance of the City through development of districts that project a sense of place, positive community image and quality environmental. Specifically, Policy 1.5 to include enhanced architectural forms, textures, colors, and materials are expected in the design of all projects. Section 2. Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Review No. 2016- 156) and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared with respect to this project. The Planning Commission has, as a result of its consideration of the record as a whole and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, Environmental Review No. 2016-156 meets all the requirements of CEQA and recommends City Council approval. Section 3. Variance No. 2018-10 shall not be effective until the City Council reviews and approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental Review No. 2016-156, General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 and Amendment Application No. 2018- 08. If said approvals are held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or otherwise denied, then this variance shall be null and void and have no further force and effect. Section 4. The Applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officials, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability, claims, actions or proceedings that may be brought arising out of its approval of this project, and any approvals associated with the project, including without limitation, any environmental review or approval, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence of the City of Santa Ana. Section 5. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana, after conducting the public hearing, hereby approves Variance No. 2018-10 as conditioned in Exhibit A, 75B-51 attached hereto and incorporated as though fully set forth herein. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated September 24, 2018, and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 241h day of September, 2018. AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: - Commissioners: ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: Mark McLoughlin Chairperson APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney By: Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, SARAH BERNAL, Recording Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2018 -XX to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on September 24, 2018. Date: Recording Secretary City of Santa Ana 75B-52 EXHIBIT A Conditions of Approval for Variance No. 2018-10 Variance No. 2018-10 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code, and all other applicable regulations. In addition, they shall meet the following conditions of approval: The Applicant must comply with each and every condition listed belowrip or to exercising the rights conferred by this variance. I. The Applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the variance. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the variance. All proposed site improvements must conform to the Site Plan Review (DP No. 2016- 45) and the staff report exhibits. 2. The Applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Measures within the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the project. 3. Any amendment to this variance must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or the variance must be amended. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit a reciprocal access and parking agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney & Planning Manager and recorded to the property. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted for review and approval. The landscape plan shall conform to the commercial landscape standards, Citywide Design Guidelines and the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a Property Maintenance Agreement must be recorded. The agreement will be subject to review and applicability by the Planning and Building Agency, the Community Development Agency, the Public Works Agency, and the City Attorney to ensure that the property and all improvements located thereupon are properly maintained, Developer (and the owner of the property upon which the authorized use and/or authorized improvements are located if different from the applicant) shall execute a maintenance agreement with the City of Santa Ana which shall be recorded against the property and which shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City Attorney. The Maintenance Agreement shall contain covenants, conditions and restrictions relating to the following: 75B-53 (a) Compliance with operational conditions applicable during any period(s) of construction or major repair (e.g., proper screening and securing of the construction site; implementation of proper erosion control, dust control and noise mitigation measure; adherence to approved project phasing etc.); (b) Compliance with ongoing operational conditions, requirements and restrictions, as applicable (including but not limited to hours of operation, security requirements, the proper storage and disposal of trash and debris, enforcement of the parking management plan, and/or restrictions on certain uses, (c) Ongoing compliance with approved design and construction parameters, signage parameters and restrictions as well as landscape designs, as applicable; (d) Ongoing maintenance, repair and upkeep of the property and all improvements located thereupon (including but not limited to controls on the proliferation of trash and debris about the property; the proper and timely removal of graffiti; the timely maintenance, repair and upkeep of damaged, vandalized and/or weathered buildings, structures and/or improvements; the timely maintenance, repair and upkeep of exterior paint, parking striping, lighting and irrigation fixtures, walls and fencing, publicly accessible bathrooms and bathroom fixtures, landscaping and related landscape improvements and the like, as applicable); (e) If Developer and the owner of the property are different (e.g., if the applicant is a tenant or licensee of the property or any portion thereof), both the applicant and the owner of the property shall be signatories to the maintenance agreement and both shall be jointly and severally liable for compliance with its terms. (f) The maintenance agreement shall further provide that any party responsible for complying with its terms shall not assign its ownership interest in the property or any interest in any lease, sublease, license or sublicense, unless the prospective assignee agrees in writing to assume all of the duties and obligations and responsibilities set forth under the maintenance agreement. (g) The maintenance agreement shall contain provisions relating to the enforcement of its conditions by the City and shall also contain provisions authorizing the City to recover costs and expenses which the City may incur arising out of any enforcement and/or remediation efforts which the City may undertake in order to cure any deficiency in maintenance, repair or upkeep or to enforce any restrictions or conditions upon the use of the property. The maintenance agreement shall further provide that any unreimbursed costs and/or expenses incurred by the City to cure a deficiency in maintenance or to enforce use restrictions shall become a lien upon the property in an amount equivalent to the actual costs and/or expense incurred by the City. (h) The execution and recordation of the maintenance agreement shall be a condition precedent to the issuance of final approval for any construction permit related to this entitlement. 75B-54 II The following are requirements that will need to be addressed and/or approved by the Police Department prior to issuance of a building permit: Submitted plans must indicate that all structures and parking lots comply with the provisions of Chapter 8, Article II, Division 3 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (Building Security Ordinance). All applicable sections must be printed verbatim on the submitted set of plans. 1. The site plan shall include all improvements as indicated in the Site Plan Review (DP No. 2016-45) plans dated July 6, 2018. 2. The site plan shall depict and note all easements listed in the title reports for both properties, with Assessor Parcel Number 400-032-02 and 400-032-03. 3. The site plan shall depict all public utilities. 4. Any mitigation measure identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis study shall be depicted and noted on the site plan prior to approval. The site plan shall depict and note a 15 foot by 15 foot sight distance triangle at all driveway entrances. 6. The site plan shall depict and note a 25 foot by 25 foot site distance triangle at all street comers. 7. Separate public water meters shall be installed for individual commercial areas and irrigation systems. The site plan shall have a note for the reviewer indicating so and depict all improvements. 8. A public sewer main shall be constructed along Fourth Street to accommodate the sewer discharge needs of the project. The size, location and limits are to be determined during plan check, including size and location of sewer laterals. The site plan shall have a note for the reviewer indicating so and depict all improvements. 75B-55 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Technical Appendices are available at the following locations: Online: santa-ana.org/pba/planning/Russell Fisch erCommercialCenter asp Paper Copies: Planning and Building Agency Planning Counter, First Floor 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Santa Ana Public Library 26 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WIUHI1i7 75B-56 REVISED FOCUSED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL Santa Ana, California March 13, 2018 (Update of the September 20, 2017 Report) Prepared for. RUSSELL FISCHER PARTNERSHIP 16061 Beach Boulevard Huntington Beach, 92647 LLG Ref. 2-17-3881-1 Prepared by., Under the Super0sion at Angela Besa Keil Mabeny, P.E. Transportation Engineer I Principal TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL [ TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 75BL161BIT8 Unne1; rnw & Greenspaa,FngImm 2Exccudie;irda &rile 250 Irvine, CA 9761E s4m5.6175r 4te8r wn :tv:vJlq enpalears.tan TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................. l 1.1 Scope of Work...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study Area............................................................................................................................ 2 2.0 Project Description.....................................................................................................................3 2.1 Site Access............................................................................................................................ 3 3.0 Existing Conditions..................................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Existing Street System.......................................................................................................... 5 3. 1.1 Public Transit.............................................................................................................. 5 3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes...................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Intersection Analysis Methodologies.................................................................................... 6 3.3.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Method of Analysis ..................................... 6 3.3.2 Highway Capacity Manual 6 (HCM 6) Method of Analysis (Unsignalized Intersections)......................................................................................................................... 7 3.3.3 Level of Service Criteria............................................................................................. 7 3.4 Existing Level of Service Results....................................................................................... 11 4.0 Traffic Forecasting Methodology............................................................................................13 5.0 Project Traffic Characteristics................................................................................................14 5.1 Project Traffic Generation.................................................................................................. 14 5.2 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment.......................................................................... 14 5.3 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions............................................................................ 15 6.0 Future Traffic Conditions ................................, 6.1 Ambient Traffic Growth ............................. 6.2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Characteristics 6.2.1 Year 2019 Traffic Volumes ............... 17 17 17 17 7.0 Traffic Impact Analysis Methodology.................................................................................... 21 7.1 Impact Criteria and Thresholds........................................................................................... 21 7.2 Traffic Impact Analysis Scenarios...................................................................................... 22 8.0 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis............................................................................. 23 8.1 Existing Plus Project Analysis............................................................................................ 23 8.1.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions.................................................................. 23 8.2 Year 2019 Traffic Conditions............................................................................................. 25 8.2.1 Year 2019 Cumulative Traffic Conditions............................................................... 25 8.2.2 Year 2019 Cumulative Plus Project Conditions....................................................... 25 75B-58 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) SECTION PAGE 9.0 Site Access and Internal Circulation Evaluation 27 9.1 Site Access.......................................................................................................................... 27 9.2 Internal Circulation Evaluation........................................................................................... 27 10.0 Recommended Intersection Improvements............................................................................ 29 10.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions............................................................................ 29 10.2 Year 2019 Plus Project Traffic Conditions......................................................................... 29 11.0 Congestion Management Program (CMP) Compliance Assessment ................................... 30 12.0 State Of California (Caltrans) Methodology.......................................................................... 31 12.1 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis (Signalized Intersections) .......... 31 12.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions — Caltrans Methodology .................................... 33 12.2.1 Existing Traffic Conditions................................................................................. 33 12.2.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions............................................................ 33 12.3 Year 2019 Traffic Conditions — Caltrans Methodology..................................................... 34 12.3.1 Year 2019 Cumulative Traffic Conditions......................................................... 34 12.3.2 Year 2019 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions ..................................... 34 12.4 Recommended Improvements — Caltrans Methodology..................................................... 37 12.4.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions............................................................ 37 12.4.2 Year 2019 Plus Project Traffic Conditions......................................................... 37 13.0 Roadway Segment Evaluation................................................................................................. 38 13.1 Roadway Link Capacities...................................................................................................38 13.2 Roadway Link Level of Service Criteria............................................................................ 38 13.3 Roadway Link Analysis Results......................................................................................... 40 13.3.1 Existing Plus Project Analysis............................................................................ 40 13.3.2 Year 2019 Plus Project Analysis......................................................................... 42 14.0 Summary Of Findings And Conclusions................................................................................ 44 75B-59 APPENDICES APPENDIX A. Traffic Study Scope of Work B. Existing Traffic Count Data C. Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets D. Project Driveway Level of Service Calculation Worksheets E. Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets — Caltrans 75B-60 LIST OF FIGURES SECTION -FIGURE # FOLLOWING PAGE 1-1 Vicinity Map.......................................................................................................................2 2-1 Existing Aerial Site Photograph.........................................................................................3 2-2 Proposed Site Plan ...............................................................................................................3 3-1 Existing Roadway Conditions and Intersection Controls...............................................5 3-2 Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes........................................................................6 3-3 Existing PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes........................................................6 5-1 Project Trip Distribution Pattern— Gas Station............................................................. 15 5-2 Project Trip Distribution Pattern — Commercial........................................................... 15 5-3 AM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volumes....................................................................... 15 5-4 PM Peak Hour and Daily Project Traffic Volumes....................................................... 15 5-5 Existing Plus Project AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................ 15 5-6 Existing Plus Project PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes ............................... 15 6-1 Location of Cumulative Projects..................................................................................... 17 6-2 AM Peak Hour Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes ................................................... 17 6-3 PM Peak Hour and Daily Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes .................................. 17 6-4 Year 2019 AM Peak Hour Cumulative Traffic Volumes ............................................. 17 6-5 Year 2019 PM Peak Hour and Daily Cumulative Traffic Volumes ............................ 17 6-6 Year 2019 AM Peak Hour Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes ....................... 17 6-7 Year 2019 PM Peak Hour and Daily Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes....... 17 75B-61 LIST OF TABLES SECTIOI-TABLE # PAGE 2-1 Project Development Summary........................................................................................4 3-1 Level of Service Criteria For Signalized Intersections...................................................9 3-2 Level of Service Criteria For Unsignalized Intersections ............................................ 10 3-3 Existing Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis....................................................... 12 5-1 Project Traffic Generation Rates and Forecast............................................................... 16 6-1 Location and Description of Cumulative projects.....................................................18-19 6-2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Generation Forecast........................................................... 20 8-1 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis .................................. 24 8-2 Year 2019 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ................................................... 26 9-1 Project Driveway Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ....................................... 28 12-1 Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections (HCM 6 Methodology) ............ 32 12-2 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis — Caltrans ................ 35 12-3 Year 2019 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis — Caltrans .................................. 36 13-1 Roadway Link Capacities................................................................................................ 39 13-2 Existing Plus Project Roadway Segment Level of Service Summary ........................... 41 13-3 Year 2019 Cumulative Plus Project Roadway Segment Level of Service Summary... 43 75B-62 REVISED FOCUSED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL Santa Ana, California March 13, 2018 (Update of the September 20, 2017 Report) 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Focused Traffic Impact Analysis report addresses the potential traffic impacts and circulation needs associated with Tustin Avenue Retail Project (hereinafter referred to as Project) in the City of Santa Ana and has been prepared in response to the City of Santa Ana's Development Review Committee comment from the Public Works Agency. The Project will include the development of a commercial building with a drive-through and a gas station convenience store at 301 and 325 N. Tustin Avenue, respectively. The Project would include construction of a 7,417 square -feet (SF) commercial building with drive-through to replace a 4,200 sit-down restaurant and a 2,778 SF gas service station convenience store to replace the existing gas station building and car wash. 1.1 Scope of Work This traffic report documents the findings and recommendations of a traffic impact analysis conducted by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) to determine the potential impacts associated with the proposed Project. The traffic analysis evaluates the existing operating conditions at four (4) key study intersections one (1) key roadway segment within the project vicinity, estimates the trip generation potential of the proposed Project, and forecasts future near-term (Year 2019) operating conditions without and with the proposed Project. Where necessary, intersection improvements/mitigation measures are identified. This traffic report satisfies the traffic impact requirements of the City of Santa Ana and is consistent with the current Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County. The Scope of Work for this traffic study, which is included in Appendix A, was developed in conjunction with City of Santa Ana Public Works Department staff. The project site has been visited and an inventory of adjacent area roadways and intersections was performed. Existing weekday peak hour traffic count information has been collected at four (4) key study intersections and one (1) key roadway segment for use in the preparation of intersection level of service calculations. Information concerning cumulative projects (planned and/or approved) in the vicinity of the proposed Project has been researched at the City of Santa Ana and City of Tustin. Based on our research, there are sixteen (16) cumulative projects located in the City of Santa Ana and eight (8) cumulative projects located in the City of Tustin. The twenty-four (24) cumulative projects were considered in the cumulative traffic analysis for this project. This traffic report analyzes existing and future weekday daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic conditions for a near-term (Year 2019) traffic setting upon completion of the proposed 75B-63 Project. Near-term (Year 2019) cumulative daily and peak hour traffic forecasts were projected by incorporating a one percent (1.0%) annual growth rate and the trip generation potential of twenty- four (24) cumulative projects. 1.2 Study Area Four (4) key study intersections and one (1) key roadway segment have been identified for evaluation. Of the four (4) identified intersections, two (2) are located within the City of Santa Ana and two (2) are located in the City of Tustin. The one (1) roadway segment is located within the City of Santa Ana. The four (4) intersections/one (1) roadway segment listed below provide regional and local access to the study area and define the extent of the boundaries for this traffic impact investigation. Key Study Intersections 1. Tustin Avenue at Fourth Street (Santa Ana) 2. Tustin Avenue at First Street (Tustin) 3. SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) 4. SR -55 NB Ramps at Fourth Street/Irvine Boulevard (Tustin/Caltrans) Key roadway sezinent A. Tustin Avenue, between Fourth Street and First Street (Santa Ana) Figure I -I presents a Vicinity Map, which illustrates the general location of the Project and depicts the study locations and surrounding street system. The Level of Service (LOS) investigations at these key locations were used to evaluate the potential traffic -related impacts associated with area growth, cumulative projects and the proposed Project. When necessary, this report recommends intersection and/or roadway improvements that may be required to accommodate future traffic volumes and restore/maintain an acceptable Level of Service, and/or mitigates the impact of the project. Included in this Focused Traffic Impact Analysis are: ■ Existing traffic counts, ■ Estimated project traffic generation/distribution/assignment, ■ Estimated cumulative project traffic generation/distribution/assignment, • AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing conditions, • AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing plus project conditions, ■ AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for future near-term (Year 2019) traffic conditions without and with the proposed Project, • Site Access Evaluation, • Congestion Management Program Compliance Assessment, and • Roadway Segment Evaluation. 75B-64 lEn 55 X) C - hnetimel - I S;tafflng'Sulutions A Servides nA El - (D GD,Bro�BurdD-' Al ...... . ..... ..... Del Taco 1.7 .......... .......... kehqbffltation-Hbspit 14 V :31 La6CDrp E First Sl VV F ct)l CD V-1 First St rD �Q 55 KEY FIGURE 1 -1 Q) - STUDY INTERSECTION I� a - STUDY ROADWAY SEGMENT NO SCALE - PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-65 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project site is comprised of two parcels and is currently occupied by an existing gas station building and car wash at 325 N. Tustin Avenue and a sit-down restaurant at 301 N. Tustin Avenue. The site is generally located south of Fourth Street and east of Tustin Avenue. Both properties are located in the Professional (P) zoning district. 301 N. Tustin Avenue has a General Plan land use designation of Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) and 325 N. Tustin has the General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (GC). As proposed, the Project requires approval of a general plan amendment to change the land use designation from PAO to GC, zone change from P to Commercial General (C2) and a conditional use permit for the proposed drive-through services. Figure 2-1 is an existing aerial photograph of the Project site. The Project will include the development of a commercial building with a drive-through and a gas station convenience store at 301 and 325 N. Tustin Avenue, respectively. The Project would include construction of a 7,417 square -feet (SF) commercial building with drive-through to replace a 4,200 sit-down restaurant and a 2,778 SF gas service station convenience store to replace the existing gas station building and car wash. Please note that the proposed Project will provide internal access between the two parcels. Table 2-1 provides a summary of the proposed Project components. The Project is expected to be constructed and completed by Year 2019, which has been utilized to assess the Project's potential traffic impacts at full occupancy of the site within an opening year traffic setting. Figure 2-2 presents the site plan for the proposed Project prepared by Bundy Finkel Architects. 2.1 Site Access Vehicular access to the existing gas station at 325 N. Tustin Avenue is currently provided by one (1) right in -right out driveway on Tustin Avenue and two (2) right in -right out driveways on Fourth Street. Access to the existing restaurant at 301 N. Tustin Avenue is currently provided by one (1) full access driveway and one (1) right in -right out driveway on Tustin Avenue. Vehicular access will remain generally similar to the current driveways with the exception of the removal of the one (1) right in -right out driveway at the existing restaurant along Tustin Avenue and the western right in -right out driveway along Fourth Street. A total of three (3) driveways will provide access to the proposed Project site. 75B-66 II T2Y _ ni \_ �,t✓:. y 8 �f xry i�'CY. ' Y+C e^_Fii � i .wYw:i� 3 � <%j `,• Mw 11, ear, 0 � •4z y X Y t[ $ .c % LINSCQTT LAW & GREENSPAN engineers FIGURE 2-2 ®NO SCALE PROPOSED SITE PLAN TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-68 TABLE 2-1 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY' Project Description Project Development Totals Exis6ne Development ❑ 301 N. Tustin Avenue o Quality Restaurant 4,200 SF ❑ 325 N. Tustin Avenue o Gas Station With Convenience Market With Car Wash 8 VFP Proposed Development ❑ 301 N. Tustin Avenue o Commercial Building With Drive -Through 7,417 SF ❑ 325 N. Tustin Avenue o Gas Station With Convenience Market 8 VFP Notes: VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions I Source: TCA AmI ilecls, 11/01/17. 75B-69 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Existing Street System The principal local network of streets serving the project site includes Fourth Street, First Street, and Tustin Avenue. The following discussion provides a brief synopsis of these key area streets. The descriptions are based on an inventory of existing roadway conditions. Fourth Street is a six -lane, divided roadway oriented in the east -west direction that borders the Project site to the north. The posted speed limit on Fourth Street is 40 miles per hour (mph). On - street parking is not permitted along this roadway in the vicinity of the project. A traffic signal controls the study intersection of Fourth Street at Tustin Avenue. First Street is a four to six -lane, divided roadway oriented in the east -west direction that provides two or three lanes in each direction separated by a raised median island. The posted speed limit on First Street is 40 mph. On -street parking is not permitted along this roadway. A traffic signal controls the study intersections of First Street at Tustin Avenue. Tustin Avenue is a five -lane, divided roadway, oriented in the north -south direction. On -street parking is permitted along the west side of the roadway in the vicinity of the Project. The posted speed limit on Tustin Avenue is 40 mph. Traffic signals control the study intersections of Tustin Avenue at Fourth Street and First Street. Figure 3-1 presents an inventory of the existing roadway conditions for the arterials and intersections evaluated in this report. This figure identifies the number of travel lanes for key arterials, as well as intersection configurations and controls for the key area study intersections. 3.1.1 Public Transit Public transit bus service is provided in the project area by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Two (2) OCTA bus routes operate within the vicinity of the Project site on First Street, Fourth Street and Tustin Avenue, which consist of the following: ■ OCTA Route 64 (Huntington Beach to Tustin): Route 64 is a community bus route serving the Cities of Huntington Beach, Westminster, Garden Grove, Santa Ana and Tustin. The major routes of travel include Bolsa Avenue, First Street and Newport Boulevard. Nearest to the project site are bus stops on First Street - eastbound and westbound of the intersection with Tustin Avenue. Route 64 operates on approximate 30 -minute headways during weekdays and 20 -minute headways on weekends. • OCTA Route 71 (Newport Beach to Placentia): Route 71 is a community bus route serving the Cities of Newport Beach, Costa Mesa, Irvine, Tustin, Santa Ana, Orange, Anaheim and Placentia. The major routes of travel include Newport Boulevard, Red Hill Avenue, Newport Avenue, First Street, Tustin Avenue and Rose Avenue. Nearest to the project site are bus stops on Tustin Avenue at the intersections with First Street and Fourth Street. Route 71 operates on approximate 30 -minute headways during weekdays and 45 -minute headways on weekends. 75B-70 KEY — APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT FIGURE 3-1 • = TRAFFIC SIGNAL, OL — OVERLAP P - PARKING, NP = NO PARKING EXISTING ROADWAY U - UNDIVIDED, D — DIVIDED (to SCALE 2 - NUMBER OF TRAVEL LANES CONDITIONS AND (%X = POSTED SPEED LIMIT (MPH) INMRSECTION CONTROLS [:— PROJECT SITE TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-71 +EE3 6 PHASE 3 PHASE SE SIGN \ SIGNAL L FOURTH 6D ST NP IRVINE BLVD 40 NP ............ ': .;..... ..� $ 3 00 qoq 2 K 0 vz a 2 i 5D FIRST NP 4D NP ST o 40 NP 40 NP \� �F2 66 PHASE SIGNAL \ ' N/S g� .R i e KEY — APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT FIGURE 3-1 • = TRAFFIC SIGNAL, OL — OVERLAP P - PARKING, NP = NO PARKING EXISTING ROADWAY U - UNDIVIDED, D — DIVIDED (to SCALE 2 - NUMBER OF TRAVEL LANES CONDITIONS AND (%X = POSTED SPEED LIMIT (MPH) INMRSECTION CONTROLS [:— PROJECT SITE TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-71 3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes Four (4) key study intersections and one (1) key roadway segment have been identified as the locations at which to evaluate existing and future traffic operating conditions. Some portion of potential project -related traffic will pass through each of these intersections, and their analysis will reveal the expected relative impacts of the project. These key locations were selected for evaluation based on discussions with City of Santa Ana staff and in consideration of Orange County CMP requirements. Existing daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic volumes for the key study intersections of Tustin Avenue at Fourth Street and Tustin Avenue at First Street, as well as the one (1) key roadway segment evaluated in this report were obtained from manual turning movement counts conducted by Transportation Studies, Inc. in October 2016. Please note that counts collected in October 2016 were grown by 1 % to 2017 to create a 2017 baseline condition. Existing AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic volumes for the key study intersections of SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street and SR -55 NB Ramps at Fourth Street/Irvine Boulevard were obtained from manual turning movement counts conducted by AimTD LLC in May 2017. Figures 3-2 and 3-3 illustrate the existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the four (4) key study intersections evaluated in this report, respectively. Figure 3-3 also presents the existing average daily traffic volumes for the one (1) key roadway segment in the vicinity of the proposed Project. Please note that these existing volumes include the traffic generated by the existing land uses. Appendix B contains the detailed peak hour and daily traffic count sheets for the key intersections and roadway segments evaluated in this report. 