Exhibit C. Page 1 of 90. Prepared for: Prepared by: November 2011

Transcription

1 AGREEMENT FOR EXCHANGE OF REAL PROPERTY TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA MCAS TUSTIN SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM/INITIAL STUDY Prepared for: South Orange County Community College District Marguerite Parkway Mission Viejo, California County of Orange OC Community Resources 1770 rth Broadway Santa Ana, California Prepared by: RGP PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 8921 Research Drive Irvine, California vember 2011 Page 1 of 90

2 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. Introduction Project Summary Organization of Addendum Previous Environmental Documentation Purpose of the Exchange Agreement Addendum Basis for an EIR Addendum Evaluation of Alternatives Summary of Findings Intended Use of this Document Environmental Checklist Form Project Title Lead Agency Name and Address Contact Person and Telephone Number Project Location Project Sponsors Names and Addresses General Plan Designation Existing Zoning - Existing Other Public Agencies Approvals Required Environmental Factors Affected Environmental Determination Project Description Project Location and Surrounding Uses Project Description and Explanation of Checklist Responses Aesthetics Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Agriculture and Forest Resources Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Air Quality Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Biological Resources Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Cultural and Paleontological Resources Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Geology and Soils Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Hazards and Hazardous Materials Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Hydrology and Water Quality Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Land Use and Planning i vember 2011 Page 2 of 90

3 Table of Contents Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Mineral Resources Existing Conditions Project Evaluation ise Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Population and Housing Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Public Services Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Recreation Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Transportation/Traffic Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Utilities and Service Systems Existing Conditions Project Evaluation Mandatory Findings of Significance Summary of Measures Sources/Acronyms Sources Acronyms Report Preparers RGP Planning & Development Services (RGP) Austin-Foust Associates (Austin-Foust) List of Figures Figure 1 Local Vicinity Map Figure 2 Project Site Boundaries List of Tables Table 1. Environmental Factors Affected... 7 Table 2. Environmental Determination... 8 Table 3. Surrounding Land Uses Table 4. Swap Areas Land Use and Trip Generation Summary Table 5. Specific Plan FEIS/EIR Measures Applicable to Project Site Appendices Appendix A ATEP-District and County Land Swap Traffic Evaluation Technical Memorandum (May 2011) ii vember 2011 Page 3 of 90

4 1. Introduction 1.1 Project Summary Introduction The Proposed Project consists of an Agreement for the Exchange of Real Property between the South Orange County Community College District (SOCCCD or District) and the County of Orange (County) (the Exchange Agreement ) that delineates the terms and processes associated with the exchange of the ultimate ownership of land within the former Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin, an area now referred to as Tustin Legacy. The Exchange Agreement permits the exchange of the ultimate ownership of two sites, of 10 acres each, between the SOCCCD and the County. The Project rationalizes property boundaries to allow the location of future County of Orange facilities adjacent to other County facilities at the Rancho Santiago Community College District (RSCCD) Sheriff s Training Academy site and the creation of a unified land area for the future ATEP campus. The City of Tustin has approved a Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan which will allow for implementation of the project. The SPA modified Planning Area (PA) boundaries and designations for Neighborhood A by further dividing the existing Neighborhood A PA to create two new sub-pas. The SPA allows the relocation of a proposed animal care center across Armstrong Avenue from Neighborhood C to Neighborhood A, and removes the requirement to obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for such a land use. The SPA also allows the law enforcement training facility on one of the new sub-pas as an alternative location within Neighborhood A. These public institutional uses are currently permitted uses within Tustin Legacy, specifically within Neighborhood A and in the adjacent Neighborhood C. As Lead Agency for the SPA and certain subsequent implementation actions described below, the City prepared CEQA document evaluating the SPA and subsequent implementation actions, which was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on September 13, 2011 and certified by the City Council on October 4, The SPA does not modify the permitted intensity of land use development at the ATEP campus of 893,851 square feet. The SPA therefore would not have any impact on densities on the ATEP site, as density restrictions are applied to the site as a whole rather than to individual PAs; similarly, there would be no change to the number of vehicle trips on the ATEP site (5,470 trips per day, the impacts of which were analyzed in prior environmental documentation). The SPA does not have any impact on the uses allowed by the District Conveyance Agreement (as defined below). The approved MCAS Tustin Specific Plan changes approved by the City will not be effective until execution of the Exchange Agreement and the completion of the land exchange between the District and County that is described in the Exchange Agreement. The SPA does not change or affect the City s approval of the Phase 3A Concept Plan or the District s right to construct the Phase 3A Concept Plan. The City s CEQA document also evaluated future City implementation actions associated with the exchange of properties between SOCCCD and the County, including but not limited to: 1. Modification Three to the Agreement Between the United States of America and the City of Tustin, California for the Conveyance of a Portion of the Former Marine Corps Air Station Tustin ( EDC Agreement ) 2. Amendment. 1 to Agreement Between the City of Tustin and the South Orange County Community College District for Conveyance of a Portion of MCAS Tustin and the Establishment of an Advanced Technology Educational Campus ( SOCCCD Conveyance Agreement ) 3. Amendment. 1 to Agreement Between the County of Orange and the City of Tustin Related to MCAS Tustin ( County-Tustin Cooperative Agreement ) The Project will be approved, carried out, and implemented by the District and the County of Orange. The District and County of Orange will be taking an action (i.e. approval) on the Proposed Project; therefore, pursuant to CEQA, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, known as the CEQA Guidelines, Section (c), the District or the County is considered the Lead Agency. SOCCCD and the County 1 vember 2011 Page 4 of 90

