Document Anaheim_doc_510aab43d1

5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-1 5.10 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Existing conditions information presented in this section is based on project-specific facilities reports and coordination with affected public utility agencies. Specific references are identified as relevant. This section addresses the following public utilities; the service provider is noted parenthetically: • Wastewater Treatment and Collection (Anaheim Public Utilities Department) • Water Supply and Distribution Systems (Anaheim Public Utilities Department) • Solid Waste (Republic Waste Services of Southern California, LLC) • Electricity (Anaheim Public Utilities Department) • Natural Gas (Southern California Gas Company) • Communications (Time Warner and AT&T) The analysis in this section is based in part on the following technical reports: Sewer • Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CCAAMPSS) – Analysis of Models for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project (DSEIR No. 339), CH2M HILL, June 2009. The referenced document is included in Appendix G. Water • Urban Water Management Plan, Psomas, 2005. • The Platinum Triangle Water Supply Assessment, Psomas, July 2009. The water supply assessment is included in Appendix H and the Urban Water Management Plan is available for review at the City of Anaheim Department of Public Works. 5.10.1 Environmental Setting Sewer Treatment and Collection The City of Anaheim’s local sanitary sewer system serves the project vicinity and is tributary to the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), District 2. The entire OCSD system encompasses 479 square miles of northern and central Orange County. OCSD operates the third largest sewer system on the west coast, consisting of over 582 miles of sewer lines, 15 offsite pumping station, two regional wastewater treatment plants, and an ocean disposal system. Sewer from the City sewer system is conveyed to the county trunk and interceptor sewer to regional treatment and disposal facilities. The major OCSD sanitary sewers serving the Platinum Triangle are the Newhope-Placentia Trunk (State College Avenue), the Olive Subtrunk, the Orangewood Diversion Sewer, and the Santa Ana River Interceptor (SARI) line. • Newhope-Placentia/Orangewood Basin. The Newhope-Placentia Trunk is 39 inches in diameter and flows south down State College Boulevard to Orangewood Avenue. At Orangewood Avenue, the Newhope-Placentia Trunk turns to the west past the western boundary of the stadium to Lewis Street, then south to Lewis Street through the City of Orange to the County SARI. The properties along Orangewood Avenue are tributary to the Newhope-Placentia Trunk via eight- ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-2 • The Planning Center August 2010 inch City sewers in and along the street. The northern limit of this basin is generally Gene Autry Way (west of State College Boulevard) and the backside of the businesses along Orangewood Avenue. The eastern limit is the Santa Ana River, the southern is the City boundary, and the western is Interstate 5 • Olive Basin. The Olive Subtrunk is located along Katella Avenue at the northeastern end of the Platinum Triangle area and continues in a westerly direction through Howell Avenue to connect to the Newhope-Placentia Trunk at State College Boulevard. The size of the line within that reach ranges from 24 to 30 inches in diameter. The Olive Subtrunk also collects sewage from areas east of the Santa Ana River. All flows east of the Santa Ana River can be diverted to the SARI. • Orangewood Diversion Sewer. The old county Newhope-Placentia Trunk is located at the north end of the Platinum Triangle area and flows south within State College Boulevard from the Edison Corridor to Orangewood Avenue, then east along Orangewood Avenue to the county SARI. The size of the line within this reach ranges from 36 to 42 inches in diameter. Flows north of the State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue intersection (in the old alignment of the Newhope-Placentia line) can be diverted easterly by the OCSD Orangewood Diversion Sewer. The OCSD Orangewood Diversion Sewer was built to alleviate a deficiency in the Newhope- Placentia Trunk identified by OCSD in their 1991 Master Plan. Currently, there is a diversion structure that allows sewage to flow either east or west down Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard. • Santa Ana River Interceptor. The SARI line, a regional brine line, is designed to convey 30 million gallons per day (mgd) of nonreclaimable sewer from the upper Santa Ana River basin to the ocean for disposal, after treatment. The nonreclaimable wastewater consists of desalter concentrate and industrial wastewater. Domestic wastewater is also received on a temporary basis. OCSD maintains two wastewater treatment plants within Orange County: Reclamation Plant No. 1, located in Fountain Valley; and Treatment Plant No. 2, located in Huntington Beach. OCSD plans to upgrade the level of wastewater treatment at both of its treatment plants to meet secondary treatment standards for the projected 2020 effluent flow of 240 to 320 mgd. The effluent discharge to the ocean is a blend of advanced primary and secondary treated wastewater as specified in the OCSD’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Plant No. 1 is located at 10844 Ellis Avenue in the City of Fountain Valley, about four miles northeast of the ocean. The plant receives sewage from six major sewer pipes and provides advanced primary and secondary treatment. Secondary effluent is either blended with advanced primary effluent and routed to the ocean disposal system, or is sent to the Orange County Water District (OCWD) for further treatment and distribution for reclaimed water uses. Plant No. 2 is located at 22212 Brookhurst Street in the City of Huntington Beach, about 1,500 feet from the ocean. The plant receives sewage from five major sewer pipes, and all of the effluent from the plant is discharged to the ocean outfall disposal system. The Platinum Triangle As shown in Figure 5.10-1, Sewer Model Boundaries and Recommended Improvements, the Platinum Triangle is divided into 14 sewer model boundaries. ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: CH2M HILL 2009 5. Environmental Analysis Sewer Model Boundaries and Recommended Improvements SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.10-1 0 2,400 Scale (Feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-4 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-5 In June 2006, The Platinum Triangle Sewer Study, Addendum to the First Revision (June 2006 sewer study) was prepared to analyze the adopted General Plan development intensities. As shown in Table 5.10-1, development intensities modeled by the June 2006 sewer study analyzed sewer improvements required to develop to its full potential based on the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) and the maximum dwelling units per acre, instead of the maximum square footage and the number of units approved under the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (MLUP). The maximum land use intensities allowed in each benefit parcel and the flow were input into each sewer model to determine routed flows at the key connection points in the system. Figure 5.10-1 shows the sewer model boundaries and sewer improvements recommended as part of the June 2006 sewer study. Table 5.10-1 Permitted Platinum Triangle Development Intensity Land Use Maximum Development Intensity Industrial 0.5 floor area ratio (FAR) Institutional 3.0 FAR Office Office development: 1,790,550 sq. ft. Office-High: No maximum FAR Office-Low: 0.5 FAR Commercial development: 10,000 sq. ft., no maximum FAR Mixed-Use Residential: 10,266 dwelling units at densities up to 100 dwelling units per acre Office development: 3,265,000 sq. ft., no maximum FAR Commercial development: 2,254,400 sq. ft., 0.4 FAR Subsequent to the June 2006 sewer study, three stretches of new backbone sewer have been constructed in the Platinum Triangle for additional sewer capacity. One stretch is approximately 1,000 feet of new sewer along Katella Avenue east of State College Boulevard within Model 117. The second stretch is a reverse sewer (flowing easterly instead of westerly), approximately 2,000 feet along Katella Avenue in Model 28B between Lewis Street and State College Boulevard. And the third stretch is approximately 3,000 feet of new sewer along Gene Autry Way and Santa Cruz Street just west of State College Boulevard in Model 47. Water Supply Senate Bill 610 (SB 610) was signed into law on October 9, 2001. It mandates that a city or county approving certain projects subject to CEQA identify any public water system that may supply water for the project, and (ii) request those public water systems to prepare a specified water supply assessment. Pursuant to SB 610, a water supply assessment (WSA) for the Platinum Triangle was prepared to evaluate the potential effect of the proposed development on current and future water supplies. According to the WSA, the City currently obtains water from: 1) naturally and artificially recharged local groundwater and 2) imported water. In addition, the City of Anaheim Water Department maintains 17 interconnections with adjacent water purveyors that are temporarily utilized on an as-needed or emergency basis. In 2007/08, the City received approximately 79 percent of its water supply from its groundwater wells and 21 percent from imported water. Groundwater supply is managed by the OCWD, and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) provides imported water supplies to the City. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-6 • The Planning Center August 2010 Anaheim Public Utilities Department The Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD) provides water service to the Platinum Triangle. APUD’s water service area population as of 2008 was approximately 353,000 and is expected to increase to approximately 436,000 by the year 2030. Figure 5.10-2, City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department Service Area shows the service area boundaries. The basic water services include single-family residential, multifamily residential, and general services commercial, industrial, municipal, and institutional) consumers. APUD’s current major water system facilities consist of eight purchased water connections to MWD (one untreated and seven treated water connections), 18 active wells, one 920- million-gallon (mg) reservoir for untreated water, one 15 mgd water treatment plant, 12 treated water reservoirs with 28.75 mg of treated storage capacity, permanent chlorination facilities at various sites, nine booster pump stations, approximately 750 miles of water mains, and approximately 7,850 fire hydrants. Figure 5.10-3, City of Anaheim Major Water Facilities, depicts the location of the City’s major water supply, treatment, and storage facilities. APUD’s water system serves areas ranging in elevation from less than 60 feet to over 1,200 feet above sea level (asl). To provide appropriate operating pressures for such a wide range of elevations, the water system is divided into 19 pressure zones. The lowest pressure zone operates at a static hydraulic grade line (HGL) elevation of 220 feet asl and the highest pressure zone at a static HGL elevation of 1,320 feet asl. APUD’s water distribution system is generally divided into two main geographic areas: the Flatland Area (555 HGL elevation and below) and the Hill and Canyon Area (585 HGL elevation and above). The Flatland Area is approximately 21,000 acres, situated generally north and west of the Santa Ana River, and can be almost entirely served by groundwater (with MWD imported water supplementing as necessary). The project site is located in the Flatland Area. The Hill and Canyon Area is approximately 11,000 acres, situated generally south and east of the Santa Ana River, and served primarily by the imported water from MWD and the Lenain Water Treatment Plant (LWTP). Groundwater The primary source of groundwater for the City is the Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin) that underlies the north half of Orange County beneath broad lowlands. The Basin covers an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote Hills and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminating at the Orange County line to the northwest, where its aquifer systems continue into the Central Basin of Los Angeles County. The Basin is dominated by a deep structural depression containing a thick accumulation of fresh water-bearing imbedded marine and continental sand, silt, and clay deposits. The sediments containing easily recoverable fresh water extend to approximately 2,000 feet in depth. Although water bearing aquifers exist below that level, reduced water quality and pumping make these materials economically unviable at present. However, upper, middle, and lower aquifer systems are recognized in the Basin with well production yields ranging from 500 to 4,500 gallons per minute, but are generally 2,000 to 3,000 gallons per minute. The Basin is one of the richest and most plentiful sources of groundwater in the entire State, holding millions of acre-feet (af) of water, of which about 1.25 to 1.5 million af is available for use. To ensure that the Basin is not overdrawn, OCWD recharges the Basin with local and imported water. Groundwater conditions in the Basin are influenced by the natural hydrologic conditions and the Basin is recharged primarily by four sources: 1) local rainfall, which varies due to the extent of the annual seasonal precipitation; 2) storm and base flows from the Santa Ana River, which includes recycled wastewater from treatment plants in Riverside and San Bernardino counties; 3) imported water; and 4) highly treated recycled wastewater. The production capability of the Basin has increased as a result of increased wastewater reclamation and the blending of waters of different qualities to produce high- quality potable water for public distribution. ---PAGE BREAK--- NOT TO SCALE 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.10-2 City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department Service Area Source: Psomas, 