EXHIBIT “A”
CITY COUNCIL REIMBURSEMENT POLICY FOR ACTUAL AND NECESSARY
EXPENSES INCURRED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF OFFICIAL DUTIES
PURPOSE
This policy governs the reimbursement of actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of a City Council member(s) official duties.
AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES
Authorized activities (and expenses) shall be directly related to an ultimate benefit to the City, including but not limited to Council member education and training; attendance as a representative of the City at events of other governmental functions. Expenses incurred in connection with the following types of activities generally are authorized reimbursable expenses, as long as the other requirements of this policy are met:
1. Meeting with representatives of local, regional, state and national government on issues directly affecting the City;
2. Attending educational seminars designed to improve the skill and information level of City Council members, in their role as a City Council member;
3. Attending training required by law, including ethics training (AB 1234) and sexual harassment training (AB 1661);
4. Attending City events, in their official capacity as a City Council member; and
5. Attending events implementing a City strategy for attracting or retaining businesses to the City.
All other activities for which expense payment or reimbursement is sought require prior approval by a majority vote of the City Council. The City Manager and the Mayor shall determine whether something constitutes an “authorized activity” in the event of a question as to the applicability of this part. Any authorized activity that requires participation in regional, state and national organizations whose activities directly affect the City's interests or airplane travel and/or overnight stays requires prior approval by a majority vote of the City Council.
AUTHORIZED EXPENSES
The following expenses are authorized to be paid for or reimbursed by the City:
185
Exhibit “A”
1. Transportation. City Council member(s) will use the most economical form of transportation reasonably available, consistent with the individual City Council member(s) travel and scheduling requirements when booking travel, including hotel and plane fare.
A. Mileage for personal vehicles. The City will reimburse City Council member(s) for the use of personal vehicles at the then-current U.S. Internal Revenue Service rate.
The City will not reimburse City Council member(s) for any other personal vehicle expenses.
When calculating mileage, the City will use the lesser of (1) the distance from the City Council member(s) residence of record or (2) actual miles traveled. Mileage reimbursement shall not exceed the cost of the lowest available airfare.
B. Rental vehicles. The City will pay for or reimburse City Council member(s) for the actual cost of rental vehicles if a rental vehicle is more economical than other forms of transportation.
C. Airfare and airport transportation. The City will pay for or reimburse City Council member(s) for the actual cost of airfare in coach class. If necessary, the City Council may approve payment/reimbursement of business class air travel or the equivalent. The City will reimburse City Council member(s) for the cost of airport transportation by taxi (including Uber or Lyft), shuttle, ride share, or parking, as applicable.
2. Lodging. The City will pay for or reimburse City Council member(s) for lodging expenses incurred in attending an authorized activity. The City will provide a TOT exemption certificate for the City Council member to present to the hotel. Lodging expenses are authorized only for events located outside of a 50-mile radius of the City. The City will reimburse City Council member(s) up to the applicable U.S. General Services Administration per diem rate as set forth at gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diem-rates.
3. Meals. The City will reimburse City Council member(s) for dining expenses incurred while attending (1) a conference, seminar or meeting outside of the City; or (2) a City related business meeting within the City. The City will reimburse City Council member(s) up to the applicable U.S. General Services Administration per diem rate for each separate meal as set forth at gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diem-rates. The City will not reimburse City Council member(s) for alcohol expenses.
4. Registration. The City will pay for or reimburse City Council member(s) for the actual and necessary cost of registration for attendance at an authorized event.
5. Incidentals. The City will reimburse City Council member(s) for incidental expenses incurred while conducting official business outside of the City, up to the applicable U.S.
General Services Administration per diem rate set forth at gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diemrates. Reimbursable incidentals include tips for drivers, porters, bellhops, baggage carriers, hotel housekeepers, and internet access connections if necessary in the furtherance of conducting official City business.
186
Exhibit “A”
6. Travel Arrangements. Due to individual preferences or needs, and unless otherwise arranged in advance by the City Manager, City Council member(s) shall be responsible for arranging all travel, lodging and event registration for activities authorized pursuant to this policy.
UNAUTHORIZED EXPENSES
The City will not pay for or reimburse City Council member(s) for expenses not related to an ultimate benefit to the City including but not limited to:
• Barber and/or beauty shop services;
• Fines for traffic or parking violations;
• Any person accompanying a City Council member;
• Personal telephone calls;
• Fitness/health facility use;
• Alcoholic beverages;
• Entertainment (theater, movies, sporting events);
• Personal losses incurred while on City business
• Other expenses not otherwise authorized by a majority vote of the City Council.
PAYMENT AND REIMBURSEMENT PROCEDURE
1. Notice to City Council. Council member(s) shall notify the City Council at its next regularly scheduled meeting, during Reports from City Council members of any travel requiring reimbursement. Excluding Unauthorized expenses, if a City Council member is seeking reimbursement for an expense such as airfare or hotel or an expense that does not fall within the authorized expenses in this policy, the proposed expense shall be agenized for consideration by the City Council.
2. Reimbursement. Each City Council member seeking reimbursement must:
A. Excluding training required by law, City Council member(s) shall present a brief report on the authorized activity attended to the City Council at its next regularly scheduled meeting, during Reports from City Council members. If multiple City Council members attended, a joint report may be made.
B. Prepare an expense report on a City form and submit it to the Finance Department, with a copy to the City Clerk, within 30 days after the expense being incurred. The expense report must (1) define the benefit of the expense to the City and document that the expense in question met the requirements of this policy; (2) include details of meeting or meal attendees and issues discussed; (3) identify the dates of travel and, for mileage reimbursement, actual miles traveled; and (4) be accompanied by receipts documenting each expense. Expense reports shall be maintained as a public record.
187
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 6.3. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0557
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tom Kisela, City Manager
1. SUBJECT
Proposal to analyze a possible increase in the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax rate.
2. SUMMARY
Proposal to direct City staff to analyze a possible increase in the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax rate.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Authorize staff to analyze a possible increase in the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax rate.
4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.
5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 2: Be a fiscally healthy community
b: Analyze future fiscal needs and potential revenue opportunities.
6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The City of Orange is a full-service city with aging infrastructure. City services such as police, fire, parks, and libraries are essential to maintaining the quality of life for Orange residents. In recent years, City revenues have not kept pace with the increase in costs to maintain the services and infrastructure that the community relies on. As part of the Fiscal Year 2024 budget process, the City Council directed staff to present options to increase City revenues so that they are sufficient to maintain the high quality of City services.
One policy option is to increase the rate of the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). TOT is a tax on persons staying in Orange for a period of 30 days or less. TOT generally applies to persons staying in hotels or short-term rentals, and as such is not typically paid by city residents. The current TOT rate for the City of Orange is 10%.
The process to increase the rate of TOT would include subsequent Council action to hold a public hearing and place a measure on the ballot, which would require majority approval by voters to be enacted. Staff is requesting direction from City Council to analyze the impact of an increase in the TOT rate to 15%. If so directed, staff would come back to Council with revenue projections, additional policy analysis, and a tentative timeline for the approval process.
City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™188
Item #: 6.3. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0557
7. ATTACHMENTS
· None
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™189
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 6.3. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0557
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tom Kisela, City Manager
1. SUBJECT
Proposal to analyze a possible increase in the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax rate.
2. SUMMARY
Proposal to direct City staff to analyze a possible increase in the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax rate.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Authorize staff to analyze a possible increase in the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax rate.
4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.
5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 2: Be a fiscally healthy community
b: Analyze future fiscal needs and potential revenue opportunities.
6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The City of Orange is a full-service city with aging infrastructure. City services such as police, fire, parks, and libraries are essential to maintaining the quality of life for Orange residents. In recent years, City revenues have not kept pace with the increase in costs to maintain the services and infrastructure that the community relies on. As part of the Fiscal Year 2024 budget process, the City Council directed staff to present options to increase City revenues so that they are sufficient to maintain the high quality of City services.
One policy option is to increase the rate of the Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). TOT is a tax on persons staying in Orange for a period of 30 days or less. TOT generally applies to persons staying in hotels or short-term rentals, and as such is not typically paid by city residents. The current TOT rate for the City of Orange is 10%.
The process to increase the rate of TOT would include subsequent Council action to hold a public hearing and place a measure on the ballot, which would require majority approval by voters to be enacted. Staff is requesting direction from City Council to analyze the impact of an increase in the TOT rate to 15%. If so directed, staff would come back to Council with revenue projections, additional policy analysis, and a tentative timeline for the approval process.
City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™190
Item #: 6.3. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0557
7. ATTACHMENTS
· None
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™191
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0552
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tom Kisela, City Manager
1. SUBJECT
City of Orange Fiscal Health Report. (Continued from August 8, 2023)
2. SUMMARY
A presentation on the City of Orange’s fiscal health based on the California State Auditor’s 2021 fiscal health analysis report.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive and file.
City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™192
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0552
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tom Kisela, City Manager
1. SUBJECT
City of Orange Fiscal Health Report. (Continued from August 8, 2023)
2. SUMMARY
A presentation on the City of Orange’s fiscal health based on the California State Auditor’s 2021 fiscal health analysis report.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive and file.
City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™193
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 8.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0525
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Russell Bunim, Community Development Director
1. SUBJECT
Public Hearing to consider adoption of a resolution approving the demolition of an existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building located at 534 W. Struck Avenue; certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20; and adopting all findings and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
2. SUMMARY
The applicant, Prologis, L.P., is proposing the demolition of an existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt Resolution No. 11487. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, Design Review No. 5028-21 to demolish an existing 40,000 SF manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building, located at 534 W. Struck Avenue.
4. FISCAL IMPACT
None
5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 1: Provide for a safe community
d: Assure the development of the City occurs in a fashion that maximizes public safety.
Goal 2: Be a fiscally healthy community
e: Create an environment to attract, retain, and expand economic opportunities.
6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
Proposal
The project involves the demolition of an existing 40,000 SF manufacturing facility and complete redevelopment of the project site. The project would also include the removal of the existing unused railroad spur located on the east side of the site. The site would then be redeveloped with a 57,900 City of Orange Page 1 of 4 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™194
Item #: 8.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0525
railroad spur located on the east side of the site. The site would then be redeveloped with a 57,900 SF truck terminal, that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building to be located at the southeast portion of the site. The proposed building would be up to 45 feet in height and include 84 loading dock doors. The project would provide 62 automobile parking stalls, 15 in excess of the required parking. Additionally, the project would provide 188 trailer parking stalls. The building would operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is anticipated that the facility would employ a total of 60 to 130 employees over the work shifts.
Development of the project would enhance the existing industrial character of the site and surrounding area with new modern building elevations, new landscaping, hardscape, other on-site improvements, and street frontage improvements. Development of the truck terminal would replace the existing building with a new modern concrete tilt-up building. Additional details about the architectural and landscape design can be found in the Design Review Committee (DRC) staff reports, (Attachment 3), Planning Commission (PC) staff report (Attachment 5) and development plans (Attachment 7).
The project has been designed to comply with the development standards of the Industrial (M-2) zone with the exception of the landscape guidelines and to be compatible with the adjacent surrounding development and uses. The proposed contemporary building design and scale complement the character of the area. Overall, the proposed project presents an integrated design that provides a renewed, updated, and improved appearance to the site and to the surrounding community.
Landscaping
The landscape program for the site concentrates landscaping along the property frontage on Struck Avenue consisting of different types and sizes of trees, a variety of shrubs, and ground cover. Based on the City’s Landscape Guidelines the benchmark calculation for tree quantity, 125 trees are recommended for the project site. The revised proposal includes 78 trees, which is short of the benchmark for the site. Landscaping is not proposed along the east, south, and west perimeter beyond the security gates, as it would interfere with the trailer parking areas located along the perimeter of the site. However, landscaping does include drought tolerant trees on the south side corner areas at the rear of the property.
The DRC reviewed the proposal and made a recommendation of approval with conditions designed to alleviate the lack of landscaping on the site. Conditions of Approval No 18-24, in Resolution No. 11487 (Attachment 1) address tree upsizing, in some areas to a minimum of 50 feet in height, upsizing from 15-gallon trees to 24” box trees, and increasing the number of on-site trees from 68 to 78 (Attachment 4).
Given the nature of the use, a majority of the site is needed for the movement and parking of trucks.
Further, the project and the multi-family residential project across the cul-de-sac use the same or similar tree and planting materials in an effort to provide a compatible landscape theme. Staff believes that the landscape plan achieves the intent of the City’s landscape standards despite the lack of landscaping on the truck bay area of the site.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was originally prepared for the proposed project. On September 23, 2021, the City circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 for the Project. The MND was circulated for public review from September 23, 2021, to October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional City of Orange Page 2 of 4 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™195
Item #: 8.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0525
October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional technical analysis (e.g., air quality and noise modeling, traffic). Therefore, in order to address the environmental concerns raised, additional analyses were prepared, and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to provide comprehensive environmental review of the Project (Attachment 8).
The EIR (California State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2021090399), was prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Article 9, Sections 15120-15132 to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with constructing and operating the proposed project.
The draft EIR was made available for public review in accordance with CEQA between March 31, 2023, and May 15, 2023.
Staff received five written comment letters during the public review period. The City prepared a Response to Comments to address environmental comments received during the public review period. The public comments and responses can be found in the Final EIR (Attachment 9).
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15087(c)(6), the project site is listed on the EnviroStor database for a historic recognized environmental condition for past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products; however, a no further action was recommended as remediation of soil was completed by Orange County. Implementation of the proposed project may result in significant environmental effects related to the following topical issues:
• Biological Resources (impacts to nesting migratory birds) • Cultural Resources (potential to encounter significant subsurface archaeological resources) • Geology and Soils (potential to unearth and adversely impact paleontological resources) • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (soils contaminated with volatile organic compounds) • Tribal Cultural Resources (potential to unearth and adversely impact tribal cultural resources) Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the EIR that reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels (Attachment 10).
Findings of Fact (Attachment 11) have been prepared based upon the entire record before the City Council, as described in Subsection 1.4 of the Findings, including the EIR.
8. PUBLIC NOTICE
On August 10, the City mailed a Public Hearing Notice to a total of 38 property owners/tenants within a 400-foot radius of the project site and persons specifically requesting notice. The project site has been posted in one location with the notification on that same date. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the newspaper on August 12, 2023.
9. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 City Council Resolution No 11487
· Attachment 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 10-23 · Attachment 3 Design Review Committee Staff Reports dated November 3, 2021, and February 16, 2022
· Attachment 4 Design Review Committee Minutes dated November 3, 2021, and February 16, 2022
City of Orange Page 3 of 4 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™196
Item #: 8.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0525
· Attachment 5 Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 17, 2023 · Attachment 6 Planning Commission Minutes dated July 17, 2023 · Attachment 7 Development Plans with Color Elevations and Color Martials Board · Attachment 8 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) No. 1870-20 · Attachment 9 Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) No. 1870-20 · Attachment 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program · Attachment 11 Findings of Fact
· Attachment 12 Economic and Fiscal Impact Report
City of Orange Page 4 of 4 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™197
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 8.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0525
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Russell Bunim, Community Development Director
1. SUBJECT
Public Hearing to consider adoption of a resolution approving the demolition of an existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building located at 534 W. Struck Avenue; certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20; and adopting all findings and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
2. SUMMARY
The applicant, Prologis, L.P., is proposing the demolition of an existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt Resolution No. 11487. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20, adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, Design Review No. 5028-21 to demolish an existing 40,000 SF manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building, located at 534 W. Struck Avenue.
4. FISCAL IMPACT
None
5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 1: Provide for a safe community
d: Assure the development of the City occurs in a fashion that maximizes public safety.
Goal 2: Be a fiscally healthy community
e: Create an environment to attract, retain, and expand economic opportunities.
6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
Proposal
The project involves the demolition of an existing 40,000 SF manufacturing facility and complete redevelopment of the project site. The project would also include the removal of the existing unused railroad spur located on the east side of the site. The site would then be redeveloped with a 57,900 City of Orange Page 1 of 4 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™198
Item #: 8.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0525
railroad spur located on the east side of the site. The site would then be redeveloped with a 57,900 SF truck terminal, that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building to be located at the southeast portion of the site. The proposed building would be up to 45 feet in height and include 84 loading dock doors. The project would provide 62 automobile parking stalls, 15 in excess of the required parking. Additionally, the project would provide 188 trailer parking stalls. The building would operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is anticipated that the facility would employ a total of 60 to 130 employees over the work shifts.
Development of the project would enhance the existing industrial character of the site and surrounding area with new modern building elevations, new landscaping, hardscape, other on-site improvements, and street frontage improvements. Development of the truck terminal would replace the existing building with a new modern concrete tilt-up building. Additional details about the architectural and landscape design can be found in the Design Review Committee (DRC) staff reports, (Attachment 3), Planning Commission (PC) staff report (Attachment 5) and development plans (Attachment 7).
The project has been designed to comply with the development standards of the Industrial (M-2) zone with the exception of the landscape guidelines and to be compatible with the adjacent surrounding development and uses. The proposed contemporary building design and scale complement the character of the area. Overall, the proposed project presents an integrated design that provides a renewed, updated, and improved appearance to the site and to the surrounding community.
Landscaping
The landscape program for the site concentrates landscaping along the property frontage on Struck Avenue consisting of different types and sizes of trees, a variety of shrubs, and ground cover. Based on the City’s Landscape Guidelines the benchmark calculation for tree quantity, 125 trees are recommended for the project site. The revised proposal includes 78 trees, which is short of the benchmark for the site. Landscaping is not proposed along the east, south, and west perimeter beyond the security gates, as it would interfere with the trailer parking areas located along the perimeter of the site. However, landscaping does include drought tolerant trees on the south side corner areas at the rear of the property.
The DRC reviewed the proposal and made a recommendation of approval with conditions designed to alleviate the lack of landscaping on the site. Conditions of Approval No 18-24, in Resolution No. 11487 (Attachment 1) address tree upsizing, in some areas to a minimum of 50 feet in height, upsizing from 15-gallon trees to 24” box trees, and increasing the number of on-site trees from 68 to 78 (Attachment 4).
Given the nature of the use, a majority of the site is needed for the movement and parking of trucks.
Further, the project and the multi-family residential project across the cul-de-sac use the same or similar tree and planting materials in an effort to provide a compatible landscape theme. Staff believes that the landscape plan achieves the intent of the City’s landscape standards despite the lack of landscaping on the truck bay area of the site.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was originally prepared for the proposed project. On September 23, 2021, the City circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 for the Project. The MND was circulated for public review from September 23, 2021, to October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional City of Orange Page 2 of 4 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™199
Item #: 8.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0525
October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional technical analysis (e.g., air quality and noise modeling, traffic). Therefore, in order to address the environmental concerns raised, additional analyses were prepared, and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to provide comprehensive environmental review of the Project (Attachment 8).
The EIR (California State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2021090399), was prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Article 9, Sections 15120-15132 to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with constructing and operating the proposed project.
The draft EIR was made available for public review in accordance with CEQA between March 31, 2023, and May 15, 2023.
Staff received five written comment letters during the public review period. The City prepared a Response to Comments to address environmental comments received during the public review period. The public comments and responses can be found in the Final EIR (Attachment 9).
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15087(c)(6), the project site is listed on the EnviroStor database for a historic recognized environmental condition for past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products; however, a no further action was recommended as remediation of soil was completed by Orange County. Implementation of the proposed project may result in significant environmental effects related to the following topical issues:
• Biological Resources (impacts to nesting migratory birds) • Cultural Resources (potential to encounter significant subsurface archaeological resources) • Geology and Soils (potential to unearth and adversely impact paleontological resources) • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (soils contaminated with volatile organic compounds) • Tribal Cultural Resources (potential to unearth and adversely impact tribal cultural resources) Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the EIR that reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels (Attachment 10).
Findings of Fact (Attachment 11) have been prepared based upon the entire record before the City Council, as described in Subsection 1.4 of the Findings, including the EIR.
8. PUBLIC NOTICE
On August 10, the City mailed a Public Hearing Notice to a total of 38 property owners/tenants within a 400-foot radius of the project site and persons specifically requesting notice. The project site has been posted in one location with the notification on that same date. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the newspaper on August 12, 2023.
9. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 City Council Resolution No 11487
· Attachment 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 10-23 · Attachment 3 Design Review Committee Staff Reports dated November 3, 2021, and February 16, 2022
· Attachment 4 Design Review Committee Minutes dated November 3, 2021, and February 16, 2022
City of Orange Page 3 of 4 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™200
Item #: 8.1. 8/22/2023 File #: 23-0525
· Attachment 5 Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 17, 2023 · Attachment 6 Planning Commission Minutes dated July 17, 2023 · Attachment 7 Development Plans with Color Elevations and Color Martials Board · Attachment 8 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) No. 1870-20 · Attachment 9 Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) No. 1870-20 · Attachment 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program · Attachment 11 Findings of Fact
· Attachment 12 Economic and Fiscal Impact Report
City of Orange Page 4 of 4 Printed on 8/17/2023
powered by Legistar™201
RESOLUTION NO. 11487
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ORANGE CERTIFYING FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 1870-20,
ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3137-21, MAJOR
SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 1039-21, DESIGN REVIEW
NO. 5028-21 TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING 40,000
SQUARE FOOT (SF) MANUFACTURING FACILITY
AND SITE REDEVELOPMENT WITH A 57,900 SF
TRUCK TERMINAL THAT INCLUDES 52,900 SF OF
WAREHOUSE SPACE, 5,000 SF OF OFFICE SPACE,
AND AN ACCESSORY 5,400 SF MAINTENANCE
BUILDING, LOCATED AT 534 WEST STRUCK
AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) NO. 1870-20
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) NO. 3137-21
MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW (MJSP) NO. 1039-21
DESIGN REVIEW (DRC) NO. 5028-21
WHEREAS, the City Council has authority pursuant to Orange Municipal Code (OMC)
17.08.020 to review and take action on a Conditional Use Permit, Minor Site Plan Review, Design Review, and Environmental Impact Report; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan establishes goals and policies in the Industrial Manufacturing (M-2) district designed to encourage and implement the creation of high quality development; and
WHEREAS, applications were filed by Prologis L.P., in accordance with the provisions of the OMC, for Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, Design Review No. 5028-21, and were submitted for approval, to demolish an existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building, upon property described in Exhibit “A” to this Resolution (Project); and WHEREAS, the applications for the Project were processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report was prepared by the City in its capacity as Lead Agency to evaluate the physical environmental impacts of the Project, in conformance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 and in conformance with the Local CEQA Guidelines; and 202
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, the Draft Environmental Impact Report was circulated and made available for public review for a minimum period of 45 days, between March 31, 2023, and May 15, 2023; and
WHEREAS, staff received five written comment letters during the public review period.
The City prepared a “Response to Comments” to address environmental comments received during that public review period; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Project at its July 17, 2023, meeting and recommended certification Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20 to the City Council, approval of the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, with conditions, of Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, and Design Review No. 5028-21; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted one duly advertised public hearing on August 22, 2023, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support of or opposition to the Project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council certifies the Final EIR No. 1870-20, approves the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and approves Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, and Design Review No. 5028-21 to demolish an existing 40,000 SF manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building based on the following findings:
SECTION 1 – ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was originally prepared for the proposed project. On September 23, 2021, the City circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 for the project. The MND was circulated for public review from September 23, 2021, to October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional technical analysis (e.g., air quality and noise modeling, traffic).
Therefore, in order to address the environmental concerns raised, additional analyses were prepared and an EIR was prepared to provide comprehensive environmental review of the Project.