5 Introduction have agreed that since the District will consider the project before the County, the District will be the Lead Agency pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15051(d). The District and County have agreed to jointly conduct the CEQA analysis. 1.2 Organization of Addendum The organization of this CEQA document is according to the following sections: Section 1: Introduction Section 2: Project Description Section 3: Section 4: Summary of Measures Section 5: Sources/Acronyms Section 6: Report Preparers Appendix This Addendum incorporates the Environmental Checklist Form from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines as the Initial Study. The environmental issue impact questions contained in Section 3 of this document also conform to the required contents of this Environmental Checklist Form. 1.3 Previous Environmental Documentation A Final Joint Program Environmental Statement/Environmental Report (FEIS/EIR) for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin was prepared by the City of Tustin and the Department of the Navy (Navy) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) dated October 1996, as amended by the Errata dated September The Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the FEIS/EIR was adopted by the City on January 16, 2001 (Resolution 00-90). On March 3, 2001, a Record of Decision (ROD) was issued by the Navy approving the FEIS/EIR and the Specific Plan. There have been one supplement and three addendums to the FEIS/EIR. The City of Tustin certified a supplement to the FEIS/EIR on December 4, 2004 and an addendum on April 3, The District certified an addendum on vember 12, 2008 (Resolution 08-35) related to the approval of a Long Range Academic & Facilities Plan and a Long Range Facilities Plan for the ATEP campus. The District also certified an addendum on March 24, 2009 (Resolution 09-05) related to a Concept Plan for Phase 3A of the ATEP campus. The original FEIS/EIR document, the supplement, and the City s and District s addendums are collectively referred to herein as the FEIS/EIR. The City certified a CEQA document related to the SPA action on October 4, 2011, which established that there would be no potential for significant impacts to the environment to occur as a result of the Specific Plan Amendment; therefore, no supplemental or subsequent EIR would be required. Section of the FEIS/EIR states that the FEIS/EIR is a Program EIR and it is intended to be used as the CEQA compliance document for all public and private actions made in furtherance of, the Specific Plan. The FEIS/EIR analyzed the environmental consequences of the Navy disposal and local community reuse of the MCAS Tustin Site per the Reuse Plan and the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (referred to in this document as the Specific Plan). The CEQA analysis also analyzed the environmental impacts of certain Implementation Actions that the City of Tustin and City of Irvine must take to implement the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, including but not limited to the adoption by the City of Tustin of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan and adoption of the MCAS Tustin Redevelopment Plan. The MCAS Tustin Specific Plan proposed and the FEIS/EIR analyzed a multi-year development period for the planned urban reuse project (Tustin Legacy). When individual activities within the Specific Plan are proposed, the lead agency is required to examine the individual activities to determine if their effects were fully analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The agency can approve the activities as being within the scope of the 2 vember 2011 Page 5 of 90

