HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-E3 (CC RES 16-55 (RESPONSE TO COMMENTS))City of Tustin
Vintage Residential Project
Response to Comments for
Initial Study (IS) / Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
Lead Agency:
City of Tustin
Community Development Department
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Project Applicant:
Intracorp SoCal-1, LLC
4041 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 250
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Table of Contents
Section Page
1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1-1
1.2 FORMAT OF THE RESPONSE TO COMMENTS..........................................................1-1
1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ....................1-1
2. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS......................................................................................................2-1
3. REVISIONS TO THE MND...........................................................................................................3-1
3.1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................
3-1
3.2 MND REVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENTS.....................................3-1
APPENDICES
A. Traffic Impact Analysis Memo
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page i
Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
Figure5 Site Plan...........................................................................................................................3-5
Figure8 Landscape Plan...............................................................................................................3-7
Figure 10 Recreation Area............................................................................................................... 3-9
Figure11 Paseos........................................................................................................................3-11
Page ii October 2016
1. Introduction
1.1 INTRODUCTION
This document contains responses to the comments that the City of Tustin received on the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) for the Vintage project during the public review period, which began July 27,
2016, and closed August 26, 2016. This document has been prepared in accordance with California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the
State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.) and represents the independent
judgment of the Lead Agency. This document and the circulated MND together comprise the Final MND.
1.2 FORMAT OF THE RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
This document is organized as follows:
Section 1, Introduction. This section describes CEQA requirements and content of this Final MND.
Section 2, Response to Comments. This section provides a list of agencies and interested persons
commenting on the MND; copies of comment letters received during the public review period, and individual
responses to written comments. To facilitate review of the responses, each comment letter has been
reproduced and assigned a number (Al through A4 for letters received from agencies and organizations,
and R1 through R4 for letters received from residents). Individual comments have been numbered for each
letter and the letter is followed by responses with references to the corresponding comment number.
Section 3, Revisions to the MND. This section contains revisions to the MND text and figures as a result
of the comments received by agencies and interested persons as described in Section 2, and/or
typographical errors and omissions discovered subsequent to release of the MND for public review.
The responses to comments contain material and revisions that will be added to the text of the Final MND.
The City of Tustin staff has reviewed this material and determined that none of this material constitutes the
type of significant new information that requires recirculation of the MND for further public comment under
CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. None of this new material indicates that the project will result in a
significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the Vintage MND. Additionally, none of
this material indicates that there would be a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified
environmental impact that will not be mitigated, or that there would be any of the other circumstances
requiring recirculation described in Section 15073.5.
1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines do not require that lead agencies prepare formal written responses
to comments on a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Nevertheless, the City of Tustin, in the interest of full
disclosure, has prepared formal written responses to comments on the MND. Because CEQA and the State
CEQA Guidelines do not outline a procedure for responding to comments on Mitigated Negative
Declarations, the City of Tustin implements the procedures for responding to comments on environmental
impact reports in this situation. Thus, in accordance with CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21092.5,
copies of the written responses to public agencies will be forwarded to those agencies at least 10 days prior
to the City Council's consideration of the MND. The responses will be forwarded with copies of this Final
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 1-I
1. Introduction
MND, as permitted by CEQA, and will conform to the legal standards established for response to comments
on draft environmental impact reports.
Page 1-2 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
2. Response to Comments
This section provides all written responses received on the MND and the City's responses to each comment.
Comment letters and specific comments are given letters and numbers for reference purposes. Where
sections of the MND are excerpted in this document, the sections are shown indented. Changes to the
MND text are shown in bold underlined text for additions and s'r�At for deletions.
The following is a list of agencies and persons that submitted comments on the MND during the public
review period.
Number
Reference
Commenting Person/Agency
Date of Comment
Page
No.
Agencies & Organizations
Al
Department of Transportation
Caltrans
August
17, 2016
2-11
A2
Governor's Office of Planning
and Research (OPR)
August
31, 2016
2-11
A3
Orange County Fire Authority
OCFA)
August
11, 2016
2-11
A4
South Coast Air Quality Management
District
11, 2016
2-19
Residents
-August
R1
Dave Hackett
lAugust26,
2016
12-23
R2
Heather Hackett
I August
25, 2016
12-27
R3
I Maureen Li
lAugust
15, 2016
12-31
R4
I Reese Udall
lAuciust 26, 2016
2-27
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-1
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-2 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
LETTER Al —Christopher Herre, Branch Chief, Caltrans (2 pages)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIMCT 12
3347 MICM SON DRIVE, SlUrFE leo
1RVINE.CA 92612-8894
PHONE (949) 72.4-2085
PAX (949) 72A-2592
M 711
www.".Ca.gov
August 17, 2016
Ms. Elaine Dove
City of Tustin
Planning Division
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA. 92780
Dear Ms. Dove:
RECEIVED SerrafrsDrmghr.
AUGy�q Serious 0r ghr.
UG 2 2 B16 Nerve -wrl
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Bk:
File: IGR/CEQA
SCH#: 2016071081
Log #: 2016-00100
I-5
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) appreciates the opportunity to review
and comment on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Vintage Lofts Residential Project.
The project applicant is proposing to subdivide a 6.81 -acre lot into two development parcels for
condominium purposes to accommodate 140 -residential units and ancillary uses, including, but
not Iimited to onsite private drives, parking, sidewalks, recreation uses and community center,
walls and landscaping. The discretionary actions required to allow for the development of 140
multi -family residential units are as follows:
• General Plan Amendment -- Change the site's land use designation from I (Industrial) to
Planned Community Residential (PC Residential).
• Zone Change — Change the site's zoning from Planned Industrial (PM) to Planned
Community Residential (P -C) District.
• Tentative Tract Map — Subdivision of existing 6.81 -acre parcel into two development
parcels for condominium purposes.
■ Design Review
■ Development Agreement - The Development Agreement authorizes the development of
project with a 5 -year term and two 1 -year extensions and in return requires public
benefits in the form of payment of park in -lieu, affordable housing and traffic fees over
and above the City's standard development impact fees, city signage and public
infrastructure improvements.
Caltrans Local Development-Inlergovernmental Review program reviews impacts of local
development to the transportation system, including the State Highway System. The Department
works to ensure that local land use planning and development decisions include the provision of
transportation choices, including transit, intercity rail passenger service, air service, walking and
biking, when appropriate. The Department advocates community design (e.g. urban infill, mixed
use, transit oriented development) that promotes an efficient transportation system and healthy
communities.
"Provrde a swA. sm=inu5k, rnfrgmW;znd e,QtClenr tmnVwia*n ,lyorm
ro ehbance Cnty�wnla's economy and IrmNllry"
Al -1
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-3
2. Response to Comments
Ms. Elaine Dove
August 17, 2016
Page 2
Caltrans is a commenting agency at this time on this project and has the following
comments for your consideration, in addition to those made in our letter to the city dated Al -2
June 15, 2016 (see attached).
Hydraulics:
Hydraulic comments: • Final construction plans and hydrology calculations
(existing & proposed condition) need to be reviewed and approved by hydraulics
branch during Encroachment Permit Process. • Need the hydraulic calculations
(existing & proposed condition) to clarify that there will be no increase in water
surface elevation in the existing system. • No diversion flow shall be allowed. 1.
Need a letter from City of Tustin concurring approval of this proposal prior to
Caltrans final approval. 2. Caltrans Maintenance Branch should review and make
comments on this proposal.
Landscape Architecture:
Al -3
2. On page 48 the 3rd paragraph under Response it is stated " The buildings would be Al -4
replaced with 140 two -three and four story residential units" This is the only mention of
a four story residents is this an error?