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-8 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- NOT TO SCALE 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.10-3 City of Anaheim Major Water Facilities Source: City of Anaheim Public Utilities ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-10 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-11 The most recent example of a highly successful OCWD wastewater reclamation project is the construction and operation of OCWD’s new $500 million water-purification plant, which is designed to turn wastewater into drinking water. This new Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) project currently treats and recharges up to 70 million gallons per day of wastewater back into the Basin for future potable use. This equates to the recycling of over 72,000 acre feet per year of wastewater back into the Basin for future extraction and potable use. Additionally, the approved expansion of the GWRS will increase the recharge capacity to 90,000 afy. Basin recharge occurs largely in the following recharge basins: 1) Warner Basin, a 50-foot deep recharge basin located next to the Santa Ana River at the intersection of the SR-55 and SR-91 freeways; 2) Burris Pit, located between Lincoln Avenue and Ball Road; 3) Kraemer Basin, located adjacent to Burris Pit, and 4) Santiago Creek. All of these recharge facilities are located in or adjacent to the City of Anaheim. A large portion of the recharge of the OCWD groundwater basin comes from water flowing in the Santa Ana River south of the Prado Dam, located in San Bernardino County, just east of the Orange County’s jurisdictional boundary. With the exception of contractual rights conveyed to Bryant Ranch landowners in east Yorba Linda, which have contractual rights to approximately 2,800 afy of Santa Ana River water, OCWD has the legal rights to all of the Santa Ana River flow south of the Prado Dam. OCWD is a special district that manages the Basin largely through the basin production percentage (BPP) that is established each water year. The BPP is set based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, ideal precipitation, Santa Ana River runoff, and basin management objectives. The BPP represents a set percentage identifying the amount of groundwater all pumpers in the basin can pump without paying a high pumping tax or basin equity assessment (BEA) to OCWD. Groundwater production equal to or less than the BPP pays a replenishment assessment and if groundwater production is greater than the BPP, a BEA is paid on each af of water pumped above the BPP. According to OCWD’s Engineer’s Report for fiscal year 2006−2007, total groundwater production from the Basin in OCWD's jurisdiction was 349,858 af. Because of the location of many of the City’s wells adjacent to the Santa Ana River and in the northeast part of the groundwater basin, especially the six wells near Anaheim Lake, City wells are ideally located within the Basin. From a hydro-geological standpoint, the City’s wells pump from geological structures which are relatively high up and geologically differentiated from other parts of the OCWD groundwater basin. In addition, because the City’s wells are located relatively near to the Prado Dam outlet to the Santa Ana River, particularly as compared to the well locations of other producers in the Basin, the City’s well fields draw water from easily accessible groundwater tables that are recharged on a naturally- occurring priority basis due to: 1) the location of OCWD recharge basins in or adjacent to the City, and 2) the City’s wells’ location in or near the upper reaches of the Santa Ana River. In essence, Santa Ana River water has the natural effect of recharging the portion of the OCWD Basin that provides groundwater to the City wells prior to such Santa Ana River water reaching the lower portion of the river. Thus, City wells are ideally located within the OCWD Groundwater Basin that the groundwater production in Anaheim does not generally affect the production of groundwater production wells operated by other producers located in other portions of the Basin. Table 5.10-2 sets forth the past groundwater production amount from each of the City’s wells and Table 5.10-3 shows the City’s projection based on past trends and the anticipated BPP during a normal water year. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-12 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.10-2 Historic Groundwater Pumping by Well (AF) Well No. 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 12 36.7 - - - 14 628.5 502.4 477.4 539.8 509.1 18 362.9 376.7 92.0 - - 19 65.0 - - - - 20 802.1 665.0 409.0 - - 22 2,005.6 551.1 - - - 24A 332.0 231.6 214.7 251.6 296.9 25 591.6 408.2 505.5 484.8 544.9 26 1,233.9 347.6 - - - 27 997.6 803.4 984.0 1,383.4 234.6 28 1,027.3 818.6 780.2 988.8 580.9 29 573.8 226.4 394.2 - - 34 1,091.4 1,272.8 743.1 409.5 - 36 2,254.4 1,829.1 1,358.3 1,077.2 934.3 39 831.8 959.4 1,019.3 1,722.4 615.3 40 1,513.2 2,156.1 2,155.1 2,396.7 1,849.9 41 5,884.4 4,951.2 5,048.7 5,957.0 5,612.7 42 4,453.5 3,738.5 3,658.3 4,302.4 4,267.6 43 4,650.0 4,521.6 4,373.1 4,520.8 4,402.8 44 4,309.3 3,887.3 3,541.8 4,346.2 4,034.0 45 3,643.7 2,840.2 2,299.8 4,077.2 5,319.3 46 4,486.1 2,609.3 2,090.6 2,869.9 3,354.1 47 2,012.2 2,045.6 3,327.8 4,022.0 5,195.5 49 2,920.4 3,009.8 2,664.5 3,396.0 6,174.4 51 2,477.8 1,759.4 1,626.6 1,595.6 2,571.3 55 2,237.5 2,322.6 1,272.1 2,581.9 4,865.4 48 - - - - 1,080.0 52 - - - - 2,130.1 105 0.0 0.0 - - - 112 408.7 314.1 - - - 53 - 493.9 2,821.1 4,965.0 3,896.2 Total 51,831.4 43,641.9 41,857.2 51,888.2 58,469.3 Potable Total1 51,499.4 43,410.3 41,642.5 51,636.6 58,172.4 1 Potable total excludes pumping from Well No. 24A, which is an irrigation well serving Dad Miller Golf Course. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-13 Table 5.10-3 Estimated Pumping by Well to 2015 (AF) Well No. 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 12 14 466 470 475 479 483 488 18 19 20 22 *24A* 272 275 277 280 282 285 252 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 27 215 217 219 221 223 225 28 532 537 542 546 551 556 29 34 36 855 863 870 878 886 894 392 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 1,691 1,707 1,722 1,738 1,753 1,769 41 5,129 5,176 5,223 5,270 5,317 5,365 42 3,900 3,936 3,972 4,008 4,043 4,079 43 4,024 4,061 4,098 4,135 4,171 4,208 44 3,687 3,721 3,755 3,788 3,822 3,856 45 4,861 4,906 4,950 4,995 5,040 5,084 46 3,066 3,094 3,122 3,150 3,178 3,206 47 4,748 4,792 4,835 4,879 4,922 4,966 49 5,642 5,694 5,746 5,798 5,849 5,901 51 2,350 2,372 2,394 2,415 2,437 2,458 55 4,447 4,487 4,528 4,569 4,610 4,650 48 988 997 1,006 1,015 1,024 1,033 52 1,947 1,965 1,983 2,001 2,019 2,037 105 112 53 3,561 3,594 3,626 3,659 3,691 3,724 Total 52,382 52,863 53,343 53,824 54,304 54,785 Potable Total1 52,100 52,588 53,066 53,544 53,022 54,500 1 Potable total excludes pumping from Well No. 24A, which is an irrigation well serving Dad Miller Golf Course. 2 Assumed out of operation. Imported Water (Surface Water) MWD is the wholesale water agency that serves supplemental imported water from northern California through the State Water Project (SWP) and the Colorado River to 26 member agencies located in portions of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura counties. The City of Anaheim is one of only three retail member agencies of MWD in Orange County. As a member agency, pursuant to the Metropolitan Act, the City has preferential rights to a certain percentage of water delivered to MWD each year primarily from the SWP and/or the Colorado River Aqueduct as well as other MWD storage programs. Being a member agency of MWD puts the City in a better position ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-14 • The Planning Center August 2010 relative to receiving water directly from MWD, as opposed to other agencies in Orange County that obtain their imported MWD water through Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). The City purchases both treated potable and untreated nonpotable water from MWD. The treated water is delivered through MWD connections A-01 through A-07 via five major feeders, East Orange County Feeder No. 2, Orange County Feeder, Second Lower Feeder, West Orange County Feeder, and Allen- McColloch Pipeline. Untreated MWD water is delivered to the City's Walnut Canyon Reservoir (WCR) through MWD Connection A-08 via the Santiago Lateral of the Lower Feeder System, and this water is treated by the LWTP. WCR has a total capacity of 2,823 af (920 mg).Together, the WCR and LWTP form a receiving, storage, and treatment facility. Recycled Water The City does not currently utilize recycled water. However, OCWD utilizes recycled water generated from the OCSD treatment facilities for regional recycled water projects and groundwater recharge. Although a formal Recycled Water Optimization Plan has not been completed for the City, APUD requires separate irrigation services for any new landscaped area larger than 2,500 square feet in the City, including properties within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and the Platinum Triangle, which will enable easy conversion to recycled water if and when it becomes available. Historic Water Production Table 5.10-4 shows the City’s historic water production by source from 2002 through 2008. Table 5.10-4 City of Anaheim Historic Water Production by Source (AF) Source 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 Groundwater 50,852 51,831 43,642 41,858 51,637 58,172 Imported Water 23,943 25,066 28,030 31,256 24,696 15,272 Total 74,795 76,897 71,672 73,114 76,333 73,445 Total Water Into System (Water Demand) 74,541 76,900 71,108 72,798 76,687 74,212 Source: Psomas, Table 4.3 of WSA 2009 Water Demand In 2007/08, the City’s water demand was approximately 74,000 acre-feet per year (afy) including unaccounted-for water, which was actually over 5,000 afy less than what was projected in the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). In essence, this means that City businesses and residents are using less water than was originally forecast, which is likely due to the fact that the previous UWMP conservatively over-estimated water demand, and water demand is being reduced due to effective conservation efforts being undertaken by the City and increased water efficiencies resulting from more stringent building codes and more efficient appliances tankless water heaters, high-efficiency clothes washing machines, etc.). ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-15 Reliability of Long-Term Water Supply Increased environmental regulations and the collaborative competition for water from outside the region have resulted in reduced supplies of water in the recent years. Furthermore, continued population and economic growth correspond to increased water demands in the region, putting an even larger burden on local supplies. On June 5, 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a statewide drought and directed state agencies and departments to take specified actions and on February 27, 2009, he proclaimed a state of emergency and directed all state government agencies to utilize their resources, implement a state emergency plan, and provide assistance for people, communities, and businesses impacted by the drought. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Imported Water) The reliability of the City of Anaheim’s water supply currently depends on the reliability of both imported water and groundwater supplies, which are managed and delivered by MWD and OCWD, respectively. MWD has a 5,200-square-mile service area and imports about half of the water used in southern California. The other half includes local surface and groundwater supplies, recycled water, and water imported from the Owens Valley by the City of Los Angeles. Of the total water supply, 20 percent goes to urban uses and 80 percent goes to agriculture uses. As a wholesaler, MWD has no retail customers, and distributes treated and untreated water directly to its 26 member agencies. One such member agency is the City of Anaheim. The SWP, MWD’s Colorado River Aqueduct, and MWD’s local water facilities and programs have many layers that provide reliability. Through the 1996 Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) and subsequent updates, MWD has worked toward identifying and developing water supplies to provide 100 percent reliability. The IRP is an adaptive planning framework and, with the adopted annual implementation reporting and five-year updating cycle, MWD and its member agencies will continue to refine and revise the resource targets as new information and technologies become available. Due to competing needs and uses for all of the water sources and regional water operational issues, MWD undertook a number of planning processes: the Integrated Resources Planning Process, the Water Surplus and Drought Management Plan, the Strategic Planning Process, the Regional Urban Water Management Plan, and most recently, the Report on Metropolitan Water Supplies: A Blueprint for Water Reliability. Combined, these documents provide a framework and guidelines for optimum water planning into the future. It should be noted that some of the recent issues surrounding operational limitations in supply related to species protection and delta smelt issues are considered by MWD to be somewhat short-term in nature and are not expected to affect the overall 20-year planning period. State Water Project The SWP is a water storage and delivery system of reservoirs, aqueducts, powerplants and pumping plants. It is owned and operated by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and its main purpose is to store water and distribute it to 29 urban and agricultural water suppliers in Northern California, the San Francisco Bay Area, the San Joaquin Valley, the Central Coast, and Southern California. Of the contracted water supply, 80 percent goes to urban users and 20 percent goes to agricultural users. The reliability of the SWP impacts MWD’s member agencies’ ability to plan for future growth and supply. On an annual basis, each of the 29 SWP contractors, including MWD, requests an amount of SWP water based on their anticipated yearly demand. After receiving the requests, DWR assesses the amount of water supply available based on precipitation, snowpack