6 Introduction project covered by the FEIS/EIR. If the agency finds that pursuant to Sections 15162, 15163, 15164, and of the CEQA Guidelines no new effects would occur, nor would a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects occur, then no supplemental or subsequent EIR is required Purpose of the Exchange Agreement Addendum Pursuant to Sections and of the State CEQA Guidelines, the District is the Lead Agency for the CEQA compliance associated with the Proposed Project because it will approve, carry out, and implement the Project and will be the first agency to approve the Project. The County will be a responsible agency. Based on the analysis in this Initial Study and Addendum, the District and County determined that the potential impacts of the Proposed Project were previously analyzed in or are substantially similar to the impacts analyzed in the FEIS/EIR and that none of the conditions identified in Public Resources Code Section or Section of the CEQA Guideless applies. The District and County determined that they would prepare this Addendum to: (1) evaluate whether the Project s environmental impacts were already analyzed in the FEIS/EIR; (2) document the District s and County s findings with respect to the Project and its environmental determinations; and, (3) evaluate and document that a new, supplemental or subsequent EIR, Negative Declaration (ND), or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or other CEQA document was not warranted. This Addendum is the appropriate CEQA documentation for the project because: the Proposed Project does not change the land uses that are currently permitted within the same MCAS Tustin Specific Plan Neighborhood or immediately adjacent Neighborhood, the impacts of which have been previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR; the Proposed Project would not permit an intensification of permitted uses that would lead to increased environmental impacts; the Proposed Project does not modify previously-analyzed projects in any substantive way; no new mitigation measures are required; none of the conditions identified in Public Resources Code Section or Section of the CEQA Guideless applies; and no new significant adverse project-specific or cumulative impacts in any environmental areas were identified, nor would any project-specific or cumulative impacts in any environmental areas be made worse as a result of implementing the Project. 1.5 Basis for an EIR Addendum An agency may prepare an addendum to a prior EIR to pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section that states, in pertinent part, that: The lead agency [ ] shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. An agency may prepare an addendum to document its decision that a subsequent EIR is not required. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, subdivisions (a) and (e) and Section 15162, subdivision (a).) The Proposed Project is consistent with and aids in the implementation of the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. Specifically, the Proposed Project would not change the overall intent of the Education Village (PA-1), which is described as a specialized educational environment with an array of public-serving uses, or of the Urban Regional Park (PA-6), which is described as a major urban recreation opportunity (MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, pg. 2-10). Further, the Proposed Project would not change the intensity or scale of 1 MCAS Tustin Zone Change (Specific Plan Amendment) , DDA and Development Plan Addendum, p vember 2011 Page 6 of 90

7 Introduction development approved in the Specific Plan, County Public Benefit Conveyance (PBC), District s Conveyance Agreement, Long-Range Academic and Facilities Plan (LRP), and Concept Plan or analyzed in the previously certified FEIS/EIR. The Proposed Project rationalizes parcel configuration to allow for a more efficient use of property by creating contiguous, compact and conventionally shaped parcels for future development pursuant to the approved land uses. As such, there are no new significant impacts resulting from the Project, nor is there any substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified environmental impacts. In addition, the circumstances under which the Project would be implemented would not result in new or more severe significant environmental impacts. ne of the conditions described in Section of the CEQA Guidelines have occurred. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions to the previously certified FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions to the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. The District and County will continue to comply with the adopted applicable MMRPs. 1.6 Evaluation of Alternatives CEQA requires a comparative evaluation of a proposed project and alternatives to the project, including the Project alternative. This Addendum relies on the FEIS/EIR for the evaluation of alternatives. The FEIS/EIR addressed a reasonable range of alternatives for the project. The City of Tustin is implementing Alternative 1 of the FEIS/EIR, and there is no information indicating that the City should implement a different Alternative or that a different Alternative is feasible. Consistent with Section of the State CEQA Guidelines that identifies which environmental evaluation is required for projects that are consistent with a community plan or zoning, there is no need to address new alternatives in this Addendum. Additionally, there are no circumstances cited in Section of the State CEQA Guidelines, which require preparation of a subsequent EIR relative to alternatives. 1.7 Summary of Findings Based on the initial study analysis and environmental checklist prepared for the Project and pursuant to Section 15162, 15163, 15164, and of the CEQA Guidelines, the District and County have determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that: The Project was examined in light of the FEIS/EIR and has been adequately analyzed in the FEIS/EIR because the Proposed Project does not substantively modify the previously-analyzed proposal included in the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan; The Project would not have any effects that were not already examined in the FEIS/EIR, no new mitigation measures are required, and there are no new significant adverse project-specific or cumulative impacts in any environmental areas that were identified, nor would any projectspecific or cumulative impacts in any environmental areas be made worse as a result of implementing the Project; All feasible mitigation measures identified in the FEIS/EIR have been incorporated into subsequent actions that the District and the County of Orange commit to fully implement; There is no information indicating that a different Alternative should be implemented or is feasible under the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan; 4 vember 2011 Page 7 of 90