Permits:
3. In the event of any activity in Caltrans right-of-way an encroachment permit will be
required. For specific details on the Department's Encroachment Permits procedure, Al -5
please refer to Department Encroachment Permits Manual, Eight Edition.
This Manual is available on the web site: hltp://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/ep(
"Provide a safe. susramable, inregrared and efJtclew rrartspormrinn igvem
7a enhance Callfarnra's economy and 11va61lNy"
Page 2-4 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
Ms. Elaine Dove
August 17, 2016
Page 3
Please continue to keep us informed of this project and any future developments that
could potentially impact State transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need
to contact us, please do not hesitate to call Aileen Kennedy at (949) 724-2239.
Sincerely,
MAUREEN EL HARAKE
Branch Chief, Regional -Community -Transit Planning
District 12
c: Eric Dickson, Landscape Architecture
Steven Sowers, Traffic Operations Southwest
Kamran Mazhar, Traffic Design
Ahmad Khosravi, Hydraulics
Scott Morgan, Office of Planning and Research
"Provide a safe, sustainable. integrated and efficient transportation system
to enhance California's econamy and livability"
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-5
2. Response to Comments
Attachment to Caltrans' August 17,
2016 Letter
U&1 of At t i 4I&-- a ffVKN1A STAIE 1RAN5PORTATION AGSM t
ILIMU:MLtiT}RO .L'_Sictttcr
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SCH#: None
DISTRICT 12
Log #: 4733
3347 MICHELSON DRIVE, SUITE 100
1-5
IRVIN[; CA 92612-8894
Serlaur Drwtght.
PHONE (949)724.2086
Serlaadmught
FAX (949) 724-2592
Help save muert
TTY 711
www.dol.ca.gov
June 13, 2016
Ms. Elaine Dove
File: IGR/CEQA
City of Tustin
SCH#: None
Planning Division
Log #: 4733
300 Centennial Way
1-5
Tustin, CA, 92780
Dear Ms. Dove:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the General Plan Amendment (GPA)
2016-01, Zone Change 2016-001, Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) No. 17993 and Desitin
Review (DR) 2016-004, for the Vintage 140 unit condominium complex at 420 W. 6th Street
within the City of Tustin.
Caltrans Local Development -Intergovernmental Review program reviews impacts of local
development to the transportation system, including the State Highway System. The Department
works to ensure that local land use planning and development decisions include the provision of
transportation choices, including transit, intercity rail passenger service, air service, walking and
biking, when appropriate. To ensure a safe, efficient, and reliable transportation system, we
encourage early consultation and coordination with local jurisdictions and project proponents on
all development projects that utilize the multimodal transportation network.
The Department advocates community design (e.g. urban infill, mixed use, transit oriented
development) that promotes an efficient transportation system and healthy communities
The Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is a commenting agency on this project
and has the following comments for your consideration.
Traffic Operations:
1. Demonstrate if a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is needed following the Caltrans TIS
guide at h t ;www. v t ffi oc. i a fit ti i e. f.
2. If a TIS is required, please prepare a draft TIS scope proposal and submit for our
review, include any Vehicle Miles Travel (VMT) red uci ng strategies,
Provide aWe sastalnable Oregmied and efJ cim rranWrfallon sy'alem
to enhance Cal{fomla's ec my andHvabdAy'
Al -6
Al -7
Page 2-6 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
Ms. Elaine Dove
June 13, 2016
Page 2
3. Submit the required traffic analysis scenarios for a general plan amendment
showing traffic impacts at all intersections leading to and from all California State
Highways. Include all intersections with ramps at the Newport Avenue and Red Al -8
Hill Avenue interchanges for the I-5 Santa Ana Freeway. As a minimum, provide
Existing Conditions, Proposed Project Only with Select Zone Analysis, General
Plan Build -out Only, and General Plan Build -out Plus Proposed Project.
Office of Outdoor Advertising:
4. Regarding A-15 (Freeway Signage) of the project plans, if the display operates as an on -
premise display as defined in Business and Professions Code 5272 ODA (Outdoor
Advertising) will not require a permit.
5. However if the display advertises off -premise commercial copy you will have to
apply for a State ODA Permit and comply with the current standards of the
California Outdoor Advertising Act and the Federal Highway Beautification Act.
Information on outdoor advertising may be obtained by contacting George Anzo
Jr. Southern Area Manager George.anzordot.ca.gov. .
6. Illuminated signs could be considered a traffic safety hazard given the potential
of light and glare to distract drivers. Section 21466.5 of the California Vehicle
Code regulates illumination by placing limits on maximum light output.
http://w%vw.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/det.qil/pubs/vctop/vc/dl 1/c2/a3/21466.5
Landscape Architecture:
7. There is no existing landscape adjacent to the proposed project. The area between
Caltrans right of way and the proposed development is too narrow to landscape. There
are no landscaping issues.
8. The proposed 20' high sound wall is located about 8' below the level of the 1-5 freeway,
and approximately 12' of sound wall will be visible from the freeway level with 3 story
buildings above and beyond the sound wall, The height of the proposed sound wall is
approximately the height of the existing building.
9. Please provide final detail plans of the sound wall aesthetics visible from the freeway.
'Prnririe a mfr, rwlalwnhle, i'ncl.egmled and emcient iransporotivn .nyvem
iv enho ur Cv;Ebmia'f economy and llrvbifity"
Al -9
Al -10
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-7
2. Response to Comments
Ms. Elaine Dove
June 13, 2016
Page 3
10. The visual character of the corridor changes slightly from the existing commercial theme
to a residential theme. Although the development will consist of 2 and 3 story buildings, Al -10
freeway viewers would not notice substantial visual changes along the freeways. cont'd
Local Development IGR:
11. Please identify if there is an environmental determination for this project under CEQA. I
Al -11
Please continue to keep us informed of this project and any future developments that
could potentially impact State transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need
to contact us, please do not hesitate to call Aileen Kennedy at (949) 724-2239.
Sincerely,
MAUREEN EL RARAKE
Branch Chief, Regional -Community -Transit Planning
District 12
c: Steve Sower, Traffic Operations Southwest
George Anzo Jr - Southern Area Manager
Office of Outdoor Advertising
Greg Grant, Right of Way Engineering
Kamran Mazhar, Chief Design F& Traffic Design
Pravlde a =k. nWalwbk, fnkwuied wde/frclrnr erawWrlaflm sysrem
0 eolwme Caltlanfa's eranoary and inubduy"
Page 2-8 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
Al. Response to Comments from Maureen EI Harake, Branch Chief, Caltrans, dated August 17,
2016.
Al -1 This comment is a summary of the Vintage residential project and a summary of the
role Caltrans' Local Development -Intergovernmental Review program. Because this
summary does not raise concerns related to the project's environmental impacts, no
response is necessary.
Al -2 This comment references a comment letter submitted to the City of Tustin on June 15,
2016; this letter is addressed in Response to Comment A1-6 through Al -12.
A1-3 Caltrans review is underway. Although no improvements are proposed within the
Caltrans right of way, due to the site's proximity to Interstate 5, the hydraulic plans and
final calculations were submitted to Caltrans on July 7, 2016 to ensure that an
encroachment permit would not be required.
Al -4 The proposed project would be limited to three stories. The last paragraph on page 48
is revised to indicate that demolished buildings would be replaced with 140 two-, and
three-story residential units.
Al -5 Please refer to Response to Comment A1-3 above.