on northern California watersheds, volume of water in storage, projected carryover storage, and Sacramento-San Joaquin River ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-16 • The Planning Center August 2010 Delta regulatory requirements. Once the percentage is set early in the water year, the agency can count on that amount of supply or more in the coming year. The percentage is typically set at a conservative level and then held or adjusted upwards later in the year. Based on initial estimates supplied by the DWR and considering the Interim Remedial Order, MWD staff was estimating that it could lose up to 30 percent of its SWP supplies in 2008. MWD’s current measures to address potential water supply shortages and interruptions include calling for extraordinary conservation, cutting groundwater replenishment and agricultural water deliveries, maximizing groundwater production, acquiring additional supplies, and drawing from dry year storage programs. Therefore, MWD’s 2007 IRP, adopted in 2008, includes a forecast of 22 percent reduction in SWP deliveries. Because of uncertainties related to SWP deliveries to MWD based on delta smelt and other issues, Section 6 of the WSA analyzes an additional 13 to 18 percent loss of SWP supply above and beyond the 22 percent MWD has already factored into supply calculations (for a total reduction of 35 to 40 percent in SWP deliveries). Delta Smelt The delta smelt is a federally and state-listed threatened fish species that inhabits the estuaries of the Bay-Delta region. In May 2007, a federal court invalidated the biological opinion issued by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for operations of the SWP and Central Valley Project with regard to the delta smelt. On August 31, 2007, the federal court ordered interim operating rules until a new biological opinion is issued by the USFWS. Under the ruling, operational limits on delta pumping are in place from the end of December, when fish are about to spawn, until June, when the smelt migrate. The federal ruling and protective measures will be in effect until the biological opinion is rewritten. These protective actions and the simulations resulted in reduced SWP water deliveries. Therefore, DWR conducted simulations to evaluate 2007 SWP delivery reliability in light of possible long-term cutbacks due to delta smelt protective orders and possible impacts from climate change and reduced snow pack. In addition to the interim remedies and the proceedings to address immediate environmental concerns, the Delta Vision process has been created by Governor Schwarzenegger to identify long-term solution to the conflicts in the Bay-Delta region and the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) is being prepared. The BDCP will identify a set of water flow and habitat restoration actions to contribute to the recovery of endangered and sensitive species and their habitats in the Bay-Delta region. Therefore, the BDCP would provide species and habitat protection and improved reliability of water supplies by securing long-term operating permit for the SWP. The BDCP is expected to be completed by the end of 2010. Colorado River Aqueduct The Colorado River is MWD’s original source of water after MWD’s establishment in 1928. MWD has a legal entitlement to receive water from the Colorado River under a permanent service contract with the Secretary of the Interior. Under the 1931 priority system that has formed the basis for the distribution of Colorado River water made available to California, MWD holds the fourth priority apportionment right to 550,000 afy and the fifth priority right to 662,000 af of water, which is in excess of California’s basic apportionment. Prior to 2002, MWD could divert over 1.2 million af in any year, but since then, MWD’s deliveries of Colorado River water varied from a low of 633,000 af in 2006 to a high of 897,000 af in 2005. In 2007, MWD received approximately 713,500 AF of Colorado River water. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-17 Water Transfer and Exchange Programs California’s agricultural activities consume approximately 34 million af of water annually, which is 40 percent of the water used for all consumptive uses. Voluntary water transfers and exchanges can make a portion of this agricultural water supply available to support the State’s urban areas. Such existing and potential water transfers and exchanges are an important element for improving the water supply reliability within MWD’s service area and accomplishing the reliability goal set by MWD’s board of directors. MWD is currently pursuing voluntary water transfer and exchange programs with state, federal, public and private water districts and individuals. Supply Management Strategies On the regional level, MWD has taken a number of actions to secure a reliable water source for its member agencies. MWD recently adopted a water supply allocation plan for dealing with potential shortages that takes into consideration the impact on retail customers and the economy, changes and losses in local supplies, the investment in and development of local resources, and conservation achievements. Additional actions taken by MWD during the first half of 2008 include the adoption of a $1.9 billion spending plan, increased rates and charges, and the funding of a new reservoir to benefit Colorado River supply capabilities. The $1.9 billion spending plan for 2008−09 includes spending for the improvement of water conveyance facilities, water transfers, and providing financial assistance to member agencies’ local conservation, recycling, and groundwater clean-up efforts. As shown in Table 5.10-5, regional water projections for MWD indicate surplus water through 2030 under average year, single dry year, and multiple dry year conditions. Table 5.10-5 Metropolitan Regional Imported Water Supply Reliability Projections (AF) Region-Wide Projections 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Supply Information1 During Average Year 2,465,140 2,579,140 2,505,040 2,512,040 2,512,040 During a Single Dry Year 3,253,640 3,438,180 3,486,560 3,439,560 3,390,560 During Year 3 of Multiple Dry Year Period 2,599,760 2,653,060 2,685,580 2,677,580 2,660,580 Demand Information2 During Average Year 2,063,000 1,985,000 2,029,000 2,141,000 2,269,000 During a Single Dry Year 2,348,000 2,234,000 2,275,000 2,388,000 2,511,000 During Year 3 of Multiple Dry Year Period 2,420,000 2,341,000 2,355,000 2,479,000 2,609,000 Surplus Information During Average Year 402,140 594,140 476,040 371,040 243,040 During a Single Dry Year 905,640 1,204,180 1,211,560 1,051,560 879,560 During Year 3 of Multiple Dry Year Period 179,760 312,060 330,580 198,580 51,580 1 Projected supplies include current supplies and supplies under development. This data was obtained from MWD’s 2006 IRP Implementation Report supply projections and includes a 22% reduction in SWP deliveries based on MWD’s 2007 IRP Implementation Report. 2 Demand data obtained from MWD’s 2005 UWMP demand projections. Orange County Water District (Groundwater) Reliability of groundwater is managed by implementation of the OCWD’s Long Term Facilities Plan (LTFP), Ground Management Plan (GMP), and local agency programs as described below: ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-18 • The Planning Center August 2010 OCWD Long Term Facilities Plan OCWD has prepared a draft LTFP to evaluate potential basin and water quality enhancement projects that may be implemented in the 20-year planning period. The LTFP includes a master list of developed and proposed projects. The various projects are grouped into five categories: 1) recharge facilities, 2) water source facilities, 3) basin management facilities, 4) water quality management facilities, and 5) operational improvements facilities. Each project is evaluated using criteria such as technical feasibility, cost, institutional support, functional feasibility, and environmental compliance. OCWD Groundwater Management Plan OCWD finalized its GMP that complies with Senate Bill 1938 (SB 1938). The GMP’s objectives are to protect and enhance groundwater quality and to cost-effectively protect and increase the Basin’s sustainable yield. Various programs, policies, goals, and projects are defined in the GMP to assist OCWD staff in meeting these objectives. OCWD 2020 Water Master Plan Report OCWD’s Water Master Plan Report (MPR) describes local water supplies and estimates their availability extending to the year 2020. Specifically, OCWD states in its 2020 Water MPR that significant water supply sources will be available in the future for potable, nonpotable, and recharge purposes. The 2020 Water MPR discusses source waters such as imported water from MWD, base flows from the Santa Ana River, treated wastewater through the OCWD/OCSD Groundwater Replenish System program, and possibly desalinated ocean water. The local supplies’ availability and projections from the 2020 Water MPR have been revised and are being pursued with the LTFP. Anaheim Public Utilities Department Reliability is a measure of a water system's expected success in managing water shortages. The City has strategies to manage water demand with respect to frequency and magnitude of supply deficiencies. On February 16, 1991, the City adopted Ordinance No. 5204, which is now codified as Anaheim Municipal Code section 10.18.010 et seq., relating to water shortages. This ordinance consists of three Water Shortage Plans that can be implemented during declared water shortages. This ordinance was a result of the severe drought the City experienced starting in 1987. In response, on March 19, 1991, the Anaheim City Council adopted Resolution No. 91R-65, in which the City Council determined that a water shortage existed and ordered implementation of Water Shortage Plan II, in accordance with Ordinance No. 5204. Effective April 1, 1992, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 92R-65, discontinuing Water Shortage Plan II, and ordered Water Shortage Plan I. This reduced Anaheim’s target of water conservation from 15 percent to 10 percent. On September 16, 2008, the City Council approved guidelines asking residents and businesses for voluntary reduction in water use and stretch water supplies. Plumbing repairs, sprinkler system adjustments, reduced landscape watering, runoff and evaporation management are some of the smart practices the City urges its residents and businesses to adopt. On April 14, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6138 in response to MWD’s request to its member agencies to adopt more stringent conservation ordinances that would put into effect different levels of conservation related to MWD’s Water Supply Allocation Plan levels. Groundwater is currently the most reliable and least expensive water resource for the City. The Department has scheduled the drilling of one new well every three years. The new wells replace existing shallow and deteriorated wells and provide additional production capacity. Additional groundwater pumping capacity will add to the reliability of the system by: 1) meeting peak demands during the ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-19 summer months, 2) providing a contingency for wells that are temporarily out of service, and 3) providing availability for any additional pumping requests from OCWD. The City's long-term plans to assure a reliable water supply include, but are not limited to, the following: • Reduction of water demand through aggressive water use efficiency programs, with a goal to reduce demand by 15 percent by 2020, compared to 1993. • Groundwater production capacity and distribution ability to meet 100 percent of the water service area demands. • Cooperation with OCWD to maximize conservation activities throughout Orange County and increase groundwater recharge capabilities. Drainage The Platinum Triangle covers an area that includes portions of City of Anaheim Drainage Districts 25, 26, and 27. Drainage Master Plans have been completed for these Districts and updated following the County’s publication of new hydrologic parameters in 1986. The new parameters resulted in greater storm runoff projections than previously estimated resulting in most existing storm drain systems being classified as undersized. The City’s drainage criteria was developed with this issue in mind and resulted in the declaration that most systems within the City would be designed for a minimum storm frequency of 10 years with specific and practical limits regarding surface flow during storms. This lower limit was established due to the overall limited conveyance capacity However, storm drain systems tributary to the Santa Ana River require sizing to convey the runoff from a 25-year storm event. The improvement of river by the Corps of Engineers to provide adequate capacity over the last decade has eliminated this once notable conveyance constrain and created the opportunity to relieve the watershed during heavy rainfall. In general, the area west of State College Boulevard will, at a minimum require drainage infrastructure adequate to convey the 10-year runoff. Larger facilities may be required to meet the surface flow limitations. The area generally located east of State College Boulevard drains to the South Anaheim Channel (E12) and then to the Santa Ana River. Solid Waste The Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department (OCIWMD) provides solid waste service to the City of Anaheim with the Waste Disposal Agreement. Republic Waste Services of Southern California, LLC, doing business as Anaheim Disposal, provides solid waste collection and disposal for the City of Anaheim. After the waste is collected, it is processed through Republic Waste Services of Southern California, LLC’s Regional Material Resource Recovery Facility (MRF). The MRF is located at 1131 North Blue Gum Street in Anaheim and contains an 800-foot-long automated and manual sorter/conveyor system that separates more than 70 types of recyclables. The MRF processes an average of 3,200 tons of material each day. Once the materials have passed through the sorter/conveyer system, they are bundled and transferred for immediate shipment to domestic and international markets. Nonrecyclable waste that remains is moved to the onsite 40,000-square-foot solid waste transfer operation for final processing and consolidation before delivery to landfills. Household toxic waste is disposed of at the Anaheim Household Hazardous Waste Collection Center operated by the County of Orange and located at 1071 North Blue Gum Street in Anaheim. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-20 • The Planning Center August 2010 Landfills Orange County owns and operates three active landfills: Olinda Alpha Landfill at 1942 North Valencia Avenue in Brea; Frank R. Bowerman (FRB) Landfill at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road in Irvine; and Prima Deshecha Landfill at 32250 La Pata Avenue in San Juan Capistrano. Daily and total disposal capacities at these landfills are shown in Table 5.10-6, Orange County Landfills. Based on the California Integrated Waste Management Board’s Jurisdiction Profile, the waste generated by the City of Anaheim is taken to the Olinda Alpha Landfill. The Olinda Alpha Landfill is the closest facility to the project and would likely be the solid waste facility most often receiving waste from the project site. This landfill has a daily tonnage maximum of no more than 8,000 per day and a permitted life to 2013. To ensure that the maximum permitted daily tonnage at a particular landfill is not exceeded, waste haulers are subject to diversion to another OC Waste & Recycling landfill or one of the transfer stations located throughout the County. The FRB Landfill comprises a total of 752 acres with 341 acres currently permitted for disposal. The FRB Landfill is permitted to take in 11,500 tons of solid waste (mixed municipal and residential solid waste) per day. Although the FRB Landfill has a projected closure date of 2053, OCIWMD is in the process of proposing horizontal and vertical expansion of the landfill. If approved, the life of the FRB Landfill would extend to 2053. Landfill operations are subject to air quality regulations set forth by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and water quality regulations enforced by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Table 5.10-6 Orange County Landfills Landfill Daily Capacity1 (tpd) Disposal Capacity2 (mcy) Disposal Acres Total Acres Estimated Cease Operation Olinda Alpha (ID#30-AB-0035) 8,000 27.3 (as of 6/30/09) 420 565 12/31/2021 Frank R. Bowerman (ID#30-AB-0360) 11,500 200.8 (as of 6/30/09) 534 725 12/31/2053 Prima Deshecha (ID#30-AB-0019) 4,000 134.27 (as of 6/30/09) 699 1,530 12/31/2067 Total 23,500 362.37 1,653 2,820 – tpd = tons per day mcy = million cubic yards (1 cy airspace = 0.6 ton refuse) 1 Daily capacity refers to the maximum amount of daily tonnage that may be disposed. 2 Refuse disposal capacity refers to the available air space capacity at the landfill. Recycling Assembly Bill (AB) 939 (Sher, Chapter 1095, Statutes of 1989), the Integrated Waste Management Act, requires every California city and county to divert 50 percent of its waste from landfills by the year 2000. In accordance with AB 939, the City of Anaheim has achieved steady gains in its diversion rate of solid waste from landfills though conservation, recycling, and composting. The City’s diversion rate increased from 44 percent in 1995 to 51 percent in 2004. The City is required to maintain this diversion rate of 50 percent. Diversion rates for later years are not approved yet, however, preliminary data indicates 48 percent for 2005 and 2006. To facilitate the diversion of waste from landfills, the City of Anaheim participated in 37 programs in 2006. The City of Anaheim’s recycling program, Recycle Anaheim, consists of an automated trash collection program along with a broader recycling and yard waste collection system. In collaboration with its franchise contractor, the City provides an automated curbside recycling program for solid waste ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-21 disposal, which uses the three-can automated collection system of trash, commingled recyclable materials, and yard waste. All commercial bulk collection from multiunit residential and commercial premises collected in three-yard bins is processed at the Regional Material Recovery Facility in Anaheim for landfill diversion. Electricity APUD’s Electrical Division currently provides electricity to Anaheim’s citizens and businesses. The distribution system consists of 70 circuit miles of 69 kilovolt (kV) transmission lines and 1,400 circuit miles of 12 kV and lower distribution lines, 594 miles of which are underground, for a total of 1,470 circuit miles of transmission and distribution lines. To facilitate the safe and efficient transfer of electricity to residences and businesses, 11 distribution substations are located throughout the City. APUD supplied 3,233,508 Megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity to its customers in FY 2006. Of this amount, 628,397 MWh were sold to residential uses, 641,798 MWh to commercial uses, 1,287,909 MWh to industrial uses, and 675,404 MWh to other utilities. Anaheim obtains its electricity supply from its resources located in or near Anaheim and across the western United States. To round out its electricity supply, the City of Anaheim participates in seasonal power exchanges as well as additional market purchases where necessary. Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company (SCG) provides gas service in the City of Anaheim and has facilities throughout the City, including the project area. SCG operates its Anaheim Base within the Platinum Triangle at the corner of Gene Autry Way and State College Boulevard. As a Regional Response and Emergency Operations Center for SCG, the Anaheim Base plays a key role in providing day-to-day service, as well as in critical and emergency situations. Telephone AT&T provides telephone service to the project site. Cable Time-Warner provides cable service to the project site. 5.10.2 Thresholds of Significance According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project: U-1 Would exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. U-2 Would 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. U-3 Would 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. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-22 • The Planning Center August 2010 U-4 Would not have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, and new and/or expanded entitlements would be needed. U-5 Would result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. U-6 Would be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs. U-7 Would not comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. U-8 Would result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity. U-9 Would result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas. U-10 Would result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alteration related to telephone service. U-11 Would result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/reception. The Initial Study, included as Appendix A, substantiates that impacts associated with the following thresholds would be less than significant: • Threshold U-10 • Threshold U-11 These impacts will not be addressed in the following analysis. 5.10.3 Environmental Impacts The following impact analysis addresses thresholds of significance for which the Initial Study disclosed potentially significant impacts. The applicable thresholds are identified in brackets after the impact statement. IMPACT 5.10-1: PROJECT-GENERATED SEWAGE COULD BE ADEQUATELY TREATED BY THE SEWER SERVICE PROVIDER FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT. [THRESHOLDS U-1, U-2 (PART), AND U-5] Impact Analysis: In June 2009, CH2M HILL prepared a technical memorandum entitled the Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers (CCAAMPSS) for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project – Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 (June 2009 CCAAMPSS), included in Appendix G of this DSEIR. This technical memorandum incorporated the development intensities analyzed by the June 2006 sewer study and subsequent revisions to the project. For modeling purposes of the June 2009 CCAAMPSS, the permitted development intensities were distributed into subareas to accurately reflect the total increased development intensity. Because this modeling approach removed the need to generalize numbers, some subareas showed less development intensities when compared to the June 2006 sewer study even though the overall intensity amount was ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-23 greater. The distribution of the development intensities is shown in Attachment 1 of the June 2009 CCAAMPSS. The June 2009 CCAAMPSS ran 12 models (Models 15, 28B, 47, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, and 123) following the sanitary flow modeling methodology of the CCAAMPSS, which is based on using diurnal curves, rather than using the traditional peaking factor method. The diurnal curve method better represents the pattern of sanitary wastewater flows generated by a type of land use over a 24-hour period. The new model run incorporated the three stretches of new backbone sewers in Models 117, 28b, and 47. The proposed amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (DSEIR No. 340) was incorporated into Model 15 for the cumulative impact. The June 2009 CCAAMPSS determined that the Proposed Project would require upsizing of 7,373 linear feet of sewer pipe in Models 15, 28B, 47, 119, 120, 121, and 122. Table 5.10-7 shows the length, capacity, and location of the required sewer pipes. There are no improvements proposed for Models 115, 116, 117, 118, and 123. Figure 5.10-4, Proposed Sewer Improvements, shows recommended sewer improvements to the Proposed Project. Table 5.10-7 Platinum Triangle Sewer Improvements Model No. Upstream – Manhole Pipe Length Capacity (d/D)1 Existing Diameter2, 3 Selected Diameter Location 107111–107110 358 ft 0.73 8 in 10 in Howell Ave. 107110–107109 342 ft 0.74 8 in 10 in Howell Ave. 15 107109–107108 364 ft 0.65 8 in 10 in Howell Ave. Office District Subtotal 1,064 ft 107402–107401 353 ft 1 8 in 10 in Wright Circle 107401–107403 305 ft 1 8 in 10 in Rigney Way 107403–107411 230 ft 1 8 in 10 in Rigney Way 28B 107411–108214 147 ft 0.48 8 in 10 in Rigney Way Katella (Subarea B) District Subtotal 1,035 ft 108207–108206 197 ft 1 8 in 15 in Gene Autry Way 47 108206–108205 357 ft 1 8 in 15 in Gene Autry Way Gene Autry District Subtotal 554 ft 127308–127306 470 ft 1 8 in 10 in Douglass Road 119 127306–127304 406 ft 1 8 in 15 in Douglass Road Katella (Subarea D) Subtotal 876 ft 108403–108404 212 ft 0.76 8 in 10 in State College Bl. 108404–108405 223 ft 1 8 in 10 in State College Bl. 108405–119101 69 ft 0.69 8 in 10 in State College Bl. 119209–119108 341 ft 1 8 in 12 in Dupont Dr. 119108–119107 274 ft 1 8 in 12 in Dupont Dr. 119107–119106 272 ft 1 8 in 12 in Dupont Dr. 119106–118309 278 ft 0.65 8 in 12 in Dupont Dr. 118309–118308 137 ft 1 10 in 15 in Orangewood 118308–118307 218 ft 0.75 12 in 15 in Orangewood 118307–118308 158 ft 1 12 in 15 in Orangewood 118308–118306 70 ft 1 12 in 15 in Orangewood 118306–119102 392 ft 1 12 in 15 in Orangewood 120 119102–119101 73 ft 1 12 in 15 in Orangewood Gateway and Orangewood Districts Subtotal 2,717 ft ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-24 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.10-7 Platinum Triangle Sewer Improvements Model No. Upstream – Manhole Pipe Length Capacity (d/D)1 Existing Diameter2, 3 Selected Diameter Location 119211–119210 255 ft 0.76 8 in 10 in Rampart St. 119210–119206 277 ft 0.49 8 in 10 in Rampart St. 121 119206–129102 395 ft 1 8 in 12 in Easement Orangewood District Subtotal 857 ft 118108–118107 190 ft 1 15 in 21 in Private 122 118107–118106 10 ft 1 15 in 21 in Private Stadium District Subtotal 200 ft Total 7,373 ft d = depth of flow (in) D = Diameter of the pipe (in) City of Anaheim’s capacity criteria of max d/D are: 0.67 = d/D for pipeline with diameters less than 12” 0.75 = d/D for pipeline with diameters equal to or greater than 12” City of Anaheim's design criteria of max d/D are: 0.50 = d/D for pipeline with diameters less than or equal to 12” 0.60 = d/D for pipeline with diameters greater than 12” 1 Capacity as a result of the Proposed Project. 2 Selected diameter is not recommended by sewer modeling, but based on the City's criteria of recommending pipe improvements: 3 Selected diameter is larger than the diameter recommended by the sewer modeling based on the following assumptions: Recommend pipe replacement instead of parallel system for existing small diameter 10", and 12") pipes. Either recommend pipe replacement or parallel system for existing 15" diameter pipes, on a case-by-case basis. Generally, recommend parallel system for existing 18" diameter pipes and larger. For pipe diameter 12" and larger, only downsizing by one pipe size is allowed. For pipe diameters 8" and 10", no downsizing is allowed. For gaps in the sewer design requirements when there is no sewer need in the sewer section being considered but there is a sewer need on either or both sides of the sewer section), criteria through applies. Replace all 6" diameter pipes with 8" or larger. Maintain continuity of pipe diameter to match upstream and pipe diameters. Increase pipe diameter to provide better transition between upstream and pipe diameters. ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: CH2M HILL 2009 5. Environmental Analysis Proposed Sewer Improvements SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.10-4 0 2,400 Scale (Feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-26 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-27 Potential Spills The Hydra model analysis was performed to determine the potential of any spills within the City sewers in the project area (trunk sewers along State College Boulevard, Howell Avenue, and Orangewood Avenue) due to surcharging as indicated by OCSD’s modeling of their trunk sewers during a 10-year storm event. The Hydra analysis assumed: • Recommended sewer improvements for the Platinum Triangle area are constructed • Recommended sewer improvements are constructed at same inverts of existing sewers • Flows within the OCSD trunk sewers based on the modeling results figures provided by OCSD Table 5.10-8 shows the depth of the sewer below ground and the anticipated surcharge above pipe crown for each of the Hydra models. Therefore, as shown, the hydraulic grade line for the surcharge is below the depth of the sewer. For example, the depths of the existing City sewers within Model 28B are approximately 7 to 15 feet below the ground elevation. However, because surcharge was experienced at approximately 2 feet above the pipe crown, the surcharge is anticipated to be experienced at hydraulic grade line of 5 to 13 feet below ground elevation. Therefore, provided that assumptions made for the Hydra analysis do not change, the potential for sewer spills during a 10-year storm event is low. Table 5.10-8 Surcharge Levels within the City Sewers in the Platinum Triangle Model Depth of Sewer below Ground Elevation (ft) Surcharge Above Pipe Crown (ft) 28B 7–15 2 47 14 2 115 7–9 1–2 116 6 1–2 117 7–8 2 118 7–11 2 119 9–12 2–3 120 6–7 2–4 121 16 0 122 5 2–4 123 14 1 IMPACT 5.10-2: WATER SUPPLY AND DELIVERY SYSTEMS ARE ADEQUATE TO MEET PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. [THRESHOLDS U-2 (PART) AND U-4] Impact Analysis: As shown in Table 5.10-9, the build-out of the Platinum Triangle would result in a total demand of 5,249 afy, which includes the existing demands from the arena, stadium, and landscape irrigation of afy that have been a part of, and included in, the existing citywide demand; (ii) the 2,656 afy from the February 2005 WSA, which was included in the 2005 UWMP; and (iii) the 1,804 afy of additional demand addressed in the 2009 WSA. As shown, when subtracting the existing water use by the existing uses onsite (landscape irrigation, arena, and stadium) and the permitted Platinum Triangle development intensities as included in 2005 UWMP, the additional water demand for the Proposed Project would be 1,804 afy. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-28 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.10-9 Total Water Demand Demand Land Use Units Demand Factor1 Gallons Per Day afy Residential 18,909 du 105 gpd/unit 1,985,445 2,224 Commercial 4,909,682 sf 195 gpd/ksf 957,388 1,072 Office 14,340,522 sf 60 gpd/ksf 860,431 964 Institutional 1,500,000 sf 60 gpd/ksf 90,000 101 Parks 9.07 ac 3,500 gpd/ac 31,745 36 Subtotal 3,925,009 4,397 Less Existing Industrial1 2,272,155 sf (-89,473) (-100) Total 3,835,536 4,297 3.8 % Losses 163 Existing Landscape Irrigation2 164 ac 3,000 gpd/ac 492,000 551 Existing Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim3 238 Total Platinum Triangle Water Demand4 5,249 Less Existing Landscape Irrigation (-551) Less Existing Arena and Stadium (-238) Less February 2005 WSA Additional Demand (included in 2005 UWMP) (-2,656) Water Demand Increase 1,804 Source: Psomas, 2009 Based on Average Day Demand Includes cumulative projects that are approved and under construction. du = defined as dwelling unit ksf = 1,000 square feet of building area 1 These industrial demands were derived from average of past three years of water meter readings from the subject industrial parcels. 2 Existing Landscape Irrigation demand calculated based on 20% of gross acreage of the Platinum Triangle (820 acres) being landscaped and irrigated. Demand factor based on typical application rate for median, parkway and onsite landscaping typical to the existing land uses. Since this demand is included in existing water usage figures in February 2005 WSA and 2005 UWMP (and not anticipated to change due to future land use intensification), it was not included in determining Water Demand Increase. 3 Existing Honda Center Arena and Angel Stadium demands are not included in the projections above but are included in the currently approved Platinum Triangle plan. Since this demand is included in existing water usage figures in the February 2005 WSA and 2005 UWMP (and not anticipated to change due to future land use intensification), it was not included in determining Water Demand Increase. 4 Total water demand for the Proposed Project includes 2,656 afy from existing and/or previously approved development included for the densities anticipated by the previous version of the Platinum Triangle plan, which was included in the 2005 UWMP, the existing landscape irrigation demand described in footnote 2, the existing Arena and Stadium demand described in footnote 3, and 1,804 afy additional demands shown here and addressed in this WSA. Thus this WSA analyzes the full 5,249 afy water demand projected for the current Platinum Triangle proposed development intensities. Water Supply and Demand According to the WSA prepared for the Proposed Project, the City’s average water demand for 2009/10 is approximately 76,170 afy and is projected to increase to 81,960 afy by 2029/30 without the Platinum Triangle. However, as shown in Table 5.10-10, there are adequate water supplies from now through 20- year planning period to meet the City’s water demand. As discussed above in Environmental Setting, OCWD establishes the BPP each water year based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, ideal precipitation, Santa Ana River runoff, and basin management objectives. The BPP was initially established in 1969 and has generally ranged from 60 to 80 percent. The average BPP for the past 20 years is 72.9 percent and the City’s water supply projection assumed an average BPP of 67 percent groundwater and 33 percent imported. At the end of the 20-year planning period for this WSA, as required by SB 610, City water demand for 2029/30 is projected to be approximately 88,520 afy. This projection includes future demands from the City based on the overall projected growth rate, as well as ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-29 added demands from the Proposed Project, the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Project, and the amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan and Convention Center Expansion, all of which have been, or are being, addressed in other WSAs prepared since the 2005 UWMP. Implementation of the Proposed Project would require an additional 90 afy in 2009/10, 540 afy by 2014/15, 990 afy by 2019/20, 1,440 afy by 2024/25, and 1,800 afy by build-out year 2029/30 (all numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10). Comparison of projected demand and supply concluded that there are adequate water supplies to meet the water demand created by the Proposed Project. The WSA concluded that there would be surplus water through the 20-year planning period. Table 5.10-10 shows the projected water supply and demand with the proposed increase in development intensities. As shown in Table 5.10-10, forecasts indicate that APUD would continue to have a supply surplus of potable water through 2030 under Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Year conditions. Table 5.10-10 With Project Water Supply and Demand (afy) Source 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Normal Year Supply MWD Imported1 29,090 30,430 29,560 29,640 29,640 Local (Groundwater)2 52,110 54,500 56,460 58,360 59,310 Total Supply 81,200 84,930 86,020 88,000 88,950 Demand Without TPT Expansion3 76,170 78,040 79,760 81,500 81,960 Existing plus Approved TPT Demand4 1,440 1,940 2,450 2,950 3,450 Additional TPT Expansion Demand5 90 540 990 1,440 1,800 Additional KPMC Demand6 40 210 330 330 330 Additional ARSP Demand7 30 610 740 880 980 Total Demand 77,770 81,340 84,270 87,100 88,520 Supply/Demand Difference 3,430 3,590 1,750 900 430 Single Dry Year Supply MWD Imported 38,390 40,570 41,140 40,590 40,010 Local (Groundwater) 54,970 57,500 59,560 61,570 62,570 Total Supply 93,350 98,070 100,700 102,160 102,580 Demand Without TPT Expansion 80,360 82,340 84,140 85,980 86,470 Existing plus Approved TPT Demand 1,520 2,050 2,580 3,110 3,640 Additional TPT Expansion Demand 90 570 1,040 1,520 1,900 Additional KPMC Demand 40 220 350 350 350 Additional ARSP Demand 30 640 780 930 1,030 Total Demand 82,040 85,820 88,890 91,890 93,390 Supply/Demand Difference 11,320 12,250 11,810 10,270 9,190 Multiple Dry Year Supply MWD Imported 30,680 31,310 31,690 31,600 31,390 Local (Groundwater) 54,970 56,130 57,830 59,480 60,130 Total Supply 85,650 87,440 89,520 91,080 91,520 Demand Without TPT Expansion 80,650 82,340 84,140 85,980 86,470 Existing plus Approved TPT Demand 1,520 2,050 2,580 3,110 3,640 Additional TPT Expansion Demand 90 570 1,050 1,520 1,900 Additional KPMC Demand 40 220 350 350 350 Additional ARSP Demand 30 640 780 920 1,030 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-30 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.10-10 With Project Water Supply and Demand (afy) Source 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Total Demand 82,040 83,770 86,320 88,770 89,750 Supply/Demand Difference 3,610 3,670 3,200 2,310 1,770 Source: WSA 2009 afy = acre feet per year. All afy rounded to nearest 10. A full discussion of current and under-development water supply entitlements, water rights, and water service contracts can be found in the WSA. Supply Assumptions: 1 Imported water supply is the result of the “MWD Average Year Supply” times the Level 10, (1.18%) allocation percentage for the City of Anaheim from MWD’s 2009 Water Supply Allocation Model. The “MWD Average Year Supply” that was taken from the MWD 2006 IRP Implementation Report includes a 22% reduction in SWP supply based on 2007 MWD IRP Implementation Report. This 22% reduction in SWP supply is the amount of SWP water MWD has forecast would be reduced for delivery to MWD and its customers due to pumping restrictions that may be imposed to protect the Delta smelt and due to potential future impacts from climate change. Thus, the imported supply numbers included in this water supply assessment include the potential for a reduction in total SWP deliveries to MWD as a result of judicial and regulatory actions designed to protect Delta smelt as well as account for future climate change impacts. The Level 10 allocation percentage for the City of Anaheim was obtained from MWD. This allocation percentage, which is based on MWD’s Water Supply Allocation Model, corresponds to a 50% reduction in regional supply. This is conservative in that the proposed allocation for Year 2009/10, which is the first year MWD has enforced an allocation program, is set at Level 2, corresponding to a 10% reduction in regional supply. 2 Groundwater supply is estimated to equal 67% of total demand. Demand Assumptions: 3 Demand projections are consistent with the OCP-2006 housing and population projections released in December 2008, adjusted to reflect current (2006−2008) water demand data provided by the City with all Platinum Triangle demand excluded. The demand includes unaccounted for water. 4 This demand includes the additional demand for the Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 afy at build-out) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand (551 afy) and existing demands for the Arena (Honda Center) and Angel Stadium of Anaheim (238 afy) that were not specifically addressed in the February 2005 WSA, except within the overall existing Citywide demands as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. 5 This demand refers to the additional demand necessitated by the revised project description. Total Project demand equals 5,249 afy at build-out, which includes existing landscape irrigation demand of 551 afy, existing Arena and Stadium demand of 238 afy, 2,656 afy from the February 2005 WSA plus 1,804 afy from the current WSA. See Table 5.10-7, Total Water Demand. 6 Project demand assumptions and phasing are from May 2007 WSA. 7 Additional project demand assumptions are discussed in concurrent ARSP WSA. Water Reliability The City’s water supply projection assumed up to 67 percent groundwater and 33 percent imported, which has been confirmed as reliable by MWD. Additionally, analyses of normal, single-dry, and multiple- dry year scenarios demonstrate the City’s ability to meet demand during the 20-year analysis period. Finally, an analysis was conducted utilizing assumed temporary shortages in MWD’s water supply, which demonstrates the City’s ability to meet demand under reasonably foreseeable temporary allocations to deal with cutbacks in SWP deliveries due to Delta smelt and other environmental issues. There are a number of water supply challenges for MWD and its service area, such as critical dry conditions and protective measures for the delta smelt in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta which resulted in uncertainty about future pumping operations from the SWP due to ruling in the federal courts in August 2007. However, the Platinum Triangle WSA includes, as a worse-case scenario, an analysis under the assumption that SWP deliveries will be reduced by both 35 and 40 percent. Table 5.10-11 shows the worst case scenario demand and supply comparison under temporary 40 percent reduction in SWP water supply. This level of evaluation goes beyond the scope and requirements of SB 610. In the event that the SWP water supply is temporarily reduced by 40 percent, the project’s water demand would be met by implementing water conservation in the range of 0.3 to 3 percent, as shown in Table 5.10-11 Should extraordinary circumstances require it, the City can meet its water demand by increasing production of groundwater beyond the BPP up to the basin safe yield, increasing imported water purchases from available storage programs, and/or decreasing demand through water ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-31 conservation measures. Moreover, under temporary MWD allocation shortages, the City would trigger its Conservation Ordinance and call for at least a 10 percent reduction in usage by all customer classes with rate penalties if users exceed 90 percent of their previous year’s water use. With planned water supplies and facilities, there is adequate water to serve the Proposed Project. Table 5.10-11 With Project Water Demand and Supply (afy*) Under Temporary 40 Percent SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2011–2030 Water Sources Normal Years Dry Years8 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 SUPPLY Imported1 26,260 26,260 28,910 28,910 28,910 Local (Groundwater)2 51,460 51,800 55,730 54,830 56,130 Total Supply 77,720 78,060 84,640 83,740 85,040 DEMAND Total City Demand without Proposed Project, KPMC and ARSP3 76,540 76,920 82,470 80,540 82,340 Existing plus Approved Platinum Triangle Demand4 1,540 1,640 1,860 1,910 2,050 Additional Proposed Project Demand5 180 270 380 470 570 Additional Kaiser Medical Center Demand6 40 40 220 220 220 Additional ARSP Demand7 50 80 110 610 640 % of Normal Year Demand 100.0 100.0 106.7 103.7 105.5 Total Multiple Year Demand 76,810 77,310 83,180 81,840 83,770 Supply/Demand Difference 910 750 1,460 1,900 1,270 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Imported1 25,270 25,270 29,120 29,120 29,120 Local (Groundwater)2 53,510 53,810 57,750 56,450 57,830 Total Supply 78,780 79,080 86,870 85,570 86,950 Total Multiple Year Demand 79,870 80,320 86,200 84,250 86,320 Supply/Demand Difference -1,090 -1,240 670 1,320 630 Percent Conservation Required 1.4% 1.5% 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Imported1 25,360 25,360 29,020 29,020 29,020 Local (Groundwater)2 55,130 55,440 59,490 58,140 59,480 Total Supply 80,490 80,800 88,510 87,160 88,500 Total Multiple Year Demand 82,280 82,750 88,790 86,770 88,770 Supply/Demand Difference -1,790 -1,950 -280 390 -270 Percent Conservation Required 2.2% 2.4% 0.3% - 0.3% 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Imported1 25,360 25,360 28,820 28,820 28,820 Local (Groundwater)2 59,510 56,660 60,600 59,050 60,130 Total Supply 81,870 82,020 89,420 87,870 88,950 Total Multiple Year Demand 84,350 84,560 90,450 88,130 89,750 Supply/Demand Difference -2,480 -2,540 -1,030 -260 -800 Percent Conservation Required 2.9% 3.0% 1.1% 0.3% 0.9% Source: WSA 2009. *afy rounded to nearest 10. 