The EIR (California State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2021090399), was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Article 9, Sections 15120-15132 to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with constructing and operating the proposed project. Implementation of the proposed project may result in significant environmental effects related to the following topical issues:
• Biological Resources (impacts to nesting migratory birds) • Cultural Resources (potential to encounter significant subsurface archaeological resources) • Geology and Soils (potential to unearth and adversely impact paleontological resources) • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (soils contaminated with VOCs) 203
• Tribal Cultural Resources (potential to unearth and adversely impact tribal cultural resources).
Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Final EIR No. 1870-20 that reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. The Draft EIR was made available for public review for a minimum period of 45 days, between March 31, 2023, and May 15, 2023. Staff received five written comment letters during the public review period. The City prepared a “Response to Comments” to address environmental comments received during that public review period.
The City Council, in approving the project, has independently reviewed and analyzed the Final EIR NO. 1870-20, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and adapts the facts and analysis and the Findings of Fact (Findings) contained therein and, accordingly, certifies the Final EIR No. 1870-20. The Findings are based upon the entire record before the City Council, as described in Subsection 1.4 of the Final EIR No. 1870-20.
SECTION 2 – FINDINGS
General Plan Finding:
1. The project must be consistent with the goals and policies stated within the City’s General Plan.
The project is consistent with the goals and policies stated within the City’s General Plan Land Use and Economic Development Elements in that the proposed truck terminal development helps to provide a service that contributes to a diversified mix of land uses in the surrounding community. Redevelopment of the existing vacant and degraded site will re-establish the economic viability of the property through aesthetic enhancement and the elimination of physical deterioration. In addition, redevelopment of the site will provide distribution services that support local revenue generating businesses which will in turn contribute to the economic vitality and support the employment base in the area. The City’s industrial area as a whole, has a high demand for industrial and office uses, particularly among those who want to own their buildings. The City seeks to encourage intensification and/or redevelopment of underutilized parcels.
Conditional Use Permit Findings:
1. A Conditional Use Permit shall be granted upon sound principles of land use and in response to services required by the community (OMC 17.10.030.F.1).
The granting of this Conditional Use Permit is based upon sound principles of land use and in response to services required by the community in that consideration has been given to whether the proposed use will detrimentally affect adjacent land uses. The proposed project supports the goals of the existing General Plan Land Use Element by fulfilling a range of desired uses.
The site is compatible with the adjacent surrounding development and uses. The proposed contemporary building design and scale complement the character of the area and the landscaping provides the project frontages with a hierarchy of plant material that soften the 204
building mass and scale. New trees and landscaping will provide a visual buffer for the residential property to the north and adjacent Homeless Navigation Center (HUB). Granting a permit in this instance is therefore based upon sound land use principles and responds to the needs of the community at-large.
2. A Conditional Use Permit shall not be granted if it will cause deterioration of bordering land uses or create special problems for the area in which it is located (OMC 17.10.030.F.2).
The project is not expected to detrimentally affect adjacent land uses or create special problems in the area. The project has been designed to comply with the development standards of the Industrial Manufacturing (M-2) zone and to be compatible with the adjacent surrounding development and uses. Development of the project would re-introduce activity to the property, and enhance the existing industrial character of the site and surrounding area with new modern building elevations, new landscaping, hardscape, other on-site improvements, and street frontage improvements.
3. A Conditional Use Permit must be considered in relationship to its effect on the community or neighborhood plan for the area in which it is located (OMC 17.10.030.F.3).
There is no community or neighborhood plan for the area. As stated in the General Plan finding, the project is consistent with and implements the General Plan. The project site is designated Light Industrial in the City of Orange General Plan. The Light Industrial designation allows for the manufacturing, processing, and distribution of goods. The exterior design, including colors and materials, and landscape palette provides an internally consistent and integrated design theme that upholds community aesthetics.
4. A Conditional Use Permit, if granted, shall be made subject to those conditions necessary to preserve the general welfare, not the individual welfare of any particular applicant (OMC
17.10.030.F.4).
All project conditions maintain a purpose of preserving the general welfare of the City and community. Conditions specifically serve to manage project construction, provide for site maintenance, address water quality, protect or improve the public right-of-way, protect or improve utilities and accommodate aesthetics.
Major Site Plan Review Findings:
1. The project design is compatible with surrounding development and neighborhoods (OMC
17.10.060.H.1).
The project has been designed to comply with the development standards of the M-2 zone and to be compatible with the adjacent surrounding development and uses. The proposed contemporary building design and scale complement the character of the area and the landscaping provides the project frontages with a hierarchy of plant material that soften the building mass and scale. Overall, the proposed project presents an integrated design that 205
provides a renewed, updated, and improved appearance to the site and to the surrounding industrial district.
Development of the project would enhance the existing industrial character of the site and surrounding area with new modern building elevations, new landscaping, hardscape, other onsite improvements, and street frontage improvements. A landscape plan which includes a variety of new trees, shrubs, and groundcover has been provided. The project will incorporate an ample spacing of trees and ornamental landscaping at the site’s frontage.
2. Major Site Plan approval shall be granted if the project conforms to City development standards and any applicable special design guidelines or specific plan requirements (OMC
17.10.060.H.2).
The project as proposed conforms to City development standards for the M-2 zoning district.
There are no special design guidelines or specific plans affecting the property. The site redevelopment with the 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building would meet the M2 development standards. The site would provide 62 passenger on-site parking spaces, which exceeds the OMC requirements of 47 parking spaces based on the proposed use.
3. Major Site Plan approval shall be granted if the project provides for safe and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation, both on- and off-site (OMC 17.10.060.H.3).
The project provides safe and adequate access and circulation for vehicles and pedestrians from west Struck Avenue. The on-site circulation has been designed to accommodate all access needs to parking spaces and for emergency vehicles. Disabled parking and access have been designed to accommodate building code requirements. The site would provide 62 on-site passenger parking spaces, which exceeds the OMC requirements of 47 parking spaces based on the proposed use.
4. Major Site Plan approval shall be granted if City services are available and adequate to serve the project (OMC 17.10.060.H.4).
A review of the project with all City Departments concludes that City services will be available and adequate to serve this site, including water, sewer, police, and fire services.
5. Major Site Plan approval shall be granted if the project has been designed to fully mitigate or substantially minimize adverse environmental effects (OMC 17.10.060.H.5).
Any potentially significant environmental effects have been evaluated in Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20 and mitigated to a less than significant level. Project conditions, mitigation measures, and the OMC will adequately manage construction and use regulation needs of the project.
Design Review Finding:
206
1. The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards, and their required findings (OMC 17.10.070.G.3).
There are no specific plans or specific design standards applicable to this site. The project site is designated Light Industrial in the City of Orange General Plan. The Light Industrial designation allows for the manufacturing, processing, and distribution of goods. The exterior design, including colors and materials, and landscape palette provides an internally consistent and integrated design theme that upholds community aesthetics. The project as proposed will generally provide positive improvements to the vacant and degraded site conditions.
SECTION 3– CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following conditions are imposed:
1. The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability or claims that may be brought against the City arising out of its approval of this permit, save and except that caused by the City’s active negligence. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceedings and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. These conditions shall be reprinted on the second page of the construction documents when submitted to the Building Division for the plan check process.
3. Within two (2) days of final approval of this Project, the applicant shall deliver to the Planning Division a cashier’s check payable to the Orange County Clerk in an amount required to fulfill the fee requirements of Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) and the County Administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code 21152, & Cal Code Regulations 15075
4. The Project approvals includes certain fees and/or other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020, these conditions or requirements constitute written notice of the fees and/or exactions. The applicant is hereby notified that the ninety (90) day protest period commencing from the date of approval of the Project has begun. If the applicant fails to file a protest regarding these conditions or requirements, the applicant is legally barred from later challenging such exactions per Government Code Section 66020.
5. All construction shall conform in substance and be maintained in general conformance with plans and exhibits labeled as Attachment 7 in the August 22, 2023 staff report, including modifications required by the conditions of approval, and as recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission.
6. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval contained within Resolution No. 11487 associated with Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, Design Review No. 5028-21, Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20, and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Project is approved as a precise plan. After any application has been approved, if changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of any use or structure, a changed plan may be submitted to the Community Development 207
Director for approval. If the Community Development Director determines that the proposed change complies with the provisions and the spirit and intent of the approval action, and that the action would have been the same for the changed plan as for the approved plot plan, the Community Development Director may approve the changed plan administratively.
8. Subsequent modifications to the approved architecture and color scheme shall be submitted for review and approval to the Community Development Director or designee. Should the modifications be considered substantial, the Director may refer the review to the Design Review Committee.
9. Any modifications to the plans including, but not limited to, the landscaping and parking as a result of other Department requirements such as Building Codes, Water Quality, Fire, or Police shall be submitted for review and approval to the Community Development Director or designee. Should the modifications be considered substantial, the modifications shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
10. Any future expansion in area or in the nature and operation of the approved use by Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, Design Review No. 5028-21, shall require new or amended applications.
11. Prior to any grading/construction permit issuance by the City of Orange, the project proponent shall coordinate with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and the Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) on any potential modifications to the rail crossing including adjacent development which may require a diagnostic in accordance with California Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Railroad Administration requirements at the onset of the final design phase.
12. Prior to approval of the final landscape plan, the applicant shall coordinate with the City and OCTA with respect to the type and location of trees at the northeast corner and along the northern boundary of the Project site to ensure consistency with Metrolink SCRRA’s Design Criteria Manual.
13. The applicant will contact and coordinate with SCRRA should a Right of Way Encroachment Agreement be necessary.
14. If not utilized, Project approvals expire 24 months from the approval date. Extensions of time may be granted, if requested in writing in accordance with OMC Section 17.08.060. The Planning entitlements expire unless building permits are pulled within 24 months of the original approval.
15. Grading operations shall be restricted to Monday through Friday between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., with limited grading as necessary permitted on Saturdays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Mechanics may service the equipment up to two hours after each shift.
16. All other construction activities shall conform to the City’s Noise Ordinance, OMC Chapter
8.24, and shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction activity will be permitted on Sundays and Federal holidays.
17. Any new lighting on the premise shall be installed in such a way to direct, control, and screen the lighting to prevent off site light spillage onto adjoining properties and shall not be a nuisance to any point beyond the exterior boundaries of the property. 208
18. Prior to building permits, the landscape plans shall be revised to show that six of the eight large stature trees along the back of Struck Avenue shall be revised to trees of a minimum height of 50 feet; Applicant may select which trees will be substituted.
19. Prior to building permits, the landscape plans shall be revised to show that six of the ten large stature street trees that are in line with the front of building shall be revised to trees of a minimum height of 50 feet; Applicant may select which trees will be substituted.
20. Prior to building permits, the landscape plans shall be revised to show that four of the trees at the rear of the property line shall be substituted with a minimum 50-foot height tree; Applicant may select which trees will be substituted.
21. Prior to building permits, the landscape plans shall be revised to show that ten new trees shall be added to the planter area and in the two corners of the rear of the property and to the northeast corner of the property. Trees shall be a minimum 30-foot height taken from the proposed palette.
22. Prior to building permits, the landscape plans shall be revised to show that all of the Desert Willows on the plans shall be substituted with 30-foot minimum height trees.
23. Prior to building permits, the landscape plans shall be revised to show that the parking lot fingers in the equipment yard shall have Canary lsland Pines; one per finger.
24. Prior to building permits, the landscape plans shall be revised to show that the 15-gallon Brisbane box trees shall be upsized to 24" box.
25. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director that all mechanical and air conditioning equipment shall be shielded and screened from view from adjacent streets and properties. The screening shall be integrated architecturally with the building and painted to match the walls of the building.
26. Prior to building permits, all required parking spaces shall be shown on construction documents as doubled striped to City standards.
27. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall pay any outstanding monies due to the City for Planning Division entitlement activities related to this project.
28. In conjunction with the operation of the business(es), the property owner shall be responsible to maintain the property to a level deemed adequate by the Community Development Director. This includes, but is not limited to, the buildings, on-site landscaping, trash areas, signage, utilities, property walls, and gates (if applicable).
29. Any graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours from the time the City of Orange Notice of Violation is received by the applicant/property owner.
30. In conjunction with the operation of the business(es), all loading and trash enclosure areas shall be maintained and kept clean and free of debris.
31. In conjunction with the operation of the business(es), all noise levels generated shall conform to the levels allowed by the OMC.
32. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained per manufacturers specifications and fitted with the best available noise suppression devices (i.e., mufflers, silencers, wraps, etc). 209
33. Construction equipment shall not idle for extended periods of time in the vicinity of sensitive receptors.
34. Fixed and/or stationary construction equipment shall be located as far as possible from sensitive receptors (e.g., generators, compressors, rock crushers, cement mixers). Shroud or shield all impact tools, and muffle or shield all intake and exhaust ports on powered construction equipment.
35. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate that the trash enclosures utilize similar materials, colors, and finishes as the industrial buildings, including any roofing.
36. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate that the trash enclosure shall conform to City Standard Plan 409.
37. In conjunction with the operation of the business(es), all loading and unloading (i.e. deliveries) activities shall only occur in the designated loading dock and loading zone areas on the subject site.
38. In conjunction with the operation of the business(es), all loading and trash enclosure areas shall be maintained and kept clean and free of debris.
39. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained per manufacturers’ specifications and fitted with the best available noise suppression devices (i.e., mufflers, silencers, wraps, etc).
40. Prior to grading permits, the construction contractor shall prepare a traffic control plan detailing the locations of equipment staging areas, material stockpiles, proposed road closures, and hours of construction operations to minimize impacts to sensitive receptors.
41. In conjunction with the operation of the business(es), should parking or queuing issues arise on the site or the surrounding neighborhood, the applicant shall work with the Community Development Department to resolve any issues. If such issues are not resolved to the City’s satisfaction, the Major Site Plan Review application shall be presented to the Planning Commission for its consideration of further conditions and modifications.
40. Landscape maintenance shall be performed in such a manner as to allow all trees to retain their full canopy height for screening and full canopy breadth for shade at point of maturity, except as required for public safety purposes.
41. All landscape areas shall be maintained in a neat and healthy condition. Should the plant material die, the property owner/operator shall replace it with similar new plant material.
42. Prior to certificate of occupancy, all parking lot and landscaping improvements shall be completed according to the approved plans and to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.
43. Prior to building permits, a Tree Removal Permit shall be approved by the Community Service Director in accordance with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. A plan is required for submittal to the City depicting all of the existing on-site trees, the species of each tree, and the number of trees proposed for removal and replacement.
44. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall work with the Public Works Department to determine if the right-of-way can accommodate street tree installation, and to determine the quantity, size, spacing, species, and locations of street trees along all street frontages of the project.
210
45. Prior to the issuance of Grading Permits, Applicant shall, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, conduct all necessary activities, including, but not limited to, soils analysis, to determine pavement section of Struck Avenue (between Batavia Street and the east terminus/cul-de-sac) needed to support the traffic loading (TI of 9.5) identified in the Project’s approved Traffic Impact Study. The proposed pavement section shall be approved by the Public Works Department.
46. Prior to the issuance of Occupancy Permits, Applicant shall (remove and) reconstruct Struck Avenue (between Batavia Street and the east terminus/cul-de-sac) to provide for the approved pavement section. The pavements section shall be no less than the minimum identified in the City’s Standard Plan No. 104 (Standard Commercial and Industrial Street Section.) Applicant shall design and construct the aforementioned and any associated street improvements to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, and accordance with all applicable laws, requirements and standards.
47. Plans submitted for Building Plan Check shall comply with the California Fire Code as amended by the City and as frequently amended and in effect at the time of application for building permits. On-site fire department access will require easement recording prior to issuance of a rough grading permit and shall be reviewed by the Fire Department prior to approval.
48. Prior to building permits, payment of Transportation System Improvement Program fees is required.
49. Truck trips generated by the project shall utilize the City’s existing truck routes to travel to and from the project vicinity.
50. Prior to grading permits, the property owner shall maintain in good condition, all on-site driveways where heavy-duty trucks would travel.
51. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall submit an address number request, including an addressing plan, to the Public Works Department for review and approval.
52. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the address number of each commercial building shall be illuminated during the hours of darkness so that it shall be easily visible from the street. The numerals in these numbers shall be no less than six inches in height and be of a color contrasting to the background. In addition, any business which affords vehicular access to the rear through any driveway, alleyway or parking lot shall also display the same numbers on the rear of the building.
53. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the building closest to the street frontage shall have the lowest address number.
54. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the building in the back, not clear in sight from the street, an illuminated address sign shall be placed in the front.
Mitigation Measures
55. All project Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features shall be complied with and implemented as stated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program located in the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20.
211
In addition to the above conditions, procedural requirements are contained herein as Exhibit B to this Resolution.
ADOPTED this 22nd day of August 2023.
Daniel R. Slater, Mayor, City of Orange
ATTEST:
Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the 22nd day of August, 2023 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
RECUSED: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
212
EXHIBIT A
The Land referred to herein below is situated in the City of Orange, County of Orange, State of California, and is described as follows:
PARCEL 1:
THAT PORTION OF THE LAND ALLOTTED TO A. SEBASTIAN VAN DECLARATION
GRAAF IN DECREE OF PARTITION OF THE RANCHO SANTIAGO DE SANTA ANA, RECORDED IN CASE NO. 1192, AND ENTERED SEPTEMBER 12, 1868 IN BOOK B, PAGE 410 OF JUDGMENTS OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF CALIFORNIA, IN
THE CITY OF ORANGE, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID VAN DE GRAAF ALLOTMENT DISTANT NORTH 89°39’30” WEST 6600.00 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ALLOTMENT; THENCE NORTH 0°12’40” EAST 1320.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°35’35” WEST 579.48 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 1161, PAGE 547 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINES SOUTH 0°12’40” WEST 1320.66 FEET TO THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID ALLOTMENT; THENCE SOUTH 89°39’30” EAST 579.48 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THAT PORTION LYING EASTERLY OF THE EASTERLY LINE AND THE
SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION THEREOF, OF THE LAND SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 32, PAGE 25 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION INCLUDED WITHIN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINES:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTER LINE OF COLLINS AVENUE,
60.00 FEET WIDE, WITH THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE 5.075 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 32, PAGE 25 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID
COUNTY, SAID EASTERLY LINE BEING ALSO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE
ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY RIGHT-OF-WAY AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO SAID RAILWAY COMPANY, RECORDED MAY 19, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 78387, IN BOOK 4719, PAGE 405 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTER LINE NORTH 89°39’30” WEST 549.21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0°12’40” EAST 506.00 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID WESTERLY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 89°39’30” EAST 550.07 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTER LINE TO SAID WESTERLY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 0°18’30” WEST 506.09 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
213
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID ALLOTMENT, NORTH 89°45’00” WEST 7179.48 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ALLOTMENT AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 440 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE NORTH 0°11’00” EAST 1320.66 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF STRUCK AVENUE AS ESTABLISHED BY THE DEED RECORDED MAY 13, 1965 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 9517, IN BOOK 7518, PAGE 808 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT
ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY CONVEYED TO THE
PLASTIC AND REALTY PROPERTIES COMPANY BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 1974 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 13043, IN BOOK 11288, PAGE 672 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS, AND SAID POINT IS HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE FROM SAID TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SOUTH 89°43’00” EAST 467.86 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE PLASTIC AND REALTY
PROPERTIES COMPANY LAND AS ESTABLISHED IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED
DOCUMENT, TO A POINT OF CUSP WITH A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 89°43’00” EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 133°20’30” AN ARC DISTANCE OF 139.64 FEET TO A POINT ON A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY AND NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43°20’30” AN ARC DISTANCE OF 37.82 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 89°43’00” WEST 332.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0°11’00” EAST 30.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING, AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ORANGE BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 24, 1975 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 14940, IN BOOK 11345, PAGE 24 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL 2:
A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES OF LAYING, OR CAUSING
TO BE LAID, GAS,
WATER, STORM DRAIN, AND SEWER PIPES AND MAINS AND CONDUITS AT LEAST 18 INCHES OR MORE UNDER, AND THROUGH THE WESTERLY 10 FEET OF THE
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND AS PERMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS OF THE CITY OF ORANGE, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT OF ACCESS TO SAID
GAS, WATER, STORM DRAIN, AND SEWER LINES FOR THE PURPOSES OF
INSTALLATION, INSPECTION, ALTERATION, REPAIR, REPLACEMENT OR OTHER
RELATED ACTIVITY, UPON THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN DEED AND GRANT OF EASEMENT DATED OCTOBER 15, 1974, EXECUTED BY WILLIAM C.
LAZIER AND OTHERS, RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 1974 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 13043, IN BOOK 11288, PAGE 672 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
THAT PORTION OF THE LAND ALLOTTED TO A. SEBASTIAN VAN DE GRAAF, IN
DECREE OF PARTITION OF THE RANCHO SANTIAGO DE SANTA ANA, RENDERED IN CASE NO. 1192 AND ENTERED SEPTEMBER 12, 1968 IN BOOK B, PAGE 410 OF 214
JUDGMENTS OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTER LINE OF COLLINS AVENUE,
60.00 FEET WIDE, THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE 5.075 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 32, PAGE 25
OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID
COUNTY, SAID EASTERLY LINE BEING ALSO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE
ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FEY RAILWAY COMPANY RIGHT-OF-WAY AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO SAID RAILWAY COMPANY, RECORDED MAY 19, 1959 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 78387, IN BOOK 4719, PAGE 405 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTER LINE NORTH 89°39’30” WEST 549.21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0°12’40” EAST 506.00 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID WESTERLY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 89°39’30” EAST 550.07 FEET PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTER LINE TO SAID WESTERLY LINE; THENCE SOUTH 0°18’30” WEST 506.00 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTHERLY 40.00 FEET AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED
TO THE CITY OF
ORANGE, RECORDED JUNE 30, 1970 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20711, IN BOOK 9361, PAGE 347 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
ALSO EXCEPTING THERE FROM THE FOLLOWING:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID ALLOTMENT, NORTH 89°45’00” WEST 7179.48
FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID ALLOTMENT AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 440 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE NORTH 0°11’00” EAST 1320.66 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF STRUCK AVENUE AS ESTABLISHED BY THE DEED RECORDED MAY 13, 1965 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 9517, IN BOOK 7518, PAGE 808 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY CONVEYED TO THE PLASTIC AND REALTY PROPERTIES COMPANY BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 15, 1974 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 13043, IN BOOK 11288, PAGE 672 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, AND SAID POINT IS HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE FROM SAID TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, SOUTH 89°43’00” EAST 467.86 FEET
ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE PLASTIC AND REALTY PROPERTIES COMPANY
LAND AS ESTABLISHED IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED DOCUMENT, TO A POINT OF
CUSP WITH A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 89°43’00” EAST;
THENCE SOUTHERLY AND SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 133°20’30” AN ARC DISTANCE OF 139.64 FEET TO A POINT ON A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTHERLY AND NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43°20’30” AN ARC DISTANCE OF 37.82 FEET; THENCE TANGENT 215
TO SAID CURVE NORTH 89°43’00” WEST 332.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0°11’00” EAST
30.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ORANGE BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 24, 1975 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 14940, IN BOOK 11345, PAGE 24 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL 3:
A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS ON AND OVER THE WESTERLY 20 FEET OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 84-757, IN THE CITY OF ORANGE, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 194, PAGES 5 AND 6 OF PARCEL
MAPS, AS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN DEED AND GRANT OF EASEMENT RECORDED APRIL 05, 1985 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 85-121284 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE.
