Document Anaheim_doc_5249fe8c0b

5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-1 5.2 AIR QUALITY This section evaluates the potential for implementation of the Proposed Project to impact air quality. The project’s impacts are compared to the Adopted MLUP. The analysis in this section is based on air quality analysis completed by The Planning Center. The air quality model output sheets are included as Appendix C 5.2.1 Environmental Setting South Coast Air Basin The project site is in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which includes all of Orange County and the nondesert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The air basin is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills and is bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant, with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter. The general region is in the semipermanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific. The climate is mild, tempered by cool sea breezes. This weather pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, and Santa Ana winds. Temperature and Precipitation The annual average temperature varies little throughout the SoCAB, ranging from the low to middle 60s, measured in degrees Fahrenheit With a more pronounced oceanic influence, coastal areas show less variability in annual minimum and maximum temperatures than inland areas. The climatological station nearest the site is in Anaheim (ID No. 040192). The average minimum temperature is reported at 46.9°F in December and the average maximum temperature is 86.9°F in August (WRCC 2009). In contrast to a very steady pattern of temperature, rainfall is seasonally and annually highly variable. Almost all rain falls from November through April. Summer rainfall is normally restricted to widely scattered thundershowers near the coast with heavier shower activity in the east and over the mountains. Rainfall averages around 12.92 inches per year in the project area, as measured in Anaheim (WRCC 2009). Humidity Although the SoCAB has a semiarid climate, the air near the surface is typically moist because of the presence of a shallow marine layer. Except for infrequent periods when dry, continental air is brought into the SoCAB by offshore winds, the ocean effect is dominant. Periods of heavy fog, especially along the coastline, are frequent; low stratus clouds, often called high fog, are a characteristic climatic feature. Annual average humidity is 70 percent at the coast and 57 percent in the east portions of the SoCAB. Wind Wind patterns across the south coastal region are characterized by westerly and southwesterly onshore winds during the day and easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Wind speed is somewhat greater during the dry summer months than during the rainy winter season. Between periods of wind, periods of air stagnation may occur, both in the morning and evening hours. Air stagnation is one of the critical determinants of air quality conditions on any given day. During the winter and fall months, surface high-pressure systems over the SoCAB, combined with other meteorological conditions, can result in very strong, downslope Santa Ana winds. These winds normally continue a few days before predominant meteorological conditions are reestablished. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-2 • The Planning Center August 2010 The mountain ranges to the east affect the transport and diffusion of pollutants by inhibiting the eastward transport of pollutants. Air quality in the SoCAB generally ranges from fair to poor and is similar to air quality in most of coastal southern California. The entire region experiences heavy concentrations of air pollutants during prolonged periods of stable atmospheric conditions Inversions In conjunction with the two characteristic wind patterns that affect the rate and orientation of horizontal pollu- tant transport, there are two similarly distinct types of temperature inversions that control the vertical depth through which pollutants are mixed. These inversions are the marine/subsidence inversion and the radiation inversion. The height of the base of the inversion at any given time is known as the “mixing height.” The combination of winds and inversions are critical determinants in leading to the highly degraded air quality in summer and the generally good air quality in the winter in the project area. Air Pollutants of Concern Criteria Air Pollutants The pollutants emitted into the ambient air by stationary and mobile sources are regulated by federal and state law. These are known as criteria air pollutants and are categorized into primary and secondary pollutants. Primary air pollutants are those that are emitted directly from sources. Carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead (Pb) are primary air pollutants. VOC and NOX are criteria pollutant precursors and go on to form secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. Ozone (O3) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are the principal secondary pollutants. Presented below is a description of each of the primary and secondary criteria air pollutants and their known health effects. Other pollutants, such as carbon dioxide, a natural by-product of animal respiration that is also produced in the combustion process, have been linked to such phenomena as global warming (see Section 5.11, Greenhouse Gas Emissions). Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas produced by incomplete combustion of carbon substances, such as gasoline or diesel fuel. The primary adverse health effect associated with CO is interference with normal oxygen transfer to the blood, which may result in tissue oxygen deprivation (SCAQMD 2005). Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) are compounds comprised primarily of atoms of hydrogen and carbon. Internal combustion associated with motor vehicle usage is the major source of hydrocarbons. VOCs are synonymous with reactive organic gases. Other sources of VOC include evaporative emissions associated with the use of paints and solvents, the application of asphalt paving, and the use of household consumer products such as aerosols. Adverse effects on human health are not caused directly by VOC, but rather by reactions of VOC to form secondary pollutants such as ozone (SCAQMD 2005). Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) serve as integral participants in the process of photochemical smog production. The two major forms of NOX are nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). NO is a colorless, odorless gas formed from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen when combustion takes place under high temperature and/or high pressure. NO2 is a reddish-brown irritating gas formed by the combination of NO and oxygen. NOX acts as an acute respiratory irritant and increases susceptibility to respiratory pathogens (SCAQMD 2005). ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-3 NO2 is a by-product of fuel combustion. The principal form of NO2 produced by combustion is NO, but NO reacts with oxygen to form NO2, creating the mixture of NO and NO2 commonly called NOX. NO2 acts as an acute irritant and, in equal concentrations, is more injurious than NO. At atmospheric concentrations, however, NO2 is only potentially irritating. There is some indication of a relationship between NO2 and chronic pulmonary fibrosis. Some increase in bronchitis in children (two and three years old) has also been observed at concentrations below 0.3 part per million (ppm). NO2 absorbs blue light; the result is a brownish-red cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility. NO2 also contributes to the formation of PM10, PM2.5, and ozone (SCAQMD 2005). Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, pungent, irritating gas formed by the combustion of sulfurous fossil fuels. Fuel combustion is the primary source of SO2. At sufficiently high concentrations, SO2 may irritate the upper respiratory tract. At lower concentrations and when combined with particulates, SO2 may do greater harm by injuring lung tissue. A primary source of SO2 emissions is high-sulfur-content coal. Gasoline and natural gas have very low sulfur content and hence do not release significant quantities of SO2 (SCAQMD 2005). Particulate Matter (PM) consists of finely divided solids or liquids such as soot, dust, aerosols, fumes, and mists. Two forms of fine particulates are now recognized. Inhalable coarse particles, or PM10, include the particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns 10 one-millionths of a meter or 0.0004 inch) or less. Inhalable fine particles, or PM2.5, have an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns 2.5 one- millionths of a meter or 0.0001 inch) or less. Particulate discharge into the atmosphere results primarily from industrial, agricultural, construction, and transportation activities. However, wind action on arid landscapes also contributes substantially to local particulate loading. Both PM10 and PM2.5 may adversely affect the human respiratory system, especially in those people who are naturally sensitive or susceptible to breathing problems (SCAQMD 2005). Diesel particulates are classified by the CARB as a carcinogen. Fugitive dust primarily poses two public health and safety concerns. The first concern is that of respiratory problems attributable to the particulates suspended in the air. The second concern is that of motor vehicle accidents caused by reduced visibility during severe wind conditions. Fugitive dust may also cause significant property damage during strong windstorms by acting as an abrasive (much like sandblasting). Finally, fugitive dust can result in a nuisance factor due to the soiling of proximate structures and vehicles (SCAQMD 2005). Ozone (O3), or smog, is one of a number of substances called photochemical oxidants that are formed when VOC and NOX (both by-products of the internal combustion engine) react with sunlight. O3 is present in relatively high concentrations in the SoCAB, and the damaging effects of photochemical smog are generally related to the concentrations of O3. O3 poses a health threat to those who already suffer from respiratory diseases as well as to healthy people. Additionally, O3 has been tied to crop damage, typically in the form of stunted growth and premature death. O3 can also be a corrosive, resulting in property damage such as the degradation of rubber products (SCAQMD 2005). Toxic Air Contaminants The public’s exposure to toxic air contaminants (TACs) is a significant environmental health issue in California. In 1983, the California Legislature enacted a program to identify the health effects of TACs and to reduce exposure to these contaminants to protect the public health. The Health and Safety Code defines a TAC as “an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.” A substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant pursuant to subsection of Section 112 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 United Sates Code Section 7412[b]) is a toxic air contaminant. Under state law, the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA), acting through the California Air Resources Board (CARB), is authorized to identify a substance as ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-4 • The Planning Center August 2010 a TAC if it determines the substance is an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or to an increase in serious illness, or may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. California regulates TACs primarily through Assembly Bill (AB) 1807 (Tanner Air Toxics Act) and AB 2588 (Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act of 1987). The Tanner Air Toxics Act sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB adopts an “airborne toxics control measure” for sources that emit designated TACs. If there is a safe threshold for a substance (a point below which there is no toxic effect), the control measure must reduce exposure to below that threshold. If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate toxics best available control technology to minimize emissions. CARB has, to date, established formal control measures for 11 TACs, all of which are identified as having no safe threshold. Air toxics from stationary sources are also regulated in California under the Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act of 1987. Under AB 2588, toxic air contaminant emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized by the air quality management district or air