8 Introduction The Project does not propose substantial changes to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan which would require major revisions to the FEIS/EIR due to new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects than previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR; There have been no substantial changes in circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would require major revisions to the FEIS/EIR due to new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects than previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR; and new information of substantial importance as described in subsection (a)(3) of Section has been revealed that would require major revisions to the FEIS/EIR or its conclusions. 1.8 Intended Use of this Document This Addendum, which includes the Environmental Checklist/Initial Study for the Project, will serve as the appropriate CEQA documentation for all applicable public agency decision-makers and the public regarding the objectives and components of the Project. The CEQA Guidelines defines an Initial Study as a preliminary analysis prepared by a Lead Agency to determine whether a new, supplemental, or subsequent EIR, ND, or MND or other CEQA document must be prepared or to identify the significant environmental effects to be analyzed in an EIR. 2 This Addendum has been prepared in accordance with the following: California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resources Code Sections ); California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (State CEQA Guidelines, Sections ); and, District guidelines for the implementation of CEQA. This Addendum is intended to serve as the CEQA environmental document for any activities by the District, County of Orange or any responsible or other agency s actions in implementing, approving, permitting or carrying out the Project in any other way. 1.9 Environmental Checklist Form This checklist and the following evaluation of environmental impacts takes into consideration the preparation of environmental documents prepared at an earlier stage in the Project. Therefore, the checklist and evaluation evaluate the adequacy of these earlier documents pursuant to Section and of the CEQA Guidelines. One of these previous environmental documents is the FEIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine Corps Air Station Tustin and MMRP (SCH ). The City and the Navy prepared the FEIS/EIR in accordance with CEQA and NEPA. The FEIS/EIR analyzed the environmental consequences of the Navy disposal and local community reuse of the MCAS Tustin Site per the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. The CEQA analysis also analyzed the environmental impacts of certain Implementation Actions that the City of Tustin and City of Irvine took to implement the Specific Plan. The FEIS/EIR analyzed a multi-year development period for the Tustin Legacy planned urban reuse project. When individual development activities within the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan are proposed, the lead agency is required to examine individual activities to determine if their effects were fully analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The lead agency can approve the activities as being within the scope of the project covered by the FEIS/EIR if the agency finds that pursuant to Sections 15162, 15163, 15164, and of the CEQA Guidelines that no new effects would occur, nor would a substantial increase in the severity of 2 California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (State CEQA Guidelines), Sections and vember 2011 Page 8 of 90

9 Introduction previously identified significant effects occur. Then the lead agency can determine that no supplemental or subsequent environmental document is required. The Tustin City Council certified the FEIS/EIR and MMRP on January 16, The Navy published its ROD on March 3, Since that time, there has been one supplement and several addendums to the FEIS/EIR. The Proposed Project will be approved, carried out, and implemented by the District and County of Orange. Pursuant to Sections and of the CEQA Guidelines, because the County will approve the Project first, the County is the lead agency. The District and County agreed to jointly prepare this comprehensive Environmental Checklist to determine if the Project is within the scope of the FEIS/EIR and if new effects would occur as a result of the Project and to document their findings in this Addendum Project Title Agreement for Exchange of Real Property Lead Agency Name and Address South Orange County Community College District Marguerite Parkway Mission Viejo, CA Attention: Debra Fitzsimons, Vice Chancellor Contact Person and Telephone Number Debra Fitzsimons, Vice Chancellor (949) Project Location On either side of Armstrong Avenue, south of Valencia Avenue, within the Tustin Legacy development (former MCAS Tustin) Project Sponsors Names and Addresses South Orange County Community College District Marguerite Parkway Mission Viejo, CA Attention: Debra Fitzsimons, Vice Chancellor County of Orange OC Community Resources 1770 rth Broadway Santa Ana CA Attention: Steve Franks, Director General Plan Designation Existing MCAS Tustin Specific Plan. 6 vember 2011 Page 9 of 90