Al -6 This comment is a summary of the role Caltrans' Local Development -
Intergovernmental Review program. Because this summary does not raise concerns
related to the project's environmental impacts, no response is necessary.
Al -7 According to the Trip Generation Thresholds provided on page 2 of the Caltrans Guide
for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) may be
required if a project generates 1 or more trips assigned to a state highway facility. As
demonstrated in MND page 126, Table 4-20, Project Trip Generation (provided below),
the project would generate fewer trips than the existing land use. Therefore, the project
would result in fewer trips on the surrounding roadway network than in the existing
condition.
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rates
Condorrinium' DU 5.81 0.07 0.37 0.44 0.35 0.17 0.52
Industrial Park2 TSF 6.83 0.67 0.15 0.82 0.18 0.67 0.85
Proi ect Trip Generation
Proposed Project (Condos) 140 DU 813 10 51 62 49 24 73
Existing Industrial Park 183.43 TSF -1253 -123 -27 -150 -33 -123 -156
Total Trip Generation -439 -113 24 -89 16 -99 -83
TSF =Thousand Square Feet
'Trip rates from the Institute of Transporation Engineers, Trip Generation, 9th Edition, 2012. Land Use Code 230 -Condominium
'Trip rates from the Institute of Transporation Engineers, Trip Generation, 9th Edition, 2012. Land Use Code 130 -Indust rid Park.
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-9
2. Response to Comments
Al -8 Please see the response to Comment A1-6. A TIS following the Caltrans Guide is not
required based on the project trip generation. The City's TIA comports with the City's
existing standards for traffic studies and based on that analysis, the proposed project
would not result in any significant impacts. As discussed in the MND and the project
TIA (Transpo Group, Inc., 2016), no project impacts are forecast under the Existing
With -Project conditions and in the Buildout Year 2035 With -Project scenario.
Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Al -9 The comment is a summary of Caltrans requirements related to freeway signage. The
project shall comply with all Caltrans regulations related to freeway signage. The
project would construct a non -illuminated sign identifying "Old Town Tustin" which shall
be placed/imbedded on the project sound wall adjacent to Interstate 5 freeway and be
of a size and in a location which will not encroach into Caltrans right-of-way; therefore,
Caltrans review would not be required.
Al -10 The comment correctly states that there are no landscape issues, that the three-story
buildings would be visible beyond the 20 -foot sound wall, but would not cuase
substantial visual changes along the freeway. As requested, the final plans for the
sound wall have been submitted to Caltrans as part of the hydrology review. As
discussed in Section I, Aesthetics, of the MND, visual and aesthetic impacts would be
less than significant. All lighting fixtures are required to have light shielding pursuant to
the City's municipal code, "Tustin City Code" (TCC) Section 9271 hh, which would
prevent light spillage off of the property. The 20 -foot noise wall adjacent to the site
boundary with 1-5 would screen passing motorists from light and glare impacts.
Al -11 The environmental documentation for this project is a MND. All project impacts would
be less than significant with implementation of existing regulations, project design
features, and mitigation measures.
Page 2-10 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
LETTER A2 — Scott Morgan, Director, OPR (1 page)
�,OF PL1yp„
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
( Alkok%'fi
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE Of PLANNING AND RESEARCH
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT'
EDMUND G. BROWN JR.
GovEalloR KENALEX
DMEctoR
August 29, 2016
Elaine Dove
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92680
Subject: Vintage Lofts Residential Project
SCH#: 2016071081
Dear Elaine Dove:
RECEIVED
AUG 31 2016
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT
The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Mitigated Negative Declaration to selected state
agencies for review. The review period closed on August 26, 2016, and no state agencies submitted
comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse
review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act.
Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the
environmental review process. If you have a question about the above-named project, please refer to the
ten -digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office.
Sincerely,
S; Morgan
Director, State Clearinghouse
140010th Street P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812-3044
(916) 445-0613 PAX(916)323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov
A2-1
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 2-11
2. Response to Comments
Document Details Report
State Clearinghouse Data Base
SCH# 2o16071081
Project Title Vintage Lofts Residential Project
Lead Agency Tustin, City of
Type MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
Description The Vintage Lofts Residential project proposes to subdivide a 6.81 acre lot into two parcels for
condominium purposes to accommodate 140 for sale residential units and ancillary uses (e.g private
drives, parking, sidewalks, recreation uses and community center, walls and landscaping). The
discretionary actions required to allow the project include a general plan amendment, zone change,
planned community residential district standards, tentative tract map, and development agreement.
.Leat! Agency Contact
Name Elaine Dove
Agency City of Tustin
Phone (714) 573-3136 Fax
email
Address 300 Centennial Way
City Tustin State CA Zip 92580
Project Location
County Orange
City Tustin
Region
Lat/Long 33' 44'21 " N / 117° 49'37" W
Cross Streets Southwest comer of W. 6th St and S. B St
Parcel No. 401-341-04
Township 5W Range 9W Section Base SB
Proximity to:
Highways 5
Airports
Railways
Waterways
Schools Tustin HS
Land Use GP: Industrial; Z: Planned industrial
Project Issues Aesthetic/Visual; Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic -Historic; Biolbgical Resources;
Drainage/Absorption; Flood Pfain/Flooding; Forest Land/Fire Hazard; Geologic/Seismic; Minerals;
Noise; Population/Housing Balance; Public Services; Recreation/Parks; Schools/Universities; Septic
System; Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading; Solid Waste; Toxic/Hazardous;
Traffic/Circulation; Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; Wetland/Riparian; Landuse; Growth
Inducing; Cumulative Effects
Reviewing Resources Agency; Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 5; Department of Parks and Recreation;
Agencies Department of Water Resources; Office of Emergency Services, California; California Highway Patrol;
Caltrans, District 12; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Native American Heritage
Commission
Date Received 07/28/2016 Start of Review 07/28/2016 End of Review 08J26/2016
N OYP.' Rlanke in data field. raciilf frnm incnffinianr inf—mine ....,.AA -A k- i—a
Page 2-12 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
A2. Response to Comments from Scott Morgan, Director, OPR, dated April 20, 2012.
A2-1 This comment states that the State Clearinghouse circulated the MND for state agency
review. As the comment does not raise concerns related to the project's environmental
impacts, no response is necessary.
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-13
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-14 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
LETTER A3 — Tamera Rivers, Management Analyst, Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) (2 pages)
ti=lar ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY
P.O. Box 57115, Irvine, CA 92619-711 S • 1 Fire Authority Road, Irvine. CA 92602
Jeff Bowman, Fire Chief (714) 573-6000 www.ocra.org
°�oxtc+
August 11, 2016
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA92780
Attn: Elaine Dove, Senior Planner
Subject: Mitigated Negative Declaration - Vintage Lofts Residential Project
Dear Ms. Dove:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject document. As stated in the document, The
Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) provides fire protection and emergency medical services
response to the project area. We have the following comments regarding the subject document:
o Page 117 - Orange County Fire Authority has 72 fire stations.
o Page 120 - Under Project Design Features, the following items should be considered in
order to insure a fire safe project: I
O Structures should have automatic fire sprinkler systems.
O Access to and around structures to meet OCFA and California Fire Code I
requirements
O A water supply system to supply fire hydrants and automatic fire sprinkler systems. I
Fire hydrant spacing is 500 feet between fire hydrants.
e Turning radius and access in and around the project site and buildings shall be I
designed to accommodate large fire department vehicles and their weight.
o If the project includes traffic signals on public access ways, they should include
the installation of optical preemption devices.
