Document Anaheim_doc_33cef90c17

Appendices SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim Appendix A Notice of Preparation and Initial Study ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendices The Planning Center August 2010 This page left blank intentionally. ---PAGE BREAK--- Initial Study for AMENDMENT TO THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN AND ASSOCIATED ACTIONS City of Anaheim, California Lead Agency: City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California 92805 Prepared by: The Planning Center 1580 Metro Drive Costa Mesa, California 92626 (714) 966-9220 December 2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP i Initial Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page PROJECT Project Project Background Purpose of the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Project Description Anticipated Additional Project Approvals CITY OF ANAHEIM ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM CITY OF ANAHEIM ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Environmental Factors Potentially Evaluation of Environmental I. II. Agricultural Resources III. Air IV. Biological V. Cultural VI. Geology and Soils VII. Hazards and Hazardous VIII. Hydrology and Water IX. Land Use and Planning X. Mineral Resources XI. XII. Population and Housing XIII. Public XIV. XV. Transportation/Traffic XVI. Utilities and Service Systems XVII. Mandatory Findings of FISH AND GAME REFERENCES ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP ii Initial Study LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Regional 2 Vicinity 3 Aerial 4 Platinum Triangle General Plan Land 5 PTMU Overlay Zone Mixed Use LIST OF TABLES Figure Page 1 Proposed Development Intensities in The Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay Zone........11 2 Proposed Development Intensities in the PTMU Overlay Zone by ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 1 Initial Study PROJECT DESCRIPTION Introduction The City of Anaheim is the Lead Agency responsible for preparing a Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 (DSEIR No. 339) to analyze the impacts of increased development intensities in the adopted The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (MLUP). The Platinum Triangle MLUP encompasses approximately 820 acres at the confluence of Interstate 5 (I-5) and State Route 57 (SR-57) in the City of Anaheim in Orange County, California. A General Plan Amendment, amendments to The Platinum Triangle MLUP and Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and Zoning reclassifications have been proposed by the City to expand the boundaries of the PTMU Overlay Zone and increase the permitted residential, office, commercial and institutional development intensities within the Platinum Triangle. Approval of the proposed amendments would result in maximum development intensities of 18,909 dwelling units, 14,340,522 square feet of office uses, 4,909,682 square feet of commercial uses, and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses within the Platinum Triangle (herein after also referred to as the “proposed project” and “proposed amendments”). There is no proposed development intensity increase for properties within the Platinum Triangle that are outside of the expanded PTMU Overlay Zone. A detailed project description and associated figures are included under the Project Description subheading. DSEIR No. 339 will tier off of Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 for The Platinum Triangle MLUP and Associated Actions (FSEIR No. 332), which was certified on October 25, 2005. This Initial Study presents information on the project and an evaluation of the probable environmental effects anticipated by the project. Together with the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the Environmental Checklist Form, the Initial Study has been distributed to all responsible agencies as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A notice has also been sent to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of The Platinum Triangle and interested parties indicating that these documents are available for a 30-day public review at the Planning Department within Anaheim City Hall at 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard in the City of Anaheim or on the Planning Department’s website (www.anaheim.net/planning, click on the link to “Current Environmental Documents”). The notice was also sent to Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development (“CREED”) and Orange County Communities Organized for Responsible Development (“OCCORD”). As discussed below, these two entities challenged the previous environmental impact report prepared for the proposed project. Project Location The Platinum Triangle consists of approximately 820 acres and is located at the confluence of I- 5 and SR-57, in the City of Anaheim (“City”) in Orange County, California. As shown in Figure 1, Regional Location, the project area is located within the south-central portion of the City. As shown in Figure 2, Local Vicinity Map, the Platinum Triangle is located generally east of I-5, west of the Santa Ana River channel and SR 57, south of the Southern California Edison easement, and north of the City limit. The Platinum Triangle encompasses Angel Stadium of Anaheim, the Honda Center, The Grove of Anaheim, and surrounding light industrial buildings, industrial parks, distribution facilities, offices, hotels, restaurants, and supporting retail uses. One mixed-use development in The Platinum Triangle has been completed and several more are under construction or in the planning stages. An aerial photograph of the project area is shown in Figure 3, Aerial Photograph. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 2 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 3 Initial Study Figure 1 Regional Location ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 4 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 5 Initial Study Figure 2 Local Vicinity 5 57 22 Orange Anaheim Garden Grove Santa Ana Orangewood Av Katella Av Gene Autry Way Ball Rd Chapman Av Lampson Av Garden Grove Bl Cerritos Av Harbor Bl Lewis St State College Bl Sunkist St Anaheim Bl East St Batavia St Glassell St Main St Angel Stadium of Anaheim Santa Ana River SCE Easement The Platinum Triangle Honda Center ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 6 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 7 Initial Study Figure 3 Aerial Photograph 57 Orange Garden Grove Anaheim Orangewood Av Katella Av Cerritos Av Ball Rd Chapman Av Harbor Bl Lewis St State College Bl Sunkist St Anaheim Bl East St Batavia St Main St Gene Autry Way Angel Stadium of Anaheim The Platinum Triangle Honda Center Santa Ana River 5 57 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 8 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 9 Initial Study Project Background Within the past years, the Anaheim City Council has approved several actions relating to the area encompassed by The Platinum Triangle. On May 30, 1996, the Anaheim Planning Commission certified Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) No. 320 (State Clearinghouse No. 95041029) and adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 92 and Area Development Plan No. 120 for the portion of the Stadium property associated with the Sportstown Development. Area Development Plan No. 120 entitled a total of 119,543 seats for new and/or renovated stadiums, 750,000 square feet of urban entertainment/retail uses, a 500-room hotel (550,000 square feet), a 150,000-square-foot exhibition center, 250,000 square feet of office development and 15,570 on-site parking spaces. The Grove of Anaheim, the renovated Angel Stadium of Anaheim, and the Stadium Gateway Office Building were developed or renovated under this plan. On March 2, 1999, the Anaheim City Council adopted the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan (MLUP). The boundaries for this MLUP were generally the same as those for The Platinum Triangle, with the exception that this MLUP included 15 acres adjacent to I-5 that are not a part of the current Platinum Triangle boundaries. As part of the approval process for the Anaheim Stadium Area MLUP, the City Council also certified Final EIR No. 321 (State Clearinghouse Number 9611041) and adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106. Development within the Anaheim Stadium Area was implemented through the Sports Entertainment (SE) Overlay Zone. The SE Overlay Zone permitted property owners to continue to operate or expand current uses or develop within the provisions of the existing zoning. The SE Overlay Zone also allowed property owners to develop sports, entertainment, retail, and office uses at increased intensities than previously permitted and provided associated development standards for these uses. Implementation of the SE Overlay Zone was projected to result in a net loss of 491,303 square feet of industrial space and increases of 1,871,285 square feet of new office space, 452,026 square feet of new retail space, and 991,603 square feet of new hotel space. Projects that were developed under the SE Overlay Zone included the Ayers Hotel, the Arena Corporate Center, and the Westwood School of Technology. On May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved a comprehensive citywide General Plan and Zoning Code Update, which included a new vision for The Platinum Triangle. The General Plan Update changed the General Plan designations within the project area from Commercial Recreation and Business Office/Mixed Use/Industrial to Mixed-Use, Office-High, Office-Low, Industrial, Open Space and Institutional to provide opportunities for existing uses to transition to mixed-use, residential, office, and commercial uses. The General Plan Update also established an overall maximum development intensity for The Platinum Triangle for up to 9,175 dwelling units, 5,000,000 square feet of office space, 2,044,300 square feet of commercial uses, industrial development at a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.50, and institutional development at a maximum FAR of 3.0. In addition, the square footage/seats allocated to the existing Honda Center and all of the development intensity entitled by Area Development Plan No. 120 were incorporated into The Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use land use designation. Final EIR No. 330 (State Clearinghouse Number [PHONE REDACTED]), which was prepared for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update and associated actions, analyzed the above development intensities on a citywide impact level and adopted mitigation monitoring programs, including an Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle. In order to provide the implementation tools necessary to realize the City’s new vision for The Platinum Triangle, on August 17, 2004, the City Council replaced the Anaheim Stadium Area MLUP with The Platinum Triangle MLUP, replaced the SE Overlay Zone with The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone, approved the form of the Standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement and approved associated zoning reclassifications. Under these updated zoning regulations, property owners desiring to develop under the PTMU Overlay ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 10 Initial Study Zone provisions are required to enter into a standardized Development Agreement