PARCEL 4:
A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR THE PLACEMENT AND INSTALLATION OF
UTILITIES ON, IN AND
OVER THE WESTERLY 10 FEET OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 84-757, IN THE CITY OF ORANGE, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 194, PAGES 5 AND 6 OF
PARCEL MAPS, AS SET FORTH IN THAT
CERTAIN DEED AND GRANT OF EASEMENT RECORDED APRIL 05, 1985 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 85-121284 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE.
APN: FOR CONVEYANCING PURPOSES ONLY: 375-331-04
216
EXHIBIT B
PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
General
1. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, including all City regulations.
Violation of any of those laws in connection with the use will be cause for revocation of this permit.
2. Construction permits, including building permits and grading permits, as required by the City, shall be obtained in advance of any site demolition, clearing and grubbing, and grading and for all construction work, as required by the Community Development Department’s Building Division and Public Works Grading Division. Failure to obtain the required building permits may be cause for revocation of this entitlement.
3. Plans submitted for Building Plan Check shall comply with the California Fire Code as amended by the City and as frequently amended and in effect at the time of application for building permits.
4. Prior to the operation of the business, the applicant shall file for, or if applicable, amend a business license with the Business License Division. Failure to obtain the required business license will be cause for revocation of this approval.
5. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall pay all applicable development fees, including but not limited to: City sewer connection, Orange County Sanitation District Connection Fee, Transportation System Improvement Program, Fire Facility, Police Facility, Park Acquisition, Sanitation District, and School District, as required.
Landscaping
6. Prior to building permits, final landscaping plans for the Project shall be designed to comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines as described in Section IX et al of the City of Orange Landscape Standards and Specifications. The Project landscape architect shall submit documentation certifying compliance with this requirement (Appendix B of the City of Orange Landscape Standards and Specifications) for review and approval by the Community Development Director or designee in coordination with the Public Works Director or designee.
7. Prior to certificate of occupancy, all landscaping improvements shall be completed according to the approved plans, the City of Orange Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines, and City of Orange Landscape Standards and Specifications. The project landscape architect shall submit documentation certifying compliance with this requirement (Appendix E of the City of Orange Landscape Standards and Specifications) for review and approval by the Community Development Director or designee, in coordination with the Public Works Director or designee.
8. Prior to building permits, City required irrigation and landscape inspection notes, in accordance with the City of Orange Landscape Standards and Specifications, shall be placed on the final landscape plan, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or designee, in coordination with the Public Works Director or designee. 217
9. Prior to building permits, the final landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director when landscaping is proposed within the public right-of-way and/or the Project is constructing Storm Water Quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) in landscaped areas.
10. Prior to building permits, the final landscape plan shall include a note that a fully automated irrigation system will be provided.
11. Prior to building permits, landscape plans shall include landscape area calculations needed for State landscape water use reporting.
12. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall prepare a final landscaping and irrigation plan consistent with the grading plans, site plans, and the conceptual landscaping plan as proposed for the project for the review and approval of the Community Development Director or designee, in coordination with the Public Works Director or designee.
13. Prior to building permits, all landscaping located within public areas shall be shown on the landscape plans and shall include the installation of root barriers acceptable to the Public Works Department on the sidewalk side of the tree, or where conditions warrant, the installation of a Deep Root box as directed by the Public Works Director.
Police:
14. Prior to building permits, the Project shall comply with the requirements of OMC Chapter
15.52 (Building Security Standards), which relates to hardware, doors, windows, lighting, etc.
Approved structural drawings, if any, shall include sections of the security code that apply.
Specifications, details, or security notes may be used to convey the compliance.
15. Security and design measures that employ Defensible Space concepts shall be utilized in development and construction plans. These measures incorporate the concepts of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED), which involves consideration such as placement and orientation of structures, access and visibility of common areas, placement of doors, windows, addressing and landscaping.
16. Prior to building permits, a photometric study shall be reviewed and approved by the Police Department. A minimum of one foot candle shall be maintained on all surfaces of the parking lot, from dusk until the termination of business every operating day. The applicant shall ensure that lighting on the site shall be directed, controlled, and screened in such a manner so as to refrain from shining directly on surrounding properties.
17. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall schedule a light reading inspection with the Crime Prevention Bureau. The lighting shall be tested and confirmed to determine if the lighting meets or exceeds the exterior boundary standards. The applicant shall use shielding so as to ensure that the light standards meet the requirements of OMC Section 17.12.030 for the areas beyond the property’s exterior boundaries; light spillage or pollution to surrounding residential areas shall not exceed a maintained minimum of 0.5 foot-candle.
Subdivision:
18. Prior to grading permits all works within public right-of-way and public utility easements will require Encroachment Permits, including sidewalk and driveway constructions and utility main and lateral constructions.
19. Prior to grading permits all public infrastructures, including street sections, sidewalk, driveway apron, and utilities shall comply with City of Orange Standard Plans and Specifications. 218
20. Prior to certificate of occupancy, utilities serving the development, such as electric, cable television, street lighting and communication shall be installed underground, completed and approved by the appropriate utility provider.
21. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall remove unused driveway approaches and restored them to full height curb and gutter, including any sidewalk restoration at the driveway apron.
22. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall remove unused driveway approaches and restore them to full height curb and gutter, including any sidewalk restoration at the driveway apron.
23. Prior to grading permits, driveway aprons shall conform to Public Works Standard Plan 115 for commercial driveways with ADA accessibility.
24. Prior to grading permits, all driveway approaches shall conform to ADA standards for wheelchair access and to Public Works Standard Plans 115 and 116.
25. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the developer shall be required to construct sidewalks to meet current standard along Struck Avenue per City of Orange Engineering Standard Plan 118.
26. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall provide adequate wheelchair accessibility around driveway aprons that do not conform to current ADA standards.
27. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall repair any cracked, uneven, or damaged public sidewalk, curb and gutter along property frontages.
28. Prior to certificate of occupancy, all landscaping shall include the installation of root barriers on the sidewalk side of tree, or where conditions warrant the installation of Deep Root box as directed by the Community Services Department.
29. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the sanitary sewer system connecting from the buildings to the public mainline shall be private and maintained by the property owner.
30. Prior to grading permits, the applicant shall submit a grading plan in compliance with City standards for review and approval by the Public Works Director. All grading and improvements on the subject property shall be made in accordance with the Manal of Grading and Standard Plans and Specifications to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The applicant may be required to include Phased Erosion and Sediment control Plans, Site Demolition Plan, and Utility Plan as parts of the grading plan.
31. Prior to grading permits, plans preparation and submittals shall be per Development Services Plan Preparation Guidelines and Checklist, and Checklist for Submittal Packages.
32. Prior to grading permits, a geotechnical report shall accompany the grading plan review.
33. A Hydrology Study/Report shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department. The Hydrology Study/Report shall comply with the Orange County Hydrology Manual and Addenda (OCHM). Design Storm Frequency at a minimum, shall be 10-year storm (25-year in a sump condition), and a 100-year storm event. Proposed improvements shall comply with freeboard requirements per OCHM and County Local Drainage Manuals.
34. Prior to grading permits, site grading shall conform to the latest California building Code Section 1804. The ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped away from 219
the building at a slope of 5% for previous surfaces, and 2% for impervious surfaces, at a minimum distance of 10 feet.
35. Prior to grading permits, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit from the Public Works Department prior to start of any site demolition, clearing and grubbing, and grading.
36. Prior to grading permits, any soil imported or exported shall require a transportation permit from the Public Works Department Traffic Division.
37. Prior to grading permits, upon submittal of grading plan for plan check, the applicant shall make a deposit to cover plan check and inspection services related to the grading activities.
38. Prior to grading permits, the grading plan shall detail all of the locations where retaining walls will be constructed. Geometric detail of retaining walls shall be shown on the grading plan, including material type, dimensions, backfill, and subdrains. A building permit is also required for retaining walls over 4 feet in height as measured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall prior to construction. Structural details and design calculations shall be submitted as a separate document and will be reviewed and permitted by the City Building Division.
39. Prior to grading permits, any grading outside of the owner’s property boundary shall require the applicant to either obtain a temporary construction easement or permission by adjacent property owners in a form suitable to the Public Works Director.
40. Prior to grading permits, trash receptacle locations and details shall be included on the grading plan. The trash storage area shall be constructed per Public Works Department Standard Plan 409.
41. Prior to grading permits, the applicant shall show all sewer and storm drain lines on the grading plan. Other utility lines, such as water lines, may also be shown on the grading plan for reference.
42. Prior to grading permits, the applicant shall show all structural BMPs for water quality purposes on the grading plan. Water quality features shown on the grading plan shall match the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP).
43. Prior to grading permits, any direct storm water discharge into the Orange County Flood Control (OCFD) channels shall require a permit from OCFD.
44. Prior to building permits, and prior to building foundation construction, a Certificate Letter of Line and Grade shall be submitted to Public Works Construction Inspector demonstrating that the site grading and pad elevation are completed according to the grading plan.
Water Quality:
45. Prior to grading permits the applicant shall submit a Priority Project WQMP for review and approval to the Public Works Department that:
a. Prioritizes the use of Low Impact Development principles as follows: preserves natural features; minimizes runoff and reduces impervious surfaces; and utilizes infiltration of runoff as the method of pollutant treatment. Infiltration BMPs to be considered include the use of permeable materials such as concrete and concrete pavers, infiltration trenches, infiltration planters, and other infiltration BMPs as applicable, 220
b. Incorporates the applicable Site Design, Routine Source, Structural Control and Low Impact BMPs as defined in the Model Water Quality Management Plan and Technical Guidance Document,
c. Maintains the hydrologic characteristics of the site by matching time of concentration, runoff, velocity, volume and hydrograph for a 2-year storm event, d. Minimizes the potential increase in downstream erosion and avoids downstream impacts to physical structures, aquatic and riparian habitat,
e. Generally describes the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for structural and Treatment Control BMPs,
f. Identifies the entity or employees that will be responsible for long-term operation, maintenance, repair and or replacement of the structural and Treatment Control BMPs and the training that qualifies them to operate and maintain the BMPs, g. Describes the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of all structural and Treatment Control BMPs,
h. Includes a copy of the forms to be used in conducting maintenance and inspection activities,
i. Meets recordkeeping requirements (forms to be kept for 5 years). j. Includes a copy of the form to be submitted annually by the project owner to the Public Works Department that certifies that the project’s structural and treatment BMPs are being inspected and maintained in accordance with the project’s WQMP.
46. Prior to the certificates for use of occupancy, the applicant shall demonstrate the following to the Public Works Department:
a. That all structural and treatment control BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with the approved plans and specifications, b. That the applicant is prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP,
c. That an adequate number of copies of the project’s approved final Project WQMP are available for the future occupiers.
47. Prior to the certificates of occupancy or final signoff by the Public Works Department, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of Public Works, that the preparer of the WQMP has reviewed the BMP maintenance requirements in Section V of the WQMP with the responsible person and that a copy of the WQMP has been provided to that person. A certification letter from the WQMP preparer may be used to satisfy this condition.
48. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall review the approved WQMP and grading plan to ensure the structure’s downspouts or drainage outlet locations are consistent with those documents. Copies of the building or architectural plans specifically showing the downspouts and drainage outlets shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review.
49. The project applicant shall maintain all structural, treatment and low impact development BMPs at the frequency specified in the approved WQMP. Upon transfer of ownership or management responsibilities for the project site, the applicant shall notify the City of Orange 221
Public Works Department of the new person(s) or entity responsible for maintenance of the BMPs.
50. Prior to the grading permits (including, as appropriate: clearing, grubbing, surface mining, or paving permits), the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under the State’s General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit) by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or other proof of filing. A copy of the SWPPP required by the General Permit shall be kept at the project site and be available for review by City representatives upon request.
51. For those projects requiring coverage by the State of California’s General Industrial Permit:
Prior to certificates for use and occupancy, the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage under the State’s General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity has been obtained by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or other proof of filing.
52. Prior to City approval of the landscape plans, the applicant shall review the approved WQMP and ensure the proposed landscape plans are consistent with the project grading plans. The plans must show any proposed storm water treatment BMPs such as bioretention planters, drywells, permeable pavers, or any other proposed surface water quality BMPs.
Water Division:
53. Prior to building permits, the applicant shall submit improvement plans to the Water Division for review and approval for any new fire hydrants, domestic water services, fire services, landscape services, and any other proposed improvements or relocations affecting the public water system facilities.
54. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall be responsible for the installation of necessary fire hydrants and fire services as approved by the Fire Department and Water Division.
55. Prior to building permits, the Water Division shall approve the type and location of landscaping and fire service (backflow prevention) device for proposed City services.
56. Prior to building permits, construction documents shall show that a six foot minimum horizontal clearance and a one foot minimum vertical clearance would be maintained between City water mains, laterals, services, meters, fire hydrants and all other utilities except sewer.
The Water Division shall review and approve the construction documents.
57. Prior to building permits, construction documents shall show that an eight-foot minimum clearance is provided between City water mains, laterals, services, meters, fire hydrants, signs, or trees or other substantial shrubs and plants as required by the Water Division. The Water Division shall review and approve the construction documents.
58. Prior to building permits, construction documents shall show that permanent signs, awning, surface water quality management features or other structures are not built over water mains, laterals, services, meters, or fire hydrants as required by the Water Division. 222
59. Prior to building permits for the first phase of work, the applicant shall be responsible for obtaining approval all of the necessary encroachment permits from affected agencies for all public water construction work.
60. Prior to approval of a water improvement plan, the applicant shall satisfy all water main connection, plan check, and inspections charges as determined by the Water Division.
61. Plans submitted during plan check shall show that the water improvement plans are consistent with the fire suppression plans and or fire master plan. The applicant’s consultant preparing the water improvement plans shall coordinate their plans with the consultant preparing the fire suppression plans and/or fire master plan so that their designs concur.
62. Plans submitted during plan check shall show that the minimum separation requirements are met and that each of the various designer’s plan sets match. The applicant’s consultant preparing the improvement and utility plans shall coordinate their plans with the consultants preparing the landscape, architectural, surface water quality management, fire master and/or fire suppression plans so that their designs are consistent.
63. At least 14 calendar days prior to commencing construction, the applicant’s civil engineer shall prepare and provide product material submittals consistent with the water improvement plans for all proposed public water system facilities to the Water Division per the City of Orange General Water Construction Notes for review and approval.
64. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall furnish and install individual pressure regulators on new services where the incoming pressure exceeds eighty-pounds per square inch.
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
Agenda Item
Design Review Committee
Item #: 4.2. 11/3/2021 File #: 21-0561
TO: Chair and Members of the Design Review Committee
THRU: Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director FROM: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner
1. SUBJECT
Design Review No. 5028-21, Prologis Orange Logistics, located at 534 Struck Avenue
2. SUMMARY
Recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission.
The Project applicant is proposing the demolition of the existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and redevelop the site with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building.
3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Applicant/Owner: Prologis, Maggie Xu, Director of Project Management Property Location: 534 Struck Avenue
General Plan Designation: Light Industrial (Max 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR)) Zoning Classification: Industrial Manufacturing (M-2)
Existing Development: 40,000 SF manufacturing facility
Associated Application: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review (MJSP) No. 1039-21, and Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) No. 1870-20
Previous DRC Project Review: None
4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project involves the demolition of the existing 40,000 SF manufacturing facility and complete redevelopment of the project site. The project would also include the removal of the existing unused Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad spur located on the east side of the site. The site would then be redeveloped with a 57,900 SF truck terminal, that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building.
The proposed building would be up to 45 feet in height and include 84 loading dock doors. The project would provide 62 automobile parking stalls, 15 in excess of the required parking.
Additionally, the project would provide 188 trailer parking stalls. The building would operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is anticipated that the facility would employ a total of 150 - 200 employees.
Vehicular access to the site would be provided via two driveways along the site’s northern border City of Orange Page 1 of 6 Printed on 7/10/2023
powered by Legistar™244
Item #: 4.2. 11/3/2021 File #: 21-0561
Vehicular access to the site would be provided via two driveways along the site’s northern border along Struck Avenue. Emergency vehicle circulation will be provided from all site vehicular access areas.
Architecture and Design Features:
Development of the truck terminal would replace the existing building with a new modern concrete tilt -up building. The north elevation facing Struck Avenue would feature a neutral color palette consisting of grays and whites, dark green accents, and green reflective glazing. The main body of the building will be painted primarly with Prologis Standard Gray (PLD-8), with accent paint colors of Prologis Standard Gray (PLD-9) and Prologis Standard Gray (PLD-6). The 84 loading dock doors are distributed between the east and west elevations. The 45-foot-tall building would be setback 10 feet from Struck Avenue. A maintenance building at the southwest portion of the property would be constructed behind the facility, out of sight from public views. The building would consist of concrete tilt-up panels with pre-finish flush metal panels.
Landscaping:
The Landscape Plan incorporates ornamental landscaping at the site’s frontage along Struck Avenue, which includes a variety of new trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Trees include Camphors, Canary Island Pines, Fern Pines, and Ornamental Pear. Shrubs include Pineapple Guava, Dwarf Bottle Brush, Silverberry, Indian Hawthorne, and Autumn Sage.
Lighting:
Exterior lighting would be installed on-site, as necessary, for safety and security. Decorative architectural lighting would also be installed to accent building entries as focal points throughout the site.
Fencing:
An 8-foot-high tubular steel fencing along the site’s perimeter will be constructed to enclose the proposed building, parking area, truck court, and loading dock area. The fence would also serve as a safety feature to secure the site and employees given the continuous operational characteristics of the use.
5. EXISTING SITE
Until the end of 2020 the site was occupied by Nursery Supplies, Inc., a manufacturer of plastic nursery planting pots. Current site improvements consist of an approximate 40,000 SF concrete tiltup building and parking. The project site contains ornamental landscaping along the site’s frontage at Struck Avenue. The site is accessed via three two-way driveways along Struck Avenue. Additionally, there is a portion of the BNSF Railroad track located in the eastern portion of the project site.
Nursery Supplies Inc., did not utilize this portion of the BNSF Railroad track;Nursery Supplies Inc. utilized the larger BNSF Railroad track located east of the on-site railroad track.
6. EXISTING AREA CONTEXT
The surrounding properties possess an urban and industrial character like the project site.
North:
The property to the north of the site on the opposite side of Struck Avenue, is designated for Public Facility uses and includes the City of Orange Public Works Department and Mary’s Kitchen.
Additionally, a future residential development project is proposed on the property immediately north of Mary’s Kitchen. At this time, the approved residential project is not under construction.
City of Orange Page 2 of 6 Printed on 7/10/2023
powered by Legistar™245
Item #: 4.2. 11/3/2021 File #: 21-0561
East:
The property to the east of the site on the opposite side of the BNSF Railroad, is designated for industrial and light industrial uses. This area contains industrial buildings and a storage yard containing various vehicles and storage facilities.
South/West:
The properties to the immediate south and west are designated for light industrial uses, and include several industrial and commercial businesses.
7. ANALYSIS AND STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
Issue 1: Project Compatibility
The project site is located in an urbanized area of the City surrounded by industrial uses. The project architectural design and use would be compatible with the surrounding uses and would not result in alteration or modification of the existing public street or sidewalk systems and patterns in the area.
The simple contemporary architectural design of the proposed truck terminal and maintenance buildings would be compatible with the proposed Corp Yard Housing project, the existing Police Department Headquarters, and the Public Works Department Corp Yard building located across the street. The simple architecture would also blend in with the existing industrial buildings located to the west. The proposed project would be consistent with the City of Orange General Plan goals by integrating the proposed project and existing development with nearby existing transit corridors, and industrial uses in the surrounding area.
Overall, development of the proposed project would enhance and strengthen the character of the site and its surroundings through new landscaping, hardscape, and other improvements on-site and along the street edge. The proposed architectural and landscape elements and design would ensure that development of the proposed project is not detrimental to the surrounding area or uses.
Additionally, project implementation would provide similar and compatible uses to those existing adjacent to and surrounding the project site.
Issue 2: Landscaping
The proposed project’s landscaping plan provides a variety of trees, shrubs, and ground cover along front yard areas, and the south/west and south/east corners of the proposed site. Based on the City’s benchmark calculation for tree quantity, 125 trees are required for the project. Planning staff and the City’s Senior Landscape Coordinator concluded that the benchmark number of trees would overwhelm the site, due to the need to dedicate much of the site for the movement and parking of trucks due to the nature of the truck terminal use. The project has provided 30 trees of 24-inch box size or larger in response to recommendations by the City’s Senior Landscape Coordinator.
Landscaping is not proposed along the east, south, and west perimeter beyond the security gates, as it would interfere with the trailer parking areas located along the perimeter of the site. Staff believes the frontage landscaping is appropriate for the site and will provide a condition related to tree maintenance. Further, the project and the multi-family residential project across the cul-de-sac use the same or similar tree and planting materials in an effort to provide a compatible landscape theme.
8. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The City’s inter-departmental staff review committee (SMART) conducted reviews of the project on March 10, 2021 and June 9, 2021. On September 8, 2021, SMART recommended that the project proceed to the Design Review Committee (DRC).
City of Orange Page 3 of 6 Printed on 7/10/2023
powered by Legistar™246
Item #: 4.2. 11/3/2021 File #: 21-0561
9. PUBLIC NOTICE
No Public Notice was required for DRC review of the project.
10. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 was prepared to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, the project site is listed on the EnviroStor database for a historic recognized environmental hazard condition; however, no further action was recommended as remediation of soil was completed by the County of Orange.
The role of the DRC is to provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission (PC on this project and the DRC’s comments may include any of the environmental impacts associated with the proposal. Comments provided by the DRC will be included in the PC staff report.
The Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt the environmental document was mailed to residents, property owners, and tenants within 300’ of the subject property. The public review period began on September 23, 2021 and ends on October 25, 2021.
11. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUIRED FINDINGS
Findings for DRC applications come from four sources:
· The Orange Municipal Code
· The Infill Residential Design Guidelines
· The Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne (commonly referred to the Old Towne Design Standards or OTDS)
· Orange Eichler Design Standards (or OEDS)
The Findings are applied as appropriate to each project. Based on the following Findings and statements in support of such Findings, staff recommends the DRC recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission with recommended conditions. · The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards, and their required findings (OMC 17.10.07.G.3).
The project site is designated Light Industrial in the City of Orange General Plan. The Light Industrial designation allows for the manufacturing, processing, and distribution of goods. The exterior design, including colors and materials, and landscape palette provides an internally consistent and integrated design theme that upholds community aesthetics. The project as proposed will generally provide positive improvements to the vacant and degraded site conditions.
12. CONDITIONS
The recommendation for approval of this project is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall conform in substance and be maintained in general conformance with plans and exhibits date labeled as October 20, 2021, in the staff report, including modifications required by the conditions of approval, and as recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee.
2. Except as otherwise provided herein, this project is approved as a precise plan. After any application has been approved, if changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of City of Orange Page 4 of 6 Printed on 7/10/2023
powered by Legistar™247
Item #: 4.2. 11/3/2021 File #: 21-0561
application has been approved, if changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of any use or structure, a changed plan may be submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. If the Community Development Director determines that the proposed change complies with the provisions and the spirit and intent of the approval action, and that the action would have been the same for the changed plan as for the approved plot plan, the Community Development Director may approve the changed plan administratively.
3. Subsequent modifications to the approved architecture and color scheme shall be submitted for review and approval to the Community Development Director or designee. Should the modifications be considered substantial, the modifications shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
4. The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability or claims that may be brought against the City arising out of its approval of these permits, save and except that caused by the City’s active negligence.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceedings and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
5. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, including all City regulations.