1 This figure represents a Level 10 Allocation (1.18% of MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply) consistent with the preceding MWD WSAP discussion. MWD's Multiple Dry Year Supply set forth in MWD's 2006 IRP Implementation Report with 40% reduction in SWP supply. MWD Multi Dry Year ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-32 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.10-11 With Project Water Demand and Supply (afy*) Under Temporary 40 Percent SWP Water Supply Shortage Multiple Dry Years 2011–2030 Supply: 2,225,800 (year 2011); 2,225,800 (year 2012); 2,450,200 (year 2013); 2,450,200 (year 2014); 2,450,200 (year 2015); 2,148,800 (year 2016), 2,148,800 (year 2017), 2,467,600 (year 2018), 2,467,600 (year 2019), and 2,467,600 (year 2020); 2,148,800 (year 2021); 2,148,800 (year 2022); 2,459,600 (year 2023); 2,459,600 (year 2024); 2,459,600 (year 2025); 2,148,800 (year 2026); 2,148,800 (year 2027); 2,442,600 (2028); 2,442,600 (year 2029); 2,442,600 (year 2030) 2 This figure represents 67% of total Anaheim Water Demand based on the anticipated BPP forecasts as discussed previously in this WSA. 3 This figure represents normal year demand updated to reflect recent (up to 2008) water use data, current growth projections, and excludes any of the Proposed Project Demand. 4 This figure includes additional demand for the Platinum Triangle addressed previously in the February 2005 WSA (2,656 afy at build-out) as well as existing landscape irrigation demand and existing demands for the Honda Center and Angel Stadium of Anaheim that were also included in the February 2005 WSA as part of the overall existing Citywide demands, as they were to remain unchanged by any land use intensification. 5 This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification as a result of the revised project description that was not included in the 2005 UWMP. Total project demand equals 5,249 afy at build-out, which includes 2,656 afy from the February 2005 WSA plus existing demands of 551 afy and 238 afy for existing landscape irrigation and the Honda Center/Angel Stadium of Anaheim, respectively, which were included as existing demands in the February 2005 WSA and the 2005 UWMP and 1,804 afy from the current WSA. 6 Based on demands from May 2007 WSA. 7 This figure represents additional demand based on increase in land use intensification proposed in a WSA being processed concurrently by the City. 8 Multi dry year demand = (normal year demand) x (106.7%, 103.7%, and 105.5% for years 1, 2, and 3 multiple dry year demand factors developed by MWDOC in their 2005 UWMP). Water Delivery System Rule 15-D of Anaheim’s Water Rules, Rates and Regulations specifies approved water facility improvements in the project vicinity that have either been completed or are in planning stages. The following improvements have been approved but have not yet been constructed. • A 16-inch water main in Orangewood Avenue from Santa Cruz to State College Boulevard (1,400 LF) • A 16-inch water main in State College Boulevard from Orangewood Avenue to Gene Autry Way (1,250 LF) • A 16-inch water main in Katella Avenue at State College to Well #45 (1,300 LF) • A new water well adjacent to the planned Fire Station No. 12 between Anaheim Way and Santa Cruz Street south of Stanford Court Furthermore, the APUD indicated that the proposed increase in development intensities would require the following improvements to the current water facilities. • A new transmission main in Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to State Route 57 (SR-57) • A new transmission main in Douglass Road from Katella to the Anaheim Stadium loop • A new transmission main in State College Boulevard from Orangewood south to the City limits • A new transmission main in the Lewis Street Connector • One new 3,000 GPM water well, location to be determined ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-33 Rule 15-D of Anaheim’s Water Rules, Rates and Regulations (Plan No. W2524D) specifies the water facility improvements required to accommodate the projected land use water demands within the City, including the Platinum Triangle. Under Rule 15-D, a new 3,500 gallons per minute (gpm) Well No. 45 was constructed in 2003, and currently supplies most of the demands in and around the Platinum Triangle area. Ultimately, changes in land use projections and addition of water facilities will require updating Rule 15- D; however, under existing Rule 15-D, the projected demands for new office, commercial, and industrial land uses have already been accounted for in determining water facility improvements. The only significant changes, in terms of projected demand quantity for the Proposed Project, were the demands resulting from new residential dwelling units. Once the City approves the necessary improvements, Rule 15-D and associated rates and figures will be revised. Compliance with the amended Rule 15-D would ensure that adequate water facilities are provided to serve the Proposed Project. Implementation of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan would not adversely impact the water delivery system. IMPACT 5.10-3: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW STORM WATER DRAINAGE FACILITIES. [THRESHOLD U-3] Impact Analysis: According to the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area prepared in January 2006, the existing storm drainage system under current condition in the Platinum Triangle is deficient. Therefore, in addition to local facilities needed as part of a specific development, a facility requirement or deficiency need must be addressed as part of the development. Specific project will be evaluated by the City Engineer to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities as identified in the appropriate drainage study and the developments in the Platinum Triangle will be required to incorporate into their plans additional local systems to meet the City’s current drainage criteria in terms of street flooding limits and other surface flow parameters, Construction of these facilities would occur in compliance with the standard engineering rules and regulations and would not result in a significant environmental effects. IMPACT 5.10-4: EXISTING AND/OR PROPOSED FACILITIES WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE PROJECT-GENERATED SOLID WASTE AND COMPLY WITH RELATED SOLID WASTE REGULATIONS. [THRESHOLDS U-6 AND U-7] Impact Analysis: Development of the Proposed Project would increase the service demand for solid waste disposal beyond existing conditions and would provide more solid waste to the Olinda Alpha Landfill. Typical waste would include, but is not limited to, green waste lawn and tree trimmings), cardboard, paper, glass, plastic, aluminum cans, diapers, food, and household hazardous waste (paint, motor oil, antifreeze, batteries), etc. Table 5.10-12 shows projected solid waste demands for residential, commercial, office, and institutional uses. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-34 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.10-12 Projected Solid Waste Demand Land Use Proposed Additional Unit Generation Factor Daily Waste Generated Proposed Project Residential 8,643 DU 90 lbs/unit/week 111,124 lbs (50 tons) Commercial 2,645,282 sq. ft. 0.046 lbs/sq. ft./day 121,683 lbs (55 tons) Office 9,284,972 sq. ft. 1 lb/100 sq. ft./day 92,850 lbs (42 tons) Institutional 1,500,000 sq. ft. 3.12 lbs/100 sq. ft./day 46,800 lbs (21 tons) Total 372,457 lbs. (168 tons) The additional 8,643 residential units would generate approximately 111,124 pounds per day or 5.562 tons per day (tpd). The proposed increase in commercial, office, and institutional uses would generate additional 55.19 tpd, 42.12 tpd, and 21.23 tpd of solid waste, respectively. Olinda Alpha Landfill is the main disposal site for the waste generated in the City of Anaheim. Olinda Alpha Landfill is located in the City of Brea and is permitted through 2013 with an operational life of 2021. The current daily tonnage at Olinda Alpha is approximately 5,600 tons and is permitted for 8,000 tons per day. The Proposed Project would generate an additional 168.94 tons of solid waste per day, which would constitute about 2.4 percent of the permitted capacity. Therefore, the proposed increase would not have a substantial impact on the Olinda Alpha landfill capacity or the MRF processing. In addition, the FRB Landfill in the City of Irvine and the Prima Deshecha Landfill in the City of San Capistrano each provides landfill capacity through 2053 and 2067, respectively. The proposed residential uses are expected to generate the typical range of recyclable and nonrecyclable waste. The Orange County Landfill system is required to have available disposal capacity for a projected period of 15 years. The Orange County Landfill System has demonstrated this capacity and regularly imports solid waste from Los Angeles County. There is available landfill capacity in the Orange County landfills to accommodate the anticipated solid waste stream generated by the Proposed Project, individually and cumulatively. The City has increased its diversion rate from 44 percent in 1995 to 51 percent in 2004. Diversion rates for later years are not yet approved. Implementation of the Proposed Project would generate increased construction and operation solid waste in the area. However, each development project in the project area would be required to submit project plans to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans as administered by the City of Anaheim. Development projects in the project area are required to comply with the City’s existing recycling and diversion programs, which would reduce impacts generated by the additional development density to a less than significant level. IMPACT 5.10-5: EXISTING AND/OR PROPOSED FACILITIES WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE PROJECT-GENERATED ELECTRICITY DEMANDS. [THRESHOLD U-8] Impact Analysis: Development pursuant to the proposed amendments would increase the electrical load on existing facilities and require upgrades to the existing 12 kV distribution systems. The impact would include, but may not be limited to, increasing conductor sizes, locating the conductors underground, installing new high and low voltage conductors, and installing new voltage transformation facilities, including one electrical substation. As described in the project description, a new electrical substation is proposed adjacent to Fire Station No. 12 between Anaheim Way and Santa Cruz Street, south of Stanford Court. This new substation would have capacity between 112 and 168 megawatts ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-35 (MW) and connect to new and existing electrical transmission and distribution lines. All installations would be located in City streets, City property and rights-of-ways, or on customer-provided easements. Distribution and transmission systems would be installed to coincide with street improvements, or as needed by a development, whichever comes first. According to APUD, the City currently consumes approximately 590,000 MWh for residential use and 630,000 MWh for commercial/office use, and APUD anticipates that a new substation would be installed when project electrical loads exceed the existing electrical capacity in the Platinum Triangle by 20 MW. The owner or developer would be required to submit plans showing that each structure will comply with the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Code of Regulations) and will consult with the APUD Business and Community Program Division in order to review Title 24 measures prior to each final Building and Zoning inspection to incorporate into the project design energy and water efficiency and sustainability practices. Therefore, APUD anticipates that impacts resulting from the Proposed Project are within the expansion capabilities of the existing service and such expansion would not be detrimental to the environment. APUD has specified electric utility improvements in the project vicinity that have been completed or are in the planning stages: • Relocate Southern California Edison transmission line underground on Katella Avenue from west of the Union Pacific Railroad to Lewis Street (850 feet) • Relocate Southern California Edison communication line underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to east of State College. (2,400 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet) • Relocate distribution circuits underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Avenue from Anaheim Way to State College Boulevard (1,500 feet) • Relocate a distribution circuit underground on Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to west of the Santa Ana River (1,600 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Gene Autry Way (950 feet) • Relocate