10 Introduction Zoning - Existing MCAS Tustin Specific Plan (SP-1 Specific Plan). The Specific Plan designation for the Project Site is Education Village (PA 1), located within Neighborhood A Other Public Agencies Approvals Required Both the District Board of Trustees and the County of Orange Board of Supervisors must approve the Addendum and the Exchange Agreement. The City would also need to take actions to implement the Exchange Agreement. The City, along with other interested entities, have been notified and given an opportunity to participate in the County s and District s CEQA process, and review and comment on the Addendum/Initial Study. The County and District have considered the comments made by the City and incorporated revisions where appropriate Environmental Factors Affected Any environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. The following table provides a summary of these environmental issue areas. Table 1. Environmental Factors Affected Aesthetics Hazards/Hazardous Materials Public Services Agriculture Resources Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation Air Quality Land Use and Planning Transportation/Circulation Biological Resources Mineral Resources Utilities/Service Systems Cultural Resources ise Mandatory Findings Geology and Soils Population and Housing of Significance 7 vember 2011 Page 10 of 90

11 Introduction Environmental Determination Based on this initial evaluation, the following table identifies the environmental determination. Table 2. Environmental Determination I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a potentially significant impact or potentially significant unless mitigated impact on the environment but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have an effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided, mitigated or overridden pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Debra Fitzsimons, Vice Chancellor South Orange County Community College District Signature Date Steve Franks, Director County of Orange, OC Community Resources 8 vember 2011 Page 11 of 90

12 2. Project Description 2.1 Project Location and Surrounding Uses The Project Site is located in the City of Tustin within the former MCAS Tustin Site, now referred to as Tustin Legacy. Tustin Legacy, which encompasses only the area within the City of Tustin, is a 1,511-acre mixed-use project which will ultimately include housing, commercial businesses, a research park, a conference center, hotels, schools, and community and regional parks. Portions of Tustin Legacy are developed, including an approximately one-million-square-foot outdoor shopping mall called The District. Approximately 1,511 acres of Tustin Legacy are located within the city of Tustin. Approximately 95 acres are located within the city of Irvine. The city of Santa Ana borders Tustin Legacy to the southwest. Tustin Legacy is in close proximity to five freeways: the Costa Mesa (SR-55), Santa Ana (I-5), Laguna (SR- 133), Garden Grove (SR-22), and San Diego (I-405) freeways (see Figure 1). Major roadways bordering Tustin Legacy include Red Hill Avenue on the west, Edinger Avenue/Irvine Center Drive on the north, Jamboree Road on the east, and Barranca Parkway on the south. Jamboree Road provides access to the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-261 toll road). John Wayne Airport is located approximately 3.5 miles to the south, and the Tustin Metrolink Commuter Rail Station is located approximately 1½ miles to the northeast of the Project Site. The Project Site is located near the northwestern corner of Tustin Legacy as shown in Figure 2. The Project Site consists of two 10-acre parcels located within PA 1, which is a acre portion of Neighborhood A. To the west and north of the Project Site is the ATEP campus, to the south is the Rancho Santiago Community College District (RSCCD) Sheriff s Training Academy, and to the east is the proposed County of Orange Urban Regional Park. Under the Specific Plan, the District is permitted to construct a maximum total floor area of 893,851 square feet anywhere on its property in Planning Area 1. The sub-planning area designations and Proposed Project do not affect the location or amount of square footage the District is permitted to construct on its property. in the ATEP site, the District has completed development at the northwest corner of Valencia Avenue and Lansdowne Road (15445 Lansdowne Road), where Phase I of the ATEP campus consists of 14,676 square feet of classrooms, laboratories, offices, food services and support space. On the northeast corner of Valencia Avenue and Lansdowne Road, a 104-space parking lot serves the existing ATEP Campus. Together, the buildings and parking lot areas for Phase I total approximately one acre. The approved ATEP Phase 3A Concept Plan permits development of a further 28 acres of the ATEP site with 305,000 square feet of various educational and support uses. The Exchange Agreement does not change or affect the City s approval of Concept Plan 3A or the District s right to construct Concept Plan 3A. Demolition of all former military structures on the ATEP site is expected to be completed at the end of 2011 or beginning half of The foundations of prior military buildings and related infrastructure continue to be present south of Valencia Avenue. The RSCCD Sheriff s Training Academy, south of the Site, consists of a 52,000-square-foot structure and various outdoor training areas on a 15-acre site. The facility opened in The County s development on the Urban Regional Park site has not yet been initiated by the County. 9 vember 2011 Page 12 of 90