Violation of any of those laws in connection with the use will be cause for revocation of this permit.
6. Building permits shall be obtained for all future construction work, as required by the City of Orange Building Division. Failure to obtain the required building permits will be cause for revocation of this permit.
7. Final sign plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to building permit issuance.
8. If not utilized, project approval expires twenty-four months from the approval date. Extensions of time may be granted, if requested in writing in accordance with OMC Section 17.08.060.
The Planning entitlements expire unless Building Permits are pulled within two years of the original approval.
9. In conjunction with construction, all activity will be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction activity will be permitted on Sundays and Federal holidays.
10. These conditions shall be reprinted on the second page of the construction documents when submitted to the Building Division for the plan check process.
11. Any graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours from the time the City of Orange Notice of Violation is received by the applicant/property owner.
12. Any new lighting on the premise shall be installed in such a way to direct, control, and screen the lighting to prevent off site light spillage onto adjoining properties and shall not be a nuisance to any point beyond the exterior boundaries of the property.
13. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall schedule a light reading inspection with the Crime Prevention Bureau. The lighting shall be tested and confirmed to determine if the lighting meets or exceeds the exterior boundary standards. The applicant shall use shielding so as to ensure that the light standards meet the requirements of OMC Section
17.12.030 for areas beyond the property’s exterior boundaries; light spillage or pollution to City of Orange Page 5 of 6 Printed on 7/10/2023
powered by Legistar™248
Item #: 4.2. 11/3/2021 File #: 21-0561
17.12.030 for areas beyond the property’s exterior boundaries; light spillage or pollution to surrounding residential areas shall not exceed a maintained minimum of 0.5 foot-candle.
14. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director that all mechanical and air conditioning equipment shall be shielded and screened from view from adjacent streets and properties. The screening shall be integrated architecturally with the building and painted to match the walls of the building.
15. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall obtain approval from the Planning Division for any and all signage associated with the proposed project and/or business.
16. Plans submitted for Building Plan Check shall comply with the California Fire Code as amended by the City and as frequently amended and in effect at the time of application for Building Permit.
17. Prior to building permit issuance, final landscaping plans for the project shall be designed to comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines as described in Section IX et al of the City of Orange Landscape Standards and Specifications.
18. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall prepare a final landscaping and irrigation plan consistent with the grading plans, site plans, and the conceptual landscaping plan as proposed for the project for the review and approval of the Director of Community Development and Community Services Director.
19. Landscape maintenance shall be performed in such a manner as to allow all trees to retain their full canopy height for screening and full canopy breadth for shade at point of maturity, except as required for public safety purposes.
13. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
· Attachment 2 - Development Plans
· Attachment 3 - Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 City of Orange Page 6 of 6 Printed on 7/10/2023
powered by Legistar™249
Agenda Item
Design Review Committee
Item #: 5.1. 2/16/2022 File #: 22-0078
TO: Chair and Members of the Design Review Committee
THRU: Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director FROM: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner
1. SUBJECT
Design Review No. 5028-21, Prologis Orange Logistics, 534 Struck Avenue
2. SUMMARY
Recommendation to the Planning Commission.
The applicant is proposing the demolition of an existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building.
3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Applicant/Owner: Prologis, Maggie Xu, Director of Project Management Property Location: 534 Struck Avenue
General Plan Designation: Light Industrial (Max 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR)) Zoning Classification: Industrial Manufacturing (M-2)
Existing Development: 40,000 SF manufacturing facility
Associated Application: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 3137-21, and Major Site Plan Review (MJSP) No. 1039-21.
Previous DRC Project Review: November 3, 2021
4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
At the DRC meeting on November 3, 2021, the Committee reviewed the proposal and continued the item to a date uncertain to allow the applicant to address comments made by the Committee on the landscape plan.
5. EXISTING SITE
Until the end of 2020 the site was occupied by Nursery Supplies, Inc., a manufacturer of plastic nursery planting pots. Current site improvements consist of an approximate 40,000 SF concrete tiltup building and parking. The project site contains ornamental landscaping along the Struck Avenue frontage. The site is accessed via three two-way driveways along Struck Avenue. Additionally, there is a portion of the BNSF Railroad track located in the eastern portion of the project site. Nursery Supplies Inc., did not utilize this portion of the BNSF Railroad track but utilized the larger BNSF City of Orange Page 1 of 5 Printed on 2/16/2022
powered by Legistar™250
Item #: 5.1. 2/16/2022 File #: 22-0078
Supplies Inc., did not utilize this portion of the BNSF Railroad track but utilized the larger BNSF Railroad track located east of the on-site railroad track.
6. EXISTING AREA CONTEXT
The surrounding properties possess an urban and industrial character like the project site.
North:
The property to the north of the site on the opposite side of Struck Avenue, is designated for Public Facility uses and includes the City of Orange Public Works Department Corporation Yard and Mary’s Kitchen. Additionally, a future residential development project is proposed on the property immediately north of Mary’s Kitchen. At this time, the approved residential project is not under construction.
East:
The property to the east of the site on the opposite side of the BNSF Railroad, is designated for industrial and light industrial uses. This area contains industrial buildings and a storage yard containing various vehicles and storage facilities.
South/West:
The properties to the immediate south and west are designated for light industrial uses, and include several industrial and commercial businesses.
7. ANALYSIS AND STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
Issue 1 Landscaping:
At its November 3, 2021, meeting the DRC discussed the proposal and had questions related to landscaping in the bio retention basin, parking areas, tree count, front yard landscaping, and heat island effect.
The applicant has reevaluated the function of the landscape areas that were previously proposed.
The applicant’s civil engineer has clarified that the south side areas at the rear of the property do not contain bio retention basins. The water quality treatment devices are located in the northwest parking area. As a result, the landscape plan has been revised to include drought tolerant trees on the south side areas at the rear of the property where only groundcover was previously proposed.
The tree count has increased from 35 to 68 total trees, including additional trees in the parking areas and front yard areas. In addition the size of some of the trees has increased. The applicant is now proposing three 48” box trees, which were not previously proposed, one additional 36” box tree (total of five), fifty-five 24” box trees, an increase from twenty-six 24” box trees, and five 15 gallon trees. In addition, the Ornamental Pear tree was eliminated from the palette.
Based on the City’s benchmark calculation for tree quantity, 125 trees are required for the project.
Although the applicant has added 33 additional trees to the site, the proposal is still short of the benchmark for the site. Further, given the nature of the use, a majority of the site is needed for the movement and parking of trucks. The Committee’s concern related to heat island effect remains as the operational needs of the facility for truck circulation preclude the distribution of trees within the paved portions of the site. Staff believes that the modified landscape plan achieves the intent of the City’s landscape standards despite the lack of landscaping on the truck bay area of the site.
8. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The City’s inter-departmental staff review committee (SMART) conducted reviews of the project on March 10, 2021 and June 9, 2021. On September 8, 2021, SMART recommended that the project City of Orange Page 2 of 5 Printed on 2/16/2022
powered by Legistar™251
Item #: 5.1. 2/16/2022 File #: 22-0078
proceed to the Design Review Committee (DRC).
9. PUBLIC NOTICE
No Public Notice was required for DRC review of the project.
10. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUIRED FINDINGS
Findings for DRC applications come from four sources:
· The Orange Municipal Code
· The Infill Residential Design Guidelines
· The Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne (commonly referred to the Old Towne Design Standards or OTDS)
· Orange Eichler Design Standards (or OEDS)
The Findings are applied as appropriate to each project. Based on the following Findings and statements in support of such Findings, staff recommends the DRC recommend approval of the project with recommended conditions.
· The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards, and their required findings (OMC 17.10.07.G.3).
The project site is designated Light Industrial in the City of Orange General Plan. The Light Industrial designation allows for the manufacturing, processing, and distribution of goods. The exterior design, including colors and materials, and landscape palette provides an internally consistent and integrated design theme that upholds community aesthetics. The project as proposed will generally provide positive improvements to the vacant and degraded site conditions.
11. CONDITIONS
The recommendation for approval of this project is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall conform in substance and be maintained in general conformance with plans and exhibits date labeled as February 16, 2022, in the staff report, including modifications required by the conditions of approval, and as recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee.
2. Except as otherwise provided herein, this project is approved as a precise plan. After any application has been approved, if changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of any use or structure, a changed plan may be submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. If the Community Development Director determines that the proposed change complies with the provisions and the spirit and intent of the approval action, and that the action would have been the same for the changed plan as for the approved plot plan, the Community Development Director may approve the changed plan administratively.
3. Subsequent modifications to the approved architecture and color scheme shall be submitted for review and approval to the Community Development Director or designee. Should the modifications be considered substantial, the modifications shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee.
4. The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability or claims that may be brought against the City arising out of its approval of this permit, save and except that caused by the City’s active negligence. The City of Orange Page 3 of 5 Printed on 2/16/2022
powered by Legistar™252
Item #: 5.1. 2/16/2022 File #: 22-0078
of its approval of this permit, save and except that caused by the City’s active negligence. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceedings and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
5. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, including all City regulations.
Violation of any of those laws in connection with the use will be cause for revocation of this permit.
6. Building permits shall be obtained for all future construction work, as required by the City of Orange, Public Works Department’s Building Division. Failure to obtain the required building permits will be cause for revocation of this permit.
7. Final sign plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director prior to building permit issuance.
8. If not utilized, project approval expires twenty-four months from the approval date. Extensions of time may be granted, if requested in writing in accordance with OMC Section 17.08.060.
The Planning entitlements expire unless Building Permits are pulled within two years of the original approval.
9. In conjunction with construction, all activity will be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction activity will be permitted on Sundays and Federal holidays.
10. These conditions shall be reprinted on the second page of the construction documents when submitted to the Building Division for the plan check process.
11. Any graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours from the time the City of Orange Notice of Violation is received by the applicant/property owner.
12. Any new lighting on the premise shall be installed in such a way to direct, control, and screen the lighting to prevent off site light spillage onto adjoining properties and shall not be a nuisance to any point beyond the exterior boundaries of the property.
13. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall schedule a light reading inspection with the Crime Prevention Bureau. The lighting shall be tested and confirmed to determine if the lighting meets or exceeds the exterior boundary standards. The applicant shall use shielding so as to ensure that the light standards meet the requirements of OMC Section
17.12.030 for areas beyond the property’s exterior boundaries; light spillage or pollution to surrounding residential areas shall not exceed a maintained minimum of 0.5 foot-candle.
14. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director that all mechanical and air conditioning equipment shall be shielded and screened from view from adjacent streets and properties. The screening shall be integrated architecturally with the building and painted to match the walls of the building.
15. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall obtain approval from the Planning Division for any and all signage associated with the proposed project and/or business.
16. Plans submitted for Building Plan Check shall comply with the California Fire Code as amended by the City and as frequently amended and in effect at the time of application for Building Permit.
17. Prior to building permit issuance, final landscaping plans for the project shall be designed to City of Orange Page 4 of 5 Printed on 2/16/2022
powered by Legistar™253
Item #: 5.1. 2/16/2022 File #: 22-0078
17. Prior to building permit issuance, final landscaping plans for the project shall be designed to comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines as described in Section IX et al of the City of Orange Landscape Standards and Specifications.
18. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall prepare a final landscaping and irrigation plan consistent with the grading plans, site plans, and the conceptual landscaping plan as proposed for the project for the review and approval of the Director of Community Development and Community Services Director.
19. Landscape maintenance shall be performed in such a manner as to allow all trees to retain their full canopy height for screening and full canopy breadth for shade at point of maturity, except as required for public safety purposes.
12. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
· Attachment 2 - Design Review Committee Minutes dated November 3, 2021 · Attachment 3 - Development Plans
City of Orange Page 5 of 5 Printed on 2/16/2022
powered by Legistar™254
255
256
257
258
Agenda Item
Planning Commission
Item #: 5.2. 7/17/2023 File #: 23-0441
TO: Chair and Members of the Planning Commission
THRU: Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director FROM: Robert Garcia, Senior Planner
1. SUBJECT
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review (MJSP) No. 1039-21, Design Review (DRC) No. 5028-21, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 1870-20, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program.
2. SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing the demolition of an existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building.
3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 10-23 entitled:
A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Orange approving Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, Design Review No. 5028-21, and Environmental Impact Report No. 1870-20 to demolish an existing 40,000 square foot (SF) manufacturing facility and site redevelopment with a 57,900 SF truck terminal that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF of office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building, located at 534 W. Struck Avenue.
4. AUTHORIZING GUIDELINES
Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Sections 17.08.020, 17.10.030.C, 17.10.060.E, and 17.13.030 authorize the Planning Commission to review and take action on the subject applications. Table
17.08.020 - Reviewing Bodies of the OMC states that when more than one type of application is filed for a single project, the application requiring the highest level of approval shall dictate the review process for the entire group of applications. Therefore, the Planning Commission is acting as the recommending body on all applications for the project to the City Council.
5. PROJECT BACKGROUND
Applicant: Prologis L.P., Maggie Xu, Director of Project Management Property Owner Prologis L.P.
Property Location 534 W. Struck Avenue
Existing General Plan Land Use
Element Designation
Light Industrial (Max 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR))
Existing Zoning Classification Industrial Manufacturing (M-2) Old Towne No
Specific Plan/PC No
City of Orange Page 1 of 6 Printed on 7/13/2023
powered by Legistar™259
Item #: 5.2. 7/17/2023 File #: 23-0441
Applicant: Prologis L.P., Maggie Xu, Director of Project Management Property Owner Prologis L.P.
Property Location 534 W. Struck Avenue
Existing General Plan Land Use
Element Designation
Light Industrial (Max 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR))
Existing Zoning Classification Industrial Manufacturing (M-2) Old Towne No
Specific Plan/PC No
Site Size 9.94 acres
Circulation Vehicular access to the site would be provided via two driveways along the site’s northern border along Struck Avenue. areas.
Existing Conditions Until the end of 2020 the site was occupied by Nursery Supplies, Inc., a manufacturer of plastic nursery planting pots. Current site improvements consist of an approximate 40,000 SF concrete tilt-up building, and parking. The project site contains ornamental landscaping along the site’s frontage at Struck Avenue.
Surrounding Land Uses and
Zoning
North: The property to the north of the site on the opposite side of Struck Avenue, is zoned for Public Facility uses and includes the City of Orange Public Works Department Facilities Division and related corporation yard and the Homeless Navigation Center (HUB).
Additionally, an affordable multi-family residential development project is currently under construction on the property immediately north of the HUB on a site that was formally part of the City’s corporation yard. East: The property to the east of the site on the opposite side of the railroad tracks, is zoned for Industrial and Light Industrial uses. This area contains industrial buildings and a storage yard containing various vehicles and storage facilities. South/West:
The properties to the immediate south and west are zoned for Light Industrial uses and include several industrial and commercial businesses.
Previous
Applications/Entitlements
Conditional Use Permit No. 1190 was approved on February 11, 1982, to allow use of a trailer as a temporary office for recreational vehicle storage.
6. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project involves the demolition of the existing 40,000 SF manufacturing facility and complete redevelopment of the project site. The project would also include the removal of the existing unused Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad spur located on the east side of the site. The site would then be redeveloped with a 57,900 SF truck terminal, that includes 52,900 SF of warehouse space, 5,000 SF office space, and an accessory 5,400 SF maintenance building. The proposed building would be up to 45 feet in height and include 84 loading dock doors. The project would provide 62 automobile parking stalls, 15 in excess of the required parking. Additionally, the project would provide 188 trailer parking stalls. The building would operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is anticipated that the facility would employ a total of 60 to 130 employees over the work shifts.
Development of the project would enhance the existing industrial character of the site and surrounding area with new modern building elevations, new landscaping, hardscape, other on-site improvements, and street frontage improvements. Development of the truck terminal would replace the existing building with a new modern concrete tilt-up building. Additional details about the City of Orange Page 2 of 6 Printed on 7/13/2023
powered by Legistar™260
Item #: 5.2. 7/17/2023 File #: 23-0441
the existing building with a new modern concrete tilt-up building. Additional details about the architectural and landscape design can be found in the Design Review Committee (DRC) staff reports and development plans (Attachments 3 and 5). The 84 loading dock doors are distributed between the east and west elevations. The 45-foot tall building would be setback 10 feet from Struck Avenue. A maintenance building at the southeast portion of the property would be constructed behind the facility, out of sight from public views. The building would consist of concrete tilt-up panels with pre-finished flush metal panels.
Exterior lighting would be installed on-site, as necessary, for safety and security. Decorative architectural lighting would also be installed to accent building entries as focal points throughout the site.
An 8-foot high tubular steel fence along the site’s perimeter would enclose the proposed building, parking area, truck court, and loading dock area. The fence would also serve as a safety feature to secure the site and employees given the continuous operational characteristics of the use.
Development Standards
Required Proposed Code Section
Building Height 45 feet or 3-stories 42 feet, 1-story 17.20.080 and General Plan, Land
Use Element
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0 FAR 0.15 FAR General Plan, Land Use Element
Setback, Front 10 feet (when adjacent to a
local street)
80 feet Truck Terminal 730
feet Maintenance
17.20.090
Setback, Rear 0 feet 125 feet Truck Terminal 0
feet Maintenance
17.20.090
Setback, West Side 0 feet 197 feet Truck Terminal
360 feet Maintenance
17.20.090
Setback, East Side 0 feet 254 feet Truck Terminal 93
feet Maintenance
17.20.090
Parking (nonresidential)47 passenger vehicle
parking spaces
62 passenger vehicle
parking spaces. 166 trailer
parking spaces
Table 17.34.060.B
Loading area (nonresidential)10 X 60 feet: For industrial uses, loading areas shall be
located to provide adequate
maneuvering area between
loading doors and parking
stalls, as determined by site
plan review.
10 X 60 Feet provided in
the loading dock area.
17.34.160 and 17.34-
180
Landscaping (nonresidential) Guideline
Benchmarks
Interior side and rear yards:
4 feet or, when adjacent to
perpendicular parking, 6
feet; 125 trees required
throughout the site, 25
percent of required trees
need to be 24-inch box and
75 percent need to be in 15
llh
Landscaping is not
proposed within the
loading dock area, as it
would interfere with the
trailer parking areas. 78
trees provided including
four 48” box trees, six 36”
box trees, 68 24” box trees,
d fll
Landscaping
Guidelines
City of Orange Page 3 of 6 Printed on 7/13/2023
powered by Legistar™261
Item #: 5.2. 7/17/2023 File #: 23-0441
located to provide adequate
maneuvering area between
loading doors and parking
stalls, as determined by site
plan review.
Landscaping (nonresidential) Guideline
Benchmarks
Interior side and rear yards:
4 feet or, when adjacent to
perpendicular parking, 6
feet; 125 trees required
throughout the site, 25
percent of required trees
need to be 24-inch box and
75 percent need to be in 15
gallon containers; Trash
Enclosures: require a 4-foot
wide landscaped planter on
at least two sides.
Landscaping is not
proposed within the
loading dock area, as it
would interfere with the
trailer parking areas. 78
trees provided including
four 48” box trees, six 36”
box trees, 68 24” box trees,
and five 15 gallon trees;
Trash Enclosures: 4-foot
wide landscaping on two
sides.
Landscaping
Guidelines
Fence height Front Yard Setback: Along
non-arterial streets, open
fences may be up to 6 feet
in height. All Other Areas:
Fences and walls 8 feet in
height.
8 feet along the entire
perimeter. A site
assessment for additional
height was submitted for
review by the Community
Development Director.
17.12.070
7. ANALYSIS AND STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
The project has been designed to comply with the development standards of the M-2 zone with the exception of the landscape guidelines and to be compatible with the adjacent surrounding development and uses. The proposed contemporary building design and scale complement the character of the area. Overall, the proposed project presents an integrated design that provides a renewed, updated, and improved appearance to the site and to the surrounding community.
Topic 1 Landscaping:
Based on the City’s Landscape Guidelines the benchmark calculation for tree quantity, 125 trees are recommended for the project site. The revised proposal includes 78 trees, which is short of the benchmark for the site. Landscaping is not proposed along the east, south, and west perimeter beyond the security gates, as it would interfere with the trailer parking areas located along the perimeter of the site. However, landscaping does include drought tolerant trees on the south side corner areas at the rear of the property.
The DRC reviewed the proposal and made a recommendation of approval with conditions designed to alleviate the lack of landscaping on the site. Conditions of Approval No 18-24, in Resolution No.
PC 10-23 (Attachment 1) address tree upsizing, in some areas to a minimum of 50 feet in height, upsizing from 15-gallon trees to 24” box trees, and increasing the number of on-site trees from 68 to 78 (Attachment 4).
Given the nature of the use, a majority of the site is needed for the movement and parking of trucks.
Further, the project and the multi-family residential project across the cul-de-sac use the same or similar tree and planting materials in an effort to provide a compatible landscape theme. Staff believes that the landscape plan achieves the intent of the City’s landscape standards despite the lack of landscaping on the truck bay area of the site.
8. PUBLIC NOTICE
On July 6, the City sent a Public Hearing Notice to a total of 38 property owners/tenants within a 400- foot radius of the project site and persons specifically requesting notice. The project site has been City of Orange Page 4 of 6 Printed on 7/13/2023
powered by Legistar™262
Item #: 5.2. 7/17/2023 File #: 23-0441
foot radius of the project site and persons specifically requesting notice. The project site has been posted in one location with the notification on that same date.
9. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was originally prepared for the proposed project. On September 23, 2021, the City circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 for the Project. The MND was circulated for public review from September 23, 2021, to October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional technical analysis (e.g., air quality and noise modeling, traffic). Therefore, in order to address the environmental concerns raised, additional analyses were prepared, and a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was prepared to provide comprehensive environmental review of the Project (Attachment 6).
The EIR, (California State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2021090399), was prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Article 9, Sections 15120-15132 to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with constructing and operating the proposed project.
The DEIR was made available for public review in accordance with CEQA between March 31, 2023, and May 15, 2023.
Staff received five written comment letter(s) during the public review period (Attachment 7). The City prepared a Response to Comments to address environmental comments received during the public review period (Attachment 7).
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15087(c)(6), the project site is listed on the EnviroStor database for a historic recognized environmental condition for past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products; however, a no further action was recommended as remediation of soil was completed by Orange County. Implementation of the proposed project may result in significant environmental effects related to the following topical issues:
• Biological Resources (impacts to nesting migratory birds) • Cultural Resources (potential to encounter significant subsurface archaeological resources) • Geology and Soils (potential to unearth and adversely impact paleontological resources) • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (soils contaminated with VOCs) • Tribal Cultural Resources (potential to unearth and adversely impact tribal cultural resources) Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the EIR that reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels (Attachment 5).
10. ADVISORY BOARD ACTION
Staff Review Committee:
The City’s inter-departmental Staff Review Committee (SRC) conducted reviews of the project on March 10, 2021, and June 9, 2021. On September 8, 2021, the SRC recommended that the project proceed to the DRC.
Design Review Committee:
The DRC reviewed the subject proposal on November 11, 2021, meeting and provided comments to the applicant before continuing the item. On February 16, 2022, the DRC reviewed the revised proposal and recommended approval to the Planning Commission with conditions.