with the City of Anaheim. Ordinances associated with the PTMU Overlay Zone and the approved zoning reclassifications became effective September 23, 2004. On October 25, 2005, the Anaheim City Council adopted and certified the Final Subsequent EIR No. 332 (FSEIR No. 332) (State Clearinghouse Number [PHONE REDACTED]) including an Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106A for The Platinum Triangle MLUP and associated actions, which utilized the certified EIR No. 321 (adopted for the Anaheim Stadium Master Land Use Plan, as discussed above) and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106. At the present time, FSEIR No. 332 serves as the primary environmental document for subsequent land use actions within The Platinum Triangle, including necessary infrastructure improvements and all local discretionary approvals necessary to implement The Platinum Triangle MLUP, consistent with Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. The General Plan Amendment associated with FSEIR No. 332 increased the allowable development intensity within The Platinum Triangle to 9,500 residential units; 5,000,000 square feet of office uses; and 2,254,400 square feet of commercial uses. Thus, throughout the years, the primary project objective of the City’s land use policy with respect to the Platinum Triangle has been to encourage high density, synergistic mixed use development in the Platinum Triangle area. Since the approval and certification of FSEIR No. 332, the majority of the permitted development intensity on private properties analyzed by the EIR has been either developed, is under construction or has been designated for development under approved Development Agreements. In addition, the Anaheim City Council has approved two addendums to FSEIR No. 332 in conjunction with requests to increase The Platinum Triangle intensity by 67 residential units; 55,550 square feet of office development; and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses. A project EIR (FEIR No. 335) has also been approved to increase the allowable development intensity by an additional 699 residential units to bring the total allowable development intensity within The Platinum Triangle to up to 10,266 residential units; 5,055,550 square feet of office uses; and 2,264,400 square feet of commercial uses. In 2007 the City embarked upon a process to adopt a General Plan Amendment; amendments to the Platinum Triangle MLUP, PTMU Overlay Zone, and the Platinum Triangle Standardized Development; and related zoning reclassifications to increase the development intensities within the Platinum Triangle to up to 18,363 residential units; 5,657,847 square feet of commercial uses; 16,819,015 square feet of office uses; and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses (hereafter, the “Platinum Triangle Expansion Project”). As required by law, the City prepared an environmental impact report in connection with the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. The Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR) was known as DSEIR No. 334 and was first circulated for a 45-day public review period from July 12, 2007 to August 27, 2007. On October 4, 2007, the City released the DSEIR No. 334 and Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106B (MMP 106B) for an additional 45-day public review. The recirculated DSEIR No. 334 contained minor revisions to the Project Description and additional traffic information based on comments received from the City of Orange and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Other minor revisions to the DSEIR were made based on other comments received on the previously circulated DSEIR No. 334. The recirculated Final SEIR (FSEIR) No. 334 was approved in December 2007 and reapproved in April 2008. However, following the approval of the FSEIR No. 334, a lawsuit was filed by CREED and OCCORD, challenging the adequacy of FSEIR No. 334. In consideration of the City’s exemplary historical record in avoiding CEQA litigation and its commitment to proper environmental review, in light of the public controversy as manifested by the two lawsuits, the City Council repealed the approval of The Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent EIR ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 11 Initial Study No. 334 and various related actions and directed staff to prepare a new EIR for the project. The City took this direction because the City has very rarely been challenged based on alleged non- compliance with CEQA, and because the City desired to assuage any concerns held by the public concerning the adequacy of FSEIR No. 334. Purpose of the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 (DSEIR No. 339) Preparation of the new DSEIR for the proposed project would utilize the certified EIR No. 332 (for The Platinum Triangle MLUP) in its analysis, and update and modify the adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A (MMP No. 106A), as appropriate. The DSEIR will analyze the environmental effects of the proposed amendments to the General Plan, The Platinum Triangle MLUP, and PTMU Overlay Zone to the degree of specificity required by Section 15146 of the State CEQA Guidelines. This DSEIR would be the primary reference document in the formation and implementation of a mitigation reporting and monitoring program for The Platinum Triangle; therefore, the previously adopted MMP No. 106A would be updated and modified based on the findings contained therein. Project Description The City of Anaheim proposes to increase the amount of residential, commercial, office, and institutional development intensities permitted in The Platinum Triangle as shown in Table 1. The proposed project has reduced the amount of office and commercial square footage and increased the amount of residential units being requested as compared to the previous Platinum Triangle Expansion Project analyzed in Final EIR No. 334 that was subsequently repealed by the City Council. 1 These modifications were made in an effort to improve the overall jobs/housing balance in The Platinum Triangle at buildout, encourage a full range of transit oriented development opportunities for ARTIC and reduce traffic impacts to the City of Orange. Some of these policy objectives, such as an improved jobs housing balance, were advocated by the City. Table 1 Proposed Development Intensities in The Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay Zone Land Use Adopted Proposed Increase Residential Units 10,266 18,909 8,643 Commercial Square Feet 2,264,400 4,909,682 2,645,282 Office Square Feet 5,055,550 14,340,522 9,284,972 Institutional Square Feet 0 1,500,000 1,500,000 The proposed project would expand the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation within The Platinum Triangle as shown in Figure 4, Platinum Triangle General Plan Land Use, create two new mixed use districts and expand two existing mixed use districts within Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone as shown in Figure 5, PTMU Overlay Zone Mixed Use Districts. Development intensity maps that further break down the allocated development in The Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Districts by sub-area will be included in the DSEIR. Development that occurs within The Platinum Triangle is implemented through the processing of subdivision maps and the submittal of plans for building permits unless a conditional use permit or a variance is required. Development in the PTMU Overlay Zone also requires approval of a Master Site Plan and/or a Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement. 1 For example, the previous FEIR No. 334 proposed 18,363 residential dwelling units; 16,819.015 square feet of office; 5,657,847 square feet of commercial; and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional. The new proposed project has reduced the amount of permissible office square feet by 2,478,493 and has also reduced the amount of permissible commercial square feet by 748,165. Thus, the impacts of the new proposed project should be reduced due to the reduction of the project size. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 12 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 13 Initial Study Figure 4 Platinum Triangle General Plan Land Use ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 14 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 15 Initial Study Figure 5 PTMU Overlay Zone Mixed Use Districts ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 16 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 17 Initial Study The proposed project also includes technical refinements and clarifications to the documents that govern and regulate development within The Platinum Triangle: the City of Anaheim General Plan, the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP), and the PTMU Overlay Zone. Below is a description of the proposed amendments to each of these documents. General Plan: A. Amend the Land Use Element (Figure LU-4: Land Use Plan) to: Redesignate approximately 191 acres from the Office High and Office Low land use designations to the Mixed Use designation; and Redesignate approximately 17 acres from the Institutional land use designation to the Mixed Use designation. B. Amend the Land Use Element (Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City) to: Increase the permitted development intensities in The Platinum Triangle; and Remove the FAR (Floor Area Ratio) requirement for Mixed Uses and Office Uses in The Platinum Triangle. C. Amend the Circulation Element (Figure C-1: Planned Roadway Network) to modify the designations of streets within The Platinum Triangle: Katella Avenue between Manchester Avenue and Anaheim Way from 6 Lane Major Arterial to 8 Lane Stadium Douglass Road between Katella Avenue and the SR-57 undercrossing from Interior Street to 6 Lane Primary Arterial; Rampart Street between Orangewood Avenue and the South City Limits adjacent to the City of Orange from Interior Street to Secondary Arterial; West Dupont Drive between Orangewood Avenue and South Dupont Drive from Interior Street to Collector Street; South Dupont Drive between West Dupont Drive and West Towne Centre Place from Interior Street to Collector Street; South Towne Centre Place between West Towne Centre Place and Rampart Street from Interior Street to Secondary Arterial; Lewis Street between Katella Avenue and Cerritos Avenue from 4 lane Secondary to 4 lane Primary; and, Cerritos Avenue between State College Boulevard and Sunkist Street from 4 lane Secondary to 4 lane Primary D. Amend the Circulation Element (Figure C-5: Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facilities) to: Extend the Class II Bikeway on Orangewood Avenue from east of State College Boulevard to West Dupont Drive and Add the Class II Bikeway to West Dupont Drive, South Dupont Drive and West Towne Centre Place to Rampart Street. Add the Class II Bikeway to Lewis Street between Katella Avenue and Ball Road. E. Amend the Green Element (Figure G-1: Green Plan) to reflect proposed Class II Bikeways. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 18 Initial Study F. Amend the Public Services and Facilities Element (Figure PSF-1: Fire and Police Facilities Map) to reflect the three Fire Stations proposed for The Platinum Triangle. Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan: A. Reflect the proposed General Plan amendments described above; B. Adjust the boundaries of the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone to create the ARTIC and Office Districts and expand the Katella and Orangewood Districts; C. Distribute the proposed increased development intensities as shown in Table 2 below: Table 2 Proposed Development Intensities in the PTMU Overlay Zone by District Acres Residential Units Office Square Feet1 Commercial Square Feet Platinum Triangle District Adopted Proposed Adopted Proposed Adopted Proposed Adopted Proposed Arena 41 41 425 425 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 ARTIC2 0 17 0 520 0 2,202,803 0 358,000 Gateway 53 50 2,142 2,949 530,000 562,250 50,000 64,000 Gene Autry 33 33 1,699 2,362 100,000 338,200 174,100 304,700 Katella 99 141 4,250 5,707 775,000 2,131,058 630,300 832,614 Orangewood 4 35 0 1,771 590,000 1,402,855 10,000 130,000 Stadium3 153 153 1,750 5,175 1,760,000 3,125,000 1,300,000 3,120,368 Total Mixed Use 383 470 10,266 18,909 3,855,000 9,862,166 2,264,400 4,909,682 Office 0 121 0 0 0 4,478,356 0 0 Total PTMU Overlay 383 591 10,266 18,909 3,855,000 14,340,522 2,264,400 4,909,682 1. The adopted General Plan allows an additional 1,200,550 square feet of office development within the Platinum Triangle, on properties outside of the PTMU Overlay Zone. The proposed project expands the PTMU Overlay Zone to encompass these properties. 2. The proposed development intensity includes 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses in addition to the residential, office and commercial uses. 3. The adopted and proposed development intensities for the Stadium District include 119,543 seats for existing (49,043 seats) and potential (70,500 seats) stadiums. D. Replace Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A with Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106C, and, E. Reflect technical refinements and clarifications including, but not limited to, refinements to street cross-sections, density descriptions and exhibits. Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone: The Proposed Project includes amendments to Chapter 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone) of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) to: A. Reflect the proposed General Plan and Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan amendments described above; B Establish and create zoning standards for two new Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Districts (the ARTIC and Office Districts); C. Modify zoning standards, including, but not limited to, temporary real estate signs, vacant lots, and setbacks and parking structure requirements for hotels and offices; and, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 19 Initial Study D. Provide development standards for the ARTIC, Stadium, Arena and Office Districts. Zoning Reclassification: The proposed project includes a request to add the PTMU Overlay Zone to the properties within the new ARTIC and Office Districts and the expanded areas of the Katella and Orangewood Districts. Related Infrastructure Upgrades The proposed project would also include upgrades to existing infrastructure to serve the proposed increased intensity of land uses. These upgrades include roadway improvements, including a railroad grade separation project along State College Boulevard, between Katella Avenue and Howell Avenue; sewer upgrades; two new water wells; a new electrical substation; natural gas infrastructure improvements; and an additional fire station. The actual design and location of the related infrastructure facilities would be reviewed through the processing of subsequent plan approvals tentative tract maps, street improvement plans, storm drain improvement plans, and Caltrans encroachment permits) associated with individual development projects. The necessary on-site infrastructure that would be provided as part of future projects would be constructed by future property owner/developers, the City of Anaheim, and/or the utility provider, as determined by the City of Anaheim and/or other responsible agencies. Future street and infrastructure improvements would be coordinated with the appropriate service providers. State College Boulevard Railroad Undercrossing: The AT&SF railroad currently crosses State College Boulevard approximately 250 feet north of Wright Circle within The Platinum Triangle. In order to improve traffic flow and safety, the City of Anaheim is working with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) on an underpass concept at this location. To accommodate this concept, the State College Boulevard profile requires depression from about 950 feet north to 750 feet south of the railroad crossing. The profiles of Wright Circle and Howell Avenue will need to be adjusted to meet the proposed grade of State College Boulevard. In anticipation of a future railroad grade separation project along State College Boulevard between Katella Avenue and Howell Avenue, a retaining wall was constructed along the southerly right-of-way of Wright Circle and the westerly right-of-way of State College Boulevard adjacent to the Stadium Lofts building. The retaining wall has a maximum height of 14 feet and was designed to be buried during the interim condition until such time that the grade separation project is constructed. The retaining wall design took into consideration the preliminary road profile of the undercrossing from a previous OCTA study and also accounted for a 3:1 landscaped slope from the back of the sidewalk to the face of wall. Portions of the retaining wall adjacent to Wright Circle and State College Boulevard that will be visible from the right-of-way upon completion of the railroad grade separation project were constructed with a decorative brick finish. Fire Stations: The Anaheim Fire Department plans to construct three new fire stations within the Platinum Triangle. The first station (Fire Station No. 12), the Battalion Headquarters Station (approximately 14,000 square feet in size), is going to be located along Santa Cruz Street, north of Orangewood Avenue. The second station (approximately 8,000 square feet) is anticipated to be located in the north central area of The Platinum Triangle. A third fire station would be required to accommodate the proposed project. The exact locations of the second and third stations have not yet been determined and the estimated timeframe for the construction of these stations would be dependent upon the level of development completed within The Platinum Triangle. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Anaheim Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 20 Initial Study Utilities: Utilities along State College Boulevard need to be relocated due to the depressed profile. Existing utilities include a water line, two sewer lines, a stormdrain pipe, a gas line, and two underground power conduits. A pump station will be required for pumping stormwater at the sag point. The City has indicated that the pump station for the sewer line is not allowed along State College Boulevard, and that sewer lines need to be relocated within a sewer easement. Water Wells: A new water well is proposed adjacent to Fire Station No. 12 between Anaheim Way and Santa Cruz Street, south of Stanford Court. The new well will have a capacity of 3,500 gallons per minute (gpm), and equipped at an initial production rate of 1,500 gpm. Discharge piping for the new well will connect to the existing 12-inch diameter main in Anaheim Way and the existing 10-inch diameter main in Santa Cruz Street. The building setback requirements and architectural treatments for the new well facility will blend with Fire Station No. 12. Another new water well, with a production capacity of 3,500 gpm, is also required. It will be located within the Platinum Triangle at a site to be determined. Electrical Substation: A new electrical substation is proposed adjacent to Fire Station No. 12 between Anaheim Way and Santa Cruz Street, south of Stanford Court. The new electrical substation will have capacity between 112 and 168 mega volt-ampere (MVA). The substation will connect to new and existing electrical transmission lines and distribution circuits located on Anaheim Way, Santa Cruz Street and Orangewood Avenue. The building setback requirements and architectural treatments for the new substation facility will blend with Fire Station No. 12. Construction of the substation will be by the electrical utility provider. Natural Gas: The Southern California Gas Company has indicated that alterations to the existing system and infrastructure improvements would be required. Anticipated Additional Project Approvals Other agencies whose approval may be required include, but are not limited to: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region; South Coast Air Quality Management District; Southern California Association of Governments; Orange County Sanitation District; City of Orange; Caltrans; and Orange County Transit Agency. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 21 Initial Study CITY OF ANAHEIM ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (To be completed by applicant) Dear Applicant: The City of Anaheim as Lead Agency is required to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA requires the City to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of your development project. In order to assist us in completing this required environmental review, please provide us with the following information: 1. Project Address or Location: The approximately 820-acre Platinum Triangle MLUP area is located east of I-5, west of the Santa Ana River channel and SR-57, south of the Southern California Edison easement and at the northern edge of the Anaheim City limit. The Cities of Orange and Garden Grove are located east and southwest of The Platinum Triangle, respectively. 2. Project Description: See the previous Project Description section of this document. 3. Assessor’s Parcel Number: Various. 4. Name of Property Owner: Various. Address: 5. Name of Authorized Agent: City of Anaheim (Planning Department) Address: 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 90805 6. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including if the site is on filled land or on a slope of ten percent or more, and provide information on its topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historic or scenic aspects. Provide pictures of the site and describe any existing structures on the site, and their current use. The Platinum Triangle, hereinafter referred to as the “project area” encompasses approximately 820 acres, including the Angel Stadium of Anaheim, the Honda Center, the Grove of Anaheim, surrounding light industrial buildings, several industrial parks, distribution facilities, offices, hotels, restaurants, and supporting retail uses (see Figure 3, Aerial Photograph). 7. Other public agencies whose approval is required for permits, financing, participation agreement). Other agencies whose approval may be required include, but are not limited to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region; South Coast Air Quality Management District; Orange County Sanitation District; City of Orange; California Department of Transportation; and Orange County Transportation Authority. 8. Site size: Approximately 820 acres or square feet (if less than an acre). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 22 Initial Study 9. Demolition proposed:
No  Yes* N/A square feet *The Master Land Use Plan is applicable to an area that is currently developed with a mix of industrial, commercial, office and sports-entertainment related uses. New development would most likely occur on sites that are currently developed and demolition of existing uses would most likely be involved. The maximum allowable intensities for The Platinum Triangle include both existing and new development. 10. Square feet of new construction: Overall, the amended Platinum Triangle MLUP would allow for the development of up to 18,909 dwelling units; 14,340,522 sq. ft. office uses; 4,909,682 sq. ft. of commercial uses, and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses . 11. Type, number, stories and height of new buildings or structures: A variety of commercial, office, residential, and industrial uses could be constructed in this area. See Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and The Platinum Triangle MLUP for permitted zoning and development standards and other development requirements. 12. Number of on-site parking spaces provided: On-site parking would be provided in accordance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code. 13. Tentative development schedule: Plan is intended to encompass a 20-year time horizon. 14. Airport Land Use Plan – Is the project area located within an airport land use plan a project may be located within an airport land use plan if it is located within 20,000 feet from the Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center runway, or within 10,000 feet from Fullerton Municipal Airport runway) or within the vicinity of a heliport or helistop facility? Three heliport/helistops exist in the vicinity of The Platinum Triangle: the Fire Training Site, the UCI Medical Center, and the parking lot at Angel Stadium of Anaheim, which is used by the Anaheim Police Department. Complete Sections 15 and 16 for proposed Residential projects only: 15. Single or Multi- Number of Units Sq. Ft. of Units No. of Bedrooms Family Units? Multifamily Up to 18,909 units 16. Will the proposed residential housing development meet any of the following Article 34 restrictions (low income housing development)*: Yes No A. Apply for property tax abatement
 B. Apply for long-term governmental financing
 C. Provide in excess of 40% of the housing units as low income housing with rent control and occupancy restrictions.
 * The proposed project does not require or preclude individual residential projects that develop in accordance to the master land use plan to apply for property tax abatement, long term government financing or provide in excess of 40% of the housing units as low income housing with rent control and occupancy restrictions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 23 Initial Study Complete Section 17 for proposed Commercial projects only: 17. A. Type of Commercial or Office: Up to 14,340,522 sq. ft. of office space and up to 4,909,682 sq. ft. of commercial space B. Is the project oriented: Regionally, City or Neighborhood C. Anticipated hours of operation: n/a D. Estimated employees per shift and number of shifts: n/a E. Location of loading facilities and anticipated hours of loading/delivery operations: n/a 18. If use is not Residential, Commercial or Office, indicate type of use below: Manufacturing/Warehousing Institutional A. Indicate major function: n/a B. Anticipated hours of operation: n/a C. Estimated employees per shift and number of shifts: n/a D. Type, location and square footage of loading facilities: n/a Complete Sections 19, 20, and 21 to determine whether a Water Assessment Study and Preliminary Grading/Drainage Plans and/or Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan needs to be submitted as part of the Initial Study. 19. Existing and proposed square feet of all on-site impervious surfaces, including all paved areas paved parking lots and walkways areas, building footprint): Existing Acreage: Proposed Acreage: N/A – The overall boundaries of The Platinum Triangle will not be changed and the following documents provide relevant information with regards to this topic. Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area, CH2MHill, January 2006; City of Anaheim Platinum Triangle Drainage Study, Merit Civil Engineering, Inc., September 2004; and Water Quality Technical Report For: Platinum Triangle Project, PSOMAS, February 2005. 20. Water Assessment – Does the Project include a proposed new development or addition that meets any of the following criteria for a “Large Scale Development” (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9): Yes No A Residential development of more than 500 dwelling units?  B Proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space?  C Office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space?  D Hotel or motel having more than 500 rooms?  E Industrial manufacturing or processing plant occupying more than 40 acres or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area?  F Mixed use project that includes one or more of the above-listed projects in items A through E?  If yes was checked in any of the above boxes, the project may qualify as a “Large Scale Development” and you may need to submit a water assessment study which identifies existing water supply entitlements, water rights, and water service contracts relevant to the water supply for the project (please contact the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 26 Initial Study The County of Orange requires that the City notify the County of certain zoning actions. The following checklist will determine the need for notification. The County will be notified of any “yes” responses to questions 1 through 4: 1. Does this zoning action involve adoption or amendment to either the Anaheim General Plan, a Specific Plan, or a Reclassification? Yes  No IF YES, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: 2. Does this zoning action involve land located east of the alignment of Weir Canyon Road? Yes No  3. Does this zoning action involve a residential project over 99 acres or 99 units in size? Yes  No 4. Does this zoning action involve a non-residential project over 29 acres or a non-residential project with more than 99 employees? Yes  No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 2) A list of “Supporting Information Sources” must be attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the Narrative Summary for each section. 3) Response Column Heading Definitions: a) Potentially Significant Impact is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. b) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact”. The mitigation measures must be described, along with a brief explanation of how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. c) Less Than Significant Impact applies where the project creates no significant impacts, only Less Than Significant impacts. d) No Impact applies where a project does not create an impact in that category. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one proposed the project falls outside of a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 27 Initial Study 4) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to a tiering, program EIR, Master EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15062(c)(3)(D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated”, describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 5) Incorporate into the checklist any references to information sources for potential impacts the General Plan, zoning ordinance). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 6) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 28 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 29 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? J J J I b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway or local scenic expressway, scenic highway, or eligible scenic highway? J J J I c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? I J J J d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? J J I J Narrative Summary: Questions A and B – No Impact. The proposed amendments would not alter the overall project boundaries of The Platinum Triangle. The Platinum Triangle is located generally east of I-5, west of the Santa Ana River channel and SR 57, south of the Southern California Edison easement, and north of the City limit. The project area does not contain any natural or undisturbed areas that provide undisturbed or unique vistas, and/or that are officially recognized by a local, state, or federal agency. The Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan states that the State of California has designated the SR-91, between SR-55 and Weir Canyon as a Scenic Highway. The project site is not scenic and there is no view of the project site from this freeway segment due to the distance and the presence of freeway sound walls. Increased development intensity within The Platinum Triangle would have no impact on any scenic vista or scenic resources. No further analysis of these issues in the EIR is warranted. Question C – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in changes to the massing, scale, and size of structures within the PTMU Overlay Zone which has the potential to create changes to the visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings than which was analyzed in the FSEIR No. 332. Therefore, this issue would be further analyzed in the EIR. Question D – Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed amendments would expand the PTMU Overlay Zone within the project boundaries and increase the overall development intensity within the PTMU Overlay Zone. The Platinum Triangle is envisioned as a regional activity center with entertainment, retail, high density housing and office uses that require a certain level of after-hour nighttime lighting. Nighttime illumination of buildings, pedestrian walkways, parking areas, park facilities, and roadways internal to the project area will be used to highlight building design features, emphasize prominent entrances and plazas, and create a feeling of security. Future development within The Platinum Triangle would comply with the applicable provisions of The Platinum Triangle MLUP and PTMU Overlay Zone with regards to landscaping, lighting, and setback requirements. It is also anticipated that proper installments of light fixtures that include the necessary shielding, such as hoods, filtering louvers, and glare shields may be required to maintain proper lighting in park facilities without undue glare impacts on adjoining residential areas. The project area is not located adjacent to any major open space areas and the increased light intensity resulting from the proposed amendments would not be of any unusual form or intensity. The impact would be in conformity with those analyzed in the FSEIR No. 332 and no new significant impacts are anticipated. Compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.1-1 of the MMP No. 106A would adequately mitigate potential shade and shadow impacts and no further mitigation will be necessary. No further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Mode (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? J J J I ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 30 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? J J J I c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? J J J I Narrative Summary: Questions A through C – No Impact. Based on the 2002 California Important Farmland Map, there are no areas designated as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance within or in the vicinity of the project area. The proposed amendments would not alter the overall Platinum Triangle boundaries and therefore, the level of impact would not be greater than determine in the FSEIR No. 332. No new potentially significant impact would occur to agricultural resources as a result of the changes proposed by the amendment and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? I J J J b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? I J J J c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? I J J J d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? I J J J e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? J J I J Narrative Summary: Questions A through D – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed changes to The Platinum Triangle would increase the overall development intensity and associated vehicle trips, which will result in greater short-term construction-related and long-term air emissions that have the potential to affect local and regional air quality. Therefore, a substantial increase in the severity of air quality impacts from that described in the certified FSEIR No. 332 is anticipated. An air quality analysis will be prepared for the EIR to determine the project’s potential air quality impacts and appropriate mitigation measures will be discussed in the EIR. Question E – Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction would involve the use of heavy equipment creating exhaust pollutants from on-site earth movement and from equipment bringing asphalt and other building materials to the site. With regards to nuisance odors, any air quality impacts would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the equipment itself. By the time such emissions reach any sensitive receptor sites away from the project site, they are typically diluted to well below any level of air quality concern. An occasional "whiff" of diesel exhaust from passing equipment and trucks accessing the site from public roadways may result. The FSEIR No. 332 concluded that such brief exhaust odors are an adverse, but not significant, air quality impact. However, the increased level of impact would not be substantially greater than analyzed by the FSEIR No. 332. Odors from food preparation in the restaurants and the residential units would be controlled by adherence to SCAQMD Rule 402. Therefore, odor impacts would be less than significant and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 31 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? J J J I b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? J J J I c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? J J J I d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? J J J I e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? J J J I f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? J J J I Narrative Summary: Questions A through D – No Impact. The project area is developed with urban uses and is nearly built-out with no natural resources on-site. The proposed project would not change the original project boundary and no new areas would be included as part of The Platinum Triangle. Based on the City of Anaheim General Plan Green Element, no locally designated species or natural communities, wetland habitats, or wildlife corridors are known to exist within The Platinum Triangle. The project area is not part of the Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) and would not impact any resources within the NCCP area. The proposed changes to The Platinum Triangle would not result in level of impact greater than determined in the FSEIR No. 332 and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Question E – No Impact. The project site is not located in an area where trees are subject to a preservation ordinance. The proposed project would not increase the total area to be developed by The Platinum Triangle. No new significant impact is anticipated by the propose project and the conclusion of the FSEIR No. 332 remains valid. No further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Question F – No Impact. The project site is not part of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. The conclusion of the FSEIR No. 332 remains valid and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and/or identified on the Qualified Historic Structures list of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999)? J J J I ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 32 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? J J J I c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? J J J I d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? J J J I Narrative Summary: Question A through D – No Impact. According to the FSEIR No. 332, the project area does not contain any historical resource as defined in section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Platinum Triangle is not located within the Anaheim Colony Historic District by the City’s General Plan Land Use Element and none of the structures in the project area are identified on the Qualified Historic Structures list of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999). Also, there are no known prehistoric/historic archaeological sites located within the project area. The project site has already been disturbed and the potential for any subsurface cultural resources is remote. While the limits of PTMU Overlay Zone would be adjusted, there will be no changes to The Platinum Triangle boundaries. The conclusion of the FSEIR No. 332 remains valid and no further assessment of this issue in the EIR is warranted. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. J J J I ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? J J I J iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? J J I J iv) Landslides? J J J I b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? J J I J c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? J J I J d) Be located on expansive soil, as described by Section 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property? J J I J e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? J J J I Narrative Summary: Question A – No Impact. The project site is not underlain by any known earthquake faults, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. The proposed project would not place the project area any closer to an Alquist-Priolo Zone, therefore, no new potentially significant impact would occur as a result of the proposed project. No further assessment of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Questions A (ii and iii) and C – Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in FSEIR No. 332, the project area may be exposed to impacts from earthquakes, including strong seismic groundshaking, liquefaction, lateral spreading, subsidence, and/or collapse. The impacts would be similar to those analyzed in the FSEIR No. 332 since ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 33 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact the overall boundaries for The Platinum Triangle did not change. Issues related to seismic safety have been adequately addressed in the FSEIR No. 332 and compliance with required Codes and Mitigation Measures 5.3-1 through 5.3-6 of Updated and Modified MMP No. 106A or equivalent measures would ensure that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. No further evaluation in the EIR is warranted. Question A (iv) – No Impact. The project area is already developed and does not contain any major slopes on or in the immediate vicinity. No impacts from landslides are anticipated. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question B – Less Than Significant Impact. Soils in the project area are considered to have a slight erosion potential. Development would be subject to local and state codes and requirements for erosion control and grading. In addition, development projects that encompass area of one or more acres would require compliance with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan during construction to control erosion. Adherence to the existing requirements would reduce erosion impacts to a less than significant level. No further evaluation in the EIR is warranted. Question D – Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in FSEIR No. 332, the near-surface soils within The Platinum Triangle are generally medium-dense, fine and fine-to-medium sand with occasional traces of gravel and infrequent seams of silt. As a result, the expansion potential for these soils is considered low. In addition, the design of the individual development projects within the project area would be in conformance with the California Building Code (CBC) and the Anaheim Municipal Code, Title 17 Land Development Resources. Application of the existing regulations identified in the Municipal Code and CBC and grading regulations would minimize the risk associated with any development proposed within areas containing expansive soils. This issue will not be analyzed further in the EIR. Question E – No Impact. The proposed project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative sewer disposal systems. The project would incorporate the use of City sewer lines and sewer disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would result from project implementation and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? J J I J b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? J J I J c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter-mile of an existing or proposed school? J J I J d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? J J I J e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? J J J I f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport, or helistop, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? J J I J g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? J J I J h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? J J J I ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 34 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: Question A – Less Than Significant Impact. Various hazardous materials are currently used and stored by businesses within the project area. Such materials include cleaning chemicals, fuels, and other hydrocarbon products, solvents, etc, used during operations of the facilities and for maintenance purposes. Development of The Platinum Triangle MLUP allows continued operation of these businesses. In addition, the project has designated the northern periphery of the project area as industrial, which may handle hazardous materials. However, businesses are required to obtain permits and maintain records regarding the storage, use and disposal of hazardous material. Adhering to the existing permitting process would ensure that less than significant hazard to the public or the environment occur as result of project implementation. The proposed project will not change the existing condition of the project area and/or increase the use of hazardous materials in the area. No further assessment of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Question B and D – Less Than Significant Impact. Database records searches were conducted as part of the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan FEIR No. 321 in 1999 and the FSEIR No. 332 in 2005 to identify properties that could potentially pose a variety of environmental hazards within the boundaries and immediately adjacent to The Platinum