3.3 Intersection Analysis Methodologies Existing AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the four (4) key study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology for signalized intersections and the methodology outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual 6 (HCM 6) for the unsignalized Project driveways. 3.3.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Method of Analysis In conformance with City of Santa Ana, City of Tustin, and Orange County CMP requirements, existing AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the key signalized study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. The ICU technique is intended for signalized intersection analysis and estimates the volume to capacity (V/C) relationship for an intersection based on the individual V/C ratios for key conflicting traffic movements. The ICU numerical value represents the percent signal (green) time, and thus capacity, required by existing and/or future traffic. It should be noted that the ICU methodology assumes uniform traffic distribution per intersection approach lane and optimal signal timing. 75B-72 (XX) - EXISTING PROJECT REROUTE FIGURE 3-2 = PROJECT SITE (TNO SCALE EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-73 M mo L 23a' is / + 81 z / J ` f 433 / 645 8\ 67J ( 1(-3 680— 6731 4 1 6`(- 13223 J r i a N / / FOURTH ST IRVINE BLVD r: --::-i i:.:.:.:i N 0 9 5 1'1 N FIRST ST o s //��p n � 34) aC /iI L�0651 s 66J 4 �S i 2 (XX) - EXISTING PROJECT REROUTE FIGURE 3-2 = PROJECT SITE (TNO SCALE EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-73 =DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 3-3 (XX) — EXISTING PROJECT REROUTE N m PROJECT SITE NO SCALE EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR AND DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-74 834 1071 lrtzt Z 1 ` iit so �22l\51 7E/ 61 �\f .27(35r N / FOURTH ST t IRVINE BLVD .. �, _77 �...............': �.:.':............. � ........... s 0 V W tT 9 n FIRST ST o 484\ j\ /c"rn3o �JIIr0 s 62D—' 2 =DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 3-3 (XX) — EXISTING PROJECT REROUTE N m PROJECT SITE NO SCALE EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR AND DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-74 Per City of Santa Ana requirements, the ICU calculations use a lane capacity of 1,700 vehicles per hour (vph) for through lanes and 1,600 vph for left -tum lanes and right -tum lanes. A clearance adjustment factor of 0.05 was added to each Level of Service calculation. Per City of Tustin requirements, the ICU calculations use a lane capacity of 1,700 for through and all tum lanes. A clearance adjustment factor of 0.05 was added to each Level of Service calculation. The ICU value translates to a Level of Service (LOS) estimate, which is a relative measure of the intersection performance. The ICU value is the sum of the critical volume to capacity ratios at an intersection; it is not intended to be indicative of the LOS of each of the individual turning movements. The six qualitative categories of Level of Service have been defined along with the corresponding ICU value range and are shown in Table 3-I. 3.3.2 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 6) Method of Analysis (Unsignalized Intersections) Two-way stop -controlled intersections are comprised of a major street, which is uncontrolled, and a minor street, which is controlled by stop signs. Level of service for a two-way stop -controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay. The control delay by movement, by approach, and for the intersection as a whole is estimated by the computed capacity for each movement. LOS is determined for each minor -street movement (or shared movement) as well as major -street left turns. The worst side street approach delay is reported. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole or for major -street approaches, as it is assumed that major -street through vehicles experience zero delay. The HCM control delay value range for two-way stop - controlled intersections is shown in Table 3-2. 3.3.3 Level of Service Criteria According to the Cities of Santa Ana and Tustin, LOS D is the minimum acceptable condition that should be maintained during the peak commute hours. However, the City of Santa Ana has defined exceptions to this criterion at specific locations within the study area. The City of Santa Ana has defined major development areas where LOS `B" is considered acceptable. Caltrans "endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" on State highway facilities"; it does not require that LOS "D" (shall) be maintained. However, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS. Caltrans has determined that all state owned facilities that operate below LOS D should be identified and improved to an acceptable LOS. The Caltrans Traffic Impact Study Guidelines dated December 2002 does state that if an existing state owned facility operates at less than LOS D, the existing service level should be maintained. Based on the above, the following summarizes the LOS required for each key study intersection: 75B-75 LOS "D"Requirements 2. Tustin Avenue at First Street 4. SR -55 NB Ramps at Fourth St/Irvine Blvd 3. SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street LOS "E" Requirements 1. Tustin Avenue at Fourth Street 75B-76 TABLE 3.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of Service (LOS) Intersection Capacity Utilization Value (V/C) Level of Service Description EXCELLENT. No vehicle waits longer A < 0.600 than one red light, and no approach phase is fully used. VERY GOOD. An occasional approach B 0.601— 0.700 phase is fully utilized; many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within groups of vehicles. GOOD. Occasionally drivers may have to C 0.701— 0.800 wait through more than one red light; backups may develop behind turning vehicles. FAIR. Delays may be substantial during portions of the rush hours, but enough D 0.801 — 0.900 lower volume periods occur to permit clearing of developing lines, preventing excessive backups. POOR. Represents the most vehicles E 0.901 — 1.000 intersection approaches can accommodate; may be long lines of waiting vehicles through several signal cycles. FAILURE. Backups from nearby locations or on cross streets may restrict or prevent F > 1.000 movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches. Potentially very long delays with continuously increasing queue lengths. 75B-77 TABLE 3.2 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (HCM 6 METHODOLOGY)' Level of Service (LOS) Highway Capacity Manual (RCM) Delay Per Vehicle (seconds/vehicle) Level of Service Description A < 10.0 Little or no delay B > 10.0 and < 15.0 I Short traffic delays C > 15.0 and:5 25.0 I Average traffic delays D I > 25.0 and:5 35.0 I Long traffic delays E I > 35.0 and < 50.0 I Very long traffic delays F > 50.0 Severe congestion '- Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6, Chapter 20: Two -Way Stop -Controlled Intersections. The LOS criteria apply to each lane on a given approach and to each approach on the minor street LOS is not calculated for major -street approaches or for the intersection as a whole. 75B-78 3.4 Existing Level of Service Results Table 3-3 summarizes the existing peak hour service level calculations for the four (4) key study intersections based on existing traffic volumes and current street geometries. Review of Table 3-3 indicates that three (3) of the four (4) key study intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The exception is SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street, which currently operates at unacceptable LOS E during the AM peak hour. Appendix C presents the ICU/LOS calculation worksheets for the four (4) key study intersections for the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. 75B-79 TABLE 3.3 EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS 75B-80 Minimum Acceptable Control Time Key Intersection Jurisdiction LOS Type Period ICUMCM LOS Tustin Avenue at 80 Traffic AM 0.602 B 1 Santa Ana E Fourth Street Signal PM 0.783 C Tustin Avenue at 60 Traffic AM 0.490 A 2. Tustin D First Street Signal PM 0.517 A SR -55 SB Ramps at Santa Ana/ 30 Traffic AM 0.902 E 3. D Fourth Street Caltrans Signal PM 0.783 C SR -55 NB Ramps at Tustin 30 Traffic AM 0.699 B 4. D Fourth StreeWrvine Boulevard Caltrans Signal PM 0.757 C 75B-80 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY In order to estimate the traffic impact characteristics of the proposed Project, a multi -step process has been utilized. The first step is traffic generation, which estimates the total arriving and departing traffic on a peak hour and daily basis. The traffic generation potential is forecast by applying the appropriate vehicle trip generation equations or rates to the project development tabulation. The second step of the forecasting process is traffic distribution, which identifies the origins and destinations of inbound and outbound project traffic. These origins and destinations are typically based on demographics and existing/expected future travel patterns in the study area. The third step is traffic assignment, which involves the allocation of project traffic to study area _ streets and intersections. Traffic assignment is typically based on minimization of travel time, which may or may not involve the shortest route, depending on prevailing operating conditions and travel speeds. Traffic distribution patterns are indicated by general percentage orientation, while traffic assignment allocates specific volume forecasts to individual roadway links and intersection turning movements throughout the study area. With the forecasting process complete and project traffic assignments developed, the impact of the proposed project is isolated by comparing operational (LOS) conditions at selected key intersections using expected future traffic volumes with and without forecast project traffic. The need for site- specific and/or cumulative local area traffic improvements can then be evaluated and the significance of the project's impacts identified. 75B-81 5.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS 5.1 Project Traffic Generation Traffic generation is expressed in vehicle trip ends, defined as one-way vehicular movements, either entering or exiting the generating land use. Generation equations and/or rates used in the traffic forecasting procedure are found in the 9`s Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) [Washington D.C., 2012]. Table 5-1 summarizes the trip generation rates used in forecasting the vehicular trips generated by the proposed Project and also presents the project's forecast peak hour and daily traffic volumes. As shown in the upper portion of Table 5-1, ITE Land Use 931: Quality Restaurant and ITE Land Use 946: Gasoline/Service Station With Convenience Market and Car Wash trip rates will be used to forecast the trip generation of the existing development. ITE Land Use 820: Shopping Center, ITE Land Use 937:. Coffee/Donut Shop With Drive -Through Window, and ITE Land Use 945: Gasoline/Service Station With Convenience Market will be used to forecast the trip generation of the proposed Project. A review of the middle portion of this table indicates that the existing land uses generate 1,257 daily trips, with 39 trips (21 inbound, 18 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 66 trips (37 inbound, 29 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour. A review of the lower portion of Table 5-1 indicates that the proposed Project is forecast to generate 2,135 daily trips, with 120 trips (63 inbound, 57 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 118 trips (58 inbound, 60 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour. Review of the last row of Table 5-1 shows that with application of existing trip credits, the proposed Project is forecast to generate a new of 878 daily trips, a net of 81 (42 inbound, 39 outbound) AM peak hour trips, and a net of 52 (21 inbound, 31 outbound) PM peak hour trips. 5.2 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment Figures 5-1 and 5-2 present the trip distribution pattern for the gas station and commercial components proposed Project, respectively. Project traffic volumes both entering and exiting the project site have been distributed and assigned to the adjacent street system based on the following considerations: • location of site access points in relation to the surrounding street system, • the site's proximity to major traffic carriers and regional access routes, • physical characteristics of the circulation system such as lane channelization and presence of traffic signals that affect travel patterns, ■ presence of traffic congestion in the surrounding vicinity, and • ingress/egress availability at the project site. The anticipated near-term AM and PM peak hour project traffic volumes associated with the proposed Project (the net trip volumes and existing trip credits) are presented in Figures 5-3 and 5-4, 75B-82 respectively. Figure 5-4 also presents the daily Project traffic volumes. The traffic volume assignments presented in Figures 5-3 and 5-4 reflect the traffic distribution characteristics shown in Figures 5-1 and 5-2 and the traffic generation forecast presented in Table 5-1. 5.3 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions The Existing Plus Project traffic conditions have been generated based upon existing conditions and the estimated project traffic. These forecast traffic conditions have been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, which require that the potential impacts of a Project be evaluated upon the circulation system as it currently exists. This traffic volume scenario and the related intersection capacity analyses will identify the roadway improvements necessary to mitigate the direct traffic impacts of the Project, if any. Figures 5-5 and 5-6 present projected AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the four (4) key study intersections and three (3) Project driveways with the addition of the trips generated by the proposed Project to existing traffic volumes. Figure 5-6 also presents the Existing Plus Project daily traffic volumes. 75B-83 N O h z a -30X1 o -25X 1 20X� I 1 30% 1 5%—} \ 00 \ / \25%—► K 1 / FOURTH ST IRVINE BLVD i .DWY 2:..::L � zo% , 1 ? r' \� NN,/ I I c / / ' E / L DWY 3 j L20% / o -35X f175%-� K / N e7 C FIRST ST g � 15% o / «' k-15%\ g r (tN0 SCALE KEY = INBOUND PERCENTAGE OUTBOUND PERCENTAGE = PROJECT SITE 75B-84 FIGURE 5-1 PROJECT TRIP DISTRD3UTION PATTERN - GAS STATION TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 20%-a.l I �►/ 1 \3DR� I 59. r---1-1. �.DWY 3.:.•.�,:.:J / X35% 25%— \ o / / a 25% > 5%-� 59.--► uKi / / IRVINE BLVD 25% KEY LINSCOTT- INBOUND PERCENTAGE FIGURE 5-2 LAW & OUTBOUND PERCENTAGE Ns - PROJECT SITE PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION NO SCALE PATTERN — COMMERCIAL TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-85 o 0 \ —0_ \ / 1 7 \ 0 KEY m (XX) a PASS-BY/DIVERTED TRIPS FIGURE 5-3 NO SCALE = PROJECT SITE (t NO PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-86 E k' s E! o V) ::s —1 o " 3 I 0 KEY LINSCOTT DAILY TRAMC VOLUMES FIGURE 5-4 LAW XX PASS—BY/DIVERTED TRIPS GREENSPAN N PROJECT SITE PM PEAK HOUR AND DAILY (Tt 0 SCALE eng in eer.s PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-87 2A 589 105 68 33 35'1\ 765 0 17 412ql I L 591 87;� ................ DWY 3'r:::::.:. 924 1492 3T 1082 433 47 >1 645 1078 r KEY PROJECT SITE FIGURE 5-5 15NO SCALE EXISTING PLUS PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA W7 r m M-6-0 / J O/ 361 f B\ I p::.:':::.:,:::.':.,::./ 1 LDWY �3:�:•:::'.�: � � 1354 \1342 / N `\ 93 721 \ - 1156 1 KEY 1�° 700f - DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 5-6 - PROJECT SITE tNO SCALE EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR AND DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-89 - jr / i X52 \ 'm I x255 / J O/ 361 f B\ I p::.:':::.:,:::.':.,::./ 1 LDWY �3:�:•:::'.�: � � 1354 \1342 / N `\ 93 721 \ - 1156 1 KEY 1�° 700f - DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 5-6 - PROJECT SITE tNO SCALE EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR AND DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-89 TABLE 5.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES AND FORECASTS Notes: • TE/TSF = Trip End per 1,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area • TE/VFP = Trip End per Vehicle Fueling Position 3 Source: Trip Generation, 9' Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2012). 