11. ATTACHMENTS
City of Orange Page 5 of 6 Printed on 7/13/2023
powered by Legistar™263
Item #: 5.2. 7/17/2023 File #: 23-0441
· Attachment 1 Vicinity Map
· Attachment 2 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 10-23 · Attachment 3 Design Review Committee Staff Reports dated November 3, 2021, and February 16, 2022
· Attachment 4 Design Review Committee Final Minutes dated November 3, 2021, and February 16, 2022
· Attachment 5 Development Plans with Color Elevations and Color Martials Board · Attachment 6 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) No. 1870-20 · Attachment 7 Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) No. 1870-20 · Attachment 8 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Orange Page 6 of 6 Printed on 7/13/2023
powered by Legistar™264
265
266
WEBB N WE S ° ° ° ° ° ° °° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ± ±
267
268
269
270
WEBB N WE S
271
SS WEBB N WE S
272
SS WEBB
N
W
E
S
273
274
± ± WEBB N WE S
275
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X WEBB
N
W
E
S
276
STRUCK AVENUE
FENCE ON PROPERTY
POWER POLES AND
OVERHEAD WIRES
L L L L L L L L L L L
L L
L L
L L
L L L L L L L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L L L L L L
L
L
L
Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj Clj L L
L
L
L
L L L L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L L L L L
L
L
L
L
L
L L L L
L
L
L
L
L
Clj CljClj Clj
Clj Clj
Clj Clj Clj Clj CljClj Clj Clj Clj Clj
Dt
RC
L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L Dt Dt Dt DtDt Dt Dt Dt
Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt
Dt Dt Dt
Dt RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC RC RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC RC RC RC RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
L L L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
L L L L
Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt
DtDt Dt DtDt
L
L
L
L
L
L LINE POWER POLES AND OVERHEAD WIRES
DtDtDtDt DtDt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt
RC
RC
RC RC RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
Dt DtDt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt DtDt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt
DtDt
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
Mr Mr Mr Mr
Mr Mr Mr MrMr MrMr Mr RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
Mr Mr Mr
Mr Mr Mr Mr
Mr Mr Mr Mr
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr
Mr Mr Mr
Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr Mr
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
E
E
E E E
E E E E E E E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
SL SL SL SL
SL
SL
SL SL SL SL SL SL
Mc Mc Mc McMc McMc Mc Mc McMc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc McMc
wgbwgbwgbwgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgbwgbwgbwgbwgbwgbwgbwgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb
E E E E E
Mr Mr
Mr
Mr Mr
wgb wgb wgbwgbwgb wgb wgb wgb wgbwgb
SLSL
Mc McMcMcMc
SLSLSL
SL
SL
SL
Mr MrMr
MrMr MrMr
Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc McMc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc
SL SL SL SL SLMr Mr Mr Mc
SL SL
McMc McMc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc
Mr SL SL SL SL
SL SL SLSL SL
SLSL
MrMr MrMr
Mr W
Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt
Dt Dt Dt Dt Dt
RswRsw Rsw RswRsw Rsw RswRsw RswRsw RswRsw Rsw RswRsw Rsw Rsw Rsw RswRsw RswRsw Rsw RswRsw Rsw RswRsw RswRsw RswRsw Rsw Rsw DW
AV AV
AV
Pg Pg Pg Pg
Pg
PgPg
Pg Pg Pg Pg
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg
DW
AV
AV
AV
AV
wgb
Mc
SL
L wgb wgb wgbwgbwgbwgb wgbwgbwgbwgbwgbwgbwgb wgb wgb wgb wgbwgbwgbwgb wgbwgbwgbwgbwgbwgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgbwgb wgb wgb wgb Aa Aa Aa Aa Aa
Aa AaAa Aa Mc Mc McMcMc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc
Mc Mc Mc Mc McMc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc
Mc Mc Mc Mc McMc Mc Mc McMc McMc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc
SL SL
SL SL SL SL
L
L
L
L DW
DW
DW
DW
DW
Dt Dt Dt Dt
Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg Pg
Pg
Pg
Pg
PgPgPg Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc McMc
Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc Mc
wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb wgb
wgb wgbwgb wgbwgbwgbwgb wgb wgb wgb wgbwgbwgb wgbwgbwgbwgbwgbwgb Mc wgb
RC RC
RC RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC RC
RC RC
RC RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC
RC RC
RC
RC RC RC
RC RC
RC RC
RC RC
RC
RC
W
W
Mr Mr
SL SL SL E
E
SL
RC RC TREES SYMBOL BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME PLANTING LEGEND SIZE QTY WUCOLS REMARKS ACCENTS GROUNDCOVER Rosmarinus o. 'Huntington Carpet' Coast Rosemary Westringia fruticosa SYMBOL SIZE SHRUBS BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME WUCOLS SYMBOL BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE WUCOLS SYMBOL BOTANICAL/COMMON NAME SIZE SPACING WUCOLS Prostrate Rosemary Dasylerion wheeleri Desert Spoon Texas Privet Ligustrum j. Texanum Indian Hawthorn Rhaphiolepis i. 'Springtime' Star Jasmine Trachelopspermum jasminiodes Coral Aloe Aloe striata Agave Agave victoria-reginae 5 Gal L 1 GalL 5 GalL 5 GalM 5 GalL Callistemon 'Little John' Dwarf Bottle Brush 5 GalL Silverberry Elaeagnus pungens Mexican Sage Salvia leucantha 5 Gal
L 5 GalL 5 GalL SPACING SPACING 3' OC 4' OC 3' OC 3' OC 4' OC 5' OC 3' OC 2' OC 4' OC NO EXISTING LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN AND PROPOSED 28,000 S.F. 6.4% OF THE SITE Pinus canariensis Canary Island Pine 24" Box 18 L Standard Rsw Chitalpa tashkentensis Chitalpa 24" Box
7 L Standard Magnolia g. 'Samuel Sommer'
Magnolia 48" Box
4 M Standard 36" Box Crape Myrtle Lagerstroemia i 'Muskogee' 2 M Pistacia chinensis Chinese Pistache 24" Box
8 L Standard Brisbane Box Tristania conferta
3 M Standard 24" Box African Sumac Rhus lancea 10L Standard Prunus c. 'Krauter Vesuvius' Purpleleaf Plum 36" Box 3 L Standard Indian Hawthorn Rhaphiolepis i. 'Snow White' 5 Gal L 3' OC Medicinal Aloe Aloe vera 1 GalL 2' OC Lantana 'Gold Mound' Yellow Lantana 5 GalL 6' OC Rhaphiolepis i. 'Clara' Indian Hawthorn 5 GalM 3' OC Dwarf Coast Rosemary Westringia f. 'Grey Box 5 GalL 3' OC Dianella Dt Dianella tasmanica 5 Gal 0 M Deer Grass Mr Muhlenbergia rigens 5 Gal Pink Muhly Mc Muhlenbergia capillaris 5 Gal Podocarpus gracilior Yew Pine 5 Gal M 4' OCM 3' OCM 4' OC
LRCRSClj
E SL
Wwgb
Pg
LDWAVAa Acacia redolens 'Low Boy' 1 Gal 8' O.C. Dwarf Acacia L Carissa m. 'Green Carpet' Prostrate Natal Plum 1 Gal 36" O.C.M 1 Gal 48" O.C.M 1 Gal 24" O.C.M Standard MA HEIGHT 30' 25' 30' 50' 30' 18' 30' 30' Total Tree Count 78 24" Box 22 24" Box GENERAL NOTES A LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR ALL PROJECTS THAT INVOLVE NEW CONSTRUCTION OR BUILDING ADDITIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL (FOR INDIVIDUAL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, OVER 5,000 SQUARE FEET). IF YOUR PROJECT REQUIRES A WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP), PLEASE ENSURE YOUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND CIVIL ENGINEER COORDINATE PLANS. PLEASE CONTACT CITY'S SENIOR LANDSCAPE COORDINATOR IN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT AT (714) 532-6464 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. LANDSCAPE WAS INCLUDED TO CONTROL ACCESS TO GRAFFITI PRONE WALLS. GRAFFITI RESISTANT SURFACES AND LANDSCAPING FOR EASY MAINTENANCE. WATER DIVISION SHALL APPROVE THE TYPE AND LOCATION OF LANDSCAPING AND FIRE SERVICE (BACKFLOW PREVENTION) DEVICE FOR PROPOSED CITY SERVICES.PRIOR TO CITY APPROVAL OF LANDSCAPE PLANS, THE APPLICANT SHALL REVIEW THE APPROVED WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN AND ENSURE THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLANS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROJECT GRADING PLANS. THE PLANS MUST SHOW ANY PROPOSED STORM WATER TREATMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES SUCH AS BIORETENTION PLANTERS, DRYWELLS, PERMEABLE PAVERS, OR ANY OTHER PROPOSED SURFACE WATER QUALITY BMPS. ALL ABOVE GROUND EQUIPMENT IS TO BE SUFFICIENTLY SCREENED BY PLANT MATERIAL. ALL PARKING VISIBLE TO PUBLIC SHALL BE SCREENED WITH 3' HIGH 5 GALLON SHRUBS AT 3' OC. EXISTING TREES - all existing trees are to be removed due to proposed site conditions # Species Trunk Diameter Condition 1 Eucalyptus citriodora 3.5' Healthy2 Eucalyptus citriodora 3.5' Healthy3 Eucalyptus citriodora 3.5' Healthy4 Eucalyptus citriodora 3.5' Healthy5 Washingtonia robusta 40 bt Healthy6 Avacado 2' Healthy7 Cupaniopsis anacardioides 1.5' Healthy8 Cupaniopsis anacardioides 1.5' Healthy9 Cupaniopsis anacardioides 1.5' Healthy 10 Cupaniopsis anacardioides 1.5' Healthy 11 Cupaniopsis anacardioides 1.5' Healthy 121314 Eriobotrya japonica 1.5' Healthy 15 Olea europaea 2.5' Unhealthy 16 Fraxinus spp 1.5' Healthy Cupaniopsis anacardioides 1.5' Healthy Cupaniopsis anacardioides 1.5' Healthy 17 Fraxinus spp 1.5' Healthy 18-23 Archontophoenix cunninghamiana 15' Healthy 24 Cupaniopsis anacardioides 1.5' Healthy 25 Archontophoenix cunninghamiana 15' Healthy 26 Saygrus romanzoffiana 15' Healthy 2728 Psidium guajava 10" Healthy 29 10" Healthy 30 Eucalyptus citriodora 3.5' Healthy Fraxinus spp 1.5' Psidium guajava Unhealthy City of Orange, California 20-069 05.21.20 534 W Struck Avenue 0 15' 30' 60' 711 FEE ANA STREET 714.986.2400 FAX 714.986.2408 PLACENTIA, CA 92870 N Prologis 06.22.20 08.20.20 05.05.21 08.05.21 10.11.21 01.27.22 03.22.22 06.27.22 06.27.23 277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10
AB
CD
E
F
G
DRAWING NUMBER :
POINT-BY-POINT CALCULATION
LAYOUT DESIGNER :DESIGNER EMAIL :PROJECT DATE :REVISION DATE :
-
www.performanceltg.com
Phone: (949) 878-9000 Fax: (949) 878-9001
5 Jenner Suite 130 Irvine, CA 92618
MICHAEL [email protected]
***DISCLAIMER***BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, ALL DIMENSIONS AND LUMINAIRE LOCATIONS SHOWN REPRESENT RECOMMENDED POSITIONS. THE PROJECT ENGINEER AND/OR ARCHITECT MUST DETERMINE APPLICABILITY OF THE LAYOUT TO EXISTING OR FUTURE FIELD CONDITIONS. THE LIGHTING DATAREPRESENTS ILLUMINATION LEVELS TAKEN FROM A LABORATORY SETTING UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ILLUMINATING ENGINEERING SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA (IESNA) APPROVED METHODS. ACTUAL PERFORMANCE MAY VARY DUE TO VARIATIONS IN ELECTRICAL VOLTAGE, INSTALLATION, TOLERANCE LEVELS, BUILDINGS, OTHER LIGHTING, AND OTHER VARIABLES THAT WERE NOT CONSIDERED WHEN THIS PHOTOMETRIC REPORT WAS CREATED. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER OR PROJECT ENGINEER TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE OF ALL STANDARDS INEFFECT. THIS PHOTOMETRIC LAYOUT IS THE PROPERTY OF PERFORMANCE LIGHTING AND IT CANNOT BE USED FOR INSTALLATION OF PRODUCTS OTHER THAN SPECIFIED.***ALL PHOTOMETRIC LAYOUTS, SUBMITTALS, AND QUOTES BY PERFORMANCE LIGHTING SYSTEMS AND OTHERS MUST BE PROVIDED AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE ORDER ENTRY. PERFORMANCE LIGHTING SYSTEM IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DISCREPANCIES IN PROVIDED PRODUCT DOCUMENTS ARE NOT ADDRESS:
Illuminance at Grade (Footcandles), unless otherwise specified.
QUOTE / PRICING : RYAN LIEBER - [email protected] 04/15/2021MG041521PRO-534 W STRUCK AVE ORANGE CA-0207/15/2021 WP1MH: 23.25WP1MH: 23.25
MH: 23.25WP1
WP1MH: 23.25 MH: 23.25
WP1 WP1
MH: 23.25
WP1MH: 23.25
WP1MH: 23.25
WP1MH: 23.25
WP1MH: 23.25
WP1MH: 23.25 MH: 23.25
WP1
MH: 23.25WP1
MH: 23.25WP1
MH: 23.25WP1
MH: 23.25WP1 WP1
MH: 23.25
WP1MH: 23.25
P2MH: 25
P2MH: 25
P2MH: 25
P2MH: 25
P2MH: 25
P1MH: 25P1MH: 25MH: 25P1MH: 25P1
MH: 25P1
MH: 25P1P1MH: 25
P2MH: 25
P1MH: 25
P1MH: 25 MH: 25
P1
MH: 25P1
MH: 25P1
MH: 31.5WP1
MH: 28.75WP1
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ?
? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ?
? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ?
? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ?
? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ?
? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
?
?
? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
??
?
? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
??
? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ?
? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ??
? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ?
?
?
?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
EAST TRUCK PARKING STALLS
SOUTH TRUCK PARKING STALLS
WEST TRUCK PARKING STALLS
WEST DOCK AREA
EAST DOCK AREA
285
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10
AB
CD
E
F
G
DRAWING NUMBER :
POINT-BY-POINT CALCULATION
LAYOUT DESIGNER :DESIGNER EMAIL :PROJECT DATE :REVISION DATE :
-
www.performanceltg.com
Phone: (949) 878-9000 Fax: (949) 878-9001
5 Jenner Suite 130 Irvine, CA 92618
MICHAEL [email protected]
***DISCLAIMER***BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, ALL DIMENSIONS AND LUMINAIRE LOCATIONS SHOWN REPRESENT RECOMMENDED POSITIONS. THE PROJECT ENGINEER AND/OR ARCHITECT MUST DETERMINE APPLICABILITY OF THE LAYOUT TO EXISTING OR FUTURE FIELD CONDITIONS. THE LIGHTING DATAREPRESENTS ILLUMINATION LEVELS TAKEN FROM A LABORATORY SETTING UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ILLUMINATING ENGINEERING SOCIETY OF NORTH AMERICA (IESNA) APPROVED METHODS. ACTUAL PERFORMANCE MAY VARY DUE TO VARIATIONS IN ELECTRICAL VOLTAGE, INSTALLATION, TOLERANCE LEVELS, BUILDINGS, OTHER LIGHTING, AND OTHER VARIABLES THAT WERE NOT CONSIDERED WHEN THIS PHOTOMETRIC REPORT WAS CREATED. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OWNER OR PROJECT ENGINEER TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE OF ALL STANDARDS INEFFECT. THIS PHOTOMETRIC LAYOUT IS THE PROPERTY OF PERFORMANCE LIGHTING AND IT CANNOT BE USED FOR INSTALLATION OF PRODUCTS OTHER THAN SPECIFIED.***ALL PHOTOMETRIC LAYOUTS, SUBMITTALS, AND QUOTES BY PERFORMANCE LIGHTING SYSTEMS AND OTHERS MUST BE PROVIDED AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE ORDER ENTRY. PERFORMANCE LIGHTING SYSTEM IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DISCREPANCIES IN PROVIDED PRODUCT DOCUMENTS ARE NOT ADDRESS:
Illuminance at Grade (Footcandles), unless otherwise specified.
QUOTE / PRICING : RYAN LIEBER - [email protected] 04/15/2021MG041521PRO-534 W STRUCK AVE ORANGE CA-0207/15/2021 Luminaire Schedule
Calculation SummaryLabel CalcType Units Avg Max
Symbol Qty Label Arrangement Total Lamp Lumens LLF Description BUG Rating Min Avg/Min
Lum. Watts
Max/Min
CALC AREA Illuminance Fc
?
?
? N.A. N.A.
EAST PROPERTY LINE
Illuminance Fc
?
?
? N.A. N.A.
EAST DOCK AREA Illuminance Fc 0.00 0.0 0.0 N.A. N.A.EAST TRUCK PARKING STALLS Illuminance Fc 0.00 0.0 0.0 N.A. N.A.
SOUTH TRUCK PARKING STALLS
Illuminance Fc 0.00 0.0 0.0 N.A. N.A.
WEST DOCK AREAIlluminance Fc 0.00 0.0 0.0 N.A. N.A.WEST TRUCK PARKING STALLS Illuminance Fc 0.00 0.0 0.0
12 P1 SINGLE N.A. 0.900 RSX2 LED P2 40K R4 B2-U0-G3 114.0716 P2 2 @ 180 DEGREES N.A. 0.900 RSX2 LED P2 40K R5 B5-U0-G3 114.07120 WP1 SINGLE N.A. 0.900 RSX2 LED P2 40K R4 B2-U0-G3 114.071 N.A. N.A.
286
5 34WStruckAvenueConceptualSitePlan-ExisƟng
CityofOrange,CA
#15175
10.12.2021
EXISTINGRAILROAD
STRUCK AVENUE
PARKER STREET
EXISTINGBUILDING
287
288
289
TREES SHRUBS ACCENTS GROUNDCOVER
CityofOrange,California
Sheet1
Rhuslancea/
AfricanSumac
Muhlenbergiacapillaris/
PinkMuhly
Agavevictoria-reginae/
Agave
Acaciaredolens“LowBow”/
DwarfAcacia
Carissam“GreenCarpet”/
ProstrateNatalPlum
Trachelopspermumjasminiodes/
StarJasmine
Rosemarinuso.‘HuntingtonCarpet’/
ProstrateRosemary
Aloestriata/
CoralAloe
Dasylirionwheeleri/
DesertSpoon
AloeVera/
MedicincalAloe
Westringiafruticosa/
CoastRosemary
Elaeagnuspunges/
Silverberry
Lantana“GoldMound”/
YellowLantana
Rhaphiolepisi.‘Springtime”/
IndianHawthorne
Callistemon“LittleJohn”/
DwarfBottleBrush
Salvialeucantha/
MexicanBushSage
Pinuscanariensis/
CanaryIslandPine
Chilopsislinearis/
DesertWillow
Pistaciachinensis/
ChinesePistache
Prunusc.“KrauterVesuvius”/
PurpleLeafPlum
StruckAvenue
PlantPaletteExhibit
290
TREES SHRUBS
CityofOrange,California
Sheet2
Chitalpatashkentensis/
Chitalpa
Dianellatasmanica/
Dianella
Podocarpusgracilior/
YewPine
Rhaphiolepisi“SnowWhite”/
IndianHawthorne
Rhaphiolepisi“SnowWhite”/
IndianHawthorne
Westringiaf“GreyBox”/
DwarfCoastRosemary
Westringiaf“GreyBox”/
DwarfCoastRosemary
LigustrumjTexanum/
TexasPrivet
Muhlenbergiarigens/
DeerGrass
Rhaphiolepisi“Clara”/
IndianHawthorne
Tristaniaconferta/
BrisbaneBox
Lagerstroemiai“Muskogee”/
CrapeMyrtle
Magnoliag“SamuelSommer”/
Magnolia
StruckAvenue
PlantPaletteExhibit
291
# 15175
18831 BARDEEN AVE. - STE. #100 IRVINE, CA 92612 07.14.2021.
TEL: 949.863.1770 FAX: 949.863.0851 EMAIL: [email protected] Perspective View at Struck Ave.
Orange, CA.
292
293
294
295
296
297
Draft Environmental Impact Report
SCH No. 2021090399
534 Struck Avenue
City of Orange, California
Lead Agency
City of Orange
300 East Chapman Avenue
Orange, CA 92866
CEQA Consultant
T&B Planning, Inc.