• All electrically operated gates within the Project shall install emergency opening
devices as approved by the Orange County Fire Authority.
In addition, we would like to point out that all standard conditions with regard to
development, including water supply, built in fire protection systems, road grades and
width, access, building materials, and the like will be applied to this project at the time
of plan submittal.
Serving the Cides of Aliso VicJo • Buena Part. • Cypress • Dana Point - Iryin • Laguna Nibs • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods • Lake Forest • La Palma
Los Alamilos • Mission Viejo • Placendn - Rancho Sana Margoria -San Clemente • San Juan Capistrano • Santa Ann • Seal Deach • Stanton • Tustin -Villa Park
Westminster • Yorba Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County
RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLERS AND SMOKE ALARMS SAVE LIVES
A3-1
A3-2
A3-3
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 2-I5
2. Response to Comments
Sincerely,
a -l", 9'1_�
Tamera Rivers
Management Analyst
(714)573-6199
Serving the Cities of: Aliso Viejo • Buenu Park • Cypress • Donn Point • Irvine • Lagunn Hills • Laguna Niguel • Laguna Woods -Lake Forest • La Palma
Los Alamitos • Mission Viejo • Placentia • Rancho Soma Margarita •Son Clemente • San Juan Capistrano • Santa Ano • Seal Beach • Stanton • Tustin • Vti la Park
Westminster • Yorha Linda • and Unincorporated Areas of Orange County
RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLERS AND SMOKE ALARMS SAVE LIVES
Page 2-16 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
A3. Response to Comment from Tamera Rivers, Management Analyst, OCFA
A3-1 OCFA provides a comment correcting the number of fire stations within its service area.
Page 117 of the MND is revised to state that OCFA consists of 72 fire stations. See
Section 3 of this Response to Comment document, Revisions to the MND.
A3-2 The commenter provides a list of OCFA standard conditions and suggests they be included
as Project Design Features (PDFs). These items have not been included as PDFs because
they are required by existing regulation (OCFA and CA Fire Code Requirements) and
compliance with the such regulation is required by City of Tustin Conditions of Approval.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the City of Tustin would route the project plans to the
OCFA for review and approval, and requires the payment of OCFA Plan Check and
inspection fees, per Condition of Approval 16.5. Condition 14.7 ensures that the adequacy
of a proposed water system plan, including the number, size and distribution of fire
hydrants, must meet OCFA fire protection requirements and must be stamped and
approved by OCFA.
A3-3 The proposed project would comply with all applicable OCFA standard conditions applied
at the time of OCFA submittal. The project does not include electronically operated gates
or new traffic signals.
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin •Page 2-17
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-18 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
LETTER A4 — Jillian Wong, PHD, Planning and Rules Manager, SCAQMD (2 pages)
South Coast
M Air Quality Management District
21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178
(909) 396-2000 • vww.agmd.gov
SENT VIA E-MAIL AND USPS: August 11, 2016
edove6dUstinca.ore
Elaine Dove, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
City of Tustin
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (DMND) for the
Proposed Vintage Lofts Residential Prosect
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) staff appreciates the opportunity
to comment on the above-mentioned document. The following comments are meant as guidance
for the Lead Agency and should be incorporated into the Final MND.
Proiect Description
In the project description, the Lead Agency proposes to demolish the 11 existing industrial -park
buildings totaling 183,430 square feet' in order to subdivide the 6.81 -acre lot into two parcels.
Construction would then begin to build 148 -residential condominium homes' along with
ancillary uses (e.g., private driveways, parking, sidewalks, recreation uses, a clubhouse, walls
and landscaping). Construction will occur in three phases over an approximately 25 month
period starting in 2017 with occupancy starting in 2018.
Health Risk Assessment and Associated Mitigation
The Lead Agency notes that the proposed residences will be sited just north of the Interstate -5
Freeway, which has an average daily traffic volume of 324,000 vehicles that includes 19,030
diesel trucks. 3 Because of the close proximity to the existing freeway, residents would be
exposed to diesel particulate matter, which is a toxic air contaminant. As part of the Lead
Agency's analyses, a health risk assessment was performed. That analysis determined that future
residents would be exposed to cancer risk that would exceed the SCAQMD's recommended
significance threshold of 10 in one million cases. To reduce the estimated risk to a less than
significant level, the Lead Agency mitigation including a heating, ventilation, and air
1 DMND, Appendix B: AQ & GHG Analyses, CalFFMod output sheets used 175,500 square feet for demolition
Zlbi4 Page 15 and CalEEMod output sheet, Land Use Size.
3 htw://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/ Caltrans 2014 Traffic Volumes on California Highways, Back Peak
Month (The peak month ADT is the average daily traffic for the month of heaviest traffic flow. This data is obtained
because on many routes, high traffic volumes which occur during a certain season of the year are more
representative of traffic conditions than the annual ADT) for I-5 at Newport Avenue and 2014 Daily Truck Traffic
percentage (5.5%) for Tustin/Junction Rte. 55.
A4-1
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 2-19
2. Response to Comments
Elaine Dove 2 August 11, 2016
conditioning (HVAC) air filtration system for each residential unit. The air filtration system will A4-1
have a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) of 13 or higher. These and other support cont'd.
actions will also be part of the development's Covenant, Codes & Restrictions (CC&Rs). Rmed
on the proposed mitigation, the project's cancer risk was estimated to be less than significant.
Limits to Enhanced Filtration Units
The Lead Agency should consider the limitations of the proposed mitigation for this project
(enhanced filtration) on housing residents. For example, because the filters would not have any
effectiveness unless the HVAC system is running, there may be increased energy costs to the
resident. The proposed mitigation also assumes that the filters operate 100 percent of the time
while residents are indoors. These filters also have no ability to filter out any toxic gases from
vehicle exhaust. The presumed effectiveness and feasibility of this mitigation should therefore
be evaluated in more detail prior to assuming that it will sufficiently alleviate near roadway
exposures.
Compliance With SCAQMD Rules
A4-2
Finally, the project includes demolition and soil disturbance activities that could fall under the
following SCAQMD rules: Rule 1403 — Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation
Activities would apply if asbestos is found during demolition, and Rule 1166 — Volatile Organic A4-3
Compound Emissions from Decontamination of Soil would apply if soils containing Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOCs) are encountered during soil disturbance activities. if applicable,
compliance with these rules should be included in the Final MND.
Please provide the SCAQMD with written responses to all comments contained herein prior to A4-4
the adoption of the Final MND. The SCAQMD staff is available to work with the Lead Agency
to address these issues and any other air quality questions that may arise. Please contact Gordon
Mize, Air Quality Specialist — CEQA Section, at (909) 396-3302, if you have any questions
regarding these comments.
Sincerely,
P W ?VC ay
.lillian Wong, Ph.D.
Planning and Rules Manager
Planning, Rn1C Development & Area Sources
JW.0M
( )RC 1 60 802-0 5
Control Number
" Support Actions I)escribed in the I)raf IS&ND on Page 38.
Page 2-20 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
A4. Response to Comments from Jillian Wong, PHD, Planning and Rules Manager, South Coast
Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), dated August 11, 2016.
A4-1 This comment is a summary of the project description, the findings of the Health Risk
Assessment (HRA), and the project's air filtration mitigation measure. Because this
summary does not raise concerns related to the project's environmental impacts, no
response is necessary.
A4-2 Based on market research, the developer/applicant has identified a consumer demand
for upgraded air filtration systems in similarly located projects. Therefore, the
developer/applicant has included as a project design feature (PDF -1) upgraded air
filtration systems, rated MERV13 or higher, in all residential units.