4 Trip Generation rates based on the following equations: • Daily: Ln(T)=0.65Lu(X)+5.83 • AM Peak Hour. Ln(T)=0.61Ln(X)+2.24 • PM Peak Hour. Ln(T)=0.67Ln(X)+3.31 5 In order to be conservative, the Daily and AM Peak Hour includes 6,000 SF of retail and 1,500 SF of coffee shop with drive-through window. The PM Peak Hour includes 7,417 SF of retail. 75B-90 Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Description 2 -Way Trip Generation Rates: 820: Shopping Center (TE/TSF) 4 181.80 62% 38% 4.67 48% 52% 14.08 931: Quality Restaurant (TE/TSF) 89.95 100% 0% 0.81 67% 33% 7.49 • 937: Coffee/Donut Shop With Drive -Through Window (TE/TSF) 818.58 51% 49% 100.58 50% 50% 42.80 945: Gasoline/Service Station With Convenience Market (TENFP) 162.78 50% 50% 10.16 50% 50% 13.51 946: Gasoline/Service Station With Convenience Market and Car Wash (TENFP) 152.84 51% 49% 11.84 51% 49% 13.86 Existing, Development Trin Generation: Gas Station With Market With Car Wash (8 VFP) 1,223 48 47 95 57 54 111 Pass -By (Daily 25%, AM 62%, PM 56%) -306 -30 -29 -59 -32 -30 -62 Existing Gas Station Subtotal 917 18 18 36 25 24 49 Quality Restaurant (4,200 SF) 378 3 0 3 21 10 31 Pass -By (Daily 10%, AM 0%, PM 44%) -38 0 0 0 -9 -5 -14 Existing Restmtrant Subtotal 340 3 0 3 12 5 17 Proposed Proiect Trip Generation: • Gas Station With Market (8 VFP) 1,302 41 40 81 54 54 108 Pass -By (Daily 25%, AM 62%, PM 56%) -326 -25 -25 -50 -30 -30 -60 Proposed Gas Station Subtotal 976 16 15 31 24 24 48 Commercial Building (7,417 SF) 5 2,319 94 85 179 51 55 106 Pass -By (Daily 50%, AM 50%, PM 34%) -1 160 -47 -43 -90 -17 -19 -36 - Proposed Gas Station Subtotal 1,159 47 42 89 34 36 70 Total Existing Development Trip Generation (A) 1,257 21 18 39 37 29 66 Total Proposed Project Trip Generation (B) 2,135 63 57 120 58 60 118 Total Net Project Trip Generation (C) _ (B) — (A) 878 42 39 81 21 31 52 Notes: • TE/TSF = Trip End per 1,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area • TE/VFP = Trip End per Vehicle Fueling Position 3 Source: Trip Generation, 9' Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2012). 4 Trip Generation rates based on the following equations: • Daily: Ln(T)=0.65Lu(X)+5.83 • AM Peak Hour. Ln(T)=0.61Ln(X)+2.24 • PM Peak Hour. Ln(T)=0.67Ln(X)+3.31 5 In order to be conservative, the Daily and AM Peak Hour includes 6,000 SF of retail and 1,500 SF of coffee shop with drive-through window. The PM Peak Hour includes 7,417 SF of retail. 75B-90 6.0 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 6.1 Ambient Traffic Growth Horizon year, background traffic growth estimates have been calculated using an ambient traffic growth factor. The ambient traffic growth factor is intended to include unknown and future cumulative projects in the study area, as well as account for regular growth in traffic volumes due to the development of projects outside the study area. The future growth in traffic volumes has been calculated at one percent (1.0%) per year. Applied to the Year 2017 existing traffic volumes, this factor results in a 2.0% growth in existing volumes to the near-term horizon year 2019. 6.2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Characteristics In order to make a realistic estimate of future on -street conditions prior to implementation of the proposed Project, the status of other known development projects (cumulative projects) within a two-mile radius of the proposed project has been researched at the City of Santa Ana and City of Tustin. With this information, the potential impact of the proposed Project can be evaluated within the context of the cumulative impact of all ongoing development. Based on our research during the scoping process, there are sixteen (16) cumulative projects in the City of Santa Ana and eight (8) cumulative projects in the City of Tustin that are being processed for approval. These twenty-four (24) cumulative projects have been included as part of the cumulative background setting. Table 6-1 provides a brief description for each of the twenty-four (24) cumulative projects. Figure 6-1 graphically illustrates the location of the twenty-four (24) cumulative projects. These cumulative projects are expected to generate vehicular traffic, which may affect the operating conditions of the key study intersections. Table 6-2 summarizes the trip generation potential for all twenty-four (24) cumulative projects on a daily and peak hour basis for a typical weekday. As shown, the cumulative projects are expected to generate 30,720 daily trips, with 2,501 trips (1,176 inbound, 1,325 outbound) anticipated during the AM peak hour and 2,962 trips (1,506 inbound, 1,456 outbound) produced during the PM peak hour. The AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes associated with the twenty-four (24) cumulative projects in the Year 2019 are presented in Figures 6-2 and 6-3, respectively. Figure 6-3 also presents the daily related project traffic volumes. 6.2.1 Year 2019 Traffic Volumes Figures 6-4 and 6-5 present the AM and PM peak hour cumulative traffic volumes (existing traffic + ambient growth + cumulative projects) at the four (4) key study intersections for the Year 2019. Figure 6-5 also presents the Year 2019 daily cumulative traffic volumes. Figures 6-6 and 6-7 illustrate the Year 2019 forecast AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes, with the inclusion of the trips generated by the proposed Project. Figure 6-7 also presents the Year 2019 daily cumulative plus project traffic volumes. 75B-91 aiuoo •pctu anuam upent - 1 '1 ale. JN.IJddKdi� AAJAd�dd�Fr�an rt-,. •. _ ,iY:` /f" 4e 1 I I 9 "FfoSpecl oval © - NTwtldf,V? eL OO+��..®tlf: m •nil tq - tr> �' i rn -OM ' i, . _ It ---' ,l:ncnln Ave S:, ry f- O O w" SKl on pr w ® jy' NSwlgc�n SlMOD, ,f W I tit L A93iri Sir cl © r ''� ry, -r Main S}.tt_'1 ! .I i Ntib.rmaFeb� y -•lJ - '� _ - - ! -5 -co 1 13 .! t]Q 9-7Sr (uli 4.' .. ! N(lnwcrS ... O E! oN Z / J ��o\ \�'si FOURTH ST / _51 \ 82J r IRVINE BLVD .. .. �,_7 0 L m v 9 C rt1 i P 8 FlRST ST ° s /)Il�os\ \\ olf SIL := F� cr SITEFIGURE 6-2 NO NO SCALE AM PEAK HOUR CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-93 Teti \ //^0354\ \�U (� ,� j FOURTH ST // 1 \\ — ee \� 6%J r IRVINE BLVD .T.'..... .I �................ . 'o n �iF NN o +i 9 4 <D m � F FIRSTST 1 0 ,\ �77J / R KEY - DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 6-3 PM PROJECT SITEN NO SCALE CUMULATIVE PROJECTS HTRAFFIC VOLUDAILY MES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-94 23S\ / w \ _ � _58 136 \ z / J 443 a \J97�I < FOURTH ST / \ / — 1140\ I `581 5J t IRVINE BLVD ............. is............. i .......... s 0 b S T Ca m g e FIRST ST /4 F35'�• non _ �J 1105 478- `\ 6 527— / i LINSCOTT P o ECT SITE FIGURE 6-4 (RO SCALE YEAR 2019 AM PEAK HOUR CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-95 304 371 JIl °\Z JC 1 96211\1013) FOURTH ST / 736 \ 1261 ¢� IRVINE BLVD .L•TST ......'.'.....'.'. .. ........... Imo'...... �.....;� 8 � Y 9 i b FIRST E s z � aaaaaaOOOOOO �" �495- ON 047 \ J I l 824J l r 552— 2 KEY - DAILY TRAMC VOLUMES FIGURE 6-5 PROJECT SITE ItNO SCALE YEAR 2019 PM PEAK HOUR AND DAILY CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-96 YCN 235\ w 8 iso ,n/ _117 / 658 \ J I l Z J 443 — 1150 c `\ 9 91 `\566J \\ 261 ML h/ % !� 33\ / r J I limos\i 7 / \ —1042 1769— \ 321 LINSEOTT:�� CT SITE FIGURE 6-6 NO SCALE YEAR 2019 AM PEAK HOUR CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-97 1 91623 3 1 1� \ / �.'..'..'..:...'�.I \ DWY -2 DWY 3i r.i Lj'... . L.:j / / -1646 \ � 156421 5- a� � \ / r 717 J I llr 047\ 1 58522glIL o-1 / 736 \ —x1267 KEY ' = DAILY TRAMC VOLUMES FIGURE 6-7 = PROJECT SITE N NO SCALE YEAR 2019 PM PEAK HOUR AND DAILY CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL, SANTA ANA 75B-98 TABLE 6.1 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF CUMULATIVE PROJECTS' No. Cumulative Project Location/Address Description City of Santa Ana Development Artist Gateway 117 South Sycamore Street 14 DU Live/Work 1. 70 DU Apartments, 12.623 TSF 2. Depot at Santiago 923 North Santiago Street Retail/Office 3. Lotus Townhomes 627 East Washington Avenue 8 DU Townhomes 4.995 TSF Car Wash, 20.146 TSF 4. Rocket Express Car Wash 1703 East Seventeenth Street Existing Commercial Demolition 5. Sexlinger Homes and Orchard 1584 East Santa Clara Avenue 24 DU Single Family Detached Apartments, 47.04 TSF Existing 69 DU6. First Street Family Apartments 1440 East First Street ODemolition Office 518.000 SF Office Tower with 16.000 7. One Broadway Plaza 1109 North Broadway TSF of Restaurant Floor Area 8. East First Street Apartments 2222 East First Street 419 DU Senior Residential Apartments Convert 75 Room Motel to 72 DU 9. First Street Care Home 2151 East First Street Supportive Housing Apartments 10. Tom's Trucks Residential Development 1008 East Fourth Street 170 DU Single Family Detached Apartments, 6,561 TSF 11. The Madison 200 N. Cabrillo Park Drive Commmee rcial Co 694 DU Affordable Apartments, 9.700 12. 2114 East First Apartments 2114 East First Street TSF Commercial 13. 888 Adaptive Reuse 888 North Main Street 146 Condominiums 14. Elk's Lodge 1701 East St. Andrew Place 46.438 TSF Lodge 15. Hampton Inn Hotel 2129 North Main Street 135 Room Hotel Apartments, 16.430 TSF 601 DU16. Tustin Avenue Retail 1660 E. First Street Commercial Corcial City of Tustin Develountent 201 DU Apartments, 3.000 TSF Health Club, 10.000 TSF General Office, 4.000 17. Tustin Red Hill Mixed -Use 13751-13841 Red Hill Avenue TSF Shopping Center, 3.000 TSF High - Turnover Restaurant 18. 4 Unit Condominium Complex 1051 Bonita Street 4 DU Condominiums 19. 5 Detached Residential Condos 1381-1391 San Juan Street 5 DU Condominiums 20. New Office Building 721 West First Street 7.200 TSF Office 1.800 TSF Fast -Food Restaurant w/ 21. Restaurant 14232 Newport Avenue Drive-Thru 6 Source: City of Santa Ana and City ofTlatin Planning Department staff - 75B -99 TABLE 6.1 (CONTINUED) LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF CUMULATIVE PROJECTS? No. Cumulative Project Location/Address Description 22. Grace Harbor Church 12881 Newport Avenue 10.015 TSF 2 -story Classroom 23. Habitat for Humanity 140 South A Street 2 DU Condominiums 24. Intracorp So Cal -1 420 West 6s' Street 140 DU Single Family Attached 7 Source: City of Santa Ana and City of7trstin planning Department staff. 75B-100 TABLE 6.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRIP GENERATION FORECASTS Cumulative Project Description Daily 2 -Way AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 1. Artist Gateway 93 1 6 7 6 3 9 2. Depot at Santiago 658 15 32 47 31 24 55 3. Lotus Townhomes 46 1 3 4 3 1 4 4. Rocket Express Car Wash 529 15 15 30 21 20 41 5. Sexlinger Homes and Orchard 229 5 13 18 15 9 24 6. First Street Family Apartments 459 7 28 35 28 15 43 7. One Broadway Plaza 6,175 641 94 735 198 596 794 8. East First Street Apartments 1,524 30 59 89 60 51 111 9. First Street Care Home 479 7 30 37 29 16 45 10. Tom's Trucks Residential Development 1,618 32 96 128 107 63 170 11. The Madison 2,010 30 104 134 115 69 184 12. 2114 East First Apartments 4,988 76 286 362 291 163 454 13. 888 Adaptive Reuse 848 11 53 64 51 25 76 14. Elk's Lodge 1,571 63 32 95 62 65 127 15. Hampton Inn Hotel 1;103 42 30 72 41 40 81 16. Tustin Avenue Retail 4,464 67 240 307 257 155 412 17. Tustin Red Hill Mixed -Use 2,098 57 102 159 115 81 196 18. 4 Unit Apartment Complex 27 0 2 2 1 1 2 19. 5 Detached Residential Condos 29 0 2 2 2 1 3 20. New Office Building 122 15 2 17 3 13 16 21. Restaurant 670 21 21 42 15 14 29 22. Grace Harbor Church 155 29 23 52 5 7 12 23. Habitat for Humanity 12 0 1 1 1 0 1 24. Intracorp So Cal -1 813 11 51 62 49 24 73 FCumulative Projects Total Trip Generation Potential 30,720 1,176 1,325 2,501 1,506 1,456 2,962 8 Source: Trip Generation, 9" Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2012). 75B-101 7.0 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The relative impact of the proposed Project during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour was evaluated based on analysis of future operating conditions at the four (4) key study intersections, without, then with, the proposed Project. The previously discussed capacity analysis procedures were utilized to investigate the future volume -to -capacity relationships and service level characteristics at each study intersection. The significance of the potential impacts of the Project at each key intersection was then evaluated using the following traffic impact criteria. 7.1 Impact Criteria and Thresholds 7.1.1 City of Santa Ana For the study intersection solely under the jurisdiction of the City of Santa Ana, impacts to local and regional transportation systems are considered significant if-. ■ An unacceptable peak hour Level of Service (LOS) at any of the key intersections is projected and the project increases traffic demand at the study intersection by 1% of capacity (ICU increase >_ 0.010). The City of Santa Ana considers LOS D (ICU = 0.801 - 0.900) to be the minimum acceptable LOS for all intersections, except for those locations located within the City's defined major development areas, where LOS E is considered acceptable. Based on the above, the following summarizes the LOS required for the Santa Ana key study intersection: LOS "D"Renuirements 3. SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street LOS "E" Requirements 1. Tustin Avenue at Fourth Street • At unsignalized intersections, an impact is considered to be significant if the project causes an intersection at LOS D or better to degrade to LOS E or F and the traffic signal warrant analysis determines that a signal is justified. 7.1.2 City of Tustin For the study intersection within the jurisdiction of the City of Tustin, impacts to local and regional transportation systems are considered significant i£ ■ An unacceptable peak hour Level of Service (LOS) at any of the key intersections is projected and, for this analysis, if the project increases traffic demand at the study intersection by 1% of capacity (ICU increase >_ 0.010), causing or worsening LOS E or F (ICU> 0.901), the impact is considered significant. The City of Tustin considers LOS D to be the minimum acceptable condition that should be maintained during the peak commute hours at the intersection listed below: 75B-102 LOS "D"Regrrirenrents 2. Tustin Avenue at First Street 4. SR -55 NB Ramps at Fourth Street/Irvine Boulevard 7.2 Traffic Impact Analysis Scenarios The following scenarios are those for which volume/capacity calculations have been performed at the four (4) key intersections for existing plus project, near-term (Year 2019) traffic conditions: A. Existing Traffic Conditions; B. Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions; C. Scenario (B) with Improvements, if necessary; D. Near -Term (Year 2019) Cumulative Traffic Conditions, E. Near -Term (Year 2019) Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions; F. Scenario (E) with Improvements, if necessary; and G. Scenario (H) with Improvements, if necessary. 75B-103 8.0 PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS 8.1 Existing Plus Project Analysis Table 8-1 summarizes the peak hour Level of Service results at the four (4) key study intersections for existing plus project traffic conditions. The first column (1) of ICU/LOS values in Table 8-1 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions (which were also presented in Table 3-3). The second column (2) lists existing plus project traffic conditions. The third column (3) shows the increase in ICU value due to the added peak hour Project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. The fourth column (4) presents the resultant level of service with the inclusion of recommended traffic improvements, where needed, to achieve an acceptable level of service. 8.1.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of columns (2) and (3) of Table 8-1 indicate that traffic associated with the proposed Project will not significantly any of the four (4) key study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. Although the intersection of SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street is forecast to operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour with the addition of Project traffic, the proposed Project is expected to add less than 0.010 to the ICU value. The remaining three (3) intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS with the addition of project generated traffic. Appendix C presents the existing plus project ICU/LOS calculations for the four (4) key study intersections. 75B-104 u •L G p O i i � i E c a � �w O p o U U i 0 z z z z z z z z M O R u 4 ,un 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r -i 01 � •L O O P7 U Q Q W U U U a N C � O a U pp u W F M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N o O W U Q' Q W U Pa U w � W u (Oj a F t Sol o19EldmV mnwlulIN ua Q Q Q ro m tl F N p o. E P7 C_ C C v ` F C� P4 N F fL •> L N L !A X O F W F k. vWi k0. ri] W T u (V vi R 75B-105 8.2 Year 2019 Traffic Conditions Table 8-2 summarizes the peak hour Level of Service results at the four (4) key study intersections for the Year 2019 horizon year. The first column (1) of ICU/LOS values in Table 8-2 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions. The second column (2) lists projected cumulative traffic conditions (existing plus ambient plus cumulative projects traffic) based on existing intersection geometry, but without any traffic generated from the proposed Project. The third column (3) presents forecast Year 2019 near-term traffic conditions with the addition of Project traffic. The fourth column (4) shows the increase in ICU value due to the added peak hour Project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. The fifth column (5) presents the resultant level of service with the inclusion of recommended traffic improvements, where needed, to achieve an acceptable level of service. 