Triangle. Action status on many of the identified properties were “closed” and required no further remediation and some were undergoing environmental remediation. However, these impacts are site-specific and implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.4-1 through 5.4-7 of MMP No. 106A, prepared for FSEIR No. 332, would ensure that identified hazardous waste and/or hazardous material is handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5) and according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. The mitigation measure also requires that a Phase I Site Assessment is prepared and the site receives a no-further-action status by an applicable oversight agency. Therefore, the FSEIR No. 332 determined that development of The Platinum Triangle would not create a significant hazard to the environment through the release of hazardous materials and the proposed project does not involve actions that would affect the impact finding. In addition, existing Federal and State regulations that govern hazardous material and waste management help to minimize the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The conclusion of the FSEIR No. 332 remains valid and no further discussion in the EIR is warranted. Question C – Less Than Significant Impact. The Paul Revere Elementary School at 140 W. Guinida Lane and the Ponderosa Elementary School (under construction) near Orangewood Avenue and Haster Street are within one- quarter mile of the project area. Additionally, the Anaheim City Unified School District operates the Family Oasis at 131 W. Midway Drive and the Facilities and Operations Center at 1411 S. Anaheim Boulevard. Use or handling of hazardous materials or substances within the project area would comply with appropriate state and federal rules and regulations through permitting process. No unauthorized use of hazardous materials would be allowed. The project area is occupied by various industrial uses and the proposed mixed-use development would not result in substantial adverse impact to school population due to increased amount of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. No additional analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question E – No Impact. The project area is not within the adopted Airport Land Use Plan for the Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport. Therefore, this issue will not be addressed further in the EIR. Question F – Less Than Significant Impact. The heliport safety hazards include hazards posed to aircraft from structures located within navigable airspace and crash hazards posed by aircraft to people and property on the ground. There are two heliports in the project vicinity: the North Net Training Facility and UC Irvine Medical Center. The Anaheim Police Department (APD) also uses the parking lot at the Angel Stadium of Anaheim for helicopter training exercises. The primary risks associated with heliports and training areas are take-offs and landings. The North Net Training Center is approximately one-half mile east of the project site. The flight path for this facility is along the Santa Ana River channel; flights landing and taking-off head directly for the channel and continue north or south. As helicopters are directed away from the project site, there are no hazards posed by these operations to the project site. The UC Irvine Medical Center heliport is one mile south of the project site, across I-5. The flight pattern from this facility runs along the Santa Ana River channel and the project area is not within the overflight contours for the facility. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose future residents to hazards associated with operation of this heliport. The parking lot of Angel Stadium of Anaheim is used by the APD for helicopter training exercises. The general flight path is over the Santa Ana riverbed from the south side of the parking lot. The APD has used the western portion of the parking lot in the past but has discontinued this practice. The use of the stadium parking lot for training exercises does not pose a safety concern given the flight patterns currently used by the APD. Therefore, the Platinum Triangle FSEIR No. 332 determined that operations of these heliports are not expected to pose safety hazards to future residents of the project area. The proposed project would not expose future residents to heliport safety hazards. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 35 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Question G – Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Anaheim has an emergency preparedness plan that complies with State law and interfaces with other cities and counties within Southern California. The plan outlines the operations that shall be taken in the event of a disaster. It also allows for coordination with other agencies in the event that Anaheim is affected by a disaster elsewhere. The plan addresses a warning system, emergency broadcast system (EBS), Emergency Operations Center (EOC), and shelter system. The plan provides a foundation to conduct operations and coordinate the management of critical resources during emergencies. It also provides the framework for which nongovernmental agencies and organizations that have resources needed to meet emergency requirements are integrated into the program. The City of Anaheim also participates in the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services administers SEMS and coordinates multi-agency responses to disasters. SEMS is required by the California Government Code and was developed to provide a “common language” for emergency response personnel to request resources and equipment from other agencies. In addition to resource allocation, SEMS was established to minimize the duplication of efforts during emergency response by defining common tactics and identifying a clear chain of command. The SEMS program is developed to respond to incidents as they occur, and does not provide long-term recovery guidelines. The proposed project would intensify development densities in the area. However, new development would be required to accommodate emergency vehicles. Furthermore, implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.4-3 and 5.4-4 of MMP No. 106A, prepared for FSEIR No. 332 would ensure that impacts related to emergency safety are mitigated. Therefore, no further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question H – No Impact. The project area is developed with industrial uses and no undeveloped wildland areas are adjacent to the project area. The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No further analysis in the EIR is necessary. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? J J I J b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? I J J J c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-site or off-site? J J I J d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-site or off-site? J J I J e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff? J J I J f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? J J I J g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? J J I J h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? J J I J i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? J J I J j) Inundation by seiche or mudflow? J J J I ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 36 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact k) Substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? J J I J l) Substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving waters? J J I J Narrative Summary: Question A – Less Than Significant Impact. Since the project area is already developed entirely and covered with paved surfaces, the proposed project would not increase the area of impervious surfaces. In addition, the proposed project would not change the boundaries of The Platinum Triangle. During grading and construction activities, there will be a potential for surface water runoff to carry sediment and small quantities of pollutants into the stormwater system. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.5-2 of MMP No. 106A, prepared for FSEIR No. 332, and the State General Construction Permit would ensure that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan is prepared and implemented at sites greater than one acre and the City’s Grading Ordinance requires an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as part of that permit. A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) is prepared in accordance with the City’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements and the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The in conjunction with the WQMP, will describe the structural and nonstructural Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be implemented during construction (short-term) within the project area as well as BMPs for long-term operation of The Platinum Triangle. The FSEIR No. 332 described the existing water quality conditions and provided an analysis of potential water quality impacts associated with the implementation of the MLUP. The proposed project would be required to comply with current water quality regulations associated with the City of Anaheim’s Local Implementation Plan, the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan and the County area-wide MS4 Storm Water Runoff Permit. The conclusion of the FSEIR No. 332 remains valid and no further analysis of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Question B – Potentially Significant Impact. There are two groundwater wells located on the project area: a monitoring well on the eastern border of the project area and a production well located north of Angel Stadium of Anaheim. Although the majority of the project area is already developed and do not represent a substantial groundwater recharging area, the proposed project would use groundwater as a water resource. The proposed project would contribute to the depletion of groundwater supplies. Further discussion of this issue in the EIR is warranted. Questions C and D – Less Than Significant Impact. The project involves redevelopment of the existing land uses. Thus, the project would not significantly increase the amount of impervious surface and the runoff rates are expected to remain approximately the same compared to the existing conditions. The proposed project would not increase the runoff volume within the project area. The City of Anaheim Public Works Department and the Orange County Flood Control District would review the design of the drainage system; design requirements of these two agencies would ensure that runoff is properly conveyed and discharged as appropriate. Therefore, while there would be changes to the existing drainage system, the new improvements would not substantially alter the course of a stream or river. As such, the impacts are considered less than significant and no further analysis would be provided in the EIR. Questions E and F – Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.5-3 of MMP No. 106A, prepared for FSEIR No. 332, requires the City Engineer to review the location of each project within The Platinum Triangle to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities and that the impacts of the project are mitigated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office, if the project will increase storm water flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan drainage