pollution control district. High priority facilities are required to perform a health risk assessment and, if specific thresholds are exceeded, are required to communicate the results to the public in the form of notices and public meetings. Since the last update to the TAC list in December 1999, CARB has designated 244 compounds as TACs (CARB 1999). Additionally, the CARB has implemented control measures for a number of compounds that pose high risks and show potential for effective control. The majority of the estimated health risks from TACs can be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important being particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines. In 2000, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) conducted a study on ambient concentrations of TACs and estimated the potential health risks from air toxics. The results showed that the overall risk for excess cancer from a lifetime exposure to ambient levels of air toxics was about 1,400 in a million. The largest contributor to this risk was diesel exhaust, accounting for 71 percent of the air toxics risk. In 2008, SCAQMD conducted its third update to their study on ambient concentrations of TACs and estimated the potential health risks from air toxics. The results showed that the overall risk for excess cancer from a lifetime exposure to ambient levels of air toxics was about 1,200 in a million. The largest contributor to this risk was diesel exhaust, accounting for approximately 84 percent of the air toxics risk (SCAQMD 2008). Diesel Particulate Matter In 1998, the CARB identified particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines (diesel PM) as a TAC. Previously, the individual chemical compounds in the diesel exhaust were considered as TACs. Almost all diesel exhaust particle mass is 10 microns or less in diameter. Because of their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lung. The major sources of diesel PM are from diesel-fueled engines and vehicles used in California (CARB 2000). These sources include trucks, public and school buses, large off-road equipment, portable equipment such as transport refrigeration units (TRUs), and stationary engines used to generate power or pump water. The CARB adopted the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-fueled Engines and Vehicles (Plan) in September of 2000. The Plan represents the State’s comprehensive plan to reduce diesel PM emissions within the state. Its goals are a 75 percent reduction in diesel PM by 2010 and an 85 percent reduction by 2020 from the 2000 baseline (CARB 2000). Measures to reduce diesel PM emissions range from requiring use of cleaner diesel fuel to implementing standards in improving new and in-use diesel engines for on-road and off-road vehicles and equipment. The following are regulations adopted by CARB within the past decade to reduce emissions of diesel PM from mobile sources: ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-5 • Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel (adopted 1993, amended in 2003) • CARB Rule 2021: Diesel Particulate Matter Control Measures for Waste Collection Trucks (Adopted 2003) • CARB Rule 2023: Transit Fleet Vehicles (Adopted 2005) • CARB Rule 2025: On-Road Heavy Duty Truck In-Use Regulation (Adopted 2008) • CARB Rule 2027: Port Truck Regulation (Adopted 2007) • CARB Rule 2449: Off-Road In-Use Fleet Regulation (Adopted 2007) • CARB Rule 2477: Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) – Transport Refrigeration Units (Adopted 2004) • CARB Rule 2480: ATCM – School Bus Idling (Adopted 2002) • CARB Rule 2485: ATCM – Commercial Vehicle Idling (Adopted 2004) Other Effects of Air Pollution Just as humans are affected by air pollution, so too are plants and animals. Animals must breathe the same air and are subject to the same types of negative health effects. Certain plants and trees may absorb air pollutants that can stunt their development or cause premature death. There are also numerous impacts to our economy including lost workdays due to illness, a desire on the part of business to locate in areas with a healthy environment, and increased expenses from medical costs. Pollutants may also lower visibility and cause damage to property. Certain air pollutants are responsible for discoloring painted surfaces, eating away at stones used in buildings, dissolving the mortar that holds bricks together, and cracking tires and other items made from rubber. In conformance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments, the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has prepared a monetary cost/benefit analysis related to implementation requirements. By the year 2010, the EPA estimates that its emissions reductions programs would cost approximately 27 billion dollars. The programs are estimated to result in a savings benefit of 110 billion dollars, for a net benefit of 83 billion dollars. While these values are for the nation as a whole, a net benefit ratio of about 4:1 is noted and a similar ratio could be expected for the City of Anaheim and its residents. Another direct cost/benefit issue relates to federal funding. Areas that do not meet the federal air quality standards may lose eligibility for federal funding for road improvements and other projects that require federal or California Department of Transportation approval. Cleaner air also yields benefits to ecological systems. The benefits of Clean Air Act Amendments programs that can be quantified within the overall monetary benefits include increased agricultural and timber yields, reduced effects of acid rain on aquatic ecosystems, and reduced effects of nitrogen deposited to coastal estuaries. Many ecological benefits, however, remain difficult or impossible to quantify, or can only be quantified for a limited geographic area. The magnitude of quantified benefits and the wide range of unquantified benefits nonetheless suggest that as we learn more about ecological systems and can conduct more comprehensive ecological benefits assessments, estimates of these benefits could be substantially greater. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-6 • The Planning Center August 2010 Baseline Air Quality Existing levels of ambient air quality and historical trends and projections in the City of Anaheim are best documented by measurements made by SCAQMD. The City is in the Source Receptor Area (SRA) 17 – Central Orange County (Inland Orange County). The SCAQMD air quality monitoring station in the SRA 17 that is closest to the City is the Anaheim Monitoring Station. However, this station only monitors CO, NO2, O3, PM10, and PM2.5. Consequently, data was supplemented from the Los Angeles North Main Street Monitoring Station for SO2. Data from these two stations are summarized in Table 5.2-1. The data show recurring violations of both the state and federal O3 standards. The data also indicate that the area regularly exceeds state PM10 standard and federal PM2.5 standards; however the federal PM10 standard was only exceeded once in the last five years. The CO, SO2, and NO2 standards have not been violated in the last five years at the stations. Table 5.2-1 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary Number of Days Threshold Were Exceeded and Maximum Levels during Such Violations Pollutant/Standard 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ozone1 State 1-Hour ≥ 0.09 ppm State 8-Hour ≥ 0.070 ppm Federal 8-Hour > 0.0752 ppm Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) Max. 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 14 50 29 0.120 0.097 1 8 2 0.095 0.078 6 5 3 0.113 0.089 2 7 1 0.127 0.100 2 10 5 0.105 0.086 Carbon Monoxide (CO)1 State/Federal 8-Hour > 9.0 ppm Max. 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 4.09 0 3.27 0 2.90 0 2.91 0 3.44 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)1 State 1-Hour ≥ 0.184 ppm Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 0.122 0 0.089 0 0.114 0 0.086 0 0.093 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)3 State 24-Hour ≥ 0.04 ppm Federal 24-Hour ≥ 0.14 ppm Max 24-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0 0 0.015 0 0 0.010 0 0 0.006 0 0 0.005 0 0 0.003 Coarse Particulates (PM10)3 State 24-Hour > 50 μg/m3 Federal 24-Hour > 150 μg/m3 Max. 24-Hour Conc. (μg/m3) 7 0 74.0 3 0 65.0 7 0 104.0 6 1 489.06 3 0 61.0 Fine Particulates (PM2.5)1 Federal 24-Hour > 355 μg/m3 Max. 24-Hour Conc. (μg/m3) 20 58.9 13 54.7 7 56.2 14 79.4 2 39.4 Source: CARB 2008c. ppm: parts per million; μg/m3:micrograms per cubic meter 1 Data obtained from the Anaheim Monitoring Station. 2 The USEPA revised the 8-hour O3 standard from 0.08 ppm to 0.075 ppm, effective May 2008. 3 Data obtained from the Los Angeles North Main Street Monitoring Station 4 The NOX standard was amended on February 22, 2007, to lower the 1-hr standard from 0.25 ppm to 0.18 ppm. 5 The USEPA recently revised the 24-hour PM2.5 standard from 65 μg/m3 to 35 μg/m3. However, this standard did not take effect until December 2006. Federal exceedance based on measured day the ambient air quality concentrations exceeded the 24-hour standard. 6 Maximum concentration includes exceptional events (wildfire). ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-7 Sensitive Receptors Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill, especially those with cardiorespiratory diseases. Residential areas are also considered to be sensitive receptors to air pollution because residents (including children and the elderly) tend to be at home for extended periods of time, resulting in sustained exposure to any pollutants present. Other sensitive receptors include retirement facilities, hospitals, and schools. Recreational land uses are considered moderately sensitive to air pollution. Although exposure periods are generally short, exercise places a high demand on respiratory functions, which can be impaired by air pollution. In addition, noticeable air pollution can detract from the enjoyment of recreation. Existing and proposed industrial, commercial, retail, and office areas are considered the least sensitive to air pollution. Exposure periods are relatively short and intermittent, as the majority of the workers tend to stay indoors most of the time. In addition, the working population is generally the healthiest segment of the public. The nearest sensitive land uses proximate to the project are existing and planned residential uses within The Platinum Triangle. Regulatory Setting Development associated of the Proposed Project has the potential to release emissions of criteria pollutants and dust into the ambient air; therefore, it falls under the ambient air quality standards (AAQS) promulgated at the local, state, and federal levels. The project site is in the SoCAB and is subject to the rules and regulations imposed by SCAQMD. However, SCAQMD reports to CARB, and all criteria emissions are also governed by the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Federal, state, regional, and local laws, regulations, plans, or guidelines that are potentially applicable to project are summarized below. Ambient Air Quality Standards The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) was passed in 1963 by the US Congress and has been amended several times. The 1970 Clean Air Act Amendments strengthened previous legislation and laid the foundation for the regulatory scheme of the 1970s and 1980s. In 1977, Congress again added several provisions, including nonattainment requirements for areas not meeting NAAQS and the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program. The 1990 Amendments are the latest in a series of federal efforts to regulate the protection of air quality in the United States. The CAA allows states to adopt more stringent standards or to include other pollutants. The California Clean Air Act (CCAA), signed into law in 1988, requires all areas of the state to achieve and maintain the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. The CAAQS tend to be more restrictive than the NAAQS and are based on higher health and welfare standards. These NAAQS and CAAQS standards are the levels of air quality considered to provide a margin of safety in the protection of the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those “sensitive receptors” most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed. Both the State of California and the federal government have established health-based AAQS for seven air pollutants. As shown in Table 5.2-2, these pollutants are O3, NO2, CO, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and Pb. In addition, the state has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility-reducing particles. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-8 • The Planning Center August 2010 These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. Table 5.2-2 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Averaging Time California Standard Federal Primary Standard Pollutant Health and Atmospheric Effects Major Pollutant Sources 1 hour 0.09 ppm NA Ozone (O3) 8 hours 0.070 ppm 0.075 ppm High concentrations can directly affect lungs, causing irritation. Long-term exposure may cause damage to lung tissue. Motor vehicles. 1 hour 20 ppm 35 ppm Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8 hours 9.0 ppm 9 ppm Classified as a chemical CO interferes with the transfer of fresh oxygen to the blood and deprives sensitive tissues of oxygen. Internal combustion engines, primarily gasoline-powered motor vehicles. Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1 hour 0.18 ppm 0.100 ppm Irritating to eyes and respiratory tract. Colors atmosphere reddish- brown. Motor vehicles, petroleum- refining operations, industrial sources, aircraft, ships, and railroads. Annual Arithmetic Mean * 0.03 ppm 1 hour 0.25 ppm * Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 24 hours 0.04 ppm 0.14 ppm Irritates upper respiratory tract; injurious to lung tissue. Can yellow the leaves of plants, destructive to marble, iron, and steel. Limits visibility and reduces sunlight. Fuel combustion, chemical plants, sulfur recovery plants, and metal processing. Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 μg/m3 — Respirable Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10) 24 hours 50 μg/m3 150 μg/m3 Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 μg/m3 15 μg/m3 Respirable Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24 hours * 35 μg/m3 May irritate eyes and respiratory tract, decreases in lung capacity, cancer and increased mortality. Produces haze and limits visibility. Dust and fume-producing industrial and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric photochemical reactions, and natural activities (e.g. wind-raised dust and ocean sprays). 1.5 μg/m3 * Quarterly * 1.5 μg/m3 Lead (Pb) 3-Month Average 0.15 μg/m3 Disturbs gastrointestinal system, and causes anemia, kidney disease, and neuromuscular and neurologic dysfunction (in severe cases). Present source: lead smelters, battery manufacturing & recycling facilities. Past source: combustion of leaded gasoline. Sulfates (SO4) 24 hours 25 μg/m3 * Decrease in ventilatory functions; aggravation of asthmatic aggravation of cardio- pulmonary disease; vegetation damage; degradation of visibility; property damage. Industrial processes. Source: California Air Resources Board, updated January 2010. ppm: parts per million; μg/m3: micrograms per cubic meter * = standard has not been established for this pollutant/duration by this entity. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-9 Air Quality Management Planning SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are the agencies responsible for preparing the air quality management plan (AQMP) for the SoCAB. Since 1979, a number of AQMPs have been prepared. The most recent AQMP was adopted on June 1, 2007 and incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes, and new air quality modeling tools. The 2007 AQMP proposes attainment or demonstration of the federal PM2.5 standards through a more focused control of SOX, directly emitted PM2.5, and focused control of NOX and VOC by 2015. The eight-hour ozone control strategy builds upon the PM2.5 strategy, augmented with additional NOX and VOC reductions to meet the standard by 2024, assuming an extended attainment date is obtained. Area Designations The AQMP provides the framework for air quality basins to achieve attainment of the state and federal ambient air quality standards through the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Areas are classified as attainment nonattainment areas for particular pollutants, depending on whether they meet ambient air quality standards for that pollutant. Severity classifications for ozone nonattainment range in magnitude from marginal, moderate, and serious to severe and extreme. Attainment classifications apply to individual pollutants: • Unclassified: the data are incomplete and do not support a designation of attainment or nonattainment for a pollutant • Attainment: the CAAQS was not violated at any site in the area during a three-year period for that pollutant • Nonattainment: there was at least one violation of a state AAQS for that pollutant in the area • Nonattainment/Transitional: a subcategory of the nonattainment designation; signifies that the area is close to attaining the AAQS for that pollutant The attainment status for the SoCAB is included in Table 5.2-3. As listed in this table, air quality in the SoCAB is in nonattainment of the national and state AAQS for O3, PM10, and PM2.5, while CO and SO2 are in attainment of both the federal and state standards. In addition, on March 25, 2010, CARB approved designating the Los Angeles County portion of the SoCAB as nonattainment under the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for lead and the entire SoCAB as nonattainment under the NAAQS for NOX. According to the 2007 AQMP, the SoCAB will have to meet the new federal PM2.5 standards by 2015 and the 8-hour O3 standard by 2024, and will most likely have to achieve the recently revised 24-hour PM2.5 standard by 2020. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-10 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.2-3 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin Pollutant State Federal Ozone – 1-hour Extreme Nonattainment Extreme Nonattainment1 Ozone – 8-hour Extreme Nonattainment Severe-17 Nonattainment2 PM10 Serious Nonattainment Serious Nonattainment3 (Proposed Attainment) PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment CO Attainment Attainment4 NO2 Attainment Attainment/Maintenance (Proposed Nonattainment) SO2 Attainment Attainment Lead (Pb) Attainment Nonattainment (Los Angeles Only)5 All others Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Source: California Air Resource Board, based on 2006 State Area Designations and National Area Designations current as of July 2007. 1 Under prior standard. 2 May petition for Extreme. 3 Annual Standard Revoked September 2006. 4 The USEPA granted the request to redesignate the SoCAB from nonattainment to attainment for the CO NAAQS on May 11, 2007 (Federal Register Volume 71, No. 91), which became effective as of June 11, 2007. 5 On October 15, 2008, the USEPA revised the federal AAQS from 1.5 μg/m3 to 0.15 μg/m3. CARB is recommending designating the Los Angeles County portion of the SoCAB as nonattainment under the new federal standard. The USEPA has one year to review the recommendations. Nonattainment areas have five years to attain the new lead standard. Although the SoCAB is in nonattainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5, air pollution controls have resulted in general improvement of air quality within the SoCAB. Figure 5.2-1 shows the long-term annual trend in percent basin-days exceedances of the federal standards for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 from 1990 to 2005 within the SoCAB (SCAQMD 2007). As shown, there has been a downward trend during this 20-year period. In 2005, the SoCAB exceeded the federal standards for O3, PM10 or PM2.5 on a total of 89 days at one or more locations; this compares to 128 days in 2003 and 94 days in 2004 (SCAQMD 2007). Figure 5.2-2 shows the maximum pollutant concentrations of NO2, CO, O3, PM10, and PM2.5 as percent of the federal standards within the SoCAB during this same period. Overall, as shown in this figure, pollutant concentrations of NO2, CO, O3, PM10, and PM2.5 have generally declined since 1990(SCAQMD 2007). The number of days where the SoCAB exceeds the federal 1-hour ozone standard has continually declined over the years. However, while the number of days exceeding the federal 1-hour ozone standard has dropped since the 1990s, the rate of progress has slowed since the beginning of the decade (SCAQMD 2007). According to the 2007 AQMP, although past controls were designed to address the federal 1-hour ozone and PM10 standards, they also improved on our ability to attain the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 standards. The 8-hour ozone levels have been reduced by half over the past 30 years, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and lead standards have been met, and other criteria pollutant concentrations have significantly declined (SCAQMD 2007). The federal and state CO standards were also met as of the end of 2002. On May 11, 2007, the USEPA granted the request to redesignate the SoCAB from nonattainment to attainment for the CO NAAQS (Federal Register Volume 71, No. 91), which became effective as of June 11, 2007. Although the SoCAB still experiences substantial exceedances of health-based standards for 8-hour ozone and PM2.5, the SoCAB has not violated the federal 24-hour PM10 standard during the period including 2004 through 2007. Per the criteria specified in the NAAQS, the SoCAB has been in compliance with the 24-hour PM10 standard from 2006 (based on 2004-2006 data) and has maintained compliance since (SCAQMD 2009). Subsequently, CARB approved to redesignate the SoCAB from nonattainment to attainment for PM10 under the federal standards on March 25, 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: SCAQMD 2007 Air Quality Management Plan 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.2-1 Long-Term Annual Trend in Percent Basin-Days Exceedances of Federal Standards for O , PM , 3 10 and PM2.5 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-12 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: SCAQMD 2007 Air Quality Management Plan 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.2-2 Maximum Pollutant Concentrations of NO , CO, 2 O and PM as Percent of Federal Standards 3 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-14 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-15 SCAQMD Local Rules and Regulations In addition to federal and state requirements, new construction and operation in the SoCAB is governed by the rules and regulations of the SCAQMD. 5.2.2 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 would: AQ-1 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. AQ-2 Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. AQ-3 Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). AQ-4 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. AQ-5 Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.1 South Coast Air Quality Management District Thresholds The analysis of the Proposed Project’s air quality impacts follows the guidance and methodologies recommended in the SCAQMD Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook (formerly the CEQA Air Quality Handbook). CEQA allows for the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district to be used to assess impacts of a project on air quality. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b) requires that lead agencies determine significance findings based to the “extent possible on scientific and factual data.” Furthermore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7 requires that significance thresholds used by a lead agency must be supported by substantial evidence. As air districts are the public agencies responsible for regulating air quality, they have the technical expertise and means to develop significance thresholds to evaluate impacts of a project on air quality that are substantially supported. The SCAQMD recommends lead agencies within its boundaries to use the SCAQMD Handbook in assessing air quality impacts of projects. Regional Significance Thresholds SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for air quality for construction activities and project operation, as shown in Table 5.2-4. 1 The Initial Study did not include an evaluation of odors associated with placement of residential land uses within proximity of existing industrial land use that have the potential to generate objectionable odors. A discussion of potential odor impacts has been incorporated in the EIR. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-16 • The Planning Center August 2010 Table 5.2-4 SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds Air Pollutant Construction Phase Operational Phase Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day Sulfur Oxides (SOX) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day Particulates (PM10) 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day Fine particulates (PM2.5) 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day Source: SCAQMD 2007 CO Hotspot Analysis Localized CO impacts are determined based on the presence of congested intersections. The significance of localized project impacts depends on whether the project would cause substantial concentrations of CO. A project is considered to have significant impacts if project-related mobile-source emissions result in an exceedance of the California one-hour and eight-hour CO standards, which are: • 1 hour = 20 parts per million • 8 hour = 9 parts per million Localized Significance Thresholds SCAQMD developed Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) for emissions of NO2, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 generated at the project site (off-site mobile-source emissions are not included the LST analysis). LSTs represent the maximum emissions at a project site that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent federal or state AAQS. LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the project SRA area and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. LST analysis for construction is applicable for all projects of five acres and less; however, it can be used as screening criteria for larger projects to determine whether or not dispersion modeling may be required. If emissions exceed the LST screening criteria, then dispersion modeling needs to be conducted. Projects larger than five acres can determine the localized significance for construction by performing dispersion modeling using the thresholds in Table 5.2-5 for emissions that exceed the LST screening criteria. However, LST analysis and dispersion modeling are not applicable at the master land use plan level due to the scale of the project. Individual projects implemented under the Platinum Triangle MLUP would have to undergo additional environmental analysis, which includes an evaluation of the LSTs and/or dispersion modeling. Table 5.2-5 SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds – AAQS Air Pollutant (Relevant AAQS) Concentration 1-Hour CO Standard (CAAQS) 20 ppm 8-Hour CO Standard (CAAQS) 9.0 ppm 1-Hour NO2 Standard (CAAQS) 0.18 ppm 24-Hour PM10 Standard – Construction (SCAQMD)1 10.4 μg/m3 24-Hour PM2.5 Standard – Construction (SCAQMD)1 10.4 μg/m3 24-Hour PM10 Standard – Operation (SCAQMD)1 2.5 μg/m3 24-Hour PM2.5 Standard – Operation (SCAQMD)1 2.5 μg/m3 ppm: parts per million; μg/m3: micrograms per cubic meter 1 Threshold is based on SCAQMD Rule 403. Since the SoCAB is in nonattainment for PM10 and PM2.5, the threshold is established as an “allowable change” in concentration. Therefore, background concentration is irrelevant. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-17 5.2.3 Environmental Impacts The assessment of potential air pollution impacts for the Proposed Project included both a localized and regional analysis of criteria pollutants. Regional emissions for construction and area sources from operations were calculated using the URBEMIS2007 emissions model. Emissions from transportation sources related to operations were calculated using the EMFAC2007 model. The URBEMIS2007 model includes an inventory of air pollutant emissions from stationary emissions sources. The EMFAC2007 computer model includes an inventory of emission rates for vehicular sources. Transportation emissions are based on emission rates using the EMFAC2007 computer model, based on trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from the traffic report prepared by Parson Brinkerhoff Associates. In addition, the traffic generated during the operations phase was assessed for localized concentrations of CO based on modeling of congested intersections. The calculated emissions are compared to thresholds of significance for individual projects to determine whether project emissions would result in significant air quality impacts. Model runs for operation phase air pollutant emissions are included as Appendix C. 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 5.2-1: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD GENERATE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE SHORT-TERM AIR POLLUTANTS COMPARED TO THE ADOPTED MASTER LAND USE PLAN AND WOULD CONTINUE TO EXCEED SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT’S REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS. [THRESHOLDS AQ-2 AND AQ-3] Impact Analysis: Construction emissions associated with the Adopted MLUP were considered a significant unavoidable impact in FSEIR No 332 and a statement of overriding considerations was adopted. The FSEIR No. 332 identified impacts associated with emissions of VOCs and NOx using the URBEMIS2002 computer model. Since certification of the FSEIR No. 332, new AAQS were established for PM2.5 and SCAQMD adopted significance thresholds for this criteria air pollutant. In addition, a newer version of the URBEMIS model has been released. Construction emissions for both the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project have been revised below. Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources, such as on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, vehicles hauling materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Grading activities produce fugitive dust emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) from soil-disturbing activities. Exhaust emissions from construction activities on-site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. Construction activities associated with new development in the project area would temporarily increase localized PM10, PM2.5, VOC, NOX, SOX, and CO concentrations in the project vicinity and regional emissions within the SoCAB. The primary source of construction-related CO, SOX, VOC, and NOX emissions is gasoline- and diesel-powered, heavy-duty mobile construction equipment. Primary sources of PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would be clearing and demolition activities, excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic on unpaved ground, and wind blowing over exposed earth. Construction emissions were estimated using the URBEMIS2007 computer model to provide an order of magnitude estimate of emissions from the development of individual components of the MLUP. The construction emissions analysis evaluates a construction scenario that involves the development of the MLUP over the course of 20 years. The modeling assumes development occurring on 25 percent of the ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-18 • The Planning Center August 2010 MLUP at any one time. Therefore, the model also assumes overlap of various construction activities grading, building, paving, etc.) to account for concurrent projects that are at different development phases. Construction equipment used in the construction emissions analysis are default types based on the URBEMIS2007 model. Considering the 820-acre project area and a 20-year build-out schedule, approximately 41 acres on average may be under construction at any one time in any given year. Modeled air pollutant emissions for the various project construction phases are shown in Table 5.2-6. Because SCAQMD has adopted separate threshold for construction and operation, construction emissions are compared to SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds for construction. As shown in this table, emissions generated by the construction activities would exceed the threshold values established by the SCAQMD. Therefore, significant air quality impacts from construction related emissions would occur. Table 5.2-6 Sample Project-Related Daily Construction Emissions (in pounds per day) Source VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Adopted MLUP Demolition 6 47 805 1 7 4 Grading1 11 96 49 0 134 31 Trenching 2 18 9 0 1 1 Paving 3 19 12 0 2 2 Architectural Coatings 19 <1 1 0 <1 <1 Building 51 333 1,016 2 22 16 Maximum Daily 92 513 1,115 2 160 52 Proposed Project Demolition 6 47 27 0 2 2 Grading1 11 96 49 0 134 31 Trenching 4 35 18 0 2 2 Paving 3 20 12 0 2 2 Architectural Coatings 77 <1 2 0 <1 <1 Building 120 750 2,624 4 50 36 Maximum Daily 222 948 2,732 4 190 72 SCAQMD Construction Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Difference between the Adopted MLUP and Proposed Project 130 435 1,617 2 30 20 Source: URBEMIS2007, Version 9.2.4. Based on development occurring over a 20-year build-out timeframe. Construction emissions are based on default construction usage provided by URBEMIS2007 computer model. 1 PM10 and PM2.5 generated by fugitive dust assumes maximum daily disturbance of 41 acres and implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403 for fugitive dust control, which includes the following dust control measures during ground-disturbing activities: replacing groundcover in disturbed areas quickly, watering exposed surfaces at least two time daily, implementation of equipment loading/unloading procedures to reduce fugitive dust, managing haul road dust by watering two times daily, and reducing speed on unpaved roads to less than 15 mph. Construction activities occurring within the Platinum Triangle would potentially exceed the SCAQMD emissions thresholds for NOX, CO, VOC, PM10, and PM2.5 and significantly contribute to the O3, PM10, and PM2.5 nonattainment designation of the SoCAB. The emissions shown in Table 5.2-7 represent an estimate of construction emissions from development of multiple projects occurring within the Platinum Triangle MLUP. However, actual maximum daily emissions would depend on the number of simultaneously occurring projects. Regional construction impacts associated with the Adopted MLUP in the 2FSEIR No. 332 were considered a significant impact of the project. The Proposed Project would generate substantially more ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-19 construction emissions over the same 20-year time frame as compared to the adopted MLUP. Impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. IMPACT 5.2-2: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD GENERATE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE LONG-TERM AIR POLLUTANTS COMPARED TO THE ADOPTED MASTER LAND USE PLAN AND WOULD CONTINUE TO EXCEED SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT’S REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS. [THRESHOLDS AQ-2 AND AQ-3] Impact Analysis: Operational phase emissions associated with the Adopted MLUP were considered a significant unavoidable impact in the FSEIR No. 332 and a statement of overriding considerations was adopted. The FSEIR No. 332 identified impacts associated with emissions of CO, VOCs, NOx, and PM10 using the URBEMIS2002 computer model. Since certification of the FSEIR No. 332, new AAQS were established for PM2.5 in addition to the SCAQMD adopting significance thresholds for this criteria air pollutant. Also, a newer version of the URBEMIS model has been released. Operational phase emissions for both the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project have been revised below. Stationary and mobile source emissions were compiled for the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project for residential, office, commercial, and institutional land uses in the Platinum Triangle. Mobile-source air pollutant emissions are based on the traffic study prepared for this project by Parsons Brinkerhoff (2009). Stationary sources were compiled using the URBEMIS2007 computer model. Modeling results are shown in Table 5.2-7. Table 5.2-7 Project-Related Operational Phase Emissions (in pounds per day) VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Adopted MLUP Stationary Sources 602 213 114 0.36 5 5 Mobile Sources 1,441 743 6,307 24 193 191 Total 2,043 956 6,421 24 198 196 Proposed Project Stationary Sources 1,155 443 252 0.67 9 9 Mobile Sources 2,628 1,358 11,518 43 353 350 Total 3,783 1,801 11,770 44 362 359 SCAQMD Standard 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant? Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Difference between the Adopted MLUP and Proposed Project 1,740 845 5,349 20 164 163 Source: URBEMIS2007 and EMFAC2007 based on trips and VMT from Parson Brinkerhoff (2009). Stationary sources based on worst-case summer/winter emissions. The Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for CO, NOX, VOC, PM10, and PM2.5. The Proposed Project would generate substantially more air pollutant emissions when compared to the Adopted MLUP because the project would result in additional residential, commercial, and office development. The primary source of project-related long-term air pollutant emissions are from mobile sources vehicles traveling to and from the project site). Emissions of VOC, PM10, PM2.5, and NOx that exceed the SCAQMD emission thresholds would contribute to the O3 nonattainment designation. Emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 that exceed the SCAQMD emission thresholds would contribute to the particulate matter ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-20 • The Planning Center August 2010 (PM10 and PM2.5) nonattainment designations of the SoCAB, and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable for both the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project. IMPACT 5.2-3: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES WOULD POTENTIALLY EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS OF NOX, CO, PM10, AND PM2.5. [THRESHOLD AQ-4] Impact Analysis: The SCAQMD previously considered evaluation of LSTs to be optional for lead agencies. Consequently, the FSEIR No. 332 did not evaluate whether construction activities would generate substantial pollutant concentrations. However, in 2006, SCAQMD began commenting on projects that did not conduct a localized analysis for construction activities. The analysis below addresses LSTs for both the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations during construction if it would cause or contribute significantly to elevated pollutant concentration levels. Unlike the mass (lbs/day) of construction emissions, localized concentrations refer to an amount of pollutant in a volume of air (ppm or μg/m3) and can be correlated to potential health effects. Construction associated with implementation of the Proposed Project would cause temporary, short-term emissions of CO, NOX, VOC, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD developed LSTs for emissions of NO2, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 generated at the project site (off-site mobile source emissions are not included the LST analysis). LSTs represent the maximum emissions at a project site that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent national AAQS or California AAQS. LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the project SRA area and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. Information regarding specific development projects, soil types, and the locations of receptors would be needed to quantify the level of impact associated with construction activity. Air quality emissions related to construction must be addressed on a project-by-project basis. For this broad-based master land use plan it is not possible to determine the emissions that would be generated by the development of individual projects that would occur through the implementation of the Proposed Project, due to the speculative nature of scheduling construction projects. However, it is expected that due to the proximity of the existing and proposed residences within the Platinum Triangle in addition to the magnitude of construction activities, construction activities associated within build-out of the Proposed Project could result in exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations during construction activities. Consequently, this impact would be significant for both the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project. IMPACT 5.2-4: MOBILE SOURCES OF EMISSIONS RELATED TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT EXPOSE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS. [THRESHOLD AQ-4] Impact Analysis: The Proposed Project would expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations if it would cause or contribute significantly to elevated pollutant concentration levels or place the project in an area with elevated pollutant concentrations. Unlike the mass (lbs/day) of operational emissions shown in Tables 5.2-8, localized concentrations refer to the amount of pollutant in a volume of air (ppm or μg/m3) and can be correlated to potential health effects. CO Hot Spot Analysis An air quality impact would also be significant if emission levels exceed the state or federal AAQS, thereby exposing receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-21 from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to AAQS is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Vehicle congestion has the potential to create pockets of CO called hot spots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm. Note that the federal levels are a one-hour standard of 35 ppm or the eight-hour standard of 9 ppm. Thus, an exceedance condition would occur based on the state standards prior to exceedance of the federal standard. Because traffic congestion is highest where vehicles queue while waiting to drive through an intersection, hot spots are typically produced at intersection locations. Typically, for an intersection to exhibit a significant CO concentration, it would operate at level of service (LOS) E or worse. Four intersections with the worst-case congestion (see Section 5.9, Transportation and Traffic) were selected to screen for the potential to form CO hotspots. Table 5.2-8 list the one- and eight-hour baselines and project-related CO concentrations that would occur at the study area intersections operating under an LOS F or worse with the Proposed Project, prior to the implementation of mitigation measures outlined in Section 5.9, Transportation and Traffic. As shown in this table, project-related traffic is not anticipated to exceed any of the state one- or eight-hour CO AAQS at the study area intersections. Consequently, sensitive receptors in the area would not be significantly affected by CO emissions generated by operation of the Proposed Project. Localized air quality impacts related to mobile source emissions would therefore be less than significant for the Proposed Project. Table 5.2-8 CO Concentrations at Congested Intersections in the Project Vicinity (parts per million) Exceeds CAAQS Intersection Highest 1-Hour CO Concentration 1-Hour CAAQS Highest 8-Hour CO Concentration 8-Hour CAAQS 1-Hour 8-Hour Lewis Street and Katella Avenue 6.5 20 4.6 9 No No State College Boulevard and Gateway Center Drive 6.3 20 4.4 9 No No Glassell Street and Walnut Avenue 6.1 20 4.3 9 No No Haster Street and Gene Autry Way 6.1 20 4.3 9 No No Source: CALINE4. Version 1.31. Based on traffic volumes, roadway configurations, and speed limits obtained from the traffic study prepared by Parson Brinkerhoff (2009). CO concentrations include a background ambient CO concentration of 5.8 ppm obtained from the SCAQMD, http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/CO/CO.html, for SRA 17 in year 2030. 8-Hour CO concentrations obtained by multiplying 1-Hour CO concentrations by a persistence factor of 70 percent. Diesel Particulate Matter According to the MATES III model of estimated carcinogenic risk, health risk in the Platinum Triangle ranges from 931 to 1,086 in a million (SCAQMD 2008). Overall risk for excess cancer from a lifetime exposure to ambient levels of air toxics is about 1,200 in a million in the SoCAB. Mobile sources account for approximately 94 percent of all health risk in the SoCAB while stationary sources (industries, dry cleaners, chrome-plating operations, etc.) account for the remaining 6 percent. The largest contributor to this risk is diesel exhaust, accounting for approximately 84 percent of the total air toxics risk (SCAQMD 2008). The Proposed Project would result in converting warehouse and industrial land uses to residential and ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-22 • The Planning Center August 2010 commercial land uses. This would result in lower truck trips generated as residential and commercial land uses would not generate the same number of truck trips as warehousing and industrial uses. In addition to a reduction of truck trips, heavy duty trucks and buses within the Platinum Triangle are subject to CARB Rule 2845, Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling, and Rule 2840, Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit School Bus Idling and Idling at School. These rules prohibit commercial vehicles and school buses from non-essential idling more than five minutes and limit non-essential idling for transit busses to up to 10 minutes prior to boarding. The proposed ARTIC project is within the proposed ARTIC Mixed Use District. ARTIC would entail multiple transit buses that could occur idle in close proximity to commercial, office and residential land uses. However, with adherence to CARB Rule 2845 and 2840, idling emissions from heavy duty trucks and busses throughout the Platinum Triangle, including within the proposed ARTIC Mixed-Use District, would be extremely limited. Overall, the Proposed Project would reduce emissions of diesel PM and the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, impacts from diesel PM would be less than significant. IMPACT 5.2-5: SENSITIVE LAND USES WITHIN 500 FEET OF STATE ROUTE 57 AND INTERSTATE 5 OR WITHIN THE RECOMMENDED BUFFER DISTANCES TO FACILITIES EMITTING TACS MAY BE EXPOSED TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS. [THRESHOLD AQ-4] Impact Analysis: In 2005, CARB released the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective to address the siting of sensitive land uses in the vicinity of sources that generate TACs including freeways, distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, chrome-plating facilities, dry cleaners, and gasoline-dispensing facilities. This voluntary guidance document was developed as a tool for assessing compatibility and associated health risks when placing sensitive receptors near existing pollution sources. While CARB recognizes that the recommendations within the Handbook are advisory, and land use agencies have to balance other considerations, including housing and transportation needs in determining where to site new sensitive land uses, the buffer distances indicate the potential for sensitive receptors to be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations. In July 2009, the California Association of Air Pollution Control Officers (CAPCOA) released a Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Land Use Projects to assist land use agencies in complying with CEQA. CAPCOA’s handbook states that new land use project should use CARB’s buffer distances as a preliminary screening tool and recommends a more refined analysis if a project is located within the buffer distances. The analysis below identifies impacts for both the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project. Air Quality Compatibility The Proposed Project would expose sensitive receptors (residential and recreational) to elevated pollutant concentrations if it would place sensitive land uses in an area with elevated pollutant concentrations that are substantially higher than the ambient concentrations in the SoCAB. As stated in the above diesel PM discussion, the estimated carcinogenic health risk in the Platinum Triangle ranges from 931 to 1,086 in a million and is less than the 1,200 in million average for the SoCAB. The majority of health risk in the SoCAB can be attributed to mobile sources, particularly diesel trucks. Because sensitive land uses fall outside CARB jurisdiction, CARB’s handbook addresses the siting of sensitive land uses in the vicinity of freeways, distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, chrome-plating facilities, dry cleaners, and gasoline-dispensing facilities. This guidance document was developed as a tool for assessing compatibility and associated health risks when placing sensitive receptors near existing pollution sources. Table 5.2-9 shows a summary of CARB recommendations for siting new sensitive land uses within the vicinity of air-pollutant-generating sources. Recommendations in this table are based on data ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-23 that show that localized air pollution exposures can be reduced by as much as 80 percent by following CARB minimum distance separations. However, the impact of air pollution from these sources is on a gradient that at some point becomes indistinguishable from the regional air pollution problem. Since there are no rail yards, ports, or refineries within or in close proximity to the Platinum Triangle, site recommendations for these facilities are not applicable. Table 5.2-9 CARB Recommendations for Siting New Sensitive Land Uses Source Category Advisory