8.2.1 Year 2019 Cumulative Traffic Conditions An analysis of future (Year 2019) background traffic conditions indicates that with the addition of ambient traffic growth and cumulative projects traffic, one (1) of the four (4) key study intersections will operate at an adverse LOS. The location identified below is forecast to operate at an unacceptable level of service: AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Key Intersection ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS 6. SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street 0.968 E The remaining three (3) key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS based on the LOS criteria identified in this report. 8.2.2 Year 2019 Cumulative Plus Project Conditions Review of columns (3) and (4) of Table 8-2 indicate that traffic associated with the proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the four (4) key study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. Although the intersection of SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street is forecast to operate at an adverse LOS E during the AM peak hour, with the addition of Project traffic, the proposed Project is expected to add less than 0.010 to the ICU value. The remaining three (3) key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS with the addition of project generated traffic in the Year 2019. Appendix C also presents the near-term ICU/LOS calculations for the four (4) key study intersections. 75B-106 :l! co W J a f- u OI N N Vl a � � i 9 � 0 a U .w u d 'a r .+ o E z z z 0 z 2 z z .. a R U d V V] G r.n O O O O O O O O N o (n O U q W GO W q U q � U y 7 N v p ti LU n 00 b � 0\ W n 00 F o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N o y O U q m Q W q U q u O N 9 R O N L E U F N o O CA U 6 ¢ W U W U b0 q C C ^ O r� v vi a t-: e t: F 'O Q F P. SO'I al9sjdaaad wnmlulw W q q q N S i ❑ s w s v t� = L Wi t w° F° w w° w r d Sts -i U 9.0 SITE ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION EVALUATION 9.1 Site Access Vehicular access to the existing gas station at 325 N. Tustin Avenue is currently provided by one (1) right in -right out driveway on Tustin Avenue and four (4) right in -right out driveways on Fourth Street. Access to the existing restaurant at 301 N. Tustin Avenue is currently provided by one (1) full access driveway and one (1) right in -right out driveway on Tustin Avenue. Vehicular access will remain generally similar to the current driveways with the exception of the removal of the one (1) right in -right out driveway at the existing restaurant along Tustin Avenue and the westerley right in -right out driveway along Fourth Street. A total of three (3) driveways will provide access to the proposed Project site. Table 9-1 summarizes the intersection level of service results for the three (3) proposed Project driveways under near-term (Year 2019) traffic conditions at completion and full occupancy of the proposed Project. As shown, these key study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS C or better during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Appendix D presents the near-term HCM/LOS calculations for the three (3) Project driveways. 9.2 Internal Circulation Evaluation The on-site circulation was evaluated in terms of vehicle -pedestrian conflicts. Based on our review of the preliminary site plan, the overall layout does not create any unsafe vehicle -pedestrian conflict points and the driveway throating is sufficient such that access to parking spaces is not impacted by internal vehicle queuing/stacking. Curb return radii have been confirmed and are adequate for service/delivery trucks and trash trucks. The on-site circulation is very good based on our review of the proposed site plan, whereas the alignment, spacing, and throating of the Project driveways is adequate. The circulation around the buildings is adequate with sufficient sight distance along the drive aisles. 75B-108 TABLE 9.1 PROJECT DRIVEWAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY Notes: Bold Delay/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards s/v = seconds per vehicle 75B-109 (1) Year 2019 Plus Project Intersection Time Traffic Conditions Delay LOS Key Intersection Control Period Project Driveway 1 at One -Way AM 21.0 s/v C A. Fourth Street Stop PM 18.9 s/v C Tustin Avenue at One -Way AM 12.2 s/v B B. Project Driveway j Y 2 Stop P PM 15.4 s/v C Tustin Avenue at One -Way AM 15.2 s/v C C. Project Driveway 3 J Y Stop P PM 19.8 s/v C Notes: Bold Delay/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards s/v = seconds per vehicle 75B-109 10.0 RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS For those intersections where projected traffic volumes are expected to result in unacceptable operating conditions, this report recommends (identifies) improvement measures that change the intersection geometry to increase capacity. These capacity improvements involve roadway widening and/or re -striping to reconfigure (add lanes) to specific approaches of a key intersection. The identified improvements are expected to: • mitigate the impact of existing traffic, Project traffic and future non -project (ambient traffic growth and cumulative project) traffic and • improve Levels of Service to an acceptable range and/or to pre -project conditions. 10.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the intersection capacity analysis presented previously in Table 8-1 shows that the proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the four (4) key study intersections under the "Existing Plus Project" traffic scenario. Given that there are no significant project impacts, no improvements are required under this traffic scenario. 10.2 Year 2019 Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the intersection capacity analyses presented previously in Table 8-2 shows that the proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the four (4) key study intersections under the "Year 2019 Plus Project" traffic scenario. Given that there are no significant project impacts, no improvements are required under this traffic scenario. 75B-110 11.0 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP) COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT This analysis is consistent with the requirements and procedures outlined in the current Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The CMP requires that a traffic impact analysis be conducted for any project generating 2,400 or more daily trips, or 1,600 or more daily trips for projects that directly access the CMP Highway System (HS). Per the CMP guidelines, this number is based on the desire to analyze any impacts that will be 3.0% or more of the existing CMP highway system facilities' capacity. However, as noted in this focused traffic study, the proposed Project is expected to generate a net of 878 daily trips, and thus does not meet the criteria required for a CMP traffic analysis. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed Project will not have any significant traffic impacts on the Congestion Management Program Highway System. 75B-111 12.0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA (CALTRANS) METHODOLOGY In conformance with the current Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, existing and projected AM and PM peak hour operating conditions at the two (2) state-controlled study intersections within the study area have been evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual 61h Edition operations method of analysis. These state-controlled locations include the following intersections: 3. SR- 55 Ramps at Fourth Street 4. SR -55 NB Ramps at Fourth St/Irvine Blvd Caltrans "endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" on State highway facilities'; it does not require that LOS "D" (shall) be maintained. However, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS. For this analysis, LOS D is the target level of service standard and will be utilized to assess the project impacts at the state-controlled study intersections. 12.1 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis (Signalized Intersections) AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the key study intersections were evaluated using the methodology outlined in Chapter 19 of the Highway Capacity Manual 6 (HCM 6) for signalized intersections. Based on the HCM operations method of analysis, level of service for signalized intersections and approaches is defined in terms of control delay, which is a measure of the increase in travel time due to traffic signal control, driver discomfort, and fuel consumption. Control delay includes the delay associated with vehicles slowing in advance of an intersection, the time spent stopped on an intersection approach, the time spent as vehicles move up in the queue, and the time needed for vehicles to accelerate to their desired speed. LOS criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms of the control delay in seconds per vehicle. The LOS thresholds established for the automobile mode at a signalized intersection are shown in Table 12-1. 75B-112 TABLE 12-1 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (HCM 6 METHODOLOGY)' Level of Service Control Delay Per Vehicle (LOS) (seconds/vehicle) Level of Service Description This level of service occurs when progression is A < 10.0 extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the — green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. This level generally occurs with good progression, short B > 10.0 and < 20.0 cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. Average traffic delays. These higher delays may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. C > 20.0 and < 35.0 Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. — The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping. Long traffic delays At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may D > 35.0 and < 55.0 result from some combination of unfavorable progression, — long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. Very long traffic delays This level is considered by many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high E > 55.0 and < 80.0 delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. Severe congestion This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with over saturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the F >_ 80.0 capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing factors to such delay levels. 9 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6, Chapter 19: Signalized Intersections. 75B-113 12.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions — Caltrans Methodology Table 12-2 summarizes the existing plus project peak hour HCM level of service results at the two (2) state-controlled study intersections within the study area. The first column (1) of HCM/LOS values in Table 12-2 presents a summary of existing traffic conditions. The second column (2) presents existing plus project traffic conditions. The third column (3) indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have an impact based on the LOS standards defined in this report. The fourth column (4) presents the resultant level of service with the inclusion of recommended traffic improvements, where needed, to achieve an acceptable level of service. 12.2.1 Existing Traffic Conditions Review of column (1) of Table 12-2 indicates that all two (2) state-controlled study intersections currently operate an acceptable LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours. 12.2.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of columns (2) and (3) of Table 12-2 indicates that traffic associated with the proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the two (2) state-controlled study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. Appendix E presents the Caltrans level_of service calculation worksheets for the two (2) state- controlled study intersections. 75B-114 12.3 Year 2019 Traffic Conditions — Caltrans Methodology Table 12-3 summarizes the Year 2019 peak hour HCM level of service results at the two (2) state- controlled study intersections within the study area. The first column (1) of HCM/LOS values in Table 12-3 presents a summary of existing traffic conditions. The second column (2) presents Year 2019 cumulative traffic conditions based on existing intersection geometry, but without any project generated traffic. The third column (3) presents future forecast traffic conditions with the addition of Project traffic. Column four (4) indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have an impact based on the LOS standards defined in this report. The fifth column (5) presents the resultant level of service with the inclusion of recommended traffic improvements, where needed, to achieve an acceptable level of service. 12.3.1 Year 2019 Cumulative Trak Conditions An analysis of future (Year 2019) cumulative traffic conditions indicates that with the addition of ambient traffic growth and related projects traffic, both state-controlled study intersections currently operate an acceptable LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours. 12.3.2 Year 2019 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of columns (3) and (4) of Table 12-3 indicates that traffic associated with the proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the two (2) state-controlled study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. Appendix E presents the Caltrans level of service calculation worksheets for the two (2) state- controlled study intersections. 75B-115 ) 75B.116 !})/ �22`a f § / ± ) ) u u u u « ] u u u u ) � / § � ))\! )! ( � [) kk) \0 ƒ w v ) 75B.116 d V N C ma � 'a Ra F x d 0 d i N U U U U n U 6 c aU Vrl N V 7 i 0 4 N� R v 00 O O -- F U x d N � a c O U U U U E_ �o 0 TUU o O F U x O U U U U 0 OD :p E e •= S K v > F U N N N N F x _i A 0 N N G N a � � o J5 p� u � P�i d ti w° T M V z' 75B-117 12.4 Recommended Improvements — Caltrans Methodology 12.4.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the Caltrans assessment presented previously in Table 12-2 shows that the proposed Project will not significantly impact either of the two (2) key study intersections under the "Existing Plus Project' traffic scenario. Given that there are no significant project impacts, no improvements are required under this traffic scenario. 12.4.2 Year 2019 Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the Caltrans assessment presented previously in Table 12-3 shows that the proposed Project will not significantly impact either of the two (2) key study intersections under the "Year 2019 Plus Project' traffic scenario. Given that there are no significant project impacts, no improvements are required under this traffic scenario. 75B-118 13.0 ROADWAY SEGMENT EVALUATION Per City of Santa Ana requirements, this section of the report analyzes the daily operating conditions of the key roadway segment within the vicinity of the proposed Project. One (1) key roadway segment within the City of Santa Ana has been selected for evaluation and is listed below: A. Tustin Avenue, between Fourth Street and First Street (Santa Ana) 13.1 Roadway Link Capacities Daily operating conditions for the one (1) key roadway segment (links) identified above have been investigated according to the daily volume -to -capacity (V/C) of each link. The daily V/C relationship is used to estimate the LOS of the roadway segment with the volume based on 24-hour traffic count data and the capacity based on the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) street classifications. The daily and peak hour roadway link capacity of each street classification according to the Orange County MPAH is presented in Table 13-1, along with the six corresponding service levels and associated V/C ratios. 13.2 Roadway Link Level of Service Criteria According to the City of Santa Ana, LOS D is the minimum acceptable condition that should be maintained for roadway segments. However, the City of Santa Ana has defined exceptions to this criteria in major development areas where LOS E is considered acceptable. LOS "D"Reauiremeuts A. Tustin Avenue, between Fourth Street and First Street If the daily roadway V/C ratio results in unacceptable LOS conditions, a'peak hour link analysis is conducted to determine if the roadway operates at a satisfactory service level during the peak hours. 75B-119 TABLE 13.1 ROADWAY LINK CAPACITIES10 Notes: • VPD = vehicles per day • VPH = vehicles per hour Source: Most current Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Peak hour capacity based on 10% of the daily LOS "E" capacity. 75B-120 Level of Service Criteria With Associated Roadway Capacity Daily Values (VPD) Peak Hour Facility Number Level of Service (LOS) Capacity A B C D E F (VPH)11 Type of Lanes Principal 8 -lanes divided 45,000 52,500 60,000 67,500 75,000 7,500 Major 6 -lanes divided 33,900 39,400 45,000 50,600 56,300 5,630 Primary 4 -lanes divided 22,500 26,300 30,000 33,800 37,500 3,750 Divided Collector 2 -lanes divided 9,000 12,000 15,000 20,000 22,000 2,200 Secondary 4 -lanes undivided 15,000 17,500 20,000 22,500 25,000 2,500 Commuter 2 -lanes undivided 7,500 8,800 10,000 11,300 12,500 -- 1,250 V/CRatio <0.600 0.601-0.700 0.701-0.800 0.801-0.900 0.901-1,000 >_1.01 Notes: • VPD = vehicles per day • VPH = vehicles per hour Source: Most current Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Peak hour capacity based on 10% of the daily LOS "E" capacity. 