13 Figure 1 Local Vicinity Map 10 vember 2011 Page 13 of 90

14 Figure 2 Project Site Boundaries 11 vember 2011 Page 14 of 90

15 Surrounding uses are listed in Table 3. Table 3. Surrounding Land Uses DIRECTION Project Site Project Site & rth rth rth rthwest rtheast West West West of Red Hill Ave. East East South Southeast Southwest Southeast LAND USE Sheriff s Training Facility (Neighborhood A, PA 1-B) ATEP Campus (Neighborhood A, Planning Areas (PA) 1-A, 1-E) Community Park (Neighborhood A, PA 2) Elementary School (Neighborhood A, PA 1-A) Abused Children s Shelter (Neighborhood A, PA 1-C - partial) Medium Density Residential (Neighborhood B, PAs 4 & 5) ATEP Campus (Neighborhood A, PA 1-A) Orange County Rescue Mission (Neighborhood A, PA 3) Commercial and light manufacturing Child Care Facility (Neighborhood A, PA 1-D) Urban Regional Park (Neighborhood C, PA 6) Commercial/Office (Neighborhood D, PA 8) Mixed Use (Neighborhood E, PAs 9-12) Educational Village (Neighborhood A, PA 1-G) Sheriff s Training Academy (Neighborhood A, PA 1-F) CURRENT OWNER County of Orange/Navy SOCCCD/Navy City of Tustin/Navy Tustin Unified School District County of Orange Private SOCCCD/Navy Orange County Rescue Mission Private City of Tustin/Navy County of Orange/Navy City/Navy City/Navy City of Tustin RSCCD EXISTING CONDITION Existing Military Buildings Multi-phase development in progress Vacant Land Developed Developed Under development Multi-phase development in progress Developed Developed Existing Military Buildings Existing Military Buildings Vacant Vacant Existing Military Buildings and Vacant Land Developed 2.2 Project Description The Proposed Project consists of an Exchange Agreement between the County and SOCCCD that delineates the terms and processes associated with the exchange of the ultimate ownership of land within Tustin Legacy. The Exchange Agreement permits the exchange of the ultimate ownership of 20 acres of land between the SOCCCD and the County. Pursuant to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan, a 10-acre site presently owned by the Navy, which abuts and is surrounded by the District s ATEP campus, is currently expected to be 12 vember 2011 Page 15 of 90

16 transferred to the County under a PBC once a Finding of Suitability for Transfer (FOST) is issued by the Navy for the site (henceforth, this parcel is referred to as the County Parcel ). Once issued, the FOST will document that the Navy has determined the County Parcel is environmentally suitable for transfer and that either all remediation necessary to protect human health and the environment has been completed or is in place and operating properly and successfully such that development can safely occur on the site. The remaining 10 acres is proposed for transfer from the District to the County. This parcel is henceforth referred to as the District Parcel. Part of this area is currently under District ownership, and part will be transferred from the Navy to the City and then from the City to the District following issuance of a FOST. This transfer of ownership is described in the April 22, 2004 Agreement between the City of Tustin and the South Orange County Community College District for Conveyance of a Portion of MCAS, Tustin and the Establishment of an Advanced Technology Educational Campus (the District Conveyance Agreement ). The City agreed in the District Conveyance Agreement to convey property comprising approximately acres (the ATEP Site ) to SOCCCD. Pursuant to the District Conveyance Agreement; (1) the City conveyed to SOCCCD fee title to approximately acres (the SOCCCD Fee Property ) and (2) the City subleased to SOCCCD approximately acres of the City Leased Property (the Sublease Area ), pursuant to the Sublease between the City of Tustin and the South Orange County Community College District for a Portion of MCAS Tustin dated April 29, 2004 (the Sublease ). The Sublease Area will be transferred to the City from the Navy following issuance of a FOST and then from the City to the District pursuant to the District Conveyance Agreement. The Project aids in the implementation of the previously approved Specific Plan by rationalizing property boundaries to locate future County of Orange facilities adjacent to other County facilities at the RSCCD Sheriff s Training Academy site and creating a unified land area for the future ATEP campus. The City of Tustin has approved a Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) to the MCAS Tustin Specific Plan which will allow for implementation of the Project. The SPA modified Planning Area (PA) boundaries and designations for Neighborhood A by further dividing the existing Neighborhood A PA to create two new sub-pas. The SPA allows the relocation of a proposed animal care center across Armstrong Avenue from Neighborhood C to Neighborhood A, and removes the requirement to obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for such a land use. The SPA also allows the law enforcement training facility on one of the new sub-pas as an alternative location within Neighborhood A. These public institutional uses are currently permitted uses within Tustin Legacy, specifically within Neighborhood A and in the adjacent Neighborhood C. The City has prepared a CEQA document for the SPA, which was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on September 13, 2011 and certified by the City Council on October 4, The SPA does not modify the permitted intensity of land use development at the ATEP campus of 893,851 square feet. The SPA therefore would not have any impact on densities on the ATEP site, as density restrictions are applied to the site as a whole rather than to individual PAs; similarly, there would be no change to the number of vehicle trips on the ATEP site (5,470 trips per day, the impacts of which were analyzed in prior environmental documentation). The SPA does not have any impact on the uses allowed by the District Conveyance Agreement. The approved MCAS Tustin Specific Plan changes approved by the City will not be effective until execution of the Exchange Agreement and the completion of the land exchange between the District and County that is described in the Exchange Agreement. The SPA does not change or affect the City s approval of the Phase 3A Concept Plan or the District s right to construct the Phase 3A Concept Plan. The Proposed Project does not propose any development beyond that which has already been approved by applicable local and federal agencies, and analyzed in compliance with CEQA in the FEIS/EIR. increase in development intensity or significant change in land uses is proposed. 13 vember 2011 Page 16 of 90

17 3. and Explanation of Checklist Responses This checklist and the following evaluation of environmental impacts take into consideration the preparation of an environmental document (the FEIS/EIR) which fully analyzed the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project does not involve any changes in development intensity or modification in development standards. The checklist and initial study evaluate whether the conditions identified in Sections and of the CEQA Guidelines have occurred and require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, supplemental EIR, ND, or MND. The following information is presented for each of the topical issues presented in the Initial Study environmental checklist: Existing Conditions Project Evaluation o o with o o a check mark in the box equates to Substantial Change from Previous Analysis (FEIS/EIR) Measures Sources 14 vember 2011 Page 17 of 90

18 3.1 Aesthetics Existing Conditions The existing ATEP campus buildings and associated parking (located north of Valencia Avenue) were constructed in The District Parcel (as well as the remainder of the ATEP campus) south of Valencia Avenue still has remnants of the former MCAS Tustin (constructed between 1943 and 1988), including asphalt-paved streets and parking lots, concrete sidewalks, landscaping/groundcover, and underground utilities. Most of the former military buildings on the District Parcel have been demolished. Like the District Parcel, the County Parcel contains remnants from the former MCAS Tustin. These structures have not been used in over a decade and are in varying stages of decay. The Specific Plan envisioned the removal of all existing buildings on the County Parcel. in Neighborhood C, most MCAS Tustin structures are planned for demolition. Of the existing two large hangars, which were the dominant visual element of the former military facility, one may be preserved and reused for non-military purposes; however, no final plans for reuse have been established. The Proposed Project would have no impact on these hangars Project Evaluation a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the Site and its surroundings? d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 15 vember 2011 Page 18 of 90

19 Response to a-d: Due to Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Proposed Project would not cause aesthetic impacts that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR (including Addendums thereto). The Project proposes to permit the same uses as proposed in the Specific Plan and previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. The Proposed Project exchanges ultimate property ownership of two parcels between the District and the County. The land exchange would not change the future development condition that was analyzed in the FEIS/EIR as there would be no change to development intensity, building height restrictions, setbacks, signage, and other development standards. There are no new or increased significant adverse project-specific or cumulative impacts with regard to aesthetics and visual quality that would occur as a result of the implementation of the Project. There is no new information relative to aesthetics and visual quality that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, the Proposed Project and its implementation are consistent with the FEIS/EIR. new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to aesthetics and visual quality. The FEIS/EIR anticipated that former MCAS buildings located on the Project Site would be demolished and replaced with new construction. Visual changes to the Project vicinity have already occurred with the development of ATEP Phase I, the RSCCD s Sheriff s Training Academy, the County s Abused Children s Shelter and residential neighborhoods north and south of Valencia Avenue, the construction of the Tustin Unified School District s Heritage Elementary School, as well as the demolition of buildings on the ATEP site. The visual impacts of planned construction in the area, including the development of the District Parcel and County Parcel, were analyzed in the FEIS/EIR, and there would be no new or substantially different aesthetic impacts as a result of the Proposed Project. Future construction on the properties would comply with the site development standards in the Specific Plan. Therefore, the overall intensity of the future development and the general character of the Project Site would not be substantially altered by the Project. The implementation of the Project would exchange properties between the District and County of Orange. Future construction of the Project would continue the visual change from the abandoned military facilities onsite to an education- and public-services-oriented development. This visual change, as part of the overall visual change of the former base to the larger Tustin Legacy development was not a significant impact in the FEIS/EIR. There are no designated scenic vistas in the Project area; therefore, the Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The Project Site is also not located within the vicinity of a designated state scenic highway. The Project would not change the conclusions of the historical analysis of the historic blimp hangars from the FEIS/EIR relative to visual changes since the Proposed Project would not affect these hangars. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section exist that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures with regard to aesthetics. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR were certified as complete. /Monitoring Required: new impacts or substantially more severe aesthetic impacts would result from the District s and County s approval and implementation of the Project; therefore, no new or 16 vember 2011 Page 19 of 90