Recommendations Freeways and High- Traffic Roads • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day. Distribution Centers • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units [TRUs] per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week). • Take into account the configuration of existing distribution centers and avoid locating residences and other sensitive land uses near entry and exit points. Rail Yards • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard. • Within one mile of a rail yard, consider possible siting limitations and mitigation approaches. Ports • Avoid siting of new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of ports in the most heavily impacted zones. Consult local air districts or CARB on the status of pending analyses of health risks. Refineries • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of petroleum refineries. Consult with local air districts and other local agencies to determine an appropriate separation. Chrome Platers • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a chrome plater. Dry Cleaners Using Perchloroethylene • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of any dry cleaning operation. For operations with two or more machines, provide 500 feet. For operations with three or more machines, consult with the local air district. • Do not site new sensitive land uses in the same building with perchloroethylene dry cleaning operations. Gasoline Dispensing Facilities • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater). A 50-foot separation is recommended for typical gas dispensing facilities. Source: CARB 2005. Under the Proposed Project, development of residential uses and associated private recreational areas would be limited to the mixed-use districts. As shown in Figure 5.2-3, CARB 500-Foot Recommended Buffer Distance from Freeways, portions of the mixed-use districts and associated private facilities would fall within the 500-foot buffer distance to Interstate 5 (I-5) and State-Route 57 (SR-57). Proposed parks within the Platinum Triangle would not be within the 500-foor buffer distance of the freeway. In addition, future residents and recreational uses may be within the recommended buffer distance of existing distribution centers, chrome platers, dry cleaners, gas stations, or other facilities that may be currently operating within the Platinum Triangle that emit TACs. Consequently, applicants for new development within the Platinum Triangle would need to evaluate air quality land use compatibility. However, the mixed-use districts would be buffered from the existing industrial areas in the Platinum Triangle by the office districts. Placement of sensitive uses (residential and recreational) near major pollutant sources would result in significant air quality impacts from the exposure of persons to substantial concentrations of toxic air pollutant contaminants. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-24 • The Planning Center August 2010 IMPACT 5.2-6: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE 2007 AQMP. [THRESHOLD AQ-1] Impact Analysis: A consistency determination plays an important role in local agency project review by linking local planning and individual projects to the AQMP. It fulfills the CEQA goal of informing decision makers of the environmental efforts of the project under consideration at an early enough stage to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed. It also provides the local agency with ongoing information as to whether they are contributing to clean air goals contained in the AQMP. The regional emissions inventory for the SoCAB is compiled by the SCAQMD and SCAG. Regional population, housing, and employment projections developed by SCAG are based on the land use designations of the City’s General Plan and form, in part, the foundation for the emissions inventory of the AQMP. These demographic trends are incorporated into the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) compiled by SCAG to determine priority transportation projects and determine VMT within the SCAG region. As shown in Table 5.2-10, the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project would result in an overall increase in both trips and VMT in the Platinum Triangle because the project would substantially increase the density of development in the Platinum Triangle. Although the project would increase VMT and trips in the local area, the project would result in a net benefit to the SCAG region as a whole because it precludes the need for people to be housed in less dense development, farther away from employment centers. This is evidenced by the decrease in average trip length because employment, services, and housing would be located in proximity to each other, as well as to existing development, thus reducing the need to develop in outlying areas that would result in longer trips and an increase in emissions. The need for residents within the project site and surrounding area to travel long distances to other commercial and entertainment centers would be reduced. SCAG’s Compass Blueprint program identifies changes to land use and transportation trends on key infill areas located near transit and existing jobs and housing in the region to reduce VMT. Portions of the Platinum Triangle are identified in the Opportunity Area Map for Orange County (SCAG 2007). SCAG has identified these 2 percent areas as the key parts of the region for targeting growth, where projects, plans and policies consistent with the Compass Blueprint principles will best serve the mobility, livability, prosperity and sustainability goals of the Growth Vision. Impacts would be greater under the Proposed Project compared to the Adopted MLUP. However, the Adopted MLUP and the Proposed Project would remain consistent with the SCAG’s strategies to reduce VMT in the SCAG region and the proposed development would be consistent with the AQMP under the second indicator. Consequently, impacts are considered less than significant relative to project consistency with the AQMP. Table 5.2-10 Comparison of Trips and Vehicle Miles Traveled Scenario Trips per Day VMT Per Day Average Trip Length Existing 84,416 655,113 7.76 Adopted MLUP 243,060 1,715,669 7.06 Proposed Project 443,263 3,135,398 7.07 Increase from Adopted MLUP 200,203 1,419,729 0.01 Source: Parson Brinkerhoff 2009. VMT: vehicle miles traveled. ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: City of Anaheim 5. Environmental Analysis SEIR No. 339 The Planning Center • Figure 5.2-3 CARB 500-Foot Recommended Buffer Distance from Freeways 0’ 1,600’ Scale Note: The new Mixed Use boundaries include expansion of the Katella and Orangewood Districts and the addition of the ARCTIC and Office Districts. 57 5 Connector Street 500-Foot Buffer Zone from Freeways Public Parks Open Space Market Street Lewis Street ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-26 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-27 IMPACT 5.2-7: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT CREATE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS; HOWEVER, IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD RESULT IN NEW RESIDENTIAL LAND USES LOCATED NEAR EXISTING ODOR GENERATORS. [THRESHOLD AQ-5] Impact Analysis: SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, regulates the generation of offensive odors. Project construction would involve the operation of heavy equipment and haul trucks, resulting in exhaust emissions and attendant nuisance odors. Any such odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the equipment itself. By the time odors generated by diesel exhaust reached the sensitive residential receptors, they would be diluted to well below any level of air quality concern. An occasional “whiff” of diesel exhaust from passing equipment and trucks accessing the site from public roadways may result. Such brief exhaust odors are not significant air quality impact. Additionally, some odor would be produced from the application of asphalt, paints, and coatings. Again, any exposure of the general public to these common odors would be of short duration and less than significant. Off-Site Impacts Odors generated by land uses within the Platinum Triangle must comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which prohibits the generation of odors that cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to a considerable number of persons or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of people. Because proposed office, commercial, hotel, and residential land uses typically do not generate substantial odors, no significant impacts would occur. Impacts would be less than significant. On-Site Impacts SCAQMD cites the following land uses as having the potential to generate noisome odors: agricultural (farming and livestock), chemical plants, composting operations, dairies, fiberglass molding, landfills, refineries, rendering plants, rail yards, and wastewater treatment plants (SCAQMD 2005). Industrial uses within the Platinum Triangle area may generate odors that are objectionable to some. At buildout, residential areas would be buffered by office uses from industrial areas that have the potential to generate odors. Therefore, at buildout, residential land uses would not be exposed to objectionable odors. While many of the industrial land uses within The Platinum Triangle are generally non-odorous, during conversion of The Platinum Triangle residential land uses maybe temporarily located adjacent to industrial businesses that generate odors. Consequently, impacts would be potentially significant without mitigation measures to ensure that new land uses are not located in proximity to existing land uses that generate substantial odors within the Platinum Triangle. 5.2.4 Cumulative Impacts In accordance with the SCAQMD methodology, any project that produces a significant project-level regional or localized air quality impact in an area that is in nonattainment would significantly contribute to a cumulative impact. Regional or local emissions that exceed the emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD are considered a substantial source of air pollution that has the potential to contribute significantly to a cumulative impact. Cumulative projects within the local area include new development as well as general growth within the project area. As air pollutant emissions are typically confined within the project’s air basin, the cumulative project area encompasses the entire SoCAB. The greatest source of emissions within the SoCAB is from mobile sources. The SCAQMD considers a project cumulatively significant when project- related emissions exceed the SCAQMD regional and localized emissions thresholds shown in Tables 5.2-4 and 5.2-5. The FSEIR No. 332 for the Adopted MLUP identified significant unavoidable cumulative air quality impacts. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-28 • The Planning Center August 2010 Construction The SoCAB is in nonattainment for O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). Construction of cumulative projects will further degrade the regional and local air quality. Air quality will be temporarily impacted during construction activities. Mitigation measures specified for the project will assist in mitigating these cumulative impacts and can be applied to all similar cumulative projects. Due to the magnitude of construction projected with build-out of the Proposed Project , construction emissions are projected to exceed the SCAQMD’s regional emission thresholds. Therefore, the Proposed Project would significantly contribute to cumulative impacts within the SoCAB and cumulative impacts would be significant. Operation For operational air quality emissions, any project that does not exceed or can be mitigated to less than the daily regional threshold values is not considered by the SCAQMD to be a substantial source of air pollution and does not add significantly to a cumulative impact. As shown in Table 5.2-8, operational emissions generated by the project would exceed the regional emission thresholds for CO, NOX, VOC, PM10, and PM2.5.Air pollutant emissions generated by the Proposed Project and other cumulative development would cumulatively contribute to air quality impacts. Consequently, the project would significantly contribute to cumulative impacts within the SoCAB and the region’s NAAQS and CAAQS nonattainment designations. Therefore cumulative impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be significant. It should be noted that the ARTIC project is considered a cumulative project, which would result in regional air quality benefits. ARTIC will be a world-class transportation center where people transfer between travel services to reach both regional and interregional activity centers and business districts. The specific objectives of the ARTIC Project are: • to provide a regional intermodal transit center that can combine multiple transportation modes at a central location; • to accommodate projected increases in mass transit ridership; • to provide a transit oriented building that can accommodate future transportation modes; • to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle access to multimodal transit options; • to provide improved access and availability of mass transit resources; • to encourage the reduction of vehicle miles traveled on freeways and local arterial streets; and • to provide improved access to activity centers and destinations within the region. ARTIC will provide a necessary component for this transportation network within Anaheim and will serve as the gateway to the southern California region. The ARTIC Project will enhance Orange County’s overall transportation system by accommodating additional bus transit options, additional alternatives to road based travel, and improved services for the transit-dependent. As a result, development of ARTIC would partially off- set regional cumulative air quality emissions through the increased use of public transit services. However, air pollutant emissions from build-out of the Proposed Project are still expected to exceed of SCAQMD’s air quality significance thresholds. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-29 Localized Emissions Unlike regional construction and air quality emissions, elevated concentrations of air pollutant emissions generated during construction of the project are concentrated in a localized area of impact and disperse farther away from the project site or intersection. Therefore, cumulative impacts would only occur if more than one project is being constructed in the local vicinity at the same time. Because the multiple projects comprising the Platinum Triangle MLUP could be constructed within the time frame or in close proximity to the other project sites within the Platinum Triangle, including the ARTIC project, cumulative construction localized impacts could occur. Consequently, project-related construction could significantly contribute to localized concentrations of air pollutants at sensitive receptors in the immediate vicinity of the project. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be significant with regard to construction activities. As shown under Impact 5.2-4, operational phase emissions in addition to cumulative development within the vicinity of the project would not result in exposure of persons to substantial pollutant concentrations. Consequently, project implementation would not significantly contribute to localized concentrations of air pollutants. 5.2.5 Existing Regulations and Standard Conditions • SCAQMD Rule 201: Permit to Construct • SCAQMD Rule 402: Nuisance Odors • SCAQMD Rule 403: Fugitive Dust • SCAQMD Rule 1403: Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities • CARB Rule 2480: Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) – Schools • CARB Rule 2485: Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) – Commercial Vehicles • Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) • Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 20) • Motor Vehicle Standards (AB1493) • 2007 AQMP 5.2.6 Level of Significance Before Mitigation Upon implementation of regulatory requirements and standard conditions of approval, Impact 5.2-4 and Impact 5.2-6 would be less than significant. Without mitigation, the following impacts would be potentially significant: • Impact 5.2-1 Construction activities associated with the Proposed Project would generate substantially more short-term air pollutants compared to the Adopted MLUP and would continue to exceed SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds. • Impact 5.2-2 Implementation of the Proposed Project would generate substantially more long- term air pollutants compared to the Adopted MLUP and would continue to exceed SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds. • Impact 5.2-3 Construction activities would potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-30 • The Planning Center August 2010 • Impact 5.2-5 Multifamily Residential Units within 500 feet of State Route 57 and Interstate 5 or within the recommended buffer distances to facilities emitting TACs may be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations. • Impact 5.2-7 The Proposed Project would not create objectionable odors; however, new development could be proximate to existing odor generators. 5.2.7 Mitigation Measures Impact 5.2-1 Applicable Measures from MMP No. 106A The following mitigation measures were included in Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 prepared for the Platinum Triangle, adopted by the City Council on October 25, 2005, as part of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 (FSEIR No. 332), and are applicable to the Proposed Project. (For mitigation measures to reduce energy consumption, see also Chapter 5.10, Utilities and Service Systems). Additions are shown in bold and deletions are indicated in strikeout format. The reference number for each measure from MMP No.106A is shown in (italics). Construction 2-1 Ongoing during grading and construction, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to reduce construction-related emissions; however, the resultant value is expected to remain significant. (5.2-1) a) The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to reduce operational emissions. b) Where feasible, the The contractor shall use Tier 3 or higher, as identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, off-road construction equipment with higher air pollutant emissions standards for equipment greater than 50 horsepower, based on manufacturer’s availability. low emission mobile construction. c) The contractor shall utilize existing power sources power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary diesel-power generators, where feasible. 2-2 Ongoing during grading and construction, the property owner/developer shall implement the following measures in addition to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 to further reduce in order to reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions. To assure compliance, the City shall verify compliance that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections. The measures to be implemented are listed below: (5.2-2) a) The property owner/developer shall implement standard mitigation measures in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rules 402 and 403, to control fugitive dust emissions and ensure that nuisance dust conditions do not occur during construction. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-31 b) In addition to the standard measures, the property owner/developer shall implement supplemental measures as feasible to reduce fugitive dust emissions to the extent feasible during construction operations. To assure compliance, the City shall verify compliance that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections. The measures to be implemented are listed below: a) o During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall rRe-establish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering as quickly as possible to achieve a minimum control efficiency for PM10 of 5 percent. b) o During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply chemical soil stabilizers Pave to on-site haul roads to achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 85 percent compared to travel on unpaved, untreated roads. c) o The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall pPhase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. d) o The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall sSchedule activities to minimize the amount of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. o Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. o Restore landscaping and irrigation that are removed during construction in coordination with local public agencies. e) o During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall sSweep streets with Rule 1186–compliant PM10–efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. f) o During active demolition and debris removal and grading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall sSuspend demolition and grading operations when during high winds speeds exceed 25 miles per hour to achieve an emissions control efficiency for PM10 under worst-case wind conditions of 98 percent in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. o Wash off trucks leaving site. g) o During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall mMaintain a minimum 12-inch freeboard ratio on haul trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other suitable means to achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 91 percent. o Cover payloads on trucks hauling soil using tarps or other suitable means. h) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-32 • The Planning Center August 2010 every three hours on the construction site to achieve an emissions reduction control efficiency for PM10 of 61 percent. i) During active demolition and debris removal, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply water to disturbed soils at the end of each day to achieve an emission control efficiency for PM10 of 10 percent. j) During scraper unloading and loading, the property owner/developer’s construc- tion contractor shall ensure that actively disturbed areas maintain a minimum soil moisture content of 12 percent by use of a moveable sprinkler system or water truck to achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 69 percent. k) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall limit on-site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour to achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 57 percent. 2-3 Prior to approval of each grading plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for Demolition Plans), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export Plans detailing construction and demolition (C&D) recycling and waste reduction measures to be implemented to recover C&D materials. These plans shall include identification of off-site locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on-site or to an adjacent site, sale to a soil 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 not all can be reused at the project site. (5.2-3) 2-4 Prior to issuance approval of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence that high-solids or water-based low emissions paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s regulations. To ensure that volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions from architectural coatings do not exceed AQMDs significance thresholds for architectural coatings, the number of gallons of coatings shall be restricted, to the maximum extent feasible, to the maximum daily coating usage identified in Table 5.2-9 of the SEIR. This information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall specify the use of high volume/low pressure spray equipment or hand application. Air atomized spray techniques shall not be permitted. Where feasible, the paint contractor shall use hand applications as well. This information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. Additionally, the property owner/developer’s shall specify the use of high- volume/low-pressure spray equipment or hand application. Air-atomized spray techniques shall not be permitted. Plans shall also show that property owner/developers shall construct/build with materials that do not require painting, or use prepainted construction materials, to the extent feasible. (5.2-4) Additional Mitigation No additional mitigation measures are available. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-33 Impact 5.2-2 Applicable Measures from MMP No. 106A The following mitigation measures were included in Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 prepared 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. (For mitigation measures to reduce energy consumption, see also Chapter 5.10, Utilities and Service Systems). Additions are shown in bold and deletions are indicated in strikeout format. The reference number for each measure from MMP No.106A is shown in (italics). Operation 2-5 In accordance with the timing required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager, but no later than prior to the first final Building and Zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall implement the following measures to reduce long-term operational CO, NOX, ROG, and PM10 emissions: (5.2-5) • Traffic lane improvements and signalization as outlined in the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan Draft Traffic Study Report by Parsons Brinkerhoff, August 2009, traffic study and Master Plan of Arterial Highways shall be implemented as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager. • The property owner/contractor shall place bus benches and/or shelters as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager at locations along any site frontage routes as needed. 2-6 Prior to approval of building permits, the property owner/architect shall submit energy calculations used to demonstrate compliance with the performance approach to the California Energy Efficiency Standards to the Building Department that shows each new structure exceeds the applicable Building and Energy Efficiency Standards by a minimum of 10 percent at the time of the building permit. Prior to issuance of a building permit, plans shall show the following: a) Energy-efficient roofing systems, such as vegetated or “cool” roofs, that reduce roof temperatures significantly during the summer and therefore reduce the energy requirement for air conditioning. Examples of energy efficient building materials and suppliers can be found at http://eetd.lbl.gov/ CoolRoofs or similar websites. b) Cool pavement materials such as lighter-colored pavement materials, porous materials, or permeable or porous pavement, for all roadways and walkways not within the public right-of-way, to minimize the absorption of solar heat and subsequent transfer of heat to its surrounding environment. Examples of cool pavement materials are available at http://www.epa.gov/heatisld/ images/extra/level3_pavingproducts.html or similar websites. c) Energy saving devices that achieve the existing 2008 Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards, such as use of energy efficient appliances appliances) and use of sunlight-filtering window coatings or double-paned windows. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-34 • The Planning Center August 2010 d) Electrical vehicle charging stations for all commercial structures encompassing over 50,000 square feet. e) Shady trees strategically located within close proximity to the building structure to reduce heat load and resulting energy usage at residential, commercial, and office buildings. Implementation of energy conservation techniques installation of energy saving devices, construction of electrical vehicle charging stations, use of sunlight filtering window coatings or double-paned windows, utilization of light-colored roofing materials as opposed to dark-colored roofing materials, and placement of shady trees next to habitable structures) shall be indicated on plans. (5.2-6) The following Mitigation Measure from Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106A is no longer applicable because SCAQMD adopted Rule 445, Wood-Burning Devices. SCAQMD Rule 445 prohibits installation of wood- burning fireplaces. Consequently, all fireplaces installed within the Platinum Triangle would be required to be gas-burning and former Mitigation Measure 5.2-7 is no longer required. 5.2-7 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the placement of a note on the plans stating that to reduce the health impacts of air quality hazards within The Platinum Triangle, placement of wood-burning fireplaces in residential units shall be prohibited. As an alternative to wood-burning fireplaces, gas fireplaces may be used. Additional Mitigation No additional mitigation measures are available. Impact 5.2-3 Applicable Measures from MMP No. 106A Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-4 would also reduce localized concentration of air pollutants during construction. Additional Mitigation No additional mitigation measures are available. Impact 5.2-5 Applicable Measures from MMP No. 106A No mitigation measures are applicable. Additional Mitigation 2-7 Applicants for new residential developments in the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan within 500 feet of Interstate 5 (I-5) or State Route 57 (SR-57) shall be required to install high efficiency Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) filters of MERV 14 or better in the intake of residential ventilation systems. MERV 14 filters have a Particle Size Efficiency rating of 90 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-35 percent for particulates 1.0 micron to 3.0 microns in size and a Particle Size Efficiency rating of 75 to 85 percent for particles 0.3 to 1.0 micron in size. A MERV 14 filter creates more resistance to airflow because the filter media becomes denser as efficiency increases. Heating, air conditioning, and ventilation systems shall be installed with a fan unit designed to force air through the MERV 14 filter. To ensure long-term maintenance and replacement of the MERV 14 filters in the individual units, the following shall occur: a) Developer, sale, and/or rental representative shall provide notification to all affected tenants/residents of the potential health risk from I-5/SR-57 for all affected units. b) For rental units within 500 feet of the I-5/SR-57, the owner/property manager shall maintain and replace MERV 14 filters in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. The property owner shall inform renters of increased risk of exposure to diesel particulates from I-5 or SR-57 when windows are open. c) For residential owned units within 500 feet of I-5/SR-57, the homeowner’s association (HOA) shall incorporate requirements for long-term maintenance in the Covenant, Conditions, and Restrictions and inform homeowners of their responsibility to maintain the MERV 14 filter in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. The HOA shall inform homeowners of increased risk of exposure to diesel particulates from I- 5/SR-57 when windows are open. 2-8 Based on the recommended buffer distances of the California Air Resources Board, applicants for new developments in the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan shall place residential structures and active outdoor recreational areas outside of the recommended buffer distances to the following stationary air pollutant sources: • 1,000 feet from the truck bays with an existing distribution center that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units, or where transport refrigeration unit operations exceed 300 hours per week. • 1,000 feet from an existing chrome plating facility. • 300 feet from a dry-cleaning facility using perchloroethylene using one machine and 500 feet from dry-cleaning facility using perchloroethylene using two machines. • 50 feet from gas pumps within a gas-dispensing facility and 300 feet from gas pumps within a gasoline-dispensing facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater. 2-9 All outdoor active-use public recreational areas associated with development projects shall be located more than 500 feet from the nearest lane of traffic on Interstate 5 and State Route 57. Impact 5.2-7 Applicable Measures from MMP No. 106A No mitigation measures are applicable. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-36 • The Planning Center August 2010 Additional Mitigation 2-10 For projects located within 1,000 feet of an industrial facility that emits substantial odors, which includes but is not limited to • wastewater treatment plants • composting, greenwaste, or recycling facilities • fiberglass manufacturing facilities • painting/coating operations • coffee roasters • food processing facilities Project Applicant shall submit an odor assessment to the Planning Director prior to approval of any future discretionary action that verifies that the South Coast Air Quality Management District has not received three or more verified odor complaints. If the Odor Assessment identifies that the facility has received three such complaints, the applicant will be required to identify and demonstrate that Best Available Control Technologies for Toxics (T-BACTs) are capable of reducing potential odors to an acceptable level, including appropriate enforcement mechanisms. T-BACTs may include, but are not limited to, scrubbers at the industrial facility, or installation of Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) filters rated at 14 or better at all residential units. 5.2.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation Impact 5.2-1 Implementation of Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-4 would reduce construction emissions associated with new development projects in the Platinum Triangle. However, due to the magnitude of construction activities that could take place with build-out of the Proposed Project, emissions of CO, NOX, VOC, PM10, and PM2.5 would continue to exceed the SCAQMD’s regional construction regional emissions thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. As a result, Impact 5.2-1 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.2-2 Implementation of Mitigation Measures 2-4 through 2-6 would reduce operational phase emissions of the project. However, due to the magnitude of new air pollutant emissions sources that could result with build- out of the Proposed Project, emissions would exceed the SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. As a result, Impact 5.2-2 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.2-3 Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-4 would reduce on-site construction emissions to the extent feasible. However, due to the magnitude of the construction grading activities, the probability that multiple construction activities could occur at the same time, and the proximity of existing and future sensitive receptors within the Platinum Triangle, construction emissions may exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds. As a result, Impact 5.2-3 would remain significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 5.2-37 Impact 5.2-5 Placement of sensitive uses near major pollutant sources would result in significant air quality impacts from the exposure of persons to substantial concentrations of toxic air pollutant contaminants. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-7 and 2-8 would ensure that residences within the Platinum Triangle are not located in close proximity to major stationary sources of air pollution identified by CARB. As a result, no significant impact would occur. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-7 would reduce the potential indoor health risk. While long-term maintenance associated with replacement of the MERV filters is not in the control of the developer for indoor air quality impacts, Mitigation Measure 2-7 would require the property manager (rentals) and HOA (homeowners) to require homeowners to replace filters to reduce health risk associated with diesel particulates from being located within 500 feet of I-5 and SR-57. As a result, implementation of Mitigation Measures 2-7 and 2-8 would ensure that residents within the Platinum Triangle would not be exposed to levels of toxic air contaminants that exceed the ambient concentrations in the project vicinity, which are 931 to 1,086 in a million in the Platinum Triangle area (SCAQMD 2009). While Mitigation Measure 2-9 would reduce the potential outdoor health risk for parks within close proximity to the freeway, development projects may include outdoor private recreational areas within the CARB- recommended distance of 500 feet. Therefore, placement of private outdoor recreational areas would expose people to elevated levels of toxic air contaminants that exceed the ambient concentrations in the project vicinity, which are 931 to 1,086 a million in the Platinum Triangle (SCAQMD 2008), and impacts would be potentially significant. Impact 5.2-6 would be significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.2-7 Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-10 would ensure that residences within the Platinum Triangle that are located in close proximity to an industrial facility that emits substantial odors properly mitigate the impacts of the odors. Therefore, impacts would be reduced to less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5. Environmental Analysis AIR QUALITY Page 5.2-38 • The Planning Center August 2010 This page intentionally left blank.