75B-120 13.3 Roadway Link Analysis Results 13.3.1 Existing Plus Project Analysis Table 13-2 summarizes the results of the Existing Plus Project daily analysis for the one (1) key roadway segment. The first column (1) shows the number of lanes, the second column (2) shows the arterial classification and the third column (3) shows the existing LOS "E" capacity. The fourth column (4) shows the daily volume, V/C ratio and resulting level of service for "Existing" traffic conditions. The fifth column (5) shows the daily volume, V/C ratio and resulting level of service for "Existing Plus Project" traffic conditions and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have an impact based on the LOS standards defined in this report. Existing Traffic Conditions Review of column (4) of Table 13-2 indicates that the one (1) key roadway segment currently operates at LOS A. Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of column (5) of Table 13-2 indicates that the one (1) key roadway segment is forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable service level on a daily basis with the addition of Project generated traffic to existing traffic and will not have a significant impact. 75B-121 75B-122 V y R C C e� z d e s u 'e L C e rei « W :fl a C v o ¢ eo e � W F U ° owe is a rn o T E E a � W Q a e e v •K o U '� R a M o W u A L 3 E •E Ca a 'n 0➢ � � ry n o W a e e R 'y rej O Q p U e c u c q v v � w C � C V N � yN � Y h T Q V1 9 0 F w a X ¢ 75B-122 13.3.2 Year 2019 Plus Project Analysis Table 13-3 summarizes the results of the Year 2019 Plus Project daily analysis for the one (1) key roadway segment. The first column (1) shows the number of lanes, the second column (2) shows the arterial classification and the third column (3) shows the existing LOS `B" capacity. The fourth column (4) shows the daily volume, V/C ratio and resulting level of service for "Year 2019 Cumulative" traffic conditions. The fifth column (5) shows the daily volume, V/C ratio and resulting level of service for "Year 2019 Cumulative Plus Project' traffic conditions and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have an impact based on the LOS standards defined in this report. Year 2019 Cumulative Traffic Conditions An analysis of future (Year 2019) background traffic conditions indicates that the addition of ambient traffic growth and cumulative projects traffic will not adversely impact the one (1) key roadway segment. The one (1) key study roadway segment is forecast to continue to operate at acceptable LOS A on a daily basis with the addition of ambient traffic growth and cumulative projects traffic. Year 2019 Cumulative Plus Proiect Traffic Conditions Review of column (5) of Table 13-3 indicates that traffic associated with the proposed Project will not significantly impact the one (1) key roadway segment, when compared to the LOS standards specified in this report. The one (1) key roadway segment is forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS with the addition of project generated traffic in the Year 2019. 75B-123 M r J m H 75B-124 u w 0 E � z u m � � o V C 0' � C C+ O V E � m U F e N U o c a o r T u E q o ni h 0 Q a d ac U •o- opo e u v: N L y y u F r T � E •� e n q O ' N N O Ml y •v G O a � ii O T e • 0 n •i u o Y y Q � U w � e .J zwa d t w u w b � V T z, 9 0 F w a X Q 75B-124 14.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS • Project Description — The Project site is comprised of two parcels and is currently occupied by an existing gas station building and car wash at 325 N. Tustin Avenue and a sit-down restaurant at 301 N. Tustin Avenue. The site is generally located south of Fourth Street and east of Tustin Avenue. Both properties are located in the Professional (P) zoning district. 301 N. Tustin Avenue has a General Plan land use designation of Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) and 325 N. Tustin has the General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (GC). As proposed, the Project requires approval of a general plan amendment to change the land use designation from PAO to GC, zone change from P to Commercial General (C2) and a conditional use permit for the proposed drive-through services. The Project will include the development of a commercial building with a drive-through and a gas station convenience store at 301 and 325 N. Tustin Avenue, respectively. The Project would include construction of a 7,417 square -feet (SF) commercial building with drive-through to replace a 4,200 sit-down restaurant and a 2,778 SF gas service station convenience store to replace the existing gas station building and car wash. Please note that the proposed Project will provide internal access between the two parcels. Study Scope — The following four (4) key study intersections and one (1) key roadway segment were selected for detailed peak hour and daily V/C / level of service analyses under Existing Traffic Conditions, Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions, Year 2019 Cumulative Traffic Conditions and Year 2019 Cumulative plus Project: Rey Study Intersections 1. Tustin Avenue at Fourth Street (Santa Ana) 2. Tustin Avenue at First Street (Tustin) 3. SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) 4. Sr -55 NB Ramps at Fourth Street/Irvine Boulevard (Tustin/Caltrans) Key roadway seeneent A. Tustin Avenue, between Fourth Street and First Street (Santa Ana) Existing Traffic Conditions — Three (3) of the four (4) key study intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours for the Existing traffic conditions. The exception is SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street, which currently operates at unacceptable LOS E during the AM peak hour. ■ Project Trip Generation — With the application of existing trip credits, the proposed Project is forecast to generate a new of 878 daily trips, a net of 81 (42 inbound, 39 outbound) AM peak hour trips, and a net of 52 (21 inbound, 31 outbound) PM peak hour trips. ■ Cumulative Projects Traffic Characteristics — Twenty-four (24) cumulative projects were considered as part of the cumulative background setting. The twenty-four (24) cumulative 75B-125 projects are forecast to generate 30,720 daily trips, with 2,501 trips (1,176 inbound, 1,325 outbound) anticipated during the AM peak hour and 2,962 trips (1,506 inbound, 1,456 outbound) produced during the PM peak hour. Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions — The proposed Project will not significantly any of the four (4) key study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. Although the intersection of SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street is forecast to operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour with the addition of Project traffic, the proposed Project is expected to add less than 0.010 to the ICU value. The remaining three (3) intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS with the addition of project generated traffic under the Existing Plus Project traffic conditions. Year 2019 Cumulative Traffic Conditions Plus Project —Traffic associated with the proposed Project will not significantly impact any of the four (4) key study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. SR -55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street is forecast to operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour with the addition of Project traffic, the proposed Project is expected to add less than 0.010 to the ICU value. The remaining three (3) key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS with the addition of project generated traffic in the Year 2019. Site Access Assessment— The three (3) proposed Project driveways under near-term (Year 2019) traffic conditions at completion and full occupancy of the proposed Project. As shown, these key study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS C or better during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. • Internal Circulation Evaluation — The on-site circulation was evaluated in terms of vehicle - pedestrian conflicts. Based on our review of the preliminary site plan, the overall layout does not create any unsafe vehicle -pedestrian conflict points and the driveway throating is sufficient such that access to parking spaces is not impacted by internal vehicle queuing/stacking. Curb return radii have been confirmed and are adequate for service/delivery trucks and trash trucks. The on- site circulation is very good based on our review of the proposed site plan, whereas the alignment, spacing, and throating of the Project driveways is adequate. The circulation around the buildings is adequate with sufficient sight distance along the drive aisles. CMP Compliance Assessment — The proposed Project is expected to generate a net of 878 daily trips, and thus does not meet the criteria required for a CMP traffic analysis. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed Project will not have any significant traffic impacts on the Congestion Management Program Highway System. State of California (Caltrans) Analysis for Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions— Based on the evaluation using Caltrans criteria, the proposed Project will not significantly impact either of the two (2) state-controlled study intersections. Both intersections are forecast to continue to operate at acceptable LOS C with the addition of project generated traffic under the Existing Plus Project traffic conditions. 75B-126 • State of California (Caltrans) Analysis for Year 2019 Plus Project Traffic Conditions— Based on the evaluation using Caltrans criteria, the proposed Project will not significantly impact either of the two (2) state-controlled study intersections. Both intersections are forecast to continue to operate at acceptable LOS C with the addition of project generated traffic under the Year 2019 Plus Project traffic conditions. • Existing Roadway Segment Evaluation — The one (1) key roadway segment currently operates at LOS A under Existing traffic conditions. ■ Existing Plus Project Roadway Segment Evaluation — The one (1) key roadway segment is forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable service level on a daily basis with the addition of Project generated traffic to existing traffic and will not have a significant impact. • Year 2019 Cumulative Plus Project Roadway Segment Evaluation —The proposed Project will not significantly impact the one (1) key roadway segment, when compared to the LOS standards specified in this report. The one (1) key roadway segment is forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS with the addition of project generated traffic in the Year 2019. 75B-127 BUNDY-FINKEL ■ Architects Architecture Planning Meeting Notes Neighborhood Meeting Tustin Ave. Retail Meeting Date: 12-13-16 Meeting Location: EI Ranchito Restaurant, Santa Ana Attendees: (See attached for attendance list) Yoon Hee Choe, D.D.S. (Neighbor to the south) Maribel Martinez (Looking for space to lease) Paul S. Gregory (Business operator across the street) Interiors The following are the notes from the meeting held to present the Tustin Ave. Retail project to the surrounding neighbors. No negative comments received. Dr. Choe inquired if trees were to be planted along the property line. We responded that there would be. Ms. Martinez asked when the project would be completed and indicated she might be interested in leasing space in the building. Mr. Gregory asked when the restaurant would be shutting down. Sincerely, Bundy -Finkel Architects PIA—D -9 Richard Finkel, A.I.A. TUSTIN AVENUE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT SUNSHINE MEETING NOTES EXHIBIT 9 1120 Bristol Street • Suite 120 -Costa Mesa -CA 92688 - P. 714 850-7575 - F. 714 850-7576 75B-128 Atlantic Square Starbucks - CDs February 19, 2018 Page 2 Chase Russell - Russell Fischer Partnership 12-13-16 Richard Finkel - Bundy -Finkel Architects EI Ranchitc Restaurant Q Yoon Nee Uoe ).b,S. (114) 313-8183 (be -t ) yoo_nhee6�o dds CyAhoa,co.m N. 20 c Iwc 7 ta�.ti. , m -z-o max Imo. , CA- Sz"1 75B-129 d fi 4TH STREET 75B-130 N A LS 11.20.18 RESOLUTION NO.2018-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NO. 2016-156 AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM RELATIVE TO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2018-05, AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-08, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2018-18 AND VARIANCE NO. 2018-10 FOR THE PROJECT LOCATED AT 301 AND 325 N. TUSTIN AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant, Richard Finkel, representing Russell Fischer Partnership LLC, is requesting approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05, Amendment Application No. 2018-08, Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-18 and Variance No. 2018-10 in order to facilitate construction of a new multi -tenant commercial building with ancillary drive-through service at 301 North Tustin Avenue and a service station at 325 North Tustin Avenue. B. The provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq., as amended, require the evaluation of environmental impacts in connection with proposals for discretionary projects. C. Pursuant to Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, an Initial Study relative to the proposed project concluded that implementation of the project could result in potentially significant effects on the environment and identified mitigation measures that would reduce the significant effects to a less -than -significant level. D. The City of Santa Ana prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), Environmental Review No. 2016-156 for the proposed project which reflects the City's independent judgement and analysis as lead agency for the project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that the project would have a less than significant environmental impact with implementation of mitigation measures. Mitigation measures are included to address cultural resources, hazards, and tribal and cultural resources. EXHIBIT B 75B-133 E. On August 13, 2018, Notice of Intent to adopt the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156 was published in the OC Register newspaper, circulated to interested parties, and the State Clearinghouse. F. The documents related to the Mitigated Negative Declaration were made available for a 30 -day public review and comment period at the Santa Ana City Hall, the Main Library, and on the 'project webpage on the City's website. G. Comments received were addressed in a Response, to Comments document that provides sufficient information to demonstrate that the environmental conclusions and mitigation measures remain valid as disclosed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. H. The mitigation measures set forth in Mitigated Negative Declaration are fully enforceable and will be 'implemented using the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by reference. On October 8, 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing and voted to recommend that the City Council approve a resolution to adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156 and the related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project. J. On November 20, 2018, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing to consider all testimony, written and oral, related to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016- 156, and the related Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project, at which time all persons wishing to testify were heard, the project was fully considered, and all other legal prerequisites to the -adoption of this Resolution occurred. Section 2. The ,City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the information contained in the Initial Study and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156, prepared with respect to this project.. The City Council has, as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, the. MND ,adequately addresses the expected •environmental impacts of this project. On the basis of this review, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Section 3. The City Council hereby adopts and approves the MND and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and directs that the Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County ,of Orange in 75B-134 the manner required by law. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Council Action dated November 20, 2018, and exhibits attached hereto; and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 4. Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations (CCR) § 735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have the potential for any significant adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon which wildlife resources depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human activity. However, pursuant to Fish and Game Code § 711.2 and Title XIV, CCR § 735.5, the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees in conjunction with this project is at the discretion of the State of California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Section 5. The Applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officials, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability, claims, actions or proceedings that may be brought arising out of its approval of this project, and any approvals associated with the project, including, without limitation, any environmental review or approval, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence of the City of Santa Ana. Section 6. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6. The Planning and Building Agency shall give direct notice to the Applicant of the City Council's decisions and these findings. ADOPTED this day of 2018. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor 75B-135 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D: HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2018-xx to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on , 2018. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 75B-136 EXHIBIT A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 75B-137 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Tustin Avenue Retail Project MND SCH# 2018081033 City of Santa Ana 75B-138 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Authority and Purpose Pursuant to, and in accordance with California Public Resources Code, Section 21081.6 (AB 3180), a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the City of Santa Ana's Tustin Avenue Retail Project Mitigated Negative Declaration (MIND) SCH# 2018081033 has been prepared. The purpose of this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is to ensure compliance with and effectiveness of the mitigation measures set forth in the Tustin Avenue Retail Project MND. Section 15074(d) of the CEQA Guidelines states that, when adopting a mitigated negative declaration, the lead agency shall adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes that it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to reduce or avoid significant environmental effects. Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines require a public agency to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring the implementation of required mitigation measures applied to proposed projects. Monitoring Program List of Mitigations The City of Santa Ana's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Tustin Avenue Retail Project consists of a list of mitigation conditions and/or verifications required for incremental implementation of the project The following provides information regarding the purpose and procedures for each individual significant impact and related mitigation measures. For each significant impact and corresponding set of mitigation measures, the party responsible for mitigation implementation and monitoring is identified. The required timing for implementation of each measure is also specified. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 75B-139 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impacts RequiredIN[itigation Measu CS V. Cultural Resources Items (b) and (c) The Tustin Avenue Retail Development Project site AIM CR -A Should previously unidentified historical, Implementing Entity: Project applicant/ sill be graded prior to construction, and if during archaeological or paleontological resources be uncovered during developer and cultural resources expert grading, it is revealed that previously unidentified archaeological, Paleontological or geologic deposits the course of construction, grading/construction shall be halted in the area of concern so that the findings can be assessed. If it is Monitoring en Ci of Sana Ara g cY City exist, an expect appropriate m the nature of the find determined that more formal data collection u ed, needa Planning and Building Agency most be afforded the opportunity to evaluate any controlled excavation shall be required to adequately record the Timing: Grading/construction phase additional finds and to complete an analysis in find and recover (he associated materials in accordance with accordance with CEQA guidelines, as amended. CEQA guidelines, as amended. Excavating the materials in this controlled manner will minimize the risk of any resources being lost, damaged or destroyed. AIM CR -1- Prior to the sten of construction, the project Implementing Entity: Project applicant/ developer shall retain a Native American Monitor to conduct a developer and Native American Monitor Native American Indian Sensitivity Training for cm snuction Personnel prior to commencement of any excavation activities. Monitoring en Ci of Santa Ana � Agency: City The training session shall include a lundout and focus on how to Planning and Building Agency and Native identify Native American resources encountered during Amencon tribal group(s) earthmoving activities and the procedures followed if resources Timing: Grading/commrction phase are discovered, dm duties of the Native American Monitor and the general steps the Monitor would EORDw in conducting a salvage investigation. The project developer shall renin a Native American Monitor to be on-site during all project -related, ground -disturbing construction activities (e.g., pavement removal, auguring boring, grading, excavation, potholing, trenching, and grubbing) of previously undutudxd native sods. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 2 75B-140 V. Cultural Resources Item (d) If future activities in project site adversely impact previously unidentified cultural resources, including burial sites or sacred lands, an archaeologist will be afforded the opportunity to evaluate any additional finds and to complete an analysis in accordance with CEQA guidelines, as amended. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MMCR-3. Any future development that occurs u a result of the proposed project will be subject to the provisions of Section 7050.5 of the Calif nuia Health and Safety Code. Section 7050.5 requires the contractor to notify the County Coroner if suspected human remains are uncovered. The Coroner will then determine whether the remains are of forensic interest. If the Coroner, with the aid of a supervising archaeologist, determines that the remains are or appear to be of a Native American individual, he/she avould contact the Native American Heritage Commission for further investigations and proper recovery of such remains, if necessary. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 3 75B-141 Implementing Entity. Project applicant/developey County Coroner, qualified arelueologist Monitoring Agenry: City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency and the Native American Heritage Comn fission Timing: Gtading/eonsnuction phase Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impacts Required Nlitigation,mcisures Implementation VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Items (a), (b), end (c) Due to the age of the existing budding, them is a potential AIMHAZIAsbesrosAbateamene. Prior many Implementing Entity: Project applicant/ that asbestos containing mawrials (AC10) and, perhaps, lead- demolition, a thorough asbestos survey is required in developer and Certified Asbestos Consultant base paint (I -BP) may be present. Exposure to either ACM of accordance with the EPA and SCAQbID Rule 403. All Monitoring o g � ry' Ci ty of Santa Ana LBP may expose construction wvrkets and people in the onsite structures that contain wbesms must have the ACM Planning and Building Agency (Building vicinity of the project site to potential health risks. removed according to proper abatement procedures Safety Division) and the South Coast Air recommended by the asbestos consultant and as requited by the SCAQMD. All abatement activities shall be in Quality Management District (SCAQMD) compliance with Cahli nnia and Federal OSI IA, and with Timing. Prior to demolition phase the SCAQMD requirements. Only asbestos trained and certified abatement personnel shall be allmved m perform asbestos abatement. All ACM removed from onsite structures shall be transported by a licensed to handle ACM and disposed of at a licensed receiving facility and under proper manifest Follovving completion of the asbestos abatement, the asbestos consultant shall provide a report documenting the abatement procedures used, the volume of ACM removed, where the material was disposed. Tliis report shall include transportation and disposal manifests or dump tickets. The abatement report shall be prepared for the property owner or other responsible party, with a copy submitted to the SCAQMD and the City of Santa Ana. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 4 75B-142 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impacts Required Mitigation Measures Implementation VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Cad. Due to the age of the existing building, there is a potential MAI HAZ-1Ashesros Noddcation. SCAQMD Rule Implementing Entity. Project applicant/ that asbestos containing materials (ACM) and, perhaps, lead- 1403 establishes noti4ntion and work practice developer and City of Santa Ana Planning base paint (LBP) may be p s;enL Furposure m eitherAChl or requirements to limit asbestus emissions from building and Building Agency (Building Safety LDP may expose construction unrkea and people in the demolition and renovntion activities. State law requires Division) vicinity of the project site to potential health risks. that a copy of the asbestos demolition notification form be Monitoring Ci of Santa A �g en ry' City na provided to Building and Safety petsonncl prior m the Planning aril Building Agency (Building m issuance of a demolition perit. Local governments are Safety Division) and the South Coast Air responsible for the asbestus notification process. Quality ivlaaagement District (SCAQh1D) Timing. Prior to and during demolition/ construction phase AIMHAZ-5 Lead BasedPaiarRemoml. Prior to the Implementing Entity. Project issuance of a permit for demolition of any structure, a applicant/developer and licensed Lead Based licensed LBP professional shall be contacted to evaluate Paint wnsulumt the structure for LBP. If LBP is discovered, it shag be MonitoringCi of Santa Ana City removed according to proper abatement procedures an�B°cy' Planning and Agency ng recommended by the consultant and in accordance with Safety Division) and the South Coast Air n) an t Coast Ai SCAQMD, State of California and Federal requiranents. Only LBP trained and certified abatement personnel shall Quality Management District (SCAQMD) be allowed to perform abatement activities. Ag LBP Timing. Prior to and during demolition removed from these structures shag be hauled and phase disposed of by a transportation company licensed m transport this type of material, In addition, the material shag be taken to a landfill or receiving facility licensed to accept the waste. Following completion of the LBP abatcmcn4 the LBP consultant shag provide a report documenting the abatement procedums used, the volume of LBP removed, where the material vvas moved to, and include transportation and disposal manifests or dump tickets. The abatement report slag be prepared for the Property ownet or other responsible patty, with a copy submitted to die SCAQMD and the City of Santa Ana MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 5 75B-143 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Please refer to Impacts in pmsious section V. Cultural Please refer to MM CR-? and MM CR -3 in section V. Please refer to Implememation in pvn ious Resources, Items (b), (e), and (d). Cultural Resources, Items (b), (c), and (d). section V. Cultural Resources, items (b), (c), and (d). MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 6 75B-144 LS 11.20.18 RESOLUTION NO.2018-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2018-05 FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 431 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE AND 2321 EAST FOURTH STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Richard Finkel (Applicant), representing Russell Fischer LP, is requesting approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 to amend the General Plan land use designation of the property at 301 North Tustin Avenue from Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC) and to update text portions of the City's Land Use Element to reflect this change in order to facilitate construction of a new multi -tenant commercial building with ancillary drive-through service at 301 North Tustin Avenue and a service station at 325 North Tustin Avenue. B. In addition, the City of Santa Ana is proposing to change the land use designation of the properties at 431 North Tustin Avenue and 2321 East 41 Street from Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC) and to update text portions of the City's Land Use Element to reflect this change. C. On June 12, 2018, pursuant to Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52, the City mailed consultation letters to all tribes listed on the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Tribal Consultation List. D. On October 8, 2018, the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing and voted to recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Review No. 2016-156 and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05. E. On November 20, 2018, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana held a duly noticed public hearing to consider all testimony, written and oral, related to General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05, at which time all persons wishing to testify were heard, the project was fully considered, and all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution occurred. Resolution No. 2018-xx EXHIBIT 2 Page 1 of 5 75B-145 F. General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 has been filed to amend the General Plan to change the land use designation of the property at 301 North Tustin Avenue from Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC). In addition, the City of Santa Ana is proposing to change the land use designation of the properties at 431 North Tustin Avenue and 2321 East 4t' Street from Professional and Administrative Office (PAO) to General Commercial (GC) and to update text portions of the City's Land Use Element to reflect this change. 1. The existing General Plan land use designation for the project area is Professional & Administrative Office (PAO) which are typically in areas that are in close proximity to freeways allow for professional and/or administrative offices, with floor area ratio intensity ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. 2. The proposed General Plan land use designation for the project area is General Commercial (GC) which applies to commercial corridors and major arterial roadways in the City, allows for facilities and services including shopping, recreation, cultural and entertainment activities and the floor area ratio intensity ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. 3. The general plan amendment will support several goals and policies of the General Plan, including the Land Use Element, Economic Development Element, Circulation Element, and Urban Design Element. In specific, General Plan Land Use Element Goal 1 to promote a balance of land uses to address basic community needs. Policy 1.10 to encourage the location of commercial centers at arterial roadway .intersections in commercial districts. Land Use Element Goal 2 to promote land uses that enhance the City's economic and fiscal viability. Policy 2.4 supporting pedestrian access with an enhanced pedestrian walkway. Furthermore, the project is consistent with Policy 2.8, to promote rehabilitation of commercial properties, and encourage increased levels of capital investment. Policy 2.9 supporting developments that create a business environment that is safe and attractive. Policy 5.5 to encourage development that is compatible with and supporting of surrounding land uses. The commercial center and its operations are compatible with the surrounding commercial and professional businesses. Economic Development Goal 2 to maintain and enhance the diversity of the City's economic base. Specifically, Policy 2.3 to encourage the development of mutually beneficial and supportive business clusters within the community. Economic Development Goal 4 to expand the tax base of local government to improve and maintain the level of public services. Policy 4.1 to target business attraction and retention resources towards firm with high positive net revenue implications for local government, particularly those engaged in business -to -business taxable sales transactions. Resolution No. 2018-xx Page 2 of 5 75B-146 Circulation Element Goal 2 to promote design and construction that facilitates safe utilization of the City's transportation system. Policy 2.1 to limit the number of driveways on arterial streets to reduce vehicular conflict, and facilitate traffic flow. Urban Design Goal 1 to improve the physical appearance of the City through development of districts that project a sense of place, positive community image and quality environmental. Specifically, Policy 1.5 to include enhanced architectural forms, textures, colors, and materials are expected in the design of all projects and Policy 1.6 to include plazas, open spaces, and courtyards connecting to public right-of-way to encourage public interaction. G. The City Council has weighed and balanced the General Plan's policies, and has determined that based upon this balancing that General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 is consistent with the purpose of the general plan. Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance rezoning the real properties located at 301, 325 and 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East Fourth Street and Amended Sectional District Map number 9-5-9 showing the above described change in use district designation (AA No. 2018-08). This recommendation is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission and Council Action dated October 8, 2018 and November 20, 2018, respectively and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 3. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the initial study and the mitigated negative declaration (MND), Environmental Review No. 2016-156, prepared with respect to this project. The City Council has, as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, the MND adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this project. On the basis of this. review, the City Council finds that there is no evidence from which it can be fairly argued that the project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment Section 4. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana after conducting the public hearing hereby approves General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05. The amendments to the Land Use Element are attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Council Action dated November 20, 2018, and exhibits attached hereto; and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Resolution No. 2018-xx Page 3 of 5 75B-147 Section 5. This Resolution shall not be effective unless and until Ordinance No. NS- (AA No. 2018-08) becomes effective. If said ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or otherwise does not go into effect for any reason, then this resolution shall be null and void and have no further force and effect. Section 6. The Applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officials, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability, claims, actions or proceedings that may be brought arising out of its approval of this project, and any approvals associated with the project, including, without limitation, any environmental review or approval, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence of the City of Santa Ana. Section 7. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6. The Planning and Building Agency shall give direct notice to the Applicant of the City Council's decisions and these findings. ADOPTED this _ day of , 2018. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney By' Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers Miguel A. Pulido Mayor 75B-148 Resolution No. 2018-xx Page 4 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2018-xx to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on .2018. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 75B-149 Resolution No. 2018-xx Page 5 of 5 City of Santa Ana General Plan Land Use Element 1998 City of Santa Ana Planning Division Adopted February 2, 1998 (Reformatted January 2010) The following is a chronology of the approved general plan amendments that have been incorporated into this document since the comprehensive update of the General Plan Land Use Element adapted by the Santa Ana City Council February 2, 1998 (GPA 1997- 05): GPA 2018-02 (May 15, 2018) GPA 201091 GPA 2015-01(May15, 2018) GPA 200802 GPA 2017-02 (December 19,2017) GPA 2007-03 GPA 2D17 -0i (June 27,2117) GPA 2008-01 GPA 2016-03 (February 21, 2017) GPA 2004-03 GPA 2016-02(May 17,2016) GPA 2007-02 GPA 2016-01(Ap 119, 201 6) GPA 2007-01 GPA 201503 (February 2, 2016) GPA 2006-01 GPA 2014-02 (October 21, 2014) GPA 2005-01 GPA 2014-01 (Joe 3, 2014) GPA 2003-01 (February 18, 2003) GPA 2011-03 (March 19, 2012) h 19, 2007) 6,2011) GPA 2005-02 (October 17, 2005) GPA 2001-02 (January 7, 2002) 7,2010) GPA 200"1(Apn75,2005. as passed by GPA 2000-09 (May 7, 2001) W. 2009) the voters of Santa Ana) GPA M08(Febmary 5, 2001) 18, 2009) GPA 2004-04 (July 19, 2004) GPA 200003 (December4, 2000) 5,2008) GPA 20)4-06 (July 6, 2004) GPA 2000-02(November 2D, 2000) uary 2, 2009) GPA 200302(June 16, 2003) GPA 1999-02 (October 18,1999) 18, 2007) GPA 2003-01 (February 18, 2003) GPA 1999-01 (August 16,1999) h 19, 2007) GPA 2002-01(Sepumber 3, 2002) GPA 1998-04 (October 5,1998) bar 2, 2006) GPA 2002-03(August19, 2002) GPA 1998-05(September 21,1998) ember 5, 2005) GPA 2001-03 (February 19, 2002) GPA 1998-01 (May 4, 1998) EXHIBIT A 75B-150 ■ W2 fa L\.11■ i 75B-151 Land Use Designations Land Use Plan ©(p u z 56MA41-d W MBaw.kMrlr.MSsdaiTM F. - 1 75B-152 -ro Land Use Plan 6 Development Intensity Standards/ FAR Areas Go E.M.. LAND USE ELEMENT Commercial The Land Use Plan identifies three land use designations that encourage a variety of office, retail and commercial enterprises to serve the community. • The Professional/Administrative Office (PAO) designation applies to those areas where professional and/or administrative offices are predominant, or where such development is being encouraged. Land included in this designation is found primarily near the Civic Center, and along the First Street and Tustin Avenue Corridors in close proximity to freeways. There are other smaller PAO areas in the City such as along North Broadway and along portions of east and west Seventeenth Street. A total of 64-2-.609.6 acres is included in this land use designation. The floor area ratio intensity standard applicable to this land use designation ranges from 0.5 to 1.0. The Professional and Administrative Office areas are intended to provide a unique environment for office development in those areas of the City where office uses are the predominant land use. The purpose for maintaining and supporting these areas exclusively for office and office -related uses is to encourage major employment centers at locations which significantly lessen the impact to the City's local street system. The First Street/Tustin Avenue office corridor between the Santa Ana (I-5) and Costa Mesa (SR -55) Freeways serves this purpose. In addition, the orderly, well-maintained quality of existing development supports a continuation of these areas as functional office/employment centers. The Professional and Administrative Office designation includes a range of floor area ratios to differentiate development intensity and character in relation to adjacent land uses. The areas with a FAR of 0.5 are not major office centers, but rather have an established character of lower intensity garden office and professional service uses. These areas are typically adjacent to low density residential neighborhoods, or are converted residential office uses. Office development along East Fourth Street, between Grand Avenue and the Santa Ana Freeway, is typical of this low-rise office character. The PAO area located adjacent to the Civic Center contains a range of office development intensity which supports the City's functional role as the government center of the County. The types of uses typically located in the PAO district include the following-. • Professional and administrative offices,/office parks; ■ Service activities such as copy centers, courier services, travel agencies, and restaurants when such uses are an integral component of a planned office development; and Professional uses such as accountants, attorneys, doctors, engineers, and insurance brokers. A-20 CITY OF SANTA ANA GENERAL PLAN 75B-153 LAND USE ELEMENT The General Commercial (GC) district applies to commercial corridors in Santa Ana including those located along Main Street, Seventeenth Street, Harbor Boulevard, and other major arterial roadways in the City. The intensity standard applicable to this designation is a floor area ratio of0.5 -1.0, though most General Commercial districts have a FAR of 0.5. A total of88}8 888.7 acres of land is included in this designation. General Commercial districts are key components in the economic development of the City. They provide highly visible and accessible commercial development along the City's arterial transportation corridors. In addition, General Commercial land uses provide important neighborhood facilities and services, including shopping, recreation, cultural and entertainment activities, employment, and education. The districts also provide support facilities and services for industrial areas including office and retail, restaurants and various other services. The General Commercial development standards are based upon the character and intensity of development, as well as the degree of access and market demand for these properties. The relationships to adjacent land uses, are also considered. Uses typically located in this district are: • Business and professional offices; • Retail and service establishments; ■ Recreational, cultural, and entertainment uses; and • Vocational schools. General Commercial Districts have a floor area ratio of0.5 with the exception of the Mid -town area which has an floor area ratio of up to 1.0. One Broadway Plaza District Center is a separate land use designation as it has an FA.R. of 2.9, which exceeds the typical District Centerintensity limit. Additionally, it does not include a residential component. One Broadway Plaza is envisioned as a landmark professional office complex that will be a focal point in the Downtown Redevelopment area serving the Civic Center complex, Downtown, and Midtown urban areas. The City's District Centers and major development areas are shown in Exhibit A-5. CITY OF SANTA ANA GENERAL PLAN 75B-154 W LAND USE ELEMENT Table A-4 Land Use Man Build -out Capacities Land Use Intena(ty/ Acres Oens( EUecthre Bu(Idoof' Theoretical Buildout 45,198 du Residential Low Density Residential LR -7 6,456.9 7 dWac Low Medium Density Residential LMR -11 1 420.61 11 duhe 1 4,627 du Medium Density Residential MR -15 370.1 15 dWac 5,551du Subtotal 7,3971 Non Res. all du' Res. Non -Res. 55,624 du Res. Mixed Use District Center Other" DC 309.5 50 du /ac FAR 1.0.2.0 11,955,583 sl 3,017 du 23,764,53451 3,017 du Heritage OC 18.8 FAR 1.7 54,090 4 1,221 du 54,090sl 1,221 du Downtown DC 62.5 FAR 3.0 2,057,824 4 1,661 du 2.057,824 sf 1,661 du Metro East DC 98.3 FAR 3.0 3,245,185 sf 5,551 du 3,245.185 sf 5,551 du Transit Village DC 51.4 FAR 5.0 402,8644 2,761 du 402,8644 2,761 du Harbor Corridor DC 125.0 FAR 5.0 1,836,1554 2,029 du 1,836,1558 2,029 du Urban Neighborhood UN 276.9 FAR 0.53.0 876,546 4 5,016 du 876,546 5,016 du Subtotal — Commercial f44.i 20An,42d 21,256 du 32,237,371 �,. 26 551.9984'.=9,,-�-r1a 21,256 du Professional S Admin. Office PAFFAR 0.5.1.0 13.zis999 d General CornnerCial FAR 0.5.1.0 9.354.7974 a8595448 38.709.59481One Broadway Plaza District Ctrs OBPDC 4--609`5 FAR 2.9 543,193 d 543,193 sf Sl�tal 33,173,9894 65,604,7954ndustrial Other IND FAR 0.45 42,199,991 4 42,199,991 4 Institutional INS 900.6 FAR 02-0.5 6,974,7404 17,436,650 st Open Space I 0S 1 1.010.91 FAR 02 8,806,961 4 8,806,961 ad Subtotal 1,911.5 15,781,701 It 26,243,811 8f FAR=fbn area ratio, d.o.=dwelling unit, s L—square feet (of floor area). Acreage shown in table does not include roads in right-of-way. t Elf above capacity for non-residential development assumes development possible under the lower range of FAR intensity standards with the exception of the Metro East District Center, Transit Village District Center, Downtown District Center, Heritage District Center, and Urban Neighborhood areas. The Harbor Corridor District Center, Metro East District Cerner, Transit Village District Center, Downtown District Center, and Urban Neighborhood areas allow a range of intensity for mixture of residential and non-residential development based on the zoning development standards. Residential effective capacity was calculated by adding the 21.256 units possible in the District Center and Urban Neighborhood with the existing 74,588 (Census 2000) housing units. ' Land use designation permits both residential and non-residential development. Build -out assumes 90% of land area will be developed as commercial and 10% will be developed as residential. with the exception of Town and Country Manor project intended for continuum of care and housing seniors. ' Land use designation permits high intensity office development with ancillary retail use. This table has been revised to correspond with the GIS Land Use Map illustrated in Exhibit 2. CITY OF SANTA ANA GENERAL PLAN 75B-155 75B-156 LS 11,20 18 ORDINANCE NO. NS-XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO. 2018-08 REZONING THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 325 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, 401 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, AND 2320 EAST FOURTH STREET FROM THE PROFESSIONAL (P) TO THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C2) ZONING DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Richard Finkel (Applicant), representing Russell Fischer LP, has filed Amendment Application No. 2018-08 with the City of Santa Ana to change the zoning designation of the parcels located at 301 and 325 North Tustin Avenue from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2) in order to facilitate construction of a new multi -tenant commercial building with ancillary drive-through service at 301 North Tustin Avenue and a service station at 325 North Tustin Avenue. B. In addition, the City of Santa Ana is proposing to amend the zoning designation of 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East Fourth Street from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2). C. General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05 was filed concurrently with the Amendment Application for consistency with the General Plan. D. On October 8, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and voted to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 2018-08 which is consistent with the General Plan, as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05. E. The City Council has reviewed applicable general plan policies and has determined that this proposed rezoning is consistent with the purpose of the general plan. F. The City Council, prior to taking action on this ordinance, held a duly noticed public hearing on November 20, 2018. G. The City Council also adopts as findings all facts presented in the Request for Council Action dated November 20, 2018 accompanying this matter. Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 1 of 3 75B4671 H. For these reasons, and each of them, Amendment Application No. 2018- 08 is hereby found and determined to be consistent with the intent and purpose of Chapter 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, thus changing the zoning district is found to be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Santa Ana and otherwise justified by the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare. Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance rezoning the real properties located at 301, 325 and 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East Fourth Street and Amended Sectional District Map number 9-5-9 showing the above described change in use district designation (AA No. 2018-08). This recommendation is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission and Council Action dated October 8, 2018 and November 20, 2018, respectively and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 3. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Environmental Review No. 2016-156) prepared with respect to this project. The City Council has, as a result of its consideration of the record as a whole and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, Environmental Review No. 2016- 156 meets all the requirements of CEQA. Section 4. The zoning designation of the real properties located at 301 North Tustin Avenue, 325 North Tustin Avenue, 401 North Tustin Avenue and 2320 East Fourth Street is hereby reclassified from Professional (P) to General Commercial (C2). An amended Sectional District Map, showing the above described changes in use district designation, is hereby approved and attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. Section 6. This ordinance shall not be effective unless and until Resolution No. 2018- (Environmental Review No. 2016-156 and General Plan Amendment No. 2018-05) is adopted and becomes effective. If either resolution and/or ordinance are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or otherwise does not go into effect for any reason, then this ordinance shall be null and void and have no further force and effect. Section 7. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Ordinance No. NS-XXXX Page 2 of 3 75B-158 Section 8. The Applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City of Santa Ana, its officials, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability, claims, actions or proceedings that may be brought arising out of its approval of this project, and any approvals associated with the project, including, without limitation, any environmental review or approval, except to the extent caused by the sole negligence of the City of Santa Ana. ADOPTED this _ day of 2018. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney By: isa Storck Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the attached Ordinance No. NS- to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on 2018 and that said ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 75B-159 Ordinance No NS -)(XXX Page 3 of 3 ZONING DISTRICTS Al GENHRALAGRICULTURAL CSM SOUTH MANSTREET COMLERCAL DST R2 TAO-FAMLYRESOENCE -B PARKNG MODFOATIDN Cl COLMIINFTY CO&WERCAL GC GOVERNAENTCENTER R3 MULTPLE-FAALY RES CBRCE -OZ OVERLAY ZONE CMO COLMINRYCOM.ERCIAL-MJSBIM OST. M1 LOHTNDUSTRAL R4 SUBURBANAPARTMENT PLANNEDRESOENTNL C2 GBIERALCOMr RCNL M2 HEN AVY DIISTRIAL RE RES CENTAL ESTATE -PRD DEVELOPMENT C4 PUNNEDSHOPPNG CENTER O OPEN SPACE SO SPBCFCDEVELOPLENT -HD2 HEIGHTDSTRCTI C5 ARTHRAL COM4ERCAL P PROFESSIONAL SP SPECFIC PUN CR COMERCALR6OENTAL R1 SNGLE-FAMLYRESC@!CE SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP: 9-5-9 e CITV OF SANTA ANA, CALJFORNIA A 75B-160