a distribution circuit underground on Douglas Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue (1,000 feet) Furthermore, the APUD indicated that the proposed increase in development intensities would require the following improvements to the current electric facilities: ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-36 • The Planning Center August 2010 • Two new distribution duct banks on Katella Avenue from Anaheim Way to Lewis Street (800 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Douglas Road to Howell Avenue (2,000 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on State College Boulevard from Cerritos Avenue to Katella Avenue (2,600 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Avenue from I-5 to the Santa Ana River (4,800 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from Haster Street to the east side of I-5 (2,500 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet) • A new transmission duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet) • A new transmission duct bank on Lewis Street and Santa Cruz Street from Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,000 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on the east side of the Angel Stadium parking lot from Orangewood Avenue to the SR-57 (2,000 feet) • A new distribution duct bank on Douglas Road from SR-57 to Cerritos Avenue (4,000 feet) The electrical substation will be required when project electrical loads exceed the existing electrical capacity in the project area by 20 MW of customer load. The existing electric system capacity in the Platinum Triangle area is approximately 40 MW. To meet this increased electrical demand, the electric utility had determined that a new electrical substation in the project area would be required. A suitable site for the substation has been secured at the City-owned property at Orangewood Avenue and Anaheim Way, on the same parcel where the new fire station and water well will be located. Therefore, provided that a new electrical substation is constructed to meet increased electrical demand, and new electrical distribution and transmission lines are constructed, implementation of the PT MLUP would not adversely impact the electrical supply and the impacts would be less than significant. IMPACT 5.10-6: EXISTING AND/OR PROPOSED FACILITIES WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE PROJECT-GENERATED NATURAL GAS DEMANDS. [THRESHOLD U-9] Impact Analysis: Development pursuant to the amendments would increase the natural gas demand in the project area. The project area is served by SCG but would require substantial upgrades to the existing system. SCG has indicated that the Proposed Project would require an additional 1.5 miles of 465 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) large-diameter gas transmission pipelines, along with placement of at least two additional pressure limiting stations in the area, and alteration of at least three miles of existing gas main in the area to increase capacity. Gas service will be added to the existing system by SCG as necessary to meet the requirements of individual development projects within the project site. It is anticipated that with necessary system ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-37 upgrades and facility improvements, SCG would be able to service the project site with natural gas, which would be provided in accordance with the SCG’s policies and extension rules on file with the Public Utilities Commission when the contractual arrangements are made. The availability of natural gas service is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, SCG is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission and federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action that affects gas supply, or the conditions under which service is available, gas service would be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Although the Proposed Project would create additional demands on natural gas supplies and distribution infrastructure, the increased demands are projected to be within the service capabilities of SCG provided necessary improvements are made in coordination with SCG. Increased building densities and heights in the project area could interfere with the communication function of a microwave tower at the corner of Gene Autry Way and State College Boulevard. However, the current PTMU Overlay Zone would allow a nonscreened rooftop microwave communications tower with a variance, if relocation of the microwave tower is necessary. 5.10.4 Cumulative Impacts As discussed in the appropriate sections, the Proposed Project would result in substantial increase in the areas of all public utilities. Impacts to utilities and service systems would occur incrementally to cause cumulative impacts and upgrades to existing systems, and new construction would be necessary. Implementation timing of other related projects such as ARTIC and the Anaheim Resort Area Specific Plan Amendment would also impact the service provider’s ability to provide adequate services. However, such increase is projected and appropriate payment mechanism is available to fund the necessary utility improvements as planned by each utility service provider. Necessary utility and service systems improvements would be required as part of the project development and any remaining measures have been included as part of additional mitigation measures. Therefore, since impacts to utility systems can be mitigated to less than significant level without exceeding or jeopardizing service levels, cumulative impacts would also be considered less than significant. 5.10.5 Existing Regulations and Standard Conditions • City of Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 10.18, Water Conservation Ordinance No. 6138 (adopted April 14, 2009). APUD shall monitor and evaluate the projected supply and demand for water by its customers. APUD shall recommend to the City Council such Water Reduction Plan(s) as provided in the Municipal Code Chapter 10.18, which permit APUD to prudently plan for and supply water to its customers. The City Council may, by resolution, order implementation of such Water Reduction Plan(s) as appropriate. At any time, the City Council may discontinue any Plan, modify any Plan, or may implement another Plan as provided in this chapter. • Assembly Bill 939 (Sher, Chapter 1095, Statutes of 1989). The Integrated Waste Management Act requires every California city and county to divert 50 percent of its waste from landfills by the year 2000. In addition, AB 939 requires each county to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element for its unincorporated areas, identifying waste characterization, source reduction, recycling, composting, solid waste facility capacity, education and public information, funding, special waste (asbestos, sewage sludge, etc.), and household hazardous waste. In addition, each county must prepare a countywide siting element, specifying areas for transformation or disposal sites to provide capacity for solid waste generated in the jurisdiction which cannot be reduced or recycled for 15 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-38 • The Planning Center August 2010 5.10.6 Level of Significance Before Mitigation Without mitigation, the following impacts would be potentially significant: • Impact 5.10-1 The proposed sewer demand exceeds the existing sewer handling capacity. • Impact 5.10-2 The proposed water supply demand exceeds the existing water supply capacity. • Impact 5.10-3 The Proposed Project would result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities. • Impact 5.10-4 The Proposed Project would substantially increase the solid waste disposal needs. • Impact 5.10-5 The Proposed Project would result in substantial increase in electricity demands. • Impact 5.10-6 The Proposed Project would result in substantial increase in natural gas demands. 5.10.7 Mitigation Measures Impact 5.10-1 (Sewer) Applicable Mitigation Measures from MMP No. 106A The following mitigation measures were included in the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) No. 106A for the Platinum Triangle, adopted by the City Council on October 25, 2005, as part of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 and are applicable to the Proposed Project. Additions are shown in bold and deletions are indicated in strikeout format. The mitigation reference numbers from MMP No. 106A are shown in (italics). 10-1 The City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities, as identified in the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle Sewer Study. If the project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the Benefit Parcels and Development Mitigation (Appendix D of The Platinum Triangle Sewer Study), prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final Building and Zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-39 if adopted for the project area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. (5.11-5) 10-2 Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner/developer shall coordinate with the OCSD to ensure that all improvements and construction schedules are coordinated. (5.11-7) Additional Mitigation 10-3 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall contact Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) regarding sewer capacity. Additionally, if requested by the OCSD, the property owner/developer shall place up to three flow monitoring devices for up to a month to verify capacity and ensure consistency with the OCSD’s modeling results. 10-4 Prior to approval of sanitary sewer connections for each development project, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to prevent the sewer spill for below-grade structures of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. Where requested by the City Engineer, sewer improvements shall be constructed with larger than recommended diameter to maintain the surcharge levels within the pipe and the invert elevation of sewer laterals shall be located above the hydraulic grade line elevation of the surcharge levels when they are above the pipe crown. 10-5 Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where OCSD will be upsizing truck lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner shall coordinate with OCSD to ensure that backflow prevention devices are installed at the lateral connections to prevent surcharge flow from entering private properties. 10-6 Prior to final design approval, additional analysis shall be performed for each individual project using flow, wet-weather data, and other information specific for that project in order to obtain more accurate results of the surcharge levels for final design. Impact 5.10-2 (Water Supply) Applicable Mitigation Measures from MMP No. 106A The following mitigation measures were included in the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for the Platinum Triangle, adopted by the City Council on October 25, 2005, as part of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 and are applicable to the Proposed Project. Additions are shown in bold and deletions are indicated in strikeout format. The mitigation reference numbers from MMP No. 106A are shown in (italics). 10-7 Prior to issuance of a building permit, submitted landscape plans shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Anaheim adopted Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines. This ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-40 • The Planning Center August 2010 ordinance is in compliance with the State of California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881)Conservation in Landscaping Act (AB 325). Among the measures to be implemented with the project are the following: • Use of water-conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible; • Use of vacuums and other equipment to reduce the use of water for wash down of exterior areas; • Low-flow fittings, fixtures and equipment including low flush toilets and urinals; • Use of self-closing valves for drinking fountains; • Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors; • Infrared sensors on sinks, toilets and urinals; • Low-flow shower heads in hotels; • Infrared sensors on drinking fountains; • Use of irrigation systems primarily at night, when evaporation rates are lowest; • Water-efficient ice machines, dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water using appliances; • Cooling tower recirculating system; • Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation system; • Use of waterway recirculation systems; • Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation; and • Use of reclaimed water for irrigation and washdown when it becomes available. In conjunction with submittal of landscape and building plans, the applicant shall identify which of these measures have been incorporated into the plans. (5.11-1) 10-8 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide engineering studies, including network analysis, to size the water mains for ultimate development within the project. This includes detailed water usage analysis and building plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering reviews and approval in determining project water requirements and appropriate water assessment fees. (5.11-2) 10-9 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation meter ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-41 when the total landscaped area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) (5.11-3) 10-10 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit following certification of SEIR No. 334339, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall comply with Rule 15D of the Water Utilities Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Rule 15D shall be amended to include construction of a new well with a minimum 1,500 GPM capacity within The Platinum Triangle. (5.11-4) Additional Mitigation 10-11 Ongoing, the City shall continue to collaborate with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, its member agencies, and Orange County Water District to ensure that available water supplies meet anticipated demand. If it is forecast that water demand exceeds available supplies, the City shall trigger application of its Water Conservation Ordinance, Municipal Code Section 10.18, as prescribed, to require mandatory conservation measures as authorized by Section 10.18.070 through 10.18.090, as appropriate. 