20 revised mitigation measures are required for aesthetics and visual quality. In addition, there are no applicable mitigation measures contained in the City s 2011 City of Tustin Annual MMRP Report (2011 MMRP) for the FEIS/EIR with regard to aesthetics and visual quality. refinements related to the Project are necessary to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no new mitigation measures are required. /Monitoring Measures t Being Implemented: Measure Vis-1, regarding urban design plan adoption in conjunction with any zoning ordinance amendments, is the responsibility of others to implement, and therefore is not within the Project s responsibility to implement. Sources: Field Observations ATEP Phase 3A Concept Plan Addendum/Initial Study LRP Addendum/Initial Study as amended by vember 2008 Errata ATEP LRP as amended by the October and vember 2008 Erratas (LRP) ATEP LARP as amended by the October 2008 Errata FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pp. 3-84, through 4-114, and Addendum (pp. 5-3 through 5-8) and Final Supplement #1 MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (pp through 3-62, pp through 3-81, pp through 3-88, and pp through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 2011 City of Tustin Annual Monitoring Reports City of Tustin Resolution vember 2011 Page 20 of 90

21 3.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources Existing Conditions There were no agricultural uses on the Site in the recent past. There are currently no agricultural uses on the Site Project Evaluation a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? Response to a-e: Due to Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. The Proposed Project would not cause impacts to agriculture and forest resources that were not previously analyzed in the FEIS/EIR (including 18 vember 2011 Page 21 of 90

22 Addendums thereto). There continue to be no agricultural resources on the property. There are no new or increased significant adverse project-specific or cumulative impacts with regard to agricultural resources that are identified as a result of the approval and implementation of the Project. The impacts of the development of the properties has already been analyzed in the FEIS/EIR. There is no new information relative to agricultural resources that was not in existence at the time the FEIS/EIR was prepared. Therefore, no new mitigation measures are required in relation to impacts to agricultural resources. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section exist that would trigger the need to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR or other environmental document to evaluate Project impacts or mitigation measures with regard to agricultural resources. Specifically, there have not been: (1) changes to the Project that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the previous FEIS/EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; or (3) the availability of new information of substantial importance relating to significant effect or mitigation measures or alternatives that was not known and could not have been known when the FEIS/EIR was certified as complete. Monitoring Required: In certifying the FEIS/EIR, the Tustin City Council adopted Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations on January 16, 2001 concluding that impacts to agricultural resources on other areas of MCAS Tustin were unavoidable (Resolution ). mitigation is required. /Monitoring t Being Implemented: new impacts or substantially more severe impacts will result from the District s and County s approval and implementation of the Proposed Project; therefore, no new or revised mitigation measures are required for agricultural resources. In addition, there are no applicable mitigation measures contained in the City s approved MMRP for the FEIS/EIR with regard to agricultural resources. refinements are necessary to the FEIS/EIR mitigation measures and no new mitigation measures are required. Sources: Field Observations ATEP Phase 3A Concept Plan Addendum/Initial Study ATEP LRP Addendum/Initial Study as amended by vember 2008 Errata ATEP LRP as amended by the October and vember 2008 Erratas ATEP LRAP as amended by the October 2008 Errata FEIS/EIR for Disposal and Reuse of MCAS Tustin (pp. 3-84, through 4-114, and Addendum (pp. 5-8 through 5-10) and Final Supplement #1 MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan (pp through 3-62, pp through 3-81, pp through 3-88, and pp through 3-137) Tustin General Plan 2011 City of Tustin Annual Monitoring Reports City of Tustin Resolution vember 2011 Page 22 of 90