According to Status of Research on Potential Mitigation Concepts to Reduce Exposure
to Nearby Traffic Pollution, prepared by California Air Resources Board (CARB),
August 23, 2012, research has shown that homes with positive static pressure HVAC
systems with MERV 13 to 16 air filters result in a 90 percent reduction in fine particles
(PM10) when compared to outdoor levels of PM10. It should be noted that the
requirement for MERV 13 filters is a project design feature and is not mitigation, as
CEQA is limited to the analysis of a project onto the surrounding environment and does
not include analysis of environmental impacts onto the proposed project. Pursuant to
California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(2015) 62 CalAth 369, Case No. S213478, agencies are not required to analyze the
CEQA impact of existing environmental conditions on a project's future users or
residents, unless the proposed project risks exacerbating those environmental hazards
or conditions that already exist. The proposed project would not exacerbate existing
environmental hazards. As discussed in the MND, all construction and operational air
quality impacts are found to be less than significant. The project will negligibly add ADT
to the I-5 Freeway. The health risk assessment determined that the net reductions from
the filtration system would result in the risks being lowered to less than 10 in one
million, the SCAQMD cancer risk significance threshold. Therefore, impacts related to
emissions from I-5 would be less than significant. The health risk assessment has been
provided to the City as an information item for land use decision making, but is not a
CEQA required analysis condition.
A4-3 Pursuant to existing regulations, the project applicant will be required to ensure that all
contractors that perform work on the proposed project adhere to all applicable
regulations, including SCAQMD Rule 1403 and 1166. Page 89 of the MND has been
revised to state that the project includes demolition and soil disturbance activities that
are subject to SCAQMD Rule 1403 — Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation
Activities — if asbestos is found during demolition, and Rule 1166 — Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions from Decontamination of Soil for soils containing VOCs.
A4-4 Written responses will be transmitted to SCAQMD prior to adoption of the MND by the
City Council.
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-21
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-22 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
LETTER R1 — Dave Hackett, Dated August 26, 2016 (1 page)
From: Hackett, Dave [mailtD:HackettD@CTT.com]
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 4:21 PM
To: Dove, Elaine
Subject: 420 W. 6th Street
Hi Elaine! My name is Dave Hackett. I own 445 112 W. 6th Steet with my wife and live directly across the
street from the proposed project at 420 W. 6th St.
Although there are aspects of the prop osedprojectI am very concerned about the additional traffic, parking, and
the construction dirt/noise.
The parking on 6th St. is already an issue due to the residents of Tustin Acres and some apartments parking on
the street. Often cars will stay three and four days in a row parked on 6th. I also see people being dropped off to
park their car in my neighborhood. The additional homes will add to the issue. I would fully support any permit
parking for residents only or a no parking overnight initiative.
In addition speeding on 6th Street is areal issue. I am concerned not only about the speed but the volume of
traffic. Hopefully there will not be an entrance to the developm ent in front of my house. I am concerned on how
the additional traffic will be handled. I would support speed bumps.
Hopefully the developers will work with the current residents regarding the noise and dirt.
Regards,
Dave & Karen Hackett
Sent from my iPhone
NOTICE: The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential and may be privileged. If
you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you are hereby notified to: (i) delete the message and
all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender
immediately.
R1-1
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin •Page 2-23
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-24 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
R1. Response to Comments from Dave Hackett, dated August 26, 2016.
R1-1 The commenter's main concern is that the proposed project could negatively impact
traffic speed and volume, and parking in the area. The commenter also expresses
concern with regard to the potential negative construction noise and construction dust
impacts of the proposed project.
The MND demonstrated that there are not significant and unavoidable impacts
associated with the proposed 140 -unit development, including Air Quality, Noise, and
Traffic. As demonstrated in MND Section 3.3, Air Quality, there are no project -related
air quality impacts from short-term construction activities or long-term operation of the
project. The project will comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) Rule 402 (Nuisance) and Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust). As required by PPP -3
of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP, Section 4 herein) the
project developer will require construction contractors and subcontractors to employ
the following enhanced dust control measures during construction to minimize
particulate matter (PM -10 and PM -2.5) emissions:
1. Suspend the use of all construction equipment during first -stage smog alerts.
2. Apply soil stabilizers such as hay bales or aggregate cover to inactive areas.
3. Prepare a high wind dust control plan and implement plan elements and
terminate soil disturbance when winds exceed 25 mph.
4. Stabilize previously disturbed areas if subsequent construction is delayed.
5. Water exposed surfaces and haul roads 3 times/day.
6. Cover all stock piles with tarps.
7. Replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly.
8. Reduce speeds on unpaved roads to less than 15 mph.
9. Trenches shall be left exposed for as short a time as possible.
10. Identify proper compaction for backfilled soils in construction specifications.
11. Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose material or require all trucks to
maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
12. Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried out from the construction
site.
13. Provide water spray during loading and unloading of earthen materials.
14. Minimize in -out traffic from construction zone.
Section 3.12, Noise, demonstrates that changes in traffic noise due to the project would
not result in significant long-term, traffic -related noise impacts to offsite uses and no
mitigation is required. Likewise, the project would not result in any significant short-
term or long-term impacts from project construction or operations.
The project's Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared by a licensed traffic engineer,
utilizing City of Tustin intersection evaluation methodology and significance criteria.
The TIA is consistent with City of Tustin traffic study guidelines and the Caltrans Guide
for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies.
Section 3.16, Transportation/Traffic, and the project -specific traffic study both
demonstrate that the project would not result in more traffic as compared to existing
conditions, but would reduce the volume of traffic to the site. The project would
generate a net total of 439 fewer daily trips (-439) including 89 fewer trips (-89) during
the AM peak hour and 83 fewer trips (-83) during the PM peak hour. Net negative trips
are anticipated because the existing industrial use generates more trips than the
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin •Page 2-25
2. Response to Comments
proposed residential use. As a result, in the project's opening year, and in year 2035,
all intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service (LOS) B or
better in the "with -project" traffic condition. Project -generated traffic would not
contribute to a significant cumulative traffic impact in either the AM or PM peak hours.
The majority of intersections would operate at LOS A.
Every unit in the Vintage project would have a two -car attached garage. Parking for
the proposed project would meet the off-street parking requirements of the City of
Tustin. A total of 315 parking spaces are required, including 280 covered spaces and
35 guest parking spaces. The project provides 280 garage spaces and 69 guest
parking spaces for a total of 349 parking spaces. City Condition of Approval 6.5 (k)
requires residents to keep garages clear and available to park vehicles. In addition, the
CC&Rs shall include provisions requiring the HOA to develop and adopt an
enforcement program for parking regulations within the development to ensure
garages are kept clear.
The rest of the MND demonstrates that there are no significant environmental impacts.
These comments, including the comment's support for speed bumps, permit parking
and no overnight parking will be forwarded to the decisionmakers for their
consideration.
Page 2-26 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
LETTER R2 — Heather Hackett, Dated August 25, 2016 (1 page)
From: Heather Hackett [mailm;hackett.heather@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 7:47 PM
To: Dove, Elaine
Subject: 420 W. 6th Street
Hi Elaine! My name is Heather Hackett. I own 445 W. 6th Ste et and live directly across the street from the
proposed project at 420 W. 6th St.
Although there are aspects of the proposed project am very concerned about the additional traffic, parking, and
the construction dirt/noise.