3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92602
Project Applicant
Prologis
17777 Center Court Drive North, Suite 100
Cerritos, CA 90703
Lead Agency Discretionary Permits
Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21
Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21
Design Review No. 5028-21
Environmental Review No. 1870-20
March 2023
298
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Name and Number Page
S.0 Executive Summary.........................................................................................................S-1 S.1 Introduction............................................................................................................... S-1 S.2 Project Overview ...................................................................................................... S-2 S.2.1 Location and Setting......................................................................................S-2 S.2.2 Project Summary ...........................................................................................S-3 S.2.3 Project Objectives .........................................................................................S-3 S.3 EIR Process............................................................................................................... S-3 S.4 Areas of Controversy and Issues to be Resolved...................................................... S-4 S.5 Alternatives to the Proposed Project......................................................................... S-5 S.5.1 No Project/No Development Alternative .......................................................S-5 S.5.2 No Project/Existing Zoning Alternative ........................................................S-5 S.5.3 Reuse Alternative...........................................................................................S-6 S.6 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Conclusions ................................. S-6
1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................1-1
1.1 Purposes of CEQA and Legal Authority for this Draft EIR ......................................1-1
1.2 Summary of the Project Evaluated by this EIR .........................................................1-2
1.3 CEQA Process Overview...........................................................................................1-2
1.4 Project Background....................................................................................................1-4
1.4.1 Comments received during the MND Public Review Period ........................1-4
1.5 Draft EIR Scope, Format, and Content......................................................................1-7
1.5.1 Draft EIR Scope.............................................................................................1-7
1.5.2 Use of this EIR.............................................................................................1-11
1.5.3 Content and Organization of this Draft EIR ...............................................1-12
1.5.4 Incorporation by Reference.........................................................................1-14
1.6 Responsible and Trustee Agencies ..........................................................................1-15
1.7 Areas of Controversy ...............................................................................................1-16
2.0 Environmental Setting ....................................................................................................2-1
2.1 Regional Setting and Location...................................................................................2-1
2.2 Local Setting and Location ........................................................................................2-1
2.3 Surrounding Land Uses..............................................................................................2-1
2.4 Planning Context........................................................................................................2-6
2.4.1 City of Orange General Plan ........................................................................2-6
2.4.2 Zoning............................................................................................................2-6
2.5 Existing Physical Site Conditions..............................................................................2-6
2.5.1 Natural Resources and Topographic Features .............................................2-6
2.5.2 Air Quality and Climate ................................................................................2-9 299
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page ii
2.5.3 Cultural Resources & Tribal Cultural Resources.........................................2-9
2.5.4 Geology .........................................................................................................2-9
2.5.5 Hydrology....................................................................................................2-10
2.5.6 Noise............................................................................................................2-10
2.5.7 Transportation.............................................................................................2-10
2.5.8 Utilities and Service Systems.......................................................................2-11
3.0 Project Description .........................................................................................................3-1
3.1 Regional Setting.........................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Project Location and Setting......................................................................................3-1
3.3 Statement of Objectives.............................................................................................3-1
3.4 Proposed Project ........................................................................................................3-2
3.4.1 Building Characteristics and Operations......................................................3-5
3.4.2 Traffic, Circulation and Parking...................................................................3-7
3.5 Project Construction Details......................................................................................3-8
3.6 Summary of Requested Actions...............................................................................3-12
4.0 Environmental Analysis...................................................................................................4-1
4.0.1 Summary of EIR Scope ..................................................................................4-1
4.0.2 Analysis Format.............................................................................................4-1
4.0.3 Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis............................................................4-2
4.0.4 Related Projects.............................................................................................4-5
4.1 Air Quality ..............................................................................................................4.1-1
4.1.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................4.1-1
4.1.2 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.1-9
4.1.3 Methodology.............................................................................................4.1-13
4.1.4 Basis for Determining Significance..........................................................4.1-23
4.1.5 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................4.1-24
4.1.6 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.1-33
4.1.7 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.1-34
4.1.8 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.1-34
4.2 Biological Resources ..............................................................................................4.2-1
4.2.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................4.2-1
4.2.2 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.2-2
4.2.3 Basis for Determining Significance............................................................4.2-5
4.2.4 Impact Analysis ..........................................................................................4.2-6
4.2.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis.......................................................................4.2-8
4.2.6 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation .................................................4.2-9
4.2.7 Mitigation ...................................................................................................4.2-9
4.2.8 Significance of Impacts After Mitigation..................................................4.2-10
4.3 Cultural Resources..................................................................................................4.3-1
4.3.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................4.3-1
4.3.2 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.3-3 300
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page iii
4.3.3 Basis for Determining Significance..........................................................4.3-11
4.3.4 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................4.3-11
4.3.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.3-12
4.3.6 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.3-13
4.3.7 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.3-13
4.3.8 Significance of Impacts After Mitigation..................................................4.3-14
4.4 Energy.....................................................................................................................4.4-1
4.4.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................4.4-1
4.4.2 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.4-2
4.4.3 Methodology...............................................................................................4.4-4
4.4.4 Basis for Determining Significance............................................................4.4-5
4.4.5 Impact Analysis ..........................................................................................4.4-5
4.4.6 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.4-12
4.4.7 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.4-12
4.4.8 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.4-13
4.5 Geology and Soils...................................................................................................4.5-1
4.5.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................4.5-1
4.5.2 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.5-3
4.5.3 Basis for Determining Significance............................................................4.5-6
4.5.4 Impact Analysis ..........................................................................................4.5-7
4.5.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.5-11
4.5.6 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.5-12
4.5.7 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.5-13
4.5.8 Significance of Impacts After Mitigation..................................................4.5-13
4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions.....................................................................................4.6-1
4.6.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................4.6-1
4.6.2 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.6-8
4.6.3 Methodology.............................................................................................4.6-22
4.6.4 Basis for Determining Significance..........................................................4.6-25
4.6.5 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................4.6-26
4.6.6 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.6-32
4.6.7 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.6-32
4.6.8 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.6-33
4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials...........................................................................4.7-1
4.7.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................4.7-1
4.7.2 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.7-3
4.7.3 Basis for Determining Significance............................................................4.7-7
4.7.4 Impact Analysis ..........................................................................................4.7-8
4.7.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.7-15
4.7.6 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.7-16
4.7.7 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.7-17
4.7.8 Significance of Impacts After Mitigation..................................................4.7-17 301
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page iv
4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality.................................................................................4.8-1
4.8.1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................4.8-1
4.8.2 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.8-3
4.8.3 Basis for Determining Significance............................................................4.8-7
4.8.4 Impact Analysis ..........................................................................................4.8-7
4.8.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.8-15
4.8.6 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.8-17
4.8.7 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.8-17
4.9 Noise .......................................................................................................................4.9-1
4.9.1 Noise Fundamentals...................................................................................4.9-1
4.9.2 Existing Noise Conditions ..........................................................................4.9-3
4.9.3 Regulatory Framework...............................................................................4.9-5
4.9.4 Basis for Determining Significance............................................................4.9-9
4.9.5 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................4.9-10
4.9.6 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.9-20
4.9.7 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.9-22
4.9.8 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.9-23
4.10 Transportation.......................................................................................................4.10-1
4.10.1 Environmental Setting ..............................................................................4.10-1
4.10.2 Regulatory Framework.............................................................................4.10-5
4.10.3 Methodology.............................................................................................4.10-6
4.10.4 Basis for Determining Significance..........................................................4.10-7
4.10.5 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................4.10-7
4.10.6 Cumulative Impact Analysis...................................................................4.10-15
4.10.7 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation .............................................4.10-15
4.10.8 Mitigation ...............................................................................................4.10-15
4.11 Tribal Cultural Resources.....................................................................................4.11-1
4.11.1 Existing Conditions ..................................................................................4.11-1
4.11.2 Regulatory Framework.............................................................................4.11-1
4.11.3 Basis for Determining Significance..........................................................4.11-3
4.11.4 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................4.11-4
4.11.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis.....................................................................4.11-4
4.11.6 Significance of Impacts Before Mitigation ...............................................4.11-5
4.11.7 Mitigation .................................................................................................4.11-5
4.11.8 Significance of Impacts After Mitigation..................................................4.11-6
5.0 Other CEQA Considerations ............................................................................................5-1
5.1 Significant Environmental Effects that Cannot be Avoided if the Project is Implemented...........................................................................................................5-1
5.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would be Caused by the Project Should it be Implemented........................................................................5-1
5.3 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Project....................................................................5-2 302
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page v
5.4 Effects Found not to be Significant During the EIR Preparation Process .................5-4
5.4.1 Aesthetics.......................................................................................................5-4
5.4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources .............................................................5-9
5.4.3 Land Use and Planning...............................................................................5-10
5.4.4 Mineral Resources.......................................................................................5-11
5.4.5 Population and Housing..............................................................................5-11
5.4.6 Public Services............................................................................................5-12
5.4.7 Recreation ...................................................................................................5-14
5.4.8 Utilities and Service Systems.......................................................................5-15
5.4.9 Wildfire........................................................................................................5-20
6.0 Alternatives to the Project..............................................................................................6-1
6.1 Introduction................................................................................................................6-1
6.2 Project Objectives......................................................................................................6-2
6.3 Summary of Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ...................................................6-2
6.4 Alternatives Considered But Not Carried Forward for Detailed Analysis ................6-3
6.4.1 Alternative Site ..............................................................................................6-3
6.4.2 Alternative Development Project On-Site .....................................................6-4
6.4.3 Alternative Land Use.....................................................................................6-4
6.5 Alternatives Analysis.................................................................................................6-5
6.5.1 No Project/No Development Alternative .......................................................6-6
6.5.2 No Project/Existing Zoning Alternative ........................................................6-6
6.5.3 Reuse Alternative...........................................................................................6-7
6.6 Environmentally Superior Alternative .....................................................................6-10
7.0 References ...................................................................................................................7-1
7.1 Persons Contributing to EIR Preparation...................................................................7-1
7.1.1 City of Orange ...............................................................................................7-1
7.1.2 T&B Planning, Inc.........................................................................................7-1
7.2 Documents Appended to this EIR..............................................................................7-1
7.3 Documents Incorporated by Reference......................................................................7-3
7.4 Documents and Websites Consulted..........................................................................7-4
7.5 Persons Consulted/Written or Verbal Communication............................................7-10
7.5.1 Public Service Correspondence ..................................................................7-10
7.5.2 Tribal Consultation .....................................................................................7-10 303
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Number and Name Page
Figure 2-1 Regional Location Map..............................................................................................2-2 Figure 2-2 Local Vicinity Map....................................................................................................2-3 Figure 2-3 USGS Topographic Map............................................................................................2-4 Figure 2-4 Surrounding Land Uses..............................................................................................2-5 Figure 2-5 Existing General Plan Land Use Designations..........................................................2-7 Figure 2-6 Existing Zoning Designations....................................................................................2-8 Figure 3-1 Existing Site Plan.......................................................................................................3-3 Figure 3-2 Truck Terminal Site Plan ...........................................................................................3-4 Figure 3-3 Architectural Elevation ..............................................................................................3-6 Figure 3-4 Conceptual Landscape Plan .......................................................................................3-9 Figure 3-5 Proposed Grading Plan ............................................................................................3-10 Figure 4.0-1 Cumulative Development Location Map...................................................................4-6 Figure 4.1-1 Sensitive Receptor Locations................................................................................4.1-19 Figure 4.1-2 Modeled On-Site Emission Source.......................................................................4.1-21 Figure 4.1-3 Modeled Off-Site Emission Sources.....................................................................4.1-22 Figure 4.8-1 Existing Conditions Hydrology Map ......................................................................4.8-2 Figure 4.9-1 Noise Measurement Locations................................................................................4.9-4 Figure 4.9-2 Receiver Locations................................................................................................4.9-11 Figure 4.9-3 Operational Noise Source Locations.....................................................................4.9-13 Figure 4.10-1 City of Orange General Plan Bike Network .........................................................4.10-2 Figure 4.10-2 Existing Pedestrian Facilities................................................................................4.10-3 Figure 4.10-3 Existing Transit Routes.........................................................................................4.10-4 Figure 4.10-4 Truck Routes.......................................................................................................4.10-10 Figure 4.10-5 Project Driveway Truck Access..........................................................................4.10-14 304
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Number and Name Page
Table S-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program........................................................ S-7 Table 1-1 Summary of MND Comments...................................................................................1-4 Table 1-2 Summary of NOP and Scoping Meeting Comments.................................................1-8 Table 1-3 Location of CEQA Required Topics........................................................................1-14 Table 3-1 Construction Activity Phases and Durations ...........................................................3-11 Table 3-2 Construction Equipment Requirements...................................................................3-12 Table 4.0-1 Cumulative Development Land Use Summary .........................................................4-5 Table 4.1-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards ..............................................................................4.1-6 Table 4.1-2 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin ..................4.1-8 Table 4.1-3 Project Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary 2018-2020 ...................................4.1-9 Table 4.1-4 Maximum Daily Regional Emissions Thresholds ................................................4.1-23 Table 4.1-5 Overall Construction Emissions Summary...........................................................4.1-26 Table 4.1-6 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions.............................................................4.1-26 Table 4.1-7 Localized Construction-Source Emissions ...........................................................4.1-27 Table 4.1-8 Localized Significance Summary of Operations ..................................................4.1-29 Table 4.4-1 Construction Electricity Usage ...............................................................................4.4-6 Table 4.4-2 Project Generated Traffic Annual Fuel Consumption (All Vehicles).....................4.4-8 Table 4.4-3 On-site Cargo Handling Equipment Fuel Consumption Estimates ........................4.4-9 Table 4.4-4 Project Annual Operational Energy Demand Summary .........................................4.4-9 Table 4.6-1 GWP and Atmospheric Lifetime of Select GHGs..................................................4.6-2 Table 4.6-2 Top GHG-Producing Countries and the European Union ......................................4.6-5 Table 4.6-3 Amortized Annual Construction Emissions..........................................................4.6-26 Table 4.6-4 Project GHG Emissions........................................................................................4.6-26 Table 4.6-5 2017 Scoping Plan Consistency Summary ...........................................................4.6-27 Table 4.8-1 Project Peak Flows................................................................................................4.8-13 Table 4.9-1 Indoor Ground-Borne Vibration (GBV) and Ground-Borne Noise Impact Criteria for General Vibration Assessment.............................................................4.9-6 Table 4.9-2 Construction Noise Level Compliance .................................................................4.9-12 Table 4.9-3 Reference Noise Level Measurements..................................................................4.9-14 Table 4.9-4 Operational Noise Level Compliance ...................................................................4.9-16 Table 4.9-5 Existing with Project Traffic Noise Level Increases ............................................4.9-17 Table 4.9-6 Opening Year Conditions with Project Traffic Noise Level Increases.................4.9-18 Table 4.9-7 Project Construction Vibration Levels..................................................................4.9-19 Table 4.9-8 Cumulative Traffic Noise Level Increases............................................................4.9-21 Table 5-1 General Plan Consistency Analysis...........................................................................5-6 Table 5-2 Zoning Development Standards Consistency Analysis.............................................5-7 305
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page viii
TECHNICAL APPENDICES (BOUND SEPARATELY)
Appendix A1 Written Comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendix A2 Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Written Comments on the NOP Appendix B1 Air Quality Impact Assessment
Appendix B2 Health Risk Assessment
Appendix C Biological Technical Report
Appendix D Cultural and Paleontological Resources Letter Report Appendix E Energy Analysis
Appendix F Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation
Appendix G Greenhouse Gas Analysis
Appendix H1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix H2 Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Appendix H3 Soil Management Plan
Appendix I1 Priority Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix I2 Preliminary Drainage Study
Appendix J Noise and Vibration Analysis
Appendix K1 Traffic Analysis
Appendix K2 VMT Screening Evaluation
306
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page ix
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Acronym Definition
§ Section
AB Assembly Bill
AB 52 Native Americans: California Environmental Quality Act AB 1493 Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards
AB 2595 California Clean Air Act
ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
AIRFA American Indian Religious Freedom Act
AFY Acre Feet per Year
A-P Act Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
APN Assessor Parcel Number
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
ASTM American Society of Testing and Materials
ASTs Above ground storage tanks
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BACM Best Available Control Measure
BACT Best Available Control Technology
BMPs Best Management Practices
CAA Federal Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CalEEMod™ California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CalFire California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALGAPS California LBNL GHG Analysis of Policies Spreadsheet CALGreen Code California Green Building Standards Code
CalRecycle California Department of Resources and Recycling Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CBSC California Building Standards Code
CCR California Code of Regulations
307
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page x
CD consistency determination
CDFA California Department of Food and Agriculture
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFGC California Fish and Game Code
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CFS Cubic Feet per Second
CH4 Methane
City City of Orange
CIWQS California Integrated Water Quality System
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNRA California Natural Resources Agency
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
COP Conference of the Parties
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CTR California Toxics Rule
CUP Conditional Use Permit
CWA Clean Water Act
DAMP Drainage Area Management Plan
dB Decibel
dBA A-weighted Decibels
DMV Department of Motor Vehicles
DOC Department of Conservation
DOE Determination of Eligibility
DOSH Division of Occupational Safety and Health
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
DWR Department of Water Resources
ECHO Enforcement and Compliance History Information
EDD Employment Development Department
EDR EDR Sanborn
308
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page xi
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EMFAC Emission Factor Model
EO Executive Order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
EV Electric Vehicle
FEIR Final Environmental Impact Report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
FTA Federal Transit Association
FYI For Your Information
g grams
GBV ground-borne vibration
GBN ground-based noise
GCC Global Climate Change
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agencies
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
GWP Global Warming Potential
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HFCs Hydrofluorocarbons
HHDT Heavy Heavy Duty Trucks
HMTA Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
HMTUSA Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act HSC Health and Safety Code
HSWA Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
HWCL Hazardous Waste Control Law
HWTS Hazardous Waste Transporter Database
I Interstate
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IRLR Irvine Ranch Land Reserve
IRWD Irvine Ranch Water District
309
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page xii
ISO Independent System Operator
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportration Efficiency Act kg kilogram
kBTU kilo-British thermal units
kWh kilowatt-hour
LACNHM Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
LBNL Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
lbs pounds
LDA Light duty autos
LDT Light-duty trucks
Leq equivalent continuous sound level
LHDT light-heavy duty trucks
LI Light Industrial
LIP Local Implementation Plan
LOS Level of Service
LSTs Localized Significance Thresholds
LTL Less than truckload
M-2 Industrial Manufacturing
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MCY Motorcycles
MDV Medium Duty Vehicles
MEIR maximally exposed individual receptor
MGD million gallons per day
MHDT medium-heavy duty truck
MM Mitigation Measure
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMTs million metric tons
MMTCO2e million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
MT metric ton
MTCO2e Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
MWD Metropolitan Water District
MWS Modular wetland system
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
310
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page xiii
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act NCCP Natural Community Conservation Planning
NDC nationally determined contributions
NHL National Historic Landmarks
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NOP Notice of Preparation
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPS National Park Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NTR National Toxic Rules
NVIA Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual
O2 Oxygen
O3 Ozone
OAL Office of Administrative Law
OCFA Orange County Fire Authority
OCFD Orange City Fire Department
OCIWMD Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department OCSD Orange County Sanitation District
OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority
OCTAM Orange County Transportation Analysis Model
ODC Ozone Depleting Compounds
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
OMC Orange Municipal Code
OPR Office of Planning and Research
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Assessment
Pb Lead
PFCs Perfluorocarbons
PG & E Pacific Gas and Electric
PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter (2.5 microns or smaller)
PM10 Fine Particulate Matter (10 microns or smaller)
PPV peak particle velocity
PRPA Paleontological Resources Preservation Act
311
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page xiv
Qof Old alluvial fan deposits
REL Reference Exposure Level
ROGs Reactive Organic Gasses
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency
RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SF/s.f. square foot or square feet
SB Senate Bill
SB 375 California Senate Bill 375, Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008
SB 1389 Integrated Energy Policy Report
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAG Sothern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD Southern Coast Air Quality Management District
SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center
SCE Southern California Edison
SCH California State Clearinghouse (Office of Planning and Research) SCRRA Southern California Regional Rail Authority
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SDG&E San Diego Gas and Electric
SDNHM San Diego Natural History Museum
SF square foot
SF6 Sulfur Hexafluoride
SGMA Sustainable groundwater management act
SHA Safe harbor agreement
SHMA Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
SHPO State Historic Preservation Officers
SHRC State Historical Resources Commission
SIP State Implementation Plan
SNUR Significant New Use Rule
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
SO4 Sulfates
SOC Statement of Overriding Considerations
SoCal Gas Southern California Gas Company
SR State Route
SRA Source Receptor Area
312
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page xv
SRA State Responsibility Area
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Regional Control Board
TAC Toxic Air Contaminants
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone
TEA-21 Transportation Equality Act for 21st Century
TSCA Toxic Substance Control Act
UNFCCC United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change U.S. United States
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds
WDS Waste Discharge System
WMI Watershed Management Initiative
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
ZORI Zones of Required Investigation
313
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report S.0 Executive Summary
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-1
S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
S.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as codified in Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. requires that before a public agency makes a decision to approve a project that could have one or more adverse effects on the physical environment, the agency must inform itself about the project’s potential environmental impacts, give the public an opportunity to comment on the environmental issues, and take feasible measures to avoid or reduce potential harm to the physical environment.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was originally prepared for the proposed 534 Struck Avenue Project. On September 23, 2021, the City circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 for the Project. The MND was circulated for public review from September 23 to October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional technical analysis (e.g., air quality and noise modeling, traffic). Therefore, in order to address the environmental concerns raised, additional analyses were prepared and this EIR was prepared to provide comprehensive environmental review of the Project. The MND and written comments received by the City during the public review period are provided in Technical Appendix A1 to this EIR.
This Environmental Impact Report (EIR), California State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2021090399, was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Article 9, Sections 15120-15132 to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with planning, constructing, and operating the proposed 534 Struck Avenue project (hereinafter, the “Project” or “proposed Project”). This EIR does not recommend approval or denial of the proposed Project; rather, this EIR is a source of factual information regarding potential environmental impacts that may result from implementation of the Project. The Draft EIR will be available for public review for a minimum period of 45 days. After consideration of public comment, the City of Orange (City) will consider certifying the Final EIR and adopting required findings.
The City in its capacity as Lead Agency for the proposed Project has determined that the Project clearly has the potential to result in significant environmental effects and that an EIR shall be prepared that addresses the 11 environmental topic areas list below in detail.
1. Air Quality 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
2. Biological Resources 8. Hydrology and Water Quality
3. Cultural Resources 9. Noise
4. Energy 10. Transportation
5. Geology and Soils 11. Tribal Cultural Resources
6. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
314
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report S.0 Executive Summary
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-2
This EIR’s scope was determined through the independent judgement of the City of Orange pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, and in consideration of comments received by the City in response to the circulated Mitigated Negative Declaration, this EIR’s Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the EIR Scoping Meeting. The NOP and written comments received by the City in response to the NOP, are attached to this EIR as Technical Appendix A2. As determined by the City and in consideration of public comment on the circulated MND and NOP, the 11 environmental subject areas listed above have reasonable potential to be significantly affected by planning, constructing, and/or operating the proposed Project and the potential effects resulting from the Project are analyzed herein.
Refer to EIR Section 4.0, Environmental Analysis, for a full account and analysis of the topic areas listed above. Topic areas for which the EIR concluded that impacts would clearly not be significant and that do not warrant detailed analysis in this EIR are addressed in EIR Section 5.0, Other CEQA Considerations. For each of the aforementioned subject areas, this EIR describes: 1) the physical conditions that existed at the approximate time this EIR’s NOP was filed with the California State Clearinghouse (July 29, 2022); 2) discloses the type and magnitude of potential environmental impacts from Project planning, construction, and operation; and 3) if warranted, recommends feasible mitigation measures that would reduce or avoid significant adverse environmental impacts that the proposed Project may cause.
A summary of the Project’s significant environmental impacts and the mitigation measures imposed by the City of Orange to lessen or avoid those impacts is included in this Executive Summary as Table S-1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The City applies mitigation measures that it determines 1) are feasible and practical for the Project Applicant to implement, 2) are feasible and practical for the City to monitor and enforce, 3) are legal for the City to impose, 4) have an essential nexus to the Project’s impacts, and 4) would result in a benefit to the physical environment. CEQA does not require the Lead Agency to impose mitigation measures that are duplicative of mandatory regulatory requirements.
S.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
S.2.1 LOCATION AND SETTING
The Project site is located at 534 Struck Avenue in the City of Orange, Orange County, California.
The City is in the north-central portion of Orange County. The approximate 9.94-acre Project site (Assessor Parcel Number [APN] 375-331-04) is generally located north of Collins Avenue, east of Batavia Street, south of Struck Avenue, and west of the Orange County Transportation Authority/Southern California Regional Rail Authority (OCTA/SCRRA) Railroad. The Project site is developed with an approximate 40,000 square-foot (sf) concrete tilt-up building and parking lot and was occupied until the end of 2020 by Nursery Supplies, Inc. manufacturing facility. The site is accessed via three two-way driveways along Struck Avenue. 315
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report S.0 Executive Summary
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-3
S.2.2 PROJECT SUMMARY
For purposes of this EIR, the term “Project” refers to the actions required to implement the proposed 534 Struck Avenue project, including planning, construction, and ongoing operation. The Project entails a proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21, Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21, and Design Review No. 5028-21. The Project Applicant is proposing to redevelop the site with a 57,900 sf truck terminal, that includes 52,900 sf of warehouse space and 5,000 sf of office space, and a 5,400-sf maintenance building. Refer to EIR Section 3.0, Project Description, for a detailed description of the Project.
S.2.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The fundamental purpose and goal of the Project is to accomplish the orderly development of an appropriately zoned and designated truck terminal in the City of Orange while also contributing to increased employment opportunities within the area. The project objectives have been refined throughout the planning and design process for the proposed Project and are listed below:
• Create a professional, well-maintained and attractive environment for the development of a truck terminal consistent with the underlying zoning adjacent to nearby transportation routes, including State Route 57 (SR-57) and Interstate 5 (I-5). • Provide the entitlements and framework for the development of a truck terminal with warehouse and office spaces that are responsive to local and regional trade demands. • Provide development that will enhance the City’s economic well-being and employment opportunities for community residents.
• Develop the site with a use that has architectural design and operational characteristics that are compatible with other existing and planned developments in the local area. • Provide a fully secured premise with active management to strengthen the security and safety for the local area.
• Redevelop the Project site with a new modern building that meet current California Building Code and California Green Building Code Stands with increased energy efficiency with existing available infrastructure.
S.3 EIR PROCESS
A MND was originally prepared for the proposed 534 Struck Avenue Project. On September 23, 2021, the City circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 for the Project. The MND was circulated for public review from September 23 to October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional technical analysis (e.g., air 316
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report S.0 Executive Summary
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-4
quality and noise modeling, traffic). Therefore, in order to address the environmental concerns raised, additional analyses were prepared and this EIR was prepared to provide comprehensive environmental review of the Project.