study. In addition, the property owner/developer is also required to participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program. The proposed project should not increase the amount of impervious surfaces and the runoff rates are expected to remain approximately the same compared to the approved conditions. Although runoff may contain increased amount of urban pollutants during construction activities, construction would be temporary and required compliance with the established regulations the local grading ordinance, the State General Construction Permit and the County area-wide MS4 Storm Water Runoff Permit) would ensure that impacts are reduced to less than significant. The conclusion of the FSEIR No. 332 remains valid and the proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff. No further analysis will be provided in the EIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 37 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Questions G though I – Less Than Significant Impact. The project area is located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance study area within Zone A99 and X designation. The majority of the project area is located in Zone X which lies in a 100-Year to 500-Year Flood Zone with flooding below one foot. However, Mitigation Measures 5.5-1 and 5.5-4 of MMP No. 106A, prepared for FSEIR No. 332 would ensure that potential flooding impacts are mitigated to a less than significant impact. It is anticipated that plans documenting that the design of all aboveground structures are at least three feet higher than the 100-year flood zone unless otherwise required by the City Engineer and all structures below this level are required to be flood-proofed. The proposed project would not result in greater flooding impact than analyzed in the FEIR No. 332. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question J – No Impact. The project site is developed with light industrial buildings and exhibits flat topography. Therefore, the project site would not be subject to mudflow. No water bodies are located within the project area that could produce a seiche during a seismic event. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated and no further assessment of this issue is warranted. Questions K and L – Less Than Significant Impact. The project involves development of a mixed-use community comprised of residential, commercial, office and institutional uses. These uses typically do not include activities such as material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, or hazardous materials handling; and limited storage, delivery area, loading docks, or other outdoor work areas. Construction-related runoff may also affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters. However, the project would be required to comply with current water quality regulations associated with the City of Anaheim’s Local Implementation Plan, the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan, and the County-wide MS4 Storm Water Runoff Permit. The project site is currently developed with light industrial uses and implementation of the proposed project would not be greater than the current water quality conditions. No further analysis is necessary. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project a) Physically divide an established community? J J J I b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? I J J J c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? J J J I Narrative Summary: Question A – No Impact. The proposed project would increase the adopted development intensities and expand the PTMU Overlay Zone. No physical division of an established community would result from the proposed project. No further assessment of this issue is warranted. Question B – Potentially Significant Impact. The project includes a General Plan Amendment, MLUP Amendment, and a PTMU Overlay Zone Amendment that would provide for the additional development of 8,643 dwelling units, 9,284,972 square feet of office uses, 2,645,282 square feet of commercial uses and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses in the PTMU Overlay Zone. The EIR will evaluate the consistency of these proposed amendments with City policies and regulations, and other relevant local and regional planning documents General Plan, Development Code, SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide [RCPG]). Question C – No Impact. The project area is not part of a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, the project will not conflict with any conservation plans. X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? J J J I b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use? J J J I ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 38 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Narrative Summary: Questions A and B – No Impact. The project area does not contain any mineral resources. The project area is not identified in the City of Anaheim General Plan (Figure G-4, Mineral Resource Map) as Regionally Significant Aggregate Resource Area. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of the availability of mineral resources that would be of regional value. Therefore, no additional discussion of this issue in the EIR is necessary. XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? I J J J b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? I J J J c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? I J J J d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? I J J J e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? J J J I f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport or helistop, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? J J I J Narrative Summary: Questions A, C and D – Potentially Significant Impact. The activities associated with the implementation of the project have the potential to substantially increase the ambient noise levels near existing sensitive receptors, and expose future residents to adverse noise levels from adjacent major roadways. In addition, the project would generate potentially significant noise levels during construction phases. The EIR will evaluate the existing noise conditions on-site and predict the noise conditions in the future with and without the project. The EIR will also identify applicable noise standards and provide mitigation measures to reduce impacts. Question B – Potentially Significant Impact. Project operation would not generate any significant amounts of long-term groundborne vibration or noise; thus, no impact would occur from the project. However, there is the potential for temporary vibration and noise impacts during construction. Potential vibration impacts could result from on-site blasting, which may be required during construction. Groundborne noise and vibration impacts will be addressed in the EIR and mitigation measures identified, as necessary. Question E – No Impact. The project site is not within an airport land use plan. Future residents and people working in the project area would not be exposed to excessive noise levels from these types of operations. Therefore, no further discussion will be provided in the EIR. Question F – Less Than Significant Impact. There are two heliports in the project vicinity: the North Net Training Facility and UC Irvine Medical Center. The Anaheim Police Department also uses the parking lot at the Angel Stadium of Anaheim for helicopter training exercises. There are no private airstrips within the City. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7-3 of MMP No. 106A, prepared for FSEIR No. 332, requires that new development project property owner/developer use the most current available Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resources of evaluating heliport and airport operations. While the proposed project would place more people to the heliport noise, the noise would not increase as a result of the project and no further mitigation is necessary. The conclusion of the FSEIR No. 332 remains valid and this issue would not be further analyzed in the EIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 39 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? I J J J b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? J J J I c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? J J J I Narrative Summary: Question A – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would create additional jobs and housing in the project area. Therefore, the project’s impact on local and regional population and housing will be addressed in the EIR. Questions B and C – No Impact. Since the approval of the Master Land Use Plan, 390 dwelling units have been constructed and an additional 1,530 units are under construction. None of these units are expected to be displaced as a result of project implementation. Therefore, no impacts would occur and no housing displacement issues would be discussed in the EIR. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? I J J J b) Police protection? I J J J c) Schools? I J J J d) Parks? I J J J e) Other public facilities? I J J J Narrative Summary: Questions A through E – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in increased service demand for all public services including fire and police protection, schools, and parks, as well as other public facilities. Based on coordination with service providers, impacts to public services will be evaluated in the EIR, and appropriate mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. XIV. RECREATION: Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? I J J J b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? I J J J Narrative Summary: Question A – Potentially Significant Impact. By increasing the development intensities in The Platinum Triangle, the proposed project may result in an increase in the use of existing park and recreational facilities. Impacts related to the increased use of these recreation facilitates will be evaluated in the EIR and appropriate mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. Question B – Potentially Significant Impact. Development fees collected for projects within The Platinum Triangle will be used for the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. In addition, developers of residential projects ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 40 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact totaling over 325 units on parcels eight acres or larger are required to construct an on-site public park, at a minimum size of 44 square feet per dwelling unit. Impacts to the physical environment related to the construction or expansion of recreation facilitates for the proposed project will be evaluated in the EIR, and appropriate mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? I J J J b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? I J J J c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results in substantial safety risks? J J I J d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses? I J J J e) Result in inadequate emergency access? J J I J f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? J J I J g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation bus stops/routes, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, etc.)