The parking on 6th St. is already an issue due to the residents of Tustin Acres and some apartments parking on
the street. Often cars will stay three and four days in a row parked on 6th. I also see people being dropped off to
park their car in my neighborhood. The additional homes will add to the issue. I would fully support any permit
parking for residents only or a no parking overnight initiative.
In additi on speeding on 6th Street is a real issue. I am concerned not only about the speed but the volume of
traffic. Hopefully there will not be an entrance to the developm ent in front of my house. I am concerned on how
the additional traffic will be handled. I would support speed bumps.
Hopefully the developers will work with the current residents regarding the noise and dirt.
Regards,
Heather Hackett
R2-1
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-27
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-28 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
R2. Response to Comments from Heather Hackett, dated August 25, 2016.
R2-1 The commenter's makes the identical comments as Dave Hackett in Letter R-1 and is
referred to Responses to Comment R1-1. These comments will be forwarded to the
decisionmakers for their consideration.
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin •Page 2-29
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-30 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
Maureen Li, Dated August 15, 2016 (1 page)
-----Original Message -----
From: Maureen Li [mailto:Maureen.Li@wdc.com]
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 1:43 PM
To: Dove, Elaine
Cc: maureenli@yahoo.com
Subject: Intracorp So Cal -1LLC - Written Comments
Dear Ms. Dove,
As a property owner near by, I am writing to express my concern related to additional residential development in a very
cramped area of Old Town Tustin. Not only the streets are narrow ( 6th, Pacific , A and B) surrounding the proposed
development, over the years, high density apartment complexes were built at the end of 6th street and apartments at
the City line with Santa Ana to the East_ All kinds of vehicles were parked on the streets mentioned in Old Town Tustin.
The proposed development will posted additional Parking challenges and continue to be the #1 concerns for the
impacted home owners.
We see folks from other high density area coming to drop off their vehicles and left them parked overnight and over the
weekends. They came in 2-3 at a time and carpool back to where they come from_ Other uses skateboards, roller
blades and other transport after dropping off their vehicle parked on 6th, Pacific, Main, A and B streets. These folks left
behind trash and all drips on the roadway. I have to call police several time because my driveway was blocked by the
parked vehicle preventing me from getting out.
I understanding the importance of community development. If I may suggest the fallowing actions for your
consideration:
Traffic study to support the added traffic resulting from the condo development.
Requiring parking permits for the residents who reside in the area and no parking on these streets without a City issued
permit.
Red curb the areas where parked vehicle is interfering with our driveway access.
I can be contacted at maureenli@yahoo.com if you need any additional information from me.
Respectfully submitted,
Maureen Li
HO - 535 Pacific street
Tustin
R1-3
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin *Page 2-31
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-32 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
R3. Response to Comments from Maureen Li, dated August 15, 2016.
R3-1 The commenter states that there is a parking issue in this part of Old Tustin and
expresses concern that the proposed project would result in additional parking
challenges on public streets. The commenter wants to ensure that a traffic study for
the project has been prepared. Furthermore, she expresses support of permit parking
on the local public streets and the use of red curbs in areas where parking is interfering
with private driveways.
Section 3.16, Transportation/Traffic, and the project -specific traffic study both
demonstrate that the project would not result in more traffic as compared to existing
conditions, but would reduce the volume of traffic to the site. The project would
generate a net total of 439 fewer daily trips (-439) including 89 fewer trips (-89) during
the AM peak hour and 83 fewer trips (-83) during the PM peak hour. Net negative trips
are anticipated because the existing industrial use generates more trips than the
proposed residential use. As a result, in the project's opening year, and in year 2035,
all intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service (LOS) B or
better in the "with -project" traffic condition. Project -generated traffic would not
contribute to a significant cumulative traffic impact in either the AM or PM peak hours.
The majority of intersections would operate at LOS A.
Every unit in the Vintage project would have a two -car attached garage. Parking for
the proposed project would meet the off-street parking requirements of the City of
Tustin. A total of 315 parking spaces are required, including 280 covered spaces and
35 guest parking spaces. The project provides 280 garage spaces and 69 guest
parking spaces for a total of 349 parking spaces. City Condition of Approval 6.5 (k)
requires residents to keep garages clear and available to park vehicles. In addition, the
CC&Rs shall include provisions requiring the HOA to develop and adopt an
enforcement program for parking regulations within the development to ensure
garages are kept clear.
The rest of the MND demonstrates that there are no significant environmental impacts.
These comments, including the comment's in support for permit parking and no
overnight and red curbs near private driveways, will be forwarded to the
decisionmakers for their consideration.
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin •Page 2-33
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-34 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
LETTER R4 — Reese Udall, Dated August 26, 2016 (1 page)
From: Reese Udall [mailto:reeseudall@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 4:31 PM
To: Dove, Elaine
Subject: Vintage Lofts Project
Hi Elaine,
Carne in today 8/26 to inspect the Vintage Lofts Project on 6th Street.
I own a small 5 -unit apartment building down wind and caddy -corner to this project at 545 S. B St. This project
sound nice and removing the industrial park is a plus. The current concerns are for my many tenants, the
neighborhood and future building values as follows: 1) dust corning down wind blanketing everything (the
plan is to take 5' of top soil off), 2) dirty streets and 3) future parking. If these issues arise, I am confident the
City will help rectify the problem.
Thanks for your time and attention to this matter.
Reese Udall, Manager
545 S. B Street Apartments, LLC
949-363-7238
R4-1
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 2-35
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-36 October 2016
2. Response to Comments
R4. Response to Comments from Reese Udall, dated August 26, 2016.
R4-1 The Commenter's concern is that the proposed project could negatively impact
individual property value. The commenter also expresses concern for the proposed
project with regard to construction dust and parking.
The Commenter's concerns regarding property value will be shared with the decision -
makers. However, it should be noted that neither the Public Resources Code nor the
State CEQA Guidelines requires that a MND evaluate social or economic impacts of a
project unless those social or economic impacts would lead to physical environmental
changes (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(e) and Section 15131). Since property
values are an economic consideration, they are not included within the MND.
As demonstrated in MND Section 3.3, Air Quality, there are no project -related air
quality impacts from short-term construction activities or long-term operation of the
project. The project will comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) Rule 402 (Nuisance) and Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust). The project developer
will require construction contractors and subcontractors to employ the following
enhanced dust control measures during construction to minimize particulate matter
(PM -10 and PM -2.5) emissions:
1. Suspend the use of all construction equipment during first -stage smog alerts.
2. Apply soil stabilizers such as hay bales or aggregate cover to inactive areas.
3. Prepare a high wind dust control plan and implement plan elements and
terminate soil disturbance when winds exceed 25 mph.
4. Stabilize previously disturbed areas if subsequent construction is delayed.
5. Water exposed surfaces and haul roads 3 times/day.
6. Cover all stock piles with tarps.
7. Replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly.
8. Reduce speeds on unpaved roads to less than 15 mph.
9. Trenches shall be left exposed for as short a time as possible.
10. Identify proper compaction for backfilled soils in construction specifications.
11. Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose material or require all trucks to
maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
12. Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried out from the construction
site.
13. Provide water spray during loading and unloading of earthen materials.
14. Minimize in -out traffic from construction zone.
As determined by the MND, dust control measures required by the SCAQMD would
ensure that there are no significant impacts to streets and adjacent properties.
Please see Response to Comment R1-1 for a detailed response to the project's
provision of guest parking spaces.
The rest of the MND demonstrates that there are no significant environmental impacts.
These comments will be forwarded to the decisionmakers for their consideration.