The City filed a NOP with the State Clearinghouse of the California Office of Planning and Research (State Clearinghouse) to indicate that an EIR would be prepared to evaluate the Project’s potential to impact the environment. The NOP was filed with the State Clearinghouse and distributed to potential Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and other interested parties on July 29, 2022, for a 30-day public review period. The City received written comments on the scope of the EIR during those 30 days, which were considered by the City during the preparation of this EIR.
This EIR will be circulated for review and comment by the public and other interested parties, agencies, and organizations for a 45-day review period. During the 45-day public review period, public notices announcing availability of the Draft EIR will be mailed to interested parties, and copies of the Draft EIR and its Technical Appendices will be available for review at the locations indicated in the public notices.
After the close of the 45-day Draft EIR public comment period, the City will prepare and publish responses to written comments it received on the environmental effects of the Project. The Final EIR will be considered for certification by the City of Orange decision-makers. Certification of the Final EIR would be accompanied by the adoption of written findings and a statement of overriding considerations for any significant unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR. In addition, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and because the Project will include mitigation measures, the City must adopt a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP), which describes the process to ensure the Project’s construction and operational activities will comply with the mitigation measure in the Final EIR.
S.4 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY AND ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b)(2) requires the Lead Agency (City of Orange) to identify any known issues of controversy in the Executive Summary.
After consideration of all comments received in response to the NOP and during the Project’s scoping meetings, the Lead Agency has identified environmental issues of concern relating to truck trips and travel, air quality, and noise impacts. No other areas of controversy associated with the proposed Project are known. Considering the foregoing, this EIR addresses all environmental issues that are known by the City and that were identified in the comment letters that the City received in response to the circulated MND and the NOP. Written comments received by the City in response to the circulated MND and the NOP are summarized in Section 1.0 of this EIR (refer to Table 1-1, Summary of MND Comments, and Table 1-2, Summary of NOP and Scoping Meeting Comments). 317
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report S.0 Executive Summary
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-5
S.5 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. As demonstrated in Section 4.0 of this EIR, implementation of the Project would not result in significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance after the implementation of Project design features, mandatory regulatory requirements, and feasible mitigation measures; thus, there is no need for the City to consider adoption of alternative development scenarios to the Project. Notwithstanding, the EIR does address the following alternative:
S.5.1 NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE
The No Project/No Development Alternative considers no development on the Project site beyond what occurs on the site under existing conditions (as described in EIR Section 3.0). As such, the Project site would remain with an existing vacated 40,000 square foot concrete tilt-up manufacturing building.
Under this alternative, no future operations or improvements would be made to the Project site and none of the Project’s parking, utility, and infrastructure improvements would occur. The No Project/No Development Alternative would leave the site vacant with the existing manufacturing building and associated parking, therefore, no environmental impacts would occur. This alternative would eliminate the Project’s construction-related impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, paleontological resources, and tribal cultural resources. However, this alternative would fail to meet all of the Project’s objectives.
S.5.2 NO PROJECT/EXISTING ZONING ALTERNATIVE
The No Project/Existing Zoning Alternative considers redevelopment of the Project site with a warehouse building that would be allowed under the existing M-2 zoning. Under this alternative, the site would be redeveloped with a 201,520 square foot warehouse building which represents continuation of development consistent with the existing community development type and zoning designations. Because this alternative would result in redevelopment of the Project site, it would result in the same construction-related impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, paleontological resources, hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources as the Project. The No Project/Existing Zoning Alternative would not avoid or substantially lessen any of the Project’s significant impacts.
This alternative would not fully meet Project Objectives 1 (Create a professional, well-maintained and attractive environment for the development of a truck terminal consistent with the underlying zoning adjacent to nearby transportation infrastructure such as the SR-57 and I-5) and 2 (Provide the entitlements and framework for the development of a truck terminal with warehouse and office spaces that are responsive to local and regional trade demands) because the site would not be developed with a truck terminal use. The remaining Project Objectives 3–6 would be attained with this alternative. 318
534 Struck Avenue
Environmental Impact Report S.0 Executive Summary
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-6
S.5.3 REUSE ALTERNATIVE
The Reuse Alternative assumes the Project does not proceed and the existing 40,000 square-foot concrete tilt-up manufacturing building and parking lot would remain and be reused by a future tenant.
Until the end of 2020, the Project site was occupied by Nursery Supplies, Inc., a manufacturer of plastic nursery planting pots. Under the Reuse Alternative, the existing building and associated facilities onsite would be retained and reoccupied for use with a similar manufacturing use that is consistent with that allowed by-right pursuant to the M-2 zone. Because no grading would occur under the Reuse Alternative, impacts related to archaeological resources, biological resources, paleontological resources, hazardous materials, and tribal cultural resources would be eliminated. However, the Reuse Alternative would not result in remediation of the site in the event that unknown contaminated soils are present during grading. Additionally, this alternative would result in increased operational energy demand and GHG emissions compared to the Project, because it would not redevelop the Project site with a new modern building that meets current California Building Code and California Green Building Code standards with increased energy efficiency with existing available infrastructure. Moreover, the Reuse Alternative does not meet the overall intent of Project Objectives 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6; and only partially meets Project Objective 4.
S.6 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, AND CONCLUSIONS Table S-1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program provides a summary of the Project’s environmental impacts, as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(a). Also presented are the mitigation measures recommended by the Lead Agency to further avoid adverse environmental impacts or to reduce their level of significance. After the application of all feasible mitigation measures, the Project would not result in any significant and unavoidable environmental effects. 319
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-7
Table S-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
4.1 Air Quality
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project would not emit air pollutants
that would contribute to a delay in the
attainment of federal and State ozone
standards in the SCAB. As such, the Project
would not conflict with and could obstruct
implementation of the AQMP, and impacts
would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold b: Less-than-Significant Impact.
Project-related activities would not exceed
the applicable South Coast AQMD regional
thresholds of significance during
construction and operations. As such,
Project-related emissions would not violate
South Coast AQMD air quality standards or
contribute to the non-attainment of ozone
standards in the SCAB, and impacts would
be less than significant
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold c: Less-than-Significant Impact.
Implementation of the Project would not: 1)
exceed applicable South Coast AQMD
localized criteria pollution emissions
thresholds during construction and
operation; 2) would not expose sensitive
receptors to toxic air contaminants (i.e.,
DPM) that exceed the applicable South
Coast AQMD carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic risk significance thresholds; and 3) would not cause or measurably
contribute to the formation of a CO “hot
spot.”
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
320
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-8
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
Threshold d: Less-than-Significant Impact.
Although short-term construction activities
and long-term operational land uses could
produce objectionable odors, compliance
with standard construction requirements and
regulations established by the City of
Orange and South Coast AQMD would
reduce odor impacts to less-than-significant
levels. Near- and long-term odor impacts
would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
4.2 Biological Resources
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: No Impact. The Project site
does not contain habitat that is suitable
habitat for any plant or wildlife species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold b: No Impact. The Project site
does not contain riparian and/or other
sensitive natural habitats; therefore, the
Project would have no impact on riparian or
other sensitive habitats as classified by the
CDFW or USFWS.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold c: No Impact. No State- or
federally-protected wetlands are located on
the Project site; therefore, no impact to
wetlands would occur.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold d: Potentially Significant Direct
Impact. There is no potential for the Project
to interfere with the movement of fish or
impede the use of a native wildlife nursery
site. However, the Project has the potential
to impact nesting migratory birds protected
by the MBTA and California Fish and Game
Code, should habitat removal occur during
MM 4.2-1 In the event that vegetation and tree removal
should occur between January 15 and September 15, the
Project Applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a nesting bird survey no more than 3 days prior to commencement of construction activities. The biologist
conducting the clearance survey shall document the
negative results if no active bird nests are observed on the Project site or within the vicinity during the clearance survey with a brief letter report, submitted to the City of Project Applicant, Project
Biologist
City of Orange
Community
Development Department
Prior to construction Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
321
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-9
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
the nesting season and nesting birds be
present.
Orange Community Development Department prior to
construction, indicating that no impacts to active bird nests would occur before construction can proceed. If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre-construction
clearance survey, construction activities shall stay outside of a 200-foot buffer around the active nest. For listed and raptor species, this buffer shall be 500-feet. A biological monitor shall be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the
construction activity. Prior to the commencement of
construction activities and the issuance of any permits, results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring shall be provided to the City of Orange
Community Development Department.
Threshold e: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project would not conflict with any
local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold f: No Impact. The Project impact
area is not located within the boundaries of
any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or State
habitat conservation plan. Therefore, no
impact would occur.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
4.3 Cultural Resources
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: No Impact. No historic
resources, as defined by CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5, are present on the Project
site; therefore, no historic resources could be
altered or destroyed by construction or
operation of the Project.
No mitigation is required N/A N/A N/A No Impact
322
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-10
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
Threshold b: Significant Direct Impact. No
known archeological resources are present
on the Project site and the likelihood of
uncovering buried prehistoric resources on
the Project site is low due to the magnitude
of historic ground disturbance on the Project
site. Nonetheless, the potential exists for
Project-related construction activities to
result in a direct impact to significant
subsurface archaeological resources should
such resources to be discovered during
Project-related grading activities.
MM 4.3-1 In the event a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork
activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and workers should avoid altering the materials until a qualified archaeologist who meets the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology has evaluated the resource. The Applicant shall include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resource found during construction-related activities shall be
recorded on the appropriate Department of Parks and
Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria by a qualified archaeologist.
Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, glass, ceramics, wood, or shell artifacts, or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined to be significant under CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, the
qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a
research design and archeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The archaeologist shall also perform
appropriate technical analyses, prepare a comprehensive report complete with methods, results, and
recommendations, and provide for the permanent curation or repatriation of the recovered resources in cooperation with the designated most likely descendant as needed. The report shall be submitted to the City of Orange, the SouthCentral Coastal Information Center, and the State Historic Preservation Office, if required.
Project Applicant/Project
Archaeologist
City of Orange
Community
Development Department
In the event a potentially
significant cultural
resource is encountered
during subsurface
earthwork activities
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Threshold c: Less-than-Significant Impact.
In the unlikely event that human remains are
discovered during Project grading or other
ground disturbing activities, the Project
would be required to comply with the
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
323
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-11
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
applicable provisions of California Health
and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and
California Public Resources Code Section
5097 et seq. Mandatory compliance with
State law would ensure that any discovered
human remains are appropriately treated and
would preclude the potential for significant
impacts.
4.4 Energy
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The amount of energy and fuel consumed by
construction and operation of the Project
would not be inefficient, wasteful, or
unnecessary. Furthermore, the Project
would not cause or result in the need for
additional energy facilities or energy
delivery systems. Accordingly, the Project’s
impacts associated with energy consumption
would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold b: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project would not conflict with or
obstruct a State or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency and impacts
would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
4.5 Geology and Soils
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: Less-than-Significant Impact.
Implementation of the Project would not
expose people or structures to substantial
direct or indirect adverse effects related to
liquefaction or fault rupture. The Project site
is subject to seismic ground shaking
associated with earthquakes; however,
mandatory compliance with local and State
regulatory requirements and building codes
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
324
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-12
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
would ensure that the Project minimizes
potential hazards related to seismic ground
shaking to less-than-significant levels.
Threshold b: Less-than-Significant Impact.
Implementation of the Project would not
result in substantial soil erosion or loss of
topsoil. The Project Applicant would be
required to obtain a NPDES permit for
construction activities and adhere to a
SWPPP, and prepare an erosion control plan
to minimize water and wind erosion.
Following completion of development, the
Project’s owner or operator would be
required by law to implement a SWQMP
during operation, which would preclude
substantial erosion impacts in the long-term.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold c: Less-than Significant Impact.
There is no potential for the Project’s
construction or operation to cause, or be
impacted by, on- or off-site landslides or
lateral spreading. Potential hazards
associated with unstable soils would be
precluded through mandatory adherence to
the recommendations contained in the sitespecific geotechnical report during Project construction.
No mitigation is required. Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project site contains soils with low
susceptibility to expansion; therefore, the
Project would not create substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property associated
with the presence of expansive soils.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold e: No Impact. No septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems are
proposed to be installed on the Project site.
Accordingly, no impact would occur
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
325
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-13
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
associated with soil compatibility for
wastewater disposal systems.
Threshold f: Significant Direct Impact. The
Project would not impact any known
paleontological resource or unique
geological feature. However, the Project site
is underlain by older alluvium soils with a
high sensitivity for paleontological
resources. Accordingly, construction
activities on the Project site have the
potential to unearth and adversely impact
paleontological resource that may be buried
beneath the ground surface
MM 4.5-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall provide written evidence to the
Community Development Department that the Applicant
has retained a qualified paleontologist to respond on an asneeded basis to address unanticipated paleontological discoveries.
In the event that paleontological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, all construction
activities within 100 foot vicinity of the find shall halt until the qualified paleontologist identifies the paleontological significance of the find. If determined to be significant, the fossil shall be collected and prepared to the point of
identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent
collections of a museum repository. At the conclusion of curation, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program. Construction shall not resume within the vicinity until the site paleontologist states in writing that the proposed construction activities would not significantly damage paleontological resources.
Project Applicant/Project
Paleontologist
City of Orange
Community
Development Department
Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: Less-than-Significant Impact.
Project GHG emissions would not exceed
the 3,000 MT CO2e per year threshold.
Therefore, impacts are less than significant
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold b: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project would not conflict with
applicable plans, policies, and regulations
adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of GHG emissions.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Summary of Impacts
326
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-14
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
Threshold a: Significant Direct and
Cumulatively-Considerable Impact. The
Project site contains soils contaminated with
VOC although not expected to pose a
substantial risk to the environment or people
on the Project site, could require
remediation. Remediation of existing
contamination would result in an improved
long-term environmental condition at the
Project site
MM 4.7-1 The Project Contractor shall adhere to the
protocols and performance standards stipulated in the SMP (Technical Appendix H3). Contractors working at the site follow all applicable Cal/OSHA regulations for
construction safety. A Completion Report shall be
prepared at the conclusion of grading activities. The report shall document field monitoring activities and visual
observations made during grading/excavations, as well as soil sampling locations and results. The report shall
include a description of the location of impacted soil
encountered, actions taken to characterize and mitigate impacts, confirmation soil sampling results, and
disposition of any excavated soil. In addition, the report shall include a description of encountered subsurface
structures and steps to remove and close such structures.
The report shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Orange Community Development Director, prior to
issuance of building permits.
Project Contractor City of Orange
Community
Development Department
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Less-than-Significant Impact
During Project construction and operations,
mandatory compliance to federal, State, and
local regulations would ensure that the
proposed Project would not create a
significant hazard to the environment due to
routine transport, use, disposal, or upset of
hazardous materials.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold c: No Impact. The Project site is
not located within one-quarter mile of any
existing or proposed school. Accordingly,
the Project would not emit hazardous
emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold d: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project site is listed on the EnviroStor
database sites; however, this listing
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
327
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-15
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
represents a historic REC at the site. The
status of the site is listed as “refer: other
agency” and no further action (NFA) was
recommended for the site as “remediation of
soil was completed by Orange County.”
With the consideration of the absence of
reported violations, spills, or releases, the
Project site is not considered to be a REC
and would not create a significant hazard to
the public or environment
Threshold e: No Impact. The Project site is
not within an airport land use plan or within
2 miles of a public airport or public use
airport. As such, the Project would not result
in an airport safety hazard for people
residing or working in the Project area.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold f: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project site does not contain any
emergency facilities nor does it serve as an
emergency evacuation route. During
construction and long-term operation,
adequate emergency vehicle access is
required to be provided. Accordingly,
implementation of the Project would not
impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold g: No Impact. The Project site is
not located in close proximity to wildlands
or areas with high fire hazards. Thus, the
Project would not expose people or
structures to a significant wildfire risk.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
Threshold a: Less-than Significant Impact.
The Project would not violate any water
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
328
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-16
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality.
Adherence to a SWPPP and SWQMP is
required as part of the Project’s
implementation to address construction- and
operational-related water quality
Threshold b: Less-than Significant Impact.
The Project would not physically impact any
of the major groundwater recharge facilities
in the Orange County Groundwater Basin.
The Project would not substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the Project would impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
Basin
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold c: Less-than Significant Impact.
The Project would be required to comply
with applicable water quality regulatory
requirements to minimize erosion and
siltation. Additionally, the Project would not
result in flooding on- or off-site or
impede/redirect flood flows. Lastly, the
Project would not create or contribute runoff
that would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold d: Less-than Significant Impact.
The Project site would not be subject to
inundation from tsunamis, seiches, or other
hazards.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold e: Less-than Significant Impact.
The Project would not conflict with or
obstruct implementation of a water quality
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
329
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-17
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan.
4.9 Noise
Threshold a: Less-than Significant Impact.
The Project would generate short-term
construction and long-term operational
noise but would not generate noise levels
that exceed significance thresholds. The
Project would not result in generation of
substantial temporary or permanent increase
in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold b: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project’s construction and operational
activities would not result in excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold c: No Impact. The Project site is
not located within two miles of a public
airport or within an airport land use plan, nor
is the Project site located within the vicinity
of a private airstrip.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
4.10 Transportation
Threshold a: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project would not conflict with a
program, plan, policy addressing the
circulation system such that the Project
would result in a significant impact on the
environment.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold b: Less-than-Significant Impact
The Project meets the Low VMT Area
screening criteria and would result in a less
than significant VMT impact.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
Threshold c: Less-than-Significant Impact.
The Project would not create or substantially
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
330
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-18
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
increase safety hazards due to a design
feature or incompatible use.
Threshold d: Less-than-Significant Impact.
Adequate emergency access would be
provided to the Project site during
construction and long-term operation. The
Project would not result in inadequate
emergency access to the site or surrounding
properties.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant Impact
4.11 Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold a: Potentially Significant Direct
Impact: The Project site does not contain any
recorded, significant tribal cultural resource
sites; therefore, the Project would not cause
a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource that
is listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources
or a local register of historical resources.
Nonetheless, Project construction activities
have the potential to unearth and adversely
impact tribal cultural resources that may be
buried at the Project site
MM 4.11-1 Prior to the commencement of any ground
disturbing activity at the project site, the Project Applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor approved by the
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation – the
tribe that consulted on this project pursuant to Assembly Bill A52 (the “Tribe” or the “Consulting Tribe”). A copy of the executed contract shall be submitted to the City of Orange Planning and Building Department prior to the
issuance of any permit necessary to commence a grounddisturbing activity. The Tribal monitor will only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve grounddisturbing activities into areas of undisturbed soils. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the Tribe as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, potholing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the Project site. The Tribal Monitor will complete daily
monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site
monitoring shall end when all ground-disturbing activities on the Project site are completed, or when the Tribal
Representatives and Tribal Monitor have indicated that all upcoming ground-disturbing activities at the Project site have little to no potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Resources.
Project Applicant City of Orange
Community Development
Department
Prior to ground-disturbing
activities
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
331
534 STRUCK AVENUE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Page S-19
THRESHOLD MITIGATION MEASURES (MM) RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER
MITIGATION
Upon discovery of any Tribal Cultural Resources,
construction activities shall cease in the immediate vicinity of the find (not less than the surrounding 100 feet) until the find can be assessed. All Tribal Cultural Resources
unearthed by project activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and Tribal monitor approved by the Consulting Tribe. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Consulting Tribe will retain it/them in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, for
educational, cultural and/or historic purposes. If human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized at the Project site, all ground disturbance shall immediately cease, and the county coroner shall be notified per Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, and Health & Safety
Code Section 7050.5. Human remains and grave/burial
goods shall be treated alike per California Public
Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2). Work may
continue on other parts of the Project site while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5[f]). If a non-Native American resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource,” time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. The treatment plan
established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical
resources and PRC Sections 21083.2(b) for unique
archaeological resources
332
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR” or “EIR”) is an informational document that represents the independent judgment of the City of Orange, acting as the Lead Agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and evaluates the physical environmental effects that could result from constructing and operating the proposed 534 Struck Avenue Project (hereafter, the “Project”). Discretionary actions and other related ministerial actions that are required to construct and operate the Project also are described in this EIR.
When the term “Project” is used in this EIR with the initial letter capitalized, the term shall mean all aspects of the planning, construction, and operation of the 534 Struck Avenue Project, including all discretionary and administrative approvals and permits required for its implementation. When the term “Project Applicant” is used with the initial letters capitalized, the term shall mean Prologis, L.P., which is the entity that submitted applications to the City of Orange to entitle the Project Site as proposed and as evaluated in this EIR.
1.1 PURPOSES OF CEQA AND LEGAL AUTHORITY FOR THIS DRAFT EIR This Draft EIR has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code § 21000 et. seq. (“CEQA”), as amended, and the CEQA State Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regulations § 15000 et. seq.) (“CEQA Guidelines”), as amended. As stated by CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a), the basic purposes of CEQA are to:
• Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed government actions (including the discretionary approval of land entitlement applications submitted by private parties); • Identify the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; • Prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible; and
• Disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner the agency chose if a project will be approved involving significant environmental effects.
Following preliminary review of the Project’s application materials, the City of Orange concluded that the Project and its associated implementing actions have the potential to result in significant environmental effects; as such, the City proceeded with preparation of this EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(d). The City determined that a Project EIR, as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15161, would be required. Accordingly, this document serves as a Project EIR. As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15161, this Project EIR shall “…focus primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the development project,” and “…examine all phases of the 333
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
project including planning, construction, and operation.” Also, in conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15121(a), the purposes of this EIR are to: (1) disclose information by informing public agency decision makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effects associated with all phases of the Project, (2) identify possible ways to minimize or avoid those significant effects, and (3) to describe a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project that would feasibly attain most of the basic Project objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen its significant environmental effects.
1.2 SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT EVALUATED BY THIS EIR
The City of Orange is the Lead Agency for the proposed Project, under whose authority this EIR has been prepared. The Project Applicant is proposing to redevelop the Site with a 57,900 sf Truck Terminal, that includes 52,900 sf of warehouse space and 5,000 sf of office space, and a 5,400-sf maintenance building. The proposed building would be built up to 45 ft and include 84 dock doors (cross-dock configuration). The Project would provide automobile parking stalls in excess of the requirements (47 automobile parking stalls) of the Orange Municipal Code (OMC). The Project would provide a total of 62 automobile parking stalls consisting of 59 standard parking stalls, 2-9 ft. by 18 ft. accessible parking stalls, and 1-12 ft by 18 ft accessible parking stall. Additionally, the Project would provide 188 trailer parking stalls. Ornamental landscaping, lighting, and walls would be installed per compliance with the OMC. The building would operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is anticipated that the facility would employ a total of 60 to 130 employees.
The redevelopment would require the demolition of the existing, 40,000 sf manufacturing facility, associated parking, and removal of an unused portion of the existing, privately owned railroad spur located on the east side of the site. Additionally, the Project would remove approximately 315 linear feet of on-street parking along Struck Avenue.
Specifically, the Project Applicant is requesting the following governmental approval from the City of Orange to implement the Project (refer to Chapter 3.0, Project Description, for a complete description of the Project’s construction and operational characteristics):
• Conditional Use Permit No. 3137-21
• Major Site Plan Review No. 1039-21
• Design Review No. 5028-21
• Environmental Review No, 1870-20
• Demolition permits for on-site structures and other improvements • Grading and Building Permits to grade and construct the Project
1.3 CEQA PROCESS OVERVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, §§ 21000- 21177) requires that all public agencies within the State of California, having land use approval over project activities that have the potential to affect the quality of the environment, shall regulate such activities 334
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
so that impacts to the environment can be prevented to the extent feasible. Such activity is reviewed and monitored through the CEQA process, as provided in the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, §§ 15000-15387). CEQA distinguishes varied levels of documentation and public review based on a project’s anticipated level of effect on the environment.