? I J J J Narrative Summary: Questions A and B – Potentially Significant Impact. Implementation of the project would cause an increase in traffic and increase the number of vehicle trips, and the volume of vehicles on roads and at intersections. A traffic and circulation study will be prepared for the EIR to determine the project’s potential traffic impacts, including compliance with level of service standards established for designated roads and highways in the vicinity of the project. Mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. Question C – Less Than Significant Impact. There are two heliports in the project vicinity: the North Net Training Facility and UC Irvine Medical Center. The Anaheim Police Department also uses the parking lot at Angel Stadium of Anaheim for helicopter training exercises. There are no private airstrips within the City. Heliport safety hazards include hazards posed to aircraft from structures located within navigable airspace and crash hazards posed by aircraft to people and property on the ground. The primary risks associated with heliports are take- offs and landings. The City typically seeks to minimize public exposure to heliport-related risks primarily through minimizing the siting of incompatible land uses surrounding the City’s existing heliports. The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) of Orange County assists local agencies to ensure that there are no direct conflicts with land uses, noise, or other issues that would impact the functionality and safety of heliport operations. The ALUC requires that local jurisdictions’ general plans and zoning ordinances are consistent with Airport Environs Land Use Plans (AELUPs), which contain noise contours, restrictions for types of construction and building heights in navigable air space, as well as requirements impacting the establishment or construction of sensitive uses within close proximity to airports and heliports. Therefore, although implementation of The Platinum Triangle will allow development of various land uses, including high rise residential uses in proximity to the existing heliports, such development would initiate a review by the ALUC for compatibility. It is anticipated that following AELUP guidelines will help reduce hazards related to heliports within the project area and the impacts would be less than significant. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted. Question D – Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would intensify uses and increase the number of vehicle trips occurring in the project area. Although the proposed project would not change the backbone circulation system and arterial connections of the existing Platinum Triangle MLUP, the projected increase in turning movements and pedestrian traffic would increase the safety hazards in the project area. Therefore, the EIR will address potential safety hazards associated with the proposed project and provide mitigation measures, if necessary. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 41 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Question E – Less Than Significant Impact. Although the proposed project would increase the area traffic, all vehicle access will be designed and improved in accordance with the requirements of the City Engineer to reduce any emergency access impact at buildout of The Platinum Triangle. The property owner/developer is required to submit customary emergency access plans for review and approval of the Anaheim Fire Department prior to the issuance of building permits. This plan would ensure that sufficient accessibility for emergency vehicles is provided during all phases of construction. It should be noted that during construction, if any project work street widening, emergency access improvements, sewer connections, sound walls, storm drain construction, street connections, etc.) occurs in the vicinity of the Caltrans right-of-way, an encroachment permit would be required. Implementation of Measure 5.10-6 of MMP No. 106A, prepared for FSEIR No. 332, also requires the property owner/developer to dedicate, including any necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)- of-way as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan adjacent to their property to maintain adequate levels of service and access within the project area. Therefore, less than significant impact would result from the project implementation and no further evaluation in the EIR is necessary. Question F – Less Than Significant Impact. New development will comply with the parking requirements set forth for the use in the Zoning Code, therefore, it is not anticipated that there would be any significant impacts created by new development. Parking will not be further analyzed in the EIR. Question G – Potentially Significant Impact. The Platinum Triangle MLUP promotes alternative forms of transportation by integrating design standards for bus stops, enhanced pedestrian walkways, and the regional bike system. The proposed project will continue to promote alternative mode of transportation and comply with the design standards of The Platinum Triangle. However, the proposed project will amend the General Plan Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facilities, this issue would be further discussed in the EIR. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? I J J J b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? I J J J c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? I J J J d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project (including large scale developments as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question No. 20 of the Environmental Checklist) from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? I J J J e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? I J J J f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? I J J J g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? I J J J h) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity? I J J J i) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas? I J J J j) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to telephone service? J J I J ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 42 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact k) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/reception? J J I J Narrative Summary: Questions A through I – Potentially Significant Impact. The project would require the implementation of new electrical, water, sewer, and stormwater drainage facilities that would connect to existing utility systems provided by the City of Anaheim and other agencies. Additionally, the project would generate solid waste that would be disposed of in the County of Orange landfill system. Based on technical studies to be prepared for the project and/or coordination with utility/service providers, the EIR will evaluate impacts to utility/service systems, and will determine the existing conditions and impacts of project build- out on utility/service systems, and assess environmental impacts. The EIR will also evaluate consistency of the project with applicable statutes and regulations related to public services and utilities and potential physical impacts associated with implementation of utility systems. A Water Supply Assessment in accordance with SB 610 will be completed as part of the EIR. Question C – Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is currently developed with industrial buildings and associated parking lots. Since the project site is covered with impervious surfaces, the rate or volume of stormwater within the project site would not be greater than the existing conditions. However, The Platinum Triangle Drainage Study, prepared in September 2004 by Merit Civil Engineering identified existing deficiencies in the drainage system. Therefore, this issue would be further discussed in the EIR. Question J – Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will increase the demand on the telephone service system; however, telephone service already exists in the project area and telephone facilities can be upgraded without any significant impact on the environment. Further discussion of this issue in the EIR is not warranted. Question K – Less Than Significant Impact. Time-Warner provides cable television service to the City of Anaheim. The infrastructure capacity for cable television is also expected to expand with new development without any significant impact on the environment. Further discussion of this issue in the EIR is not warranted. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? J J J I b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) I J J J c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? I J J J Narrative Summary: Question A – No Impact. Because the project site is already developed and approved for redevelopment, the proposed increase in development intensities would not further degrade the quality of environment related to biological and cultural resources compared to the adopted MLUP. Impacts related to biological resources and cultural resources have been adequately addressed in the FSEIR No. 332. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Nos. 5.12-1 and 5.12-2 of MMP No. 106A, prepared for FSEIR No. 332 would ensure that impacts are reduced to less than significant level and no further discussion on this issue is warranted. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 43 Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Less than Significant Impact No Impact Questions B and C – Potentially Significant Impact. Development of the proposed project would result in potentially significant impact in the areas of aesthetics, air quality, land use, population and housing, public services, transportation, and utilities. The project has the potential to result in cumulative impacts and affect the human environment. Because of this potential for significant adverse effects, an EIR will be prepared for the project. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 44 Initial Study This page has been left intentionally blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 45 Initial Study Fish and Game Determination (Per Section 21089(b) of the Public Resources Code, all project applicants and public agencies subject to the California Environmental Quality Act shall pay a Fish and Game filing fee for each project that would adversely affect wildlife resources.)* Based on the responses contained in this Environmental Checklist, there is no evidence that the proposed project has a potential for a change that would adversely affect wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Has the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CCR 753.5 been rebutted by substantial evidence? X Yes (Certificate of Fee Exemption) No (Pay fee) *Note: Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)(2)(A) states that projects that are Categorically Exempt from CEQA are also exempt from filing fee. ---PAGE BREAK--- Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP Amendment to The Platinum Triangle MLUP 46 Initial Study REFERENCES CITED Anaheim, City of. 2004, May (amended). City of Anaheim General Plan. Anaheim, City of. 2004, May (amended). Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Anaheim, City of. 2004, August (amended). The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. California Department of Conservation. 2002 California Important Farmland Map. The Planning Center. 2004, May. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330. The Planning Center. 2005, May. The Platinum Triangle Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, No. 332.