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin •Page 2-37
2. Response to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 2-38 October 2016
3. Revisions to the MND
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This section contains revisions to the MND based upon (1) additional or revised information required to
prepare a response to a specific comment; (2) applicable updated information that was not available at the
time of MND publication; and/or (3) typographical errors. Changes made to the MND are identified here in
strokeeut tex4 to indicate deletions and in bold underlined text to signify additions. These changes do not
result in new, different or more significant impacts than previously identified. These changes represent
minor alterations that clarify and amplify information that was contained in the publicly circulated version of
the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
3.2 MND REVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENTS
The following text has been revised in response to comments received on the MND.
Page 7, Project Location, is revised as follows:
The proposed project site is located at southwest corner of W. 6th Street and S. B Street (420 4 320-
438 W. 6TH Street and 338 620 — 694 S. B Street) in Tustin, California.
Page 48, Section I, Aesthetics, is revised as follows:
The buildings would be replaced with 140 two-; and three-,-, and four --story residential units.
Page 50, Section I, Aesthetics is revised as follows:
PPP -2: Lighting. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a photometric lighting
plan showing compliance with the TCC Section 8102, (""^T which requires a minimum one foot-
candle of light on the private drives and parking surfaces and a minimum of one-quarter foot-candle of light
on the walking surfaces. The lighting plan is to be overlaid onto a tree landscape plan. The photometric
plan must also show no light spillage pursuant to TCC Section 9271 hh.
Page 89, Section VIII, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, is revised as follows:
Prior to demolition of the site, building materials will be carefully assessed for the presence of lead-
based paint, and its removal, where necessary, will need to comply with State and federal
regulations, including Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Rule 29, Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1926.The OSHA rule establishes standards for occupational health
and environmental controls for lead exposure. The standard also includes requirements addressing
exposure assessment, methods of compliance, respiratory protection, protective clothing and
equipment, hygiene facilities and practices, medical surveillance, medical removal protection,
emnlovee information and trainina. sians. recordkeenina. and observation of monitorina. Because
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin •Page 3-1
3. Revisions to the MND
29 CFR Part 1926 is an existing regulation, federal law requires compliance with 29 CFR Part 1926
whether it is included in this Initial Study or not. Furthermore, Title 17, CCR, Division 1, Chapter 8.
identifies procedures for accreditation, certification, and work practices for lead-based paint and
lead hazards. Section 36100 thereof specifically sets forth requirements for lead-based paint
abatement in public and residential buildings.
Furthermore, the project includes demolition and soil disturbance activities that are subject to
SCAQMD Rule 1403 which governs the demolition of buildings containing asbestos materials
(ACMs). Rule 1403 specifies work practices with the goal of minimizing asbestos emissions during
building demolition and renovation activities, including the removal and associated disturbance of
ACMs. The requirements for demolition and renovation activities include asbestos surveying;
notification; ACM removal procedures and time schedules; ACM handling and clean-up procedures;
and storage, disposal, and landfill disposal requirements for asbestos -containing waste materials
(ACWM). The project is also subject to SCAQMD Rule 1166 which sets requirements to control the
emission of VOC from excavating, grading, handling and treating VOC-contaminated soil as a result
of leakage from storage or transfer operations, accidental spillage, or other deposition. Prior to
demolition of the site, building materials would be carefully assessed for the presence of ACMs and
removal, where necessary, will need to comply with State and federal regulations, including Rules
1403 And 1166
Page 118, Section XIV, Public Services, is revised as follows:
The OCFA consists of 7 divisions, 9 battalions, 74 72 fire stations, 951 firefighters, 6 executive chiefs, and
248 professional staff members.
Page 118, Section XIV, Public Services, is revised as follows:
availability ef adequate fore PFeteGtien serviGes. The agreements s eper's pre rata fair share
equipment, and persenne'. PPP -7 Is a Gity of Tustin standard A-e-nd-itie.n -;;nd- stipulates that the develepe
must enter Onte the Sser.,Ured fire preteGtien agreement prier te i.,Ssuanr.e ef any building permits for the
proposed proje6t. Implementation of PPP 7would reduce potential impacts related to the proje6t'S
M neremental contFibution to cumulative Fegional demand fOF fiFe proteotion services to a less than significant
level.
Page 128, Section 3.16 Transportation and Traffic, is revised as follows:
As shown in Table 4-22, all study area intersections are forecast to operate at satisfactory LOS under the
Buildout Year 2013 With -Project conditions.
Page 120, Section XIV, Public Services, is revised as follows:
Page 3-2 October 2016
3. Revisions to the MND
Table 5-1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, has been revised as follows:
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 3-3
3. Revisions to the MND
5.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE 5-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Number
Measure
Monitoring Activity
Implementation
Responsibilityfor
Timing
Outside Agency
Responsibilityl
Oversight of
Coordination
Verification
Com pliancel
I
Verification
AESTHETICS
Design
Features
RProect
None
Policies, Plans,
and Procedures
PPP -1
Project construction hours will be limited to the
Construction hours.
Project
City of Tustin
Ongoing
NIA
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 600 p.m., Mondays
Deaelcper/Construction
Community
through Friday, and the hours of 9:00 a.m. and
Contractor
Development Dept_
6800 p.m. on Saturday and never on Sundays or
city -observed federal holidays.
Pi
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the
Lighting plan.
Project
City of Tustin
Prior to Building
N/A
applicant shall submit a photometric lighting plan
Developer/Construction
Community
Permits
showing compliance wth the TCC Section 8102,
Contractor
Development Dept.
(N192Y42);-which requires a minimum one foot-
candle of light on the private drives and parking
surfaces and a minimum of one-quarter foot-
candle of light on the vvelking surfaces. The
lighting plan is to be overlaid onto a tree landscape
plan. The photometric plan must also show no light
spillage pursuant to TCC Section 9271 hh.
Mitigation
Measures
None.
AIR QUALITY
Pro'ect Desi nFeatures
PDF -1
The applicantrdeveloper shall install upgraded air
Air filtration systems.
Project
Cityof Tustin
Prior to Building
NIA
filtration systems in all residential units, Air
DevelcperfConstructicn
Community
Permits
filtration devices shall be rated MERV13 or higher.
Contractor
Development Dept.
Ventilation systems in residential units shall meet
the following minimal deli n standards:
City of Tustin - Initial SludyAWitigefed Nega floe Declaration Page 142
Oulage Lofts R -id -6.1 Proiect July 2016
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin 11 3-1
3. Revisions to the MND
5.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE 5-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Number
Measure
Monitoring Activity
Implementation
Respon sibilityfor
Timing
Outside Agency
Responsibilityl
Oversight of
Coordination
Verification
Com pliancel
Verification
A MERV13 or higher rating;
At least one air exchanges) per hour of fresh
outside filtered air;
At least four air exchange(s) per hour
recirculation; and
At least 0.25 air exchange(s) per hour in
unfiltered infiltration.
;Ioan ng Ra intenanise, and
9 OF Was ng a the
monitoring, and FeplaGeMeRi of the filters, as
needed
Policies Plans,
and Procedures
Pli
Fugitive dust.
Project
City of Tustin
Ongoing–
Possible
The project will comply with South Coast Air
Developer/Construction
Community
Durina
coordination with
Quality Management District(SCAQMD) Rule 402
Contractor
Development Dept.
Construction
SCAQMD
(Nuisance) and Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), The
project developer will require construction
contractors and subcontractors to employ the
following enhanced dust control measures during
construction to minimize particulate matter (PM -10
and PM -2.5 emissions.
City of Tustin - Initial SrudyMifigafed V ge floe Declaration Pege 143
Vintage Lofts Resd-6.1 Proiect July 2616
Page 3-2 October 2016
3. Revisions to the MND
5.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE 5-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Number
Measure
Monitoring Activity
Implementation
Respon sibilityfor
Timing
Outside Agency
Responsibility/
Oversight of
Coordination
Verification
Com pliancel
Verification
1. Suspend the use of all construction
equipment during first -stage smog alerts.
2. Apply soil stabilizers such as hay bales or
aggregate cover to inactive areas.
3. Prepare a high vend dust control plan and
implement plan elements and terminate soil
disturbance when winds exceed 25 mph.
4. Stabilize previously disturbed areas if
subsequent construction is delayed.
5. Water exposed surfaces and haul roads 3
timesiday
6. Cover all stock piles with tarps.
7, Replace ground cover in disturbed areas
quickly.
8. Reduce speeds on unpaved roads to less
than 15 mph.
9, Trenches shall be left exposed for as short a
time as possible.
10. Identify proper compaction for backfilled soils
in construction specifications.
11. Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose
material or require all trucks to maintain at
least two feet of freeboard.
12. Sneep streets daily if visible soil material is
carried out from the construction site.
13, Provide Aeter spray during loading and
unloading of earthen materials.
14. Minimize in -out traffic from construction zone.
BIOLOGICAL
RESOURCES
Proecr Design
Features
None.
Policies Plans and Procedures
None
Miti tion Measures
Cityof Tustin- Inigal Srudyiblitigefed Negaf!�Decfararion Page 144
Vintage Lofts Resde 6.1 Proiect July 2616
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 3-3
3. Revisions to the MND
5.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
TABLE 5-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Number
Measure
Monitoring Activity
Implementation
Respon sibilityfor
Timing
Outside Agency
Responsibilityl
Oversight of
Coordination
Verification
Com pliancel
Verification
MM B-1
Prior to approval of grading plans, the Community
Nesting Bird Survey
Project
City of Tustin
Prior to grading
NIA
Development Department shall verify that the
Developer/Construction
Community
permit
following note is included on the contractor
Contractor
Development Dept
specifications to ensure compliance with the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (M BTA)
To avoid impacts on nesting birds, vegetation on
the project site should be cleared between
September 1 and February 28. If vegetation
clearing occurs inside the peak nesting season
(between March 1 and August 31), a pre -
construction survey (or possibly multiple surveys)
shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist to
identify if there are any active nesting locations. If
the Biologist does not find any active nests within
the impact area, then vegetation
clearing/construction work will be allowed. If the
Biologist finds an active nest within the
construction area and determines that the nest
may be impacted by construction activities, the
Biologist wll delineate an appropriate buffer zona
around the nest depending on the species and the
type of construction activity. Construction acttvdies
would be prohibited in the buffer zone until a
qualified Biologist determines that the nest has
been abandoned."
CULTURAL
RESOURCES
Pro ecr Design Features
None.
Policies, Plans, and Procedures
PPP -4
Should human remains be discovered duringDiscovery
of human
Project
City of Tustin
Aagefag—
Possibl
project construction, the projectwould be required
remaire.
Developer/Construction
Community
During Grading
=inae tion with
to comply with State Health and Safety Code
Contractor
Development Dept.
NAHC and
City of Tustin - Initial SrudyW Ilgafed Neige floe Declaration Page 145
Vintage Lofts Residential Project Juty 2016
Page 3-4 October 2016
3. Revisions to the MND
MND Figures 5, 8, 10, and 11 have been revised as follows:
Figure 5
Site Plan
Z7""r-
--
VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
City of Tustin
September 20, 2016
N6RM
LI-f,WAUN6,
�ocm. xe ou;rc
suA.nHn�EHs �E saasr
9raucr, oAaF w:.
114711,111 Rlk
rcr+o..tc�aEz ;Is
11-
NES- 09
rC- RGN]E]E>. :I9
CI. T-K'STYif COOR F,ufI
, • rorr ITY, coiox s-�Fa+F�
51 SF.. 61 SW CC MSC iW
51 S,Mb S .CC-M$C1.t2
eK ::xuis.A.w sin-.:alae=:rEu.Ei
1Vx4ltiN.w SIR:-Cal:%ti::HHAY'l
f.0.. . E<fTSNAry S1H'. (ai,'ri S; HFiAF t
F' •=MMi0.6E5lLECJ.70.�71HAEl
fZ=MM1UlbE5 tiCJ.aIS:)1EME3
.. - ;k
FIGURE 5
Site Plan
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 3-5
3. Revisions to the MND
This page intentionally blank.
Page 3-6 October 2016
3. Revisions to the MND
Figure 8 Landscape Plan
mmmI * ac -END
yrs
VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL PROTECT
City of Tustin
Scplcmbcr 20, 2016
FIGURE 8
Landscape Plan
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin • Page 3-7
3. Revisions to the MND
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 3-8 October 2016
Figure 10 Recreation Area
3. Revisions to the MND
PUBLIC PARK
PLANTING
DG PATH
TURF
ENHANCED PAVING
U ECORATIVE FEATURE
DOG WASTE STATION
SEAT WALL
I NO MOW GRASS
RECREATION AREA
BUILT IN BBQ
POTTED PLANTS
ENHANCED PAVING
POOL
WROUGHT IRON FENCE
RAISED PLANTER W/ BENCH
VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
City of'Custin
September 20, 2016
Vintage Residential Project
FIGURE 10
Recreation Area
City of Tustin •Page 3-9
3. Revisions to the MND
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 3-10 October 2016
Figure 11 Paseos
I
I!-
u�iJ J/
4
TYPICAL'.ELROSE PLACEPASEO
VINTAGE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
City ofTustin
September 20, 2016
Vintage Residential Project
3. Revisions to the MND
SHADE TOLERANT
STRING LIG
-COLORED CO
- OUTDOOR SE
- POTTED PL,
FIRE PIT GATHE
TYPICAL 'VERANDA COURT' PASEO
FIGURE II
Paseos
City of Tustin •Page 3-11
3. Revisions to the MND
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 3-12 October 2016
Appendices
Appendix A. Traffic Impact Analysis Memo
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin
Appendices
This page intentionally left blank.
October 2016
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT
Appendices
Inter -Com
JUNE 28, 2016
ELAINE DOVE, SENIOR PLANNER
TUSTIN
BUILDING OUR FUTURE
HONORING OUR PAST
KRYS SALDIVAR, PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER-TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION
DRAFT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: 420 W. 6T" STREET RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
—2ND REVIEW
Public Works Staff has reviewed the Revised 420 W. 6T" Street Residential Project
dated May 13, 2016. The preparation of the document is consistent with Tustin
requirements and the conclusions are supported throughout the analysis. However,
there are minor inconsistencies and corrections throughout the document that need to
be addressed. Please consider the following comments:
1. There are a couple of minor inconsistencies and corrections in Figure 3 for
intersections #1 and #3. Note that SB is a driveway at #1 and NB is a driveway
at #3 but Figure 4 inconsistent as far as showing corresponding lanes and turn
volumes. Also at #1 note de facto NBR.
2. In Figure 5, please note in the title that this Figure represents the Buildout Year
(2035) Peak Hour Volumes "No -Project."
3. Please re -review the headings on the calculation sheets in the Appendices to be
consistent with the headings in the document figures (i.e. Pacific & W 611 St vs. E
611 St.?). Again, City staff did not check every work sheet, but did notice
inconsistencies on a few.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Vintage Residential Project City of Tustin
Appendices
This page intentionally left blank.
October 2016