When it is determined through preliminary review that a project may likely have one or more significant effects upon the environment, then an EIR must be prepared. The “scope” of the EIR may be determined through preparation of an Initial Study and a public scoping process. The EIR should consider both the potential project-specific (direct and indirect) and cumulative environmental impacts that could result from the implementation of the proposed project.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15121, the EIR is primarily an informational document intended to inform the public agency decision-makers and the general public of the potentially significant effects of a proposed project. The EIR should disclose all known potentially significant impacts; identify feasible means to minimize or mitigate those effects; and, consider a number of feasible alternatives to the project that might further reduce significant impacts while still attaining the project objectives. The decision-makers must consider the information in an EIR before taking action on the proposed project.
The EIR may constitute substantial evidence in the record to support the agency’s action on the project.
The EIR is prepared by or under the direction of the Lead Agency, the City of Orange. The City of Orange (“City”) is the public agency that has the primary responsibility for approving or carrying out the Project. Further, Responsible and Trustee Agencies, which are public agencies that have a level of discretionary approval over some component of the proposed Project, may rely upon the EIR prepared by the City.
An EIR is prepared in two key stages. First, a Draft EIR is prepared and distributed for public and agency review. Once comments on the Draft EIR are received, responses to those comments and any additional relevant project information are prepared and compiled in a Final EIR. Both of these documents (i.e., the Draft EIR and the Final EIR), along with any related technical appendices, represent the complete record of the EIR. Throughout this document, the terms Final EIR or Draft EIR may be used interchangeable since both are part of the ultimate EIR record; however, “Draft EIR” may be used specifically when referring to information provided in the volume made available for the CEQA-required 45-day public review period.
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15087, this Draft EIR will be made available for review by the public and public agencies for a minimum period of 45 days to provide comments “on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the possible impacts on the environment and ways in which the significant effects of the project might be avoided or mitigated” (CEQA Guidelines § 152049(a)). Responses to written comments received during the public review period will be included in the Final EIR (“FEIR”). During the decision-making process, the Project and its design features, objectives, merits, environmental consequences, and socioeconomic factors, among other information contained in the Project’s administrative record will be considered by City of Orange 335
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
decision-makers. If the FEIR is certified and the Project approved, the City of Orange and other public agencies with permitting authority over all, or portions, of the Project would be able to rely on the FEIR as part of their permitting processes to evaluate the environmental effects of the Project as they pertain to the approval or denial of applicable permits.
1.4 PROJECT BACKGROUND
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was originally prepared for the proposed 534 Struck Avenue Project. On September 23, 2021, the City circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1870-20 for the Project. The MND was circulated for public review from September 23 to October 25, 2021. During the 30-day public review period, comments received requested additional technical analysis (e.g., air quality and noise modeling, traffic). Therefore, in order to address the environmental concerns raised, additional analyses were prepared and this EIR was prepared to provide comprehensive environmental review of the Project.
1.4.1 COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE MND PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD As previously stated, the MND was circulated for public review from September 23 to October 25, 2021. The MND and written comments received by the City during the public review period are provided in Technical Appendix A1 to this EIR. Please refer to Table 1-1, Summary of MND Comments, for comments received during MND public review period.
Table 1-1 Summary of MND Comments
Commenter Date Comment(s) Response to Comments
John Miller October
1, 2021
• Asks about entry and exit of the
Project and raises concern
regarding traffic on Struck
Avenue
• As described in Section 3.0, Project
Description, vehicular access to the
Project Site would be provided via two
driveways along the site’s northern border
along Struck Avenue.
• As concluded in the Traffic Analysis
(Technical Appendix K1 to this EIR), the
Project would not result in deficiencies at
any of the 9 study area intersections
analyzed, including Struck Avenue at
Katella Avenue, Main Street, or Batavia.
• Concerned about truck parking
on Parker Street
• The Project would provide 188 trailer
parking stalls and 84 dock doors to ensure
adequate trailer truck parking on the
Project site. Additionally, the Project
would comply with Section 10.34.060,
Prohibited Parking — Trucks,
Recreational Vehicles and Similar
Vehicles, of the City’s Municipal Code
regarding restrictive parking on public
streets. Specifically, oversized vehicles
336
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Commenter Date Comment(s) Response to Comments
shall not park on any public street or any
public or dedicated alley, except while
mechanically disabled, or while loading or
unloading merchandise, goods, or building
materials; or when such vehicle is parked
in connection with, and in the performance
of a service to or on a property in the block
in which such vehicle is parked or left
standing.
• Raises concern on odor of
diesel fuel due to truck idling
for hours
• The Project would comply with California
Code of Regulations Title 13, Division 3,
Chapter 10, Article 1, Section 2485,
“Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit
Diesel‐Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle
Idling,” which limits nonessential idling to
five minutes or less for commercial trucks.
• Asks about the opportunity for
public comments, copy of the
site plan and truck yard
orientation
• This EIR will be made available for review
by the public and public agencies for a
minimum period of 45 days to provide
comments. Additionally, public comments
can be made during the Planning
Commission hearing for the Project.
• As shown in Figure 3-2, Site Plan, the
proposed building would be centered in
the Project site with locking doors to the
eastern and western end of the building
(cross-dock) and parking surrounding the
Project site.
• Asks about plans for
wall/foliage for screening
between the Project site and
adjacent property to the west
• The Project Applicant would install an
approximately 8-foot-high tubular steel
fencing along the site’s perimeter to
enclose the proposed building, parking
area, truck court, and loading dock area.
Keith Early October
25, 2021
• Raises concern on truck traffic
on surrounding streets
• The Project truck trips would travel long
City of Orange approved truck routes. As
shown on Figure 4.10-4, Truck Routes,
trucks would travel along Struck Avenue
to State Route 57 (SR-57) or to Batavia
Street, providing the most efficient access
to regional transportation facilities. Trucks
would not travel along Parker Street,
which is not an approved truck route.
• Moreover, data collected five facilities
that are very similar in nature to the
proposed use indicates most of the truck
activity occurs outside of the typical
morning and evening peak commute hours
337
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Commenter Date Comment(s) Response to Comments
(7-9 AM and 4-6 PM; (Technical
Appendix K1 to this EIR).
• Raises concern on exhaust
fumes and noise from the
Project
• As concluded in Section 4.1, Air Quality,
the Project would not result in
construction or operational air quality
impacts prior to mitigation measures.
Additionally, implementation of MM 4.1-
1 would be required to decrease cancer
risks.
• As concluded in Section 4.9, Noise, the
Project would generate short-term
construction and long-term operational
noise but would not generate noise levels
that exceed the standards established by
the Orange General Plan or Municipal
Code at the nearby noise-sensitive receiver
locations. Therefore, noise impacts would
be less than significant.
• Raises concern on the low
amount of employment (10
jobs) that would be generated
by the Project and the need for
employment in the area.
• As shown in in the Project’s Vehicle Miles
Travel (VMT) Memorandum (Technical
Appendix K2 to this EIR), based on the
employment density factors identified in
the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) Employment
Density Study, the Project is anticipated to
generate approximately 60 to 130
employees. However, this comment is
noted for the record.
• Provide alternative to develop
the Project site as small 10,000
sf buildings for small
businesses
• Refer to Section 6.0, Alternatives, for an
analysis of project alternatives.
• Raises concern on the amount
of tax revenue the proposed use
would generate compared to
other uses.
• This comment does not raise any issues
with the environmental analysis provided
in the EIR, thus, no further response is
required.
Law Office
of John P.
Given on
behalf of
Mary’s
Kitchen
October
25, 2021
• Raises concern on the MND’s
inaccuracy in describing
Mary’s Kitchen and the
Project’s impacts to Mary’s
Kitchen
• As shown in Section 2.0, Environmental
Setting, and Section 4.0, Environmental
Analysis, the EIR accurate describes the
operations and Project impacts to the
former Mary’s Kitchen site (now occupied
by HUB OC.
338
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Commenter Date Comment(s) Response to Comments
• Raises concern on the Project’s
Air Quality Impact Analysis
and Mary’s Kitchen not being
listed as a sensitive receptor
• As shown in Figure 4.1-1, Sensitive
Receptors, the Project’s Air Quality
Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix B1
to this EIR) has been updated to include
the former Mary’s Kitchen site as a
sensitive receptor R3.
• Raises concern on the Project’s
air quality impacts to Mary’s
Kitchen
• As concluded in Section 4.1, Air Quality,
the Project would not result in
construction or operational air quality
impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.
• Raises concern on the Project’s
operational air quality impacts
from traffic since trip
generation was derived from
two facilities of similar uses
and future tenants are currently
unknown
• As part of the updated Traffic Analysis
(Technical Appendix K1 to this EIR), the
methodology to calculate trip generation
was modified to include five local existing
facilities that are very similar in nature to
the proposed use. In order to calculate a
rate for the Project that most closely
reflects the anticipated operations, the 5
local sites were surveyed over 2 days to
develop an average trip generation rate.
Moreover, in an effort to conduct a
conservative traffic assessment, no credit
has been taken for the existing use.
• Raises concern on the Project’
Noise Impact Analysis and
Mary’s Kitchen not being listed
as a sensitive noise receptor
• As shown in Section 4.9, Noise, the
Project’s Noise Impact Analysis
(Technical Appendix J to this EIR) has
been updated to include the former Mary’s
Kitchen site as a sensitive noise receptor.
• Concludes that the MND is
inadequate due to failure to
analyze the Project’s air
quality, noise, and vibration
impacts to Mary’s Kitchen as a
sensitive receptor and that an
EIR may be required
• As discussed above, the Project’s
technical reports have been updated to
include the former Mary’s Kitchen site as
a sensitive receptor and this EIR includes
the results of the updated technical
analyses.
1.5 DRAFT EIR SCOPE, FORMAT, AND CONTENT
1.5.1 DRAFT EIR SCOPE
The City filed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) with the State Clearinghouse of the California Office of Planning and Research (State Clearinghouse) to indicate that an EIR would be prepared to evaluate the Project’s potential to impact the environment. The NOP was filed with the State Clearinghouse and distributed to potential Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and other interested parties on July 29, 2022, for a 30-day public review period. The NOP was distributed for public review to solicit 339
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
responses that would help the City identify the full scope and range of potential environmental concerns associated with the Project so that these issues could be fully examined in this EIR.
In addition, two publicly-noticed EIR Scoping Meetings were held on August 22, 2022. The scoping meetings were held at Orange City Hall Weimer Room, located at 300 E. Chapman Avenue Orange, CA 92866, and Shaffer Park Community Room, located at 190 N. Shaffer Street Orange, CA 92865.
The EIR Scoping Meetings provided public agencies, interested parties, and members of the general public an additional opportunity to learn about the Project, the CEQA review process, and how to submit comments on the scope and range of potential environmental concerns be addressed in this EIR.
The NOP and written comments received by the City during the NOP public review period are provided in Technical Appendix A2 to this EIR. Substantive issues raised in response to the NOP and during the Scoping Meetings are summarized below in Table 1-2, Summary of NOP and Scoping Meeting Comments. The purpose of Table 1-2 is to present a summary of the environmental topics that were identified by public agencies, interested parties, and members of the general public to be of primary interest. Regardless of whether or not an environmental or CEQA-related comment is listed in Table 1-2, all relevant comments received in response to the NOP and the EIR Scoping Meeting are addressed in this EIR.
Table 1-2 Summary of NOP and Scoping Meeting Comments
Commenter Date Comment(s)
Location in EIR Where
Comment(s) Addressed
Comments Received at Scoping Meetings
Keith Crane
August 22,
2022
• Raises concern on the location of the
maintenance building due to close
proximity to his property and its
potential air quality and noise
impacts
• Raises concern on tree foliage and
pine needles falling on adjacent
property
• Recommends trucks use Batavia and
Katella/Main for truck route
• Asks about measures to prevent
trucks from traveling outside of
designated routes
• Recommends alternative to develop
the Project site as buildings for small
businesses
• Raises concern on street parking and
truck trips per day
Section 4.1, Air Quality,
Section 4.9, Noise,
Section 4.10,
Transportation, and
Section 6.0, Alternatives
John Miller
• Recommends block wall around the
Project site instead of fencing
• Raises concern on truck turning
Section 4.1, Air Quality,
and Section 4.10,
Transportation
340
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Commenter Date Comment(s)
Location in EIR Where
Comment(s) Addressed
radius from Struck Avenue to
Katella Avenue
• Raises concern on overflow parking
for employees and parking on Parker
Street
• Raises concern on trucks and
pedestrian safety due to past
accidents on Main/Collins
• Request to consider cut-through
traffic on Parker Street
• Asks about clarifications on soil
samples in the Phase II
Environmental Site Assessment
(ESA) and a copy of the results
• Asks question about the new
operation of Mary’s Kitchen
John
• Asks why the Project went from an
MND to EIR
• Raises concern on the safety of
residential uses near the Project site
• Asks about truck trips generated by
the Project
• Request to study traffic on Struck
Avenue
• Raises concern on pedestrian safety
issues from homeless shelter
Section 1.0, Introduction,
and Section 4.10,
Transportation
Comments Received during NOP Public Review Period
Native American
Heritage Commission
(NAHC)
August 11,
2022
• Provides information regarding
required Native American
consultation pursuant to Senate Bill
18 and Assembly Bill 52.
Section 4.3, Cultural
Resources, and Section
4.11, Tribal Cultural
Resources
Orange County
Transportation
Authority (OCTA)
August 29,
2022
• Requests to change any reference to
BNSF to “OCTA/SCRRA”—the
railroad is owned by OCTA and
operated by the Southern California
Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA)
• Requests coordination with SCRRA
is required on the abandonment of
the industry track.
• Requests to ensure drainage is
designed to drain away from the
tracks during construction and postconstruction
• Requests that lighting should be
designed to keep light away from the
Section 4.8, Hydrology
and Water Quality,
Section 4.10,
Transportation, Section
5.4.1, Aesthetics
341
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Commenter Date Comment(s)
Location in EIR Where
Comment(s) Addressed
tracks
• Requests that trees near the tracks
should be maintained to avoid
encroachment onto the railroad.
• Expresses that a Right of Way
Encroachment Agreement with
SCRRA may be necessary during
construction
California Department
of Transportation
(Caltrans)
August 30,
2022
• Consider bicycle, pedestrian, electric
vehicle charging, and ridesharing
opportunities at the site including
bicycle storage, accessible
walkways, charging stations, and
pick-up/drop-off locations.
• Requests to provide discussion on
active transportation.
• Requests to include discussion about
the City multimodal mobility
strategies relating to existing bus
and rail services for local and
regional connectivity.
• Requests to submit copies of all
traffic related documents for review.
• Requests to evaluate installation of
electric vehicle charging
infrastructure
• Requests to identify, and seek to
resolve (with appropriate local
partners, including, but not limited
to, the local government) any
potential pedestrian or bicycling
conflict points to, from, or within the
Project site
• Requests to ensure on-site truck
parking facilities include adequate
facilities for drivers
• Requests to consider pricing
strategies to incentivize and
encourage greater use of ZEV trucks
Section 4.10,
Transportation
Law Office of John P.
Given on behalf of
Mary’s Kitchen
August 24,
2022
• Comments made were the same as
the previous comment letter on
October 25, 2021
Refer to Table 1-1,
Summary of MND
Comments
John Miller N/A
• Raises concern on truck turning
radius from Struck Avenue to
Katella Avenue
Section 4.1, Air Quality,
and Section 4.10,
Transportation
342
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
Commenter Date Comment(s)
Location in EIR Where
Comment(s) Addressed
• Asks about clarifications on soil
samples in the Phase II ESA and a
copy of the results
• Recommends block wall around the
Project site instead of fencing
• Raises concern on maintenance
building and its emissions/odor into
the air
• Raises concern on overflow parking
for employees
In light of the comments received by the City in response to the circulated MND, NOP, and the EIR Scoping Meeting, Section 4.0 of this EIR evaluates the Project’s potential to cause adverse effects to the following environmental issue areas:
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Noise
• Transportation
• Tribal Cultural Resources
Based on the findings of the circulated MND, the following environmental topics were determined to be less than significant or no impact and will not be evaluated further in the EIR:
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture and Forestry Resources
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
1.5.2 USE OF THIS EIR
This EIR will be made available for review by the public and public agencies for a minimum period of 45 days to provide comments “on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the possible impacts on the environment and ways in which the significant effects of the project might be avoided or mitigated” (CEQA Guidelines § 152049(a)). During the decision-making process, the Project and its design features, objectives, merits, environmental consequences, and socioeconomic factors, among other information contained in the Project’s administrative record, will be considered by City decision-makers.
343
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
1.5.3 CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION OF THIS DRAFT EIR
This Draft EIR contains all of the information required to be included in an EIR as specified by the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines (California Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et. seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 5). This Draft EIR is organized in the following manner:
• Section S.0, Executive Summary, provides an overview of the EIR document and CEQA process. The Project, including its objectives, is described, and the location and regional setting of the Project Site is documented. In addition, the Executive Summary discloses potential areas of controversy related to the Project, including those issues identified by other agencies and the public, and identifies potential alternatives to the proposed Project that would reduce or avoid significant impacts, as required by CEQA. Finally, the Executive Summary provides a summary of the Project’s impacts, mitigation measures, and conclusions, in a table that forms the basis of the EIR’s Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program. • Section 1.0, Introduction, provides introductory information about the CEQA process and the responsibilities of the City, serving as the Lead Agency for this EIR; a brief description of the Project; the purpose of this EIR; applications proposed by the Project Applicant that would require discretionary City approvals; permits and approvals required by other agencies; and an overview of the EIR format.
• Section 2.0, Environmental Setting, describes the environmental setting, including an overview of the regional and local setting, as well as descriptions of the Project Site’s physical conditions and surrounding context. The existing setting is defined as the condition of the Project Site and surrounding area at the approximate date this EIR’s NOP was released for public review. The setting discussion also addresses the relevant regional planning documents that apply to the Project Site and vicinity.
• Section 3.0, Project Description, serves as the EIR’s Project Description for purposes of CEQA and contains a level of specificity commensurate with the level of detail proposed by the Project, including the summary requirements pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15123. This section provides a detailed description of the Project, including its purpose and main objectives; design features; landscaping; site drainage; utilities; grading and construction characteristics; and operational characteristics expected over the Project’s lifetime. In addition, the discretionary actions required of the City and other government agencies to implement the Project are discussed.
• Section 4.0, Environmental Analysis, provides an analysis of the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts that may occur from implementing the proposed Project. The topics analyzed in this section include the topics summarized above under subsection 1.5.1. Topics that were found to have no potential of being significantly impacted are discussed in Section 344
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
5.0, Other CEQA Considerations. A conclusion concerning significance is reached for each discussion, and mitigation measures are presented as warranted. The environmental changes identified in Section 4.0 and throughout this EIR are referred to as “effects” or “impacts” interchangeably. The CEQA Guidelines also describe the terms “effects” and “impacts” as being synonymous (CEQA Guidelines § 15358).
In the environmental analysis subsections of Section 4.0, the existing conditions are disclosed that are pertinent to the subject area being analyzed, accompanied by a specific analysis of physical impacts that may be caused by implementing the proposed Project. Impacts are evaluated on a direct, indirect, and cumulative basis. Direct impacts are those that would occur directly as a result of the proposed Project. Indirect impacts represent secondary effects that would result from Project implementation. Cumulative effects are defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15355 as “…two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” The analyses in Section 4.0 are based in part upon technical reports that are appended to this EIR. Information also is drawn from other sources of analytical materials that directly or indirectly relate to the proposed Project and are cited in Section 7.0, References. Where the analysis demonstrates that a physical adverse environmental effect may or would occur without undue speculation, feasible mitigation measures are recommended to reduce or avoid the significant effect. Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable, have an essential nexus to a legitimate governmental interest, and be “roughly proportional” to the impacts of the Project.
The discussion then indicates whether the identified mitigation measures would reduce impacts to below a level of significance. In most cases, implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce the adverse environmental impacts to below a level of significance. If mitigation measures are not available or feasible to reduce an identified impact to below a level of significance, the environmental effect is identified as a significant and unavoidable adverse impact, for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) would need to be adopted by the City pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15093.
• Section 5.0, Other CEQA Considerations, includes specific topics that are required by CEQA. These include a summary of the Project’s significant and unavoidable environmental effects, a discussion of the significant and irreversible environmental changes that would occur should the Project be implemented, as well as potential growth-inducing impacts of the proposed Project. Section 5.0 also includes a discussion of the potential environmental effects that were found not be significant during the preparation of this EIR. • Section 6.0, Project Alternatives, describes and evaluates alternatives to the proposed Project that could reduce or avoid the Project’s adverse environmental effects. CEQA does not require an EIR to consider every conceivable alternative to the Project but rather to consider a reasonable range of alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation. Three (3) alternatives are presented in Section 6.0. 345
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399
• Section 7.0, References, cites all reference sources used in preparing this EIR and lists the agencies and persons that were consulted during preparation of this EIR. Section 7.0 also lists the persons who authored or participated in preparing this EIR.
CEQA requires that an EIR contain, at a minimum, certain specified content. Table 1-3, Location of CEQA Required Topics, provides a quick reference in locating the CEQA-required sections within this document.
Table 1-3 Location of CEQA Required Topics
CEQA Required Topic
CEQA
Guidelines
Reference Location in this EIR
Table of Contents § 15122 Table of Contents
Summary § 15123 Section S.0
Project Description § 15124 Section 3.0
Environmental Setting § 15125 Section 2.0
Consideration and Discussion of Environmental
Impacts
§ 15126 Section 4.0
Significant Environmental Effects Which Cannot be
Avoided if the Proposed Project is Implemented
§ 15126.2(b) Section 4.0 & Subsection 5.1
Significant Irreversible Environmental Impacts Which
Would be Involved in the Proposed Action Should it
be Implemented
§ 15126.2(c) Subsection 5.2
Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project § 15126.2(d) Subsection 5.3 Consideration and Discussion of Mitigation Measures
Proposed to Minimize Significant Effects
§ 15126.4 Section 4.0 & Table S-1
Consideration and Discussion of Alternatives to the
Proposed Project
§ 15126.6 Section 6.0
Effects Not Found to be Significant § 15128 Subsection 5.4 Organizations and Persons Consulted § 15129 Section 7.0 & Appendices Discussion of Cumulative Impacts § 15130 Section 4.0
Energy Conservation Appendix D Subsection 4.3
1.5.4 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
CEQA Guidelines § 15147 states that the “information contained in an EIR shall include summarized… information sufficient to permit full assessment of significant environmental impacts by reviewing agencies and members of the public,” and that the “placement of highly technical and specialized analysis and data in the body of an EIR shall be avoided.” CEQA Guidelines § 15150 allows for the incorporation “by reference all or portions of another document… [and is] most appropriate for including long, descriptive, or technical materials that provide general background but do not contribute directly to the analysis of a problem at hand.” The purpose of incorporation by reference is to assist the Lead Agency in limiting the length of this EIR. Where this EIR incorporates a document by reference, the document is identified in the body of the EIR, citing the appropriate 346
534 Struck Avenue Project
Environmental Impact Report 1.0 Introduction
Lead Agency: City of Orange SCH No. 2021090399