10-12 Prior to issuance of a building permit, submitted landscape plans for all residential, office and commercial landscaping shall demonstrate the use of drought tolerant plant materials pursuant to the publication entitled “Water Use Efficiency of Landscape Species” by the U.C. Cooperative Extension, August 2000. 10-13 Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans water efficient design features including, but not limited to (as applicable to the type of development at issue) waterless water heaters, waterless urinals, automatic on and off water facets, and water efficient appliances. 10-14 Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation lines for recycled water. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. 10-15 Prior to approval of a project that exceeds the statutory thresholds set forth in SB 610 and SB 221, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City Engineer that adequate water supply exists to serve the Proposed Project. If it cannot be demonstrated that adequate water exists to serve the specific project, the project shall not be approved. 10-16 Prior to issuance of the first building permit or grading permit following certification of SEIR No. 339, whichever occurs first, Rule 15-D shall be amended to include the following improvements. • A transmission main in Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to SR-57. • A transmission main in Douglass Road from Katella Avenue to the Anaheim Stadium loop. • A transmission main in State College Boulevard from Orangewood Avenue south to the City limits. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-42 • The Planning Center August 2010 • A transmission main in the Lewis Street Connector. • A new 3,000 gallon per minute water well. Impact 5.10-3 (Storm Water Drainage) Applicable Mitigation Measures from MMP No. 106A The following mitigation measures were included in the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for the Platinum Triangle, adopted by the City Council on October 25, 2005, as part of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 and are applicable to the Proposed Project. Additions are shown in bold and deletions are indicated in strikeout format. The mitigation reference numbers from MMP No. 106A are shown in (italics). 10-17 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities, as identified in the Platinum triangle Drainage Study Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area. If the project will increase stormwater flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan drainage study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing deficient storm drain system or will create a deficiency in an existing storm drain, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the drainage facilities, as required by the City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the Development Mitigation within Benefit Zones (Appendix E of the Platinum Triangle Drainage Study) of the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final Building and Zoning inspection for the building/ structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the Project Area, as determined by the city Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. (5.5-3) Impact 5.10-4 (Solid Waste) Applicable Mitigation Measures from MMP No. 106A The following mitigation measures were included in the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for the Platinum Triangle, adopted by the City Council on October 25, 2005, as part of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 and are applicable to the Proposed Project. Additions are shown in bold and deletions are indicated in strikeout format. The mitigation reference numbers from MMP No. 106A are shown in (italics). 10-18 Prior to the final building and zoning inspections of each development, the The property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, and the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans as administered by the City of Anaheim. Implementation of said plan shall commence upon occupancy and shall remain in full effect ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-43 as required by the Street and Sanitation Division and may include, at its discretion, the following plan components: (5.11-8) • Detailing the locations and design of on-site recycling facilities. • Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. • Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City or governing agency. • Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing. • Providing trash compactors for nonrecyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and number of trips required for collection • Providing on-site recycling receptacles accessible to the public to encourage recycling for all businesses, employees, and patrons where feasible. • Prohibiting curbside pick-up. • Ensuring hazardous materials disposal complies with federal, state, and city regulations. 10-19 Ongoing during project operations, the The following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: (5.11-9) • Usage of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging. • Recovery of materials, such as aluminum and cardboard. • Collection of office paper for recycling. • Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. 10-20 Prior to the approval of each grading plan (for import/export plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for demolition plans), the The property owner/developer shall submit a Demolition and Import/Export Plans, if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division, and /or Street and Sanitation Division. The plans shall include identification of off-site locations for material export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on-site, sale to a broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if all cannot be reused on the project site. (5.11-10) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-44 • The Planning Center August 2010 Impact 5.10-5 (Electricity) Applicable Mitigation Measures from MMP No. 106A The following mitigation measures were included in the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for the Platinum Triangle, adopted by the City Council on October 25, 2005, as part of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 and are applicable to the Proposed Project. Additions are shown in bold and deletions are indicated in strikeout format. The mitigation reference numbers from MMP No. 106A are shown in (italics). 10-21 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the The property owner/developer shall submit plans showing that each structure will comply with exceed the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Code of Regulations) by a minimum of 10 percent and will consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Resource Efficiency Department Business and Community Programs Division. in order to review Title 24 measures incorporated into the project design including energy efficient designs. This consultation shall take place during project design in order to review Title 24 measures that are incorporated into the project design energy efficient practices efficiency and allow potential systems alternatives such as thermal energy storage air-conditioning, lighting, and building envelope options. Plans submitted for building permits shall show the proposed energy efficiencies and systems alternatives. (5.11-11) 10-22 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, In order to conserve energy, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans implement energy-saving practices that will be implemented with the project in compliance with Title 10 24, which may include the following: • High-efficiency air-conditioning with EMS (computer) control. • Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution. • Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle. • Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads. • Isolated HVAC zone control by floors/separable activity areas. • Specification of premium-efficiency electric motors compressor motors, air- handling units, and fan-coil units). • Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces. • Use of compact fluorescent lamps in place of incandescent lamps. • Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps. • Use of Energy Star exit lighting or exit signage. • Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-45 • Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots. • Consideration of thermal energy storage air conditioning for spaces or hotel buildings, meeting facilities, theaters, or other intermittent-use spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods. • Consideration for participation in Resource Efficiency’s Advantage Services Programs such as: ƒ New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering fees for up to $10,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems. ƒ Energy Sale for New Construction – Cash incentives ($150 300 to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements. ƒ Green Building Program – Offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. ƒ Thermal Energy Storage Feasibility Study – Cost sharing of up to $5,000 for the feasibility study of TES applied to new facilities. (5.11-12) • Use of high efficiency toilets (1.28 gallons per flush (gpf) or less). • Use of zero to low water use urinals (0.0 gpf to 0.25 gpf). • Use of weather-based irrigation controllers for outdoor irrigation. • Use of drought-tolerant and native plants in outdoor landscaping. 10-23 Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, For any buildings requiring a change in electrical service, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the an underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for of Underground Systems. Electrical Service Fees service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the Cityand Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. The underground electrical service will consist of the following improvements to the current electric facilities: (5.11-13) • Relocate Southern California Edison transmission line underground on Katella Avenue from west of the Union Pacific Railroad to Lewis Street (850 feet). • Relocate Southern California Edison communication line underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to east of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). • Relocate distribution circuits underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-46 • The Planning Center August 2010 • A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Avenue from Anaheim Way to State College Boulevard (1,500 feet). • Relocation a distribution circuit underground on Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to west of the Santa Ana River (1,600 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Gene Autry Way (950 feet). • Relocate a distribution circuit underground on Douglas Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue (1,000 feet). 10-24 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the The property owner/developer shall submit plans for review and approval which shall ensure that buildings are in conformance with exceed the State Energy Conservation Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Administrative Code) by a minimum of 10 percent. (5.11-14) Additional Mitigation 10-25 Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications of Underground Systems. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. The underground electrical service will consist of the following improvements to the current electric facilities: • Two new distribution duct banks on Katella Avenue from Anaheim Way to Lewis Street (800 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Douglas Road to Howell Avenue (2,000 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on State College Boulevard from Cerritos Avenue to Katella Avenue (2,600 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Ave. from I-5 to the Santa Ana River (4,800 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from Haster Street to the east side of I-5 (2,500 feet). ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.10-47 • A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet). • A new transmission duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet). • A new transmission duct bank on Lewis Street and Santa Cruz Street from Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,000 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on the east side of the Angel Stadium parking lot from Orangewood Avenue to the SR-57 (2,000 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Douglas Road from SR-57 to Cerritos Avenue (4,000 feet). 10-26 Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, the property owner/developer shall provide an electrical load analysis to the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The analysis shall include a load schedule and maximum electrical coincident demand. Should the property owner/developer’s load analysis result in a contributed load forecasted to exceed 20 MVA above the existing 40 MVA capacity of the electrical system currently serving the Platinum Triangle area, the APUD will initiate construction of a new electrical substation within the Platinum Triangle project area. Electrical service fees and other appli- cable fees for the electrical substation will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. Impact 5.10-6 (Natural Gas) 10-27 The City shall coordinate all future street and infrastructure improvements within the Platinum Triangle with other service providers including Southern California Gas Company and the Orange County Sanitation District so that required infrastructure upgrades maybe constructed concurrently. 5.10.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation The mitigation measures identified above would reduce potential impacts associated with utilities and service systems to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts relating to utilities remain. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 5.10-48 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank.